Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Wrong: Housing Policy, Not Tax Policy, Caused Recession
IBD ^ | 12/06/2012 | Paul Sperry

Posted on 12/08/2012 10:50:16 AM PST by SeekAndFind

President Obama argues Republicans want to go back to pre-recession policies of cutting "taxes for the folks at the very top" and rolling back "regulations on big banks."

He warned: "We tried that top-down approach. It's what caused the mess in the first place."

Did it, though?

Most economists agree the recession was caused by the subprime mortgage crisis, which had little if anything to do with tax policies.

In fact, real economic growth accelerated after 2003, when the Bush tax cuts for top earners and small businesses fully went into effect. The 73-month economic boom of the 2000s didn't end until December 2007, when the housing market collapsed.

So what killed housing?

To hear Obama, greedy bankers were allowed to run amok, rubber-stamping loans for practically anyone with a pulse.

He's right that underwriting was a joke, and as someone who advocated for easier home lending, he would know. Clinton's Role

Only, it wasn't because regulators looked the other way. Quite the opposite; they encouraged lenders to make risky loans.

Shoddy subprime lending expanded due in large part to federal housing regulations that institutionalized "flexible" mortgage underwriting standards for loan originators and government-backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

And they, under pressure from Congress and their Housing and Urban Development "mission" regulators, wound up underwriting nearly half the risky subprime and other nonprime mortgages outstanding, fueling the financial market for subprime securities.

While Bush is commonly blamed for the historic housing bubble that burst in 2007, housing experts now agree it began 10 years earlier in 1997 — under a Democratic administration.

The easy-credit orgy that took place over that decade was fed by federal housing policies designed to pump up homeownership rates.

It had a name: the National Homeownership Strategy.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: financialcrisis; obama; recession; taxes

1 posted on 12/08/2012 10:50:21 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
It wasn't Bush's fault. There was an international deleveraging.

Bush has gotten a bad rap for the worldwide meltdown.

2 posted on 12/08/2012 10:52:05 AM PST by Tau Food (Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The Democrats and their media boot-lickers are going to contine to blame Bush as long as it continues to work.

Hoover was blamed for the Great Depression through the 1970s; it was a powerful “agrument” used by the left for decades.

As long as the msm continues to kiss Obama’s butt...they will make this argument.


3 posted on 12/08/2012 10:56:14 AM PST by kjo (+)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

1)Bush never fought back.
2)The GOP communication skills are pathetic.
3)The state run MSM has mind control over the public educated morons.


4 posted on 12/08/2012 10:58:01 AM PST by cp124 (Government is value subtracted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Clinton started the housing crisis with commanding the banks to give those loans and Barney Frank, et al, fought the Bush admin when they questioned them on it. CSPAN has a video of it all; yet, the lies persist because the lies are repeated and the truth isn’t.


5 posted on 12/08/2012 11:03:00 AM PST by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cp124
That is one thing that I will never forgive Bush for. He never defended himself, nor the Republican Party and it's principles.
6 posted on 12/08/2012 11:04:15 AM PST by Cowboy Bob (Greed + Envy = Liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cp124

the rinos never tried to fight back. who knows if their rebuttals would have worked? they have/had dozens of overwhelming examples of what caused the mortgage crisis, but they did nothing, just like they’ve done nothing with the birth certificate issue, or the SS#, voter fraud, & on & on & on. they will not present information that the media will not, that could drastically sway public opinion, with common internet social sights, etc. what possible good is the GOP-e? they just run a body to say they have a candidate.


7 posted on 12/08/2012 11:08:36 AM PST by stickywillie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Obama says whatever he thinks idiots want to hear and the congress will buy. But, I repeat myself.


8 posted on 12/08/2012 11:08:52 AM PST by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; Tau Food

This was actually true in Europe, too, particularly in Spain under Zapatero. Housing prices inflated enormously because just about anybody could get credit (thanks to government programs ensuring this) and the Socialist Zapatero government also “guaranteed” housing to various groups, such as “youth,” which in Spain is anybody under about 40, especially if among the lifetime unemployed. I remember hearing an interview with one woman, a perpetual student, who had “bought” an apartment with the government’s money despite the fact that she had no job, no prospects of one, and lived entirely on government money to begin with. Naturally, this was bound to collapse in no time at all...as it did.


