Job market recovery still painfully slow
Tea Party Solution

Redding, CA

#164 Jan 24, 2013
Local wrote:
I'll save you the time, numbnuts. Here is why the housing crash happened, and why Clinton is responsible:
The Clinton-era document that Mason cites—“The National Homeownership Strategy: Partners in the American Dream
I see that you're trying to shift attention away from the fact that repubs and Clinton BOTH passed Glass-Steagall to another conservative spin-- that it was 'liberal' homeownership programs that caused the subprime financial collapse.

This is just not true.(Even if it was true Bush Jr. also pushed for more homeownership).

Conservative Campaign That Blames The Global Financial Crisis On A Government Push To Make House More Affordabl" Is Disproved By The Data.

As reported by McClatchy: "As the economy worsens and Election Day approaches, a conservative campaign that blames the global financial crisis on a government push to make housing more affordable to lower-class Americans has taken off on talk radio and e-mail.

Commentators say that's what triggered the stock market meltdown and the freeze on credit. They've specifically targeted the mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which the federal government seized on Sept. 6, contending that lending to poor and minority Americans caused Fannie's and Freddie's financial problems.

Federal housing data reveal that the charges aren't true, and that the private sector, not the government or government-backed companies, was behind the soaring subprime lending at the core of the crisis." [McClatchy, 10/12/08,

: http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/2011...

The government had NOTHING to do with subprime loans, except for the fact that Bush's SEC looked away from the real estate bubble that Wall Street was inflating.

Sub-prime lenders were under NO government mandate to make and pool these loans. It was the collapse of the loan pools that caused Goldman Sachs,Lehman, Bear Stearns, and all of the other huge Wall Street firms to almost collapse.

That's why it was called the sub-prime crash. But the pro-corporate, government regulation haters quickly tried to spin this collapse into something that had nothing to do with Wall Street greed and short sightedness.

But you guys can never accept that unfettered corporate capitalism can ever do any wrong.

Since: Nov 11

Colusa

#165 Jan 24, 2013
Local wrote:
<quoted text>

btw, did he ever admit to having "sexual relations with that woman".
Of course not.......y'all gave him a pass on that as well.
.
Do you always put words in peoples mouths?

I have told you in plain English that I think Clinton was 100% responsible for the problems related to his sex life and I did not give him a pass on that.

Why do you say I did?

How can you have a conversation with someone if you keep putting words in the mouth of the people you are talking to?

If that is how you are going to be why bother talking to me at all, why not just talk to yourself?
Tea Party Solution

Redding, CA

#166 Jan 24, 2013
Local wrote:
Here is why the housing crash happened, and why Clinton is responsible:
The Clinton-era document that Mason cites—“The National Homeownership Strategy: Partners in the American Dream...Bill Clinton's drive to increase homeownership went way too far
I see that you're trying to shift attention away from the fact that repubs and Clinton BOTH passed Glass-Steagall to another conservative spin-- that it was 'liberal' homeownership programs that caused the subprime financial collapse.

This is just not true.(Even if it was true Bush Jr. also pushed for more homeownership).

Conservative Campaign That Blames The Global Financial Crisis On A Government Push To Make House More Affordabl" Is Disproved By The Data.

As reported by McClatchy: "As the economy worsens and Election Day approaches, a conservative campaign that blames the global financial crisis on a government push to make housing more affordable to lower-class Americans has taken off on talk radio and e-mail.

Commentators say that's what triggered the stock market meltdown and the freeze on credit. They've specifically targeted the mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which the federal government seized on Sept. 6, contending that lending to poor and minority Americans caused Fannie's and Freddie's financial problems.

Federal housing data reveal that the charges aren't true, and that the private sector, not the government or government-backed companies, was behind the soaring subprime lending at the core of the crisis." [McClatchy, 10/12/08,

: http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/2011...

The government had NOTHING to do with subprime loans, except for the fact that Bush's SEC looked away from the real estate bubble that Wall Street was inflating.

Sub-prime lenders were under NO government mandate to make and pool these loans. It was the collapse of the sub-prime loan pools that caused Goldman Sachs,Lehman, Bear Stearns, and all of the other huge Wall Street firms to almost collapse.

That's why it was called the sub-prime crash. But the pro-corporate, government regulation haters quickly tried to spin this collapse into something that had nothing to do with Wall Street greed and short sightedness.

You guys can never accept that unfettered corporate capitalism can ever do any wrong.
Tea Party Solution

Redding, CA

#167 Jan 24, 2013
And regarding Gramm, one of the sponsors of the Gramm, Leach, Bliley bill, he also FURTHER helped to de-regulate the markets and allowed the sub-prime crash to happen.

