Obama's Reelection Platform Debunked as "Phoney"

[edthecynic]

When people don't want to admit to themselves they elected an affirmative action moron....well you get it.

Here is from the article:

At a campaign rally, Obama said Romney is "just churning out the same ideas that we saw in the decade before I took office . . . the same tax cuts and deregulation agenda that helped get us into this mess in the first place."

It's a standard Obama talking point. But it's not true. Bush's tax cuts did not cause the last recession.

In fact, once they were fully in effect in 2003, they sparked stronger growth — generating more than 8 million new jobs over the next four years, and GDP growth averaging close to 3%.

Those tax cuts didn't explode the deficit, either, as Obama frequently claims. Deficits steadily declined after 2003, until the recession hit.

Nor was Bush a deregulator. Conservative Heritage Foundation's regulation expert James Gattuso concluded, after reviewing Bush's record, that "regulation grew substantially during the Bush years."

Even the Washington Post's fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, gave Obama's claim three out of four "Pinocchios," saying "it is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters."

What did cause the economic crisis? The housing bubble. And that, in turn, was the result of a determined federal effort to boost homeownership by, among other things, pressuring banks to lower lending standards.

Read More At IBD: Obama's Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims - Investors.com

Gee, weren't Bush's tax cuts in effect for more than 4 years, and wouldn't an honest appraisal of their effect include all years they were in effect. BTW, that is a rhetorical question, the answer is an undeniable "yes."

So deficits declined by borrowing from SS until the BUSH Depression hit. How could anyone possibly blame the BUSH Depression on Bush???

And the Bush economic crisis/Bush Depression was a result of a determined federal/Bush effort to boost home ownership, the very heart of the Bush 2004 presidential election campaign, so how could anyone possibly blame Bush for his own campaign.

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.

Good grief. Bush went to Congress over and over and over again to get reforms for Freddy and Fannie, and was rebuffed each time.
Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

Just more complete bullshit. Bush's reform bill passed the GOP controlled House, but the GOP controlled Senate would not bring it up for a vote!

It was Pelosi who got a the reform bill passed and signed into law, as you well know.

 

[Listening]

Gee, weren't Bush's tax cuts in effect for more than 4 years, and wouldn't an honest appraisal of their effect include all years they were in effect. BTW, that is a rhetorical question, the answer is an undeniable "yes."

So deficits declined by borrowing from SS until the BUSH Depression hit. How could anyone possibly blame the BUSH Depression on Bush???

And the Bush economic crisis/Bush Depression was a result of a determined federal/Bush effort to boost home ownership, the very heart of the Bush 2004 presidential election campaign, so how could anyone possibly blame Bush for his own campaign.

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.

Good grief. Bush went to Congress over and over and over again to get reforms for Freddy and Fannie, and was rebuffed each time.
Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

Just more complete bullshit. Bush's reform bill passed the GOP controlled House, but the GOP controlled Senate would not bring it up for a vote!

It was Pelosi who got a the reform bill passed and signed into law, as you well know.

So after posting your crap about Bush...you admit he went looking for reform.

Are always this easy ?

And it is clearly documented that Waters and Frank were against any regulation or modifications to FM.

 

[edthecynic]

When people don't want to admit to themselves they elected an affirmative action moron....well you get it.

Here is from the article:

At a campaign rally, Obama said Romney is "just churning out the same ideas that we saw in the decade before I took office . . . the same tax cuts and deregulation agenda that helped get us into this mess in the first place."

It's a standard Obama talking point. But it's not true. Bush's tax cuts did not cause the last recession.

In fact, once they were fully in effect in 2003, they sparked stronger growth — generating more than 8 million new jobs over the next four years, and GDP growth averaging close to 3%.

Those tax cuts didn't explode the deficit, either, as Obama frequently claims. Deficits steadily declined after 2003, until the recession hit.

Nor was Bush a deregulator. Conservative Heritage Foundation's regulation expert James Gattuso concluded, after reviewing Bush's record, that "regulation grew substantially during the Bush years."

