Newt or Mitt VS Obama. Can either of 'em beat him?

[BC]

Around 15 % of the population of most industrialized nations are considered 'poor'.. this counts for the USA as well.  The overall figures are pretty steady across decades.  In absolute numbers, sure the numbers have risen but so has the population.

It will never go down to zero, so accept the baseline for being what it is.  It is not an exception.

But yes, these citizens are a part of the democratic process and have equal power to vote.  If a political party wants to embrace them, fine.. If a party wants to ignore them also fine.  Romney could have done better, much better even with 'off the cuff' talk among his 'friends'.

Quibbling over nothing is neither productive nor does it help resolve anything.  Poverty is simply is what it is for a number of factors.

I do hope though that healthcare coverage will help reduce the number of medical bankruptcies that may force some rather normal folks into poverty and hardship.

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-06-05/health/bankruptcy.medical.bills_1_medical-bills-bankruptcies-health-insurance?_s=PM:HEALTH

[Misha]

more of the cockroaches poor folks to move in. 

Sorry GOB, but equating the poor with cockroaches even in jest is a bit much IMHO. When I see a poor homeless person, I don't think less-than-human, but rather there but for the grace of God go I. The worst excesses and depravities of humanity have been justified when fellow humans were portrayed as "insects" or less than human.

[GoodOlBoy]

Sorry GOB, but equating the poor with cockroaches even in jest is a bit much IMHO.

I was actually referring to the "other" well known inhabitants of Section 8 houses:
 
The woman renting the house told police she had 12 children and also grandchildren in the home......."The house is dirty and the carpets are extremely nasty," a Broward Sheriff's Office report states. "There is hardly any food in the fridge … Out of the seven bedrooms only four of them have mattresses in them. Some children sleep on the couches in the living room and some sleep with their older siblings in the same bed.".......... Inspection records show the kitchen sink fell through the countertop, the home became infested with roaches, and the carpets needed cleaning. The tenant moved out.
 
GOB

[GQBlues]

...
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2012-09-13/news/fl-high-hud-rentals-20120907_1_judith-aigen-white-neighbors-neighborhoods/2

Unbelievable! In the article...

..The woman renting the house told police she had 12 children and also grandchildren in the home....

What's the cost of food voucher per child? $2-300 bucks? Multiplied by 12? Then...

...In Miramar, the government is paying Christian Mateo $2,250 a month to accommodate a family of eight living in his five-bedroom home with pool. The family pays nothing....

...and these guys don't pay taxes and will likely get tax refunds under the EIC....

These are the poor folks of America! Yipee! Go Obama!...and they don't even have to speak English!

[GoodOlBoy]

...and they don't even have to speak English!

Si Senor! 
 
GOB

PS.... The final insult to the neighborhood homeowners GQ: Property values goes down, the crime rate goes up, blah, blah, blah.

Like I said, "Only in America!"

[GQBlues]

...
PS.... The final insult to the neighborhood homeowners GQ: Property values goes down, the crime rate goes up, blah, blah, blah....

Nope. It doesn't stop there GOB. When that happens, the city gets strapped for cash/revenue, which affects the public sector union, then they go on strike and next thing you know - the city/county/state goes broke and bankrupt! etcetera - que sera!

Yipee! Go Obama..Hooray for the 47%

[GoodOlBoy]

....... the city gets strapped for cash/revenue, which affects the public sector union, then they go on strike and next thing you know - the city/county/state goes broke and bankrupt!.....

Is this the point in the bedtime story when a daring and brave man comes along offering "hope-n-change" and becomes President of the GoodOl' USA?
 
GOB

[GoodOlBoy]

BTW.... GOB and his wife will be carrying on the way to cast their vote November 6th.
 
Just in case:


 

 
GOB

[Misha]

I was actually referring to the "other" well known inhabitants of Section 8 houses:


...

