Trayvon Martin Shooting Death Sparks ...

Trayvon Martin Shooting Death Sparks Outrage on Social Media

There are 66309 comments on the Wall Street Journal story from Mar 22, 2012, titled Trayvon Martin Shooting Death Sparks Outrage on Social Media. In it, Wall Street Journal reports that:

Social media has put the spotlight on the story Trayvon Martin , an unarmed African-American teenager who was shot to death last month by a neighborhood watch captain in Florida.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Wall Street Journal.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#39131 Sep 30, 2012
Gubmint news.
1 post removed
Barbara

Ipswich, MA

#39133 Sep 30, 2012
Freebird USA wrote:
<quoted text> As a Granite State native I am ALL TOO FAMILIAR with all manner of Bay Staters.
Ha ha ha. Good for you.
Buffalo Bill

Buffalo, NY

#39134 Sep 30, 2012
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>

BTW, if you truly want freedom where even the Constitution isn't and impediment, I suggest you move to Somalia!

There's really not a whole lot you can't do there!

Have fun!
No thanks, my fat tropical friend.

I really don't think I want to meet any of you relatives right now.

They sound pretty kinky though.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#39135 Sep 30, 2012
Buffalo Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL!
I never reversed myself.
It's all about Law.
But Congress needs to enact more laws to insure that the existing laws get enforced.
They can appropriate more money so the courts and law enforcement can be able to handle this epidemic.
And they can appropriate more money for prisons....
...and hospitals for the mentally ill.
The prisons could be supported by prisoners who would opt to work and get to keep about 40% of their earnings while they were incarcerated.
If they choose not to participate then they would be poor even by prison standards.
My vision of freedom is a place where we could all walk down any street at night and feel safe.
Some call it Nirvana.
Perhaps you can't imagine how some folks in the black community feel about having to live in constant fear of gangs and pimps and drug dealers, but do insult them.
Spout off to them about how things are gonna change.
lol! I'm sorry. So now you're challenging state's rights son? You want to impose the federal government on state and local laws?!?!?!

Wow.

Seems to me your boy Romney feels the need to cut back... especially with all the con rhetoric of reducing the size of the federal government, or curtailing NCLB.

You have your nirvana son. And you'll never attain it.

Even Jesus couldn't.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#39136 Sep 30, 2012
Buffalo Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
No thanks, my fat tropical friend.
I really don't think I want to meet any of you relatives right now.
They sound pretty kinky though.
lol! Son, I was just helping you find your "nirvana."

You seem to have this problem of dealing with the real world, I see!
1 post removed
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#39138 Sep 30, 2012
blame it on Bush wrote:
<quoted text>It doesn't take much to look up 1992 GSE act. These morons are just too stupid. Obama got an economy the the mortgage crises melted down. Who started the whole meltdown? DoddFrank
lol! No. GLB did.

Cons are just too afraid to admit their legislation is what started the mortgage mess going!
1 post removed
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#39140 Sep 30, 2012
lol! I knew Barfalo Bill was an idiot and a liar.

Now I can add scared to his list of "accomplishments!"
2 posts removed
NoBlamer 2012

Mcarthur, CA

#39143 Sep 30, 2012
this is how the democrats caused the housing crunch

In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods.

ovomit is still doing it

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#39144 Sep 30, 2012
NoBlamer 2012 wrote:
this is how the democrats caused the housing crunch
In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules
Reagan, BoyToy.

Since: Apr 12

Truth's Door

#39145 Sep 30, 2012
NoBlamer 2012 wrote:
this is how the democrats caused the housing crunch

In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods.

ovomit is still doing it
Go review your history, Idiot.

Judy, when you figure out what 15% of something is, then you can graduate to the next level.

No one is free to have an intellectual debate with you when you don't know your history and when you freely toss unprovoked insults and hurl racist words and jokes.

Your sorry, no-good butt can only be laughed at.

HA!

FOUR MORE YEARS!!!!

