It is Obama's fault!

[yota5]

It is fact that Obama, inherited an economy in a tail spin. It is fact that the burst of the housing bubble caused our economic slide.

Liberals conveniently forget that the sorry state of our economy can be traced all the way back to the Clinton administration when he signed in the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. The CRA 1977 opened the door for banks to get involved with risky investment practices for the first time in US history.

Then democrats in congress did two things. First through their efforts with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and A.C.O.R.N' democrats pressured banks into issuing mortgages to folks that couldn't afford them, and no chance of ever paying them back . The catalyst behind this Charlie Foxtrot was provided by Barack Obama, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Maxine Waters: all democrats. Then the democrats took control of the congress, and spent us into oblivion.

Liberals may have forgotten these events but the American people didn't. That is why the 2010 election was such a resounding republican success. Barack Obama, inherited a financial catastrophe that was engineered by, and voted for by Barack Obama, and the liberal congress. The American people continue to pay for the mistake of putting these yahoos into office. I can't wait for 2012. How about you?

Government-mandated loans

Starting with the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 Congress forced banks to give loans they would not otherwise give.[14] According to the Cato institute, this raised demand and gathered momentum after Reagan left office when the White House pressured HUD,[15] the Attorney General,[16] The Federal Reserve and all institutions with regulatory authority over banks to pressure them to make loans to low income African-Americans using racial statistics to determine whether the banks were compliant. Jonathan R. Macey, a professor at Cornell University Law School, stated "No bank, no matter what it does, is safe from charges of discrimination. And this is true despite the fact that the industry spends over half of its profits to comply with regulations."[16]

Causes of the United States housing bubble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States housing bubble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[AmericanFirst]

Don't ever tell the dimwits the truth, it drives them nuts and they come up with all sorts of silly lies trying to defend themselves. It is actually kind of funny.

 

[keee keee]

Record unemployment, record gas prices, inflation, lies, misinformation, incompetence, corruption, total chaos. Is this what hope and change meant?
Obama lies, Our soldiers continue to die, Osama doesn't die!!!!

 

[LilOlLady]

It is fact that Obama, inherited an economy in a tail spin. It is fact that the burst of the housing bubble caused our economic slide.

Liberals conveniently forget that the sorry state of our economy can be traced all the way back to the Clinton administration when he signed in the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. The CRA 1977 opened the door for banks to get involved with risky investment practices for the first time in US history.

Then democrats in congress did two things. First through their efforts with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and A.C.O.R.N' democrats pressured banks into issuing mortgages to folks that couldn't afford them, and no chance of ever paying them back . The catalyst behind this Charlie Foxtrot was provided by Barack Obama, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Maxine Waters: all democrats. Then the democrats took control of the congress, and spent us into oblivion.

Liberals may have forgotten these events but the American people didn't. That is why the 2010 election was such a resounding republican success. Barack Obama, inherited a financial catastrophe that was engineered by, and voted for by Barack Obama, and the liberal congress. The American people continue to pay for the mistake of putting these yahoos into office. I can't wait for 2012. How about you?

Government-mandated loans

Starting with the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 Congress forced banks to give loans they would not otherwise give.[14] According to the Cato institute, this raised demand and gathered momentum after Reagan left office when the White House pressured HUD,[15] the Attorney General,[16] The Federal Reserve and all institutions with regulatory authority over banks to pressure them to make loans to low income African-Americans using racial statistics to determine whether the banks were compliant. Jonathan R. Macey, a professor at Cornell University Law School, stated "No bank, no matter what it does, is safe from charges of discrimination. And this is true despite the fact that the industry spends over half of its profits to comply with regulations."[16]

Causes of the United States housing bubble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States housing bubble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Talk about stupid. Were you sleeping the 8 years Bush was borrowing and spending like a drunken sailor? What we are seeing now it cause and effect. Obama has fixed the problem and we are finally recovering from near disaster. Bush and his cronies almost singe handed destoryed this country. One more day and we would have been beyond the point of no return. Blind hatred is dangerous.