In that case you were missing an "and" as it should have been "cockroaches and poor folks" though one could argue as to whether all poor folks are associated with cockroach infestations 

[GQBlues]

No, I feel it is a story not meant for news, just solely to soil the republican candidate that has no place at all in the current news cycle. We have Americans dying and embassies being fire bombed and defaced. We have a president with a propaganda machine generating tweets to twits to cover for his ineptitude in hopes of winning another election all else be dammed and lapdogs getting as much of it just as fast as they can. If you are perpetuating it, you are the problem. If you were insulted from my statement, the shoe must fit. More kool-aid?

 Not only are we being kept in the dark about what really happened to the warning received by the state department about the planned attack against the consulate office, we now apparently are being told that Eric Holder, and everyone else in this administration, is absolved of ANY knowledge to the stalled case of ‘Fast & Furious’ that ultimately ended in the death of a border patrol guard.
 
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/19/13966068-investigation-finds-no-evidence-ag-eric-holder-knew-of-fast-and-furious-gun-running-sting?lite&ocid=msnhp
 
Who the heck ordered this covert operation then? George Bush?
 
Moreover, the result of Ted Stevens case, the late Alaskan Senator who was unjustly ‘framed’ by the judicial prosecutors back in 2008 removing him from the senatorial balloting during the election thereby eliminating any chance of a filibuster in the Senate (Stevens would have represented that ‘lone’ Republican to offset the majority Senate seating); found the prosecuting team who withheld evidence to prove Stevens’ innocence are absolved of obstruction of justice and perjury or any other 'criminal misconduct. The plan was executed without any legal consequences for the frame-up and the Democrats got their majority seats on both houses.
 
 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/crime-scene/post/systematic-concealment-of-key-evidence-in-ted-stevens-investigation-report/2012/03/15/gIQAZy83DS_blog.html
 
…if these aren’t enough….there’s still no word on why there’s a Congressional block and stalling to the investigation of a white house leak of sensitive security information to the media..
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/02/us/national-security-leaks-lead-to-fbi-hunt-and-news-chill.html?pagewanted=all


Yipee! Go Obama!

 

[oldernotwiser]

No, I feel it is a story not meant for news, just solely to soil the republican candidate that has no place at all in the current news cycle. We have Americans dying and embassies being fire bombed and defaced. We have a president with a propaganda machine generating tweets to twits to cover for his ineptitude in hopes of winning another election all else be dammed and lapdogs getting as much of it just as fast as they can. If you are perpetuating it, you are the problem. If you were insulted from my statement, the shoe must fit. More kool-aid?

It is to bad then you don't control the media.  Perhaps then you could determine what stories are news.  You could also then practice this technique of attempting to smear both the messenger and the vehicle used to present the message when any message was out there that you did not agree with. 


Right now I don't believe Romney can defeat Obama, can he make a comeback, maybe.  To me, he is just the wrong candidate for the republican party.  An issue that could favor the Republican party is Tax reform, however Romney will have difficulty selling that, he won't show his taxes. 


Foreign Policy, he hardly mentioned anything at the convention.  The few times he has done anything dealing with foreign policy he has stuck his foot in his mouth.


Balancing the budget, fiscal restraint, could be another Republican area of strength.  What is the plan, he sure isn't going to cut defense, he isn't going to raise revenue in taxes, he wants to decrease that.  The math doesn't work, there is only so much he can cut from the remaining programs.


He has little if any chance of winning, I could be wrong, but that is my feeling at this time.

[GoodOlBoy]

Right now I don't believe Romney can defeat Obama, can he make a comeback, maybe.

 
I happen to agree with you ONW.
There are to many people on the dole who don't want to give up all of their "freebies".
 

To me, he is just the wrong candidate for the republican party. 

Again, I agree with you.
The Republicans should have never nominated a Mormon.
On the other hand, African Americans have no problems with a Muslim (Obama) in the White House.
After all, they loved Muhammad Ali, correct?
 
My wife is very disappointed in the choices for president.
To bad since this is the first presidential election she can legally vote in. 
 
She came from a collapsed country where all the stuff was free and she knows how that worked out for the U.S.S.R. 
So Obama is definitely off her Christmas list.
 
Romney..... she doesn't trust him either.
 
I asked Marina who she would like to vote for.
Strangely, she said Ronald Reagan?!?!
 