Even the Washington Post's fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, gave Obama's claim three out of four "Pinocchios," saying "it is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters."

What did cause the economic crisis? The housing bubble. And that, in turn, was the result of a determined federal effort to boost homeownership by, among other things, pressuring banks to lower lending standards.

Read More At IBD: Obama's Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims - Investors.com

Gee, weren't Bush's tax cuts in effect for more than 4 years, and wouldn't an honest appraisal of their effect include all years they were in effect. BTW, that is a rhetorical question, the answer is an undeniable "yes."

So deficits declined by borrowing from SS until the BUSH Depression hit. How could anyone possibly blame the BUSH Depression on Bush???

And the Bush economic crisis/Bush Depression was a result of a determined federal/Bush effort to boost home ownership, the very heart of the Bush 2004 presidential election campaign, so how could anyone possibly blame Bush for his own campaign.

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.

Enter Maxie Waters and Barney Fudgepacker.

We don't need to regulate anything.

So a couple of MINORITY congresspeople are more powerful than the great George W Bush.

Btw, the bill was passed in the GOP controlled House over their objections, but the GOP controlled Senate never brought it up for a vote therefore by CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood "logic" Barney Frank defeated the great George W Bush.
Damn you morons are pathetic!

 

[Listening]

Gee, weren't Bush's tax cuts in effect for more than 4 years, and wouldn't an honest appraisal of their effect include all years they were in effect. BTW, that is a rhetorical question, the answer is an undeniable "yes."

So deficits declined by borrowing from SS until the BUSH Depression hit. How could anyone possibly blame the BUSH Depression on Bush???

And the Bush economic crisis/Bush Depression was a result of a determined federal/Bush effort to boost home ownership, the very heart of the Bush 2004 presidential election campaign, so how could anyone possibly blame Bush for his own campaign.

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.

Enter Maxie Waters and Barney Fudgepacker.

We don't need to regulate anything.

So a couple of MINORITY congresspeople are more powerful than the great George W Bush.

Btw, the bill was passed in the GOP controlled House over their objections, but the GOP controlled Senate never brought it up for a vote therefore by CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood "logic" Barney Frank defeated the great George W Bush.
Damn you morons are pathetic!

Talking out your ass again.

What was needed was reform....which Bush wanted.

End of story.

 

[Murf76]

Gee, weren't Bush's tax cuts in effect for more than 4 years, and wouldn't an honest appraisal of their effect include all years they were in effect. BTW, that is a rhetorical question, the answer is an undeniable "yes."

So deficits declined by borrowing from SS until the BUSH Depression hit. How could anyone possibly blame the BUSH Depression on Bush???

And the Bush economic crisis/Bush Depression was a result of a determined federal/Bush effort to boost home ownership, the very heart of the Bush 2004 presidential election campaign, so how could anyone possibly blame Bush for his own campaign.

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.

Enter Maxie Waters and Barney Fudgepacker.

We don't need to regulate anything.

So a couple of MINORITY congresspeople are more powerful than the great George W Bush.

Btw, the bill was passed in the GOP controlled House over their objections, but the GOP controlled Senate never brought it up for a vote therefore by CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood "logic" Barney Frank defeated the great George W Bush.
Damn you morons are pathetic!

Sorry, but you're so full of shit that all you can do is reach for pathetic deflections and even those don't hold water. The TOPIC of the thread is that Obama's talking points are all bogus. And since you've already been owned on the Fanny/Freddy attempted derailment.. feel free to go ahead and address the phoniness of your candidate.

 

[edthecynic]

Good grief. Bush went to Congress over and over and over again to get reforms for Freddy and Fannie, and was rebuffed each time.
Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

Just more complete bullshit. Bush's reform bill passed the GOP controlled House, but the GOP controlled Senate would not bring it up for a vote!

It was Pelosi who got a the reform bill passed and signed into law, as you well know.

