More economic GOOD News...DOW hits new record..on track to hit 17K.

[Sallow]

Do you think the street lies? Who is benefiting under the current gains, middle class Americans?

Yes irony that you would use the Dows gain...

Typical double standard...

I worked for the NYSE for 13.5 years..and now I work for a new financial firm.

There's no "double standard", I have a vested interest in a healthy market.

As do most Americans who have 401ks and other retirement plans or a stock portfolio.

Additionally a healthy stock market generally indicates an economy that's either healthy or recovering.

Only doom sayers think this is bad news.

I am all for a healthy financial market, always have been...

The 20MILL who are still unemployed would love it too if they had a 401K...

The Double Standard you will display comes later, you know it and so does everyone else...

The Admin has failed miserably at creating a Recovery...

As I've posted numerous times in this VERY THREAD, the job losses in the private sector that occurred during the Bush administration in the private sector HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY REVERSED.

What hasn't been reversed is the job losses in the PUBLIC SECTOR.

As you folks want to shrink government recovering those losses are completely incompatible with your agenda.

At least when there is a Democrat at the helm.


Because during the Reagan and George W. Bush years, hiring in the public sector was robust.

 

[Sallow]

Read it an weep gloom and doom conserverinos!

Dow Average and S&P 500 Hit New Highs
Stocks Notch Records as Beaten-Down Shares Mount a Rally

nvestors snapped up shares of companies large and small, driving major indexes to records and reviving beaten-down technology stocks.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed 112.13 points, or 0.7%, to 16695.47, notching its second record finish in as many sessions and its third new high of 2014. The Dow notched 52 records in 2013.

The S&P 500 added 18.17 points, or 1%, to 1896.65, squeezing out its ninth record close of the year.

That along with a great April jobs report should really be making you folks cry.

How is this going to help all the people on food stamps and the unemployed?

Funny how you libs were all about "Occupy Wall Street" to protest their obscene profits at the expense of the poor, but now you try to use their "good news" as an Obama victory.

Well it should put to rest the notion that all these rich folks "care" about America and/or her people.

They don't.

Got it now?

 

[Faun]

More denial. Hear it from Bill Clinton himself.

Bill Clinton Blames Democrats for Housing Mess

When asked a poignant question about Democrat claims that the sub-primes crisis was the fault of Republicans, Bill Clinton blames the bulk of the mess on Democrats in Congress blocking Republican as well as his reforms to Fannie and Freddie.

Read more at LiveLeak.com - Bill Clinton Blames Democrats for Housing Mess

When we stop to realize that Democrats took control of both the House and the Senate during the last two years of the Bush Presidency, we must ask why they failed to take the appropriate actions to implement this legislation.

If a few Republicans are responsible for the obstruction of most of the Obama agenda, then why couldn't a Democratic majority do something to stop Bush from causing the recession?

Had the Democrat Senate passed the bill, the White House would have had to take a stand. Also, if the Democrats were so favorable towards the reform, why is it that they had 40% of their Reps vote against it when the Republicans only had 6% vote against it? Then we can also look at 2007 when President Bush went before Congress to push for regulations on Fannie and Freddie, and Pelosi wouldn't even consider it. Leadership goes both ways. Mostly, it's hard to get Congress to act on something before it becomes a crisis, unless they can garnish votes from it. It would have been very difficult for any Congressman to return to their constituents and say "See... we headed off a crisis... do you see a crisis? No, because we avoided that." Voter's don't buy that, they want to see a crisis, then a response to it... and the housing crisis, was created by Congress pushing subprime loans back in the Clinton administration.


The Democrats BTW, opposed the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (S.190)

The point is there is plenty of blame to go around and it was a bipartisan problem. Blaming it all on Bush is ridiculous and nothing short of left wing hack shit.

Go figure, Clinton didn't actually say what you ascribe to him. In that video, he never assigned the bulk of the blame on Democrats or himself ... nor did he say that Democrats "blocked" Republicans. What he actually said was that where Democrats get blame is for "resisting calls for additional oversight by himself and Republicans. He doesn't say they "blocked" Republicans -- because they didn't, as you can see for yourself if you lookup any of the bills I mentioned which Republican leadership in the Senate killed. Furthermore, despite your fallacious claim that Clinton placed the "bulk of the blame" at Democrats' feet, had you watched the video, you would see he placed most of the blame on the repeal of the 'uptick rule.'

Oh really? Is that what you heard him say?

Let me tell you precisely what he said.

Interviewer: "Pelosi signed the Graham Bill, she knew what was in the bill when she signed it, isn't she playing politics right now?"

Clinton: "Well, maybe everybody does that a little bit. The responsibility the democrats have may rest MORE in RESISTING ANY EFFORTS of THE REPUBLICANS in congress or me when I was president to put some standards in to tighten up on Fannie May and Freddie Mac."


So, the responsibility of the democrats may rest more in the fact they resisted the republicans in congress to put any standards to tighten up on Fannie May and Freddie Mac.