Of course she knows he is dead, but she says that he was a strong leader (real man) and she still respects him.
 
GOB

[GQBlues]

...
Right now I don't believe Romney can defeat Obama, can he make a comeback, maybe.  To me, he is just the wrong candidate for the republican party.  An issue that could favor the Republican party is Tax reform, however Romney will have difficulty selling that, he won't show his taxes.

Like GOB, I agree on all counts. Especially GOB's assertion, which i mentioned in this thread over a month ago that there's just too many Peggy Josephs, Henrietta Hughes, and Senor/Senora El Libre Dinero. Me vote for Ubama.

Foreign Policy, he hardly mentioned anything at the convention.  The few times he has done anything dealing with foreign policy he has stuck his foot in his mouth.

In light of his recent knee jerk reaction, despite the state department echoing his sentiment, in this latest event, he doesn't seem too comfortable dealing with this type of crisis.

Balancing the budget, fiscal restraint, could be another Republican area of strength.  What is the plan, he sure isn't going to cut defense, he isn't going to raise revenue in taxes, he wants to decrease that.  The math doesn't work,..

Agree.

...there is only so much he can cut from the remaining programs.

Disagree. He can certainly cut a huge slot from the welfare system by reforming it in the manner Clinton did. Take away ALL entitlements for illegal immigrants, severely punish all employers who employ and/or hire illegal aliens (except owners of Spearmint Rhinos and the like - who employ a huge number of young and pretty devushkayas Russian students), and abolish the public sector Union and quit financing private sector union's benefit and pension plans...but we all know there's a better chance of Jesus descending down from the heavens before any of those ever happens.

...He has little if any chance of winning, I could be wrong, but that is my feeling at this time.

Yes. 2 chances. Slim and none. Leaning more on the latter.

...My wife is very disappointed in the choices for president. To bad since this is the first presidential election she can legally vote in...

Same here GOB. My wife have seen and strongly object to the way and manner so many of our freeloaders residents and citizens alike take advantage of the systemas much as they can then have the audacity to demand even more -AND- to add insult to injury, wave their country's silly flag (other than the one that's actually *caring* for them) every chance they get.

Yipee! Go Obama! 4 more years! heck...make that forever please!

[Faux Pas]

It is to bad then you don't control the media.  Perhaps then you could determine what stories are news.  You could also then practice this technique of attempting to smear both the messenger and the vehicle used to present the message when any message was out there that you did not agree with. 


Right now I don't believe Romney can defeat Obama, can he make a comeback, maybe.  To me, he is just the wrong candidate for the republican party.  An issue that could favor the Republican party is Tax reform, however Romney will have difficulty selling that, he won't show his taxes. 


Foreign Policy, he hardly mentioned anything at the convention.  The few times he has done anything dealing with foreign policy he has stuck his foot in his mouth.


Balancing the budget, fiscal restraint, could be another Republican area of strength.  What is the plan, he sure isn't going to cut defense, he isn't going to raise revenue in taxes, he wants to decrease that.  The math doesn't work, there is only so much he can cut from the remaining programs.


He has little if any chance of winning, I could be wrong, but that is my feeling at this time.

More deflection and red herring. My post and your response to that post has nothing to do with who's qualified to be president and whom can defeat whom or why. I personally don't give one rats fat ass who you vote for president. I am not a Romney supporter although I will vote for Romney in an attempt to keep the current idiot from further occupying the office of president. I don't care what you think of Romney or Obama. Are we clear on that?

If you wish to continue this discourse please, bring something of substance and intelligent to the discussion rather than building a strawman for you to attack? Look back, my point is to do with the attacks on our embassy and the murder of our citizens. It is about our president's complete dismissal of these attacks and his apologies to the murderers. You do realize attacking our embassy and murdering our Ambassador, soldiers and citizens is attacking our country? Furthermore, where we are to date in this situation. Our president and his election machine rather than taking swift action on the murderers, saving our embassies and saving more American lives is choosing to point fingers at his opponent in the up coming election to hide and disguise his own ineptness and complete and total failure as president with disinformation and bright shiny things for his sheeple to follow.

