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.
It is obvious to anyone reading the interview in that Hussein's remark in its full context is far from trying to invite trouble, except insofar as any peep of independence from a weak nation to a strong one can be described as inviting trouble.
You're trying to cover your array of misunderstandings on the economy by posting long ago quotes about Iraq? Pretty flimsy, as Hans Blix might say.
No try to follow along Iraq was brought up......
I don't have any mis understandings about the economy! And who is responsible for starting this mess we now have and the continuation of it with obama and the dems! Again.
Iraq war - remember the supposed reason for the Iraq war? WMD's. There weren't any. Remember Rummsfeld saying it could take 6 days, 6 weeks, he doubted 6 months. It has been 6 years. Failure.
Find the quote. Post it here. He never said that. We knew all along that it was going to be a "long slog" (Rummsfeld's words).
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkb0305
Dems have only controlled congress for 2 years, and in that 2 years, Bush vetoed anything they tried to pass. This mess did not happen in the last 2 years. Who controlled congress before that? Oh ya, repubs.
Wrong again. You'll have to go back to the Carter era (maybe you weren't even around then) and the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act). That is the piece of legislation that forced banks to make loans in low income neighborhoods to people who couldn't qualify, or risk losing their FDIC backing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkb0305
I don't know all the details of Fannie, Freddie, and the loan industry, but I do know that there were banks that did not participate in sub prime mortgages. So, I don't know that anyone was "forcing" the banks to do that.
Banks had no choice. They had to. If they didn't, they were reported, and risked their FDIC backing (as I said above). Barak himself, as a "community organizer for ACORN, was doing this.
[quote=nononsenseguy;7660320]Find the quote. Post it here. He never said that. We knew all along that it was going to be a "long slog" (Rummsfeld's words).
*
o Department of Defense news briefing, February 12, 2002 [3]
* I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today would last five days, or five weeks, or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that.
o Interview with Steve Croft, Infinity CBS Radio Connect, November 14, 2002 [4]
* And it is not knowable if force will be used, but if it is to be used, it is not knowable how long that conflict would last. It could last, you know, six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.
Wrong again. You'll have to go back to the Carter era (maybe you weren't even around then) and the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act). That is the piece of legislation that forced banks to make loans in low income neighborhoods to people who couldn't qualify, or risk losing their FDIC backing.
The OP said it is the dems fault because they have been in control of congress for the last 2 years. Clearly, that is not true. That is my point.
It's amazing to me how bitter the Republicans are now that they are not in control. Whining like little kids. Settle down, you had your turn and f'ed it up.
That Jindal speech the other night was pathetic and short sighted to say the least. Sad really. Don't they know that the money from the stimulus is going to be spent HERE in the US? How is that hurting the economy?
Wrong again. You'll have to go back to the Carter era (maybe you weren't even around then) and the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act). That is the piece of legislation that forced banks to make loans in low income neighborhoods to people who couldn't qualify, or risk losing their FDIC backing.
The CRA outlawed redlining -- the practice of refusing to lend to people who lived in certain geographic areas simply on the basis of an address. That established something you couldn't do, but there was nothing to establish any affirmative responsibility until 1989 when Bush-41 signed a law that made CRA ratings public. Then Clinton came along and formalized the CRA rating process while indicating that it would be best if covered banks and S&L's had acceptable CRA ratings if they expected to win favorable federal review of applications for mergers, acquisitions, and interstate banking operations. That put some muscle behind the law and many banks began CRA lending in earnest. Most new CRA lending was into low- and moderate-income (LMI) communities, typically urban and often minority. These communities had had credit needs all along of course, but those hadn't been met by prime lenders. Instead they were met by such as Household Finance, Beneficial Finance, or The Money Store at subprime terms (high rates, high fees, and high points) that had been made legal in 1980. The abusive terms of those loans had been a significant barrier to wealth accumulation in LMI communities. And surprise, surprise...when prime lenders finally went into these communities, nearly half of all borrowers were eligible at prime terms, and nearly all the rest at near-prime or Alt-A terms. And because those terms were more favorable than what the finance companies had been charging, these borrowers were able to make their new payments and have money left over. Enough to fix up the car, paint the house, or plant a new garden. After a few years, property values in LMI communities began to rise, and both public and private investment if neighborhood infrastructure increased, and all the while, the growing CRA loan portfolio was performing better than industry averages. CRA, it turned out, was both good policy and good business.
Now, that's not the end of the story, but it's enough for this time. Enough to establish that CRA was emphatically NOT a piece of legislation that forced banks to make loans in low income neighborhoods to people who couldn't qualify, or risk losing their FDIC backing.
Iraq war - remember the supposed reason for the Iraq war? WMD's. There weren't any. Remember Rummsfeld saying it could take 6 days, 6 weeks, he doubted 6 months. It has been 6 years. Failure.
Dems have only controlled congress for 2 years, and in that 2 years, Bush vetoed anything they tried to pass. This mess did not happen in the last 2 years. Who controlled congress before that? Oh ya, repubs.
I don't know all the details of Fannie, Freddie, and the loan industry, but I do know that there were banks that did not participate in sub prime mortgages. So, I don't know that anyone was "forcing" the banks to do that.
1) The probability of was just one of several reasons given for the Iraq invasion. LWers have revised history to make it the only reason. Furthermore, as David Kay noted in his originial report, you'd have to be an idiot to assume Saddam didn't disguise/hide/move WMD, many of which were small enough to be carried in a suitcase.
2) Democrats resisted Fannie reform at every turn.
3) The Clinton JD and HUD actually sued any bank that didn't give a certain positions of minorities mortgages. I'd call that "forcing".
1) The probability of was just one of several reasons given for the Iraq invasion. LWers have revised history to make it the only reason. Furthermore, as David Kay noted in his originial report, you'd have to be an idiot to assume Saddam didn't disguise/hide/move WMD, many of which were small enough to be carried in a suitcase.
2) Democrats resisted Fannie reform at every turn.
3) The Clinton JD and HUD actually sued any bank that didn't give a certain positions of minorities mortgages. I'd call that "forcing".
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.
