How the Republican Government shutdown works

[easyt65]

Hint Ronnie Raygun TRIPLED every other US Prez debt AND Dubya doubled every other US POrez debt (while he lost 1+ million PRIVATE sector jobs).. lol

Obama has added more debt in his 1st 4 years than EVERY US President from Washington to Bush...COMBINED. Considering how Obama VOWED he would cut the deficit in HALF by the end of his 1st term in office (a la '...and if you like your plan / doctor you can keep them'), this is an un-deniable FAIURE of near 'biblical proportions'.

This is FACT, documented, historical fact. They are not negotiable or debatable... Yet STILL ardent Liberal / Obama supporters will continue to try to do whatever it takes to deny and blame others. LOL

 

[Dad2three]

Yes, you conservatives suck at math and history, I agree with that. When did Republicans "take credit" for the money the incompetent Obama spent shutting down government? I don't remember when you did that. But if you say so, you probably did. At least you are now. Conservatives are idiots, stop listening to Faux News and believing whatever they tell you

Conservatives are idiots and bad with math and history?

Liberals pretty much agree that the economy started going south under Bush his last 2 years in his final term in office. THIS was the economic decline Obama and Liberals claim Obama 'inherited'. Liberals also pretty much agree that whoever controls Congress controls the purse strings, and therefore the economy / budget as well....unless it is THEY who control Congress / the purse strings.

During Bush's 1st 6 years in office 9/11 occurred, the economic aftermath of 9/11 happened, and 2 wars were fought. No 'economic decline' was experienced, but approx. 2 1/2 Trillion was added to the debt...in 6 (SIX YEARS)...during a time when there was a pretty close split in Congress. (2 1/2 trillion in 6 years in approx. 1/3rd of the debt Obama added in his 1st 4 years!)

Democrats secured a Super-Majority Control of Congress, controlling the purse strings / budget the last 2 years of Bush's administration...during which time the Liberals say the economy started going south. During this 1 1/2 - 2 year period another 1 1/2 TRILLION was added to the debt...in only 2 years. WHAT was the difference between Bush's 1st 6 years and his last 2? Oh yeah, Democrats took over Congress! They held this Super Majority control of Congress through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office.

The economic decline Obama claims to have inherited came from 2 years of Liberal control of the budget and 2 more years of horrendous fiscal irresponsibility. For instance, while supposedly in a declining economy Obama and the Liberals passed the tremendously FAILED Stimulus bill, a nearly $1 TRILLION addition to the nation's debt in one shot that contained over 7,000 pieces of DNC-ONLY pork, continued such horrible programs as 'Cash for Clunkers' that ended up hurting the economy/poor & middle class families, and ended up costing OVER $742,000 PER JOB Obama claimed to have created / saved!

In Obama's 1st 4 years he set US records for 'monthly', 'annual', and 'total' deficit spending - adding over $6 trillion to the US debt in ONLY 4 years, more debt added than by EVERY US President from Washington to Bush COMBINED, single-handedly securing the 1st US Credit rating down-grade by refusing to accept more budget cuts to prove he was serious about reducing the deficit as he was warned, and added a record number of job-creation / business-strangling regulations.

These are DOCUMENTED, HISTORICAL FACTS which speak for themselves. Responding with opinion or personal attacks do not effect me at all because you are arguing with these documented history / facts, not me.

The final statistical and historical fact is that Obama is ARGUABLY the worst President in US history. Personally, though, I would award that title to the racist LBJ, the man who started the whole liberal program of 'Economic Slavery' that has been used to oppress blacks, ensure more and more Americans remain UN-successful and dependent on the government, and that they continue to vote for the liberal politicians who will keep the 'free' money and handouts flowing.

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse


2004 Republican Convention:

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...

Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

(APPLAUSE)

Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."



Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”

FACTS on Dubya's great recession | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[rightwinger]

CNN, Jan 25, 2010: "Democrats control the House 256 to 178, with one seat vacant. ... That's one short of the filibuster-proof supermajority they have held since last spring...Liberals seem to forget (or choose to ignore) who controlled congress during Bush’s terms in office."

"So, almost half of the debt accumulated under President Bush came from a House and Senate controlled by the Democrats. And the Democrats controlled both houses for a less amount of time than the Republicans."

-- Sorry, you are right...they were 1 seat shy of a 'SUPER' Majority. LOL. Still, they were firmly in control of the control of Congress and thus firmly in control of the nation's purse strings and the economy.

----------------------

President Obama, knowing what he was stepping into, also proclaimed that his Budget Plan would cut the deficit in HALF by the end of his 1st term in office. ... and then the 1st economic bill he signed into effect was the nearly $1 trillion debt-adding failed Stimulus bill. After setting deficit-spending records (never a good way to try to CUT the budget in half), Obama ended up adding OVER $6 TRILLION to the debt in only 4 years. By his own standards, this was an Obama FAILURE!

