- Banned
- #1
A definitive exposure of the LEAST FRANKEST Politicos in U.S. History: Bwarney FWANK:
Is Barney Frank? - Thomas Sowell - Townhall Conservative
Is Barney Frank? - Thomas Sowell - Townhall Conservative
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Lawmaker Accused of Fannie Mae Conflict of Interest
Friday , October 03, 2008
By Bill Sammon
WASHINGTON
Unqualified home buyers were not the only ones who benefitted from Massachusetts Rep. Barney Franks efforts to deregulate Fannie Mae throughout the 1990s.
So did Franks partner, a Fannie Mae executive at the forefront of the agencys push to relax lending restrictions.
Now that Fannie Mae is at the epicenter of a financial meltdown that threatens the U.S. economy, some are raising new questions about Frank's relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannies assistant director for product initiatives. Moses worked at the government-sponsored enterprise from 1991 to 1998, while Frank was on the House Banking Committee, which had jurisdiction over Fannie.
Both Frank and Moses assured the Wall Street Journal in 1992 that they took pains to avoid any conflicts of interest. Critics, however, remain skeptical.
"Its absolutely a conflict," said Dan Gainor, vice president of the Business & Media Institute. "He was voting on Fannie Mae at a time when he was involved with a Fannie Mae executive. How is that not germane?
"If this had been his ex-wife and he was Republican, I would bet every penny I have - or at least whats not in the stock market - that this would be considered germane," added Gainor, a T. Boone Pickens Fellow. "But everybody wants to avoid it because hes gay. Its the quintessential double standard."...
Sowell is a racist and a homophobe.
There, now that we have that out of the way....
Sowell is a racist and a homophobe.
There, now that we have that out of the way....
Well I think the race card is done. But the gay card? May still be viable.
Sowell is a racist and a homophobe.
There, now that we have that out of the way....[/quote
You play a great Statist/Liberal...Staying in a Holiday Inn Express?
Cut 'em to the quick. Good form.
Everything that Sowell wrote was correct, what's missing though was Barney's conflict of interest at the time:
Lawmaker Accused of Fannie Mae Conflict of Interest - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum - FOXNews.com
Lawmaker Accused of Fannie Mae Conflict of Interest
Friday , October 03, 2008
By Bill Sammon
WASHINGTON
Unqualified home buyers were not the only ones who benefitted from Massachusetts Rep. Barney Franks efforts to deregulate Fannie Mae throughout the 1990s.
So did Franks partner, a Fannie Mae executive at the forefront of the agencys push to relax lending restrictions.
Now that Fannie Mae is at the epicenter of a financial meltdown that threatens the U.S. economy, some are raising new questions about Frank's relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannies assistant director for product initiatives. Moses worked at the government-sponsored enterprise from 1991 to 1998, while Frank was on the House Banking Committee, which had jurisdiction over Fannie.
Both Frank and Moses assured the Wall Street Journal in 1992 that they took pains to avoid any conflicts of interest. Critics, however, remain skeptical.
"Its absolutely a conflict," said Dan Gainor, vice president of the Business & Media Institute. "He was voting on Fannie Mae at a time when he was involved with a Fannie Mae executive. How is that not germane?
"If this had been his ex-wife and he was Republican, I would bet every penny I have - or at least whats not in the stock market - that this would be considered germane," added Gainor, a T. Boone Pickens Fellow. "But everybody wants to avoid it because hes gay. Its the quintessential double standard."...
Another way to measure the relationship between the CRA and the subprime crisis is to examine foreclosure activity across neighborhoods that are classified by income. Data made available by RealtyTrac on foreclosure filings from January 2006 through August 2008 indicate that most foreclosure filings (e.g., about 70 percent in 2006) have taken place in middle- or higher-income neighborhoods. More important, foreclosure filings have increased at a faster pace in middle- or higher-income areas than in lower-income areas that are the focus of the CRA.9/ (See Table 7.)
Two basic points emerge from our analysis of the available data. First, only a small portion of subprime mortgage originations is related to the CRA. Second, CRA-related loans appear to perform comparably to other types of subprime loans. Taken together, the available evidence seems to run counter to the contention that the CRA contributed in any substantive way to the current mortgage crisis.
