Skip to comments.President Bush Mortgage Speech 2002(Helping those w bad credit buy houses)
Posted on 05/01/2009 8:51:06 PM PDT by sickoflibs
click here to read article
Bush substantially increased the per child tax deduction amount so you benefited from that even if your overall income went up beyond that.
Your taxes would have been much higher under Gore, Kerry and now Obama.
Thanks. I had trouble following your comment.
Yep, Bush promoted single-Mom-hood, Why? It was a Rove strategy. “No Child left.... with vouchers.” He betrayed us with NCLB. He gave tax credits to single Moms.
Yes, your friend Obama does not promote single motherhood.
he promotes abortion— something you must adore.
Oh I want to be your spectacle.
I know ridicule is a foundation of the Left’s rationality.
Let’s be clear that you could not post the speech unedited. You had to post your own inaccurate subtexts into the speech.
You have yet to win an argument on Bush and so you hope that appealing to some sense of ridicule will back me off.
You keep bumping my post. Thanks.
I will agree that’s true but it was unnoticable in my federal contribution during those years and remains worthless to me now. The larger tax cuts Bush did enact were not applicable to me, thus were of no value to me.
I am sure my taxes will continue to go up now that I am expected to pay the mortgages of those too stupid to read their mortgage agreement and put effort into understanding the conditions set forth therein, followed by Obama’s and that shrill ‘tard Pelosi’s bailing out of those bankers and finance world self-titled gurus who lavished exorbitant pay and bonuses on themselves.
Yeah, I’m sure the soaking of this little ole single mom is far from done. And as much as I try to be my own cheerleader pushing myself through yet another doubleshift day, I can tell you this, I am just about sapped and I am pissed off at ALL of them.
You are so welcome.
I am studying your posts and Schiff.
Its good to see that others have tried to reason with you as well.
Your odd fixation on Bush is hard to understand since it does not seem to be a fixation of Schiff’s.
Regardless of personal anger, politics is about discerning lesser evils.
Republicans have always been the lesser evil.
The peculiar fixation on conflating Republican and democrats is not helpful.
Advocating for more conservative Republicans or more expansive tax cuts is legitimate and compelling argument.
pretending they are all the same is not and has the effect of promoting the current overwhelming dominance of the democratic party in the American public sphere.
RE :”Its good to see that others have tried to reason with you as well.”
Nothing as nutty as you.
You missed my recent: Peter Schiff Wall Street Unspun 4-29-09 (Republicans in power act like Democrats)
Schiff: "Where was Dick Armey when George Bush was promoting economic stimulus? Where was Dick Armey when George Bush was blaming the crisis on Wall Street? Where was Dick Armey when George Bush was proposing the bailouts and stimulus plans? It really aggravates me that the only time the republicans can say the truth, the only time they have any principles is when their in the minority, when they cant do anything. When they are actually in control and have power they govern like democrats. Its only when theyre out of power that they talk about the free market, that they sound like what they campaigned for. It makes me more aggravated at the republicans than the democrats. Maybe the democrats are just dumb; maybe they dont know any better. But obviously the republicans know. But when the republicans are in power they deliberately dont say anything. Its like as long as republicans are in the minority theyre OK, theyre fine. You can just never put them in the majority because they act like democrats."
Your substantive claims are overwhelming.
Its good for you to choose a quotation that you think indicates substance to provide something of an actual argument target.
Schiff is clearly wrong in this paragraph.
The fiscal conservatism that you seem to demand and seems to be in Schiff’s mind was obtained when Republicans came to a congressional majority in 1994. Republicans began to lose seats again in 1998 when they pressed to shut down the federal government at the nadir of their fiscal conservatism. The demise of republicans in the late 90s laid the ground work for Bush’s compassionate conservatism.
Republicans have not governed with much of an eye for fiscal conservatism since 2001 but this is a function of being defeated in the late 1990s for seeking cuts in federal spending. Demorats easily portrayed them as hating the poor, education and almost any other social idea you can imagine.
The primary problem is the senate where the concept of RINO is powerfully entrenched and democrats stand to gain more seats in 2010.