Hating people is like burning down your own house to get rid of a rat. Henry Emerson Fosdick

 

[8537]

First of all, Clinton did not sign the CRA in 1977.

Second, if the CRA was the problem then why were 80% of failing subprimes offered by banks that weren't covered by the CRA?

Third, no bank was ever forced to give a single loan to a single person that didn't meet objective lending standards created by the GSE's for conforming loans.

 

[LilOlLady]

Record unemployment, record gas prices, inflation, lies, misinformation, incompetence, corruption, total chaos. Is this what hope and change meant?
Obama lies, Our soldiers continue to die, Osama doesn't die!!!!

Are you aware that you have just described the Bush administration?


F*ck what you heard; recognize what you see.

 

[yota5]

First of all, Clinton did not sign the CRA in 1977.

Second, if the CRA was the problem then why were 80% of failing subprimes offered by banks that weren't covered by the CRA?

Third, no bank was ever forced to give a single loan to a single person that didn't meet objective lending standards created by the GSE's for conforming loans.

You are right. Jimmy Carter signed the original version of CRA in 1977. Maybe the following article will help clear up the confusion.

"CRA regulations give community groups the right to comment on or protest about banks' non-compliance with CRA.[7] Such comments could help or hinder banks' planned expansions. Groups at first only slowly took advantage of these rights.[45] Regulatory changes during President Bill Clinton's administration allowed these community groups better access to CRA information and enabled them to increase their activities.[4][40][94]

In an article for the New York Post, economist Stan Liebowitz wrote that community activists intervention at yearly bank reviews resulted in their obtaining large amounts of money from banks, since poor reviews could lead to frustrated merger plans and even legal challenges by the Justice Department.[95] Michelle Minton noted that Chase Manhattan and J.P. Morgan donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to ACORN at about the same time they were to apply for permission to merge and needed to comply with CRA regulations.[80]

According to the New York Times, some of these housing advocacy groups provided early warnings about the potential impact of lowered credit standards and the resulting unsupportable increase in real estate values they were causing in low to moderate income communities. Ballooning mortgages on rental properties threatened to require large rent increases from low and moderate income tenants that could ill afford them.[96]

Housing advocacy groups were also leaders in the fight against subprime lending in low- and moderate-income communities, "In fact, community advocates had been telling the Federal Reserve about the dangers of subprime lending since the 1990s", according to Inner City Press. "For example, Bronx-based Fair Finance Watch commented to the Federal Reserve about the practices of now-defunct non-bank subprime lender New Century, when U.S. Bancorp bought warrants for 24% of New Century's stock. The Fed, rather than take any action on New Century, merely waited until U.S. Bancorp sold off some of the warrants, and then said the issue was moot." However, subprime loans were so profitable, that they were aggressively marketed in low-and moderate-income communities, even over the objections and warnings of housing advocacy groups like ACORN.[97]"

Community Reinvestment Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[BlindBoo]

It is fact that Obama, inherited an economy in a tail spin. It is fact that the burst of the housing bubble caused our economic slide.

Liberals conveniently forget that the sorry state of our economy can be traced all the way back to the Clinton administration when he signed in the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. The CRA 1977 opened the door for banks to get involved with risky investment practices for the first time in US history.

Then democrats in congress did two things. First through their efforts with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and A.C.O.R.N' democrats pressured banks into issuing mortgages to folks that couldn't afford them, and no chance of ever paying them back . The catalyst behind this Charlie Foxtrot was provided by Barack Obama, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Maxine Waters: all democrats. Then the democrats took control of the congress, and spent us into oblivion.

Liberals may have forgotten these events but the American people didn't. That is why the 2010 election was such a resounding republican success. Barack Obama, inherited a financial catastrophe that was engineered by, and voted for by Barack Obama, and the liberal congress. The American people continue to pay for the mistake of putting these yahoos into office. I can't wait for 2012. How about you?