9 posted on 12/08/2012 11:13:37 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowboy Bob

It was always a mystery to me why Bush never said anything. I can only think he felt that there was controversy over his election, and he didn’t want to stir up more rancor or give the Dems and the media any more reason to hate him. But he didn’t realize that silence looks like weakness, and there’s nothing that emboldens the Dems (or any enemy) like perceived weakness.

It was too bad, because I think he actually would have gotten support had he fought back.


10 posted on 12/08/2012 11:16:29 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

I give Bush a slice of blame for pushing home ownership for minorities to even more unrealistic levels and not actually doing much or succeeding at anything to rein in the abuses that were built into the system when he took office.

You can’t be the guy in charge for eight years of a federally-caused crisis and not have at least some responsibility for it.

Also, he got completely rolled by Paulson to push massive Goldman Sachs bailout bills.


11 posted on 12/08/2012 11:17:34 AM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Everytime the government is involved in our personal finances: College loans, housing loans, car loans/kickbacks, health ins, car insurance, we get scre***.
12 posted on 12/08/2012 11:25:11 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

The problem was not Bushs creation,but certainly his lack of outrage and failure to expose the Depth of this problem as well as the rest of the republican establishment IS to blame. Just as Bush let Himself get Hammered for 8 years,and not defend the Right side ,led us to the Marxist we have now.
Ihave spoken to some democrat relatives for years about this,telling them that the CRA was responsible for this and they just laugh,they never heard of it and just say,yeah,sure it was Bush, his wars and tax cuts,they dont have a Clue.The fault is the Lap Dog Main Stream Media,as well as The Republican Establishment which has given up the fight and Joined the Dark Side.


13 posted on 12/08/2012 11:30:44 AM PST by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

The problem was not Bushs creation,but certainly his lack of outrage and failure to expose the Depth of this problem as well as the rest of the republican establishment IS to blame. Just as Bush let Himself get Hammered for 8 years,and not defend the Right side ,led us to the Marxist we have now.
Ihave spoken to some democrat relatives for years about this,telling them that the CRA was responsible for this and they just laugh,they never heard of it and just say,yeah,sure it was Bush, his wars and tax cuts,they dont have a Clue.The fault is the Lap Dog Main Stream Media,as well as The Republican Establishment which has given up the fight and Joined the Dark Side.


14 posted on 12/08/2012 11:30:44 AM PST by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: livius

it makes it impossible to make our arguments on the street when our supposed leaders completely ignore the egregious acts that we spread the word about.....that infuriates me as much as anything out there.


15 posted on 12/08/2012 11:30:58 AM PST by stickywillie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

The problem was not Bushs creation,but certainly his lack of outrage and failure to expose the Depth of this problem as well as the rest of the republican establishment IS to blame. Just as Bush let Himself get Hammered for 8 years,and not defend the Right side ,led us to the Marxist we have now.
Ihave spoken to some democrat relatives for years about this,telling them that the CRA was responsible for this and they just laugh,they never heard of it and just say,yeah,sure it was Bush, his wars and tax cuts,they dont have a Clue.The fault is the Lap Dog Main Stream Media,as well as The Republican Establishment which has given up the fight and Joined the Dark Side.


16 posted on 12/08/2012 11:31:14 AM PST by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

The problem was not Bushs creation,but certainly his lack of outrage and failure to expose the Depth of this problem as well as the rest of the republican establishment IS to blame. Just as Bush let Himself get Hammered for 8 years,and not defend the Right side ,led us to the Marxist we have now.
Ihave spoken to some democrat relatives for years about this,telling them that the CRA was responsible for this and they just laugh,they never heard of it and just say,yeah,sure it was Bush, his wars and tax cuts,they dont have a Clue.The fault is the Lap Dog Main Stream Media,as well as The Republican Establishment which has given up the fight and Joined the Dark Side.


17 posted on 12/08/2012 11:31:14 AM PST by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

The problem was not Bushs creation,but certainly his lack of outrage and failure to expose the Depth of this problem as well as the rest of the republican establishment IS to blame. Just as Bush let Himself get Hammered for 8 years,and not defend the Right side ,led us to the Marxist we have now.
Ihave spoken to some democrat relatives for years about this,telling them that the CRA was responsible for this and they just laugh,they never heard of it and just say,yeah,sure it was Bush, his wars and tax cuts,they dont have a Clue.The fault is the Lap Dog Main Stream Media,as well as The Republican Establishment which has given up the fight and Joined the Dark Side.