- President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama added another $1 Trillion Dollars to that amount.
- President Bush began a string of expensive financial bailouts. Obama accelerated that through the Stimulus Bill and other government handouts.
- President Bush created a Medicare drug entitlement that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. Despite his lies that the ACA would not cost a dime and would pay for itself, President Obama's 'Obamacare' cost Americans a $626 billion dollar down-payment, an estimated $1+ Trillion total cost of the program, AND that's not counting the BILLIONS paid out for a FAILED WEB SITE that reportedly STILL does not work as it is supposed to.
- President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. Obama DOUBLED that number.
- President Bush became the first President to spend 3 percent of GDP on federal antipoverty programs. President Obama surpassed that number by increasing this spending by over 20%.
- President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Another $1.5 Trillion was added during his last 2 years in which Liberals controlled Congress. Bush, therefore, is credited with adding $4 trillion in debt over EIGHT (8) years during arguably one of this nation's worst historical periods. Obama added over $6 trillion in only FOUR (4) years.
(** Heritage Foundation, Pew Research Org, and several others...)

Filibuster is only used in the Senate
The House uses a majority vote

 

[bravoactual]

Yes, you conservatives suck at math and history, I agree with that. When did Republicans "take credit" for the money the incompetent Obama spent shutting down government? I don't remember when you did that. But if you say so, you probably did. At least you are now. Conservatives are idiots, stop listening to Faux News and believing whatever they tell you

Conservatives are idiots and bad with math and history?

Liberals pretty much agree that the economy started going south under Bush his last 2 years in his final term in office. THIS was the economic decline Obama and Liberals claim Obama 'inherited'. Liberals also pretty much agree that whoever controls Congress controls the purse strings, and therefore the economy / budget as well....unless it is THEY who control Congress / the purse strings.

During Bush's 1st 6 years in office 9/11 occurred, the economic aftermath of 9/11 happened, and 2 wars were fought. No 'economic decline' was experienced, but approx. 2 1/2 Trillion was added to the debt...in 6 (SIX YEARS)...during a time when there was a pretty close split in Congress. (2 1/2 trillion in 6 years in approx. 1/3rd of the debt Obama added in his 1st 4 years!)

Democrats secured a Super-Majority Control of Congress, controlling the purse strings / budget the last 2 years of Bush's administration...during which time the Liberals say the economy started going south. During this 1 1/2 - 2 year period another 1 1/2 TRILLION was added to the debt...in only 2 years. WHAT was the difference between Bush's 1st 6 years and his last 2? Oh yeah, Democrats took over Congress! They held this Super Majority control of Congress through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office.

The economic decline Obama claims to have inherited came from 2 years of Liberal control of the budget and 2 more years of horrendous fiscal irresponsibility. For instance, while supposedly in a declining economy Obama and the Liberals passed the tremendously FAILED Stimulus bill, a nearly $1 TRILLION addition to the nation's debt in one shot that contained over 7,000 pieces of DNC-ONLY pork, continued such horrible programs as 'Cash for Clunkers' that ended up hurting the economy/poor & middle class families, and ended up costing OVER $742,000 PER JOB Obama claimed to have created / saved!

In Obama's 1st 4 years he set US records for 'monthly', 'annual', and 'total' deficit spending - adding over $6 trillion to the US debt in ONLY 4 years, more debt added than by EVERY US President from Washington to Bush COMBINED, single-handedly securing the 1st US Credit rating down-grade by refusing to accept more budget cuts to prove he was serious about reducing the deficit as he was warned, and added a record number of job-creation / business-strangling regulations.

These are DOCUMENTED, HISTORICAL FACTS which speak for themselves. Responding with opinion or personal attacks do not effect me at all because you are arguing with these documented history / facts, not me.

The final statistical and historical fact is that Obama is ARGUABLY the worst President in US history. Personally, though, I would award that title to the racist LBJ, the man who started the whole liberal program of 'Economic Slavery' that has been used to oppress blacks, ensure more and more Americans remain UN-successful and dependent on the government, and that they continue to vote for the liberal politicians who will keep the 'free' money and handouts flowing.

So NO you can't present ANY bills the Dems passed 2007-2009 to change Dubya/GOP policy that created Dubya's recession. Thanks

Hint Ronnie Raygun TRIPLED every other US Prez debt AND Dubya doubled every other US POrez debt (while he lost 1+ million PRIVATE sector jobs).. lol

Today's Republican Party will have to disown The Great Ronnie God because he granted Amnesty to Undocumented Workers.

 

[Dad2three]

CNN, Jan 25, 2010: "Democrats control the House 256 to 178, with one seat vacant. ... That's one short of the filibuster-proof supermajority they have held since last spring...Liberals seem to forget (or choose to ignore) who controlled congress during Bush’s terms in office."

"So, almost half of the debt accumulated under President Bush came from a House and Senate controlled by the Democrats. And the Democrats controlled both houses for a less amount of time than the Republicans."

-- Sorry, you are right...they were 1 seat shy of a 'SUPER' Majority. LOL. Still, they were firmly in control of the control of Congress and thus firmly in control of the nation's purse strings and the economy.

----------------------

President Obama, knowing what he was stepping into, also proclaimed that his Budget Plan would cut the deficit in HALF by the end of his 1st term in office. ... and then the 1st economic bill he signed into effect was the nearly $1 trillion debt-adding failed Stimulus bill. After setting deficit-spending records (never a good way to try to CUT the budget in half), Obama ended up adding OVER $6 TRILLION to the debt in only 4 years. By his own standards, this was an Obama FAILURE!