"Then-Senator Phil Gramm "Inserted A Key Provision Into The 2000 Commodity Futures Modernization Act That Exempted...Derivatives Such As Credit Default Swaps From Regulation."

As reported by Time: "As chairman of the Senate Banking Committee from 1995 through 2000, Gramm was Washington's most prominent and outspoken champion of financial deregulation. He played the leading role in writing and pushing through Congress the 1999 repeal of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act that separated commercial banks from Wall Street, and he inserted a key provision into the 2000 Commodity Futures Modernization Act that exempted over-the-counter derivatives such as credit-default swaps from regulation by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)." [Time, 1/24/09]
Tea Party Solution

Redding, CA

#168 Jan 24, 2013
Local wrote:
<quoted text>

Clinton's amendments to the repeal of the glass Steagall act included amendments that expanded the scope and power of the community reinvestment act........the most damning part of the whole deal.
You need to do your homework
The Community Reinvestment Act also had nothing to do with the sub-prime crisis. In fact CRA regulated loans were of a higher caliber than sub-prime loans, and their defaults were low.

From the source I cited above:

"Federal Reserve Board data show that:
• More than 84 percent of the subprime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending institutions.
• Private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year.
• Only one of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006 was directly subject to the housing law that's being lambasted by conservative critics.[McClatchy, 10/12/08,"

Private firms made most of the sub-prime loans that caused the crisis. They were under NO government mandate to make these loans.

SHOW us the government mandate for private firms to make sub-prime loans. You can't because it never happened.
sociopathic Liberals

Chico, CA

#169 Jan 24, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
The Community Reinvestment Act also had nothing to do with the sub-prime crisis. In fact CRA regulated loans were of a higher caliber than sub-prime loans, and their defaults were low.
From the source I cited above:
"Federal Reserve Board data show that:
• More than 84 percent of the subprime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending institutions.
• Private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year.
• Only one of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006 was directly subject to the housing law that's being lambasted by conservative critics.[McClatchy, 10/12/08,"
Private firms made most of the sub-prime loans that caused the crisis. They were under NO government mandate to make these loans.
SHOW us the government mandate for private firms to make sub-prime loans. You can't because it never happened.
How then could the Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg say the following at a business breakfast in mid-town Manhattan on November 1, 2011?

"It was not the banks that created the mortgage crisis. It was, plain and simple, Congress who forced everybody to go and give mortgages to people who were on the cusp. Now, I’m not saying I’m sure that was terrible policy, because a lot of those people who got homes still have them and they wouldn’t have gotten them without that. But they were the ones who pushed Fannie and Freddie to make a bunch of loans that were imprudent, if you will. They were the ones that pushed the banks to loan to everybody. And now we want to go vilify the banks because it’s one target, it’s easy to blame them and Congress certainly isn’t going to blame themselves.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011...
Local

Clearlake, CA

#170 Jan 24, 2013
ThirtyThirty wrote:
<quoted text>

I said I don't think the devil (or anyone else) made him do it. I think he(Clinton) signed it(Finance modernization act) because he thought it was a good idea..........
I knew that you would see it my way eventually.

Now, if you come ALL the way clean by admitting that Clinton screwed us all and he couldn't have made a more serious mistake, you have faced reality.

waiting.......
Local

Clearlake, CA

#171 Jan 24, 2013
sociopathic Liberals wrote:
<quoted text>
How then could the Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg say the following at a business breakfast in mid-town Manhattan on November 1, 2011?
"It was not the banks that created the mortgage crisis. It was, plain and simple, Congress who forced everybody to go and give mortgages to people who were on the cusp. Now, I’m not saying I’m sure that was terrible policy, because a lot of those people who got homes still have them and they wouldn’t have gotten them without that. But they were the ones who pushed Fannie and Freddie to make a bunch of loans that were imprudent, if you will. They were the ones that pushed the banks to loan to everybody. And now we want to go vilify the banks because it’s one target, it’s easy to blame them and Congress certainly isn’t going to blame themselves.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011...
Ya, and ole Barney Frank(D) was sticking it to someone at Fannie (no pun intended, but it is true), and during the whole time the American taxpayers were getting it in the "fanny".
I think Barney ended up marrying him.....yuuuuuuuck
Local