Since: Apr 12

Truth's Door

#39146 Sep 30, 2012
Buffalo Bill wrote:
<quoted text>5 million (approx.)...

Mostly black but substantially white...

...comitt (approx.) 90% of all crime.

They get little sympathy from me.

Black or white, it doesn't matter.

Freedom and Independence would take a quantum leap in America if these people were off the street.

Everybody would recieve a great benefit.

Even greater than you think.
Forget the 5 million.

Let's just get your nasty azz off the streets

FOUR MORE YEARS!!!!
NoBlamer 2012

Mcarthur, CA

#39147 Sep 30, 2012
Regulatory changes 1995

In July 1993, President Bill Clinton asked regulators to reform the CRA in order to make examinations more consistent, clarify performance standards, and reduce cost and compliance burden.[51] Robert Rubin, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, under President Clinton, explained that this was in line with President Clinton's strategy to "deal with the problems of the inner city and distressed rural communities". Discussing the reasons for the Clinton administration's proposal to strengthen the CRA and further reduce red-lining, Lloyd Bentsen, Secretary of the Treasury at that time, affirmed his belief that availability of credit should not depend on where a person lives, "The only thing that ought to matter on a loan application is whether or not you can pay it back, not where you live." Bentsen said that the proposed changes would "make it easier for lenders to show how they're complying with the Community Reinvestment Act", and "cut back a lot of the paperwork and the cost on small business loans".[36]

By early 1995, the proposed CRA regulations were substantially revised to address criticisms that the regulations, and the agencies' implementation of them through the examination process to date, were too process-oriented, burdensome, and not sufficiently focused on actual results.[52] The CRA examination process itself was reformed to incorporate the pending changes.[40] Information about banking institutions' CRA ratings was made available via web page for public review as well.[36] The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) also moved to revise its regulation structure allowing lenders subject to the CRA to claim community development loan credits for loans made to help finance the environmental cleanup or redevelopment of industrial sites when it was part of an effort to revitalize the low- and moderate-income community where the site was located.[53]

During one of the Congressional hearings addressing the proposed changes in 1995, William A. Niskanen, chair of the Cato Institute, criticized both the 1993 and 1994 sets of proposals for political favoritism in allocating credit, for micromanagement by regulators and for the lack of assurances that banks would not be expected to operate at a loss to achieve CRA compliance. He predicted the proposed changes would be very costly to the economy and the banking system in general. Niskanen believed that the primary long term effect would be an artificial contraction of the banking system. Niskanen recommended Congress repeal the Act.[54]

Niskanen's, and other respondents to the proposed changes, voiced their concerns during the public comment & testimony periods in late 1993 through early 1995. In response to the aggregate concerns recorded by then, the Federal financial supervisory agencies (the OCC, FRB, FDIC, and OTS) made further clarifications relating to definition, assessment, ratings and scope; sufficiently resolving many of the issues raised in the process. The agencies jointly reported their final amended regulations for implementing the Community Reinvestment Act in the Federal Register on May 4, 1995. The final amended regulations replaced the existing CRA regulations in their entirety.[55](See the notes in the "1995" column of Table I. for the specifics)
1 post removed
NoBlamer 2012

Mcarthur, CA

#39149 Sep 30, 2012
Legislative changes 1999

In 1999 the Congress enacted and President Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act. This law repealed the part of the Glass–Steagall Act that had prohibited a bank from offering a full range of investment, commercial banking, and insurance services since its enactment in 1933. A similar bill was introduced in 1998 by Senator Phil Gramm but it was unable to complete the legislative process into law. Resistance to enacting the 1998 bill, as well as the subsequent 1999 bill, centered around the legislation's language which would expand the types of banking institutions of the time into other areas of service but would not be subject to CRA compliance in order to do so. The Senator also demanded full disclosure of any financial "deals" which community groups had with banks, accusing such groups of "extortion".[56]