So after posting your crap about Bush...you admit he went looking for reform.

Are always this easy ?

And it is clearly documented that Waters and Frank were against any regulation or modifications to FM.

It is also documented that they were POWERLESS minority members of the House and the bill was PASSED in the GOP controlled House over their objections. It is also documented that the GOP controlled Senate killed the bill by refusing to even bring it up for a vote.

How exactly is that Frank's fault.
What a moron!

 

[edthecynic]

Enter Maxie Waters and Barney Fudgepacker.

We don't need to regulate anything.

So a couple of MINORITY congresspeople are more powerful than the great George W Bush.

Btw, the bill was passed in the GOP controlled House over their objections, but the GOP controlled Senate never brought it up for a vote therefore by CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood "logic" Barney Frank defeated the great George W Bush.
Damn you morons are pathetic!

Sorry, but you're so full of shit that all you can do is reach for pathetic deflections and even those don't hold water. The TOPIC of the thread is that Obama's talking points are all bogus. And since you've already been owned on the Fanny/Freddy attempted derailment.. feel free to go ahead and address the phoniness of your candidate.

Which I thoroughly debunked, which is why you two switched to Barney frank, and now that I made fools of the two of you on that topic, you pretend to want to return to the OP for more foolishness.

 

[SniperFire]

Just more complete bullshit. Bush's reform bill passed the GOP controlled House, but the GOP controlled Senate would not bring it up for a vote!

It was Pelosi who got a the reform bill passed and signed into law, as you well know.

So after posting your crap about Bush...you admit he went looking for reform.

Are always this easy ?

And it is clearly documented that Waters and Frank were against any regulation or modifications to FM.

It is also documented that they were POWERLESS minority members of the House and the bill was PASSED in the GOP controlled House over their objections. It is also documented that the GOP controlled Senate killed the bill by refusing to even bring it up for a vote.

How exactly is that Frank's fault.
What a moron!

Give us the name of ONE Democrat in Washington that spoke up against the policy of the Federal government backing loans to poor people who could never hope to ever repay it.


We will wait.

 

[Listening]

Just more complete bullshit. Bush's reform bill passed the GOP controlled House, but the GOP controlled Senate would not bring it up for a vote!

It was Pelosi who got a the reform bill passed and signed into law, as you well know.

So after posting your crap about Bush...you admit he went looking for reform.

Are always this easy ?

And it is clearly documented that Waters and Frank were against any regulation or modifications to FM.

It is also documented that they were POWERLESS minority members of the House and the bill was PASSED in the GOP controlled House over their objections. It is also documented that the GOP controlled Senate killed the bill by refusing to even bring it up for a vote.

How exactly is that Frank's fault.
What a moron!

Your post was about Bush....not the GOP senate.

Bush's policies (and I throughly detest the moron) were, at least, somewhat concerned about the problems with FM gone wild.

And the GOP lost both houses in 2006. But you can't help but blame Bush for everything in an effort to keep Obama's diaper clean.

So if you are going to evaluate Bush in a meaningful way (as you suggest), maybe you should stop at 2006 and present the data which would show you don't have f**king leg to stand on.

Obama is master f**k up.

 

[Listening]

So a couple of MINORITY congresspeople are more powerful than the great George W Bush.

Btw, the bill was passed in the GOP controlled House over their objections, but the GOP controlled Senate never brought it up for a vote therefore by CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood "logic" Barney Frank defeated the great George W Bush.
Damn you morons are pathetic!

Sorry, but you're so full of shit that all you can do is reach for pathetic deflections and even those don't hold water. The TOPIC of the thread is that Obama's talking points are all bogus. And since you've already been owned on the Fanny/Freddy attempted derailment.. feel free to go ahead and address the phoniness of your candidate.

Which I thoroughly debunked, which is why you two switched to Barney frank, and now that I made fools of the two of you on that topic, you pretend to want to return to the OP for more foolishness.

