W:1083,1531:2983:3137]******Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

MaggieD said:

No. It was put squarely on the back of Bush.

Click to expand...

Only because he was the only one who could stop the banks and he helped them instead.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Fenton said:

Thank you. I started studying the Sub-Prime Collapse about 3 years ago, just out of curiosity. It didn't make sense to me that private lending institutions would take the chance at insolvency by writing loans that were substandard.

As it turns out, they were following regulatory forces put into place in Clinton's Affordable Home Strategy in 1995. So when the Left was screaming it was a lack of regulations, it was actually REGULATORS like HUD that created and drove the secondary market.

I have allot on Eric Holder when he worked under Janet Reno and quotes from her threatening banks that "did not play ball".

And then these Liberals started pushing the " it's Bush's Fault " lie because their President is tanking economy and they can't accept responsibility for their actions so I have a drop-box account that's loaded with information that counters their desperate claims.

I've just accessed about a quarter of it and posted it.

Obama's currently doing the exact same thing with Ginnie Mae AND arguing for the to lower their standards. Unbelievable.

Click to expand...

So you couldn't understand why bankers wanted to make lots of easy money? That's HUGE comprehension problem, no wonder you are so confused.
The banks wrote all those "no doc" loans because they could resell them and then bet against them. It was all about the CASH. Bankers took over $160 Billion in "bonus" money during the boom.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Vern said:

So posting facts = hatred?


Why would people not read it. Am I not making clear straightforward points? Am I not posting solid factual links to back up those points?


Yes I am blaming Bush. But see how I used actual facts to make my case instead of anecdotal stories. Please let me know which clear straightforward point you dont believe.


That’s not a surprising reply. I find Conservatives often run away from the facts. Before you run away, could you please explain why you want to run away?

Anyhoo, thanks everybody for the praise. Not one of you could contest anything I posted. You could only whine or deflect. Lets face it, your beef is I posted facts that shred the silly things you want to believe and you cant use your usual excuses to make the facts go away.

Click to expand...

when you are seemingly blaming ONE person for the housing problem, it should be ignored.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Vern said:

Q Well there was a 300 % increase in subprime loans. Why not call it a “Subprime Bubble”?

A Subprime loans refers to the credit score of the borrower. It doesn’t make it a bad loan if proper underwriting standards are used. Bush’s working group said it was “triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages,”. He leaves out the part where it “quickly spread to all mortgages”. In 2004, 4.3 % of all mortgages were No Doc loans. In 2006 over 50% of all loans were No Doc loans. That’s over a 1000 % increase in loans where the borrowers income was not fully documented or documented at all. “Another form of easing” is a nice way of saying “lower lending standards”. And notice it lines up with the dates already posted. In addition to No Docs, banks allowed piggyback loans, teaser rates, I/0 and even negative amortization loans.

(from Dallas Fed link above)

"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN’T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.

Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them. And then they sold the loan and risk to investors and GSEs clamoring for the loans. Actually banks, pension funds, investment banks and other investors clamored for them. Bush forced Freddie and fannie to buy an additional 440 billion in mortgages in the secondary market.

Click to expand...

This is good stuff, and I appreciate it. Maybe you have this later in the thread, but a significant driver for the mortgage lenders to create notes they would not themselves want to own was that they had no intention of owning them and by packaging them with other crappy loans, they could get the ratings services to stamp them AAA. Basically allowing them to sell a ton of low value notes together as high value notes. It was if you could build Yugo's and put 1000 of them on a boat and sell them as Mercedes.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

mtm1963 said:

when you are seemingly blaming ONE person for the housing problem, it should be ignored.

Click to expand...

