Re-Evaluating Newt..

[SAT2]

So you support bypassing the constitution and the consent of the senate.

Damn you are gullible....................

You're confused about the "czars" issue.

Most of these posts do have to have Senate confirmation.

I can't post links yet, but the evidence is in a post from the Washington Independent dated
9/8/09 titled "When is a Czar not a Czar".

So the answer is yes, to say you're going to abolish czars is political grandstanding.

As of the spring of 2010, Obama had 10 confirmed Czar's and 22 non-confirmed Czars.

Better Know a Czar | Intellectual Takeout (ITO)

Perhaps Newt meant he would obey the Constitution and get rid of those that have not been confirmed by the Senate.

Dream on. These kinds of advisers have been around for a long time. The USC doesn't forbid them.

 

[Full-Auto]

Show me one bank that was forced to make any loans.

Try you tube, the tags are cuomo and banks.

Youve been owned BTW

'Encouraged' is not the same as 'forced'.

Overlook the lawsuits, it is all you can cling too. Pissing upwind may hold a better result for you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Bush had them, Clinton had them, and so on and so on back, back, back.

Hypocrisy from the Hard Right wack.

 

[SAT2]

'Encouraged' is not the same as 'forced'.

When it is suggested that the government will withhold business or funding from the lending institution if they don't play ball, that is a bit more than 'encouraging'. The bankers had to accept the questionable loans or retaliation from the government was threatened. It's just like the federal government dictates to the schools that they don't HAVE to accept this or that government program or policy, but if they fail to do so, their government funding could be withheld. It happens a LOT. Which is one reason I want the federal government to get out of the business of dispensing charity, benevolence, or social funding of ANY type to ANYBODY.

And it's a bit more than that. The Federal Reserve sets interest rates. So when the government says "You will loan to Johnny Foodstamp", the banks realize that is an order, not a request.

And when the government says, "Hey, no problem, we will give 2 trillion to Fannie and Freddie to buy up your bad loans when you bundle them", and the folks on Wall Street figure they can't lose.

Heck, they even got to keep their bonuses after the government bailed them out.

Except nobody said to loan to Johnny Foodstamp or Mary Welfare. There was no such order. Those who qualify for food stamps and welfare were not candidates for conventional home loans. They would only qualify for non-conventional loans like the ones that led to the financial crisis. Privately issued loans.

 

[Full-Auto]

When it is suggested that the government will withhold business or funding from the lending institution if they don't play ball, that is a bit more than 'encouraging'. The bankers had to accept the questionable loans or retaliation from the government was threatened. It's just like the federal government dictates to the schools that they don't HAVE to accept this or that government program or policy, but if they fail to do so, their government funding could be withheld. It happens a LOT. Which is one reason I want the federal government to get out of the business of dispensing charity, benevolence, or social funding of ANY type to ANYBODY.

And it's a bit more than that. The Federal Reserve sets interest rates. So when the government says "You will loan to Johnny Foodstamp", the banks realize that is an order, not a request.

And when the government says, "Hey, no problem, we will give 2 trillion to Fannie and Freddie to buy up your bad loans when you bundle them", and the folks on Wall Street figure they can't lose.

Heck, they even got to keep their bonuses after the government bailed them out.

Except nobody said to loan to Johnny Foodstamp or Mary Welfare. There was no such order. Those who qualify for food stamps and welfare were not candidates for conventional home loans. They would only qualify for non-conventional loans like the ones that led to the financial crisis. Privately issued loans.

Privately issued loans freddie and fannie were eager to buy.

 

[SAT2]

And it's a bit more than that. The Federal Reserve sets interest rates. So when the government says "You will loan to Johnny Foodstamp", the banks realize that is an order, not a request.

And when the government says, "Hey, no problem, we will give 2 trillion to Fannie and Freddie to buy up your bad loans when you bundle them", and the folks on Wall Street figure they can't lose.

Heck, they even got to keep their bonuses after the government bailed them out.

