Obama Not Perfect But Better than What We have Had

[Truthseeker420]

So? Almost 10% unemployment, almost $4 for a gallon of gas, anyone see the PRICE of FOOD today?

But no matter, this IS all so much better than when Bush was in office.

Gawd, you can't make this shit up folks.

The economy crashed under Bush, you(rational person) can't blame Obama for that.

Are you really that naive and stupid??

The economy didn't "collapse," if it did you would be hiding under a rock.

The CRA created an economic recession...

You cant force banks into lending to those who have no fucking intention of paying those loans back.

You cant give a motherfucker a house and allow that greedy motherfucker (who had nothing before) to use that home as collateral to buy endless goods on credit..

You can if you are a big bank and defrauding American taxpayers.

 

[Truthseeker420]

I've found Obamabots to absolutely CLUELESS.

You can give them fact after fact of what is going on today, YET NONE of that is the Fault of their beloved boyking.

It's the Republicans fault.
Now of course it's the Tea Party's fault.
It's always SOMEONE else's fault..

Yet everything that happened under Bush, WAS ALL HIS FAULT.

What facts have you given?

 

[Mr.Nick]

But The Republicans didn't set the bar very high.

Have you seen the misery index??

Do you know what the fuck it is and how its calculated??

unbelievable...

I agree Republicans screwed up the surplus Clinton left them.

You apparently have absolutely no clue as to how government works..

Oh and what you call a "surplus" I call an artificial demand for product based on forced credit due to CRA loans.

Clinton is the one to blame for this bullshit - the republican congress at the time to boot for attempting to prove they're not "racists" by forcing banks to give welfare fucks credit - the same credit working folks earn...

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, for those perpetual Bush Bashers, let's take a look at what Obama inherited and where we are at now.

Stat Jan 2009 Now Change
Avg.. Retail price/gallon gas in U.S. $1.83 $3.704 89.6%
Crude oil, European Brent (barrel) $43..48 $105..02 167.7%
Crude oil, West TX Inter. (barrel) $38..74 $107..38 178.9%
Gold: London (per troy oz.) $853.25 $1,469.50 70.5%
Corn, No.2 yellow, Central IL $3.56 $6.33 78.1%
Soybeans, No. 1 yellow, IL $9.66 $13..75 42.3%
Sugar, cane, raw, world, lb. Fob $13..37 $35..39 164.7%
Unemployment rate, non-farm, overall 7.6% 9.4% 23.7%
Unemployment rate, blacks 12.6% 15.8% 25.4%
Number of unemployed 11,616,000 14,485,000 24.7%
Number of fed. Employees, ex. Military (curr = 12/10 prelim) 2,779,000 2,840,000 2.2%
Real median household income (2008 v 2009) $50,112 $49,777 -0.7%
Number of food stamp recipients (curr = 10/10) 31,983,716 43,200,878 35.1%
Number of unemployment benefit recipients (curr = 12/10) 7,526,598 9,193,838 22.2%
Number of long-term unemployed 2,600,000 6,400,000 146.2%
Poverty rate, individuals (2008 v 2009) 13.2% 14.3% 8.3%
People in poverty in U.S. (2008 v 2009) 39,800,000 43,600,000 9.5%
U.S.. Rank in Economic Freedom World Rankings 5 9 n/a
Present Situation Index (curr = 12/10) 29.9 23.5 -21.4%
Failed banks (curr = 2010 + 2011 to date) 140 164 17.1%
U.S.. Dollar versus Japanese yen exchange rate 89.76 82.03 -8.6%
U.S.. Money supply, M1, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) 1,575.1 1,865.7 18.4%
U.S.. Money supply, M2, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) 8,310.9 8,852.3 6.5%
National debt, in trillions $10..627 $14..052 32.2%

 

[Mr.Nick]

The economy crashed under Bush, you(rational person) can't blame Obama for that.

Are you really that naive and stupid??

The economy didn't "collapse," if it did you would be hiding under a rock.

The CRA created an economic recession...

You cant force banks into lending to those who have no fucking intention of paying those loans back.

You cant give a motherfucker a house and allow that greedy motherfucker (who had nothing before) to use that home as collateral to buy endless goods on credit..

You can if you are a big bank and defrauding American taxpayers.

Do you not understand democrats forced lenders to lend to those who lenders refused to lend to???

Those who actually have credit cards (not me I'm too smart for that shit) your interest rates are high because welfare fucks fucked over the banks and never paid their tabs.

The banks will recoup that money somehow some way.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Have you seen the misery index??

Do you know what the fuck it is and how its calculated??

unbelievable...

I agree Republicans screwed up the surplus Clinton left them.

You apparently have absolutely no clue as to how government works..

Oh and what you call a "surplus" I call an artificial demand for product based on forced credit due to CRA loans.

Clinton is the one to blame for this bullshit - the republican congress at the time to boot for attempting to prove they're not "racists" by forcing banks to give welfare fucks credit - the same credit working folks earn...

I know what your saying everthing bad that happens is the fault of the poor brown man, I just disagree.

 

[Stephanie]

I agree Republicans screwed up the surplus Clinton left them.

You apparently have absolutely no clue as to how government works..

Oh and what you call a "surplus" I call an artificial demand for product based on forced credit due to CRA loans.

Clinton is the one to blame for this bullshit - the republican congress at the time to boot for attempting to prove they're not "racists" by forcing banks to give welfare fucks credit - the same credit working folks earn...

I know what your saying everthing bad that happens is the fault of the poor brown man, I just disagree.

THERE IT IS FOLKS, when NOTHING else, bring up the MANS SKIN COLOR.

 

[JoeB131]

You apparently have absolutely no clue as to how government works..

Oh and what you call a "surplus" I call an artificial demand for product based on forced credit due to CRA loans.

Clinton is the one to blame for this bullshit - the republican congress at the time to boot for attempting to prove they're not "racists" by forcing banks to give welfare fucks credit - the same credit working folks earn...

I know what your saying everthing bad that happens is the fault of the poor brown man, I just disagree.

THERE IT IS FOLKS, when NOTHING else, bring up the MANS SKIN COLOR.

I consider myself pretty conservative, but I have to agree with Truthseeker here.

It's dishonest to blame the Community Reinvestement Act (a law that has been on the books since the 1970's) for the collapse of the banking system.

Of the top 25 institutions that failed, only one gave out CRA loans.

The real culprit was not a poor person getting $100,000 to buy a fixer-upper. The real culprit was the banks calling the $100K loan a $1,000,000 asset based on interest payments and property value increases and selling that mortgage off to another institution. Eventually someone got holding the bag.

It wasn't just the poor that were the problem. It was middle class folks who bought huge houses they didn't need on the expectation they could flip them in a couple years and make a huge profit. It's the building companies throwing up McMansions that now sit vacant because no one can afford them or even some that sit unfinished.

Part of the problem was that Chris Cox and the SEC were lax in their enforcement. (They did have plenty of time to watch internet porn, though.)

 

[Liability]

But The Republicans didn't set the bar very high.

Obama Not Perfect But Better than What We have Had

I must award partial credit.

It is indeed true (albeit a massive understatement) to say that President Obama is not perfect.

However, he is not "better" than what we've had. He is the pits. He has been (and still is) the worst President in our history, bar none.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Obama is Obysmal.

 

[Truthseeker420]

You apparently have absolutely no clue as to how government works..

Oh and what you call a "surplus" I call an artificial demand for product based on forced credit due to CRA loans.

Clinton is the one to blame for this bullshit - the republican congress at the time to boot for attempting to prove they're not "racists" by forcing banks to give welfare fucks credit - the same credit working folks earn...

I know what your saying everthing bad that happens is the fault of the poor brown man, I just disagree.

THERE IT IS FOLKS, when NOTHING else, bring up the MANS SKIN COLOR.

Michele Bachmann: Poor MInorities Responsible for Economic Crisis
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DHuxHyafyM]‪Michele Bachmann: Poor MInorities Responsible for Economic Crisis‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

Scapegoating Minorities for Failures of Banking
Blaming CRA makes little sense, but gets finance industry off the hook

Scapegoating Minorities for Failures of Banking

 

[Iridescence]

When Obama got elected it was so obvious that there would be massive disappointments rippling through the country. There was such a 'faith' put in him, expectations that were completely irrational. Because he is a black man (and YES that DID matter) and because he represented a type of success that so many of 'us' want to believe 'we' are ready for within our societies here in this country. The sad fact is that 'we' are not ready for what he has brought forth and for the most part the majority of the masses completely overlook his potential. He has to work within a system that does not allow the type of rebellion that 'the people' seem to expect him to put forth. One small step... at a time, perhaps.

 

[bripat9643]

I consider myself pretty conservative, but I have to agree with Truthseeker here.

It's dishonest to blame the Community Reinvestement Act (a law that has been on the books since the 1970's) for the collapse of the banking system.

Of the top 25 institutions that failed, only one gave out CRA loans. .

There is no such thing a "CRA loan." Under the CRA, Banks were intimidated into granting loans to people who wouldn't have been qualified under standard lending practices. Lefting groups like ACORN could sue them and prevent them from expanding if they didn't meet some arbitray guidelines established by the federal government. There were no specific loands designated as "CRA." This argument only establishes the purveyor as a demagogue.

The real culprit was not a poor person getting $100,000 to buy a fixer-upper. The real culprit was the banks calling the $100K loan a $1,000,000 asset based on interest payments and property value increases and selling that mortgage off to another institution. Eventually someone got holding the bag. .

Such a thing never occured. You're obviously just a bullshitter.

It wasn't just the poor that were the problem. It was middle class folks who bought huge houses they didn't need on the expectation they could flip them in a couple years and make a huge profit. It's the building companies throwing up McMansions that now sit vacant because no one can afford them or even some that sit unfinished.

Such things only occured because the government made it possible for uncredit worthy buyers to enter the market in droves thereby driving the price of housing up at unprecedented rates.

Part of the problem was that Chris Cox and the SEC were lax in their enforcement. (They did have plenty of time to watch internet porn, though.)

The lax enforcement was deliberate. Loans to deadbeats wouldn't have been possible without it. It was deliberate government policy to look the other way.

 

[bripat9643]

When Obama got elected it was so obvious that there would be massive disappointments rippling through the country. There was such a 'faith' put in him, expectations that were completely irrational. Because he is a black man (and YES that DID matter) and because he represented a type of success that so many of 'us' want to believe 'we' are ready for within our societies here in this country. The sad fact is that 'we' are not ready for what he has brought forth and for the most part the majority of the masses completely overlook his potential. He has to work within a system that does not allow the type of rebellion that 'the people' seem to expect him to put forth. One small step... at a time, perhaps.

So your argument is that he isn't leftist enough?

 

[Iridescence]

Nope... Not what my argument is at all...Leftists may not be nearly as disconnected as they are said to be. It seems that no matter who we put in office there are going to be issues. Perhaps the key is to recognize the system for what it is and to work at adjusting people's minds accordingly to what best fits into such since the system itself 'cannot' be changed...

 

[JoeB131]

@ Britpat- Look, I realize that if you sit around letting Limbaugh and Hannity do your thinking for you, you probably start believeing all sorts of BS.

But let's look at what the Banking Industry itself said about CRA.

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."**

CRA was effective long before the subprime market existed. CRA was passed in 1977 to correct the longstanding problem of redlining – the lack of lending in low and moderate income communities and in communities of color. CRA has been on the books for three decades, while the lending practices that created this crisis didn’t exist until the past five years.

Most subprime lenders weren’t covered under CRA. The predominant players in the subprime market – mortgage brokers, mortgage companies and the Wall Street investment banks that provided the financing – aren’t covered under CRA. Finance company affiliates of major banks also participated heavily, but are only included in CRA to the extent their bank parents choose them to be. In fact, many banks shifted the most risky lending – the loans at the root cause of this current crisis -- to affiliates to escape CRA requirements and regulatory oversight.

Wall Street created the demand for riskier loans. The subprime market is the result of loans made without regard to the borrower’s ability to repay the loan and with little or no documentation of income. Lenders chose to engage in risky underwriting practices because Wall Street was eager for high-interest investments, not because of CRA.