- President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama added another $1 Trillion Dollars to that amount.
- President Bush began a string of expensive financial bailouts. Obama accelerated that through the Stimulus Bill and other government handouts.
- President Bush created a Medicare drug entitlement that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. Despite his lies that the ACA would not cost a dime and would pay for itself, President Obama's 'Obamacare' cost Americans a $626 billion dollar down-payment, an estimated $1+ Trillion total cost of the program, AND that's not counting the BILLIONS paid out for a FAILED WEB SITE that reportedly STILL does not work as it is supposed to.
- President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. Obama DOUBLED that number.
- President Bush became the first President to spend 3 percent of GDP on federal antipoverty programs. President Obama surpassed that number by increasing this spending by over 20%.
- President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Another $1.5 Trillion was added during his last 2 years in which Liberals controlled Congress. Bush, therefore, is credited with adding $4 trillion in debt over EIGHT (8) years during arguably one of this nation's worst historical periods. Obama added over $6 trillion in only FOUR (4) years.
(** Heritage Foundation, Pew Research Org, and several others...)

NOT HONEST about how Congress works huh? Without a SUPER MAJORITY AND A DEM PREZ, Dems couldn't do ANYTHING without Dubya vetoing it (weird he started vetoing in 2007 right?) AND WITHOUT 66 IN THE SENATE AND 2/3RDS IN THE HOUSE, COULDN'T OVERRIDE DUBYA'S VETO? lol


Dems were "in control" forgetting that the Prez HAD the most influence UNLESS there is a super, super majority to override, lol


Weird, Dubya/GOP policies did what in 8 years Bubs?

 

[Dad2three]

Yes, you conservatives suck at math and history, I agree with that. When did Republicans "take credit" for the money the incompetent Obama spent shutting down government? I don't remember when you did that. But if you say so, you probably did. At least you are now. Conservatives are idiots, stop listening to Faux News and believing whatever they tell you

Conservatives are idiots and bad with math and history?

Liberals pretty much agree that the economy started going south under Bush his last 2 years in his final term in office. THIS was the economic decline Obama and Liberals claim Obama 'inherited'. Liberals also pretty much agree that whoever controls Congress controls the purse strings, and therefore the economy / budget as well....unless it is THEY who control Congress / the purse strings.

During Bush's 1st 6 years in office 9/11 occurred, the economic aftermath of 9/11 happened, and 2 wars were fought. No 'economic decline' was experienced, but approx. 2 1/2 Trillion was added to the debt...in 6 (SIX YEARS)...during a time when there was a pretty close split in Congress. (2 1/2 trillion in 6 years in approx. 1/3rd of the debt Obama added in his 1st 4 years!)

Democrats secured a Super-Majority Control of Congress, controlling the purse strings / budget the last 2 years of Bush's administration...during which time the Liberals say the economy started going south. During this 1 1/2 - 2 year period another 1 1/2 TRILLION was added to the debt...in only 2 years. WHAT was the difference between Bush's 1st 6 years and his last 2? Oh yeah, Democrats took over Congress! They held this Super Majority control of Congress through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office.

The economic decline Obama claims to have inherited came from 2 years of Liberal control of the budget and 2 more years of horrendous fiscal irresponsibility. For instance, while supposedly in a declining economy Obama and the Liberals passed the tremendously FAILED Stimulus bill, a nearly $1 TRILLION addition to the nation's debt in one shot that contained over 7,000 pieces of DNC-ONLY pork, continued such horrible programs as 'Cash for Clunkers' that ended up hurting the economy/poor & middle class families, and ended up costing OVER $742,000 PER JOB Obama claimed to have created / saved!

In Obama's 1st 4 years he set US records for 'monthly', 'annual', and 'total' deficit spending - adding over $6 trillion to the US debt in ONLY 4 years, more debt added than by EVERY US President from Washington to Bush COMBINED, single-handedly securing the 1st US Credit rating down-grade by refusing to accept more budget cuts to prove he was serious about reducing the deficit as he was warned, and added a record number of job-creation / business-strangling regulations.

These are DOCUMENTED, HISTORICAL FACTS which speak for themselves. Responding with opinion or personal attacks do not effect me at all because you are arguing with these documented history / facts, not me.

The final statistical and historical fact is that Obama is ARGUABLY the worst President in US history. Personally, though, I would award that title to the racist LBJ, the man who started the whole liberal program of 'Economic Slavery' that has been used to oppress blacks, ensure more and more Americans remain UN-successful and dependent on the government, and that they continue to vote for the liberal politicians who will keep the 'free' money and handouts flowing.

So NO you can't present ANY bills the Dems passed 2007-2009 to change Dubya/GOP policy that created Dubya's recession. Thanks

Hint Ronnie Raygun TRIPLED every other US Prez debt AND Dubya doubled every other US POrez debt (while he lost 1+ million PRIVATE sector jobs).. lol

Today's Republican Party will have to disown The Great Ronnie God because he granted Amnesty to Undocumented Workers.

Ronnie ALSO advocated OPEN BORDERS IN 1980 DEBATES!

