Media cover-up of Democrat responsibility for the mortgage meltdown changed the course of the nation [Reader Post]

By 28 Comments

Rasmussen’s latest tracking poll shows 46% strongly disapprove of Obama’s performance as president. That is compared to 43% who strongly disapproved of George W. Bush at the end of his presidency. But how much worse would Obama’s numbers be (and how much better Bush’s) if not for this Rasmussen finding:

One bright spot in the numbers for the President is that 51% of voters still say former President George W. Bush is more to blame for the nation’s economic woes. Just 41% point the finger of blame at the current President.

In fact, the mortgage meltdown was overwhelmingly a Democrat production, and one in which Barack Hussein Obama played a crucial double role, while George W. strove mightily for 8 years to secure much stronger oversight for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The only media outlet to tell the truth about Bush’s efforts to rein in the Democrat’s reckless government subsidized lending policies was Fox:

Fox was also the only major media outlet to explain why Obama was the second largest recipient of Fannie and Freddie lobbying money, behind only corrupt Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd. It is because there are two sides to the affirmative-action lending scheme that destroyed the U.S. mortgage market, and Obama was crucial to both of them.

The seeds of the meltdown were planted by the Clinton administration’s creative use of lawsuits to force banks to implement affirmative action in the issuing of housing loans. Listen to Clinton Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Andrew Cuomo announcing a multi-billion dollar settlement under which banks would lower their lending standards for low income and minority borrowers. Cuomo explicitly calls it “affirmative action” (at 2:40), and explicitly acknowledges that the loans will not be economically rational (that they will have higher default rates than normal, profitable loans, at 2:20 and 3:00):

But Democratic administrations bent on establishing affirmative actions loans were only half the equation. Clinton needed boots on the ground: minority activist groups who could push lawsuits through the legal floodgates that the Clinton lawyers were opening up. To create a sea change in lending practices, there needed to be this hounding legal threat, and this is where Obama came in.

The boots on the ground were provided by the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN), which was getting legal advice from Obama. This is the “community organizer” work that constitutes Obama’s entire pre-electoral resume. He was helping groups like ACORN use bogus claims of racial victimization to extort, not equal treatment for blacks, but special treatment, on unprofitable terms for the extorted parties. (Obama acknowledges this work at 5:20 above. Background on the Community Reinvestment Act that Obama and ACORN used–signed by President Carter in 1976–begins at 3:50.)

President Clinton signed legislation forcing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to underwrite the unprofitable loans. (Fannie and Freddie are public-private corporations that back private loans with repayment implicitly guaranteed by the federal government. That implicit guarantee has been made explicit through the ongoing bank bailouts). Without this underwriting, the damage from the Obama-ACORN extortion racket would have been limited. The banks that knuckled under would have lost value accordingly, which would have stiffened resistance and probably would have led to the Community Reinvestment Act being declared unconstitutional. But with government underwriting, the financial risk could be passed on to taxpayers, making the banks happy to write as many bad loans as they could find takers for, poisoning the entire financial system, as Obama fully understands.

“Sub-prime lending started off as a good idea,” Obama says (at 6:30 above):

…helping Americans buy homes who previously couldn’t afford to. Financial institutions created new financial instruments that could securitize these loans [losses?], slice them into finer and finer risk categories, and spread them out amongst investors and around the country, as well as around the world. In theory this should have allowed mortgage lending to be less risky and more diversified.

No, mixing bad loans with good was not a way to make mortgage lending less risky, no matter how it was securitized. The securitization just allowed this insane mixing to proceed on a massive scale.

But while Obama knows how the “sub-prime mortgage fiasco” came about, and his own role in it, he constantly blames the disaster on the one person who did the most to try to stop it. Bush tried and failed to roll back the reckless government foray into the backing of uneconomic loans. After the Democrats regained Congress in 2006 they kept expanding government’s exposure to bad loans, a course they are still pursuing today, even after bringing the world economy to the brink of collapse.

If you prefer to read rather than watch, Stanley Kurtz wrote an excellent summary of the ACORN-Fannie-Freddie-Obama ménage for the NY Post in October 2008.

Orson Scott Card wrote a nice pre-election bit on the media’s systematic (and ultimately successful) efforts to keep the American electorate ignorant of Democrat and Obama culpability for the financial meltdown.

Ace of Spades was one of many to note many examples of media cover up as they transpired. One instance here.

