Obama Sucked Tonight

[Trolling]

This threads full of hate, love freedom of speech...'merica.

 

[mr2shim]

What? you clearly didn't hear mr2shims tell us that only republicans do bad things, democrats are angels in disguise.

They are, did you not know this prior?

 

[nontheist]

Clinton and Carter and democratic congress are the fucking reason we had a housing bubble and added fuel to the fire in 1995 with the changes in Community Reinvestment Act.

 

[abandonconflict]

"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda"

Dubya

 

[UncleBuck]

Thats a campaign add, Bush pointed out in 2003 Fannie Mae was running a muck and proposed a watchdog group for them but as you can guess democrats blocked it.

repubs controlled congress, ad is from 2004.

 

[UncleBuck]

Clinton and Carter and democratic congress are the fucking reason we had a housing bubble and added fuel to the fire in 1995 with the changes in Community Reinvestment Act.

[video=youtube;ZVdTzPEYvH4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVdTzPEYvH4[/video]

 

[nontheist]

repubs controlled congress, ad is from 2004.

September 11, 2003
The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.
Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.
The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.
The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt — is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

 

[NoDrama]

They are, did you not know this prior?

I was unaware that democrats had divinity on their side.

 

[UncleBuck]

i am a sock puppet

[video=youtube;kNqQx7sjoS8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8[/video]

 

[Canna Sylvan]

"You voted for me to tell the truth," is that shit for real?

 

[nontheist]

Are you going to post stupid shit all day unclebuck or actually try to retort with relevant information? Bush tried in 2003 to stop it, McCain pushed again in 2005 shot down both times. Clinton revised it to force banks into subprime loans for poor creditors. Do we need to break out the crayola and storyboard?

 

[NoDrama]

Do we need to break out the crayola and storyboard?

Just stick to monosyllabic words and everything will be alright.

 

[UncleBuck]

Are you going to post stupid shit all day unclebuck or actually try to retort with relevant information? Bush tried in 2003 to stop it, McCain pushed again in 2005 shot down both times. Clinton revised it to force banks into subprime loans for poor creditors. Do we need to break out the crayola and storyboard?

tell me more about how the republican controlled congress that bush oversaw did nothing and how that's all secretly the democrats' fault, socky mcsockdouche.

 

[nontheist]

tell me more about how the republican controlled congress that bush oversaw did nothing and how that's all secretly the democrats' fault, socky mcsockdouche.

Look it up you inept piece of shit, it's time for you to start learning something instead of talking out of your ass constantly.

 

[UncleBuck]

Look it up you inept piece of shit, it's time for you to start learning something instead of talking out of your ass constantly.

it's time for you to take the fist out of your ass and realize that shrub bragged about his ownership society in SOTU speeches and the republican controlled congress did nothing for more than half a decade, socky mcsockdouche.

 

[bedspirit]

Fuck Clinton, between him and Carter's "Community Reinvestment Act" AKA give subprime mortgages and credit to people that can't afford it is a huge fucking reason the economy is in a mess.

I think Clinton was the worst president in the last fifty years, but he's a very good speaker.

As far as your assertion that the CRA had anything to do with the collapse of the economy, you couldn't be more wrong. You're a victim of propaganda. I encourage you to actually read it for yourself instead of taking some Wall Street apologist's word for it. No where in the CRA does it say that a bank has to give a loan to someone who can't pay it back. In fact it explicitly states that they don't have to give loans to people who can't pay it back. Do you know what the punishment was for having a low CRA score? There was no fine. There was no jail time handed out. Instead it would make it more difficult to merge with another bank. Than's it. In addition to that, No bank had a low enough CRA score to force them to give out a bad loan just to boost that score. In fact, in the mid 2000's it was argued in congress that the CRA should be completely done away with, not because it forced banks to do things against their best interest, but because it had become a pointless piece of bureaucry. No one bank ever fell below the mark yet still had to report their score. Finally, only 50% of the bad loans were actually given by institutions that were regulated by the CRA. The other half of those bad loans originated from institutions that were technically not banks and therefore exempt. Notice that all the times the CEOs were called before congress to justify their actions, none have ever point to the CRA.

Also, I don't recall anything in the CRA that required banks to bundle those bad loans, collude with ratings agencies to mark them as AAA investments, sell them to investors, and then bet against those same investments through AIG.

The CRA is weakest piece of phony anti-government, Wall Street cock sucking lie that's ever been peddled and it takes only a few minutes of your time to debunk. Instead you choose to regurgitate it to support a bunch of phony Republicans who probably disagree with you on most issues anyway.

 

[abandonconflict]

"I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me."

Dubya

 

[nontheist]

I think Clinton was the worst president in the last fifty years, but he's a very good speaker.

As far as your assertion that the CRA had anything to do with the collapse of the economy, you couldn't be more wrong. You're a victim of propaganda. I encourage you to actually read it for yourself instead of taking some Wall Street apologist's word for it. No where in the CRA does it say that a bank has to give a loan to someone who can't pay it back. In fact it explicitly states that they don't have to give loans to people who can't pay it back. Do you know what the punishment was for having a low CRA score? There was no fine. There was no jail time handed out. Instead it would make it more difficult to merge with another bank. Than's it. In addition to that, No bank had a low enough CRA score to force them to give out a bad loan just to boost that score. In fact, in the mid 2000's it was argued in congress that the CRA should be completely done away with, not because it forced banks to do things against their best interest, but because it had become a pointless piece of bureaucry. No one bank ever fell below the mark yet still had to report their score. Finally, only 50% of the bad loans were actually given by institutions that were regulated by the CRA. The other half of those bad loans originated from institutions that were technically not banks and therefore exempt. Notice that all the times the CEOs were called before congress to justify their actions, none have ever point to the CRA.

Also, I don't recall anything in the CRA that required banks to bundle those bad loans, collude with ratings agencies to mark them as AAA investments, sell them to investors, and then bet against those same investments through AIG.

The CRA is weakest piece of phony anti-government, Wall Street cock sucking lie that's ever been peddled and it takes only a few minutes of your time to debunk. Instead you choose to regurgitate it to support a bunch of phony Republicans who probably disagree with you on most issues anyway.

Well I am not going to post walls of text pointing out your clear delusion, instead if anyone wants to see it, it can be found here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

 

[UncleBuck]

Well I am not going to post walls of text pointing out your clear delusion, instead if anyone wants to see it, it can be found here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

you're not going to post walls of text because you're a sock puppet hack.

 

[bedspirit]

Well I am not going to post walls of text pointing out your clear delusion, instead if anyone wants to see it, it can be found here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

Hey genius, do you think you can take the time to read your own link?

However, many others hold that the CRA did not make a significant contribution of the subprime crisis. Nobel laureate Paul Krugman[108] noted in November 2009 that 55% of commercial real estate loans were currently underwater, despite being completely unaffected by the CRA.[109] According to Federal Reserve Governor Randall Kroszner, the claim that "the law pushed banking institutions to undertake high-risk mortgage lending" was contrary to their experience, and that no empirical evidence had been presented to support the claim.[110] In a Bank for International Settlements (BIS) working paper, economist Luci Ellis concluded that "there is no evidence that the Community Reinvestment Act was responsible for encouraging the subprime lending boom and subsequent housing bust", relying partly on evidence that the housing bust has been a largely exurban event.[111] Others have also concluded that the CRA did not contribute to the financial crisis, notably, FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair,[112] Comptroller of the Currency John C. Dugan,[113] Tim Westrich of the Center for American Progress,[114] Robert Gordon of the American Prospect,[115] Ellen Seidman of the New America Foundation,[116] Daniel Gross of Slate,[117] and Aaron Pressman from BusinessWeek.[118]
Legal and financial experts have noted that CRA-regulated loans tend to be safe and profitable, and that subprime excesses came mainly from institutions not regulated by the CRA. In the February 2008 House hearing, law professor Michael S. Barr, a Treasury Department official under President Clinton,[63][119] stated that a Federal Reserve survey showed that affected institutions considered CRA loans profitable and not overly risky. He noted that approximately 50% of the subprime loans were made by independent mortgage companies that were not regulated by the CRA, and another 25% to 30% came from only partially CRA regulated bank subsidiaries and affiliates. Barr noted that institutions fully regulated by CRA made "perhaps one in four" sub-prime loans, and that "the worst and most widespread abuses occurred in the institutions with the least federal oversight".[120] According to Janet L. Yellen, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, independent mortgage companies made risky "high-priced loans" at more than twice the rate of the banks and thrifts; most CRA loans were responsibly made, and were not the higher-priced loans that have contributed to the current crisis.[121] A 2008 study by Traiger & Hinckley LLP, a law firm that counsels financial institutions on CRA compliance, found that CRA regulated institutions were less likely to make subprime loans, and when they did the interest rates were lower. CRA banks were also half as likely to resell the loans.[122] Emre Ergungor of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland found that there was no statistical difference in foreclosure rates between regulated and less-regulated banks, although a local bank presence resulted in fewer foreclosures.[123]