Stop with the claims Ed. You didn't debunk anything. You are more self absorbed than our current affirmative action moron in the White House. Well keep posting the facts and you can keep shoveling the BullPelosi.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Republicans have the BEST platform. Even a brutal rapist deserves the chance to be a father and they are the ones to make sure he gets it.

Yeah kinda like where democrats think the rapist is a victim....and let him out on parole for good behavior.....LOLOLOL

That doesn't even make sense. There is nothing in the Democratic Party platform that protects the rights of a brutal rapist to be a father. Republicans can't say that.

Wait, democrats are big on soft sentances and getting people off on technicalities and letting people out of jail...so yeah they are soft on rapists

Dukakis had a furlough program where Willie Horton raped a woman. /Had he been in jail where he should have been, no rape would occur....

And do rdean what should happen to a rapist once he's convicted?1 year in jail? picking up trash? Me I vote for execution.....so lets see how much you dont like rapists

 

[Murf76]

So a couple of MINORITY congresspeople are more powerful than the great George W Bush.

Btw, the bill was passed in the GOP controlled House over their objections, but the GOP controlled Senate never brought it up for a vote therefore by CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood "logic" Barney Frank defeated the great George W Bush.
Damn you morons are pathetic!

Sorry, but you're so full of shit that all you can do is reach for pathetic deflections and even those don't hold water. The TOPIC of the thread is that Obama's talking points are all bogus. And since you've already been owned on the Fanny/Freddy attempted derailment.. feel free to go ahead and address the phoniness of your candidate.

Which I thoroughly debunked, which is why you two switched to Barney frank, and now that I made fools of the two of you on that topic, you pretend to want to return to the OP for more foolishness.

Total crap.

• Bush tax cuts and deregulation caused the recession.

At a campaign rally, Obama said Romney is "just churning out the same ideas that we saw in the decade before I took office . . . the same tax cuts and deregulation agenda that helped get us into this mess in the first place."

It's a standard Obama talking point. But it's not true. Bush's tax cuts did not cause the last recession.

In fact, once they were fully in effect in 2003, they sparked stronger growth — generating more than 8 million new jobs over the next four years, and GDP growth averaging close to 3%.

Those tax cuts didn't explode the deficit, either, as Obama frequently claims. Deficits steadily declined after 2003, until the recession hit.

Nor was Bush a deregulator. Conservative Heritage Foundation's regulation expert James Gattuso concluded, after reviewing Bush's record, that "regulation grew substantially during the Bush years."

Even the Washington Post's fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, gave Obama's claim three out of four "Pinocchios," saying "it is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters."

What did cause the economic crisis? The housing bubble. And that, in turn, was the result of a determined federal effort to boost homeownership by, among other things, pressuring banks to lower lending standards.

Read More At IBD: Obama's Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims - Investors.com

Bush didn't cause the housing bubble. In fact, he went REPEATEDLY to Congress asking for reform. The tax cuts didn't cause the collapse. And Obama's pathetic panacea to fix all that ails us by uncoupling those tax cuts would only result in a measly 28 billion annually. That's nothing when we're already spending nearly a half-trillion just to service the debt. He's full of shit.

 

[edthecynic]

So after posting your crap about Bush...you admit he went looking for reform.

Are always this easy ?

And it is clearly documented that Waters and Frank were against any regulation or modifications to FM.

It is also documented that they were POWERLESS minority members of the House and the bill was PASSED in the GOP controlled House over their objections. It is also documented that the GOP controlled Senate killed the bill by refusing to even bring it up for a vote.

How exactly is that Frank's fault.
What a moron!

Your post was about Bush....not the GOP senate.

Bush's policies (and I throughly detest the moron) were, at least, somewhat concerned about the problems with FM gone wild.

And the GOP lost both houses in 2006. But you can't help but blame Bush for everything in an effort to keep Obama's diaper clean.

So if you are going to evaluate Bush in a meaningful way (as you suggest), maybe you should stop at 2006 and present the data which would show you don't have f**king leg to stand on.