What is it that I ascribe and what are you saying Clinton did not actually say?

So no, according to rightwinger it was ONLY ONE FAG (his words not mine) that resisted. Democrats never voted with any attempts the republicans made to put regulations on Fanny May and Freddie Mac.


What in your estimation does Clinton mean when he admitted democrats resisted ANY EFFORTS republicans made?

Why are you asking me to tell you what I heard Clinton say when you just repeated what I said?? I said Clinton blamed Democrats for "resisting" oversight proposed by him and Republicans. My only hope is that you can distinguish "resisting" from "blocking," which is what you wrongly claimed Democrats did.

Do you agree with the rest of Clinton's assessment?

 

[Faun]

I worked for the NYSE for 13.5 years..and now I work for a new financial firm.

There's no "double standard", I have a vested interest in a healthy market.

As do most Americans who have 401ks and other retirement plans or a stock portfolio.

Additionally a healthy stock market generally indicates an economy that's either healthy or recovering.

Only doom sayers think this is bad news.

I am all for a healthy financial market, always have been...

The 20MILL who are still unemployed would love it too if they had a 401K...

The Double Standard you will display comes later, you know it and so does everyone else...

The Admin has failed miserably at creating a Recovery...

As I've posted numerous times in this VERY THREAD, the job losses in the private sector that occurred during the Bush administration in the private sector HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY REVERSED.

What hasn't been reversed is the job losses in the PUBLIC SECTOR.

As you folks want to shrink government recovering those losses are completely incompatible with your agenda.

At least when there is a Democrat at the helm.


Because during the Reagan and George W. Bush years, hiring in the public sector was robust.

This goes to show just how retarded the right is .... they cry about they want smaller government -- but then attack Obama for shrinking the government.

 

[Theowl32]

Go figure, Clinton didn't actually say what you ascribe to him. In that video, he never assigned the bulk of the blame on Democrats or himself ... nor did he say that Democrats "blocked" Republicans. What he actually said was that where Democrats get blame is for "resisting calls for additional oversight by himself and Republicans. He doesn't say they "blocked" Republicans -- because they didn't, as you can see for yourself if you lookup any of the bills I mentioned which Republican leadership in the Senate killed. Furthermore, despite your fallacious claim that Clinton placed the "bulk of the blame" at Democrats' feet, had you watched the video, you would see he placed most of the blame on the repeal of the 'uptick rule.'

Oh really? Is that what you heard him say?

Let me tell you precisely what he said.

Interviewer: "Pelosi signed the Graham Bill, she knew what was in the bill when she signed it, isn't she playing politics right now?"

Clinton: "Well, maybe everybody does that a little bit. The responsibility the democrats have may rest MORE in RESISTING ANY EFFORTS of THE REPUBLICANS in congress or me when I was president to put some standards in to tighten up on Fannie May and Freddie Mac."


So, the responsibility of the democrats may rest more in the fact they resisted the republicans in congress to put any standards to tighten up on Fannie May and Freddie Mac.

What is it that I ascribe and what are you saying Clinton did not actually say?

So no, according to rightwinger it was ONLY ONE FAG (his words not mine) that resisted. Democrats never voted with any attempts the republicans made to put regulations on Fanny May and Freddie Mac.


What in your estimation does Clinton mean when he admitted democrats resisted ANY EFFORTS republicans made?

Why are you asking me to tell you what I heard Clinton say when you just repeated what I said?? I said Clinton blamed Democrats for "resisting" oversight proposed by him and Republicans. My only hope is that you can distinguish "resisting" from "blocking," which is what you wrongly claimed Democrats did.

Do you agree with the rest of Clinton's assessment?

Yeah, he coughed, paused uncomfortably, and said.....uhhhh "maybe" they all play politics.

You sitting there making some distinction between resisting EVERY effort the Republicans made to tighten up Fannie and Freddie and BLOCKING is splitting hairs at best, absurd reaching at worst on your part.

The republicans did not have the number of votes to pass legislation to put stricter regulations.

Yes, Bush passed the American Dream Down payment Act. Which in every sense of the word is something Democrats wanted, and they certainly did not offer up much resistance to it.

This dates back further than 2003 and that is not what you are getting.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - NYTimes.com

New York Times in September 30, 1999:

“Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits. . . .

”Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990′s by reducing down payment requirements,” said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae’s chairman and chief executive officer. ”Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.” . . .

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980′s.“

”From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”


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

The bill was useless without limiting the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Democrats were too worried that evil private companies without government oversight would get to much power and they were worried that the CRA would be weakened.

You can blame the Republicans for being too dumb to put it through anyway, but the whole Congress was corrupt. That's why they got thrown out. Everyone including Republicans were in the back pocket of the lending industry.



