Obama, 2007. "Sub Prime Lending is a Good Idea" - Page 3

MrVicchio · 10-05-08, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by obvious Child

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

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

lol.

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

WHERE IS YOUR REPUTABLE EVIDENCE FOR THE COMMITTEE VOTE?

There was a committee vote, only you refuse to accept that fact, because it doesn't fit your spin.

obvious Child · 10-05-08, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

There was a committee vote, only you refuse to accept that fact, because it doesn't fit your spin.

No one said there wasn't a vote.

You have yet to prove it was party line.

And of course, like always and become quite predictable, you have no evidence.

Idle Speculation is all that is needed to convict with you.

MrVicchio · 10-05-08, 10:27 PM

YouTube - Who's responsible for the Freddie/Fannie mess?

Watch from 2:15 to 2:45

Go ahead... Now Their lying too?

obvious Child · 10-05-08, 10:32 PM

.....

Where is your evidence for the party line vote?

Wait, why do I bother? You never have evidence.

MrVicchio · 10-05-08, 10:42 PM

Okay, proof, how about news from 2005?

Quote:

By Wisniowski, Charles
Publication: Mortgage Banking
Date: Thursday, September 1 2005
BOTH REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC members of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee agreed about the need for a stronger, more powerful regulator for the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But when it came time to vote on the GSE reform bill, members split along party lines, as the committee voted 11 to nine to move the bill to the Senate floor.
The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (S. 190) would create and establish the Federal Housing Finance Agency as an independent agency.

GSE reform bill clears Senate Committee along party-line vote. | Banking & Finance > Banking & Finance Overview from AllBusiness.com

That enough for you?

Or is this another source just making numbers up?

And to further hammer my point about WHY nothing happened to it afterwards:

Quote:

Despite having some "problems" with the portfolio language in the bill, Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Kentucky) urged the committee members to move the bill to the floor, where it would hopefully be passed and the measure would move to conference where, in the process of reconciling S. 190 with its House counterpart, H.R. 1461, "we can craft a bill that does what needs to be done."

However, even before the vote, Bunning and other committee members both Republican and Democrat noted that S. 190's lack of bipartisan support will make the bill's movement an uphill battle.

"We came to this point last year, and we could not get a bipartisan consensus and no bill was put forward," said Bunning. "Unfortunately, I believe we will have the same result. I believe we will move a bill out of committee, but without bipartisan consensus the bill will again go nowhere, and we will not have the world-class regulator we need."--C.W.

Now, you need to provide evidence ALL these sources are LYING about the 11-9 split or admit, you were wrong.

Call me a liar again, and this is what ya get. I'll hammer you with fact, you can spin it all you want.

MrVicchio · 10-05-08, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by obvious Child

.....

Where is your evidence for the party line vote?

Wait, why do I bother? You never have evidence.

Oh what's this, FACTS, yeah right there, post above. You owe me an apology.

obvious Child · 10-05-08, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

Oh what's this, FACTS, yeah right there, post above. You owe me an apology.

Good job. It took me 3 pages to finally get you to find a respectable source.

And I called you a liar about you stating that I never blamed the Democrats about the subject. You are still in fact a liar in that regard. I never called you a liar about anything else. Furthermore, I never said the other two sources were lying. Just that their lack of evidence was rather large. Neither of the two cited anything.

Now, how about in the future, you start with evidence? You know, it's a odd concept, but try it.

MrVicchio · 10-05-08, 10:54 PM

AND FOR THE COUP DE GRACE

Quote:

Senate Banking Committee Reports
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Reform Bill

On July 28, 2005, the Senate Banking Committee considered and reported S. 190, the "Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005." This bill would create a new independent regulator for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks (GSEs).

The Committee accepted a substitute bill authored by Banking Chairman Richard Shelby (R-AL). They disagreed to a Democratic substitute by Ranking Member Paul Sarbanes (D-MD). The Sarbanes substitute would have created an affordable housing fund based on the GSEs' profits, eased portfolio limits, streamlined program approval and increased the conforming loan limits for high cost areas. It failed 9 yeas to 11 nays, and the Shelby bill passed on a straight party line vote of 11 yeas to 9 nays.

Chairman Shelby assured Democratic Senators that he would continue to work with them before the bill is considered on the Senate floor to try to come to some compromise language. NAR will continue to work with the Committee to address REALTOR® priorities. The bill is not expected to gain full Senate consideration unless an accommodation can be made to attract support from Democrats.

Read it and Weep Obvious Child.

Facts, proof and evidence, all you've brought is arrogance, innuendo and insulting me by calling me a LIAR.
Senate Banking Committee Reports Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Reform Bill

obvious Child · 10-05-08, 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVicchio

Read it and Weep Obvious Child.

Facts, proof and evidence, all you've brought is arrogance, innuendo and insulting me by calling me a LIAR.

Huh?

You haven't gotten rid of that label. I clearly posted a thread discussing who killed the bill. At the time we did not have the links you provided. I suggested that it could have gone in a number of ways and likely did, with many dems voting against. I have not accused you of lying anywhere else because you did not lie anywhere else.

And good job on finally producing real evidence. Lead with it next time.

Why would I weep? All I wanted you to do is provide evidence for a change. Good job on doing so.

Yayasmom · 10-05-08, 11:08 PM

This may be a really stupid question, but is this true?

In 2000 a law was repealed which prevented commercial banks (traditional banks like Bank of America) from getting into the brokerage business (Behr Sterns, Goldman Sachs, etc.).