Except nobody said to loan to Johnny Foodstamp or Mary Welfare. There was no such order. Those who qualify for food stamps and welfare were not candidates for conventional home loans. They would only qualify for non-conventional loans like the ones that led to the financial crisis. Privately issued loans.

Privately issued loans freddie and fannie were eager to buy.

Yeah-just like other investors. Who didn't necessarily understand what these bundles were. Which is why the problem was so widespread.

 

[Full-Auto]

Except nobody said to loan to Johnny Foodstamp or Mary Welfare. There was no such order. Those who qualify for food stamps and welfare were not candidates for conventional home loans. They would only qualify for non-conventional loans like the ones that led to the financial crisis. Privately issued loans.

Privately issued loans freddie and fannie were eager to buy.

Yeah-just like other investors. Who didn't necessarily understand what these bundles were. Which is why the problem was so widespread.

All of it brought on by government.

 

[The T]

Privately issued loans freddie and fannie were eager to buy.

Yeah-just like other investors. Who didn't necessarily understand what these bundles were. Which is why the problem was so widespread.

All of it brought on by government.

Yep. Full faith and credit of the US Gubmint...caused the crash...and credit downgraded. And I understand these cretins at F/F are wanting bonuses...

 

[Faun]

And it's a bit more than that. The Federal Reserve sets interest rates. So when the government says "You will loan to Johnny Foodstamp", the banks realize that is an order, not a request.

And when the government says, "Hey, no problem, we will give 2 trillion to Fannie and Freddie to buy up your bad loans when you bundle them", and the folks on Wall Street figure they can't lose.

Heck, they even got to keep their bonuses after the government bailed them out.

Except nobody said to loan to Johnny Foodstamp or Mary Welfare. There was no such order. Those who qualify for food stamps and welfare were not candidates for conventional home loans. They would only qualify for non-conventional loans like the ones that led to the financial crisis. Privately issued loans.

Privately issued loans freddie and fannie were eager to buy.

Thanks to Bush's homeownership plan ...

Bush Minority Homeownership Plan Rests Heavily on Fannie and Freddie

When President Bush announced his Minority Homeownership plans last week in Atlanta, his top priorities were new federal programs: a $2.4 billion tax credit to facilitate home purchases by lower-income first-time buyers, and a $200 million national downpayment grant fund.

But none of the new federal programs--if passed by Congress--will come even close to achieving the 5.5 million-household increase in minority homeownership the President set as his target.

Instead, most of the heavy lifting was assigned to two mortgage market players that have sometimes come under fire from Bush administration officials and Congressional Republicans: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Fannie's and Freddie's commitments are the bedrock core of the President's ambitious plans--but didn't get the headlines. Fannie Mae agreed to increase its already substantial lending efforts to minority families by targeting another $260 billion of mortgage purchases to them during the next nine years. Freddie Mac agreed to buy an additional $180 billion in minority-household home loans during the same period.

Besides its $180 billion mortgage purchase commitment, Freddie Mac gave President Bush a promise to implement a 25-point program aimed at increasing minority homeownership. Some of the points were cutting-edge. For example, as part of an effort to remove the fear of financial loss from first-time minority home buyers, Freddie committed itself to "explor(e) the viability of equity assurance products to protect home values in economically distressed areas."

Pressed for details on "equity assurance" by RealtyTimes, Freddie Mac vice president Craig S. Nickerson said the idea is still at an embryonic stage, but might involve limited guarantees or insurance coverage to protect buyers from the possibility of loss of their initial equity stakes should property values in their neighborhoods decline.

 

[SAT2]

Privately issued loans freddie and fannie were eager to buy.

Yeah-just like other investors. Who didn't necessarily understand what these bundles were. Which is why the problem was so widespread.

All of it brought on by government.

No. It was brought on by Wall Street risky financial instruments. It was brought on by the private sector. You haven't been paying attention.

 

[Toro]

Guy, if you and Toro really think that what happened in 2008 was good and decent and right, then you have serious moral problems.