Government-mandated loans

Starting with the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 Congress forced banks to give loans they would not otherwise give.[14] According to the Cato institute, this raised demand and gathered momentum after Reagan left office when the White House pressured HUD,[15] the Attorney General,[16] The Federal Reserve and all institutions with regulatory authority over banks to pressure them to make loans to low income African-Americans using racial statistics to determine whether the banks were compliant. Jonathan R. Macey, a professor at Cornell University Law School, stated "No bank, no matter what it does, is safe from charges of discrimination. And this is true despite the fact that the industry spends over half of its profits to comply with regulations."[16]

Causes of the United States housing bubble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States housing bubble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1977 Clinton was the AG in Arkansas and the CRA did no such thing.

CRA is not to Blame for the Mortgage Meltdown

It's time to stop the scapegoating: According to a study by the Federal Reserve, 94% of high-cost loans originated during the housing boom had nothing to do with Community Reinvestment Act goals. Lending to poor didn't spur crisis -Fed's Kroszner

The Comptroller of the Currency. John C. Dugan, agrees: "CRA [the Community Reinvestment Act] is not the culprit behind the subprime mortgage lending abuses, or the broader credit quality issues in the marketplace. Indeed, the lenders most prominently associated with subprime mortgage lending abuses and high rates of foreclosure are lenders not subject to CRA. A recent study of 2006 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data showed that banks subject to CRA and their affiliates originated or purchased only six percent of the reported high cost loans made to lower-income borrowers within their CRA assessment areas."**

* Remarks by John C. Dugan, Comptroller of the Currency, before the Enterprise Annual Network Conference (November 19, 2008), available at 2008 News Releases.

 

[yota5]

It is fact that Obama, inherited an economy in a tail spin. It is fact that the burst of the housing bubble caused our economic slide.

Liberals conveniently forget that the sorry state of our economy can be traced all the way back to the Clinton administration when he signed in the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. The CRA 1977 opened the door for banks to get involved with risky investment practices for the first time in US history.

Then democrats in congress did two things. First through their efforts with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and A.C.O.R.N' democrats pressured banks into issuing mortgages to folks that couldn't afford them, and no chance of ever paying them back . The catalyst behind this Charlie Foxtrot was provided by Barack Obama, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Maxine Waters: all democrats. Then the democrats took control of the congress, and spent us into oblivion.

Liberals may have forgotten these events but the American people didn't. That is why the 2010 election was such a resounding republican success. Barack Obama, inherited a financial catastrophe that was engineered by, and voted for by Barack Obama, and the liberal congress. The American people continue to pay for the mistake of putting these yahoos into office. I can't wait for 2012. How about you?

Government-mandated loans

Starting with the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 Congress forced banks to give loans they would not otherwise give.[14] According to the Cato institute, this raised demand and gathered momentum after Reagan left office when the White House pressured HUD,[15] the Attorney General,[16] The Federal Reserve and all institutions with regulatory authority over banks to pressure them to make loans to low income African-Americans using racial statistics to determine whether the banks were compliant. Jonathan R. Macey, a professor at Cornell University Law School, stated "No bank, no matter what it does, is safe from charges of discrimination. And this is true despite the fact that the industry spends over half of its profits to comply with regulations."[16]

Causes of the United States housing bubble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States housing bubble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Talk about stupid. Were you sleeping the 8 years Bush was borrowing and spending like a drunken sailor? What we are seeing now it cause and effect. Obama has fixed the problem and we are finally recovering from near disaster. Bush and his cronies almost singe handed destoryed this country. One more day and we would have been beyond the point of no return. Blind hatred is dangerous.

Hating people is like burning down your own house to get rid of a rat. Henry Emerson Fosdick

This reply is to help you put things in to perspective lilollady. I hope that you lay off of the Kool Aid. It's bad for your health.

"How do Bush and Obama compare on closer inspection? Just about like they do on an initial glance. According to the White House's Office of Management and Budget, during his eight fiscal years, Bush ran up a total of $3.283 trillion in deficit spending (p. 22). In his first two fiscal years, Obama will run up a total of $2.826 trillion in deficit spending ($1.294 trillion in 2010, an estimated $1.267 trillion in 2011 (p. 23), and the $265 billion in "stimulus" money that was spent in 2009). Thus, Bush ran up an average of $410 billion in deficit spending per year, while Obama is running up an average of $1.413 trillion in deficit spending per year — or $1.003 trillion a year more than Bush."

The Weekly Standard: Obama Vs. Bush On Debt : NPR

 

[yota5]

It is fact that Obama, inherited an economy in a tail spin. It is fact that the burst of the housing bubble caused our economic slide.

Liberals conveniently forget that the sorry state of our economy can be traced all the way back to the Clinton administration when he signed in the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. The CRA 1977 opened the door for banks to get involved with risky investment practices for the first time in US history.

Then democrats in congress did two things. First through their efforts with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and A.C.O.R.N' democrats pressured banks into issuing mortgages to folks that couldn't afford them, and no chance of ever paying them back . The catalyst behind this Charlie Foxtrot was provided by Barack Obama, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Maxine Waters: all democrats. Then the democrats took control of the congress, and spent us into oblivion.

Liberals may have forgotten these events but the American people didn't. That is why the 2010 election was such a resounding republican success. Barack Obama, inherited a financial catastrophe that was engineered by, and voted for by Barack Obama, and the liberal congress. The American people continue to pay for the mistake of putting these yahoos into office. I can't wait for 2012. How about you?

Government-mandated loans

Starting with the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 Congress forced banks to give loans they would not otherwise give.[14] According to the Cato institute, this raised demand and gathered momentum after Reagan left office when the White House pressured HUD,[15] the Attorney General,[16] The Federal Reserve and all institutions with regulatory authority over banks to pressure them to make loans to low income African-Americans using racial statistics to determine whether the banks were compliant. Jonathan R. Macey, a professor at Cornell University Law School, stated "No bank, no matter what it does, is safe from charges of discrimination. And this is true despite the fact that the industry spends over half of its profits to comply with regulations."[16]

Causes of the United States housing bubble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States housing bubble - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1977 Clinton was the AG in Arkansas and the CRA did no such thing.

CRA is not to Blame for the Mortgage Meltdown

It's time to stop the scapegoating: According to a study by the Federal Reserve, 94% of high-cost loans originated during the housing boom had nothing to do with Community Reinvestment Act goals. Lending to poor didn't spur crisis -Fed's Kroszner

The Comptroller of the Currency. John C. Dugan, agrees: "CRA [the Community Reinvestment Act] is not the culprit behind the subprime mortgage lending abuses, or the broader credit quality issues in the marketplace. Indeed, the lenders most prominently associated with subprime mortgage lending abuses and high rates of foreclosure are lenders not subject to CRA. A recent study of 2006 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data showed that banks subject to CRA and their affiliates originated or purchased only six percent of the reported high cost loans made to lower-income borrowers within their CRA assessment areas."**

* Remarks by John C. Dugan, Comptroller of the Currency, before the Enterprise Annual Network Conference (November 19, 2008), available at 2008 News Releases.

Boo, you failed to read my post didn't you?

 

[BlindBoo]

Boo, you failed to read my post didn't you?

Of course I read it. It is simple not true. The CRA connot be blamed for the sub-prime meltdowm because most of the defaults in the sub-prime market originated with non-bank lenders who were not affected by the rules of the CRA. The CRA didn't force those non-bank to lend to poor people.

You simply ignore all but the Democrats role is the bubble. Both sides share in the blame.

 

[BlindBoo]

First of all, Clinton did not sign the CRA in 1977.

Second, if the CRA was the problem then why were 80% of failing subprimes offered by banks that weren't covered by the CRA?

Third, no bank was ever forced to give a single loan to a single person that didn't meet objective lending standards created by the GSE's for conforming loans.

You are right. Jimmy Carter signed the original version of CRA in 1977. Maybe the following article will help clear up the confusion.

