Videos blaming Democrats for crisis

[Throckmorton]

What's the deal with them? I haven't found any argument against them but they seem to be the Republicans' Youtube equivalent to Chocolate Rain

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NU6fuFrdCJY

This one is about Freddie and Frannie. Not sure how it related to the current crisis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

 

[Vic]

Fsck not again...

No bank was ever forced to make a bad loan.

 

[her209]

Does anyone have any figures for non-sub-prime mortgages for the same period?

 

[Lemon law]

Its will give me such GOP joy to endless play endless re runs of these clips while my country goes to hell in a hand basket.

Until they come to get me , I shall hold your hand in mine.

 

[jpeyton]

The GOP is in RED FUCKING ALERT mode right now. Have you seen today's polls? I did a double-take, because I didn't think there was any way Obama was going to make these kinds of gains over a weekend.

But the numbers speak for themselves. Rasmussen's newest post-debate poll on the top 10 voter issues put Obama ahead of McCain in EVERY category, even Iraq and immigration (things that McCain had lead to this point).

What we're witnessing is a landslide movement towards Obama by the electorate. John McCain and the GOP are on the wrong side of history at the wrong moment in time. With 5 weeks to go before election day, and continued support for Obama building among Independents and disaffected Democrats, the numbers are only going to get stronger.

 

[Budmantom]

My message to congress is get it done!! and call me if you need me.....



Yours truly,

Barry

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

I wonder how Barry's acceptance speech will look like on your new plasma?

 

[pstylesss]

Originally posted by: Vic
Fsck not again...

No bank was ever forced to make a bad loan.

Still working on my post like I promised. Although it's late. I don't read blogs, btw if you're the one you accused me of getting talking points from right wing blogs - I'm actually reading the bills and news articles from 13 years ago.

If this isn't the cause, why don't you show what is?

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: Budmantom

I wonder how Barry's acceptance speech will look like on your new plasma?

I might be able to look into his eyes and see his soul.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ

Originally posted by: Vic
Fsck not again...

No bank was ever forced to make a bad loan.

Still working on my post like I promised. Although it's late. I don't read blogs, btw if you're the one you accused me of getting talking points from right wing blogs - I'm actually reading the bills and news articles from 13 years ago.

If this isn't the cause, why don't you show what is?

There is no THE cause. The very idea that an economic crisis this vast could have just one single cause is ludicrous. And even if it did, a piece of legislation already in force for 31 years and at least 2 previous housing boom-and-bust cycles would not be tops on my list.
I've already posted my own personal opinion as to the primary causes in 2 different threads this past week.

Look, I've been in mortgage for 15 years. From my perspective, this latest blame CRA for the whole thing bit is just a right-wing blogger ploy to those who are just now waking up to what's been going on for a while. Wha? Fannie/Freddie just failed? How'd that happen?
Hey, let's blame the CRA and Fannie/Freddie oversight as if all the non-Fannie/Freddie subprime that had been underpinning the inflated housing market didn't all implode last year!

 

[pstylesss]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ

Originally posted by: Vic
Fsck not again...

No bank was ever forced to make a bad loan.

Still working on my post like I promised. Although it's late. I don't read blogs, btw if you're the one you accused me of getting talking points from right wing blogs - I'm actually reading the bills and news articles from 13 years ago.

If this isn't the cause, why don't you show what is?

There is no THE cause. The very idea that an economic crisis this vast could have just one single cause is ludicrous. And even if it did, a piece of legislation already in force for 31 years and at least 2 previous housing boom-and-bust cycles would not be tops on my list.
I've already posted my own personal opinion as to the primary causes in 2 different threads this past week.

Look, I've been in mortgage for 15 years. From my perspective, this latest blame CRA for the whole thing bit is just a right-wing blogger ploy to those who are just now waking up to what's been going on for a while. Wha? Fannie/Freddie just failed? How'd that happen?
Hey, let's blame the CRA and Fannie/Freddie oversight as if all the non-Fannie/Freddie subprime that had been underpinning the inflated housing market didn't all implode last year!