It's not a left/right thing. Both parties contributed in their own way. Both were deep in bed with the bankers. (In Barney Frank's case, literally.)
It was crony capitalism at its worst, and we are all paying for it now.

and I don't see a point of replacing one tool of the Bankers (obama) with a bigger tool (romney.)

Nice straw man. I don't think the Financial Crisis was "good and decent and right." But I understand it many, many multiple times better than you. And that's why I can say you sound like a whiny liberal.

Or a TEA Partier.... The thing is, both TEA and OWS are angry about the same thing, the collusion between GOvernment and assholes on Wall Street to rip off the rest of us. It's just that both have been co-opted by the political parties and the anger misdirected... which is kind of the idea, I guess.

You must think it was fine, you made "A fortune betting against Real Estate". Don't say you weren't for the hypocrisy when you were sucking off the teet, man. Man up and admit you are part of the problem.

Tea Partiers, OWS and whiny liberals.

Are all three this ignorant? I sure hope not.

And I didn't make a fortune. I wish I did.

 

[SAT2]

People are ignorant because they don't know your personal circumstances?

 

[Toro]

People are ignorant because they don't know your personal circumstances?

When they assume they do, yes.

 

[SAT2]

People are ignorant because they don't know your personal circumstances?

When they assume they do, yes.

Point taken. Just not enjoying the constant intertwining of "whiny" and "liberal".

 

[Foxfyre]

'Encouraged' is not the same as 'forced'.

When it is suggested that the government will withhold business or funding from the lending institution if they don't play ball, that is a bit more than 'encouraging'. The bankers had to accept the questionable loans or retaliation from the government was threatened. It's just like the federal government dictates to the schools that they don't HAVE to accept this or that government program or policy, but if they fail to do so, their government funding could be withheld. It happens a LOT. Which is one reason I want the federal government to get out of the business of dispensing charity, benevolence, or social funding of ANY type to ANYBODY.

And it's a bit more than that. The Federal Reserve sets interest rates. So when the government says "You will loan to Johnny Foodstamp", the banks realize that is an order, not a request.

And when the government says, "Hey, no problem, we will give 2 trillion to Fannie and Freddie to buy up your bad loans when you bundle them", and the folks on Wall Street figure they can't lose.

Heck, they even got to keep their bonuses after the government bailed them out.

So, it should be obvious to anybody that the problem isn't really with Wall Street who are simply playing by the rules that government gave them for government's own agenda. The problem is with government that seeks to increase its own influence, prestige, power, and personal fortunes by manipulating the system for the advantage of certain pet constituencies.

Take away the federal government's power to do that, and the problem will be mostly solved. We will again be electing public servants interested in improving the nation rather than career politicians who are in it purely for their own benefit.

By the way it looks like Fannie and Freddie are soon going to need another bailout even as they have scheduled multi millions of OUR money for bonues for their execs.

The Tea Partiers, however, unlike OWS, are NOT lobbying or protesting or rallying against Wall Street. Their bullseye is squarely on those politicians who are in it to increase their own power and fortunes and who are not doing their job in the best interests of all in the country.

 

[SAT2]

You are resistant to information. The problem was lack of government oversight of Wall Street.

 

[BenNatuf]

You are resistant to information. The problem was lack of government oversight of Wall Street.

No, the problem wasw not a lack of regulation, there were plenty of regulations. The problem was malregulation.

 

[SAT2]

You are resistant to information. The problem was lack of government oversight of Wall Street.

No, the problem wasw not a lack of regulation, there were plenty of regulations. The problem was malregulation.

When you make chili, and there's no chili powder, do you just throw in cinnamon or ginger or paprika, whatever you find up in the cabinet? After all, there isn't a lack of spice, there are plenty of spices there.

There was a lack of appropriate regulation and oversight.

 

[SAT2]

One of Newt's brilliant ideas:

Repeal child labor laws.

Newt: Fire the janitors, hire kids to clean schools - Maggie Haberman - POLITICO.com

 

[Katzndogz]

Child labor laws should have gone away long ago. They serve no useful purpose except to provide a ready labor source for criminals.