Frank's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco - The Boston Globe

Congressman Barney Frank beats Sean Bielat, is re-elected to 16th term - News - The Herald News, Fall River, MA - Fall River, MA

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

This also dates back to 1994 actually. In 1994, Barack Obama was one of the plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit, alleging that Citibank had engaged in practices that discriminated against minorities. The lawsuit forced the bank to ease its lending practices.
The Daily Caller reported:

Obama pushed banks to give subprime loans to Chicago blacks | The Daily Caller

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices…

…Obama has pursued the same top-down mortgage lending policies in the White House.

Obama’s lawsuit was one element of a national “anti-redlining” campaign led by Chicago’s progressive groups, who argued that banks unfairly refused to lend money to people living within so-called “redlines” around African-American communities. The campaign was powered by progressives’ moral claim that their expertise could boost home ownership among the United States’ most disadvantaged minority, African-Americans.


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

Which one of these warnings by the Bush administration are untrue? Just wondering. You can say it did not happen. These are all official archived warnings. Not made up by "Faux News."

** 2001

April: The Administration’s FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is “a potential problem,” because “financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.”

** 2002

May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

** 2003

January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.” As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)

September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations.

September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises” and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any “legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk.” To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have “broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards” and “receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

** 2004

February: The President’s FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator.” (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to “not take [the financial market's] strength for granted.” Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by “ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, “Keeping Fannie And Freddie’s House In Order,” Financial Times, 2/24/04)

June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying “We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System.” (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

** 2005

April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.” (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05)

** 2007

July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.

August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying “first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options.” (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)

September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.

September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.

December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying “These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I’ve called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon.” (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)

** 2008

January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.

January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.

February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says “A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully.” (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.

March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and “move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation
and “modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.

“Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)

“[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)

“Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying “we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

July: Congress heeds the President’s call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.



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

Now, go ahead and read all of those warnings. I am trying to find the mass resistance democrats made when Bush signed the American Down Payment Act of 2003. Was there mass resistance? I was trying to find Pelosi with her silver dollar hyper active eyes saying she was against the AMerican Down Payment Act in 2003. Did any democrat "resist" that? Who. List them and quote them.

The fingerprints of democrats and republicans are all over the entire mess. The notion that it is all on Bush is beyond absurd.

 

[Faun]

Oh really? Is that what you heard him say?

Let me tell you precisely what he said.

Interviewer: "Pelosi signed the Graham Bill, she knew what was in the bill when she signed it, isn't she playing politics right now?"

Clinton: "Well, maybe everybody does that a little bit. The responsibility the democrats have may rest MORE in RESISTING ANY EFFORTS of THE REPUBLICANS in congress or me when I was president to put some standards in to tighten up on Fannie May and Freddie Mac."


So, the responsibility of the democrats may rest more in the fact they resisted the republicans in congress to put any standards to tighten up on Fannie May and Freddie Mac.

What is it that I ascribe and what are you saying Clinton did not actually say?

So no, according to rightwinger it was ONLY ONE FAG (his words not mine) that resisted. Democrats never voted with any attempts the republicans made to put regulations on Fanny May and Freddie Mac.


What in your estimation does Clinton mean when he admitted democrats resisted ANY EFFORTS republicans made?

Why are you asking me to tell you what I heard Clinton say when you just repeated what I said?? I said Clinton blamed Democrats for "resisting" oversight proposed by him and Republicans. My only hope is that you can distinguish "resisting" from "blocking," which is what you wrongly claimed Democrats did.

Do you agree with the rest of Clinton's assessment?

Yeah, he coughed, paused uncomfortably, and said.....uhhhh "maybe" they all play politics.

You sitting there making some distinction between resisting EVERY effort the Republicans made to tighten up Fannie and Freddie and BLOCKING is splitting hairs at best, absurd reaching at worst on your part.

The republicans did not have the number of votes to pass legislation to put stricter regulations.

Yes, Bush passed the American Dream Down payment Act. Which in every sense of the word is something Democrats wanted, and they certainly did not offer up much resistance to it.

This dates back further than 2003 and that is not what you are getting.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - NYTimes.com

New York Times in September 30, 1999:

“Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits. . . .

”Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990′s by reducing down payment requirements,” said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae’s chairman and chief executive officer. ”Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.” . . .

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980′s.“

”From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”


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

The bill was useless without limiting the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Democrats were too worried that evil private companies without government oversight would get to much power and they were worried that the CRA would be weakened.

You can blame the Republicans for being too dumb to put it through anyway, but the whole Congress was corrupt. That's why they got thrown out. Everyone including Republicans were in the back pocket of the lending industry.



Frank's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco - The Boston Globe

Congressman Barney Frank beats Sean Bielat, is re-elected to 16th term - News - The Herald News, Fall River, MA - Fall River, MA

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

This also dates back to 1994 actually. In 1994, Barack Obama was one of the plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit, alleging that Citibank had engaged in practices that discriminated against minorities. The lawsuit forced the bank to ease its lending practices.
The Daily Caller reported:

Obama pushed banks to give subprime loans to Chicago blacks | The Daily Caller

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices…

…Obama has pursued the same top-down mortgage lending policies in the White House.