"CRA regulations give community groups the right to comment on or protest about banks' non-compliance with CRA.[7] Such comments could help or hinder banks' planned expansions. Groups at first only slowly took advantage of these rights.[45] Regulatory changes during President Bill Clinton's administration allowed these community groups better access to CRA information and enabled them to increase their activities.[4][40][94]

In an article for the New York Post, economist Stan Liebowitz wrote that community activists intervention at yearly bank reviews resulted in their obtaining large amounts of money from banks, since poor reviews could lead to frustrated merger plans and even legal challenges by the Justice Department.[95] Michelle Minton noted that Chase Manhattan and J.P. Morgan donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to ACORN at about the same time they were to apply for permission to merge and needed to comply with CRA regulations.[80]

According to the New York Times, some of these housing advocacy groups provided early warnings about the potential impact of lowered credit standards and the resulting unsupportable increase in real estate values they were causing in low to moderate income communities. Ballooning mortgages on rental properties threatened to require large rent increases from low and moderate income tenants that could ill afford them.[96]

Housing advocacy groups were also leaders in the fight against subprime lending in low- and moderate-income communities, "In fact, community advocates had been telling the Federal Reserve about the dangers of subprime lending since the 1990s", according to Inner City Press. "For example, Bronx-based Fair Finance Watch commented to the Federal Reserve about the practices of now-defunct non-bank subprime lender New Century, when U.S. Bancorp bought warrants for 24% of New Century's stock. The Fed, rather than take any action on New Century, merely waited until U.S. Bancorp sold off some of the warrants, and then said the issue was moot." However, subprime loans were so profitable, that they were aggressively marketed in low-and moderate-income communities, even over the objections and warnings of housing advocacy groups like ACORN.[97]"

Community Reinvestment Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From your above link:

"Some economists, politicians and other commentators[who?] have charged that the CRA contributed in part to the 2008 financial crisis by encouraging banks to make unsafe loans. Economists, including those from the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, dispute this contention. The Federal Reserve, having examined the evidence, holds that empirical research has not validated any relationship between the CRA and the 2008 financial crisis.[100] At the FDIC, Chair Sheila Bair delivered remarks noting that the majority of subprime loans originated from lenders not regulated by the CRA, calling it a "scapegoat"

 

[signelect]

WE are at fault, Note the WE. WE fell into the bigger better, more trap. We bought bigger, bought more and had to have better. We had years of relative prosperity and never thought that the bubble would end, will get what, it is over. We are go busy blaming the other side that we won't accept that WE are the ones who caused it and now the Fat Lady is warming up to sing.

Get off your Iiberal/conservative band wagon and accept your part, we need people with integrity in Washington not the bunch of loser we have now on both sides of the fence.

 

[pete]

If the shit stain in office is so good ... he knew exactly what he was fighting to win or was it something else? Any person that got in would be facing the same circumstances, but its how they CORRECT them that matters not who caused them.
It definitely isn't larger government to correct it or spending trillions and getting in bed with radicals!

Bring the troops home ... they cant where will they work with no jobs?

 

[Londoner]

The OP should not be allowed to post this spam. It grossly misstates the facts.

The CRA was well managed until Bush needed an artificial stimulus for a dead economy. For decades the foreclosures were kept under control by very strict lending standards. Throughout the 80s and 90s lower income home owners benefited from this program. There were no problems until Bush's "Ownership Society" - which took the concepts of programs like the CRA and put them on steroids.

If you are an honest person, you will watch to this entire video. In it you will discover that George Bush outlines the most aggressive home ownership agenda in American history. He goes much further than Jimmy Carter ever imagined, especially by lowering the downpayment beyond what everybody said was reasonable. You will also discover his very specific partnership with Fannie. His plan was to put more minorities in homes than any American president. Just listen. This is a version of what Thatcher tried in Britain. The theory is that home homers are more likely to vote Republican, not only because they have more "skin in the game" (a genuine stake in their communities), but owning a home gives them a large taxable piece of private property which they seek to defend from Big Government.

Watch the video from start to finish. You will see the death of a Great Nation. (Bush used housing to stimulate a prosperity bubble in order to get a second term. Clinton used a tech bubble. Since globalization freed capital to seek 3rd world labor, all presidents stimulate the economy with artificial stimulus. They do this because Americans no longer have the wages to drive consumption. The economy has been deeply sick since America lost its postwar manufacturing dominance, and companies like Walmart bypassed American labor for sweatshops in China. Lacking the necessary wages and benefits to buy things, the American economy and consumer is kept alive on asset bubbles & credit. Bush takes this formula of using bubble to stimulate the economy to science fiction extremes. The result was the longterm death of the American Economy.)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8]YouTube - Home Ownership and President Bush[/ame]

 

[Sallow]

First of all, Clinton did not sign the CRA in 1977.