There is simply a painful gap in idealism and practical alternatives for many fiscal conservatives.
Blaming Bush won’t get you there.
RE “Schiff is clearly wrong in this paragraph”
He is talking about YOU. To you socialism is OK if Bush is president, if a democrat does it that is horrible, That is you! Schiff has you pegged, You have no values, only loyalty.
I'm sorry. I don't subscribe to this theory. Choosing that which is less wrong, but is still wrong, is not something I am willing to lower my standards to. Quite honestly, I deeply believe both parties have betrayed both this nation and the foundational ideals it was built upon, and are not salvagable.
I've enjoyed our talk though. Thanks for reaching out to me. Indeed, sometimes I am so fed up with it all, I let my frustration color my statements.
Shelby Balks At Fund For Housing - Stance Could Complicate Fannie-Freddie Oversight, June 17, 2005; Page D04
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) has come out against a proposal to divert a portion of the profits of housing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to pay for affordable housing, a committee spokesman said yesterday, perhaps undermining Democratic support for legislation to strengthen oversight of the two companies.
Committee spokesman Andrew Gray said Shelby is concerned about any program that would "encourage" the companies to take on more risk, as they have done in recent years by expanding their investment portfolios to make more money.
Well, no one here is insisting "total blame" be placed on Bush.
There is plenty of blame to go around, of which he deserves a healthy portion.
because most mortgages involve government backing such as FHA. You seem to stick to purist absolutism as if we are debating philosophy rather than politics. If all loans lacked government support there would be few people owning homes.
So you think a proper role of government is to give $$$$ for down payments on homes to low income people?
Both programs were crap. Both should have been dismissed.
Markets work -- if you let them!
Schiff is talking about when Republicans govern. There is a world of empirical facts we can examine. They did govern in a fiscally conservative manner from 1994-1997. This caused them to lose power in 1998. This caused compassionate conservatism.
Its not complicated and we can learn from these mistakes.
perhaps you and schiff both think that world is only 5 years old.
We have Bush’s stated positions. You made a good early start by posting a speech by Bush. I posted 17 different stances Bush made to prevent mortgage abuse. That is germane and significant.
I have no values and only loyalty.
That is a shame. It would be good if I had values.
For a moment I thought your claim was without merit or substance, but then I noticed it was IN ALL CAPS. THEN I REALIZED YOU MUST BE CORRECT.
Parenthesis were clever~
You're targeting the wrong person. 1) I'm not a purist and 2) I worked hard along with the SBVFT to expose the evil of John Kerry that probably won GWB the election.
I also bit my tongue about GWB for EIGHT LONG YEARS. So, if you don't like a little honest retrospective now, stuff it!
Are there any other known political advocates of reforming mortgage application processes?
I have identified one— George W. Bush.
Can you identify others?
Hey— good for you. You did some research and figured out how Congress backed out of the reforms advocated by Bush.
That’s good and I have no problem with that.
Nonetheless, it does not change the comprehensive reforms advocated by the Bush administration. I have never denied that the Republican Congress refused to implement them— as was the case in 2005.
Nonetheless, I also recognize that Fannie Mae, AIG and others made their most substantial donations to democrats to keep this machine going even stronger in 2007.
There is no attempt on my part to change history and your Shelby component only adds to the story I have already told. It does not contradict it.
Now you are making me sad.
I have repeatedly recognized the higher quality of your arguments compared to sickoflibs. There is no need to be so touchy about it.
I am not surprised to read of your role in Swift Boat vets. That is a great example of how a small group of determined people can literally win an election.
In the hundreds of pro Bush posts I have made, I have never begrudged anyone constructing better alternatives for the future. Bush was better than mcCAin in 2000, he was better that Gore in the general, Bush was better than kerry in 2004, McCain was alot worse than Bush in 2008 but better than Obama.
Make your arguments and make them well.
You pull your weight. You are specific. I don’t want GWB being left holding the bag on all known political problems.
La Raza, LULAC, and the NAACP.
They all appreciated GWB's "reforms" to eliminate those "barriers" to mortgage lending... like the barrier of having any money, or having lousy credit history. HURRAY for Prez Bush!
Oh, yeah... and the builders and lenders loved it too. More customers!
And the illegal aliens loved it too... construction jobs and free houses!
laraza lulac and naacp
You know that those groups opposed the reforms and sided with Barney Frank.
You disappoint me with this argument.
Those groups want anyone to get a loan and they hope the loans never get paid back.
That is not the Bush administration position. This is not pie in the sky. Study the 17 arguments I presented on the internet in fuller context. The same reforms had already been implemented in Texas. These probelms were highly isolated geographically.
Yes the builders loved it— I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with illegal aliens buying houses.
It was a great strategy to get past an election at any cost. Boom the economy to no end w stimulus, when it crashes we can depend on Bush-bots like lone-bush-bot to blame it on everyone else but Bush. Take the credit, pass the blame. Except voters wouldnt buy it. I wonder why?
lone-bush-bot has no principles, only loyalty.
WASHINGTON, Oct. 1 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The National Association of Realtors(r) hailed the U.S. House of Representatives for passing legislation today that would provide $400 million in grants over the next two years to help 80,000 low-income families pay downpayment and closing costs on their first homes.
The American Dream Downpayment Act, H.R. 1276, is one of NAR's top legislative priorities this Congress. The bill was introduced earlier this year by U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris (R-Fla.). U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) has introduced companion legislation, S. 811, in the Senate.
NAR also commended President George W. Bush and U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Mel Martinez for first proposing the idea for the legislation as part of the administration's commitment to help low-income and minority families achieve the American dream of the homeownership.
"Realtors applaud the Bush administration and Reps. Mike Oxley (R- Ohio), Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Bob Ney (R-Ohio) and Maxine Waters (D- Calif.) for their outstanding leadership and commitment to helping more families achieve the American dream of homeownership through the American Dream Downpayment Act," said NAR President Cathy Whatley, owner of Buck & Buck Inc. in Jacksonville, Fla. "NAR is thrilled to support legislation that would reduce two of the biggest barriers to homeownership -- downpayment and closing costs -- for 40,000 families a year. Although our homeownership rate is at a record high, one out of seven American families still faces critical housing needs. The American Dream Downpayment Act is a tremendous program that would not only create thousands of housing opportunities but also help sustain the housing market, which has been the pillar of our economy."
The bill would provide an average of $5,000 in downpayment and closing cost assistance to help first-time homebuyers with annual incomes that do not exceed 80 percent of the area median income. Grants would be made to state and local governments through HUD's HOME Investment Partnership program. The initiative is one of many discussed at last week's National Summit on Housing Opportunities convened by NAR.
The National Association of Realtors(r), "The Voice for Real Estate," is America's largest trade association, representing over 950,000 members involved in all aspects of the residential and commercial real estate industries.
It also helped fund their campaigns. Lots of back scratchin'.
LOL. I’m not touchy. I’m just tired of your mundane “you must be an Obama supporter” crap that you hurl at anyone who looks at the history objectively and without your partisan glasses.
GWB will not be left “holding the bag for all known political problems” but unless we are honest about who is causing those problems, we’ll never be able to fix them.
As I said before, I’m from the “government is not my friend” camp. It is not a matter of which candidate is worse — it is a matter of opposing all of them when they are wrong and supporting them when they are right. We see far too little of the latter from any of the charlatans we have in D.C. or our state capitols.
LOL. I have.
Unfortunately for you, your arguments go "up in smoke" pretty quickly the further you look.
Speaker Hastert Touts Law Closing the Homeownership Gap for Minorities
Posted on Wednesday, October 01, 2003 4:10:41 PM by chance33_98
WASHINGTON, Oct. 1 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Today, Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Mel Martinez joined House Republicans to tout the passage of the American Dream Downpayment Act (H.R. 1276) that will provide $5,000 each to low-income, first time home buyers. The bill, which was approved by the House by a voice vote, will provide $200 million in grant funds to help 40,000 low-income families with the down payment and expensive closing costs in buying a home.
