Nope, primarily Clinton's! The economy was on the slide when Bush took office. Clinton and Bwarney Fwank's decisions on housing loans in 1997 were big factors, and his setting up the 9-11 tragedy was Clinton's fiasco due to his incompetence in the nineties!
What a bunch of hypocritical horse shit.
To continue with the horse shit you like to spread, I expect the next thing you will write is that Bush left Obama a thriving economy. And that is why all you lying rethugs blame Obama for the current economic situation. Right? Cause you all know that the economy was in GREAT shape when Bush left office. Right. Isn't that what you think?
Funny how it is ok to say that a Dem President left a mess to a Rethug President. But say the same thing in reverse and somehow it is not true. What horse shit.
Funny how easy it is to write crap thinking NO one uses the internet to check up but here are the facts using the internet!!
For example you never mentioned the Community Reinvestment Act that was the out come of a court action led by Obama's law firm's settlement with CitiBank in 1995!
"1991 court case forced CitiBank to make unqualified loans with Obama representing ACORN in the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 1994 suit."
Obama was one of the lawyers?
The parties voluntarily dismissed the case on May 12, 1998, pursuant to a settlement agreement.
PlaintiffÂ’s Lawyers Alexis, Hilary I. (Illinois) Miner, Judson Hirsch (Illinois) FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Obama, Barack H. (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories.
CitiBank considered where these people lived as part of an area that would be prone to higher insurance premiums and that higher premiums may create financial problems for borrowers so they couldn't pay premiums and or payments! Why is that not a legitimate reason for NOT making the loan?
UPDATED: Obama Sued Citibank Under CRA to Force it to Make Bad Loans*|*Media Circus
" We find
that adherence to the act led to riskier lending by banks: in the six quarters surrounding the CRA exams lending is elevated on average by about 5 percent every quarter and loans in these quarters default by about 15 percent more often.
These patterns are accentuated in CRA-eligible census tracts and are concentrated among large banks."
New study concludes that the Community Reinvestment Act ?clearly? did lead to risky lending | AEIdeas
1) Community Re-Investment-Act encourage higher risk loans! Understand?
2) Most of the CRA loans were backed by Fannie/Freddie? Proof?
Banks re-packaged and sold with Fannie/Freddie Using CDswaps banks could unload the sub-prime loans by having Fannie/Freddie securitizing them as explained in this statement:
Oct. 23,2008 (Bloomberg) --
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have an "effective'' federal guarantee, not the "full faith and credit'' of the U.S. government, Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart said after the hearing. That does give them effectively a guarantee of the U.S. government.''
Lockhart's Fannie, Freddie Guarantee Remarks Stir Up Confusion - Bloomberg
Now Bush wanted the DEMOCRAT REPRESENTATIVES to take ACTION action FANNIE/FREDDIE and unlike the current Prez.. didn't go around Congress!
GWB's administration was LAUGHED AT BY
Democrats Frank and Dodd after 17 times trying to get Fannie/Freddie fixed!
"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.
Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
Setting the Record Straight: The Three Most Egregious Claims In The New York Times Article On The Housing Crisis
Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized
the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .The more people exaggerate these problems,
the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."..
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)
* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and
called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," New York Times, 8/11/07)
Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle - Sam Dealey (usnews.com)
So over the years these subprime loans came to a head on 9/18/2008 again NOT mentioned widely by the biased MSM and I'm sure YOU've NEVER heard about this!
September 18, 2008: Edge of Collapse
"The collapse revelation came a few days ago from Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-Pennsylvania) when he was interviewed on C-Span.
On Thursday [the 18th], at about 11 oÂ’clock in the morning, the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous drawdown of money market accounts in the United States to a tune of $550 billion being drawn out in a matter of an hour or two.
The Treasury opened up its window to help.
They pumped $105 billion into the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks.
They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts, and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldnÂ’t be further panic and there.
And thatÂ’s what actually happened.
If they had not done that their estimation was that by two oÂ’clock that afternoon, $5.5 trillion would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States, would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States, and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed.
September 18, 2008: Edge of Collapse
But of course YOUR opinion BASED ON NO information takes precedence!
They were lost to under/unemployment due to Bush's Great Recession.