Obama’s lawsuit was one element of a national “anti-redlining” campaign led by Chicago’s progressive groups, who argued that banks unfairly refused to lend money to people living within so-called “redlines” around African-American communities. The campaign was powered by progressives’ moral claim that their expertise could boost home ownership among the United States’ most disadvantaged minority, African-Americans.


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

Which one of these warnings by the Bush administration are untrue? Just wondering. You can say it did not happen. These are all official archived warnings. Not made up by "Faux News."

** 2001

April: The Administration’s FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is “a potential problem,” because “financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.”

** 2002

May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

** 2003

January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.” As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)

September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations.

September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises” and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any “legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk.” To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have “broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards” and “receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

** 2004

February: The President’s FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator.” (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to “not take [the financial market's] strength for granted.” Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by “ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, “Keeping Fannie And Freddie’s House In Order,” Financial Times, 2/24/04)

June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying “We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System.” (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

** 2005

April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.” (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05)

** 2007

July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.

August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying “first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options.” (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)

September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.

September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.

December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying “These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I’ve called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon.” (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)

** 2008

January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.

January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.

February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says “A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully.” (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.

March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and “move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation
and “modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.

“Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)

“[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)

“Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying “we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

July: Congress heeds the President’s call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.



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

Now, go ahead and read all of those warnings. I am trying to find the mass resistance democrats made when Bush signed the American Down Payment Act of 2003. Was there mass resistance? I was trying to find Pelosi with her silver dollar hyper active eyes saying she was against the AMerican Down Payment Act in 2003. Did any democrat "resist" that? Who. List them and quote them.

The fingerprints of democrats and republicans are all over the entire mess. The notion that it is all on Bush is beyond absurd.

Does this mean you're giving up on that Clinton video where you wrongly thought he was mostly blaming Democrats, when in fact, he was mostly blaming Republicans?

And by the way, I myself have never limited blame to just George Bush. But even Bush knew who was responsible as he spoke to a crowd of Republicans and said, "thanks to OUR policies, home ownership in America is at an all-time high."

As far as blaming the CRA, that's ridiculous since only a small portion of the toxic loans which tanked our economy were CRA loans.

As far as all the warnings... it baffles me how you can blame Democrats. You post warnings going back early into the Bush administration, but Republicans controlled the House all that time until 2007 and the Senate from 2003 to 2007. They were the ones in charge. They were the ones who needed to pass oversight. They didn't, so now you blame Democrats because they "resisted." Though you've already changed your tune because early, you wrongly claimed they "blocked" oversight. And yes, realize it or not, there is a difference between "resist" and "block." Which is why Clinton accurately blamed them for "resisting," and not "blocking," oversight.

As far as you pointing out how Bush then turned to Democrats to give him a bill to sign after Republicans failed him after 4 years of total control of the Congress ... you fail to mention that Democrats passed a bill with oversight and got it to his desk, which he then signed into law. Something Republicans failed to do.

 

[Theowl32]

Why are you asking me to tell you what I heard Clinton say when you just repeated what I said?? I said Clinton blamed Democrats for "resisting" oversight proposed by him and Republicans. My only hope is that you can distinguish "resisting" from "blocking," which is what you wrongly claimed Democrats did.

Do you agree with the rest of Clinton's assessment?

Yeah, he coughed, paused uncomfortably, and said.....uhhhh "maybe" they all play politics.

You sitting there making some distinction between resisting EVERY effort the Republicans made to tighten up Fannie and Freddie and BLOCKING is splitting hairs at best, absurd reaching at worst on your part.

The republicans did not have the number of votes to pass legislation to put stricter regulations.

Yes, Bush passed the American Dream Down payment Act. Which in every sense of the word is something Democrats wanted, and they certainly did not offer up much resistance to it.

This dates back further than 2003 and that is not what you are getting.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - NYTimes.com

New York Times in September 30, 1999:

“Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits. . . .

”Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990′s by reducing down payment requirements,” said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae’s chairman and chief executive officer. ”Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.” . . .

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980′s.“

”From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”


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

The bill was useless without limiting the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Democrats were too worried that evil private companies without government oversight would get to much power and they were worried that the CRA would be weakened.

You can blame the Republicans for being too dumb to put it through anyway, but the whole Congress was corrupt. That's why they got thrown out. Everyone including Republicans were in the back pocket of the lending industry.



Frank's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco - The Boston Globe

Congressman Barney Frank beats Sean Bielat, is re-elected to 16th term - News - The Herald News, Fall River, MA - Fall River, MA

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

This also dates back to 1994 actually. In 1994, Barack Obama was one of the plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit, alleging that Citibank had engaged in practices that discriminated against minorities. The lawsuit forced the bank to ease its lending practices.
The Daily Caller reported:

Obama pushed banks to give subprime loans to Chicago blacks | The Daily Caller

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices…

…Obama has pursued the same top-down mortgage lending policies in the White House.

