Barney Frank Confronts Woman At Town Hall Comparing Obama To Hitler (Congressmen, Iran)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
At a Barney Frank town hall meeting in Dartmouth, MA, a constituent asks, "Why are you supporting this Nazi policy?"
Frank responds: "On what planet do you spend most of your time?" He then calls her approach "vile, contemptible
nonsense." He closes by saying: "Trying to have a conversation with you would be like arguing with a dining room table."
omg, barney handled this rw nutbag head on.... She had the expression of a deer in headlights...
She was a left-wing nutbag, and Lynden LaRouche supporter. BTW, they thought Bush was Hitler too. All these people with posters describing 0bama as Hitler are turning out to be democrats, even Rep. Dingell's staff worker.
Any protestor at a funeral is disruptive and hurtful.... The cause is irrelevent.
The crap you speak of may not be hurtful to you but it is to the families. And what purpose does it serve? To be hurtful and disruptive... That is the mission.
That's not the point. The point is that you continue to refer to Westboro Baptist protesters as "anti-war" even though they aren't.
That's not the point. The point is that you continue to refer to Westboro Baptist protesters as "anti-war" even though they aren't.
I also refer to them as protestors who did exactly what the left are complaining about the right doing today. The difference is however that the left had no issue with it when it was simply protesting at the funerals of fallen soldiers.
That is what my point was... Why is it wrong today but okay then?
That's not what she said. She said it is un-American to shout down people and stop them from speaking.
It is only un-American, according to her, when someone or group is disagreeing with her. It is the height of democracy when the conservative side is shouted down or anyone exposing her lies is shouted down.
Umm... laRouche is a left wing nutcase. Dems have nut cases, Repubs have nut cases. Why can't we just ignore the nuts on both sides of the aisle
Because the left scream and shout about any perceived right wing protester being a nutcase and evil, while trying to cover or disavow the left wing variety.
Yes, there are nutcases on both sides and both sides need to admit it.
Yuppers! trying to redirect you back to the topic which isn't another poster.........guess you have nothing to contribute to the topic.
One could make the same statement of you. You seem to ignore discussion of the topic in favor of espousing your own biased ideals and an attempt to quiet any dissension.
Why not read the material you link to? It's readily apparent that you have not. Let's recall here that your thesis is that the GSE's were confronting perilous safety and soundness issues (they were not), that the clever Bush administration people had recognized this (despite their testimony directly to the contrary) and had developed a plan to address such problems (they had not) that if implemented, would have somehow allowed us to avoid the eventual credit crisis (it would not have). Your thesis is simply bunk from top to bottom.
Had you investigated the Big Plan (or at least this version of it), you would have found that it was to do nothing more than create a new "world class" uber-regulator within the Treasury Department who would have powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal regulators already existing at HUD with respect to GSE mission, goals, products, and programs, and at OFHEO with regard to safety, soundness, financing, and accounting practices. And far beyond those of either the officers or stockholders of the GSE's as well, it might be added. HUD -- the locus of actual expertise on housing and mortgage market issues -- was to be reduced to the role of consultant, with the GSE Czar set up to make all the final calls with a declared objective of reinforcing the confidence of the financial industry (that would be the Wall Street banks) in the propriety of GSE operations. Henhouse security has to have a green light from the fox, after all. So, go ahead...explain how this plan was in any way related to actual safety and soundness issues, how any such issues actually existed, and how in God's name implementation of the plan would have done the first thing toward allowing us to avoid the credit crisis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
We could start with the GSE's encouragement and purchase of Countrywide's 'Fast and Easy' no doc liar loans and the subsequent repackaging and selling those mortgage products to governments and investors worldwide, and move on from there...