So this is how Obama got elected. The media systematically fooled the electorate about who was responsible for the mortgage meltdown and the subsequent recession, to the point where people voting first and foremost on the state of the economy voted for the one man most responsible for creating the financial chaos.

The current Rasmussen poll indicates that the people are still duped and it is hard to see what will ever shake them out of it. People who get their information from our Democrat-controlled media will never have any reason to think they are not blaming the right people. However bad the economy gets, their Democrat information sources will never blame the Democrats, and anyone who has imbibed the anti-conservative bigotry of the established media to the point of being invested in it will resist turning to the alternate media–which is the only available source of honest information.

This dire predicament is exactly what we should expect. A society that allows all of its information industries to be taken over by leftist demagogues has gotten itself into a very bad fix, with no easy way out. (That would be our news media, academia, the big charitable foundations, our professional associations and the government.)

Maybe the collapse of the CO2-warming fraud will wake people up to the fact that our information industries are indeed capable of lying systematically and en masse for years on end. Even in the so-called “hard sciences,” if the players are Democrats, they are prone to be utterly and constantly dishonest: pure political animals, with many rationalizations, but no principles beyond their grab for power.

If it is our quiet sun that alerts the duped masses to the systematic dishonesty of our Democrat elites it will be one more exhibit for the proponents of a providential history of America, and the country will certainly require a re-awoken rationality and moral consciousness if we are to successfully negotiate any serious downturn in global temperature. There will be no more room to throw away our prosperity on attempted usurpations of our republic a la California’s death by public union payoffs or Obama’s mimicry of Hugo Chavez. If the sun stays quiet, nature will strip our prosperity for us, unless we are able to compensate by freeing liberty to maximize progress.

The first step to economic recovery is to end the insane Democrat war against energy. They want an excuse to tax this life-blood of the economy as a way to fund their broader war against liberty (the socialization or communization of everything). As I put it in my Copenhagen post:

We ought to be developing energy resources as fast as humanly possible in preparation for the likelihood of global cooling. Energy development would also save the economy, and even allow the United States, which sits atop the world’s largest fossil energy resources, to pay off the killing debt that Obama is dropping on us like a rain of battleships.

But we can’t do anything until we get rid of the Democrats. According to Rasmussen, that would be accomplished in very short order if we could just wise our fellow countrymen up to one easily verifiable truth: that it is the Democrats who were and are responsible for the financial meltdown, with President Obama being the one figure who worked both sides of this dirty street, generaling the boots-on-the-ground extortion racket on the one hand, while working as a legislator to bill the whole resulting mountain of bad debt to the American taxpayer.

28 Responses to “Media cover-up of Democrat responsibility for the mortgage meltdown changed the course of the nation [Reader Post]”

  1. 1

    BackwardsBoy

    You’d have to work pretty hard to convince me that the mortgage meltdown wasn’t planned and timed to hand the election over to Obama.

    We’ve been had.

    The only bright spot is that many more people are now aware of the malfeasance occurring in Washington and are raising their voices against it. 2010 will be the year that we begin to vote out the unresponsive politicians and replace them with representatives that are more in line with what our Founders intended: average Americans.

  2. 2

    VizBiz

    Excellent post Alec. I’ll be crosslinking this and emailing it to everyone I know.

    Today Rasmussen is showing a significant uptick in Obamas approval. Last week his strongly disapproves hit -21 and today it’s -12. Are the American people really that fickle?

    Just keep doing what you’re doing and eventually the American people will wake up. Hopefully America’s sovereignty will get patched up.

  3. 3

    John Cooper

    Alec–

    An excellent post, but let’s remember that when the Republicans had a majority in 2005, they did not push the Fannie/Freddie reform bill forward. I was so angry when I learned about this, I called my former Senator Dole (who sat on the Senate Finance Committee) and asked her staffer why the reform bill was allowed to die in her committee. Shelby [R-AL] was the chair, and the Republicans had the majority in the Senate, but they did nothing to move the bill forward.

    The lame excuse I got from the staffer was, “We didn’t have a sixty-vote majority so we didn’t bother to send the bill to the floor.” That kind of defeatist attitude really frosts me.

    …and I’m sorry, but although President Bush verbally supported Fannie/Freddie reform, he did absolutely nothing to move the bill forward – or if he did, I’m not aware of it. Yes, I know he was very busy prosecuting two wars at the time, but it’s stuff like this that got the Democrats elected in droves in 2006 and 2008.