Obama’s lawsuit was one element of a national “anti-redlining” campaign led by Chicago’s progressive groups, who argued that banks unfairly refused to lend money to people living within so-called “redlines” around African-American communities. The campaign was powered by progressives’ moral claim that their expertise could boost home ownership among the United States’ most disadvantaged minority, African-Americans.


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

Which one of these warnings by the Bush administration are untrue? Just wondering. You can say it did not happen. These are all official archived warnings. Not made up by "Faux News."

** 2001

April: The Administration’s FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is “a potential problem,” because “financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.”

** 2002

May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

** 2003

January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.” As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)

September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations.

September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises” and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any “legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk.” To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have “broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards” and “receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

** 2004

February: The President’s FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator.” (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to “not take [the financial market's] strength for granted.” Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by “ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, “Keeping Fannie And Freddie’s House In Order,” Financial Times, 2/24/04)

June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying “We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System.” (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

** 2005

April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.” (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05)

** 2007

July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.

August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying “first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options.” (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)

September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.

September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.

December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying “These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I’ve called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon.” (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)

** 2008

January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.

January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.

February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says “A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully.” (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.

March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and “move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation
and “modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.

“Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)

“[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)

“Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying “we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

July: Congress heeds the President’s call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.



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

Now, go ahead and read all of those warnings. I am trying to find the mass resistance democrats made when Bush signed the American Down Payment Act of 2003. Was there mass resistance? I was trying to find Pelosi with her silver dollar hyper active eyes saying she was against the AMerican Down Payment Act in 2003. Did any democrat "resist" that? Who. List them and quote them.

The fingerprints of democrats and republicans are all over the entire mess. The notion that it is all on Bush is beyond absurd.

Does this mean you're giving up on that Clinton video where you wrongly thought he was mostly blaming Democrats, when in fact, he was mostly blaming Republicans?

And by the way, I myself have never limited blame to just George Bush. But even Bush knew who was responsible as he spoke to a crowd of Republicans and said, "thanks to OUR policies, home ownership in America is at an all-time high."

As far as blaming the CRA, that's ridiculous since only a small portion of the toxic loans which tanked our economy were CRA loans.

As far as all the warnings... it baffles me how you can blame Democrats. You post warnings going back early into the Bush administration, but Republicans controlled the House all that time until 2007 and the Senate from 2003 to 2007. They were the ones in charge. They were the ones who needed to pass oversight. They didn't, so now you blame Democrats because they "resisted." Though you've already changed your tune because early, you wrongly claimed they "blocked" oversight. And yes, realize it or not, there is a difference between "resist" and "block." Which is why Clinton accurately blamed them for "resisting," and not "blocking," oversight.

As far as you pointing out how Bush then turned to Democrats to give him a bill to sign after Republicans failed him after 4 years of total control of the Congress ... you fail to mention that Democrats passed a bill with oversight and got it to his desk, which he then signed into law. Something Republicans failed to do.

No, considering he said democrats resisted every attempt to tighten Fannie and Freddie.

Sorry, that is something you do not think he said, but it is. Sorry.

Here are vast areas that you conveniently ignore. Let me see if I can list them for you, since you will not show the list of democrats that "resisted" Bush passing the Home Down Payment Act.

> With an implicit subsidy to American homeowners in the form of reduced mortgage rates, Fannie Mae and its sister government sponsored enterprise, Freddie Mac, squeezed out their competition and cornered the secondary mortgage market. They took advantage of a $2.25 billion line of credit from the U.S. Treasury.

> Congress, by statute, allowed them to operate with much lower capital requirements than private-sector competitors. They "used their congressionally-granted advantages to leverage themselves in excess of 70-to-1."

> The two GSEs were the only publicly traded corporations exempt from SEC oversight. All their securities carried an implicit AAA rating regardless of the quality of the mortgages.

> The Department of Housing and Urban Development set quotas for GSE investment in affordable housing.

> Encouraged by an inaccurate 1992 Boston Federal Reserve Bank study charging racial discrimination in mortgage lending, the two GSEs were strongly pressured to "lower their underwriting standards, particularly on the size of down payments and the credit quality of borrowers."

> In 1992, Congress directed HUD to establish multiple quotas requiring mortgage quotes for low-income families.

> In 1995, the Clinton administration issued a National Homeownership Strategy, loosening Fannie and Freddie's lending standards and insisting that lenders "work collaboratively to reduce homebuyer downpayment requirements."

> The administration complained that in 1989 only 7% of mortgages had less than a 10% downpayment. By 1994, it wanted that raised to 29%.

> Reduced underwriting standards spread into the entire U.S. mortgage market to those at all income levels.

> A complete decoupling of home prices from Americans' income fed the growth of the housing bubble as borrowers made smaller down payments and took on higher debt.