I'm sorry but you being in the mortgage industry for 15 years does not mean you're qualified to just say it's not part of the cause and have everyone listen to you. I know a guy that was a mortgage broker for longer (edit: actually it was about 10 years or so) and he went out of businesses... he for damn certain isn't qualified.

I never said it was THE cause and if I did I didn't mean to because I never thought that. If I remember correctly your opinion of the cause was people who were in the real estate market flipping houses or something like that to make money, and if they foreclosed it was okay because there was no way they could really go under and would just try it again.

If you want to convince me or anyone, even slightly, that you may be correct then you need to come at us with your 15 years in the mortgage industry (for all I know you were answering phones and opening mail). You need to bring some statistics, numbers, legislation, articles, quotes, video clips, SOMETHING to substantiate your claim. Quit coming into threads and lambasting us with your 15 years of experience with nothing to back up your claims. Put up or shutup.

 

[Jiggz]

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ

Originally posted by: Vic
Fsck not again...

No bank was ever forced to make a bad loan.

Still working on my post like I promised. Although it's late. I don't read blogs, btw if you're the one you accused me of getting talking points from right wing blogs - I'm actually reading the bills and news articles from 13 years ago.

If this isn't the cause, why don't you show what is?

There is no THE cause. The very idea that an economic crisis this vast could have just one single cause is ludicrous. And even if it did, a piece of legislation already in force for 31 years and at least 2 previous housing boom-and-bust cycles would not be tops on my list.
I've already posted my own personal opinion as to the primary causes in 2 different threads this past week.

Look, I've been in mortgage for 15 years. From my perspective, this latest blame CRA for the whole thing bit is just a right-wing blogger ploy to those who are just now waking up to what's been going on for a while. Wha? Fannie/Freddie just failed? How'd that happen?
Hey, let's blame the CRA and Fannie/Freddie oversight as if all the non-Fannie/Freddie subprime that had been underpinning the inflated housing market didn't all implode last year!

I'm sorry but you being in the mortgage industry for 15 years does not mean you're qualified to just say it's not part of the cause and have everyone listen to you. I know a guy that was a mortgage broker for longer (edit: actually it was about 10 years or so) and he went out of businesses... he for damn certain isn't qualified.

I never said it was THE cause and if I did I didn't mean to because I never thought that. If I remember correctly your opinion of the cause was people who were in the real estate market flipping houses or something like that to make money, and if they foreclosed it was okay because there was no way they could really go under and would just try it again.

If you want to convince me or anyone, even slightly, that you may be correct then you need to come at us with your 15 years in the mortgage industry (for all I know you were answering phones and opening mail). You need to bring some statistics, numbers, legislation, articles, quotes, video clips, SOMETHING to substantiate your claim. Quit coming into threads and lambasting us with your 15 years of experience with nothing to back up your claims. Put up or shutup.

Well, your post is lambasting the DEMS on this forum and they'll come up with all their excuses, even with the BS of no such "THE" cause to make it appear it was the GOP's fault. Except in your post you clearly showed it was the DEMS who created this big mess! I'll say NO BAIL OUT! Lend Wall St. monies at 2% if they want to stay liquid but never free money!

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ

Originally posted by: Vic
Fsck not again...

No bank was ever forced to make a bad loan.

Still working on my post like I promised. Although it's late. I don't read blogs, btw if you're the one you accused me of getting talking points from right wing blogs - I'm actually reading the bills and news articles from 13 years ago.

If this isn't the cause, why don't you show what is?

There is no THE cause. The very idea that an economic crisis this vast could have just one single cause is ludicrous. And even if it did, a piece of legislation already in force for 31 years and at least 2 previous housing boom-and-bust cycles would not be tops on my list.
I've already posted my own personal opinion as to the primary causes in 2 different threads this past week.

