Skip to comments.The Tea Party **** You. Fire Them
Posted on 05/28/2012 5:06:41 AM PDT by Zeddicus
(ref: How Banks Bought the Tea Party)
The 15 freshmen Republican representatives in the House Tea Party Caucus each ran in 2010 on a populist anti-Wall Street message, highlighting their opposition to bank bailouts like the 2008 Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and criticizing Washington for enabling the banking sector as it became Too Big to Fail. After winning, all fifteen received significant PAC contributions from the banking industry and have become a reliable vote and mouthpiece for the financial industry, a ThinkProgress analysis of campaign contributions, voting records and public statements reveals.
It would be nice if they just took money. They did worse.
11 of the 15 co-sponsored this piece of trash; is there any doubt they were bought and paid for?
(a) In General- In the examination of financial institutions--
(1) a commercial loan shall not be placed in non-accrual status solely because the collateral for such loan has deteriorated in value;
(2) a modified or restructured commercial loan shall be removed from non-accrual status if the borrower demonstrates the ability to perform on such loan over a maximum period of 6 months, except that with respect to loans on a quarterly, semiannual, or longer repayment schedule such period shall be a maximum of 3 consecutive repayment periods;
(3) a new appraisal on a performing commercial loan shall not be required unless an advance of new funds is involved;
Got it? The fact that the collateral, which was the predicate for the loan in the first place, no longer supports the loan as originally agreed, cannot be used as the reason to place the loan in "non-accrual" (that is, at risk of not performing) status.
But the predicate for the loan being made in the first place was the provision of the collateral; but for that collateral's actual value the loan would have never been made in the first place!
This is what the so-called "Tea Party" that claimed to be against bank bailouts has supported -- literally changing the qualifications on a loan after it is made so that in effect there is no collateral required at all!
This is an attempt to literally approve by legislation the effective counterfeiting of the nation's currency and you are the victims as your purchasing power will be further destroyed by this bill should it become law.
11 of 15 "Tea Partiers" are co-sponsors.
Fire them all; they're traitors and mendacious bags of pus.
Let’s name names.
I am sorry to learn of this. I fear, really fear, for our country.
Nice try but no cigar.
There is a lot more to the Tea Party Movement.
As long as ThinkProgress doesn't LeanForward.
“Nice try but no cigar.
There is a lot more to the Tea Party Movement.”
We are the Tea Party. If the current freshmen don’t live up to our expectations, fire them and hire a new batch.
Besides, the tea party candidates weren’t voted in until 2010.
What, you think the federal government is unduly influenced or controlled by banking interests? That’s just kookery, KOOKERY, KOOOOKERY!!!
I think I speak for all FReepers when I say I’ll simply shout CONSPIRACY THEORIST at you so I don’t have to listen to what you say.
Just because every bill they pass seems to enrich the elite banksters in NY, doesn’t mean anything. Everything in life is a coincidence. Nothing happens for a reason. It’s all just a collection of randome, crazy, happenstance. Just because almost every law they pass these days strengthens the power of the banking elite, is no proof that they have any influence over our government.
It’s not any reason to look further and not just drive by shout “CONSPIRACY KOOK! YOU HATE AMERICA FIRST!”.
>>>(1) a commercial loan shall not be placed in non-accrual status solely because the collateral for such loan has deteriorated in value;>>>
Sounds like a good law to me. Take a home mortgage for example. As the house ages it decreases in value. If the home owner can still pay the mortgage, he will own the home at the end of the mortgage payments.