Did the CRA cause the mortgage market meltdown? - Community Dividend - Publications & Papers | The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis
So in other words Thomas is again not backing up his conjecture with facts.
Sowell is a partisan hack. This has been refuted with data several times but the ideological shills keep repeating the same lies over and over.
If anyone can back up Sowell's argument with empirical data, please post it. But I haven't seen a single thing yet to back this up.
Excellent article by Dr. Sowell.
Contrary to liberal belief, banks don't want mortgages to fail. Saying they were making money 'hand over fist' in some sort of money making scheme is irrelevant whether true or not. And if that was true, they sure miscalculated as many of them closed their doors.
Sowell is a partisan hack. This has been refuted with data several times but the ideological shills keep repeating the same lies over and over.
If anyone can back up Sowell's argument with empirical data, please post it. But I haven't seen a single thing yet to back this up.
Which misread part of Sowell's excellent article do you find objectionable? The fact is that mortgage criteria were continuously watered down through that period because repackaging the loans into MBS's was immensely profitable. Once you run out of qualified buyers, however, you can only expand the market by loosening criteria. Which is what was done. Bad loans generally take 18 months before they go bad.
Frank continuously pushed for more "affordable loan" programs for his own political agenda. Where he should have been overseeing Fannie's regulator he was beating up on the regulator. He was joined in this by Chris Dodd. The fact that no politicians have gone to jail over the mortgage scandal is testament to the duplicity of the press with the Democratic party.
Sowell is a partisan hack. This has been refuted with data several times but the ideological shills keep repeating the same lies over and over.
If anyone can back up Sowell's argument with empirical data, please post it. But I haven't seen a single thing yet to back this up.
Which misread part of Sowell's excellent article do you find objectionable? The fact is that mortgage criteria were continuously watered down through that period because repackaging the loans into MBS's was immensely profitable. Once you run out of qualified buyers, however, you can only expand the market by loosening criteria. Which is what was done. Bad loans generally take 18 months before they go bad.
Frank continuously pushed for more "affordable loan" programs for his own political agenda. Where he should have been overseeing Fannie's regulator he was beating up on the regulator. He was joined in this by Chris Dodd. The fact that no politicians have gone to jail over the mortgage scandal is testament to the duplicity of the press with the Democratic party.
What do I find objectionable? That it is overwhelmingly false, and all the empirical evidence is against it. He doesn't back up his argument with a single piece of evidence. He just says "I believe this." Well, so what? Believing in fairies doesn't make them real.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/70006-cra-not-to-blame-for-housing-debacle.html
Like I said, if you can find a shred of empirical evidence to back up the claim, please post it. I'm more than happy to change my mind. But opinions and timelines aren't evidence.
Sowell is a partisan hack. This has been refuted with data several times but the ideological shills keep repeating the same lies over and over.
If anyone can back up Sowell's argument with empirical data, please post it. But I haven't seen a single thing yet to back this up.
Which misread part of Sowell's excellent article do you find objectionable? The fact is that mortgage criteria were continuously watered down through that period because repackaging the loans into MBS's was immensely profitable. Once you run out of qualified buyers, however, you can only expand the market by loosening criteria. Which is what was done. Bad loans generally take 18 months before they go bad.
Frank continuously pushed for more "affordable loan" programs for his own political agenda. Where he should have been overseeing Fannie's regulator he was beating up on the regulator. He was joined in this by Chris Dodd. The fact that no politicians have gone to jail over the mortgage scandal is testament to the duplicity of the press with the Democratic party.
What do I find objectionable? That it is overwhelmingly false, and all the empirical evidence is against it. He doesn't back up his argument with a single piece of evidence. He just says "I believe this." Well, so what? Believing in fairies doesn't make them real.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/70006-cra-not-to-blame-for-housing-debacle.html
Like I said, if you can find a shred of empirical evidence to back up the claim, please post it. I'm more than happy to change my mind. But opinions and timelines aren't evidence.