Here's the cause of the housing bubble and subsequent meltdown..

[willum14pb]

You may now OFFICIALLY thank the democrats for ruining our economy.




This video is a fantastic compelation of exactly what I and the other conservatives on the board have been saying is the cause of this housing bubble and subsequent meltdown.

I am very interested to hear from the resident antagonists on it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o

i urge you to watch the ENTIRE video before posting anything. I will know if you have.


not to mention the dem's have had control of our senate and house since 02, and you wonder why we're where we are today.

[tony]

Cliffs? People do have work computers that block youtube.

[blacknightteg]

i dont even want to watch the video...i watch a press conference that some head republicans did and they admitted that they and the current administration were responsible for this mess. now that comming out of their mouths, i think that holds water.

[willum14pb]

i dont even want to watch the video...i watch a press conference that some head republicans did and they admitted that they and the current administration were responsible for this mess. now that comming out of their mouths, i think that holds water.

link? what republicans? names? anything that holds any water, other than you just saying it. the video PROVES that the democrats are responsible, and no one else. The republicans actually tried to stop this from happening. How bout instead of being closed minded, you watch the video. See for yourself. Do some research.

[Alan®]

i dont even want to watch the video...i watch a press conference that some head republicans did and they admitted that they and the current administration were responsible for this mess. now that comming out of their mouths, i think that holds water.

Ok. I love how everything is Republican's fault. How about Clinton encouraging Fannie and Freddie to lax their requirements for home loan's.


Seriously though it's too late to be pointing the blame here. We need to fix it and fix it ASAP.

[4dmin]

both are at fault you can not deny it. dems/reps all have a hand in making policy. our houses are too split to say one had more a hand then the other. end of clintons administration was going into a down turn and bush has failed to work w/ dems to strengthen our economy since day one. he has been far to worried about iraq.

[willum14pb]

both are at fault you can not deny it. dems/reps all have a hand in making policy. our houses are too split to say one had more a hand then the other. end of clintons administration was going into a down turn and bush has failed to work w/ dems to strengthen our economy since day one. he has been far to worried about iraq.

The dem's have controlled our house and senate since 2002. research it. please. watch the video.

[4dmin]

The dem's have controlled our house and senate since 2002. research it. please. watch the video.

do you actually believe the sh!t you post

107th Congress (2001-2003)

Majority Party (Jan 3-20, 2001): Democrat (50 seats)

Minority Party: Republican (50 seats)

Other Parties: 0

Total Seats: 100

________

Majority Party (Jan 20-June 6, 2001): Republican (50 seats)

Minority Party: Democrat (50 seats)

Other Parties: 0

Total Seats: 100

______

Majority Party (June 6, 2001-November 12, 2002 --): Democrat (50 seats)

Minority Party: Republican (49 seats)

Other Parties: 1

Total Seats: 100

_____

Majority Party (November 12, 2002 - January 3, 2003): Republican (50 seats)

Minority Party: Democrat (48 seats)

Other Parties: 2

Total Seats: 100

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
108th Congress (2003-2005)

Majority Party: Republican (51 seats)

Minority Party: Democrat (48 seats)

Other Parties: Independent (1 seat)

Total Seats: 100

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

109th Congress (2005-2007)

Majority Party: Republican (55 seats)

Minority Party: Democrat (44 seats)

Other Parties: Independent (1 seat)

Total Seats: 100

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

110th Congress (2007-2009)

Majority Party: Democrat (49 seats)

Minority Party: Republican (49 seats)

Other Parties: 1Independent; 1 Independent Democrat

Total Seats: 100

[willum14pb]

do you actually believe the sh!t you post

im' not talking about seats... everything i post goes right over your head. You don't take the time to actually read and asses. You're so quick to jump to defend the democrats that you don't take the time to actually make an opinion. I bet you didn't even watch the video. IF YOU DID IN FACT WATCH IT, the proof is irrefutable. Dem's are the reason for the housing bubble and subsequent meltdown 110% percent.

[4dmin]

im' not talking about seats... everything i post goes right over your head. You don't take the time to actually read and asses. You're so quick to jump to defend the democrats that you don't take the time to actually make an opinion. I bet you didn't even watch the video. IF YOU DID IN FACT WATCH IT, the proof is irrefutable. Dem's are the reason for the housing bubble and subsequent meltdown 110% percent.

no difference between you and i... i posted the FACTS you post bias propaganda w/o seeing it took both parties to get us into this mess. obviously the english language isn't your strong point either b/c when you say the dems controlled both house/senate since 2002... that means they held the MAJORITY. that is untrue.

nice try though.