> Wall Street firms specializing "in packaging and investing in the lowest-quality tranches of mortgage-backed securities, profited hugely from the increased volume that government affordable lending policies sparked."

> Wall Street firms, homebuilders and the GSEs used money, power and influence to block attempts at reform. Between 1998 and 2008, Fannie and Freddie spent over $176 million on lobbyists.

> In 2006, Freddie paid the largest fine in Federal Election Commission history for improperly using corporate resources to hold 85 fundraisers for congressmen, raising a total of $1.7 million.



I will post the 1999 article by the NY Times AGAIN since you will not acknowledge the fingerprints of the democrats.

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html

Read that again.

Here is another NY Times Article that shows conclusively that both parties bear great responsibility.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/b...l=1&adxnnlx=1400594480-37/dHKKNfA6MdJDUCQKOHg

Both parties bear responsibility for that, because there was little controversy over it when it was happening. Alan Greenspan, then the chairman of the Federal Reserve, believed that the new products could distribute risk to investors, who were better able to bear it than was the banking system he was charged with regulating, and few legislators were willing to challenge Mr. Greenspan on what appeared to be an arcane issue.

When the liberals talk about deregulation, they most often point to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, which tore down the last remaining walls between commercial banks and investment banks.

There is little evidence to tie much of the problem to that law. Most of the walls, erected during the Depression, had already been breached over many years, with the approval of regulators. Besides, the first major failures of this crisis, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, were investment banks that did not go into commercial banking in a big way.

 

[Faun]

Yeah, he coughed, paused uncomfortably, and said.....uhhhh "maybe" they all play politics.

You sitting there making some distinction between resisting EVERY effort the Republicans made to tighten up Fannie and Freddie and BLOCKING is splitting hairs at best, absurd reaching at worst on your part.

The republicans did not have the number of votes to pass legislation to put stricter regulations.

Yes, Bush passed the American Dream Down payment Act. Which in every sense of the word is something Democrats wanted, and they certainly did not offer up much resistance to it.

This dates back further than 2003 and that is not what you are getting.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - NYTimes.com

New York Times in September 30, 1999:

“Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits. . . .

”Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990′s by reducing down payment requirements,” said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae’s chairman and chief executive officer. ”Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.” . . .

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980′s.“

”From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”


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

The bill was useless without limiting the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Democrats were too worried that evil private companies without government oversight would get to much power and they were worried that the CRA would be weakened.

You can blame the Republicans for being too dumb to put it through anyway, but the whole Congress was corrupt. That's why they got thrown out. Everyone including Republicans were in the back pocket of the lending industry.



Frank's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco - The Boston Globe

Congressman Barney Frank beats Sean Bielat, is re-elected to 16th term - News - The Herald News, Fall River, MA - Fall River, MA

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

This also dates back to 1994 actually. In 1994, Barack Obama was one of the plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit, alleging that Citibank had engaged in practices that discriminated against minorities. The lawsuit forced the bank to ease its lending practices.
The Daily Caller reported:

Obama pushed banks to give subprime loans to Chicago blacks | The Daily Caller

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices…

…Obama has pursued the same top-down mortgage lending policies in the White House.

Obama’s lawsuit was one element of a national “anti-redlining” campaign led by Chicago’s progressive groups, who argued that banks unfairly refused to lend money to people living within so-called “redlines” around African-American communities. The campaign was powered by progressives’ moral claim that their expertise could boost home ownership among the United States’ most disadvantaged minority, African-Americans.


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

Which one of these warnings by the Bush administration are untrue? Just wondering. You can say it did not happen. These are all official archived warnings. Not made up by "Faux News."

** 2001

April: The Administration’s FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is “a potential problem,” because “financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.”

** 2002

May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

** 2003

January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.” As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)

September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations.

September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises” and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any “legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk.” To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have “broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards” and “receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

** 2004

February: The President’s FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator.” (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to “not take [the financial market's] strength for granted.” Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by “ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, “Keeping Fannie And Freddie’s House In Order,” Financial Times, 2/24/04)

June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying “We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System.” (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

** 2005

April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.” (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05)

** 2007

July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.

August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying “first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options.” (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)

September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.

September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.

December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying “These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I’ve called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon.” (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)

** 2008

January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.

January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.

February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says “A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully.” (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.

March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and “move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation
and “modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.

“Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)

“[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)

“Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying “we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

July: Congress heeds the President’s call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.



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

Now, go ahead and read all of those warnings. I am trying to find the mass resistance democrats made when Bush signed the American Down Payment Act of 2003. Was there mass resistance? I was trying to find Pelosi with her silver dollar hyper active eyes saying she was against the AMerican Down Payment Act in 2003. Did any democrat "resist" that? Who. List them and quote them.

The fingerprints of democrats and republicans are all over the entire mess. The notion that it is all on Bush is beyond absurd.