So the fact that I am blaming one person immediately disqualifies all the solid factual links I’ve posted? I'm not seeing the logic. See how you are creating reasons not to believe the facts I’m posting? Why do I think that if I blamed barney frank you would have no problem with me blaming one person? And look at Fenton and Jack still posting that discredited youtube video. Have you criticized their discredited youtube video? ( I can say discredited because Bush said the same thing as barney and bush stopped reform)

You can point to thousands of housing and financial policies and laws prior to Bush but none of them explain why banks lowered their lending standards in late 2004 and none of them explain why Bush’s regulators did nothing to stop it. Bush’s agressive and toxic housing policies do explain why bush’s regulators did nothing. No bad mortgages, no housing bubble.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

mtm1963 said:

when you are seemingly blaming ONE person for the housing problem, it should be ignored.

Click to expand...

Since when are the Commercial Banks, the President and the Congress all one person?
Oh I forgot, the Bankers OWN those others so they don't count.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Vern said:

So the fact that I am blaming one person immediately disqualifies all the solid factual links I’ve posted? I'm not seeing the logic. See how you are creating reasons not to believe the facts I’m posting? Why do I think that if I blamed barney frank you would have no problem with me blaming one person? And look at Fenton and Jack still posting that discredited youtube video. Have you criticized their discredited youtube video? ( I can say discredited because Bush said the same thing as barney and bush stopped reform)

You can point to thousands of housing and financial policies and laws prior to Bush but none of them explain why banks lowered their lending standards in late 2004 and none of them explain why Bush’s regulators did nothing to stop it. Bush’s agressive and toxic housing policies do explain why bush’s regulators did nothing. No bad mortgages, no housing bubble.

Click to expand...

your post was bush this and bush that.

the facts are, yes bush was pushing home ownership as were democrats in congress, for that matter washington was pushing it.

yes banks pushed loans to people that shouldn't have got them.

yes people took loans they KNEW they were not qualified for, even lying in the process, but said yes anyway because, we have OUR home.

and the big one, the banks selling these BAD loans to others institutions who bought them on the faith that they were a good investment.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

iguanaman said:

Since when are the Commercial Banks, the President and the Congress all one person?
Oh I forgot, the Bankers OWN those others so they don't count.

Click to expand...

read for context next time.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Well the Obama Bond Bubble will make Bush's Mortgage Bubble look like a Hello Kitty toy. Mortgages, mutual funds, stocks, payroll checks,--everything will be hit by that one when it descends upon us. In the meantime, enjoy the rest of the dead decade before the cliff--we are half way through it.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

mtm1963 said:

your post was bush this and bush that.

the facts are, yes bush was pushing home ownership as were democrats in congress, for that matter washington was pushing it.

Click to expand...

In case you don’t know it, republicans controlled congress in 2003. Don’t be offended if you knew it. A lot of conservatives don’t.

Anyhoo, don’t equate ‘pushing home ownership’ (which everybody since FDR did) with Bush encouraging funding and protecting lower lending standards. Yes, Bush encouraged, funded and protected lower lending standards. Its why Bush’s Working Group on Financial Markets told you it started late 2004 and its why they said it was started by lower lending standards. Its why No Doc loans went from 4.3 % of all mortgages in 2004 to over 50 % in 2006. its why subprime went from 10 % in 2003 to 40 % in 2006. Go back and read what I posted.

Here's another Bush policy from 2004

BUSH ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCES NEW HUD "ZERO DOWN PAYMENT" MORTGAGE
Initiative Aimed at Removing Major Barrier to Homeownership

Preliminary projections indicate that the new FHA mortgage product would generate about 150,000 homebuyers in the first year alone.
HUD Archives: BUSH ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCES NEW HUD "ZERO DOWN PAYMENT" MORTGAGE

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Fisher said:

Well the Obama Bond Bubble will make Bush's Mortgage Bubble look like a Hello Kitty toy. Mortgages, mutual funds, stocks, payroll checks,--everything will be hit by that one when it descends upon us. In the meantime, enjoy the rest of the dead decade before the cliff--we are half way through it.

Click to expand...