18 posted on 12/08/2012 11:31:17 AM PST by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cp124
The GOP communication skills are pathetic

In today's world that should be point NUMBER #1 and #2.

19 posted on 12/08/2012 11:32:41 AM PST by VideoDoctor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker
It wasn't Bush's fault. Bush didn't force any banks to make any loans they didn't want to make. If a president could force banks to make loans, don't you think Obama would be forcing banks to make loans right now?

Bush was president when he world's economies deleveraged. He didn't cause it. He was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

20 posted on 12/08/2012 11:47:23 AM PST by Tau Food (Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ballplayer
It wasn't Bush's fault. The Community Reinvestment Act didn't require banks to make loans they didn't already want to make. If a president could make banks make loans, Obama would be doing that right now.

Bush just happened to be president when the world went through a serous cyclical deflation and deleveraging. Bush wasn't perfect, but a president can't be held responsible for an international economy. It's too big.

21 posted on 12/08/2012 11:52:38 AM PST by Tau Food (Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
Clinton started the housing crisis with commanding the banks to give those loans and Barney Frank, et al, fought the Bush admin when they questioned them on it. CSPAN has a video of it all; yet, the lies persist because the lies are repeated and the truth isn’t.

It all began with a change in the Community Reinvestment Act [CRA] - backed by Clinton, Frank, et al.

Then, they pressured the banks to give loans to unqualified people, and said that Fannie and Freddie would back the loans.

Things then spun out of control and soon, Fannie and Freddie wouldn't accept responsibility for the loans. Thats when the banks came up with the CDO's and CDS's - to spread the risk out.

The head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission [Brooksley E. Born] under Clinton tried to warn Alan Greenspan et al about the looming mortgage crisis, but was undermined by them when the when the Commission sought to initiate regulation of derivatives. Ultimately, it was the collapse of a specific kind of derivative, the mortgage-backed security years later, that triggered the economic crisis of 2008.

After Bush came into office - his oversight people tried to tell Congress that Fannie and Freddie were built on a house of cards as far as the sub-prime mortgage mess was concerned. Frank, Waters, and a few more libs told them that they were liars and racists. [See video mentioned in this thread].

22 posted on 12/08/2012 11:55:35 AM PST by Lmo56 (If ya wanna run with the big dawgs - ya gotta learn to piss in the tall grass ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The most expensive meal of all is the free lunch.


23 posted on 12/08/2012 11:57:59 AM PST by Standing Wolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lmo56
That's a darn good explanation of it plus info I didn't know Thats when the banks came up with the CDO's and CDS's - to spread the risk out.. THANKS!
24 posted on 12/08/2012 12:04:23 PM PST by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker
"You can’t be the guy in charge for eight years of a federally-caused crisis and not have at least some responsibility for it."

You betcha. His putting China on the permanent favorite trading nation can only be blamed on him. Now about everything you buy is made elsewhere - hence our permanent recession. The Bush tax cuts sure didn't create jobs in this country.

25 posted on 12/08/2012 12:04:41 PM PST by ex-snook (without forgiveness there is no Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

You just have no idea what you’re talking about if you don’t think the feds were coercing banks to make bad loans. W’s big pushes included increasing zero-down mortgages and increasing minority home ownership. So he added on to then in-place bad policies and did nothing to unwind them:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/achievement/chap7.html

http://isteve.blogspot.com/2008/09/2002-bushs-speech-to-white-house.html


26 posted on 12/08/2012 12:08:30 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Barney Frank and the Democrats started this mess, but they have all the idiots convinced it was Bush.


27 posted on 12/08/2012 12:30:54 PM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Obama Wrong! But I repeat myself!


28 posted on 12/08/2012 12:37:05 PM PST by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Lets climb out of the housing mess using the same rates as incentives...

3.5% downpayments until July 1, 1013
4.5% downpayments until January 1, 2014
5.5% downpayments until July 1, 2014
7.5% downpayments until January 1, 2015
10.0% downpayments thereafter...


29 posted on 12/08/2012 12:47:49 PM PST by StraightDave (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker
Unlike the current communists dictator King Obama, Bush had very little control over the choice to give the uneducated poor Americans a free home. Lest we forget that during Bush's term he warned the Senate and House that the Frank/Dodd would cost billions and hurt the economy. What most of you are spouting off is too bad Bush wasn't the dictator and would have cut these ignorant Americans off. Just doesn't work that way until our current communists dictator.
30 posted on 12/08/2012 12:48:56 PM PST by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Logical me

Sorry, pal, but check my links: Bush was pushing further in the bad direction we already were in. If he’d done the responsible thing, he’d have pulled back in the other direction.

Nobody here suggested he had dictatorial powers—and you shouldn’t be misrepresenting as such.


31 posted on 12/08/2012 1:01:16 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

Exactly right. He may not have started it but Bush did little to nothing to stop it.


32 posted on 12/08/2012 1:10:17 PM PST by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
The housing bubble burst because interest rates reached a point that was too high in the latter half of 2005, and then exacerbated it by going even higher in 2006 and 2007:

US 1 Year Adjustable Rate Mortgage Rate Chart

US 1 Year Adjustable Rate Mortgage Rate data by YCharts

US New Single Family Houses Sold Chart

US New Single Family Houses Sold data by YCharts

33 posted on 12/08/2012 1:20:42 PM PST by mjp ((pro-{God, reality, reason, egoism, individualism, natural rights, limited government, capitalism}))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker
I think you need to read your own sources.

Bush never forced any banker to make any loans. Bankers made loans (and made loans they later acknowledged were risky) because they were able to sell those loans to Wall Street firms who securitized them and sold them to invetors. Wall Street was able to sell them to investors because rating agencies labeled many toxic securities as AAA investment grade securities.

From top to bottom, those participating in that sales chain did so because their activities were profitable. As long as they were paid to rate crap as AAA, the rating agencies labeled crap as AAA. As long as rating agencies labeled crap as AAA, ignorant investors would buy that crap . As long as investors were willing to buy securities, Wall Street was willing to create and sell them. And, as long as Wall Street would purchase loans, lenders were willing to create them.

See if you can find one banker in this country who will say that Bush forced him to make any loan, ever.

34 posted on 12/08/2012 1:40:55 PM PST by Tau Food (Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

First, there were all kinds of coercive efforts forcing banks to make bad loans: from the need for high CRA scores to get acquisitions approved, to the government funded ACORN forcing banks to make lending commitments, to the Federal Reserve’s claims that banks were discriminating if they didn’t make loans representative by racial category and therefore determining that it was discriminatory to require traditional metrics for lending, to the subsidized Fannie, Freddie, etc., making it only practical for banks to sell to them (or the parallel securitization network that the investment banks finally went through the full value chain on)—there were all kinds of coercive efforts forcing banks not to apply sound traditional standards. Again, the reasoning was that such standards were discriminatory. Bush not only did nothing to reverse that, but he further pushed zero-down loans, with the focus on that as a tool for lifting minority homeownership.

I’ve had bankers tell me how reliably their banks lost money on the minority lending programs that the regulators forced them to inact.


35 posted on 12/08/2012 1:54:47 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

bttt


36 posted on 12/08/2012 1:59:07 PM PST by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Bankers and mortgage companies are the main culprits for our financial meltdown. When the CRA was implemented, the bankers legitimately complained about the risks of waiving lending requirements. Clinton placate them by having Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy these subprime notes along with other mortgage notes after the banks held them for six months or more. When the bankers discovered that FMFM were not auditing the mortgage notes, because the fed gov assumed bankers would not jeopardize themselves via fraud and losses from mortgages based on false applicant data. The gov was deadly wrong, because their policy of buying all the mortgage notes unaudited meant bankers can make tons of money in the six month holding period just on application fees and points. Bankers no longer cared about loan integrity and more on how much volume of mortgages they can get in the six month period. Encouraging prime applicants to falsify income so they can use their good credit history and new false income to qualify for larger loans (and larger dream house) became widespread practice. Subprime loans did not hurt as severely as false application prime loans because the subprime are clearly marked while liar loans are hidden toxic assets sold as AAA rated investments. Country Wide and WaMu were not the few rotten apples, nearly all the large US banks were involve with liar loans and selling it to FMFM. Conservatives need to stop spreading the myth that gov is the major cause of the real estate and financial collapse of 2008. If the bankers knew the gov was not auditing the mortgage notes they were buying, they at least should not have taken advantage of the gov blindspot and flooded the market with liar loans.