 

[Dad2three]

Hint Ronnie Raygun TRIPLED every other US Prez debt AND Dubya doubled every other US POrez debt (while he lost 1+ million PRIVATE sector jobs).. lol

Obama has added more debt in his 1st 4 years than EVERY US President from Washington to Bush...COMBINED. Considering how Obama VOWED he would cut the deficit in HALF by the end of his 1st term in office (a la '...and if you like your plan / doctor you can keep them'), this is an un-deniable FAIURE of near 'biblical proportions'. LOL

Yep, when the GOP dig a hole, they dig it WIDE AND DEEP. About those bills from the Dem Congress that changed Dubya/GOP policy 2007-2009? lol

 

[easyt65]

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

I LOVE how Liberals try to re-write history, always seeking to blame others for THEIR F*-ups!

"Congressman Frank, of course, blamed the financial crisis on the failure adequately to regulate the banks. In this, he is following the traditional Washington practice of blaming others for his own mistakes. For most of his career, Barney Frank was the principal advocate in Congress for using the government's authority to force lower underwriting standards in the business of housing finance. Although he claims to have tried to reverse course as early as 2003, that was the year he made the oft-quoted remark, "I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation toward subsidized housing." Rather than reversing course, he was pressing on when others were beginning to have doubts."

Barney Frank Misleads Congress:
"You said Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did have a role in pushing this along. How heavily do you think they contributed?
Congressman Frank's response was "They were not the major factor. Let's put it this way: I think you would have had a crisis without them." Once again, Frank makes assertions without numbers. Of the 19.2 million subprime and low quality loans that were on the books of government agencies in 2008, 12 million (about 62%) were held or guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie. No one who has grasped the significance of these numbers--and there is much more data in my dissent--could believe that Fannie and Freddie were "not a major factor." It was the unprecedented number of delinquencies and defaults among these mortgages, as I noted above, that drove down housing prices all over the country and caused the financial crisis. The data and my analysis led me to a conclusion that is exactly the opposite of Congressman Frank's: if it hadn't been for the government's housing policy, there would not have been a financial crisis.

Congressman Frank's response was that Republicans have been distorting the history of the crisis. However, the real history of the deterioration of mortgage underwriting standards, and the reasons for it, are outlined above. For most of his career, Congressman Frank was one of the leaders of the effort in Congress to meet the demands of activists like ACORN for an easing of underwriting standards in order to make home ownership more accessible to more people. It was perhaps a worthwhile goal, but it caused the financial crisis when it was done by lowering mortgage underwriting standards. In the end, it was a colossal policy error by Congress and two presidential administrations. Frank admitted this in the Kudlow interview above. To his credit, Frank recognized his error by 2007, but by that time it was too late. Fannie and Freddie were nearing insolvency and the housing market was so engorged with subprime and other low quality mortgages that nothing could save it."

It was a very NOBLE Liberal idea that EVERYONE deserved a big house to live in...but 'forcing' banks to hand out loans people simply COULD NOT afford was a recipe for disaster. Add in Fannie and Freddie and buffoons like D-Barney Frank at the helm of the 'USS Housing Bubble titanic', lying to Congress, and you have your answer to what REALLY happened.

...but please, don't let fact prevent liberals from continuing to proclaim that they did nothing wrong, that they have never done anything wrong, and that all of the country's woes are SOMEONE ELSE'S FAULT...

 

[bravoactual]

Under President the National Debt has shrunk. Under Bush over 1.5 Million Jobs were lost in the last full quarter of 2008 (September, October, November and December). Under President Obama Unemployment is now 5.3%.

Bush borrowed Billions of Dollars from the People's Republic of (Communist) China to finance the interest on the National Debt (nice of you to ignore that fact).

Heritage Foundation.......Conservative Think Tank.

Pew Research....Conservative Think Tank.

You continue to use Conservative Website to support your Conservative Agenda and wow.....you find conservative facts to support your Conservative Agenda....should I be surprised.

 

[bravoactual]

Hint Ronnie Raygun TRIPLED every other US Prez debt AND Dubya doubled every other US POrez debt (while he lost 1+ million PRIVATE sector jobs).. lol

Obama has added more debt in his 1st 4 years than EVERY US President from Washington to Bush...COMBINED. Considering how Obama VOWED he would cut the deficit in HALF by the end of his 1st term in office (a la '...and if you like your plan / doctor you can keep them'), this is an un-deniable FAIURE of near 'biblical proportions'. LOL

Yep, when the GOP dig a hole, they dig it WIDE AND DEEP. About those bills from the Dem Congress that changed Dubya/GOP policy 2007-2009? lol

Reagan Lied about "Arms for Hostages."

Reagan lent aid and financial support Usama bin Laden and the splinter group that became al_Qeada.

Reagan lent aid, financial and material support to Saddam Hussein.

 

[easyt65]

Ronnie ALSO advocated OPEN BORDERS IN 1980 DEBATES!

Is it NOT bad enough that you liberals continue to point back to a man who has not been President in almost a decade in attempt to pass the buck while distracting any focus on the man who is currently - and has been for 7 years - President and his failed policies, that NOW you have to reach all the way back numerous decades to Reagan to try to do so?
- Compare the situation, the vast numbers of illegals, and not only Obama's refusal to enforce existing law but his violations of it to affect this illegal 'invasion'...there is NO comparison between the 2.