Then there is you, who chooses to repeat that disinformation while apparently, totally oblivious as to why it is there. Your lack of concern for the real issue and your vigor to denigrate the republican because Obama's disinformation machine has made it fashionable to do so on twitter should be all the reason you need to stop and check yourself as an American. Mark my words, this latest Arab/muslim/jihadist uprising is just beginning and many more Americans will die as a result. Largely, due to the fact that Obama has no interest in being president as he does being a candidate.

[GQBlues]

More deflection and red herring. My post and your response to that post has nothing to do with who's qualified to be president and whom can defeat whom or why. I personally don't give one rats fat ass who you vote for president. I am not a Romney supporter although I will vote for Romney in an attempt to keep the current idiot from further occupying the office of president. I don't care what you think of Romney or Obama. Are we clear on that?

If you wish to continue this discourse please, bring something of substance and intelligent to the discussion rather than building a strawman for you to attack? Look back, my point is to do with the attacks on our embassy and the murder of our citizens. It is about our president's complete dismissal of these attacks and his apologies to the murderers. You do realize attacking our embassy and murdering our Ambassador, soldiers and citizens is attacking our country? Furthermore, where we are to date in this situation. Our president and his election machine rather than taking swift action on the murderers, saving our embassies and saving more American lives is choosing to point fingers at his opponent in the up coming election to hide and disguise his own ineptness and complete and total failure as president with disinformation and bright shiny things for his sheeple to follow.

Then there is you, who chooses to repeat that disinformation while apparently, totally oblivious as to why it is there. Your lack of concern for the real issue and your vigor to denigrate the republican because Obama's disinformation machine has made it fashionable to do so on twitter should be all the reason you need to stop and check yourself as an American. Mark my words, this latest Arab/muslim/jihadist uprising is just beginning and many more Americans will die as a result. Largely, due to the fact that Obama has no interest in being president as he does being a candidate.

Great post, FP! I strongly share your conviction. I, too will still make it to the poll along with wifey - still hopeful. BUT, as I've said before - too much Kool-aid flowing. The media machine had been churning and the Jonestown sheeples are all falling right in line..

[Eduard]

I sent my wife's voter application to supervisor of elections on Monday. She will be voting this time. A thought of what this country is going to look like in a couple of years if BHO wins really is depressing.

[BillyB]

Read it any way you want.  Bottom line is that many of those that participated could not find or were not interested in replacement cars made in USA that qualified.  Why is that? 
 The 'boost' was across the board so Obama's intent was fulfilled.  Hopefully it was a shot across the bow for US companies to think more about cars people do want to buy and can afford.

You seem happy with Obama's program and think Americans don't want American cars. If Obama did things the Japanese way to boost economy within, I would be saying American's don't want Japanese cars.
http://economyincrisis.org/content/japans-cash-clunkers-program-excludes-us-cars
 

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/18/business/la-fi-china-solar-dumping-20120518

You are satisfied with the action Obama has taken? It's too little, too late. End result is Obama couldn't save American businesses and wasted tax payers money on companies that produced product that people didn't buy.
 

The bold emphasis was to bring to your attention that raising the percentage was in Bush's term so you can wag your finger accordingly and not just one party.  Other than that referring you to a decent compilation of events and environment that produced the crisis.
 

BC, the program was started in Clinton's term. The program continued to raise it's target of getting poor into homes in Bush's term. The way it was done alarmed Bush and he called for an investigation yet you keep implying he was in on this self destructing program. He's for the poor moving up in the world and getting into homes. Isn't everybody? Only the means and methods to do so should be in question and Bush did not agree with Clinton's program so he called for an investigation and was met with a lot of resistance.
 

Were the changes in laws not a part of deregulation?.. letting the industry monitor and control itself?  Certainly the law did not tell lenders to act irresponsibly.
 