Does this mean you're giving up on that Clinton video where you wrongly thought he was mostly blaming Democrats, when in fact, he was mostly blaming Republicans?

And by the way, I myself have never limited blame to just George Bush. But even Bush knew who was responsible as he spoke to a crowd of Republicans and said, "thanks to OUR policies, home ownership in America is at an all-time high."

As far as blaming the CRA, that's ridiculous since only a small portion of the toxic loans which tanked our economy were CRA loans.

As far as all the warnings... it baffles me how you can blame Democrats. You post warnings going back early into the Bush administration, but Republicans controlled the House all that time until 2007 and the Senate from 2003 to 2007. They were the ones in charge. They were the ones who needed to pass oversight. They didn't, so now you blame Democrats because they "resisted." Though you've already changed your tune because early, you wrongly claimed they "blocked" oversight. And yes, realize it or not, there is a difference between "resist" and "block." Which is why Clinton accurately blamed them for "resisting," and not "blocking," oversight.

As far as you pointing out how Bush then turned to Democrats to give him a bill to sign after Republicans failed him after 4 years of total control of the Congress ... you fail to mention that Democrats passed a bill with oversight and got it to his desk, which he then signed into law. Something Republicans failed to do.

No, considering he said democrats resisted every attempt to tighten Fannie and Freddie.

Sorry, that is something you do not think he said, but it is. Sorry.

Here are vast areas that you conveniently ignore. Let me see if I can list them for you, since you will not show the list of democrats that "resisted" Bush passing the Home Down Payment Act.

> With an implicit subsidy to American homeowners in the form of reduced mortgage rates, Fannie Mae and its sister government sponsored enterprise, Freddie Mac, squeezed out their competition and cornered the secondary mortgage market. They took advantage of a $2.25 billion line of credit from the U.S. Treasury.

> Congress, by statute, allowed them to operate with much lower capital requirements than private-sector competitors. They "used their congressionally-granted advantages to leverage themselves in excess of 70-to-1."

> The two GSEs were the only publicly traded corporations exempt from SEC oversight. All their securities carried an implicit AAA rating regardless of the quality of the mortgages.

> The Department of Housing and Urban Development set quotas for GSE investment in affordable housing.

> Encouraged by an inaccurate 1992 Boston Federal Reserve Bank study charging racial discrimination in mortgage lending, the two GSEs were strongly pressured to "lower their underwriting standards, particularly on the size of down payments and the credit quality of borrowers."

> In 1992, Congress directed HUD to establish multiple quotas requiring mortgage quotes for low-income families.

> In 1995, the Clinton administration issued a National Homeownership Strategy, loosening Fannie and Freddie's lending standards and insisting that lenders "work collaboratively to reduce homebuyer downpayment requirements."

> The administration complained that in 1989 only 7% of mortgages had less than a 10% downpayment. By 1994, it wanted that raised to 29%.

> Reduced underwriting standards spread into the entire U.S. mortgage market to those at all income levels.

> A complete decoupling of home prices from Americans' income fed the growth of the housing bubble as borrowers made smaller down payments and took on higher debt.

> Wall Street firms specializing "in packaging and investing in the lowest-quality tranches of mortgage-backed securities, profited hugely from the increased volume that government affordable lending policies sparked."

> Wall Street firms, homebuilders and the GSEs used money, power and influence to block attempts at reform. Between 1998 and 2008, Fannie and Freddie spent over $176 million on lobbyists.

> In 2006, Freddie paid the largest fine in Federal Election Commission history for improperly using corporate resources to hold 85 fundraisers for congressmen, raising a total of $1.7 million.



I will post the 1999 article by the NY Times AGAIN since you will not acknowledge the fingerprints of the democrats.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - NYTimes.com

Read that again.

Here is another NY Times Article that shows conclusively that both parties bear great responsibility.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/b...l=1&adxnnlx=1400594480-37/dHKKNfA6MdJDUCQKOHg

Both parties bear responsibility for that, because there was little controversy over it when it was happening. Alan Greenspan, then the chairman of the Federal Reserve, believed that the new products could distribute risk to investors, who were better able to bear it than was the banking system he was charged with regulating, and few legislators were willing to challenge Mr. Greenspan on what appeared to be an arcane issue.

When the liberals talk about deregulation, they most often point to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, which tore down the last remaining walls between commercial banks and investment banks.

There is little evidence to tie much of the problem to that law. Most of the walls, erected during the Depression, had already been breached over many years, with the approval of regulators. Besides, the first major failures of this crisis, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, were investment banks that did not go into commercial banking in a big way.

Lying about what I said doesn't help you. You are falsely portraying me as denying that Clinton blamed Democrats for "resisting" oversight; when in fact, I was the one who pointed out that is what Clinton said, which I did to correct your mischaracterization of what Clinton said when you falsely claimed he blamed Democrats for "blocking" oversight.

You then again point to CRA specifics, as though they were responsible for the crash -- they weren't.