[willum14pb]

no difference between you and i... i posted the FACTS you post bias propaganda w/o seeing it took both parties to get us into this mess. obviously the english language isn't your strong point either b/c when you say the dems controlled both house/senate since 2002... that means they held the MAJORITY. that is untrue.

nice try though.

actually, the only facts you posted were what seats were held by dems and republicans. i said nothing about seats. you, again, obviously do not get what i'm saying. It did not take both parties to get involved in this mess. The INCEPTION of this bill was a GOOD IDEA ( this was the only part the rep's had their hand in). THEN the clinton administration and the democrats proposed changes to the bill that is in place in which has failed our economy. IF YOU WATCH THE VIDEO YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THIS. In 03 and 05 the republican party, namely the bush administration TRIED TO FIX THESE OBVIOUS PROBLEMS, but the democrats would not come to terms with anything. THUS, putting us in our epidimic. Look past the "oh well dem's have 48 seats and rep's 52, so they obviously had control!" Look at the votes, and what was voted on, and who would meet with who on certain issues that actually got us where we are today. Don't be so narrow minded. You obviously have done ZERO research other than what's plain to see. YOU are the type of american that refuses to look past anything and dig for truth, you are ignorant in this subject. CLEARLY.

[tony]

do you actually believe the sh!t you post

Didnt you know? Youtube trumps documented facts every single time.

[willum14pb]

Didnt you know? Youtube trumps documented facts every single time.

dont talk before watching the video. There is factual evidence INSIDE THE YOUTUBE VIDEO (mystical, i know). from documents and you can research the entire video for it's 100% truth IF YOU'D LIKE. i already took my time and it is in fact 100% correct. Now, please, before you and admin have a circle jerk about how great democrats are, watch the video.

[tony]

lol The repubs seem to be real tense today for some odd reason... wonder why.

[4dmin]

bush administration TRIED TO FIX THESE OBVIOUS PROBLEMS, but the democrats would not come to terms with anything. THUS, putting us in our epidimic. Look past the "oh well dem's have 48 seats and rep's 52, so they obviously had control!" Look at the votes, and what was voted on, and who would meet with who on certain issues that actually got us where we are today. Don't be so narrow minded. You obviously have done ZERO research other than what's plain to see. YOU are the type of american that refuses to look past anything and dig for truth, you are ignorant in this subject. CLEARLY.

ya i'm clearly ignorant... the bolded statement says it all about your CLEARLY SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE on how govt works.

i'll break it down w/ our current situation.... example:

bush wants to bailout failing companies he wants to put all power in 1 man's hands to control funding of the bailout. there are no provisions in this original plan. dems say sorry but lots of factors need to be added for this to work: oversight dealing out the money and limitations on earnings of execs we are bailing out.

so perfect working example of how things work... two different points of views on how policy should be written. your take is b/c dems disagree they are at fault for not fixing but fail to see when you make policies opposition comes from both sides.

do you honestly think people should just say yes to every bit of policy rep throw out?

[willum14pb]

absolutely ridiculous. I can hold your hand and read it to you in chapter and verse and you still don't get it. facts plainly, in front of you, irrefutable, and you still fail to realize anything.

[4dmin]

absolutely ridiculous. I can hold your hand and read it to you in chapter and verse and you still don't get it. facts plainly, in front of you, irrefutable, and you still fail to realize anything.

you didn't answer my question. but how about you post the policy bush tried to get support for that didn't make it. not your take on it but the actual policy itself so we can see what was so good about this deal that dems wouldnt support it.

[willum14pb]

you didn't answer my question. but how about you post the policy bush tried to get support for that didn't make it. not your take on it but the actual policy itself so we can see what was so good about this deal that dems wouldnt support it.

how about, instead of being narrow minded you watch the video. THEN you can actually do some research on the bill, in which the name is disclosed in the video. So i KNOW you didn't watch it. Bush proposed one in 03 and then Mccain co-sponsored one in 05. Instead of just talking like you know everything, watch the video, research it's truth, entirely, then come back with a response. All sources are stated IN THE VIDEO and he gladly puts them in simple plain english for lazy people who don't actually care to make their own assessment.

[4dmin]

how about, instead of being narrow minded you watch the video. THEN you can actually do some research on the bill, in which the name is disclosed in the video. So i KNOW you didn't watch it. Bush proposed one in 03 and then Mccain co-sponsored one in 05. Instead of just talking like you know everything, watch the video, research it's truth, entirely, then come back with a response. All sources are stated IN THE VIDEO and he gladly puts them in simple plain english for lazy people who don't actually care to make their own assessment.

well since you know the bill so well post it up and we'll pick it a part... b/c i'm sure thats why it never made it to begin with. you are trying to act like you know what you are talking about b/c you watched a 9 min youtube vid... i did start watching your vid but couldn't make it past first 3 before i was bored to tears. i would much rather read the proposal bush had

by your example i guess everyones an expert since they can youtube political vids... i guess if i get out my iphone and start surfing i can be an expert like you.

[Big J]

greed on everyone's part was the cause of all of it, plain and simple. Wall street and banks thought it was easy money, people wanted more house than they could afford, everyone wanted a slice, and the whole thing went to ****.

[4dmin]

ok i sat through your entire mccain supporter vid... here we go:

bush proposal in 2003 did have opposition from:

Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

now lets think who had majority in 2003 ...

108th Congress (2003-2005)
Majority Party: Republican (51 seats)
Minority Party: Democrat (48 seats)
Other Parties: Independent (1 seat)
Total Seats: 100

so this was still the dems fault or lack of support even within their own party. this is why reps have lost their majority b/c they COULDN'T GET THE JOB DONE. its simple - i'm not debating it was right/wrong i'm debating you need to point the finger inward if you are reps b/c they didn't help the matter.

and your mccain proposal http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-190 didn't even make it to debate and you are blaming that on Dems. also either this bill or another tried to do away w/ lobbying on this matter as well yet...

But McCain's own campaign staffers are those special interests, a fact that casts doubt on both McCain's hiring judgment and his ability to pursue tough reforms of Fannie and Freddie.

Aquiles Suarez, listed as an economic adviser to the McCain campaign in a July 2007 McCain press release, was formerly the director of government and industry relations for Fannie Mae. The Senate Lobbying Database says Suarez oversaw the lending giant's $47,510,000 lobbying campaign from 2003 to 2006.

point fingers all you want both are at fault.

[willum14pb]

OK ADMIN, Got it. I'll answer as though I was speaking to the a directly:

Originally Posted by Liberal
both are at fault you can not deny it.

How's that? The extent of the Republican blame was to whatever degree they voted like liberals - and there are some who do so. Did any Republican receive a sweetheart mortgage loan, or was it all Dems? I honestly do not know that. I know this: it was nearly entirely (if not fully entirely) Dems who were pushing for "low income housing mortgages", particularly Carter, Clinton, Frank, Dodd, and Obama - just as the video explains.

This is an excellent (and horrible) example of liberals abusing the power of government to socially engineer an outcome they desire, while simultaneously having no understanding whatsoever of the nature of economics. In this case, they created an artificially permissive market, ensuring a huge supply of unqualified buyers. The demand for homes, therefore, spiked huge. When that happens, the prices of homes absolutely skyrockets, creating this massive bubble. These same people used the artificially created equity to buy other assets on credit, compounding the problem.

Misguided liberal intentions screws markets each and every time they are given a chance to social engineer outcomes. Nearly no liberal has any understanding of the fundamental nature of the economy, nor how human nature is best checked by it with little government intervention save to punish illegal behaviour.

[/quote]
dems/reps all have a hand in making policy.
[/quote]
Massive generalization. This policy was engineered by democrats.

our houses are too split to say one had more a hand then the other.

You're trying to make this is red/blue issue. It isn't. It's a liberal intrusive social engineering versus free market conservative issue - regardless of what party each player claims to be a part. I know of no conservative who voted for these artificially created mandates.

end of clintons administration was going into a down turn and bush has failed to work w/ dems to strengthen our economy since day one. he has been far to worried about iraq.

He got a tax cut passed. That was all he could do. What else would you have had him do? Dems weren't willing to cut taxes any more, and that's one of the only things which would have helped. Cutting spending also would have helped, and he should have done so. Bush is a tax and spend moderate, and he played into the leftist's hands far too often - likely because he wanted adequate funding for the War in Iraq. The latter I agree with, but how he went about it, and what other spending he allowed is something with which I disagreed.

well since you know the bill so well post it up and we'll pick it a part...

Which bill? The initial proclamations skewing the market for mortgages, or the bill meant to reverse the damage? The latter has already been posted. If you think you can pick something apart, you should post it yourself.

b/c i'm sure thats why it never made it to begin with.

You're the one claiming proper conclusions without even knowing the facts, not I. You sound like you've drawn a conclusion in search of facts. You should do it the other way. Don't be close-minded: this is about a stupid liberal socialist policy which has caused tremendous harm to our economic well-being.

you are trying to act like you know what you are talking about b/c you watched a 9 min youtube vid...

That's interesting, considering I posted the exact same thoughts contained in this video 1-2 weeks ago, and continued to do so. This video is simply a very powerful conflagration of exactly what I've been saying. So, to turn it back on you, you're trying to claim I don't know what I'm talking about because of a 9 minute video. That isn't a rebuttal; it's a complaint - and a baseless one at that. Refute the content, or choose to agree with it, and change your mind. Any other choice is simply evidence of your partisanship at all cost.

i did start watching your vid but couldn't make it past first 3 before i was bored to tears.

That was a not a boring video. That was you sticking your fingers in your ears, because it was packed full of facts which are very uncomfortable for the hard leftist.

i would much rather read the proposal bush had

So go read it! What's stopping you?

by your example i guess everyones an expert since they can youtube political vids... i guess if i get out my iphone and start surfing i can be an expert like you.

typical response from someone who really has nothing better to say, and refuses to look at the facts inside the video.

The bottom line is any such comment is an attempt to deflect from the content, and is an ad hominem. A very weak one at that.

but how about you post the policy bush tried to get support for that didn't make it.

H.R.1461

not your take on it but the actual policy itself so we can see what was so good about this deal that dems wouldnt support it.

The Dems didn't want F&F to have their gravy train interrupted, and they had sweetheart mortgage deals as bribed insurance. They believed in their social engineering, and were too stupid to understand that you cannot manipulate the markets in that way and not pay a very steep price. It may turn out that the more insipid leftists - the strident socialist ones - knew the eventual outcome of this, and knew that the massive government bailout that would be needed would simply consolidate Government intrusion into a key segment of the private sector.

Just listen to what the Dems are saying now: they're pushing that this bailout also includes allowing the Government to hold assets of private companies "so that the people can profit from this investment when these companies recover".



You're seeing the Socialists push for Communism, and State owned assets. The government has no business owning businesses.

[4dmin]

typical response from someone who really has nothing better to say, and refuses to look at the facts inside the video.

i watched your vid and the facts you try to say "dems are at fault for economy crisis" is pure bias BS. your vid was a mccain supporter ad so you have to take is as 1/2 truth to begin with.

you can point all of the fingers you want for bush/mccain not getting their bills passed but you need to look no further then their own party. reps had majority during this time and bush's approval was at its highest.

i've already given you FACTS on majority + the actual bills your vid try to support; one didn't even make it to debate. you can dismiss all you want both parties are at fault and mccains bill contradicts the poeple he hires (obama has ties to people at fault too).

[SUBY_RUE]

The dems destroyed alot of things in the past years for self benefit, it's just now that it is catching up with us now that a rep is in office. SO Who do the people blame? the rep.... becouse it's the easy thing to do..... F*** the dems F*** obama.

[tony]

One of the biggest so-called "socialists" presided over the greatest economic failure this country has ever seen and the country recovered under the policies he set forth.

Just because a policy benefits the good of the people and not corporate welfare and/or the wealthy doesn't automatically make it socialist. I think thats where a lot of this "socialist" finger pointing fails.

[alpine_aw11]

greed on everyone's part was the cause of all of it, plain and simple. Wall street and banks thought it was easy money, people wanted more house than they could afford, everyone wanted a slice, and the whole thing went to ****.

THANK YOU. This is what needs to be touched on instead of this blaming parties bs. The government has nothing to do with people being stupid, plain and simple. If American citizens would stop acting like they can afford anything they want without making the money to support it, situations like our economy is currently in wouldn't happen. CEO's of big business are going to capitalize on dumb average joes, that's just the nature of big business. Maybe if the people getting these loans would've planned ahead, we wouldn't be in this ****hole.

[BanginJimmy]

Just because a policy benefits the good of the people and not corporate welfare and/or the wealthy doesn't automatically make it socialist. I think thats where a lot of this "socialist" finger pointing fails.

If you are talking about CRA, that was a BS bill that allowed govt to intrude on private baking. There was no reason for the act and Clinton did make it worse.

The biggest problem in our country right now is democrat and republican. Both sides of the aisle are far too partisan and refuse to work with the other. There are a few that do work across the aise (Leiberman, McCain ect.), but they are in a vast minority.

That fact is one of the reasons I support McCain over Obama.

[BanginJimmy]

Admin, Why do you only post the Senate ranks? Why not the House ones? They do about match the Senate in those periods, but the House must start all fiscal bills so they must be passed there beforehand.


Also, I dont put much stock in voting records unless I actually read the bill, and I must admit, I dont understand alot of what a bill is saying. So many bills are loaded down with random earmarks that have nothing to do with original purpose of the bill that voting 'NO' on an otherwise good bill is sometimes necessary.

[4dmin]

Admin, Why do you only post the Senate ranks? Why not the House ones? They do about match the Senate in those periods, but the House must start all fiscal bills so they must be passed there beforehand.


Also, I dont put much stock in voting records unless I actually read the bill, and I must admit, I dont understand alot of what a bill is saying. So many bills are loaded down with random earmarks that have nothing to do with original purpose of the bill that voting 'NO' on an otherwise good bill is sometimes necessary.

it doesn't matter which ones i posted b/c obviously the fact that reps were majority doesn't seem to matter when it comes to making policy

i agree w/ you it is issue of 2 partys not working together.

[JConner]

ha i was about to post this same video. It shows clear evidence that Barack Obama profited and gained popularity by granting loans to the poor people and McCain made efforts to prevent this from happening. Of course the media is not going to show this video so we have to pass it around.

[Deke]

ha i was about to post this same video. It shows clear evidence that Barack Obama profited and gained popularity by granting loans to the poor people and McCain made efforts to prevent this from happening. Of course the media is not going to show this video so we have to pass it around.

Man, it's just like the 9/11 conspiracy videos. I can't believe the media never seriously addressed those videos. I mean it looks like someone really put the time and research into making it and they lay out the facts right in front of you. How could anyone not believe it?








[/sarcasm]

I'm not saying there isn't truth to the video. I'm saying that there is always more to the story than an obviously biased telling will give you. Someone could write an absolutely scathing biography of Thomas Jefferson based on his slave ownership. It doesn't mean he wasn't an integral part of the founding of the United States (and no I'm not trying compare Obama to Jefferson).

I'm just saying that claiming a youtube video with a clear agenda (or any source of biased media) as an irrefutable truth is simply close minded and ignorant.

[4dmin]

Man, it's just like the 9/11 conspiracy videos. I can't believe the media never seriously addressed those videos. I mean it looks like someone really put the time and research into making it and they lay out the facts right in front of you. How could anyone not believe it?








[/sarcasm]

I'm not saying there isn't truth to the video. I'm saying that there is always more to the story than an obviously biased telling will give you. Someone could write an absolutely scathing biography of Thomas Jefferson based on his slave ownership. It doesn't mean he wasn't an integral part of the founding of the United States (and no I'm not trying compare Obama to Jefferson).

I'm just saying that claiming a youtube video with a clear agenda (or any source of biased media) as an irrefutable truth is simply close minded and ignorant.

good post

THIS THREAD WAS MICHAEL MOORE APPROVED!

[willum14pb]

What i wanna know is.. why was this video removed? LOL. i find that extremely "coincidental".



by the way i hope you guys watched hannity and colmes where they proved the exact same thing this video was saying and had a nice discussion on it. LOL.

[1SICKLEX]

How the fock is it the Dems? Its both parties, LED BY OUR PRESIDENT. Bush's fiscal policy is as sound as leaving R.Kelly with 14 year olds after he's drank 2 gallons of bottled water.

Open your damn eyes. Listen to this 1 hr podcast while you browse, it explains how this happened.

If you want to blame the dems, blame them for taking part in not regulating and watching this crap happen.

http://audio.thisamericanlife.org/pl...ustomproxy.php

[1SICKLEX]

ok i sat through your entire mccain supporter vid... here we go:

bush proposal in 2003 did have opposition from:



now lets think who had majority in 2003 ...



so this was still the dems fault or lack of support even within their own party. this is why reps have lost their majority b/c they COULDN'T GET THE JOB DONE. its simple - i'm not debating it was right/wrong i'm debating you need to point the finger inward if you are reps b/c they didn't help the matter.

and your mccain proposal http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-190 didn't even make it to debate and you are blaming that on Dems. also either this bill or another tried to do away w/ lobbying on this matter as well yet...



point fingers all you want both are at fault.

To sum it up, Dems can't do **** with 1 more vote. They need a 60-40 split to win.

People saying the Dems control the house need to read up on how our system of checks and balances work.