Look, I've been in mortgage for 15 years. From my perspective, this latest blame CRA for the whole thing bit is just a right-wing blogger ploy to those who are just now waking up to what's been going on for a while. Wha? Fannie/Freddie just failed? How'd that happen?
Hey, let's blame the CRA and Fannie/Freddie oversight as if all the non-Fannie/Freddie subprime that had been underpinning the inflated housing market didn't all implode last year!

I'm sorry but you being in the mortgage industry for 15 years does not mean you're qualified to just say it's not part of the cause and have everyone listen to you. I know a guy that was in the mortgage industry for longer and he went out of businesses... he for damn certain isn't qualified.

I never said it was THE cause and if I did I didn't mean to because I never thought that. If I remember correctly your opinion of the cause was people who were in the real estate market flipping houses or something like that to make money, and if they foreclosed it was okay because there was no way they could really go under and would just try it again.

If you want to convince me or anyone, even slightly, that you may be correct then you need to come at us with your 15 years in the mortgage industry (for all I know you were answering phones and opening mail). You need to bring some statistics, numbers, legislation, articles, quotes, video clips, SOMETHING to substantiate your claim. Quit coming into threads and lambasting us with your 15 years of experience with nothing to back up your claims. Put up or shutup.

The OP's video link present this as a THE cause.

You specifically asked me for a THE cause.

I told you there was not THE cause, you clearly misunderstood what I had posted earlier, and now you tell me to 'put up or shut up' and insinuated I answered the phones. Why shouldn't I just tell you to fuck off?

I'll tell you what happened, in terms anyone should be able to understand. Interest rates came down from double-digits for the 1st time in almost 2 decades. Home prices, starting from dollar amounts that would barely buy a new car today, went up and up and up and up. People got stupid. If you're looking for a THE cause, that's really it in a nutshell. Anything else is bullshit.

I supposed next you'll be asking me to provide THE cause for the dot-com bubble... guess what, it was the same reason. People got stupid.

 

[WaTaGuMp]

People taking loans they cant afford makes me cry, that is all.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Jiggz

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ

Originally posted by: Vic
Fsck not again...

No bank was ever forced to make a bad loan.

Still working on my post like I promised. Although it's late. I don't read blogs, btw if you're the one you accused me of getting talking points from right wing blogs - I'm actually reading the bills and news articles from 13 years ago.

If this isn't the cause, why don't you show what is?

There is no THE cause. The very idea that an economic crisis this vast could have just one single cause is ludicrous. And even if it did, a piece of legislation already in force for 31 years and at least 2 previous housing boom-and-bust cycles would not be tops on my list.
I've already posted my own personal opinion as to the primary causes in 2 different threads this past week.

Look, I've been in mortgage for 15 years. From my perspective, this latest blame CRA for the whole thing bit is just a right-wing blogger ploy to those who are just now waking up to what's been going on for a while. Wha? Fannie/Freddie just failed? How'd that happen?
Hey, let's blame the CRA and Fannie/Freddie oversight as if all the non-Fannie/Freddie subprime that had been underpinning the inflated housing market didn't all implode last year!

I'm sorry but you being in the mortgage industry for 15 years does not mean you're qualified to just say it's not part of the cause and have everyone listen to you. I know a guy that was a mortgage broker for longer (edit: actually it was about 10 years or so) and he went out of businesses... he for damn certain isn't qualified.

I never said it was THE cause and if I did I didn't mean to because I never thought that. If I remember correctly your opinion of the cause was people who were in the real estate market flipping houses or something like that to make money, and if they foreclosed it was okay because there was no way they could really go under and would just try it again.

If you want to convince me or anyone, even slightly, that you may be correct then you need to come at us with your 15 years in the mortgage industry (for all I know you were answering phones and opening mail). You need to bring some statistics, numbers, legislation, articles, quotes, video clips, SOMETHING to substantiate your claim. Quit coming into threads and lambasting us with your 15 years of experience with nothing to back up your claims. Put up or shutup.