Clearlake, CA

#172 Jan 24, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
I see that you're trying to shift attention away from the fact that repubs and Clinton BOTH passed Glass-Steagall to another conservative spin-- that it was 'liberal' homeownership programs that caused the subprime financial collapse.
This is just not true.(Even if it was true Bush Jr. also pushed for more homeownership).
Conservative Campaign That Blames The Global Financial Crisis On A Government Push To Make House More Affordabl" Is Disproved By The Data.
As reported by McClatchy: "As the economy worsens and Election Day approaches, a conservative campaign that blames the global financial crisis on a government push to make housing more affordable to lower-class Americans has taken off on talk radio and e-mail.
Commentators say that's what triggered the stock market meltdown and the freeze on credit. They've specifically targeted the mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which the federal government seized on Sept. 6, contending that lending to poor and minority Americans caused Fannie's and Freddie's financial problems.
Federal housing data reveal that the charges aren't true, and that the private sector, not the government or government-backed companies, was behind the soaring subprime lending at the core of the crisis." [McClatchy, 10/12/08,
: http://politicalcorrection.org/factcheck/2011...
The government had NOTHING to do with subprime loans, except for the fact that Bush's SEC looked away from the real estate bubble that Wall Street was inflating.
Sub-prime lenders were under NO government mandate to make and pool these loans. It was the collapse of the sub-prime loan pools that caused Goldman Sachs,Lehman, Bear Stearns, and all of the other huge Wall Street firms to almost collapse.
That's why it was called the sub-prime crash. But the pro-corporate, government regulation haters quickly tried to spin this collapse into something that had nothing to do with Wall Street greed and short sightedness.
You guys can never accept that unfettered corporate capitalism can ever do any wrong.
Ah yes teepee, I have kicked you around on this subject as well.
The finance Modernization act(repeal of glass steagall) was nothing more than an amended proposal that made it all way to Clinton's desk.....it was nothing at all in legal terms......it had no bearing on our lives
..........in fact, it meant nothing at all.
Until Clinton signed it. Then, and only then, it was the law of the land.

You get it numbnuts?

Nothing without Clinton's signature.....and then the law of the land after he signed it.

Oh ya. 100% Clinton's fault for signing the most damaging bill in the history of the United States.

You will sidestep, blame, and excuse Clinton.
but the reality is unavoidable. Casual readers will take note.
Casual Reader

Chico, CA

#173 Jan 24, 2013
Local wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah yes teepee, I have kicked you around on this subject as well.
The finance Modernization act(repeal of glass steagall) was nothing more than an amended proposal that made it all way to Clinton's desk.....it was nothing at all in legal terms......it had no bearing on our lives
..........in fact, it meant nothing at all.
Until Clinton signed it. Then, and only then, it was the law of the land.
You get it numbnuts?
Nothing without Clinton's signature.....and then the law of the land after he signed it.
Oh ya. 100% Clinton's fault for signing the most damaging bill in the history of the United States.
You will sidestep, blame, and excuse Clinton.
but the reality is unavoidable. Casual readers will take note.
>
>
>
Thus spoke the village idiot....
Tea Party Solution

Paradise, CA

#174 Jan 24, 2013
sociopathic Liberals wrote:
<quoted text>
How then could the Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg say the following at a business breakfast in mid-town Manhattan on November 1, 2011?
"It was not the banks that created the mortgage crisis. It was, plain and simple, Congress who forced everybody to go and give mortgages to people who were on the cusp.
Clearly the mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, didn't know what he was talking about, or he was simply going along with the corporate/ Wall Street spin on this topic. After all, Bloomberg was a big Wall Street player.

I would challenge him or anyone else the same way-- SHOW us with specific governmental papers that Wall Streeters were mandated to make sub-prime loans.
Tea Party Solution

Paradise, CA

#175 Jan 24, 2013
Local wrote:
<quoted text>
, it meant nothing at all.
Until Clinton signed it. Then, and only then, it was the law of the land.
You get it numbnuts?
Nothing without Clinton's signature.....and then the law of the land after he signed it.
Casual readers will take note.
If Gramm, Leach and Bliley had not created this bill then Clinton would not have a bill to sign.

You get it dipsht?

Casual readers will understand that the president can't sign a bill that doesn't exist.