In the fall of 1999, Senators Christopher Dodd and Charles E. Schumer prevented another impasse by securing a compromise between Sen. Gramm and the Clinton Administration by agreeing to amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. ch.16) to allow banks to merge or expand into other types of financial institutions. The new Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act's FDIC related provisions, along with the addition of sub-section § 2903(c) directly to Title 12, insured any bank holding institution wishing to be re-designated as a financial holding institution by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System would also have to follow Community Reinvestment Act compliance guidelines before any merger or expansion could take effect.[57]

At the same time the G-L-B Act's changes to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act would now allow for bank expansions into new lines of business, non-affiliated groups entering into agreements with these bank or financial institutions would also have to be reported as outlined under the newly added section to Title 12,§ 1831y.(CRA Sunshine Requirements), satisfying Sen. Gramm's concerns.[58][59]

In conjunction with the above Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act changes, smaller banks would be reviewed less frequently for CRA compliance by the addition of §2908.(Small Bank Regulatory Relief) directly to Chapter 30,(the existing CRA laws), itself. The 1999 Act also mandated two studies to be conducted in connection with the "Community Reinvestment Act":[60]
the first report by the Federal Reserve, to be delivered to Congress by March 15, 2000, is a comprehensive study of CRA to focus on default and delinquency rates, and the profitability of loans made in connection with CRA;[61]
the second report to be conducted by the Treasury Department over the next two years, is intended to determine the impact of the Act on the provision of services to low- and moderate-income neighborhoods and people, as intended by CRA.[62]

On signing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, President Clinton said that it, "establishes the principles that, as we expand the powers of banks, we will expand the reach of the [Community Reinvestment] Act".[63]
NoBlamer 2012

Mcarthur, CA

#39150 Sep 30, 2012
On signing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, President Clinton said that it, "establishes the principles that, as we expand the powers of banks, we will expand the reach of the [Community Reinvestment] Act".[63]
Barbara

Hampton Falls, NH

#39151 Sep 30, 2012
NoBlamer 2012 wrote:
Regulatory changes 1995
In July 1993, President Bill Clinton asked regulators to reform the CRA in order to make examinations more consistent, clarify performance standards, and reduce cost and compliance burden.[51] Robert Rubin, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, under President Clinton, explained that this was in line with President Clinton's strategy to "deal with the problems of the inner city and distressed rural communities". Discussing the reasons for the Clinton administration's proposal to strengthen the CRA and further reduce red-lining, Lloyd Bentsen, Secretary of the Treasury at that time, affirmed his belief that availability of credit should not depend on where a person lives, "The only thing that ought to matter on a loan application is whether or not you can pay it back, not where you live." Bentsen said that the proposed changes would "make it easier for lenders to show how they're complying with the Community Reinvestment Act", and "cut back a lot of the paperwork and the cost on small business loans".[36]
By early 1995, the proposed CRA regulations were substantially revised to address criticisms that the regulations, and the agencies' implementation of them through the examination process to date, were too process-oriented, burdensome, and not sufficiently focused on actual results.[52] The CRA examination process itself was reformed to incorporate the pending changes.[40] Information about banking institutions' CRA ratings was made available via web page for public review as well.[36] The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) also moved to revise its regulation structure allowing lenders subject to the CRA to claim community development loan credits for loans made to help finance the environmental cleanup or redevelopment of industrial sites when it was part of an effort to revitalize the low- and moderate-income community where the site was located.[53]
During one of the Congressional hearings addressing the proposed changes in 1995, William A. Niskanen, chair of the Cato Institute, criticized both the 1993 and 1994 sets of proposals for political favoritism in allocating credit, for micromanagement by regulators and for the lack of assurances that banks would not be expected to operate at a loss to achieve CRA compliance. He predicted the proposed changes would be very costly to the economy and the banking system in general. Niskanen believed that the primary long term effect would be an artificial contraction of the banking system. Niskanen recommended Congress repeal the Act.[54]
Niskanen's, and other respondents to the proposed changes, voiced their concerns during the public comment & testimony periods in late 1993 through early 1995. In response to the aggregate concerns recorded by then, the Federal financial supervisory agencies (the OCC, FRB, FDIC, and OTS) made further clarifications relating to definition, assessment, ratings and scope; sufficiently resolving many of the issues raised in the process. The agencies jointly reported their final amended regulations for implementing the Community Reinvestment Act in the Federal Register on May 4, 1995. The final amended regulations replaced the existing CRA regulations in their entirety.[55](See the notes in the "1995" column of Table I. for the specifics)
See post below.
1 post removed