  4. 4

    JustAl

    John is absolutely correct. There were three GOP presidents in office since Carter started the Fannie/Freddie time bomb ticking at HUD, and none of them did squat. We have a one party system, Republicrats, each and every one of them.

  5. 5

    Skookum

    Well done Alec! Well done indeed! This article should posted all over the web. Thank you!

    Of course, we will expect to see more; of the same caliber, in the near future.

  6. 6

    this is how you bow

    Repeal the CRA….

    they have mixed oil (socialism) with capitalism (water) in order to bring American Capitalism down.Since Carter in 1976, this has been the goal for awhile.

    So it is no surprise – NWO is what they want where elite bankers CONTROL everything and we are their slaves.

    13th Amendment ended slavery – but they don’t care.

    Revolution is the key.

  7. 7

    VizBiz

    J. Cooper,

    You are correct by addressing the Bush administration’s lack of action. There are many things that the Republicans have done (i.e. partriot act) that are counter-intuitive to our constitution. The key is to vote the bums out and only settle for Republicans that vow to uphold the constitution. Forget the swearing oath, it hasn’t meant a thing in 100 years. We only want Republicans that convince us that they are standing firm and they had better vow to begin repealing unconstitutional laws. A third party will fail, we need to take the Republican party back.

  8. 8

    John Cooper

    Well, before Mike’s America pops in and accuses me of being a troll and an Obama supporter again, members of the Bush administration made a number of speeches warning about the threat of Fannie and Freddie to our financial system. I thank President Bush for that, but for whatever reason, nobody took his warnings seriously and all his attempts at reform were blocked by Congress.

    Here’s some of The Record (3:59 YouTube video which confirms at the end what Dole’s staffer told me on the phone)

    As much as the Republicans failed in their efforts, let’s never forget that Dodd, Frank, Schumer, Bill Clinton and Carter were the prime culprits in the collapse.

    See also: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html?pagewanted=1 in the New York Times, Sept. 11, 2003:

    WASHINGTON, Sept. 10— The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

    Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

    The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

    The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt — is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

  9. 9

    Joe

    We can blame the media for being more interested in “troopergate”, and in Joe the Plummer’s past than in Obama’s, and we are right to do so, but, ultimately, the responsibility is with us, the American people. It is not like the necessary information was unavailable. We just didn’t want to listen. All we wanted to hear was “Hope and Change”. Like the old axiom (attributed to different sources) says, “in a democracy people get the government they deserve”. It may not be right, but like it or not, we (collectively) deserve what we are getting.

  10. 11

    sherlock

    #1 has it nailed. The first part of the strategy was for the media to incessantly talk up the idea of a failing economy over a period of many years during which it was actually healthy. Remember when lower year-over-year job GROWTH was hyped as “pink slips”?

    The second part was the actual preparation for the mortgage meltdown as outline above.

    The third part was providing a trigger-man. That trigger-man was Chuck Schumer of New York, who was cajoled into getting the FICA (controlled by Clintonistas) to issue a warning letter about Indy Mac, with the intent of driving down it’s stock to help some well-connected DEMS but it up and take it over.

    Indy Mac started the landslide. Schumer thought he was just engaging in run-of-the-mill corruption, when actually he had been set up to trigger an economic catastrophe that was just waiting to happen. When the landslide started, Dems were overjoyed at the timing and happily piled on, as did of course the media, which accelerated it into a full-scale recession.

    So the layers of this onion were from the outside-in: a little bit of Dem-scam hardly worth mentioning, underlaid by a plot to hurt the economy enough to pin it on GWB, and deeply founded on a conspiracy to utterly ruin the US economy and allow the Dems to institute radical social change. So far it is working pretty well.

    If we don’t get rid of the Dems and the RINOs in 2010, it may well be the last occasion on which we are allowed to do so.

  11. @John Cooper: I never accused you of being a “troll” but I do have my suspicions regarding your motives.

    I’m glad to read that you tempered your earlier comment, though I don’t believe you are aware of the multiple attempts the Bush Administration and Republicans in Congress made to address reforms.

    I have extensive posts on this subject which include efforts by the GOP legislative and executive branches to address the problem. I’m still away from my home computer so let me know if you are interested in those links and I’ll try and find them for you.