According to the Chair of the TPC, there are a few more than 15 members:
Members of the Tea Party Caucus
Washington, Jul 21 -
Here is a list of those Members of Congress who have officially joined the Tea Party Caucus:
Robert Aderholt (AL-4)
Todd Akin (MO-2)
Rodney Alexander (LA-5)
Michele Bachmann (MN-6)
Joe Barton (TX-6)
Roscoe Bartlett (MD-6)
Gus Bilirakis (FL-9)
Rob Bishop (UT-1)
Michael Burgess (TX-26)
Paul Broun (GA-10)
Dan Burton (IN-5)
John Carter (TX-31)
Howard Coble (NC-6)
Mike Coffman (CO-6)
Ander Crenshaw (FL-4)
John Culberson (TX-7)
John Fleming (LA-4)
Trent Franks (AZ-2)
Phil Gingrey (GA-11)
Louie Gohmert (TX-1)
Tom Graves (GA-9)
Ralph Hall (TX-4)
Gregg Harper (MS-3)
Wally Herger (CA-2)
Pete Hoekstra (MI-2)
Lynn Jenkins (KS-2)
Steve King (IA-5)
Doug Lamborn (CO-5)
Blaine Luetkemeyer (MO-9)
Cynthia Lummis (WY)
Kenny Marchant (TX-24)
Tom McClintock (CA-4)
Gary Miller (CA-42)
Jerry Moran (KS-1)
Sue Myrick (NC-9)
Randy Neugebauer (TX-19)
Mike Pence (IN-6)
Ted Poe (TX-2)
Tom Price (GA-6)
Denny Rehberg (MT)
Phil Roe (TN-1)
Ed Royce (CA-40)
Steve Scalise (LA-1)
Pete Sessions (TX-32)
John Shadegg (AZ-3)
Adrian Smith (NE-3)
Lamar Smith (TX-21)
Cliff Stearns (FL-6)
Todd Tiahrt (KS-4)
Zach Wamp (TN-3)
Lynn Westmoreland (GA-3)
Joe Wilson (SC-2)
A bank can't place a home in jeopardy of foreclosure simply because it is underwater - sounds reasonable
a modified or restructured commercial loan shall be removed from non-accrual status if the borrower demonstrates the ability to perform on such loan over a maximum period of 6 months
A bank can't place a home in jeopardy of foreclosure if the owner is still able to make the mortgage - sounds reasonable
a new appraisal on a performing commercial loan shall not be required unless an advance of new funds is involved
A bank can't place a business in jeopardy of foreclosure unless the owner wants to borrow more money - sounds reasonable
Am I missing something?
It's got to be the Plombo O Plato (lead or silver) thing that goes on in Mexico.
Until there are a few more specifics I see this as a stealth attack on the tea party.
"Yeah, just make up a few 'facts' and the rubes, who will never look it up, might vote the guys out."
This is a report on a study done by Think Progress here is their website: http://www.thinkprogress.com/
See if you think they are telling the truth. Don’t fall for propaganda by anyone on the left especially if they have “progress” in their name.
No way? I think the norm is for pols to abandon principles. They “have” to cater to dimwits and “have” to work to not offend anyone. They have no choice but to bandon (conservative) principles.
Nice headline. Wow, awful quick to slam the Tea Party [movement]. Since this one didn't meet the smell test, I had to research further. First, here's the entity behind all of the controversy: Americans For Financial Reform (SEIU, AFL-CIO, commies)
The only thing this bill changes (actually clarifies) is the definition of a "bad loan". AFFR wants a government examiner to be able to call a loan "bad" even if all of the payments are current.
The bill merely seeks reasonable regulation on banks in order to make the rules clearer on what are "good" loans for a bank to maintain. Banks can lend more which is good for the economy. This in no way hampers bank examiners from banking oversight. That is just the Union false charge.
Denninger and you have been punked.
You’re missing a lot.
This has nothing to do with being able to foreclose or not.
This has everything to do with a bank’s solvency, and whether the FDIC needs to step in and close them under the law.
Previously this law allows the bank to seriously inflate the assets on their books. Loans backed by collateral are counted very differently than loans with no collateral.
This is all fine if you don’t care about sound banking.
Oh and obviously the executives of these banks get bonuses based on these numbers. They have every incentive to lie about their balance sheets, and now it’s not even a crime!
Bailouts will be needed to fix this when it all inevitably blows up, and yes, stopping bailouts was what the tea party was all about.
Good catch. Thanks.
Yes, I would like to see names. In 2010, a lot of candidates co-opted the Tea Party mantle to give them a leg up. Doesn’t mean they actually bought into the Tea Party philosophy.
But money is the mother’s milk of politics and these guys quickly learn to toe the line to receive the most money with the least amount of effort. So favors = cash. I’d like to see both sides of this coin before making a judgement.
Take Denninger with a grain of salt. He’s a libertaria, voted for Obama and still maintains that Obama was better than McCain would have been. He was also an avid supporter initially of the OWS movement and I don’t know if he’s changed his stripes about that.
He does make good points on occasion, but I’d say he is often gullible to BS.
Indeed, there is nothing more hateful than a judge’s grinding ax on anyone with any means, banking or what not, who has the “audacity” of telling the community how good finance is run.