Well, your post is lambasting the DEMS on this forum and they'll come up with all their excuses, even with the BS of no such "THE" cause to make it appear it was the GOP's fault. Except in your post you clearly showed it was the DEMS who created this big mess! I'll say NO BAIL OUT! Lend Wall St. monies at 2% if they want to stay liquid but never free money!

This post is a prime example of why retards shouldn't be allowed in internet forums.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Jiggz
Well, your post is lambasting the DEMS on this forum and they'll come up with all their excuses, even with the BS of no such "THE" cause to make it appear it was the GOP's fault. Except in your post you clearly showed it was the DEMS who created this big mess! I'll say NO BAIL OUT! Lend Wall St. monies at 2% if they want to stay liquid but never free money!

Okay, you prove that this was THE cause. Let's see the numbers, the figures, the statistics beyond the rhetoric. Explain to me how hundreds of non-conforming subprime lenders failed last year because it was Fannie and Freddie's fault? Tell me why Bear Stearns, the largest buyer of that non-conforming paper and a non-FDIC bank entity allowed into the market by the GLBA, was the first on Wall Street to fail. And then Lehman Bros, the company that claims to have invented Alt-A mortgages fails. And then you see Fannie and Freddie failing. Tell me how it came about this way, I'd love to hear your opinion.
Oh, and don't forget to explain how the 2nd video link was not a call for increased regulation of Fannie but for a change of regulatory oversight body.

And BTW, my "BS" of no such THE cause was not an attempt to make it appear as it was all the GOP's fault. Quite the opposite, I think both parties share blame in this. However, in this thread, there is only one party trying to claim that the other party is entirely at fault. Do you see that?

 

[pstylesss]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ

Originally posted by: Vic
Fsck not again...

No bank was ever forced to make a bad loan.

Still working on my post like I promised. Although it's late. I don't read blogs, btw if you're the one you accused me of getting talking points from right wing blogs - I'm actually reading the bills and news articles from 13 years ago.

If this isn't the cause, why don't you show what is?

There is no THE cause. The very idea that an economic crisis this vast could have just one single cause is ludicrous. And even if it did, a piece of legislation already in force for 31 years and at least 2 previous housing boom-and-bust cycles would not be tops on my list.
I've already posted my own personal opinion as to the primary causes in 2 different threads this past week.

Look, I've been in mortgage for 15 years. From my perspective, this latest blame CRA for the whole thing bit is just a right-wing blogger ploy to those who are just now waking up to what's been going on for a while. Wha? Fannie/Freddie just failed? How'd that happen?
Hey, let's blame the CRA and Fannie/Freddie oversight as if all the non-Fannie/Freddie subprime that had been underpinning the inflated housing market didn't all implode last year!

I'm sorry but you being in the mortgage industry for 15 years does not mean you're qualified to just say it's not part of the cause and have everyone listen to you. I know a guy that was in the mortgage industry for longer and he went out of businesses... he for damn certain isn't qualified.

I never said it was THE cause and if I did I didn't mean to because I never thought that. If I remember correctly your opinion of the cause was people who were in the real estate market flipping houses or something like that to make money, and if they foreclosed it was okay because there was no way they could really go under and would just try it again.

If you want to convince me or anyone, even slightly, that you may be correct then you need to come at us with your 15 years in the mortgage industry (for all I know you were answering phones and opening mail). You need to bring some statistics, numbers, legislation, articles, quotes, video clips, SOMETHING to substantiate your claim. Quit coming into threads and lambasting us with your 15 years of experience with nothing to back up your claims. Put up or shutup.

The OP's video link present this as a THE cause.

You specifically asked me for a THE cause.

I told you there was not THE cause, you clearly misunderstood what I had posted earlier, and now you tell me to 'put up or shut up' and insinuated I answered the phones. Why shouldn't I just tell you to fuck off?