Since: Apr 12

Truth's Door

#39153 Sep 30, 2012
NoBlamer 2012 wrote:
everytime we do anything to help the worthless ghetto scum,

it backfires.

best to let them riot

then we can forn our militias and do what we do best...
Yep, just what you're doing right now!

Yapping your pie-hole!

That's all you can do, girl. And don't you forget it, you racist Idiot.

HA!

Take a look into your future...

FOUR MORE YEARS!!!!
11 posts removed
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#39165 Sep 30, 2012
NoBlamer 2012 wrote:
this is how the democrats caused the housing crunch
In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods.
ovomit is still doing it
lol! No, Phil Gramm added the rider to GLB. There was no credit cruch for over 20 years prior.

You need to become more intelligent son. I don't think it's impossible for you, just nearly impossible!
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#39166 Sep 30, 2012
NoBlamer 2012 wrote:
Regulatory changes 1995
In July 1993, President Bill Clinton asked regulators to reform the CRA in order to make examinations more consistent, clarify performance standards, and reduce cost and compliance burden.[51] Robert Rubin, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, under President Clinton, explained that this was in line with President Clinton's strategy to "deal with the problems of the inner city and distressed rural communities". Discussing the reasons for the Clinton administration's proposal to strengthen the CRA and further reduce red-lining, Lloyd Bentsen, Secretary of the Treasury at that time, affirmed his belief that availability of credit should not depend on where a person lives, "The only thing that ought to matter on a loan application is whether or not you can pay it back, not where you live." Bentsen said that the proposed changes would "make it easier for lenders to show how they're complying with the Community Reinvestment Act", and "cut back a lot of the paperwork and the cost on small business loans".[36]
By early 1995, the proposed CRA regulations were substantially revised to address criticisms that the regulations, and the agencies' implementation of them through the examination process to date, were too process-oriented, burdensome, and not sufficiently focused on actual results.[52] The CRA examination process itself was reformed to incorporate the pending changes.[40] Information about banking institutions' CRA ratings was made available via web page for public review as well.[36] The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) also moved to revise its regulation structure allowing lenders subject to the CRA to claim community development loan credits for loans made to help finance the environmental cleanup or redevelopment of industrial sites when it was part of an effort to revitalize the low- and moderate-income community where the site was located.[53]
During one of the Congressional hearings addressing the proposed changes in 1995, William A. Niskanen, chair of the Cato Institute, criticized both the 1993 and 1994 sets of proposals for political favoritism in allocating credit, for micromanagement by regulators and for the lack of assurances that banks would not be expected to operate at a loss to achieve CRA compliance. He predicted the proposed changes would be very costly to the economy and the banking system in general. Niskanen believed that the primary long term effect would be an artificial contraction of the banking system. Niskanen recommended Congress repeal the Act.[54]
Niskanen's, and other respondents to the proposed changes, voiced their concerns during the public comment & testimony periods in late 1993 through early 1995. In response to the aggregate concerns recorded by then, the Federal financial supervisory agencies (the OCC, FRB, FDIC, and OTS) made further clarifications relating to definition, assessment, ratings and scope; sufficiently resolving many of the issues raised in the process. The agencies jointly reported their final amended regulations for implementing the Community Reinvestment Act in the Federal Register on May 4, 1995. The final amended regulations replaced the existing CRA regulations in their entirety.[55](See the notes in the "1995" column of Table I. for the specifics)
SOOOO?!?!?! So far there's nothing but typical back and forth banter son.