The lost decade started in 2000. I'm happy to see you agreeing that GW owns the housing bubble, but your worries about a bond bubble are misguided and are most likely wishful thinking. It would take another Republican in the Whitehouse for that to occur and that ain't happening.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Fenton said:

On July 31, 2003, in the 108th Congress, recognizing the dangers in Fannie and Freddie, and after hearings where Fannie and Freddie were taken to the carpet for improper practices, Senators John Sununu (R-NH), Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) introduced legislation to strengthen and improve the oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Trent Lott and John McCain were co-sponsors. This bill (S. 1508) passed the Senate Banking Committee, with Democrats opposing. With the opposition by Democrats, traditionally seen as evidence that a bill will never pass the 60-vote cloture rule for a floor vote, the bill died in the 108th Congress.

It needed 5 Democrat votes on the Senate Floor but all Senate Democrats opposed it.

A 2005 Bill pushed by the Republicans

Sponsor Chuck Hagel
1/26/2005--Introduced.
Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 - Amends the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 to establish:

(1) in lieu of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), an independent Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Agency which shall have authority over the Federal Home Loan Bank
Finance Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac); and

(2) the Federal Housing Enterprise Board. Sets forth operating, administrative, and regulatory provisions of the Agency, including provisions respecting:

(1) assessment authority;
(2) authority to limit nonmission-related assets;
(3) minimum and critical capital levels;
(4) risk-based capital test;
(5) capital classifications and undercapitalized enterprises;
(6) enforcement actions and penalties;
(7) golden parachutes; and
(8) reporting.

Amends the Federal Home Loan Bank Act to establish the Federal Home Loan Bank Finance Corporation. Transfers the functions of the Office of Finance of the Federal Home Loan Banks to such Corporation. Excludes the Federal Home Loan Banks from certain securities reporting requirements.
Abolishes the Federal Housing Finance Board.

Writen by the House Republican Conference

Was not enacted.

THIS BILL would have reigned in Fannie and Freddie and had ZERO Democrat support. This is the bit of information Ole' VERN wishes he could have removed from the Internet, or any other written publication, because it's just more proof that through the Bush years attempt after attempt to stop the coming crash was either ignored or fought off by key Democrats.

Chris Dodd, then the ranking member of the Banking Committee and now its chair, was in the middle of receiving preferential loan treatment from Countrywide Mortgage, one of the companies gaming the system in the credit crisis. Meanwhile, Barack Obama took hundreds of thousands of dollars from the lobbyists McCain mentions in this speech, making him the #2 recipient of Fannie/Freddie money

This bill was re-introduced in 2007 with the Democrats in control of the banking committee, and of-course, it never made it out of committee.

Oh but it's ALL George Bush's fault...How pathetic. Look, I have my issues with George Bush. He Spent too much and was soft on immigration but I hate liars in general, sooooo the last few pages I posted has plenty of information that stops VERNs Narrative in it's tracks and ALSO shows who was ACTUALLY responsible for

Click to expand...

Fenton, thank you for going to the effort of beating back the hyper partisan nut jobs.

liars are going to lie. your effort is seriously respected!

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

ARealConservative said:

Fenton, thank you for going to the effort of beating back the hyper partisan nut jobs.

liars are going to lie. your effort is seriously respected!

Click to expand...

That’s funny, my ‘hyper partisan’ attacks don’t require me to create, distort or leave out any facts. Lets examine whats wrong with the “the senate tried to reign in Freddie and fannie” narrative

First, congratulations to Fenton for updating his false narrative. Previous versions had the magic senate bill dying in committee. When I proved that it indeed made it out of committee, he updated his false narrative. Sadly he inserted a delusion about needing 60 votes to pass a bill. He refuses to recognize that Senate Leader Frist refused to allow a vote on it. See how in fenton’s world a lack of action on the republcan’s part is magically the democrats fault.