Judges invariably intimidate or lock away anyone who would dare raise a critical finger against the way the books are run in the city.
Governmentoid lawyers are criminal fascists inherently unless they themselves comes from the industry and have learned the private ropes prior.
This country consistently blocks the experts and knowledgeable persons from access or rights of expressions in decision making. This is the hallmark of weak government and emotional lawyering done by complete ignoramuses.
“a commercial loan shall not be placed in non-accrual status solely because the collateral for such loan has deteriorated in value”
This is simply a reversal of the mark to market provision which came along shortly before the 2008 financial collapse and was a major cause of that collapse. Basically, the government said that a bank had to continually adjust its books to reflect the value of the collateral, even if the loans were performing....so the collateral goes down in value, and all of a sudden, the loan is in default...and too many loans in default, then all of a sudden you have the bank examiners running in and wreaking havoc on banks.
Bottom line, the government, as usual, created this mess by messing with the accounting rules in the first place. The cited pieces of the legislation correct that.
I’m not surprised.
These sneaky bastirds do what the politicians in New York do.
I left the Republican Party and officially joined the Conservative Party 2 years ago. What I didn’t expect was that the Conservative ticket was mostly liberals and RINOs. They were trying to camoflage their intentions. These Tea Party electees are just looking out for their next election and think that nobody will notice. They need to be brought out into the light and exposed.
Working for the goals that got them elected in order to get re-elected isn't very important once they find out how wealthy they will be in two years if they go along with the system and how less wealthy they they will stay if they maintain the principles that got them elected and get re-elected. They will fight for re-election but it is not the most important thing. The money is the important thing.
“So much for the Tea Party, or any hope of fixing our problems by voting, or the quaint notion that we have a government that represents We The People. “
“We The People”
First found in the preamble, and assumed by most to mean all of us...but was “we the people actually” the remaning delegates who were the signers? !!!!!!
No credibility. None. Might as well be straight from Van Jones.
Shill alert. Shill Alert.
(How much does Soros pay you to post, per post? Always wondered...)
Money talks and BS walks.
In two or six years the new guys will have increased their estates significantly if they have become properly corrupt and, while desirous of re-election, it isn't worth having to stick to the principles that got them elected in the first place and not gaining in affluence. If they get replaced after a term the new Representatives and Senators will follow the same path.
We have to keep trying but the future is harder and harder to change. It requires massive reform at the top conceived and implemented by those at the tơp whose interests are contrary to that reform or it requires revolution at the bottom which must lead to despotism.
This legislation seems to be designed to help the little guy keep his head above water in the government-created cesspool he finds himself in.
You can always assign evil motives if you look hard enough.
Happy Memorial Day.
These people were obviously trying to do good for the little guy.
Source ? Link ? or BS conjured up by Soros...
received significant PAC contributions from the banking industry .....
You mean like Frank and Dodd got ? or just run of the mill PAC money ???
I expect to see LOTS of bogus or inflated troll posts to discouraging TEA party people...it's the Obama/Soros way
Thanks for your research.
In this economy, how much to hire some shill bloggers? Not much, I’m thinking. Not that we shouldn’t know what’s going on over at the Marxist country clubs but this poster is not on our side.
This doesn’t make me worry about the tea party for reasons other posters have stated better than I.
What I’m worried about is that the Tea Party is more about preserving existing medicare/social security entitlements, as some statistics from early tea party polls indicate.
The majority TP supporters were concerned about Obama care not because it was a socialist abomination in and of itself, but because it infringed on another socialist abomination that is the present social security/medicare system - from which they wish to “get theirs”.
Anything (including the Tea Party) that does not dismantle the existing big government, and severely limit the extraction of money that is earned in the private marketplace for the benefit of those who live off of government payments - of any kind - is not going to change the status quo - which is reckless fiscal irresponsibility - and the consequences thereof.
It’s a trap...lol...a shill agitprop post.
You all are welcome to take your marching orders from think progress, however, I don’t see the big problem here. Things put up for collateral WILL most likely depreciate, especially now. Besides, how is this any kind of bailout for the banks?
Stopping bailout was what the tea party USED TO be about.
They had a winning issues and diluted it to almost nothing. (I am talking about the the self appointed ‘leaders’ of the tea party).
It is up to US to keep up the heat on everyone, including and especially those who were elected under a tea party banner.