If you ever bring up an Obama policy or issue, like some knee-jerk disease, Liberals can NOT physically / mentally stay on the issue and talk about the current President - they immediately point back decades at someone else. It's just a sad commentary about Obama, that Liberals can not defend / justify his actions, so they are forced to engage in distractions / blame-shifting.

 

[easyt65]

Under President the National Debt has shrunk. Under Bush over 1.5 Million Jobs were lost in the last full quarter of 2008 (September, October, November and December). Under President Obama Unemployment is now 5.3%.

Bush borrowed Billions of Dollars from the People's Republic of (Communist) China to finance the interest on the National Debt (nice of you to ignore that fact).

Heritage Foundation.......Conservative Think Tank.

Pew Research....Conservative Think Tank.

You continue to use Conservative Website to support your Conservative Agenda and wow.....you find conservative facts to support your Conservative Agenda....should I be surprised.

According to OBAMA, the man who said if you liked your plan/doctor you could keep them, unemployment is at 5.3%...which EVERY ECONOMIST knows is B$ because in order to get to that number Obama/Liberals have to completely ignore the 96+ MILLION Americans who are no longer in the US job Force any more. Unemployment for blacks right now is DOUBLE that of whites....

Ownership of our debt by China under Bush...you honestly think BUSH wrote / passed legislation allowing jobs to go over to china, borrowing more money to cover our debt? No, a President by-passing Congress to accomplish his own agenda to this magnitude did not happen until Obama came into office.

And finally, the old liberal ploy of trying to discredit information by declaring the source not to be valid. LOL
(This information was also posted in a report written by a British Political Historical institution...but we all know the Brits are nothing but a bunch of lying Conservatives, too, right?! lol Whenever libs resort to claiming anyone reporting negative information about them or Obama is biased/not valid you know it is one of their last resorts to salvage an argument....like personally attacking someone or declaring opposition to bad policy is only due to racism.

 

[Dad2three]

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

I LOVE how Liberals try to re-write history, always seeking to blame others for THEIR F*-ups!

"Congressman Frank, of course, blamed the financial crisis on the failure adequately to regulate the banks. In this, he is following the traditional Washington practice of blaming others for his own mistakes. For most of his career, Barney Frank was the principal advocate in Congress for using the government's authority to force lower underwriting standards in the business of housing finance. Although he claims to have tried to reverse course as early as 2003, that was the year he made the oft-quoted remark, "I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation toward subsidized housing." Rather than reversing course, he was pressing on when others were beginning to have doubts."

Barney Frank Misleads Congress:
"You said Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did have a role in pushing this along. How heavily do you think they contributed?
Congressman Frank's response was "They were not the major factor. Let's put it this way: I think you would have had a crisis without them." Once again, Frank makes assertions without numbers. Of the 19.2 million subprime and low quality loans that were on the books of government agencies in 2008, 12 million (about 62%) were held or guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie. No one who has grasped the significance of these numbers--and there is much more data in my dissent--could believe that Fannie and Freddie were "not a major factor." It was the unprecedented number of delinquencies and defaults among these mortgages, as I noted above, that drove down housing prices all over the country and caused the financial crisis. The data and my analysis led me to a conclusion that is exactly the opposite of Congressman Frank's: if it hadn't been for the government's housing policy, there would not have been a financial crisis.

Congressman Frank's response was that Republicans have been distorting the history of the crisis. However, the real history of the deterioration of mortgage underwriting standards, and the reasons for it, are outlined above. For most of his career, Congressman Frank was one of the leaders of the effort in Congress to meet the demands of activists like ACORN for an easing of underwriting standards in order to make home ownership more accessible to more people. It was perhaps a worthwhile goal, but it caused the financial crisis when it was done by lowering mortgage underwriting standards. In the end, it was a colossal policy error by Congress and two presidential administrations. Frank admitted this in the Kudlow interview above. To his credit, Frank recognized his error by 2007, but by that time it was too late. Fannie and Freddie were nearing insolvency and the housing market was so engorged with subprime and other low quality mortgages that nothing could save it."

It was a very NOBLE Liberal idea that EVERYONE deserved a big house to live in...but 'forcing' banks to hand out loans people simply COULD NOT afford was a recipe for disaster. Add in Fannie and Freddie and buffoons like D-Barney Frank at the helm of the 'USS Housing Bubble titanic', lying to Congress, and you have your answer to what REALLY happened.

...but please, don't let fact prevent liberals from continuing to proclaim that they did nothing wrong, that they have never done anything wrong, and that all of the country's woes are SOMEONE ELSE'S FAULT...

WAIT, USING ED PINTO'S STATS? SERIOUSLY? lol

What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral


Wall Street has its own version: Its Big Lie is that banks and investment houses are merely victims of the crash. You see, the entire boom and bust was caused by misguided government policies. It was not irresponsible lending or derivative or excess leverage or misguided compensation packages, but rather long-standing housing policies that were at fault.