Anyhoo, lets review the things cons have to ignore to believe Fentons new and improved false narrative
Bush stopped reform in 2003 (documented in this thread)
Bush reversed the restrictions President Clinton placed on Freddie and fannie’s subprime mortgage purchases (documented in this thread)
Bush protected predatory lenders (documented in this thread)
Bush forced GSEs to buy an additional 440 billion in minority mortgages (documented in this thread)

And of course, Fenton has to ignore that the House passed a reform bill in 2005, HR 1461, with a 331-90 vote. The was the only GSE reform bill to pass any chamber of the republican controlled congress. And it continues to ignore that Republican House Financial Services committee Chairman Mike Oxley blames bush for no bill passing.

And this is what Bush thought of HR 1461, the house version of GSE reform

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY
The Administration strongly believes that the housing GSEs should be focused on their core housing mission, particularly with respect to low-income Americans and first-time homebuyers. Instead, provisions of H.R. 1461 that expand mortgage purchasing authority would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers.
George W. Bush: Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 1461 - Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Q Wow, did you just prove that Bush was against reform because it “would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers”?

A first off, welcome back Q. I know it was a lot of information to digest in one day so you earned the time off. Anyhoo, yes, I did just prove that Bush was against GSE reform because it “would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers”.

I also mentioned that Republican Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee blames Bush and company for the Housing mess.

“"Instead, the Ohio Republican who headed the House financial services committee until his retirement after mid-term elections last year, blames the mess on ideologues within the White House as well as Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve.
The critics have forgotten that the House passed a GSE reform bill in 2005 that could well have prevented the current crisis, says Mr Oxley, now vice-chairman of Nasdaq.”

“What did we get from the White House? We got a one-finger salute.”

(sorry, no direct link Financial Times is a pay site. Put 'Oxley hits back at ideologues’ into google and click on the FT site)

Here’s Bush telling you there was no bubble.

Thursday, October 27, 2005; Page D01

Ben S. Bernanke does not think the national housing boom is a bubble that is about to burst, he indicated to Congress last week, just a few days before President Bush nominated him to become the next chairman of the Federal Reserve.

U.S. house prices have risen by nearly 25 percent over the past two years, noted Bernanke, currently chairman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers, in testimony to Congress's Joint Economic Committee. But these increases, he said, "largely reflect strong economic fundamentals," such as strong growth in jobs, incomes and the number of new households
"


Bernanke: There's No Housing Bubble to Go Bust

(hey fenton, cant claim to be stopping a bubble you say doesn’t exist. Insert some of your zany sound effects here. Might I suggest some type of Clown Horn)

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Vern said:

That’s funny, my ‘hyper partisan’ attacks don’t require me to create, distort or leave out any facts. Lets examine whats wrong with the “the senate tried to reign in Freddie and fannie” narrative

First, congratulations to Fenton for updating his false narrative. Previous versions had the magic senate bill dying in committee. When I proved that it indeed made it out of committee, he updated his false narrative. Sadly he inserted a delusion about needing 60 votes to pass a bill. He refuses to recognize that Senate Leader Frist refused to allow a vote on it. See how in fenton’s world a lack of action on the republcan’s part is magically the democrats fault.

Anyhoo, lets review the things cons have to ignore to believe Fentons new and improved false narrative
Bush stopped reform in 2003 (documented in this thread)
Bush reversed the restrictions President Clinton placed on Freddie and fannie’s subprime mortgage purchases (documented in this thread)
Bush protected predatory lenders (documented in this thread)
Bush forced GSEs to buy an additional 440 billion in minority mortgages (documented in this thread)

And of course, Fenton has to ignore that the House passed a reform bill in 2005, HR 1461, with a 331-90 vote. The was the only GSE reform bill to pass any chamber of the republican controlled congress. And it continues to ignore that Republican House Financial Services committee Chairman Mike Oxley blames bush for no bill passing.