    I also did this little video:

  12. 13

    Dr Bill

    I have told people for years that I did not buy my house for investment purposes; I bought it so that I could live in it. But I was really surprised that my house, which was assessed at $105,000 in 2007 was assessed in 2009 at $41,000.
    I am glad that it is paid for.

  13. 14

    VizBiz

    Good for you Dr. Bill. I wish more Americans would strive to pay off their homes and transportation. Perhaps 2010 will be a turning point when we all start thinking more about paying cash for our want and needs. Grandma and Grandpa had it right.

  14. 15

    John Cooper

    Mike–

    I like the video, although if I could make a suggestion: You might want to change the color of the text. The dark green text was simply unreadable on my monitor.

    For some reason you seem overly concerned with “my motives” so I’ll fess up. I want to return America to a constitutional form of limited government as the founders originally gave us. Clearly, that will not be possible as long as big-government Republicans are not tossed out of Congress along with ALL of the miserable Democrats. Do you disagree, or does just having an (R) behind one’s name satisfy your requirements for good governance?

    According to Republican Deficit Hypocrisy in Forbes, there are still twenty four Republicans serving in the Senate who voted for the Medicare drug benefit, including “such alleged conservatives as Jim Bunning and Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, John Cornyn of Texas, Mike Crapo of Idaho, Orrin Hatch of Utah and Jon Kyl of Arizona.”

  15. 16

    Donald Bly

    Foreclosures will Skyrocket

    As home prices continue to plummet, homeowners have to do the hard math. Is it worth keeping a home where you are $30,000 to $50,000 dollars upside down or is it more prudent to quit making payments and simply walk away after a year. For most people the desire to maintain a 720 plus credit rating and do the “right” thing is ingrained. Setting aside the morality issue, as I’m sure any banker worth his salt would do, it comes down to hard numbers.

    A friend of mine just approached me with the following scenerio and asked my advice as to what he should do. He’s never been late on a payment, He owes $120,000 dollars on a 865 square foot condo, identical to other units in his complex that are now listed for $90,000. He has a pre-payment penalty of $3,600 which comes off in April 2010 and a 9.96% interest rate. His condo fees run $196 per month which brings the total out of pocket monthly expense to $1,391 per month. Five months ago the property appraised at $150,000. 18 months ago the property appraised at $182,000.

    He has no credit card debt, two dependable cars, and an annual income in excess of $100,000 per year. Refinancing, assuming he can get refinancing, will add another $3,800 to the debt putting him $33,800 upside down with no guarantee that the value will not continue to decline. Renting closer to his work will cost him approximately $900 but save him $200 a month in gas expenses. He is fully aware that a foreclosure would most likely preclude him from purchasing a home for at least 7 years.

    Based strictly on the numbers – my recommendation, walk away. What say you?

  16. 17

    bob

    It’s funny how rightwingers can believe that everything that is good is the product of private enterprise, and that everything that is bad is the product of government. During the bubble, I didn’t hear you boy geniuses saying “Lordy, Lordy, those record quarterly results for Citigroup, Countrywide, Wachovia and the rest are the result of a massive bubble inflated by negro loans handed out by Fannnie and Freddie!” But now, you can blame the government, and more specifically blacks and the gays in government for the downside?

    You must be happy about that.

  17. 18

    Mr. Irons

    You must clearly live in a fantasy World, Bob. Let alone a hateful one at that.

    Apparently you don’t understand that all of this grew from fraud that was mandated to take place by Government itself. Apparently you turn a blind eye to the truth and just use your opinion as fact when the truths are staring you in the face. It is ill practice in public (non-profit) or private business to ever make loans of credit to low-income indivduals whose income is unable to maintain payments of the loan ontop of their basic daily needs. This generaly results always in loan defaults and shouldn’t surprise folks why this house of shakey cards came finaly crashing down.

    When liberal/moderate RINOs pushed forth to repeal the Glass-steagall Act in 1999, and Democrats willingly backed the repeal, the floodgates of massive fraud related to loans to low-income earners exploded. This has nothing to do with race, just as many whites in low-income brackets took on these loans just as minorities did at the nudging of the creditors that it was a wise move. Certain banks and loan offices were praticaly giving loans to people who either worked at minimal wage or no income at all and these people mostly took annualy adjusted rates to the loans thus compounding the issue.

    As for good from the Government? Little to nothing comes good from the Government when it tries to step outside it’s bounds of limitations written with in the Consitituion. Every single Entitlement program placed forth since the Great Society experiment enslaves people to idle depedence on Tax Payer dollars and is abused by a large portion of Americans no matter the skin color. If you want to enrich and empower people you do not simply toss them the fish for the day and say, “Good Luck.” You teach them how to fish or in this case promote Private businesses to build training systems to get people readjusted in skills to re-enter the work place while removing that free fish for the day style entitlement system. The “Welfare” of the People within the Consistution does not mean what today’s Society views it as, the word then refered to the private liberties of the person. Cessna Aircraft and Beechcraft have had extensive programs in the past and present to assist in training new hires and potential new hires in handling many various jobs, this model is what should be done outside of Government involvement to solve employement problems and income issues. Mandates do not solve anything but to further dig the hole.

    And the computer you are using? It was designed, engineered and built by a private firm. That microwave you use? Private business. That Aircraft? If it’s not a piece of crap Airbus, Private Business. That Car you drive? Private Business. Trust me, you do not want to end up using Soviet style built machines, especialy cars.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_industry_in_the_Soviet_Union

  18. 19

    MataHarley

    premium_subscriber

    First of all, Alec, great post. However allow me to take serious exception to your “only Fox” assertations… Good heavens, man. Are you blind to this blog? As @Mike’s America points out, he’s had numerous posts on this subject. And my own “Perfect Storm” compilation of events is a highlighted linked post in the frames on the right. I assure you, Fox was not the “only voice”.

    With the roots of the problem stemming first back to Carters’ era, getting more convoluted with Clinton/Rubin’s backroom regulation changes to avoid an incoming GOP Congress, topped off with the CRA template being the boilerplate for all banks if they wanted to merge and grow, what we had was EZ money, tons of buyers and an existing inventory with prices that were driven up by all those buyers bidding up existing values when writing offers on the hoods of cars outside while the for sale sign were being pounded into the ground.

    The market demand is what is to blame for unnatural and unsustainable rise in property values. However that market demand was a created product of Congress and back room regulations. When the damage was prevalent in 2005, the Dems fought the cure, and the GOP didn’t have enough voice to beat them down. It may be hard to believe, but 60 vote majorities are not the norm in our history.

    Despite all of this, I blame Congress – both aisles – equally in this. The Treasury and Fed Reserve even more. The astronomical rise in values could have been held in check by raising the rates… but no, said Greesnspan. Had the rates been raised to curb the insanity, home values would not have risen past sustainable foreclosures. A home worth $300K defaulted on by a buyer not able to pay $300K would simply have been replaced by another buyer who could pay that mortgage. But no… that $300K home was actually a $220K home, driven up in price by a fake buyers market created by legislation and regulations

    And most of all, I blame Obama and this Congress for perpetuation of an ugly nightmare. @Donald Bly: is correct. Foreclosures and short sales are about to skyrocket once again. And home values are about to take another dump when the rates rise. Latest call from the economist heads is rates between 6.8-8% by the end of 2010.

    And guess what… all these “recovery” sales are FHA mortgages (50% approx of all mortgages now) that have 3.5% down payments. Let’s see… easy math here. Purchase FHA home at $150K. 3.5% down, plus 1% mortgage insurance upfront fee means that $150K valued home has a mortgage of $146,197 on it….. or $3,803 equity.

    If the home values drop even 2.5%, the home is under water and in a short sale position. Oh happy days… aren’t we doing good?

    Now, that said, despite your usual great quality posts, Alec, I’m going to completely disagree with you. I can’t lay the mortgage meltdown solely at the Dems feet…. nor will I.

    I agree that were I to assign culpability to one party more than the other, it certainly would be to them. However my disdain for both is just about danged equal. I cannot, and will not give the GOP a pass on this. Did too much research, and watched it happen before my very eyes. It’s a bipartisan destruction of the heart of the US economy, housing – whether out of stupidity or intent – slightly weighted in the Dems favor.

    But I will give you this… the BS they call “housing recovery” is an onus all on the Dems… Pelosi, Reid, Obama specifically. The GOP get a complete pass on this. Not because of their dedication, but because they’ve been powerless to thwart the government intervention that is the jam in the cog of recovery. The HVCC, the 1st time home buyers credit, and the new RESPA rules? All “do good” legislation that sticks in the throat of recovery.

    This ain’t getting better.. .it’s going to get worse. And that one truly does belong solely to the Dems and Obama.

  19. 20

    MataHarley

    premium_subscriber

    BTW, @bob… you deserved a response all to your truly lowlife self….

    CRA loans are not only “negro”. Believe it or not, black Americans are not the only minority. But thank you for interjecting race into a purely fiscal assessment. Or perhaps you think those that are not financially solvent to pass loan qualifications should get a pass because of the color of their skin? Thank you for weighing in, you racist piece of sheeeet.

    If you didn’t hear that the bubble was alive and well, and fueled by EZ money from loans with zip for financial qualifications in the late 90s to mid 2000 years, it’s because your head was obviously too far up your derriere.

  20. 21

    Athos

    Donald Bly, I only wish I was 25% upside down. But I share the same dilemma. What happens if that condo drops to $40,000 over the next 3 years? What if it takes 10 years to reach $120,000? What is the reason he needs to refinance? ARM payment reset? What if the dollar collapses? Interest rates climbing like in the 80s, will drive down the price of real estate even more. What happens then?

    These are question that are plaguing the minds of millions of home owners, right now. My ARM doesn’t reset for another 3 years. We all must live somewhere.

  21. 22

    Alec Rawls

    John and others are right that the Republican Congress was a combination of weak and complicit, but the Republicans’ biggest failing was how they knuckled under to the community activist guerilla theater played by ACORN and Obama. Kurtz has the details in the article of his that I linked above:

    ACORN’s Democratic friends in Congress moved to force Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to dispense with normal credit standards. Throughout the early ’90s, they imposed ever-increasing subprime-lending quotas on Fannie and Freddie.

    But then the Republicans won control of Congress – and Rep. Roukema scheduled her hearing. ACORN went into action to protect its golden goose.

    IT struck as Roukema aired her concerns at that hearing. Pro testers, led by ACORN President Maud Hurd, stood up and began chanting, “CRA has got to stay!” and “Banks for greed, not for need!” The protesters then demanded the microphone.

    With the hearing interrupted and the demonstrators refusing to leave, Roukema called the Capital Police, who arrested Hurd and four others for “disorderly conduct in a Capital building” – a charge carrying a penalty of a $500 fine, six months in prison or both. As the police arrived, two of the protesters menacingly approached Roukema’s desk, still demanding the hearing microphone.

    Requests to the Capital Police to release the activists from Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Rep. Joe Kennedy (D-Mass,) failed. Then Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) showed up at the jail and refused to leave until the protesters were released; the Capital Police relented.

    Meanwhile, instead of repudiating ACORN’s intimidation tactics, Rep. Kennedy berated Roukema for arresting one of his constituents and accused the Republicans of preparing for “an all-out attack on CRA.” He also promised to introduce legislation to expand the CRA’s coverage to mortgage bankers and large credit unions.

    THIS little slice of political life from 1995 had a variety of ripple effects. Above all, ACORN’s intimidation tactics, and its alliance with Democrats in Congress, triumphed. Despite their 1994 takeover of Congress, Republicans’ attempts to pare back the CRA were stymied.

    MataHarley: you and I may consider FA a “media outlet,” but I was using the term colloquially when I said that Fox was the only outlet to report Democrat culpability. I guess I should have used “major media outlet,” but hey, when it comes to who speaks the truth, FA and other hard working blogs are major too.

    Funny comment by Bob on how “funny” it is that conservatives are only casting blame now that a meltdown has occured. Apparently he did not bother to read the post, which is about conservative efforts to reign in the affirmative action housing disaster before it exploded.

  22. 24

    Sharpshooter

    For one, Glass-Steagal covered an entirely different industry than the one that collapsed. AAMOF, it kept the problem from becoming much worse.

  23. 25

    Jeff Green

    This in an interesting article on the mortgage meltdown of our country.
    Sure enough, the media plays a huge role in every issue.
    I will be sure to pass this info.

  24. 26

    Sharpshooter

    #3

    The Repub’s didn’t have that strong a majority, to get it out of committees, particularly with the interference from Frank, Dodd, and Fannie/Freddie buyouts.

    As we’re seeing now, even a 60/40 majority isn’t enough to run roughshod over the legislature.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *