Posted on 09/04/2011 10:24:05 AM PDT by Sons of Union Vets
From Fox News Channel
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Special Report With Brit Hume
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
Great - $78 billion in extra spending - not the $1.1 trillion that it ended up.
Look, this started when you posted a misleading graph. I’m glad you now agree that it’s wrong.
It’s 100% correct. Go to the link I provided and get the figures yourself. I’m not pushing anything on you.
Goodnight.
And more than that the complaints of the Bush administration and Greenspan were solely about the amount leverage that Fannie and Freddie were using, the ratio of their loans to their assets.
That was a valid concern but they weren’t warning about the existence of a housing bubble and they weren’t warning that lending standards had become dangerously lax. In fact Dubya was a cheerleader for mass home ownership and the very sort of lending that was driving the bubble. Anyone who doubts this needs to listen to his speech to HUD, the “American Dream Downpayment Initiative”.
Ok, now that's what I recall too, and the graph supports it.
People maybe, stuborn parrots, OTOH -- FromTheSidelines has been squawking about the alignment of the Bush timeline on that damn graph all day long whilst refusing to acknowledge the fundamental reality that BOTH sides own this mess.His assertion evidently rests upon the exclusion of W's TARP from the fiscal policy that obviously unfolded well into FY2009. Thank you for pointing out that error.
The country doesn't end -- the monetary/economic facade self-destructs and gets rebooted as it has numerous times in the country's history. The country goes on -- as happened circa 1819 and 1857, for example.
I have? Really? Can you point out where? Or would you like to retract that statement as well? Because I haven't done that - the first part of deciding who's responsible for what is first properly determining who DID what. That was the first step.
You can stick to your claim about what I said - but I'd like to see you quote it first, or admit your error...
His assertion evidently rests upon the exclusion of W's TARP from the fiscal policy that obviously unfolded well into FY2009. Thank you for pointing out that error.
No, it stems from President Bush not passing - nor even proposing what was ultimately passed - the FY2009 budget which the graph shows/claims.
Seems you're still wrong about a number of things, reading in what you want to see - not what is actually written.
>>I have? Really? Can you point out where?
Then you’re ready to admit the folly inflicted upon our financial infrastructure by the pirate enterprise of W’s Ambassador to the Netherlands, the Godfather of Subprime?
Are you ready to accept that, or are you just going to keep squawking about FY Timelines that evidently obscure your perched view of the systemically corrupted RINOcRATic forest?
"The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) is a program of the United States government to purchase assets and equity from financial institutions to strengthen its financial sector that was signed into law by U.S. President George W. Bush on October 3, 2008. It was a component of the government's measures in 2008 to address the subprime mortgage crisis."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program
What he a factor? A small one. The big problem was the Congress of the early 90s that passed most of the strengthening of the CRA, and Senator Dodd who used his power and position to block any changes that the Bush Administration recommended so many times, as well documented in the source of this thread.
But can you point out where I ever denied any culpability, as you claimed? Like to retract that, or just leave that lie hanging out there?
BUMP for great freeping.
Your denial is manifested in plain sight by your continuous and repetitive FY2009 quacking obfuscation of the culpability of the RINO Fithcally Conthervative jackwagons who rode W's compassionate conservative coat-tails into office.Would you like the Albatross raw or cooked?
"ROOTS: Roland Arnall founded Long Beach Savings, in 1979, which later became the parent of Orange-based Ameriquest Mortgage Co. Fueled by Wall [who got drunk] Street capital, Long Beach Savings and its executives spawned more subprime lenders, including [but not limited to] ResMae Mortgage Corp., Encore Credit Corp. and the subprime arm of Washington Mutual..."
OK, so you admit the graph is in error, that my point was correct, but because I was driving for the truth I was somehow saying that the GOP wasn't to blame.
I'm out - you clearly have an agenda, it is not driven by the truth or reality, and is simply to bash Republicans. You aren't conservative - you're insane.
Thanks. I didn’t want that video to get lost in cyberspace.
ACORN/Obama sued the banks and forced them to make the risky loans - and now they're suing the banks because they DID. It's how Communists work - lie, lie, lie - knowing most people wont’ know the difference...
How tragically true that is
Just thought you might be interested in seeing this so I am adding it in for good measure.
Archives prove Obama was a New Party member (updated)
Brian Schwarz and Thomas Lifson (October 8, 2008)
.......Barack Obama entered electoral politics as a member of a radical marxist group aimed at gaining control of the Democratic Party in order to implement a hardline version of socialism in America. He signed a contract promising to maintain a visible relationship. The candidate should be pressed by McCain/Palin to reveal that contract and proclaim his adherence to New Party goals before the American people approve him for our highest office....read entire article.....
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/10/archives_prove_obama_was_a_new.html
Whether or not they did, what does that have to do with what I posted?
What do you mean “defunded it”? “Funding” wasn’t the issue, and that would not have made the loans go away.
Yes indeed he does. He vote "Aye" to pass it in a coequal branch of government. He could have also joined in the fight to reform Fannie and Freddie years before so it would have enough votes to get through cloture and instead the legislation died...it was being supported only on a party line.
You are not only getting the most basic facts wrong about the situation, but also don't seem to understand the basics of our system of government...I don't say that to be disparaging toward you, it's just the way it is based on your comments.
All I can say is WOW. The cognitive dissonance of those who wish to hold Bush blameless is breathtaking. To say Obama deserves the blame for TARP is simply astounding. I could agree with that if it was part of a larger point about all the politicians in 2008.
I’m in a good mood today so I’ll ask you, what basic facts did I get wrong? Be precise. I am.
“OK, so you admit the graph is in error”
What specifically, is the error. I’ve been through this half a hundred times already but I’m willing to listen. Two heads are better than one. Be precise.
To be precise - it includes the full $1.4 trillion deficit for 2009 in President Bush’s term - it’s all under his name. Sorry, that’s not the case. Not only does it overstate what he did - more importantly it understates what President Obama did.
Move the “Bush/Obama” timeline back 8 months from where it’s shown, if you want to be precise and accurate.
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.