Following the event, the Speaker released the following statement:
"As Speaker, I'm proud the U.S. House is passing this bill to help working families, like Mrs. Susie Dixon who joins us today. Essential to all families, like Susie's, is trying to achieve the American Dream of homeownership. This long overdue initiative provides assistance through $5,000 grants to low income, first-time homebuyers across the country to help with exceedingly difficult down payment and closing costs.
"While more than two-thirds of all Americans own their home, less than half of all African-American and Hispanic families do not. By passing this bill, the Republican House is working with President Bush to close this homeownership gap.
"Also very important is the fact that this bill will help construct 13,000 new homes. According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, building these homes will create 33,000 new jobs - what a much-needed shot in the arm to our nation's economic recovery and improvement of our local communities. That's a win-win situation for minority homeowners and American workers.
"By passing the American Dream Down Payment Act, we will help empower every community. We will help lift up our African-American and Hispanic Communities. As House Republicans, we recognize the significance this initiative will have to help families already owning a home, but more importantly, how it will help close the homeownership gap for those still trying to achieve this part of the American Dream."
“The speech has no negative content”
Oh yeah, the part praising Fannie Mae’s Franklin Raines for ladling out taxpayer money was especially good. As was the entire premise of the American Dream Downpayment Initiative, where taxpayers were put on the hook to provide ‘free’ down payments for Dubya’s favorite minorities.
How could any of us be so blind to Bush’s genius? Without those ‘free’ down payments we would have been deprived of tens of thousands of additional sub-prime candidates to further balloon the housing bubble. Yes, the ADDI was pure genius.
Not being prone to hero-worshipping politicians I’m always amazed at the ability of some to rationalize away the behavior of their heroes.
Wait a minute. How can Fannie and Freddie have "profits" when they get billions in bailouts? I have also heard about banks getting huge bailouts that they did not pay back, claim they have "profits." Sounds like accounting sophistry to me.
Lone-bush bots argument is that Bush wouldn't get reforms through a Republican congress. But we know from great research here that Bush managed to get home-loans to poor bad credit minorities with NO downpayments. So he could get some stuff through a republican congress. He got Iraq invasion vote through. Perhaps he could have said the deadbeats buying houses, his goal, had WMDS to get the republicans congress to pass those reforms you claim.
Note lone-bush-bots logic, its not Bush's fault, it;s Obamas, it's republicans, its anyone who asked him to do whatever he did. Lone bot has fixed no standards by which to judge Obama on.
This is exactly how I feel. Last year during election there were swarms of lone-bush-bots, egged on by talk radio. The message was, “ It's either Obama or not Obama, choose your side ”, If you asked “ But what about Republicans ...? ”, the reply was “ Are you a Marxist? ” exactly as lone-bush-bot is doing now. This attitude gives republicans a complete pass by a shrinking pool of supporters who call everyone else stupid or marxist. (as some of talk radio do.)
Levin and Hannity both told listeners to go door to door to get out the McCain vote (how could we do this??), and Hannity predicted a McCain win.
And you have concluded that everything Bush did that backfired, he was forced to do to win elections because democrats would call him uncompassionate??? Are they not doing that ANYWAY??? 2006+2008 elections show this was a short term strategy.
Plus you leave out a most key political fact prior to the housing bubble-economy crash, Iraq. As his popularity dropped on Iraq he upped the compassion where compassion=$$$$, as where did all that compassion=$$$$ come from???
It seems that you and sickoflibs should have exposed Bush prior to the 2004 election— ran against him in 2004 and won handily.
None of your arguments are answering the claims in the 17 distinct efforts to implement remedies to your concerns.
Each of those 17 items have speeches and Congressional testimony which dwarfs the speech and various sentiments contained in it.
You can continue to hyperbolize your favorite parts of the speech or you can just walk away and realize— yup, politics does not provide us with ideal results.
Bush is far far far from the most blameworthy target regarding the current crisis. Any of the posters here including me would be more blameworthy than someone who advocated and worked for solutions.
As governor of Texas, Bush did not strip away mortage protections that prevented this crisis here. Its just silly— take a pill for you BDS.
compassionate conservatism resulted in this financial mess - everybody felt good giving away someone else’s money and selling the debt “down the river” (to borrow a slavery term).