Second, if the CRA was the problem then why were 80% of failing subprimes offered by banks that weren't covered by the CRA?

Third, no bank was ever forced to give a single loan to a single person that didn't meet objective lending standards created by the GSE's for conforming loans.

Add in for those in the cheap seats..that the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act probably had a little more to do with the current situation then any CRA bill.

But it's hatin' on a different class of people...but you still get to knock Clinton.

 

[yota5]

The OP should not be allowed to post this spam. It grossly misstates the facts.

The CRA was well managed until Bush needed an artificial stimulus for a dead economy. For decades the foreclosures were kept under control by very strict lending standards. Throughout the 80s and 90s lower income home owners benefited from this program. There were no problems until Bush's "Ownership Society" - which took the concepts of programs like the CRA and put them on steroids.

If you are an honest person, you will watch to this entire video. In it you will discover that George Bush outlines the most aggressive home ownership agenda in American history. He goes much further than Jimmy Carter ever imagined, especially by lowering the downpayment beyond what everybody said was reasonable. You will also discover his very specific partnership with Fannie. His plan was to put more minorities in homes than any American president. Just listen. This is a version of what Thatcher tried in Britain. The theory is that home homers are more likely to vote Republican, not only because they have more "skin in the game" (a genuine stake in their communities), but owning a home gives them a large taxable piece of private property which they seek to defend from Big Government.

Watch the video from start to finish. You will see the death of a Great Nation. (Bush used housing to stimulate a prosperity bubble in order to get a second term. Clinton used a tech bubble. Since globalization freed capital to seek 3rd world labor, all presidents stimulate the economy with artificial stimulus. They do this because Americans no longer have the wages to drive consumption. The economy has been deeply sick since America lost its postwar manufacturing dominance, and companies like Walmart bypassed American labor for sweatshops in China. Lacking the necessary wages and benefits to buy things, the American economy and consumer is kept alive on asset bubbles & credit. Bush takes this formula of using bubble to stimulate the economy to science fiction extremes. The result was the longterm death of the American Economy.)

YouTube - Home Ownership and President Bush

It looks as though we're making a more critical analysis of the events leading up to the financial disaster of 2008. A lot of information is out there. Londoner, the following article may interest you.

"Because while the mortgage crisis convulsing Wall Street has its share of private-sector culprits -- many of whom have been learning lately just how pitiless the private sector’s discipline can be -- they weren't the ones who "got us into this mess." Barney Frank's talking points notwithstanding, mortgage lenders didn't wake up one fine day deciding to junk long-held standards of creditworthiness in order to make ill-advised loans to unqualified borrowers. It would be closer to the truth to say they woke up to find the government twisting their arms and demanding that they do so - or else.

The roots of this crisis go back to the Carter administration. That was when government officials, egged on by left-wing activists, began accusing mortgage lenders of racism and "redlining" because urban blacks were being denied mortgages at a higher rate than suburban whites.

The pressure to make more loans to minorities (read: to borrowers with weak credit histories became relentless.) Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act, empowering regulators to punish banks that failed to "meet the credit needs" of "low-income, minority, and distressed neighborhoods." Lenders responded by loosening their underwriting standards and making increasingly shoddy loans. The two government-chartered mortgage finance firms, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, encouraged this "subprime" lending by authorizing ever more "flexible" criteria by which high-risk borrowers could be qualified for home loans, and then buying up the questionable mortgages that ensued.

Barney Frank's fingerprints are all over this fiasco. Time and time again, Frank insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good shape. Five years ago, for example, when the Bush administration proposed much tighter regulation of the two companies, Frank was adamant that "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis." When the White House warned of "systemic risk for our financial system" unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing."

Frank's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco - The Boston Globe

This is the version that I remember. How about you?

 

[yota5]

Well hello Plasmaball. I live on the Cape. This is conservative country here. I'll bet that you've voted for Barney, and you get embarrassed when you're reminded of what a great mistake that has been. I'm embarrassed every election cycle when I see that we've recycled the same political garbage. Kennedy, Frank, Kerry, and Patrick come immediately to mind. I was raised a democrat. I became an independent over the disillusionment with the democratic party.

Watching democratic activity over the years bolsters my decision to go independent. The democratic party is an embarrassment to the state of Massachusetts, and the USA in general. Liberals have proven themselves to be stuck on stupid, and united in support of America's enemies.

I can understand your consternation with this thread. Liberals seem to have a real issue with truth. This could be likened to exposing a vampire to the cleansing rays of a rising sun.

 

[8537]

First of all, Clinton did not sign the CRA in 1977.

Second, if the CRA was the problem then why were 80% of failing subprimes offered by banks that weren't covered by the CRA?

Third, no bank was ever forced to give a single loan to a single person that didn't meet objective lending standards created by the GSE's for conforming loans.

You are right. Jimmy Carter signed the original version of CRA in 1977. Maybe the following article will help clear up the confusion.

"CRA regulations give community groups the right to comment on or protest about banks' non-compliance with CRA.[7] Such comments could help or hinder banks' planned expansions. Groups at first only slowly took advantage of these rights.[45] Regulatory changes during President Bill Clinton's administration allowed these community groups better access to CRA information and enabled them to increase their activities.[4][40][94]

In an article for the New York Post, economist Stan Liebowitz wrote that community activists intervention at yearly bank reviews resulted in their obtaining large amounts of money from banks, since poor reviews could lead to frustrated merger plans and even legal challenges by the Justice Department.[95] Michelle Minton noted that Chase Manhattan and J.P. Morgan donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to ACORN at about the same time they were to apply for permission to merge and needed to comply with CRA regulations.[80]

According to the New York Times, some of these housing advocacy groups provided early warnings about the potential impact of lowered credit standards and the resulting unsupportable increase in real estate values they were causing in low to moderate income communities. Ballooning mortgages on rental properties threatened to require large rent increases from low and moderate income tenants that could ill afford them.[96]

Housing advocacy groups were also leaders in the fight against subprime lending in low- and moderate-income communities, "In fact, community advocates had been telling the Federal Reserve about the dangers of subprime lending since the 1990s", according to Inner City Press. "For example, Bronx-based Fair Finance Watch commented to the Federal Reserve about the practices of now-defunct non-bank subprime lender New Century, when U.S. Bancorp bought warrants for 24% of New Century's stock. The Fed, rather than take any action on New Century, merely waited until U.S. Bancorp sold off some of the warrants, and then said the issue was moot." However, subprime loans were so profitable, that they were aggressively marketed in low-and moderate-income communities, even over the objections and warnings of housing advocacy groups like ACORN.[97]"

Community Reinvestment Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Indeed! Carter signed the CRA.

Unfortunately for the rightwing meme, CRA-regulated financial institutions were not responsible for the subprime crisis. about 80% of all foreclosed subprimes were originated by non-CRA regulagted firms - over the objections of groups like ACORN who pointed out that these firms were preying on low and moderate-income families with dishonest loan practices.

 

[BlindBoo]

Well hello Plasmaball. I live on the Cape. This is conservative country here. I'll bet that you've voted for Barney, and you get embarrassed when you're reminded of what a great mistake that has been. I'm embarrassed every election cycle when I see that we've recycled the same political garbage. Kennedy, Frank, Kerry, and Patrick come immediately to mind. I was raised a democrat. I became an independent over the disillusionment with the democratic party.

Watching democratic activity over the years bolsters my decision to go independent. The democratic party is an embarrassment to the state of Massachusetts, and the USA in general. Liberals have proven themselves to be stuck on stupid, and united in support of America's enemies.

I can understand your consternation with this thread. Liberals seem to have a real issue with truth. This could be likened to exposing a vampire to the cleansing rays of a rising sun.

Even your own links do not support your supposition.