And this is what Bush thought of HR 1461, the house version of GSE reform

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY
The Administration strongly believes that the housing GSEs should be focused on their core housing mission, particularly with respect to low-income Americans and first-time homebuyers. Instead, provisions of H.R. 1461 that expand mortgage purchasing authority would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers.
George W. Bush: Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 1461 - Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005

Click to expand...

All of these little factiods are great and everything but they really do nothing to refute anything Fenton posted. You may think you have something here but you don't. I think you're doing an admiral job with the hand you've been dealt(or in this case dealt yourself) but it's kind of hard to sell this whole "It was all Bush's fault" narrative when you've got several interviews with people like Barney Frank speaking about Fannie and Freddie in the most glowing of terms, like, ten minutes before the whole thing blew up.

Your bits and pieces that you've polished up and carefully packaged and presented to look just right are a far cry from what we can see and hear coming directly out of the mouths of those you claim "had nothing to do with it".

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Jack Fabulous said:

All of these little factiods are great and everything but they really do nothing to refute anything Fenton posted.

Click to expand...

actually they do Jack, you like fenton have to ignore:

Bush told Barney and democrats there was nothing wrong with Freddie and Fannie in 2003 (documented in this thread)
Bush stopped GSE reform in 2003 (documented in this thread)
Bush’s toxic housing and GSE policies from 2004 (documented in this thread)
Bush said there was no housing bubble in 2005 (documented in this thread)
Bush attacked the very reform you and fenton delude yourself would have prevented the Bush Mortgage Bubble (documented in this thread)
Bush attacked reform because he said it “would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers. (documented in this thread)
The republican chairman of the House Financial Services committee Mike Oxley blames Bush for reform not passing (documented in this thread)

So I’m not posting factoids. I'm posting a clear and repeated trend by the Bush admin to encourage, protect and fund the Bush Mortgage Bubble. Let me shred one of your ‘non factoids’. Here barney is specifically referring to bush’s policy of forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans.

“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would suffer financially under a Bush administration requirement that they channel more mortgage financing to people with low incomes, said the senior Democrat on a congressional panel that sets regulations for the companies.”

“Frank's comments echo concerns of executives at the government-chartered companies that the new goals will undermine profits and put new homeowners into dwellings they can't afford.”

Ouch, barney just said the Bush policy will put people into homes they cant afford. What did Bush say to that?

“Alphonso Jackson, secretary of Housing and Urban Development, said the Bush administration has no hidden motives in seeking to raise the percentage of financing for low-income homeowners.
“There is no administration more supportive of Fannie and Freddie than we are,'' Jackson said today in interview. “We are just actualizing what should have been done years ago.''

double ouch!

http://democrats.financialservices....s/112/06-17-04-new-Fannie-goals-Bloomberg.pdf

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Vern said:

actually they do Jack, you like fenton have to ignore:

Click to expand...

Sorry, Vern, but to be legitimate and not regarded as a hack you have to at least acknowledge the words spoken by the guys you're claiming are innocent.




Ouch indeed...

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Vern said:

In case you don’t know it, republicans controlled congress in 2003. Don’t be offended if you knew it. A lot of conservatives don’t.

Anyhoo, don’t equate ‘pushing home ownership’ (which everybody since FDR did) with Bush encouraging funding and protecting lower lending standards. Yes, Bush encouraged, funded and protected lower lending standards. Its why Bush’s Working Group on Financial Markets told you it started late 2004 and its why they said it was started by lower lending standards. Its why No Doc loans went from 4.3 % of all mortgages in 2004 to over 50 % in 2006. its why subprime went from 10 % in 2003 to 40 % in 2006. Go back and read what I posted.