We could if that supposition were any more accurate than your thesis above. Countrywide was an unregulated private broker that, along with such as New Century and Ameriquest, moved aggressivley into subprime mortgage markets following the collapse of major traditional finance companies between 1998 and 2000. When the Fed slashed interest rates to near-zero after 9/11 and then pledged to keep them there all but indefinitely, major institutional investors began turning to MBS's in droves for their well-known security and their suddenly quite attractive yields. This is the situation that the Wall Street street investment banks siezed upon, buying up mortgage paper and slicing and dicing it not only into instruments of their own, but into instruments based on those instruments. Huge profits and huge bonuses followed, but those could be maintained only given a continuous supply of paper to work from. Countrywide et al worked hard to supply that, eventually turning to predatory practices and de facto abandonment of underwriting standards to do so. There was no encouragement from the GSE's in this process. They bought no significant subprime paper at all until 2002, when they bought about 10% of all issues, those being the cream of the Alt-A crop, and still a tiny fraction of GSE purchases overall. By 2006 on the other hand, interest rates had risen by better than 4%, the housing market had cracked, and the Wall Street *** was essentially up. But Countrywide was still cranking out paper and began brow-beating the GSE's to take more of it. Given that pressure along with Congressional pressure to expand affordable housing efforts, shareholder demand to produce better profits, and a market share that was at historical lows, the GSE's did buy up more garbage in 2006 and 2007. But the game was long over and the goose long over-cooked by then. The loans that ultimately failed and crashed the books of the global financial community thus producing the credit crisis and subsequent near-depression were primarily written by unregulated private brokers between 2002 and 2006 into low- and moderate-income and other communities under low standards and at unnecessarily high-cost terms for securitization not through the GSE's but through other players. This crisis grew up around, not through, the GSE's.
As a side note, by the way, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with low- and no-doc loans. Many perfectly creditworthy individuals for instance do not work 9-to-5 jobs and pull down a biweekly paycheck. The fact that they cannot produce two recent pay stubs -- or any pay stubs at all for that matter -- is simply not material to their qualifications as borrowers. You should try to be a little less oblivious to context.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Um, no... you mean the Fed Gov had to save Fannie and Freddie from bankruptcy, averting worldwide financial armageddon.
Perhaps you need to be reminded that bankruptcy and conservatorship are opposites of each other. The purpose of a bankruptcy is to liquidate assets, the purpose of conservatorship is to protect them. With Wall Street on the brink of disappearance last September, the GSE's were about to inherit something frighteningly close to 100% of secondary mortgage market share, a responsibility that they were in no way sufficiently capitalized to undertake, this in part due to declines in investor confidence brought about by years of GSE-bashing and various threats and attempts at undermining them by the Bush administration. They were further at risk not from positions in their own garbage as Wall Street was, but from blowback from that garbage through exposure to what would soon become problem paper as increased interest rates, falling home values, and a dearth of refinancing funds put more and more ordinary folks into delinquency and default. The GSE's could not have functioned in such an environment as private sector entities. Conservatorship was the lone sensible option, and it should be noted that GSE doors have been open and they have been doing business as usual every day ever since. How do Lehman Brothers and the others stack up on that score would you say?
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
How the hell can anyone trust Barney Frank after Fannie and Freddie blew up in our faces in part because of those 'Fast and Easy' no doc liar loans product under Frank's 'protection?' We can all see plain as day that Frank was blatantly wrong on this, and the Bush Administration's and Snow's recommendations of increased regulatory oversight of Fannie's and Freddie's financial activities and loan products would have been the prudent course of action to pursue. We did it Frank's way and look how that turned out - not well. Go Barney... woo.
No, what we all SHOULD see plain as day is that your post is grounded only in incomprehension. It is merely another xerox copy of a deliberate CATO/Mises mythology designed to present a seemingly plausible but actually quite nonsensical scenario fabricated in hopes that the uninformed and the poorly informed will not know any better than to conclude that there must be something to it all. It seems that the propagandists have gotten their wish in your case. Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Nancy Pelosi had virtually nothing to do with the credit crisis, and neither did the GSE's or CRA. You and all those similarly situated should be embarassed at having swallowed so credulously this cup of simple right-wing swill.
It is only un-American, according to her, when someone or group is disagreeing with her. It is the height of democracy when the conservative side is shouted down or anyone exposing her lies is shouted down.
I know the press is suppressing this info, but the people at these town halls with the obama=hitler and the lady at the Frank TH are from this organization - a democratic one.
Just for the record, while Lyndon Larouche has any number of times campaigned to become the Democratic candidate for President, to characterize him or his organization as being Democratic in any ordinary sense of the word is simply delusional...
The Nationalist Socialist Party of Germany was on the Left.
O-o-o-o-o-o-h. Thanks for clearing that up for the six billion or so people on the planet who previously thought otherwise.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She had the expression of a deer in headlights...