Obama is master f**k up.

And there it is again, Bush stopped being president in Jan 2007 and all his policies and wars and tax cuts ended immediately.

Once again the GOP killed all reform while they controlled Congress. Once the Democrats took over, a reform bill was passed by Pelosi and signed by Bush.

 

[edthecynic]

When people don't want to admit to themselves they elected an affirmative action moron....well you get it.

Here is from the article:

At a campaign rally, Obama said Romney is "just churning out the same ideas that we saw in the decade before I took office . . . the same tax cuts and deregulation agenda that helped get us into this mess in the first place."

It's a standard Obama talking point. But it's not true. Bush's tax cuts did not cause the last recession.

In fact, once they were fully in effect in 2003, they sparked stronger growth — generating more than 8 million new jobs over the next four years, and GDP growth averaging close to 3%.

Those tax cuts didn't explode the deficit, either, as Obama frequently claims. Deficits steadily declined after 2003, until the recession hit.

Nor was Bush a deregulator. Conservative Heritage Foundation's regulation expert James Gattuso concluded, after reviewing Bush's record, that "regulation grew substantially during the Bush years."

Even the Washington Post's fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, gave Obama's claim three out of four "Pinocchios," saying "it is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters."

What did cause the economic crisis? The housing bubble. And that, in turn, was the result of a determined federal effort to boost homeownership by, among other things, pressuring banks to lower lending standards.

Read More At IBD: Obama's Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims - Investors.com

Gee, weren't Bush's tax cuts in effect for more than 4 years, and wouldn't an honest appraisal of their effect include all years they were in effect. BTW, that is a rhetorical question, the answer is an undeniable "yes."

So deficits declined by borrowing from SS until the BUSH Depression hit. How could anyone possibly blame the BUSH Depression on Bush???

And the Bush economic crisis/Bush Depression was a result of a determined federal/Bush effort to boost home ownership, the very heart of the Bush 2004 presidential election campaign, so how could anyone possibly blame Bush for his own campaign.

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.

Sorry, but you're so full of shit that all you can do is reach for pathetic deflections and even those don't hold water. The TOPIC of the thread is that Obama's talking points are all bogus. And since you've already been owned on the Fanny/Freddy attempted derailment.. feel free to go ahead and address the phoniness of your candidate.

Which I thoroughly debunked, which is why you two switched to Barney frank, and now that I made fools of the two of you on that topic, you pretend to want to return to the OP for more foolishness.

Total crap.

• Bush tax cuts and deregulation caused the recession.

At a campaign rally, Obama said Romney is "just churning out the same ideas that we saw in the decade before I took office . . . the same tax cuts and deregulation agenda that helped get us into this mess in the first place."

It's a standard Obama talking point. But it's not true. Bush's tax cuts did not cause the last recession.

In fact, once they were fully in effect in 2003, they sparked stronger growth — generating more than 8 million new jobs over the next four years, and GDP growth averaging close to 3%.

Those tax cuts didn't explode the deficit, either, as Obama frequently claims. Deficits steadily declined after 2003, until the recession hit.

Nor was Bush a deregulator. Conservative Heritage Foundation's regulation expert James Gattuso concluded, after reviewing Bush's record, that "regulation grew substantially during the Bush years."

Even the Washington Post's fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, gave Obama's claim three out of four "Pinocchios," saying "it is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters."

What did cause the economic crisis? The housing bubble. And that, in turn, was the result of a determined federal effort to boost homeownership by, among other things, pressuring banks to lower lending standards.

Read More At IBD: Obama's Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims - Investors.com

Bush didn't cause the housing bubble. In fact, he went REPEATEDLY to Congress asking for reform. The tax cuts didn't cause the collapse. And Obama's pathetic panacea to fix all that ails us by uncoupling those tax cuts would only result in a measly 28 billion annually. That's nothing when we're already spending nearly a half-trillion just to service the debt. He's full of shit.