Indeed, the arguments these folks make fail to withstand even casual scrutiny. But that has not stopped people who should know better from repeating them.

What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral



Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up

When an economy booms or busts, money gets misspent, assets rise in prices, fortunes are made. Out of all that comes a set of easy-to-discern facts.

Here are key things we know based on data. Together, they present a series of tough hurdles for the big lie proponents.

•The boom and bust was global. Proponents of the Big Lie ignore the worldwide nature of the housing boom and bust.

>

The housing boom and bust was global — Source: McKinsey Quarterly
>

A McKinsey Global Institute report noted “from 2000 through 2007, a remarkable run-up in global home prices occurred.” It is highly unlikely that a simultaneous boom and bust everywhere else in the world was caused by one set of factors (ultra-low rates, securitized AAA-rated subprime, derivatives) but had a different set of causes in the United States. Indeed, this might be the biggest obstacle to pushing the false narrative.


For example, if the CRA was to blame, the housing boom would have been in CRA regions; it would have made places such as Harlem and South Philly and Compton and inner Washington the primary locales of the run up and collapse. Further, the default rates in these areas should have been worse than other regions.



CRA were less likely to default than Subprime Mortgages — Source: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

What occurred was the exact opposite


Nonbank mortgage underwriting exploded from 2001 to 2007, along with the private label securitization market, which eclipsed Fannie and Freddie during the boom.

Check the mortgage origination data: The vast majority of subprime mortgages — the loans at the heart of the global crisis — were underwritten by unregulated private firms. These were lenders who sold the bulk of their mortgages to Wall Street, not to Fannie or Freddie. Indeed, these firms had no deposits, so they were not under the jurisdiction of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp or the Office of Thrift Supervision. The relative market share of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac dropped from a high of 57 percent of all new mortgage originations in 2003, down to 37 percent as the bubble was developing in 2005-06.

>

Nonbank mortgage underwriting exploded from 2001 to 2007, along with the private label securitization market, which eclipsed Fannie and Freddie during the boom – Source: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

•Private lenders not subject to congressional regulations collapsed lending standards



Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up | The Big Picture

 

[easyt65]

Reagan Lied about "Arms for Hostages."

Reagan lent aid and financial support Usama bin Laden and the splinter group that became al_Qeada.

Reagan lent aid, financial and material support to Saddam Hussein.

'Dude', 'Reagan...Reagan...Reagan....' The guy hasn't been President for 30+ Years...and he's DEAD! You can go back 30+ years in an attempt to distract from talking about this nations biggest lying current President but you can't talk about the current President. Please, come join us in THIS reality, to a 'present' where we can actually hold someone in charge accountable instead of harping on a dead President from decades ago who no one can hold accountable for anything!

 

[easyt65]

Blah, blah, blah...

SERIOUSLY? BANKS, like Freddie and Fannie, who were at the heart of the housing bubble disaster, were the victims? Frank was caught red-handed lying to Congress about the collapse. As he sat before Congress and told them there was no problem the bubble was already starting to burst...but why would Frank lie to save the GOP who liberals claim were the real culprits. That makes no sense. DUH...because it is liberal B$! Frank and Liberals try to cover for Freddie & Fannie, their own pressure on banks to reduce the standards for proving people could afford the houses they were getting loans for...because no matter what people deserved to own their own houses, whether they could afford them or not.

Like I predicted, Liberals will fight to their last dying breath to try to convince people they have never done anything wrong, are not doing anything wrong, and will never do anything wrong...as Obama has demonstrated as President...it's ALWAYS someone else's fault!

 

[Dad2three]

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

I LOVE how Liberals try to re-write history, always seeking to blame others for THEIR F*-ups!

"Congressman Frank, of course, blamed the financial crisis on the failure adequately to regulate the banks. In this, he is following the traditional Washington practice of blaming others for his own mistakes. For most of his career, Barney Frank was the principal advocate in Congress for using the government's authority to force lower underwriting standards in the business of housing finance. Although he claims to have tried to reverse course as early as 2003, that was the year he made the oft-quoted remark, "I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation toward subsidized housing." Rather than reversing course, he was pressing on when others were beginning to have doubts."

Barney Frank Misleads Congress:
"You said Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did have a role in pushing this along. How heavily do you think they contributed?
Congressman Frank's response was "They were not the major factor. Let's put it this way: I think you would have had a crisis without them." Once again, Frank makes assertions without numbers. Of the 19.2 million subprime and low quality loans that were on the books of government agencies in 2008, 12 million (about 62%) were held or guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie. No one who has grasped the significance of these numbers--and there is much more data in my dissent--could believe that Fannie and Freddie were "not a major factor." It was the unprecedented number of delinquencies and defaults among these mortgages, as I noted above, that drove down housing prices all over the country and caused the financial crisis. The data and my analysis led me to a conclusion that is exactly the opposite of Congressman Frank's: if it hadn't been for the government's housing policy, there would not have been a financial crisis.