Probably not much....a free Obama 2012 bumper sticker will do the trick for most of the brain dead libtards
I actually saw my first Obama 2012 bumper sticker yesterday in my neighborhood...it actually surprised me that someone would actually put one on their vehicle...
Disgusting headline. If it weren’t for the Tea Party, I’d be in bed in a fetal position.
Why don’t you attend a Tea Party rally and see what it’s really about..cuz obviously you know nothing of the patriotic folks who are trying to save this country.
I agree with your assessment - though your logic isn’t always correct. Historically, Houses have appreciated since WWII BUT we’ve had two significant corrections since then that have reset value considerably, then the climb began again
Now I assume this is also true at some level with commercial real estate?
Further - if we didn’t apply this same standard to homes - EVERYONE would loose their homes right now, so why the double standard for commercial real estate? I think this makes sense.
Oh I see lots of Obama sickers and I’m in a very red state. You have to figure the teachers and college students and the watchers of the Daily Show. But even here I’m slow to put on an anti Obama sticker for fear of getting my car trashed by one of Holder’s people.
Thanks for this thread.
You know that we have touched their hot button when they pull out their “buckets of pus” card!
We must be doing something RIGHT!
Wooooooooo - - - - , Karl Denninger, you seem to be a tad upset when we oppose the linchpin of the 2008 to 2012 Bolshevik Movement against Banks.
Yep, I’m writing about Hank “hair-on-fire” Paulson’s TARP.
You, Karl write: “ - - - highlighting their opposition to bank bailouts like the 2008 Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and criticizing Washington - - -. “
We then counter by sending in the “fighting fifteen!”
It is a chess game Karl, a chess game about money.
It is ALL about the money Karl, YOUR grandchildren’s descendants money.
BTW Karl, the banks were told to cave-in to Paulson in a 45 minute Gestapo-style meeting. Private Banks versus the US Federal Government Treasury Department, guess who told who will be publicly declared “to big to fail?”
Volcker, you clever old Socialist. You make have invented the concept of “to big to fail,” but Obama’s 5 TRILLION Dollar failure has proven that your idea is “to stupid to succeed.”
So Karl Denninger, what is it going to be: 1.) sh_tcan the Obamanation of the last 4 years, and oppose the Obamarule of the next 4 years; or 2.) Continue to kick America’s “can” into the Bolshevik Abyss?
Your grandchildren’s descendants will remember your choice when they visit your gravesite in the far distant future.
The zot from FR should come your way. Take your kooky crap somewhere else.
“...even though Denninger had voted for Obama. The blog-post took issue with the bank bailouts, the US national debt and “the fraud and abuse in our banking and financial system” which included the predatory lending practices at the center of the home mortgage foreclosure crisis.”
You take the word of this moron who voted for Obama?
Do you really think Freepers are stupid enough to fall for the screeching of this “progressive” idiot?
I’ll take the Tea Party over him and you everyday.
Well done, FReepers. I smell a troll in our midst...
More on the nutcase Demnninger:
“Denninger stated on Russia Today that he supports the Occupy Wall Street movement”
I had hired a contractor to build a house and had building mortgage loan set up with FCS ( Farm Credit Services) which does get federal funds.
The loan was set up so that the funds could only be drawn out in 5 separate stages of the construction. It was set up as a 25 year mortgage and I was paying payments monthly from the start.
Well, after the first 2 draws the contractor changed the terms of the agreement and totally screwed up the construction by using unapproved subcontractors, very shoddy work that didn't meet building codes.
I refused to sign off on any more draws on the loan.
The contractor filed suit and I counter-sued.
It turned out the the FCS branch manager was friends of the contractor and said they were going to foreclose on my property, saying I broke the contract. Even though I did nothing wrong and had made every payment if full and on time.
I told them I could add FCS to the suit if they wanted to try that crap and they backed off on that.
I won totally in the suit and put that contractor out of business, but it took several years to get to a jury and nearly bankrupt me in the process.
Thru all that time I made full payments and had to rent a second home. The bastards at FCS were never any help at all in getting it resolved.
If Dodd Frank were in place at that time FCS may well have been able to steal my land ( worth 5x the home loan), even though I made every payment on time.
Conspicuous by his absence is Colonel Allan West, who has had some not nice things about the Tea Party and the people who elected him. He may very well be a one-hit wonder. Shame, because there was promise there. I guess there is truth in not biting the hand that feeds you.