I have always thought the Bush family politicians were Democrat moles sent to destroy the Republican Party from within. Looks like they did a pretty good job.
Let me introduce you to some facts....
Read this and weep.
My post above was in response to dozens of articles like yours here on FR with the theme that “Democrats were solely at fault and Bush tried endlessly to fight off their attempts to loosen lending standards but lost”. Many of these Bush defense themes were BEFORE the election that didnt sell for good reason. So you have shown me nothing new, obviously dems wanted easy standards. they had NOTHING to lose. BUT BUSH DID!
The point was not that Bush was the sole cause of the problem as you claim. My point was clearly proved by my post and many replies that Bush promoted loans to minorities with bad credit and bragged about it as an major accomplishment..
Check out this 2007 Mark Levin fictional prediction of Bush bragging after leaving office. Levin clearly thought that this would be a plus in 2007 when Bush was bragging about it.
“Lets start local. Youve been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank. And thats despite record numbers of homeowners including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. And while were mentioning minorities, Ill point out that minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the Clinton Administration. Ive mentioned all those things before, but it doesnt seem to have sunk in. “Mark Levin 2007 Flashback ("Tired of you people not doing your homework"
My weeping was over when Bush left office. About 3-4 years.
No, it doesnt because the Barney Frank/CRA repeated video posts on this site are way over represented compared to the Bush ones I posted, like 100 to 1. So I figured 1 to 100 provided some very SMALL balance showing why those outside of FR did not buy the bogus (crap) ‘Bush saves us theme” that those postings were promoting.
BTW :I have no robotic loyalty to the R party or to Bush , only loyalty to the truth.
You can post what you like, but posting JUST a Bush video is playing into the hands of the”Blame Bush” crowd.
Tell me, where are the Congressional trials of Fannie Mea and Freddie Mac as compared to the Enron/WorldCom/Tyco debacles? Where are the Congressional investigations of Fannie and Fredie? Why are there no Congressional investigations of Barney Frank, Rahm Emanuel, etc.? Why didn’t SOX apply to Freddie and Fannie?
There is ample proof of Barney’s complicity in both Freddie and Fannie:
Frank was and remains a stalwart defender of Fannie Mae, which is now under FBI investigation along with its sister organization Freddie Mac, American International Group Inc. (NYSE:AIG) and Lehman Brothers (NYSE:LEH) all recently participants in government bailouts. But Frank has derailed efforts to regulate the institution, as well as denying it posed any financial risk. Franks office has been unresponsive to efforts by the Business & Media Institute to comment on these potential conflicts of interest.
While the relationship reportedly ended 10 years ago, Frank was serving on the House Banking Committee the entire 10 years they were together. The committee is the primary House body which along with the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) has jurisdiction over the government-sponsored enterprises.
He has served on the committee since becoming a congressman in 1981 and became the ranking Democrat on the committee in 2003. He became chairman of the committee, now called the House Financial Services Committee, in 2007.
Moses was the assistant director for product initiatives at Fannie Mae and had been at the forefront of relaxing lending restrictions at the company for rural customers, according to the Feb. 23, 1998, issue of National Mortgage News (NMN).
Herb Moses, who helped develop many of Fannie Maes affordable housing and home improvement lending programs, has left the mortgage industry, Darryl Hicks wrote for NMN. Mr. Moses - whose last day was Feb. 13 - spent the past seven years at Fannie Mae, most recently as director of housing initiatives. Over the course of time, he played an instrumental role in developing the companys Title One and 203(k) home improvement lending program
And just for fun let me add this: Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Barney Frank admitted a lengthy relationship with a male hooker who ran a bisexual prostitution service out of Frank’s apartment.
I am one of the blame Bush crowd. Besides, the phony “Bush tried to save us” defenses lost two elections. Time to give it up. The future is about what BoB is doing now, defending Bush is political disaster.
Everytime Frank is asked about socialization of banking and auto-industry, Frank replies “That was Bush that did that not us”. same answer with ACORN, he says “Ask Bush why he funded ACORN”
Well those Frank lines are Bush’s gift to democrats, not mine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.