You're right, as I have already shown the Invested Bigots Daily bullshit is "total crap."

 

[Murf76]

When people don't want to admit to themselves they elected an affirmative action moron....well you get it.

Here is from the article:

At a campaign rally, Obama said Romney is "just churning out the same ideas that we saw in the decade before I took office . . . the same tax cuts and deregulation agenda that helped get us into this mess in the first place."

It's a standard Obama talking point. But it's not true. Bush's tax cuts did not cause the last recession.

In fact, once they were fully in effect in 2003, they sparked stronger growth — generating more than 8 million new jobs over the next four years, and GDP growth averaging close to 3%.

Those tax cuts didn't explode the deficit, either, as Obama frequently claims. Deficits steadily declined after 2003, until the recession hit.

Nor was Bush a deregulator. Conservative Heritage Foundation's regulation expert James Gattuso concluded, after reviewing Bush's record, that "regulation grew substantially during the Bush years."

Even the Washington Post's fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, gave Obama's claim three out of four "Pinocchios," saying "it is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters."

What did cause the economic crisis? The housing bubble. And that, in turn, was the result of a determined federal effort to boost homeownership by, among other things, pressuring banks to lower lending standards.

Read More At IBD: Obama's Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims - Investors.com

Gee, weren't Bush's tax cuts in effect for more than 4 years, and wouldn't an honest appraisal of their effect include all years they were in effect. BTW, that is a rhetorical question, the answer is an undeniable "yes."

So deficits declined by borrowing from SS until the BUSH Depression hit. How could anyone possibly blame the BUSH Depression on Bush???

And the Bush economic crisis/Bush Depression was a result of a determined federal/Bush effort to boost home ownership, the very heart of the Bush 2004 presidential election campaign, so how could anyone possibly blame Bush for his own campaign.

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.

Total crap.

• Bush tax cuts and deregulation caused the recession.

At a campaign rally, Obama said Romney is "just churning out the same ideas that we saw in the decade before I took office . . . the same tax cuts and deregulation agenda that helped get us into this mess in the first place."

It's a standard Obama talking point. But it's not true. Bush's tax cuts did not cause the last recession.

In fact, once they were fully in effect in 2003, they sparked stronger growth — generating more than 8 million new jobs over the next four years, and GDP growth averaging close to 3%.

Those tax cuts didn't explode the deficit, either, as Obama frequently claims. Deficits steadily declined after 2003, until the recession hit.

Nor was Bush a deregulator. Conservative Heritage Foundation's regulation expert James Gattuso concluded, after reviewing Bush's record, that "regulation grew substantially during the Bush years."

Even the Washington Post's fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, gave Obama's claim three out of four "Pinocchios," saying "it is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters."

What did cause the economic crisis? The housing bubble. And that, in turn, was the result of a determined federal effort to boost homeownership by, among other things, pressuring banks to lower lending standards.

Read More At IBD: Obama's Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims - Investors.com

Bush didn't cause the housing bubble. In fact, he went REPEATEDLY to Congress asking for reform. The tax cuts didn't cause the collapse. And Obama's pathetic panacea to fix all that ails us by uncoupling those tax cuts would only result in a measly 28 billion annually. That's nothing when we're already spending nearly a half-trillion just to service the debt. He's full of shit.

You're right, as I have already shown the Invested Bigots Daily bullshit is "total crap."

It's your post... obviously.. that's "total crap", but thanks for proving once more that liberals are dense.

 

[Erand7899]

When people don't want to admit to themselves they elected an affirmative action moron....well you get it.

Here is from the article:

At a campaign rally, Obama said Romney is "just churning out the same ideas that we saw in the decade before I took office . . . the same tax cuts and deregulation agenda that helped get us into this mess in the first place."

It's a standard Obama talking point. But it's not true. Bush's tax cuts did not cause the last recession.