And I ask you again-- since you so are so clearly against the de-regulation of the financial industry why are you so silent about repubs blocking Wall Street regulations now?
Tea Party Solution

Paradise, CA

#176 Jan 24, 2013
ThirtyThirty wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you always put words in peoples mouths?
I have told you in plain English that I think Clinton was 100% responsible for the problems related to his sex life and I did not give him a pass on that.
Why do you say I did?
How can you have a conversation with someone if you keep putting words in the mouth of the people you are talking to?
If that is how you are going to be why bother talking to me at all, why not just talk to yourself?
Yep, loco thinks he's Clint Eastwood and that you're the empty chair.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#177 Jan 25, 2013
ThirtyThirty wrote:
Am I talking to a crazy person?
Does anyone else understand what he is talking about?
>
>
You are attempting to communicate with a conservative psycho...

His only function seems to be to disrupt dialog with his asinine posts, thus making Republicans and conservatives in general appear like total fools...

As far as his "road toad" and "10 4's " go? That's anyone's guess, but I suspect that is just one of his many ways of bringing utter irrelevancy into ongoing threads, just as he he does by constantly posting irrelevant quotes and links from threads that ended months and in some cases years ago...
sociopathic Liberals

Chico, CA

#178 Jan 25, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
Clearly the mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, didn't know what he was talking about, or he was simply going along with the corporate/ Wall Street spin on this topic. After all, Bloomberg was a big Wall Street player.
I would challenge him or anyone else the same way-- SHOW us with specific governmental papers that Wall Streeters were mandated to make sub-prime loans.
OMG!!! ROTFLMAO at you, you demorat duped lemming fool! ROTFLMAO

It just doesn't get any more left winged that this POS bloomberg!
sociopathic Liberals

Chico, CA

#179 Jan 25, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
You are attempting to communicate with a conservative psycho...
His only function seems to be to disrupt dialog with his asinine posts, thus making Republicans and conservatives in general appear like total fools...
As far as his "road toad" and "10 4's " go? That's anyone's guess, but I suspect that is just one of his many ways of bringing utter irrelevancy into ongoing threads, just as he he does by constantly posting irrelevant quotes and links from threads that ended months and in some cases years ago...
Oh yeah... and you're the dumbphuq who said that the govt.'TAKING' taxes is the same as going to the store and buying groceries??? Who's the real "psycho" here???
So STFU you POS cowardly little puke!
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#180 Jan 25, 2013
sociopathic Liberals wrote:
<quoted text>
OMG!!! ROTFLMAO at you, you demorat duped lemming fool! ROTFLMAO
It just doesn't get any more left winged that this POS bloomberg!
>
>
Quite an incisive analysis, yours is....

Since: Nov 11

Colusa

#181 Jan 25, 2013
Local wrote:
<quoted text>
I knew that you would see it my way eventually.
Now, if you come ALL the way clean by admitting that Clinton screwed us all and he couldn't have made a more serious mistake, you have faced reality.
waiting.......
Don't be deliberately stupid.

Just because he agreed with the Republicans who wrote the bill and passed through a congress they controlled does not mean he is mostly responsible for it. What a huge illogical leap!

The people who wrote the bill and shepherded it through a congress they controlled are still way more responsible for the bill than the president of the opposing party who agreed with them and signed it. Yes he is partially to blame, but obviously the people who wrote the bill and controlled congress are more to blame.

It is simply unbelievable that we have been going round and round about such a simple point. A point in which the facts are so obviously on one side, and yet you continue to make excuses for the Republicans even though you claim not to be one. This is precisely the kind of week kneed refusal to take responsibility that is ruining the GOP and disgusting me.

Since: Nov 11

Colusa

#182 Jan 25, 2013
sociopathic Liberals wrote:
<quoted text>
How then could the Mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg say the following at a business breakfast in mid-town Manhattan on November 1, 2011?
/
How Could he say it? What do you mean how could he say it? People can and do say whatever they want, true or not, accurate or false.

Are you implying it is true because the mayor of New York said it.
sociopathic Liberals

Chico, CA

#183 Jan 25, 2013
ThirtyThirty wrote:
<quoted text>
How Could he say it? What do you mean how could he say it? People can and do say whatever they want, true or not, accurate or false.
Are you implying it is true because the mayor of New York said it.
Pretty incriminating evidence there liberal lemming. Wouldn't you agree?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Paradise Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
3-Year-Old Boy Abondoned in Chico City Plaza 4 hr Progun 2
zika hits NYC 9 hr The right is wrong 23
Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice used private ... 9 hr The right is wrong 3
Barack Hussein Obama Has Lost His Mind! 14 hr Sunlight Disinfects 73
Michigan republican governor behind Flint water... 19 hr Sunlight Disinfects 24
665,000 jobs lost in Jan 16 20 hr Here Is One 3
tards run scared 21 hr Here Is One 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Paradise Mortgages