Regulatory oversight and accountability was missing. The lack of regulation in the subprime market made it easy for subprime lenders to undercut responsible lending. Because lenders used artificially low initial payments and passed the loans onto investors while hiding the disastrous consequences coming down the line, many borrowers found themselves in loans that were ultimately unaffordable. In many communities, particularly communities of color, subprime lenders were often the only ones serving the community. Had regulators leveled the playing field through common sense underwriting requirements and more vigorously enforced CRA requirements instead of allowing a race to the bottom, this crisis would have been averted.

So let's stop blaming poor people for the greed of rich people.

The real failure of Obama is that he didn't have the Justice Department go after these crooks full throttle.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

@ Britpat- Look, I realize that if you sit around letting Limbaugh and Hannity do your thinking for you, you probably start believeing all sorts of BS.

But let's look at what the Banking Industry itself said about CRA.

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."**

CRA was effective long before the subprime market existed. CRA was passed in 1977 to correct the longstanding problem of redlining – the lack of lending in low and moderate income communities and in communities of color. CRA has been on the books for three decades, while the lending practices that created this crisis didn’t exist until the past five years.

Most subprime lenders weren’t covered under CRA. The predominant players in the subprime market – mortgage brokers, mortgage companies and the Wall Street investment banks that provided the financing – aren’t covered under CRA. Finance company affiliates of major banks also participated heavily, but are only included in CRA to the extent their bank parents choose them to be. In fact, many banks shifted the most risky lending – the loans at the root cause of this current crisis -- to affiliates to escape CRA requirements and regulatory oversight.

Wall Street created the demand for riskier loans. The subprime market is the result of loans made without regard to the borrower’s ability to repay the loan and with little or no documentation of income. Lenders chose to engage in risky underwriting practices because Wall Street was eager for high-interest investments, not because of CRA.

Regulatory oversight and accountability was missing. The lack of regulation in the subprime market made it easy for subprime lenders to undercut responsible lending. Because lenders used artificially low initial payments and passed the loans onto investors while hiding the disastrous consequences coming down the line, many borrowers found themselves in loans that were ultimately unaffordable. In many communities, particularly communities of color, subprime lenders were often the only ones serving the community. Had regulators leveled the playing field through common sense underwriting requirements and more vigorously enforced CRA requirements instead of allowing a race to the bottom, this crisis would have been averted.

So let's stop blaming poor people for the greed of rich people.

The real failure of Obama is that he didn't have the Justice Department go after these crooks full throttle.

Loaning a quarter-million $$ to no income people isn't a problem? Who knew?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

When Obama got elected it was so obvious that there would be massive disappointments rippling through the country. There was such a 'faith' put in him, expectations that were completely irrational. Because he is a black man (and YES that DID matter) and because he represented a type of success that so many of 'us' want to believe 'we' are ready for within our societies here in this country. The sad fact is that 'we' are not ready for what he has brought forth and for the most part the majority of the masses completely overlook his potential. He has to work within a system that does not allow the type of rebellion that 'the people' seem to expect him to put forth. One small step... at a time, perhaps.

So your argument is that he isn't leftist enough?

I'm sure if he were just to go all Stalin on us, they'd be happy.

 

[bripat9643]

Nope... Not what my argument is at all...Leftists may not be nearly as disconnected as they are said to be. It seems that no matter who we put in office there are going to be issues. Perhaps the key is to recognize the system for what it is and to work at adjusting people's minds accordingly to what best fits into such since the system itself 'cannot' be changed...

In other words, it doesn't matter what truth is or what works and doesn't work, just brainwash people to accept whatever the government dishes out.

I think you've distilled the essense of servility into a single sentence.

 

[Rozman]

I don't see a difference:
Had two wars--now we have three
Bush had stimulus-- Obama had stimulus
Still have Gitmo.
Still have the Patriot Act.
Still have a deficit.
Questions about the legitimacy of both Presidencies.
Both are hated by the other party.

Oh...yes...Bush never tried to shove socialize medicine, that we don't want, don't need and can't afford, down our throats. I guess there is a difference.

If you remember Republicans blocked any attempt to close Gitmo. Bush Stimulus created more wealth for the rich and Obama stimulus created jobs. Our troops are pulling out of Iraq.(less than 30,000 I believe).

and Obama stimulus created jobs.

I just could not let this one go by....
and Obama stimulus created jobs.
What an utter lie....