Laws tell no one to act irresponsibly but laws can be created to where it's easily abused to achieve the desired affect.  Think about it. How do you get the poor to buy houses when they make little money or have no job? The only way to achieve the target of getting a large percentage of poor into homes is to allow them to lie on applications or have the lenders educate and encourage them to lie. HUD has a target and tells the lenders to meet that target. They can figure it out how to do it.
 

Their sentiments will be shown at the polls.  That should settle your doubts.
 

Obama has a good chance at winning. If Obama could run for a 3rd term, he would have a good chance at winning again even with an economy that's struggling. Many who voted for Obama 4 years ago pointed to the economy as the reason Obama should be elected. I doubt they believe or even care about Obama's economic policies because it's evident that he can be elected in a bad economy with high unemployment. Even you seem satisfied and happy with what Obama has done for the economy. Japan has a superior cash for clunkers program to improve their economy and we have a President that can't do better. Think about it. We can do better.

[GQBlues]

...
BC, the program was started in Clinton's term. The program continued to raise it's target of getting poor into homes in Bush's term. The way it was done alarmed Bush and he called for an investigation yet you keep implying he was in on this self destructing program. He's for the poor moving up in the world and getting into homes. Isn't everybody? Only the means and methods to do so should be in question and Bush did not agree with Clinton's program so he called for an investigation and was met with a lot of resistance. ..

LOL BillyB, you're wasting your time. despite the realistic, factual information like this:

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/10/20081009-10.html

Over the   past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the   systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful   plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter   such difficulties.  In fact, it was Congress that flatly   rejected President Bush's call more than five years ago to reform the GSEs.  Over the years, the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of   these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who   emphatically denied there were problems with the   GSEs.
2001
 

• April: The   Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem,"   because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in   financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."    (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)

2002
 

• May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles   contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply   to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  (OMB Prompt   Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003
 

• February: The Office of Federal Housing   Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that   unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. 
• September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies   before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact   "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the   financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises"   and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy   requirements.
• September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking   Member Barney Frank   (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment,   saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more   pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of   affordable housing."  (Stephen Labaton, "New   Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New   York Times, 9/11/03)   
• October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to   acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix   it."  (Sen. Carper, Hearing of   Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs,   10/16/03)
• November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that   any "legislation to reform GSE   regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and   credibility to reduce systemic risk."  To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based   and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down   the affairs of a troubled GSE."  (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank   Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004
 

• February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by   the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and   calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator:  "The Administration has   determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack   sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator."  (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
• February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress   to "not take [the   financial market's] strength for granted."  Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator."    (N. Gregory   Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
• April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing   the Administration of creating an "artificial issue."  At a speech to the   Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their   mortgages.  I don't think we are in any remote danger here.  This focus on   receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there."    ("Frank: GSE   Failure A Phony Issue," American   Banker, 4/21/04)
• June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a   world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored   enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system   that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term   vitality of that system.  Therefore, the Administration has called for a new,   first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs:  Fannie Mae,   Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System."  (Samuel   Bodman, House Financial Services   Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony,   6/16/04)

2005
 

• April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this   Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs   and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing   finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding   homeownership opportunities in America …   Half-measures will only   exacerbate the risks to our financial system."    (Secretary   John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services   Committee," 4/13/05)
• July:   Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass   legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm   our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New   Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press   International, 7/28/05)

2007
 

• August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first   things first when it comes to those two institutions.  Congress needs to get   them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider   other options."  (President George W. Bush,   Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)
• August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs   Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls   on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position.    (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York   Times, 8/11/07)
• December: President Bush again warns Congress of the   need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide   liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is   vital they operate safely and operate soundly.  So I've called on Congress to   pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and   ensures they focus on their important housing mission.  The GSE reform bill   passed by the House earlier this year is a good start.  But the Senate has not acted.  And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon."    (President George W. Bush,   Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)

