While Blame is Going Around...

Um .. it's not Obama who does this ... it's the blind followers of his, just like the blind followers of Jr. who still deny he was a moron to. People just need to stop following parties and start thinking again or nothing will ever get better.

its not obama whos putting the blame? are you kidding me? watch every speech since him and nancy pelosi pushed for that ridiculous spending bill and youll here him "I did not ask for this" "I walked into this" "NOthing we did" hes obvioulsy putting blame on someone

No ... those are only facts ... putting the blame is what partisans keep doing which is what is slowing the progress the most. Obama is only able to get his failed policies because people are too busy blaming to actually take stock in what's happening. Jr. did handle it poorly, so did Clinton when he first realized the inevitable, and Sr. was just too busy to deal with it in it's infancy. The reality is, none of them are to blame, but none of them are doing a good job to help. Obama is doing the exact same thing Jr. did, and it will cause more damage.

Sadly the best way to handle all this would have been how Sr. did, leave it be. It's the whole world not just America that is having a problem, because too many people lived beyond their means in too many countries. It can't be stopped, slowed, or even weakened. But instead of people talking about it, all they are doing is pointing fingers and letting the politicians make it worse.

first thing first. GEORGE H. BUSH IS THE FATHER. GEORGE W. BUSH. HE IS NOT A JR. SO PLEASE STOP CALLING HIM JR. now. obama needs to step up and say well this is our administration lets take action. and hes not doing that hes loving that he has no blame put on him
 
sure it was...we don't disagree on that. But I'm saying that his assistance program was designed to help people who WERE eligible for credit, I E, they had sufficient income but couldn't qualify because of the down payment.

What we're dealing with now is a program that was put into practice to give incapable borrowers more money than they could repay. and now we want to bail them out????

I just don't see these two things as the same transgression.
 
sure it was...we don't disagree on that. But I'm saying that his assistance program was designed to help people who WERE eligible for credit, I E, they had sufficient income but couldn't qualify because of the down payment.

What we're dealing with now is a program that was put into practice to give incapable borrowers more money than they could repay. and now we want to bail them out????

I just don't see these two things as the same transgression.

no tex,

these were people with lower credit scores, with less than stellar credit, but not the bottom of the pit....

this is why they put these subprime borrowers in to conventional mortgages at a 1% higher interest rate than their stellar customers, and if these poor people payed their mortgage on time for 24 months, then the bank would refix their mortgage at the 1% point lower, interest rate. It said in the article that these people would normally be charged 4% points over the conventional rate due to their subprime rating...

So these people President Bush focused on would not have qualified for a conventional mortgage with such a low interest rate, if it had not been for his different programs.
 
Well, I think there is a difference between assistance with a down payment and closing costs versus pressure to approve bogus loans. What we are doing now is providing BILLIONS, not millions, to cover a very poor plan set in motion long before Bush got in office.

My question is, when will "Bush's Watch" end and the "Obama Nation" begin to be scrutinized and held accountable? I wouldn't be surprised if we are still trying to lynch ol' George in 2012. The new era of change is upon us and we had better hold him to his promises and not let him whine his way through four years of failure, because the job was to hard...yeah...it's a mess. But by God, if you can't hit the nail on the head and drive it home, then don't pick up the hammer!

i dunno, do you think 6 weeks is long enough?:eusa_whistle:

9 months in to the Bush presidency and it still wasn't his responsibility for the 9/11 terror attack, if memory serves me....?

100 years from now 9/11 will never be Bush's responsibility. That event rest soley on the shoulders of Bill Clinton.
WRONG
it rests on the assholes that attacked us
and as for the failures on our side, that rests on SEVERAL administrations
 
No...I don't think this is meant as a joke at all. There are people who actually feel this is a relavent point of comparison. CALL ME CRAZY!!! It really is a little strange isn't it? I could understand if this 200 million was filled with earmarks and only went to people who couldn't get loans. But it was designed to help those who could qualify for the loan but didn't have the means to put down any money.

yes tex, this program of president bush's was GOOD and guess what, it was part of his CRA FOCUS... and the focus he gave fannie and freddie to put these QUALIFYING people in these low income communities, in to homes by giving them the down payment to do it....

fannie and freddie, according to their bank charter to put the poor in to homes, could NOT give a mortgage without the 5% down payment and without the poor qualifying with their salary, debt, assets, job review....so Bush's program to give the 5% downpayment, to help them get in to homes with conventional 30 yr mortgages was good....this was all to put more poorer people, without stellar credit, in to homes in lower income areas....CRA.

care
yes, that was also part of it
you seem to be begining to understand how CRA fits into this mess
glad to see you coming around
 

Forum List

Back
Top