In fact, once they were fully in effect in 2003, they sparked stronger growth — generating more than 8 million new jobs over the next four years, and GDP growth averaging close to 3%.

Those tax cuts didn't explode the deficit, either, as Obama frequently claims. Deficits steadily declined after 2003, until the recession hit.

Nor was Bush a deregulator. Conservative Heritage Foundation's regulation expert James Gattuso concluded, after reviewing Bush's record, that "regulation grew substantially during the Bush years."

Even the Washington Post's fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, gave Obama's claim three out of four "Pinocchios," saying "it is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters."

What did cause the economic crisis? The housing bubble. And that, in turn, was the result of a determined federal effort to boost homeownership by, among other things, pressuring banks to lower lending standards.

Read More At IBD: Obama's Re-Election Case Rests On 5 Phony Claims - Investors.com

Gee, weren't Bush's tax cuts in effect for more than 4 years, and wouldn't an honest appraisal of their effect include all years they were in effect. BTW, that is a rhetorical question, the answer is an undeniable "yes."

So deficits declined by borrowing from SS until the BUSH Depression hit. How could anyone possibly blame the BUSH Depression on Bush???

And the Bush economic crisis/Bush Depression was a result of a determined federal/Bush effort to boost home ownership, the very heart of the Bush 2004 presidential election campaign, so how could anyone possibly blame Bush for his own campaign.

USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.

Neither Bush, nor nothing down mortgages had a damn thing to do with the housing boom and/or the bust. The fact that you don't understand that, means the rest of your argument is pure BS.

The housing boom, right along with the dot.com boom were taking place during the Clinton years, and the two together created the rosy economic scenerio that you left wingers love to credit Clinton with.

Speculative booms always bust at some point, and both did. The dot.com boom busted in Clinton's last year, and left Bush with a recession in the first three months of his term. Hundreds of billions of dollars disappeared almost overnight in that bust, and a whole lot of dot.com millionaires wound up broke.

Bush's tax cuts ended that recession, and the economy began to grow again at a fairly healthy level, but then the housing boom began to bust two years later, and led to the 2007recession, and the financial crisis of 2008. The housing bust did not happen overnight. It took about three years to collapse to near normal levels, and another few years for the bottom to occur. Many think the bottom finally hit last year.

During the Clinton years, homeowners were cashing in their growing home equities, and living high. They were also maxing out their credit cards, with the expectation of paying them off with the next refinancing. But, equities ceased to rise, and that dried up credit. Buying took a hit as consumers quit purchasing durable goods, and the economy went into a downward spiral.

 

[editec]

Bush II's contibutions to the economic meltdown are obvious.

But his contributions to the meltdown are obviously not the whole story.

And contrary to the partisn crap posted here about what people believe, people who pay attention to economic reality (rather than to childish partisan bickering) completely understand that.

 

[bripat9643]

Investor's Business Daily? Wow, that's right up there with Beck, Breitbart and Carlson. Holy shit...

You just proved you're a genuine moron. IBD is the most respected business newspaper there is. Savvy investors trust it far more than the Wall Street Journal, which has been taken over by liberals like Al Hunt.

 

[Obamanation]

Every leftist premise is easily debunked by TRUTH. The mortgage crisis was cause by the left and their easy living to make up for it they over-regulate and make it nearly impossible to dig out of the hole they created. The cherry on top was getting their lap dog media to blame Bush for the entire situation and offer up a messiah in the form of a junior senator from a corrupt political environment to take the prize.

It's downright scary that this could happen in the Greatest Country in the world...

 

[edthecynic]

Investor's Business Daily? Wow, that's right up there with Beck, Breitbart and Carlson. Holy shit...

You just proved you're a genuine moron. IBD is the most respected business newspaper there is. Savvy investors trust it far more than the Wall Street Journal, which has been taken over by liberals like Al Hunt.

Invested Bigots Daily is a hack rag even more biased than the Murdoch owned Wall Street Urinal. No honest person has any respect for the political opinions of the Invested Bigots Daily.