I'll tell you what happened, in terms anyone should be able to understand. Interest rates came down from double-digits for the 1st time in almost 2 decades. Home prices, starting from dollar amounts that would barely buy a new car today, went up and up and up and up. People got stupid. If you're looking for a THE cause, that's really it in a nutshell. Anything else is bullshit.

I supposed next you'll be asking me to provide THE cause for the dot-com bubble... guess what, it was the same reason. People got stupid.

I didn't insinuate you answered phones, I said, bluntly, "for all I know you were answering phones and opening mail", I suggest you figure out what insinuate means. I did insinuate something though, and that was that your self described qualifications mean absolutely nothing.

I asked you to show us what the cause was, since you were so sure that CRA was not THE cause. When I asked you to provide the cause I did not mean that you had to give me a single, one and only reason why this happened. Although, you getting defensive and pretending that was what I was asking sure makes it easier for you to throw up a strawman.

I target you specifically because I have seen twice now where someone brings up the subject of the CRA and you deny it's (at the very most) a small part of the reason, however you bring nothing to the table to substantiate your claims.

I'll tell you what happened, in terms anyone should be able to understand. Interest rates came down from double-digits for the 1st time in almost 2 decades. Home prices, starting from dollar amounts that would barely buy a new car today, went up and up and up and up. People got stupid. If you're looking for a THE cause, that's really it in a nutshell. Anything else is bullshit.

Well this is a great opinion. Now what caused interest rates to decrease so significantly and what caused houses to increase to quickly? There had to have been a reason. You don't even address the basics. You seem like a Sunday paper reading kind of guy, look at the headlines and formulate an opinion but have absolutely nothing to back it up.

 

[palehorse]

I blame ALL of them.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: palehorse
I blame ALL of them.

The most accurate thing anyone has said about either the Dems or Repubs today.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ZeroIQ
I didn't insinuate you answered phones, I said, bluntly, "for all I know you were answering phones and opening mail", I suggest you figure out what insinuate means. I did insinuate something though, and that was that your self described qualifications mean absolutely nothing.

A top producing loan officer, sales manager, and broker making 6 figures (depending on the point in my career). I am also a certified underwriter, and I've even worked as a loan processor.

I asked you to show us what the cause was, since you were so sure that CRA was not THE cause. When I asked you to provide the cause I did not mean that you had to give me a single, one and only reason why this happened. Although, you getting defensive and pretending that was what I was asking sure makes it easier for you to throw up a strawman.

I did not say that the CRA was not a cause. That's your straw man. I said that no bank was ever FORCED to make a bad loan. I do think the CRA played a role, among many many other factors.

I target you specifically because I have seen twice now where someone brings up the subject of the CRA and you deny it's (at the very most) a small part of the reason, however you bring nothing to the table to substantiate your claims.

Which I never did.

Well this is a great opinion. Now what caused interest rates to decrease so significantly and what caused houses to increase to quickly? There had to have been a reason. You don't even address the basics. You seem like a Sunday paper reading kind of guy, look at the headlines and formulate an opinion but have absolutely nothing to back it up.

Interest rates came down because they were in double-digits before. I thought that would be obvious, as double-digits is WAY above the historical norm for mortgage rates. But the oil crisis and stagflation of the 70s, followed by the S&L crisis of the 80s, kept them up there until the markets stabilized from both following the end of the Bush I recession in '93.
The lowering of interest rates is then what allowed home values to increase, as homebuyers could then afford a bigger loan (lower interest = lower monthly payment per amount borrowed). This occurred slowly during the mid-late 90s, with steady appreciation in most markets, faltered a bit during the dot-com bubble, then picked up crazy speed with the drastic Fed rate cuts post-9/11.
Unfortunately, by this time, a decade into the boom, the "can't lose with real estate" mentality had taken firm hold, and from there it just got silly.

I leave out the basics because I assume people already know them. Sorry, but for me, it's a natural thought that lower rate = higher loan amount.

Originally posted by: palehorse
I blame ALL of them.