And you again point out how the minority party Democrats resisted oversight throughout the years of Republican majority rule as though that blocked Republicans from passing oversight -- it didn't.

 

[Spoonman]

i've done great with the rise in the market the last few years. i wonder how many of the poor and jobless can say the same thing? i guess the economy has really only improved for a few

 

[Uncensored2008]

Exactly, they are the sociopath party.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Go figure, Clinton didn't actually say what you ascribe to him. In that video, he never assigned the bulk of the blame on Democrats or himself ... nor did he say that Democrats "blocked" Republicans. What he actually said was that where Democrats get blame is for "resisting calls for additional oversight by himself and Republicans. He doesn't say they "blocked" Republicans -- because they didn't, as you can see for yourself if you lookup any of the bills I mentioned which Republican leadership in the Senate killed. Furthermore, despite your fallacious claim that Clinton placed the "bulk of the blame" at Democrats' feet, had you watched the video, you would see he placed most of the blame on the repeal of the 'uptick rule.'

So, Clinton didn't say what Clinton said, Obama Akbar.

Who will we believe? Our lying eyes watching a video, or the GLORIOUS PEOPLES PARTY?

The party is mother, the party is father, the party is the bringer of life, the party is the only truth... We understand Comrade, you of the sociopathic democrats have different ways of dealing with reality.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Isn't the DOW still an indication of corporate wealth? The radical left hated the DOW when a republican was president.

True, but the DOW is easy to manipulate. The Federal Reserve buys millions in stocks each month, artificially stimulating the market

There needs to be an audit of exactly what public funds are used to prop up what funds, and who is profiting.

Remember, 88% of American's who have a net worth of more than $10 million voted for Obama.

The Rich Support McCain, the Super-Rich Support Obama - The Wealth Report - WSJ

The Obama administration is funneling public funds into the pockets of the elite.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yes, very good. Corporate America is sitting on >$100 Trillion cash.

And Obama is funneling cash from the middle to the top.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yes, very good. Corporate America is sitting on >$100 Trillion cash.

Which really is not a smart thing to do. Not when we all know devaluation or outright currency repudiation is just around the corner. Best have transferred the cash offshore in some more stable currency or in physical gold - well away from confiscation.

Off your Canadian meds again? How are them hockey teams doin?

You should have stuck it out through third grade.

You would be so much better equipped for these discussions if you had...

 

[Uncensored2008]

As I've posted numerous times in this VERY THREAD, the job losses in the private sector that occurred during the Bush administration in the private sector HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY REVERSED.

Yes, but you're a sociopath, and you post what you think will promote your shameful party - with no consideration of whether what you post happens to be true.

In this case, what you post is laughably absurd.

What hasn't been reversed is the job losses in the PUBLIC SECTOR.

As you folks want to shrink government recovering those losses are completely incompatible with your agenda.

At least when there is a Democrat at the helm.


Because during the Reagan and George W. Bush years, hiring in the public sector was robust.

It's opposite day among the sociopath democrats again...

 

[Spoonman]

I worked for the NYSE for 13.5 years..and now I work for a new financial firm.

There's no "double standard", I have a vested interest in a healthy market.

As do most Americans who have 401ks and other retirement plans or a stock portfolio.

Additionally a healthy stock market generally indicates an economy that's either healthy or recovering.

Only doom sayers think this is bad news.

I am all for a healthy financial market, always have been...

The 20MILL who are still unemployed would love it too if they had a 401K...

The Double Standard you will display comes later, you know it and so does everyone else...

The Admin has failed miserably at creating a Recovery...

As I've posted numerous times in this VERY THREAD, the job losses in the private sector that occurred during the Bush administration in the private sector HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY REVERSED.

What hasn't been reversed is the job losses in the PUBLIC SECTOR.

As you folks want to shrink government recovering those losses are completely incompatible with your agenda.

At least when there is a Democrat at the helm.


Because during the Reagan and George W. Bush years, hiring in the public sector was robust.

no they haven't. most companies downsized and are still running leaner. we're at least 600 people less than we were even with the rehires we've made.

Private sector jobs help with the deficite, public sector jobs put a further drain on it. obamas stimulus package was public sector job intense. thus the massive increase in our debt. he banked the economy would recover enough on its own he's have good numbers to post and keep the democrats in power in the 2010 midterms. that didn't happen. we can't afford to keep floating the size of government we've built.

 

[Synthaholic]

 

[Spoonman]

and there we have more liberal spin. without spin you'd have nothing at all.

but one thing you can claim that is real is that half the national debt was created under barack obama.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well it should put to rest the notion that all these rich folks "care" about America and/or her people.

They don't.

Got it now?

That explains why 88% of them voted for Obama.

 

[Synthaholic]

and there we have more liberal spin. without spin you'd have nothing at all.

but one thing you can claim that is real is that half the national debt was created under barack obama.

Hey dumbass: what was the DOW at when Obama took office?

What is it now?

Shut the fuck up.