Here's another Bush policy from 2004

BUSH ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCES NEW HUD "ZERO DOWN PAYMENT" MORTGAGE
Initiative Aimed at Removing Major Barrier to Homeownership

Preliminary projections indicate that the new FHA mortgage product would generate about 150,000 homebuyers in the first year alone.
HUD Archives: BUSH ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCES NEW HUD "ZERO DOWN PAYMENT" MORTGAGE

Click to expand...

next time, quote the full text of what i said.

same thing, bush, bush............

btw, NO where in the above link does it say to loan money to people who are NOT qualified, or to NOT check out whether the home buyers financial documents are accurate.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Jack Fabulous said:

Sorry, Vern, but to be legitimate and not regarded as a hack you have to at least acknowledge the words spoken by the guys you're claiming are innocent.

Ouch indeed...

Click to expand...

Jack, I've dealt dirrectly with the false narrative created by that youtube video in this thread several times. I'm not the one who has to pretend things dont exist. you and fenton are. They spoke the words but those words had nothing to do with the Bush Mortgage Bubble. And I hope you realize that Dems were the minority party in video. (fenton didnt know that until I told him)

Vern said:

Q What about the conservative 'narrative' that Bush tried to stop the bubble?

A Its simply another false narrative created by the 'conservative entertainment complex'. That narrative is 'crafted' around the statements of Bush saying fannie and freddie needed to be regulated. Lets look at the structure of this narrative

Bush said GSEs needed to be regulated (actually true)
Barney Frank and other dems said GSEs were fine (actually true)
Democrats blocked reform (false)
GSEs caused the crisis (false)

Click to expand...

click the little button next to my name in the quote and read the whole post. a couple of posts before this one, I prove that 2003 reform had nothing to do with subprime.

Vern said:

Q What about the second part of the "bush tried to stop the bubble" narrative when "Barney Frank and other dems said GSEs were fine "? GSE's did go bankrupt

A Yes Barney Frank and other dems said there was nothing wrong with the GSEs. And they were fine in 2003. The Bush Mortgage Bubble hadn't started yet (remember we learned that it didnt start until late 2004).

Click to expand...

read this post too and see who told barney there was nothing wrong with freddie and fannie. The very next post after this one deals with who actually stopped reform. be forewarned, you aint gonna like it. You should go back and read my posts in this thread. I make clear and straightforward points and I back them up.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Vern said:

Jack, I've dealt dirrectly with the false narrative created by that youtube video in this thread several times. I'm not the one who has to pretend things dont exist. you and fenton are. They spoke the words but those words had nothing to do with the Bush Mortgage Bubble. And I hope you realize that Dems were the minority party in video. (fenton didnt know that until I told him)



click the little button next to my name in the quote and read the whole post. a couple of posts before this one, I prove that 2003 reform had nothing to do with subprime.




read this post too and see who told barney there was nothing wrong with freddie and fannie. The very next post after this one deals with who actually stopped reform. be forewarned, you aint gonna like it. You should go back and read my posts in this thread. I make clear and straightforward points and I back them up.

Click to expand...

This abject denial of fact simply will not do. There are any number of sources you can go to and listen to Barney Frank, in his own words, reject any and all reform proposals and in the process, demonize those(think John McCain) who had the audacity to suggest that reform was even necessary.

The only thing you've "proven" is that it is possible to get on a message board and construct a post which is completely one sided and dishonest. Big deal.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Jack Fabulous said:

Sorry, Vern, but to be legitimate and not regarded as a hack you have to at least acknowledge the words spoken by the guys you're claiming are innocent.




Ouch indeed...

Click to expand...

What a laugh, you're blaming Barney Frank? Do you realize that the Republicans had control of the House from Jan 1995 until 2007? So they could have made any changes they wanted in those years. Now watch president Bush:


:lamo:lamo:lamo

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Jack Fabulous said:

This abject denial of fact simply will not do. There are any number of sources you can go to and listen to Barney Frank, in his own words, reject any and all reform proposals and in the process, demonize those(think John McCain) who had the audacity to suggest that reform was even necessary.

The only thing you've "proven" is that it is possible to get on a message board and construct a post which is completely one sided and dishonest. Big deal.