Congressman Frank's response was that Republicans have been distorting the history of the crisis. However, the real history of the deterioration of mortgage underwriting standards, and the reasons for it, are outlined above. For most of his career, Congressman Frank was one of the leaders of the effort in Congress to meet the demands of activists like ACORN for an easing of underwriting standards in order to make home ownership more accessible to more people. It was perhaps a worthwhile goal, but it caused the financial crisis when it was done by lowering mortgage underwriting standards. In the end, it was a colossal policy error by Congress and two presidential administrations. Frank admitted this in the Kudlow interview above. To his credit, Frank recognized his error by 2007, but by that time it was too late. Fannie and Freddie were nearing insolvency and the housing market was so engorged with subprime and other low quality mortgages that nothing could save it."

It was a very NOBLE Liberal idea that EVERYONE deserved a big house to live in...but 'forcing' banks to hand out loans people simply COULD NOT afford was a recipe for disaster. Add in Fannie and Freddie and buffoons like D-Barney Frank at the helm of the 'USS Housing Bubble titanic', lying to Congress, and you have your answer to what REALLY happened.

...but please, don't let fact prevent liberals from continuing to proclaim that they did nothing wrong, that they have never done anything wrong, and that all of the country's woes are SOMEONE ELSE'S FAULT...

Faulty Conclusions Based on Shoddy Foundations

FCIC Commissioner Peter Wallison and Other Commentators Rely
on Flawed Data from Edward Pinto to Misplace the Causes of the
2008 Financial Crisis

RELEASE: Faulty Conclusions Based on Shoddy Foundations–FCIC Commissioner Peter Wallison and Other Commentators Rely on Flawed Data from Edward Pinto to Misplace the Causes of the 2008 Financial Crisis

lol

Mortgages, Ed Pinto, And A Vast Conspiracy Of Silence

Peter Wallison, also of the American Enterprise Institute, showed a truly heroic level of loyalty to his colleague. As a member of the Financial Crisis inquiry Commission, Wallison eagerly touted Pinto's research. But when staffers tried to compare actual loan performance to Pinto's predictions, Wallison became furious and indignant. Staffers diligently kept reviewing Pinto's work, which had been personally disseminated to other FCIC commissioners, and they met with him repeatedly. But they could never square the circle, as they explained in a memosent throughout the FCIC. The final FCIC Report discussed the basic flaws of Pinto's work.

Mortgages, Ed Pinto, And A Vast Conspiracy Of Silence



GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance


By way of contrast, during the 1991–2007 period, commercial banks' average annual loss rate on single family mortgages was about 15 basis points. During the 2008-2011 period, annual losses were 184 basis points.

Or check out the FHFA study that compares, on an apples-to-apples basis, GSEs loan originations with those for private label securitizations. The study segments loans four ways, by ARMs-versus-fixed-rate, as well as by vintage, by FICO score and by loan-to-value ratio. In almost every one of 1800 different comparisons covering years 2001 through 2008, GSE loan performance was exponentially better. On average, GSE fixed-rate loans performed four times better, and GSE ARMs performed five times better.

Mortgage analyst Laurie Goodman estimated that private label securitizations issued during 2005-2007 incurred a loss rate of 24%, whereas the GSE loss rate for 2005-2007 vintage loans was closer to 4%.

http://www.americanbanker.com/bankthink/gse-critics-ignore-loan-performance-1059187-1.html

 

[Dad2three]

Blah, blah, blah...

SERIOUSLY? BANKS, like Freddie and Fannie, who were at the heart of the housing bubble disaster, were the victims? Frank was caught red-handed lying to Congress about the collapse. As he sat before Congress and told them there was no problem the bubble was already starting to burst...but why would Frank lie to save the GOP who liberals claim were the real culprits. That makes no sense. DUH...because it is liberal B$! Frank and Liberals try to cover for Freddie & Fannie, their own pressure on banks to reduce the standards for proving people could afford the houses they were getting loans for...because no matter what people deserved to own their own houses, whether they could afford them or not.

Like I predicted, Liberals will fight to their last dying breath to try to convince people they have never done anything wrong, are not doing anything wrong, and will never do anything wrong...as Obama has demonstrated as President...it's ALWAYS someone else's fault!

Barney Frank? Oh right talking about the F/F ACCOUNTING SCANDALS of 2003-2004, before Dubya;'s subprime bubble started? AND? What super powers did Barney have in the GOP MAJORITY HOUSE 1995-JAB 2007 AGAIN? You know simple majority ruled right?


GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance


Money talks. It says the only way to measure the quality of mortgage underwriting is to track loan performance — delinquency and default rates, loss severity — in comparison with the rest of the mortgage market. Otherwise, any analysis of the government-sponsored enterprises' role in housing finance is meaningless.

And yet, critics demanding GSE reform ignore the topic altogether.


There is no data anywhere to cast doubt on the vastly superior loan performance of the GSEs. Year after year, decade after decade, before, during and after the housing crash, GSE loan performance has consistently been two-to-six times better than that of any other segment of the market. The numbers are irrefutable, and they show that the entire case against GSE underwriting standards, and their role in the financial crisis, is based on social stereotyping, smoke and mirrors, and little else.

http://www.americanbanker.com/bankthink/gse-critics-ignore-loan-performance-1059187-1.html




Your projection is noted on CONservatives and their followers Bubba

 

[Dad2three]

Under President the National Debt has shrunk. Under Bush over 1.5 Million Jobs were lost in the last full quarter of 2008 (September, October, November and December). Under President Obama Unemployment is now 5.3%.