You're trying to say something by saying nothing... not that it's a new technique on the part of cons!
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#39167 Sep 30, 2012
NoBlamer 2012 wrote:
everytime we do anything to help the worthless ghetto scum,
it backfires.
best to let them riot
then we can forn our militias and do what we do best...
lol! When you do nothing, it helps.

Which is why you keep trying to provide your version of help!

Got it son?
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#39168 Sep 30, 2012
NoBlamer 2012 wrote:
Legislative changes 1999
In 1999 the Congress enacted and President Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act. This law repealed the part of the Glass–Steagall Act that had prohibited a bank from offering a full range of investment, commercial banking, and insurance services since its enactment in 1933. A similar bill was introduced in 1998 by Senator Phil Gramm but it was unable to complete the legislative process into law. Resistance to enacting the 1998 bill, as well as the subsequent 1999 bill, centered around the legislation's language which would expand the types of banking institutions of the time into other areas of service but would not be subject to CRA compliance in order to do so. The Senator also demanded full disclosure of any financial "deals" which community groups had with banks, accusing such groups of "extortion".[56]
In the fall of 1999, Senators Christopher Dodd and Charles E. Schumer prevented another impasse by securing a compromise between Sen. Gramm and the Clinton Administration by agreeing to amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. ch.16) to allow banks to merge or expand into other types of financial institutions. The new Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act's FDIC related provisions, along with the addition of sub-section § 2903(c) directly to Title 12, insured any bank holding institution wishing to be re-designated as a financial holding institution by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System would also have to follow Community Reinvestment Act compliance guidelines before any merger or expansion could take effect.[57]
At the same time the G-L-B Act's changes to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act would now allow for bank expansions into new lines of business, non-affiliated groups entering into agreements with these bank or financial institutions would also have to be reported as outlined under the newly added section to Title 12,§ 1831y.(CRA Sunshine Requirements), satisfying Sen. Gramm's concerns.[58][59]
In conjunction with the above Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act changes, smaller banks would be reviewed less frequently for CRA compliance by the addition of §2908.(Small Bank Regulatory Relief) directly to Chapter 30,(the existing CRA laws), itself. The 1999 Act also mandated two studies to be conducted in connection with the "Community Reinvestment Act":[60]
the first report by the Federal Reserve, to be delivered to Congress by March 15, 2000, is a comprehensive study of CRA to focus on default and delinquency rates, and the profitability of loans made in connection with CRA;[61]
lol! Yes son, that's right. Read carefully!!!

"...In the fall of 1999, Senators Christopher Dodd and Charles E. Schumer prevented another impasse by securing a compromise between Sen. Gramm and the Clinton Administration by agreeing to amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. ch.16) to allow banks to merge or expand into other types of financial institutions. The new Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act's FDIC related provisions, along with the addition of sub-section § 2903(c) directly to Title 12, insured any bank holding institution wishing to be re-designated as a financial holding institution by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System would also have to follow Community Reinvestment Act compliance guidelines before any merger or expansion could take effect.[57]...."

Until then, there were no provisions in the insurance / investment arena to prevent banks from monopolizing the monetary field. In essence, banks couldn't merge or acquire other institutions unless they followed CRA lending guidelines. Technically, they couldn't simply make money off the poor.

Now you're getting it son!

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.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Obama orders investigation into election hackin... 2 min Shinichiro Takizawa 15
News Trump Isn't Bluffing, He'll Deport 11 Million P... (May '16) 3 min Bait and Switch 14,934
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 6 min Aquarius-wy 216,939
News Donald Trumpa s victory sets off protests on bo... 8 min Maria 28
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 21 min Aquarius-wy 1,460,373
News Trump's repeated claim that he won a 'landslide... 22 min Just Think 652
News Medicare looms over Trump-Ryan alliance 25 min Bubblesss2212 8
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 49 min Aquarius-wy 404,359
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 1 hr Just call me ABE 2 253,600
More from around the web