37 posted on 12/08/2012 2:05:05 PM PST by Fee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

No mention here of the disasterous monetary policy pursued by Greenspan.


38 posted on 12/08/2012 2:09:29 PM PST by spyone (ridiculum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker
I have told you why bankers were making as many loans to as many people as they could. It had nothing to do with Bush. Ultimately, it was all enabled by the fact that investors could not independently evaluate the risk of the securities they were buying and relied upon grades of AAA given to the securities by reckless rating agencies. Presidents don't have to force bankers to make money and it's not the president's job to try to stop them from making money.

Bush is NOT GUILTY. Again, you cannot name one banker in this country who was forced by Bush to make one loan. That was never necessary.

And, whenever investors again show a willingness to unwittingly spend good money to buy crap that isn't transparent (and that day will come), all of this will happen again.

And, I'm sure there will be folks who will blame it on Bush again.

39 posted on 12/08/2012 3:42:42 PM PST by Tau Food (Never give a sword to a man who can't dance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Fee
Conservatives need to stop spreading the myth that gov is the major cause of the real estate and financial collapse of 2008.

True, since the Fed is independent of "gov". The only one cause of all booms and busts is loose money.

40 posted on 12/08/2012 4:09:05 PM PST by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: spyone

You are correct. Funny how Greenspan just happened to reign over the dot com boom and bust and the housing boom. The commodity boom in 2008 was the latest, but it won’t be the last.


41 posted on 12/08/2012 4:13:11 PM PST by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

You keep ‘telling me’, but the eventual excesses—with banks bundling knowingly bad loans into inaccurately rated securities—developed out of and after banks were forced to lower their lending standards.

And Bush was right in there ignoring and encouraging it as that got worse and worse. You are being willfully or otherwise ignorant here.


42 posted on 12/08/2012 5:51:09 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food; ballplayer

The CRA certainly did force banks to make loans that they didn’t want to make. Banks were merging and acquiring like crazy through the whole period and if they didn’t have an exemplary CRA score they wouldn’t get their acquisitions approved. In actuality, banks had to fork out bad loans.

Also, the FDIC was requiring banks to drop traditional lending requirements that had disparate racial impact. That was forcing banks to make bad loans.


43 posted on 12/08/2012 5:56:47 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

government debt/gdp 1945 / 2008
compare private debt / national gdp levels of 1929 and 2008
both 300$
government stepped in a made the banks whole as promised (moral hazzard)


44 posted on 12/08/2012 7:52:51 PM PST by griswold3 (Big Government does not tolerate rivals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks SeekAndFind.
Shoddy subprime lending expanded due in large part to federal housing regulations that institutionalized "flexible" mortgage underwriting standards for loan originators and government-backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And they, under pressure from Congress and their Housing and Urban Development "mission" regulators, wound up underwriting nearly half the risky subprime and other nonprime mortgages outstanding, fueling the financial market for subprime securities... the historic housing bubble that burst in 2007... began 10 years earlier in 1997 -- under a Democratic administration. The easy-credit orgy that took place over that decade was fed by federal housing policies designed to pump up homeownership rates. It had a name: the National Homeownership Strategy.

45 posted on 12/08/2012 8:23:36 PM PST by SunkenCiv (If you didn't vote for Romney, it's your fault.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

All true (read Morgenson and Rosner’s “Reckless Endangerment” for the whole gruesome story) - but I’ve never heard one prominent Republican stand up and assert the falsehood of the blame of Bush, including Romney in the campaign when he was accused of wanting to return to the “failed policies” of the last administration - pathetic......


46 posted on 12/08/2012 9:41:10 PM PST by Intolerant in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ballplayer
The problem was not Bushs creation,but certainly his lack of outrage and failure to expose the Depth of this problem as well as the rest of the republican establishment IS to blame.

Agree - he made a number of attempts to get them to rein in Freddy and Fannie, but he never told the People what was going on or what it would cause. he should have said what it was and let them continue with the "Freddy/Fannie are fine" BS like they did until about 6 weeks before it crashed. A little publicity and warning would have gone a long way instead of letting them own the narrative.

47 posted on 12/09/2012 3:16:51 AM PST by trebb (Allies no longer trust us. Enemies no longer fear us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson