Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Schnullie who wrote (173147)	12/23/2008 2:06:50 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

in its never ending effort to shed all personal responsibility, the bush administration blames clinton (and rightfully so for what clinton did) in an effort to make itself less culpable. let me be the first to say "TOTAL BLLSHT." note - they didn't contest any of facts in the article, they just claimed that it didn't bring in the deeds of a president nearly 8 year OUT OF OFFICE!" UNBELIEVABLE!!! we have elections and the bushevics had nearly eight FREAKING YEARS to fix the mess created by clinton AND SAT ON THEIR THUMBS. it was their JOB to fix any messes left over by clinton. pointing fingers is total crap and you do the nation a disservice by letting that weasel try and play this game. yes, clinton built upon reagan's foundation (appoint greenspan in the first place) and put the nation's at risk. of that, there is no doubt. the "new economy" and "productivity miracle" was a total fabrication on clinton's watch (greenspan just changed the methods for deriving the productivity numbers). but bush came in AND MADE MATTERS EVEN WORSE! and now he wants to shirk responsibility? not with me. look, i call a spade a spade. whenever anyone says clinton balanced the budget, i'm the only once cry bullsht and explaining that the debt rose every single year clinton was in office. yes, he came close, but no cigar. the only reason he came close is b/c of his bubble economic policies, anyway, so i don't even give him credit for coming close. but bush is knee freaking deep here. this is his* crash as it happened at the end of his 2nd term. he's a punk for trying to blame clinton. p-u-n-k. he ought to man up and take responsibility. won't happen. personal accountability, just like balanced budgets, are for other presidents, not this one. from th earticle in my previous post... and i highlighted this earlier... As for Mr. Bush’s banking regulators, they once brandished a chain saw over a 9,000-page pile of regulations as they promised to ease burdens on the industry. When states tried to use consumer protection laws to crack down on predatory lending, the comptroller of the currency blocked the effort, asserting that states had no authority over national banks. The administration won that fight at the Supreme Court. But Roy Cooper, North Carolina’s attorney general, said, “They took 50 sheriffs off the beat at a time when lending was becoming the Wild West.” now, tell me which democrats forced bush's administration to sue the states. i asked before and you ignored the question. or just admit the blatantly obvious truth... the democrats screwed america, but bush was right with them leading the charge...

To: Schnullie who wrote (173147)	12/23/2008 2:17:52 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 306849

busdh warned in 2005, karl rove REJECTED warning... subprimes called a "valuable service." note - montgomery, bush and rove were all in bush's republican administration... In December 2005, Mr. Montgomery drafted a memo and brought it to the White House. “I don’t think this is what the president had in mind here,” he recalled telling Ryan Streeter, then the president’s chief housing policy analyst. It was an opportunity to address the risky subprime lending practices head on. But that was never seriously discussed. More senior aides, like Karl Rove, Mr. Bush’s chief political strategist, were wary of overly regulating an industry that, Mr. Rove said in an interview, provided “a valuable service to people who could not otherwise get credit.” While he had some concerns about the industry’s practices, he said, “it did provide an opportunity for people, a lot of whom are still in their houses today.” i suppose the ghost of clinton past forced rove to do this... right? Mr. Falcon’s report outlined a worst-case situation in which Fannie and Freddie could default on debt, setting off “contagious illiquidity in the market” — in other words, a financial meltdown. He also raised red flags about the companies’ soaring use of derivatives, the complex financial instruments that economic experts now blame for spreading the housing collapse. Today, the White House cites that report — and its subsequent effort to better regulate Fannie and Freddie — as evidence that it foresaw the crisis and tried to avert it. Bush officials recently wrote up a talking points memo headlined “G.S.E.’s — We Told You So.” But the back story is more complicated. To begin with, on the day Mr. Falcon issued his report, the White House tried to fire him. i suppose his wife wasn't a cia agent so they couldn't out her, so they tried to fire him. bushevics are so transparent.