Obama, 2007. "Sub Prime Lending is a Good Idea" - Page 2

obvious Child · 10-05-08, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

WTF does having a majority have to do with it? They needed 60 vote cloture, and they weren't gonna get it.

And where the hell did he get the vote numbers?

It's not on the bill's website.

S. 190 [109th]: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (GovTrack.us)

Quote:

Period, nadda, not happening, nice try at spin, but ain't flying.

Got it. No math for you, no reasoning, no fact checking, no referencing.

Just partisan hackery.

MrVicchio · 10-05-08, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by obvious Child

And where the hell did he get the vote numbers?

It's not on the bill's website.

S. 190 [109th]: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (GovTrack.us)

Got it. No math for you, no reasoning, no fact checking, no referencing.

Just partisan hackery.

Nice try

Doesn't fly good bye.

I've lead you to the water, I've shown you the facts, you poitn to the website and jump up and down. EVEN IF IT PASSED the committee, it would never make it on the floor. NEVER.

Barney Frank made it clear why the Dems were not going to let this pass.
"There is no crisis at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac!"

prrriiide · 10-05-08, 10:02 PM

Oooh. Cool. You found a clever edit job that takes words Obama was speaking about one thing and then ties them into another thing. I'd never feature Official State Television would do a hatchet job like that...

Obama is talking about the CRA, which I have shown in other threads to be exonerated of causing the sub-prime crisis. What the Faux-Views piece is talking about is the flipping of sub-primes into the securities markets via Fannie/Freddie. What OST fails to mention is that that same flipping by Fannie/Freddie was not possible under previous regulations, which were gutted and mostly repealed and replaced by Gramm-Leach-Bliley.

As conceived (with the Glass-Steagall regulations in place) Fannie worked very well for over 1/2 century. Freddie worked well for 25 years. How convenient is it that McCan't talks about having misgivings about Fannie/Freddie oversight, when his economic brain authored the legislation that allowed Fannie/Freddie to do what they were doing?

obvious Child · 10-05-08, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

Nice try

Doesn't fly good bye.

I've lead you to the water, I've shown you the facts, you poitn to the website and jump up and down. EVEN IF IT PASSED the committee, it would never make it on the floor. NEVER.

Barney Frank made it clear why the Dems were not going to let this pass.
"There is no crisis at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac!"

lol.

I guess that is easier. Pretend things you don't like don't exist.

I've asked you for evidence to support your link.

My request for evidence is met by " Doesn't fly good bye." I guess whenever you ask for evidence or anyone else does, I can cite your quote.

I'd love to see you take on the CRA math issue, but you won't because you're solely here for partisan hackery.

MrVicchio · 10-05-08, 10:08 PM

AND more proof that there was a vote, for you OC, who can't be bothered to search before you speak:

Quote:

What happened next was extraordinary. For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.

Different World

If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, a blizzard of terrible mortgage paper fluttered out of the Fannie and Freddie clouds, burying many of our oldest and most venerable institutions. Without their checkbooks keeping the market liquid and buying up excess supply, the market would likely have not existed.

But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn't even get the Senate to vote on the matter.

That such a reckless political stand could have been taken by the Democrats was obscene even then. Wallison wrote at the time: ``It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit. The Democrats and the few Republicans who oppose portfolio limitations could not possibly do so if their constituents understood what they were doing.''

Mounds of Materials

Bloomberg.com: News

Spare us the BS would ya? You are either ignore the facts because you cannot admit you are wrong, or you are oblivious to how the house and senate work and choose to remain so.

prrriiide · 10-05-08, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

When the CRA kicked in and forced banks to make Sub-Prime loans,

Do you even know when CRA kicked in? How about 1977. Where was the mortgage meltdown over the last 25 years?

News flash:

CRA didn't FORCE banks to do anything except make the same loans available to QUALIFIED applicants in redlined areas that they were making elsewhere for the same qualification criteria.

Your argument that CRA caused this is bull****, and I have already provved it elsewhere. Pray tell, how did a segment of the banking population (banks subjected to CRA) responsible for only 10% of the sub-prime loans cause all this damage?

obvious Child · 10-05-08, 10:13 PM

lol. Even more lack of evidence. There isn't evidence of who voted which way in the committee. Your previous link gave no link to those numbers. For all we know, it could have gone Democrat half for half against and the GOP half for half against.

Not only is there a sheer lack of any evidence for such suggestions by the author, but he's on McCain's staff.

Try again Partisan Hackery.

And you refuse to deal with post 7 because it involves using a brain.

MrVicchio · 10-05-08, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prrriiide

Do you even know when CRA kicked in? How about 1977. Where was the mortgage meltdown over the last 25 years?

News flash:

CRA didn't FORCE banks to do anything except make the same loans available to QUALIFIED applicants in redlined areas that they were making elsewhere for the same qualification criteria.

Your argument that CRA caused this is bull****, and I have already provved it elsewhere. Pray tell, how did a segment of the banking population (banks subjected to CRA) responsible for only 10% of the sub-prime loans cause all this damage?

I was refering to the reform in teh 90's sir.

MrVicchio · 10-05-08, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by obvious Child

lol. Even more lack of evidence. There isn't evidence of who voted which way in the committee. Your previous link gave no link to those numbers. For all we know, it could have gone Democrat half for half against and the GOP half for half against.

Not only is there a sheer lack of any evidence for such suggestions by the author, but he's on McCain's staff.

Try again Partisan Hackery.

And you refuse to deal with post 7 because it involves using a brain.

So Bloomberg news pulled this out of their asses? Just made numbers up?

Seriously, you are not interested in facts, just the spin you're told too by whatever leaflet Obama's camp Emails you.

obvious Child · 10-05-08, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

So Bloomberg news pulled this out of their asses? Just made numbers up?

It isn't Bloomberg per se. If you paid attention to anything you posted, you'd see this:

Quote:

Kevin Hassett, director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is a Bloomberg News columnist. He is an adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election. The opinions expressed are his own

Bloomberg is not responsible for the incorrect statements when it expresses that statement removing opinions as their own.

Quote:

Seriously, you are not interested in facts, just the spin you're told too by whatever leaflet Obama's camp Emails you.

lol.

If you really think I'm voting Obama you need to see a neurologist.

WHERE IS YOUR REPUTABLE EVIDENCE FOR THE COMMITTEE VOTE?