A solid position.

 

[charrison]

Vic,

While cra may not have forced any banks to make loans, it defiantly highly encouraged it. So difference between force and encourage may be little. Are they other factors, sure, but this is one is large enough to not be ignored. Reform of this could have stopped this problem.


And are you still against government bailouts?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: charrison
Vic,

While cra may not have forced any banks to make loans, it defiantly highly encouraged it. So difference between force and encourage may be little. Are they other factors, sure, but this is one is large enough to not be ignored. Reform of this could have stopped this problem.


And are you still against government bailouts?

There is no legitimate reform that could have taken place that the Republicans would not have blocked themselves. Case in point: all the mortgage reform that went through on state and local levels nationwide last year, new license requirements, no stated income loans, etc etc was all pushed through by Democrats over Republican objections. The primary cause of all this, first and foremost, the non-conforming subprime mortgages (meaning those which Fannie/Freddie would not buy), had long been called 'predatory lending' by the Democrats, and especially by ACORN, with several legislative attempts at curtailing such lending (like HOEPA 1995 for example).
Sorry, you guys are trying to re-write history here. I lived it, so I'm not falling for it.

At this time, I am in favor of short-term bailouts for purely pragmatic reasons. There is a crisis in confidence in the markets that threatens to spread like a cancer. Let's hire the special prosecutor and start the hearings and the blame pointing afterwards.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: charrison
Vic,

While cra may not have forced any banks to make loans, it defiantly highly encouraged it. So difference between force and encourage may be little. Are they other factors, sure, but this is one is large enough to not be ignored. Reform of this could have stopped this problem.


And are you still against government bailouts?

There is no legitimate reform that could have taken place that the Republicans would not have blocked themselves. Case in point: all the mortgage reform that went through on state and local levels nationwide last year, new license requirements, no stated income loans, etc etc was all pushed through by Democrats over Republican objections. The primary cause of all this, first and foremost, the non-conforming subprime mortgages (meaning those which Fannie/Freddie would not buy), had long been called 'predatory lending' by the Democrats, and especially by ACORN, with several legislative attempts at curtailing such lending (like HOEPA 1995 for example).
Sorry, you guys are trying to re-write history here. I lived it, so I'm not falling for it.

It is only speculation that no reform would be possible. It appears that republicans were right to want to reform what was going one several years ago. Both parties are fault. Republicans were unable to fix it and democrats acted as if there was no problem. And here we are today.

At this time, I am in favor of short-term bailouts for purely pragmatic reasons. There is a crisis in confidence in the markets that threatens to spread like a cancer. Let's hire the special prosecutor and start the hearings and the blame pointing afterwards.

I guess bailouts are not so bad when they are your industry But why are bailouts even needed. Most of these troubled assets are not toxic and can be sold to willing investors. Any bailout money need to have reforms and prosecutor attached to it.

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: palehorse
I blame ALL of them.

I blame bleeding heart liberals that think money grows on trees and who thinks that lending money to people who cannot afford houses is a great idea because "poor people" deserve a house too regardless if they can pay or not.

Now if the bailout goes though, we responsible tax payers will shoulder most of the burden, once again the hard working americans getting shafted in the US of A.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: charrison
It is only speculation that no reform would be possible. It appears that republicans were right to want to reform what was going one several years ago. Both parties are fault. Republicans were unable to fix it and democrats acted as if there was no problem. And here we are today.

I can't quite agree with this. Both parties wanted to fix only certain parts while acting like every other part was just rosy.

I guess bailouts are not so bad when they are your industry But why are bailouts even needed. Most of these troubled assets are not toxic and can be sold to willing investors. Any bailout money need to have reforms and prosecutor attached to it.

The bailouts are needed because there is no confidence in the markets. Even consumers are losing confidence. The assets themselves might be perfectly fine, profitable even, but almost no one wants to take the chance. Too many have already been burned, and no one knows when the carnage is going to stop.