Bush borrowed Billions of Dollars from the People's Republic of (Communist) China to finance the interest on the National Debt (nice of you to ignore that fact).

Heritage Foundation.......Conservative Think Tank.

Pew Research....Conservative Think Tank.

You continue to use Conservative Website to support your Conservative Agenda and wow.....you find conservative facts to support your Conservative Agenda....should I be surprised.

According to OBAMA, the man who said if you liked your plan/doctor you could keep them, unemployment is at 5.3%...which EVERY ECONOMIST knows is B$ because in order to get to that number Obama/Liberals have to completely ignore the 96+ MILLION Americans who are no longer in the US job Force any more. Unemployment for blacks right now is DOUBLE that of whites....

Ownership of our debt by China under Bush...you honestly think BUSH wrote / passed legislation allowing jobs to go over to china, borrowing more money to cover our debt? No, a President by-passing Congress to accomplish his own agenda to this magnitude did not happen until Obama came into office.

And finally, the old liberal ploy of trying to discredit information by declaring the source not to be valid. LOL
(This information was also posted in a report written by a British Political Historical institution...but we all know the Brits are nothing but a bunch of lying Conservatives, too, right?! lol Whenever libs resort to claiming anyone reporting negative information about them or Obama is biased/not valid you know it is one of their last resorts to salvage an argument....like personally attacking someone or declaring opposition to bad policy is only due to racism.

lol

Retirement Among Baby Boomers Contributing To Shrinking Labor Force


Demographics have always played a big role in the rise and fall of the labor force. Between 1960 and 2000, the labor force in the United States surged from 59 percent to a peak of 67.3 percent. That was largely due to the fact that more women were entering the labor force while improvements in health and information technology allowed Americans to work more years.

But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does.

In a March report titled "Dispelling an Urban Legend," Dean Maki, an economist at Barclays Capital, found that demographics accounted for a majority of the drop in the participation rate since 2002.


The incredible shrinking labor force

 

[Dad2three]

Blah, blah, blah...

SERIOUSLY? BANKS, like Freddie and Fannie, who were at the heart of the housing bubble disaster, were the victims? Frank was caught red-handed lying to Congress about the collapse. As he sat before Congress and told them there was no problem the bubble was already starting to burst...but why would Frank lie to save the GOP who liberals claim were the real culprits. That makes no sense. DUH...because it is liberal B$! Frank and Liberals try to cover for Freddie & Fannie, their own pressure on banks to reduce the standards for proving people could afford the houses they were getting loans for...because no matter what people deserved to own their own houses, whether they could afford them or not.

Like I predicted, Liberals will fight to their last dying breath to try to convince people they have never done anything wrong, are not doing anything wrong, and will never do anything wrong...as Obama has demonstrated as President...it's ALWAYS someone else's fault!

Sorry Bubs, F/F isn't a bank


YOU MEAN 2003-2004 ACCOUNTING SCANDALS THE VIDS WERE ABOUT BUBBA? SERIOUSLY? BEFORE DUBYA HOSED THEM AS THE ACTUAL REGULATOR OF F/F??? LOL

Yes, their own words CONTEXT of 2003-2004 BEFORE Dubya foeced F/F to join in on his subprime bubble dumbass!

KNOW WHO ELSE WASN'T IN TROUBLE IN 2003-2005? AIG, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns, WAMU, AND DOZENS OF OTHER LARGE PLAYERS WHO WENT UNDER. Weird right? What happened?



Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”


YEP RIGHTIES, DUBYA WAS REGULATOR OF THE GSE'S (F/F) FROM 2001-2009 and he FORCED F/F to purchase $440 BILLION in MBS's in the secondary market (2003-2008), Changed Clinton's 2000 rule that restricted using subprime loans to meet the "affordable housing goals" (2004) AND TO TOP IT OFF, CHANGED THEIR GOALS FROM 50% TO 56% (2004)

YEP, F/F FAILED, THANKS TO DUBYA AND HIS POLICIES BUBBA

 

[bravoactual]

Ronnie ALSO advocated OPEN BORDERS IN 1980 DEBATES!

Is it NOT bad enough that you liberals continue to point back to a man who has not been President in almost a decade in attempt to pass the buck while distracting any focus on the man who is currently - and has been for 7 years - President and his failed policies, that NOW you have to reach all the way back numerous decades to Reagan to try to do so?
- Compare the situation, the vast numbers of illegals, and not only Obama's refusal to enforce existing law but his violations of it to affect this illegal 'invasion'...there is NO comparison between the 2.

If you ever bring up an Obama policy or issue, like some knee-jerk disease, Liberals can NOT physically / mentally stay on the issue and talk about the current President - they immediately point back decades at someone else. It's just a sad commentary about Obama, that Liberals can not defend / justify his actions, so they are forced to engage in distractions / blame-shifting.

I know.

I know.

Facts give you a headache.

Ronald Reagan is YOUR GOD.

Ronald Reagan could do not wrong.

How Dare We Attack The Ronnie God.

Get over it.