Click to expand...

sorry jack, you've lost all contact with reality. You said I had "to at least acknowledge the words spoken by the guys you're claiming are innocent.". I've acknowledged it several times in this thread alone. And now you are babbling about god knows what. I was really curious how you would respond to the fact that I clearly 'acknowledged' the quotes and addressed them directly. I wondered how you would respond to the fact that Barney was simply restating what Bush told him and that Bush is the one who stopped reform. But even I was taken aback by your total ability to delude yourself. I've dealt with many conservatives at other forums and I have to say, you need help.

mtm1963 said:

next time, quote the full text of what i said.

same thing, bush, bush............

btw, NO where in the above link does it say to loan money to people who are NOT qualified, or to NOT check out whether the home buyers financial documents are accurate.

Click to expand...

M, I was only quoting the part of your post I was responding to. Your whole quote is just a click away (its the little button next to your name). And yes, nowhere in that link or any of the dozens of others that I posted does it say to loan money to people who are not qualified ( and feel free to cling to that as if your life depended on it) but the fact is banks did loan money to people who weren't qualified. And in large enough numbers to destroy the economy. And Bush's regulators not only didnt stop them, they protected them from other regulators. And thats why I blame bush.

Hey you're a con. Can you talk to Jack. I think he needs help. see how he responded to something I didnt post and pretended I didnt respond directly to his post.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Jack Fabulous said:

Your bits and pieces that you've polished up and carefully packaged and presented to look just right are a far cry from what we can see and hear coming directly out of the mouths of those you claim "had nothing to do with it".

Click to expand...

It's truly a sight to see

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

Vern said:

M, I was only quoting the part of your post I was responding to. Your whole quote is just a click away (its the little button next to your name). And yes, nowhere in that link or any of the dozens of others that I posted does it say to loan money to people who are not qualified ( and feel free to cling to that as if your life depended on it) but the fact is banks did loan money to people who weren't qualified. And in large enough numbers to destroy the economy. And Bush's regulators not only didnt stop them, they protected them from other regulators. And thats why I blame bush.

Hey you're a con. Can you talk to Jack. I think he needs help. see how he responded to something I didnt post and pretended I didnt respond directly to his post.

Click to expand...

you aren't having an honest discussion.

have fun with it.

re: Bush Mortgage Bubble FAQs[W:1083,1531]

ARealConservative said:

It's truly a sight to see

Click to expand...

See how the facts I post really upset conservatives? See how they cant respond to what I post? The actual facts shred their comfortable delusions and they cant handle it. They ‘just know’ the facts I post cant be true so they feel an emotional need to respond but all I’ve done is post Bush’s actual policies and statements. Not a phrase or sentence fragement or carefully constructed video. I’ve posted a seemingly unending string of toxic housing policies and statements that show everything conservatives have been spoon fed about the Bush Mortgage Bubble is a lie. Conservatives cant address the actual facts I post but they have to post something, anything no matter how foolish.

Anyhoo Arealcon, if you want to be useful, explain to Jack that I responded directly to his post and had already acknowledged and shredded the silly youtube video (talk about polished up and carefully packaged) that you cons have to cling to. I don’t really understand how that silly video makes all of Bush’s toxic housing polcies and statements go away or how it in anyway changes the dates of the Bush Mortgage Bubble but as I’ve already admitted, I’m not a mental health professional.

Since you guys enjoy my posts so much, here’s some more for your enjoyment (the unnamed ‘critics’ is really just barney frank)

Bush Ties Policy to Record Home Ownership

We want more people owning their own home in America," Bush said. His goal is to have 5.5 million minority homeowners in the country by the end of the decade….
And while Bush has emphasized promoting home ownership in his federal housing policy proposals, critics say that help for low-income renters and more affordable housing is a much more sorely needed focus.
Bush Ties Policy to Record Home Ownership | Fox News