2008
 

• February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the   housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their   public mission successfully."  (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And   Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
• March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with   reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  They need to continue to modernize the   FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to   homeowners to refinance their mortgages."  (President   George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New   York, NY, 3/14/08)
• April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the   much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  [There are]   constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to   correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes."  (President George W. Bush,   Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
• May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the   situation deteriorates further. 
• • "Americans are concerned about making their   mortgage payments and keeping their homes.  Yet Congress has failed to pass   legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie   Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow   state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime   loans."  (President George W. Bush,   Radio Address, 5/3/08)
  • "[T]he government ought to be helping   creditworthy people stay in their homes.  And one way we can do that – and   Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie   Mac.  That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator."    (President George W. Bush,   Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House,   5/19/08)
  • "Congress needs to pass legislation to   modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac   to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans."  (President George W. Bush,   Radio Address, 5/31/08)
• June: As foreclosure   rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to   take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass   legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."  (President George W. Bush,   Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
• July: Congress heeds   the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and   Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are   failing.
• September: Democrats in   Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Dodd questions "why weren't we   doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant   steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about   where was the administration over the last eight years."  (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08)

...the Kool-Aid effect is just too darn potent, man. It's frustrating to no end, which is why methinks BC's US-based relatives are Union members, man. LOL...

[GQBlues]

Again, one 'lone' article from the NYT back in September 11, 2002 about the subject...

http://www.google.com/search?q=NYT+spet+11%2C+2002+bush+regulation+fannie+freddie+&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

....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......
.....

Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. 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.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

 

[Daveman]

...but we all know there's a better chance of Jesus descending down from the heavens before any of those ever happens.

True... but maybe a little Quantitative Loaving would increase his odds!  It'll take some kind of miracle.

[BillyB]

 
It's easier to blame Bush then, now and even in the future. Future Presidents will not be held accountable for their own policies.
 
Poor Bush. He inherited a bad economy from Clinton, he was not responsible for 9/11 and he was not responsible for the housing market collapse and the economy that came with those events yet many people blame him. Kind of makes you wonder what's going on in the head of the average voter. Every empire will decline. Is it America's time?

[Eduard]

LOL BillyB, you're wasting your time. despite the realistic, factual information like this:

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/10/20081009-10.html

Over the   past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the   systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful   plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter   such difficulties.  In fact, it was Congress that flatly   rejected President Bush's call more than five years ago to reform the GSEs.  Over the years, the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of   these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who   emphatically denied there were problems with the   GSEs.
2001
 

• April: The   Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem,"   because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in   financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."    (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)

2002
 

• May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles   contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply   to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  (OMB Prompt   Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003
 

• February: The Office of Federal Housing   Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that   unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. 
• September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies   before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact   "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the   financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises"   and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy   requirements.
• September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking   Member Barney Frank   (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment,   saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more   pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of   affordable housing."  (Stephen Labaton, "New   Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New   York Times, 9/11/03)   
• October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to   acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix   it."  (Sen. Carper, Hearing of   Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs,   10/16/03)
• November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that   any "legislation to reform GSE   regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and   credibility to reduce systemic risk."  To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based   and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down   the affairs of a troubled GSE."  (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank   Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004
 

• February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by   the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and   calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator:  "The Administration has   determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack   sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator."  (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
• February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress   to "not take [the   financial market's] strength for granted."  Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator."    (N. Gregory   Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
• April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing   the Administration of creating an "artificial issue."  At a speech to the   Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their   mortgages.  I don't think we are in any remote danger here.  This focus on   receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there."    ("Frank: GSE   Failure A Phony Issue," American   Banker, 4/21/04)
• June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a   world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored   enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system   that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term   vitality of that system.  Therefore, the Administration has called for a new,   first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs:  Fannie Mae,   Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System."  (Samuel   Bodman, House Financial Services   Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony,   6/16/04)

2005
 

• April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this   Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs   and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing   finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding   homeownership opportunities in America …   Half-measures will only   exacerbate the risks to our financial system."    (Secretary   John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services   Committee," 4/13/05)
• July:   Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass   legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm   our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New   Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press   International, 7/28/05)

2007
 

• August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first   things first when it comes to those two institutions.  Congress needs to get   them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider   other options."  (President George W. Bush,   Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)
• August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs   Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls   on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position.    (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York   Times, 8/11/07)
• December: President Bush again warns Congress of the   need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide   liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is   vital they operate safely and operate soundly.  So I've called on Congress to   pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and   ensures they focus on their important housing mission.  The GSE reform bill   passed by the House earlier this year is a good start.  But the Senate has not acted.  And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon."    (President George W. Bush,   Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)

2008
 

• February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the   housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their   public mission successfully."  (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And   Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
• March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with   reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  They need to continue to modernize the   FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to   homeowners to refinance their mortgages."  (President   George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New   York, NY, 3/14/08)
• April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the   much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  [There are]   constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to   correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes."  (President George W. Bush,   Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
• May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the   situation deteriorates further. 
• • "Americans are concerned about making their   mortgage payments and keeping their homes.  Yet Congress has failed to pass   legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie   Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow   state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime   loans."  (President George W. Bush,   Radio Address, 5/3/08)
  • "[T]he government ought to be helping   creditworthy people stay in their homes.  And one way we can do that – and   Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie   Mac.  That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator."    (President George W. Bush,   Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House,   5/19/08)
  • "Congress needs to pass legislation to   modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac   to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans."  (President George W. Bush,   Radio Address, 5/31/08)
• June: As foreclosure   rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to   take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass   legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."  (President George W. Bush,   Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
• July: Congress heeds   the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and   Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are   failing.
• September: Democrats in   Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Dodd questions "why weren't we   doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant   steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about   where was the administration over the last eight years."  (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08)

...the Kool-Aid effect is just too darn potent, man. It's frustrating to no end, which is why methinks BC's US-based relatives are Union members, man. LOL...

this proves it, it's all Bush's fault! (too bad they don't have a crying smiley). An average American wll not go through all these facts and will be guided by short tweets and sloagans like "Forward!". We are probably fuc#ed 

[I/O]

A blackfella or a Mormon? No brainer really - he's the most feeble thing USA's produced since Jimmy Carter but the blackfella's a shew in, the Mormon's hopeless.

[BC]

this proves it, it's all Bush's fault! (too bad they don't have a crying smiley). An average American wll not go through all these facts and will be guided by short tweets and sloagans like "Forward!". We are probably fuc#ed 

Eduard,

what you and others fail to recognize is that the coin of critique has two sides.

Obama is critiqued that the economy has not yet fully recovered in his first term.

'Heads' say that the 'buck stops here' therefore Obama has failed in his first term. 
Tails says that Congress is at fault for not passing legislation he desired to help boost the economy.

Bush and others obviously knew and warned of the potential problem felt to have been a part of the resulting crisis.   

'Heads' say Congress is at fault not listening to warnings and doing something to prevent the crash.
'Tails'  say that the 'buck stops here'  therefore Bush failed to prevent the financial crash in his two terms.

See the similarities in discourse? - and how deceiving and destructive it is to simply pick a side after the coin has been tossed instead of accepting the value of the whole coin regardless how it lands after being tossed?

Way up thread, I pointed out that the only true power a President has is to suggest legislation and use his veto.. a thumbs up or thumbs down.  IIRC Gator suggested upthread that Obama's failure is that he cannot work with Congress..  But is it not Bush's fault he could not do the same to help prevent or at least limit the damage in the first place?

The political system in the US has reached equilibrium, only a few percent of the population actually decide an election and a simple vote in Congress dictates most laws.  This process leaves intense dissatisfaction of a great number of people regardless what the President or Congress does.

I'd much rather see discourse here turn towards finding a solution to the fundamental problem that plagues Government.  Any takers?

[Mod2]

A blackfella or a Mormon? No brainer really - he's the most feeble thing USA's produced since Jimmy Carter but the blackfella's a shew in, the Mormon's hopeless.

This thread is about a political process.  Adding Race and Religion to the already volatile mix is not acceptable.  This post will be left as an example, the 'line in the sand'.  Future posts even remotely nearing this line will be deleted without warning.  Before reaching or crossing the line results in warnings or other actions that would affect posting privileges in other areas of the board consistent with the purpose of RWD, this thread will be closed.