=-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw...eature=related --=

Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam

=-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs --=

You would be hard pressed to find a politician who is less frank than
Congressman Barney Frank.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/i...asp?indid=2384
http://www.keywiki.org/index.php/Barney_Frank

Even in an occupation where truth and candor are often lacking,
Congressman Frank is in a class by himself when it comes to rewriting
history in creative ways. Moreover, he has a lot of history to rewrite
in his re-election campaign this year.

No one contributed more to the policies behind the housing boom and
bust, which led to the economic disaster we are now in, than
Congressman Barney Frank.

His powerful position on the House of Representatives' Committee on
Financial Services gave him leverage to force through legislation and
policies which pressured banks and other lenders to grant mortgage
loans to people who would not qualify under the standards which had
long prevailed, and had long made mortgage loans among the safest
investments around.

All this was done in the name of promoting more home-ownership among
people who had neither the income nor the credit history that would
meet traditional mortgage lending standards.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_...on_dollar.html

To those who warned of the risks in the new policies,

=-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM --=

Congressman Frank replied in 2003 that critics "exaggerate a threat of
safety" and "conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to
the Treasury, which I do not see." Far from being reluctant to promote
risky practices, Barney Frank said, "I want to roll the dice a little
bit more in this situation."

With the federal regulators leaning on banks to make more loans to
people who did not meet traditional qualifications -- the "underserved
population" in political Newspeak -- and quotas being given to Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac to buy more of these riskier mortgages from the
original lenders, critics pointed out the dangers in these pressures
to meet arbitrary home ownership goals.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&NR=1
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=184743
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/f...asp?fndid=5197
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/f...asp?fndid=5196

But Barney Frank counter-attacked against these critics.

In 2004 he said: "I believe that we, as the Federal Government, have
probably done too little rather than too much to push them to meet the
goals of affordable housing." He went further: "I would like to get
Fannie and Freddie more deeply into helping low-income housing."

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were crucial to these schemes to force
lenders to lend to those whom politicians wanted them to lend to,
rather than to those who were most likely to pay them back. So it is
no surprise that Barney Frank was very protective towards these two
government-sponsored enterprises that were buying up mortgages that
banks were willing to make under political pressure, but were often
unwilling to keep.

The risks which banks were passing on to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
were ultimately risks to the taxpayers. Although there was no formal
guarantee to these enterprises, everybody knew that the federal
government would always bail them out, if necessary, to keep them from
failing. Everybody except Barney Frank.

"There is no guarantee," according Congressman Frank in 2003, "there
is no explicit guarantee, there is no implicit guarantee, there is no
wink-and-nod guarantee." Barney Frank is a master of rhetoric, who
does not let the facts cramp his style.

Fast forward now to 2008, after the risky mortgages had led to huge
numbers of defaults, dragging down Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the
financial markets in general -- and with them the whole economy.

Barney Frank was all over the media, pointing the finger of blame at
everybody else. When financial analyst Maria Bartiromo asked
Congressman Frank who was responsible for the financial crisis, he
said, "right-wing Republicans." It so happens that conservatives were
the loudest critics who had warned for years against the policies that
Barney Frank pushed, but why let facts get in the way?

Ms. Bartiromo did not just accept whatever Barney Frank said. She
said: "With all due respect, congressman, I saw videotapes of you
saying in the past: 'Oh, let's open up the lending. The housing market
is fine.'" His reply? "No, you didn't see any such tapes."

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27324124/CNBC...G_ BELL_TODAY

"I did. I saw them on TV," she said. But Barney Frank did not budge.
He understood that a good offense is the best defense. He also
understands that rewriting history this election year is his best bet
for keeping his long political career alive.

Among long-time politicians who are being seriously challenged for the
first time this election year, Congressman Barney Frank of
Massachusetts best epitomizes the cynical ruthlessness which hides
behind their lofty rhetoric.

Having been a key figure in promoting the risky mortgage lending
practices imposed by the federal government on lenders, and on Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac to buy these risky mortgages from the lenders,
Barney Frank blamed the resulting collapse of financial markets and
the economy on everybody except Barney Frank.

In February 2009, as chairman of the House Financial Services
Committee, Congressman Frank summoned the heads of some of the biggest
banks in the country before his committee. In the words of the Los
Angeles Times, these bankers "endured hours of hectoring" by
"indignant lawmakers" on that committee.

These bankers were in no position to talk back to members of this
committee, much less point out how committee members -- including
Chairman Barney Frank -- had themselves promoted laws and policies
responsible for the current economic disaster.

This is a committee with the power to promote legislation detrimental
to this heavily regulated industry. That in turn gives the committee
the power to force others to sit there and take it, when they are
demonized on nationwide TV.

Congressman Barney Frank has never hesitated to use his power
ruthlessly. On one occasion, he threatened bankers with summoning them
before his committee and forcing them to reveal their home addresses
-- which would of course put their spouses and children at the mercy
of any kooks that might come along.

Meanwhile, Congressman Frank could piously invoke "social justice" in
defense of similarly ruthless community activist groups like ACORN
[ http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/g...asp?grpid=6968 ] or
National People's Action, which had in fact besieged the homes not
only of bankers but also of public officials who dared to oppose their
agendas. In Barney Frank's words, these groups were simply people who
"cared about equity" and who were just "trying very hard to preserve
some equity and some social justice."

But the harassment and shakedown activities of such groups were
perhaps best captured by the words of a leader of one of these groups,
who addressed her followers by saying: "We want it. They've got it.
Let's go get it."

These were not just idle words. The dirty little secret that few in
the media seem to want to discuss is that community activists,
including Jesse Jackson, have over the years extracted literally
billions of dollars from financial institutions, as the price of peace
and of not challenging these institutions in hearings before federal
regulators, as these groups are empowered to do under the Community
Reinvestment Act.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_...on_dollar.html
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/v...ory.asp?id=809

Much of this money has been extracted in the form of risky mortgage
loans of the sort that have been at the center of the housing boom and
bust, and its repercussions in financial markets and in the economy as
a whole.

Among others who have been at the heart of the risky lending behind
the financial meltdown are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, whom
Congressman Barney Frank has also championed and protected. When
federal regulators uncovered irregularities in Fannie Mae's
accounting, and in 2004 issued what Barron's magazine called "a
blistering 211-page report," Barney Frank lashed out -- not at Fannie
Mae, but at the regulators who uncovered Fannie Mae's misdeeds. He
said "a leadership change" in the regulatory agency was "overdue."

Politicians who say we need more regulation almost never mean
regulation in the sense of impartially enforcing explicit rules, such
as the accounting rules that Fannie Mae was violating to cover up its
own risks. They mean regulation with arbitrary powers, such as those
under the Community Reinvestment Act, which enable regulators to carry
out the agendas that politicians give them.

When Congressman Jim Leach tried to get stronger regulation of Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac back in 1992, and when President George W. Bush
did so in 2004, Barney Frank opposed them.

=-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM --=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw...eature=related

A reining in of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would be a reining in of
Barney Frank's power. But he can't stop the voters from reining in his
power, unless he can once more get by this election year with pious
rhetoric to conceal his cynical actions

http://www.tsowell.com
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...ing_crash.html

"Chas. Chan" wrote in message
...
=-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw...eature=related --=

Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam

=-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs --=

You would be hard pressed to find a politician who is less frank than
Congressman Barney Frank.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/i...asp?indid=2384
http://www.keywiki.org/index.php/Barney_Frank

Even in an occupation where truth and candor are often lacking,
Congressman Frank is in a class by himself when it comes to rewriting
history in creative ways. Moreover, he has a lot of history to rewrite
in his re-election campaign this year.

No one contributed more to the policies behind the housing boom and
bust, which led to the economic disaster we are now in, than
Congressman Barney Frank.

His powerful position on the House of Representatives' Committee on
Financial Services gave him leverage to force through legislation and
policies which pressured banks and other lenders to grant mortgage
loans to people who would not qualify under the standards which had
long prevailed, and had long made mortgage loans among the safest
investments around.

All this was done in the name of promoting more home-ownership among
people who had neither the income nor the credit history that would
meet traditional mortgage lending standards.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_...on_dollar.html

To those who warned of the risks in the new policies,

=-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM --=

Congressman Frank replied in 2003 that critics "exaggerate a threat of
safety" and "conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to
the Treasury, which I do not see." Far from being reluctant to promote
risky practices, Barney Frank said, "I want to roll the dice a little
bit more in this situation."

With the federal regulators leaning on banks to make more loans to
people who did not meet traditional qualifications -- the "underserved
population" in political Newspeak -- and quotas being given to Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac to buy more of these riskier mortgages from the
original lenders, critics pointed out the dangers in these pressures
to meet arbitrary home ownership goals.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&NR=1
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=184743
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/f...asp?fndid=5197
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/f...asp?fndid=5196

But Barney Frank counter-attacked against these critics.

In 2004 he said: "I believe that we, as the Federal Government, have
probably done too little rather than too much to push them to meet the
goals of affordable housing." He went further: "I would like to get
Fannie and Freddie more deeply into helping low-income housing."

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were crucial to these schemes to force
lenders to lend to those whom politicians wanted them to lend to,
rather than to those who were most likely to pay them back. So it is
no surprise that Barney Frank was very protective towards these two
government-sponsored enterprises that were buying up mortgages that
banks were willing to make under political pressure, but were often
unwilling to keep.

The risks which banks were passing on to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
were ultimately risks to the taxpayers. Although there was no formal
guarantee to these enterprises, everybody knew that the federal
government would always bail them out, if necessary, to keep them from
failing. Everybody except Barney Frank.

"There is no guarantee," according Congressman Frank in 2003, "there
is no explicit guarantee, there is no implicit guarantee, there is no
wink-and-nod guarantee." Barney Frank is a master of rhetoric, who
does not let the facts cramp his style.

Fast forward now to 2008, after the risky mortgages had led to huge
numbers of defaults, dragging down Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the
financial markets in general -- and with them the whole economy.

Barney Frank was all over the media, pointing the finger of blame at
everybody else. When financial analyst Maria Bartiromo asked
Congressman Frank who was responsible for the financial crisis, he
said, "right-wing Republicans." It so happens that conservatives were
the loudest critics who had warned for years against the policies that
Barney Frank pushed, but why let facts get in the way?

Ms. Bartiromo did not just accept whatever Barney Frank said. She
said: "With all due respect, congressman, I saw videotapes of you
saying in the past: 'Oh, let's open up the lending. The housing market
is fine.'" His reply? "No, you didn't see any such tapes."

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27324124/CNBC...G_ BELL_TODAY

"I did. I saw them on TV," she said. But Barney Frank did not budge.
He understood that a good offense is the best defense. He also
understands that rewriting history this election year is his best bet
for keeping his long political career alive.

Among long-time politicians who are being seriously challenged for the
first time this election year, Congressman Barney Frank of
Massachusetts best epitomizes the cynical ruthlessness which hides
behind their lofty rhetoric.

Having been a key figure in promoting the risky mortgage lending
practices imposed by the federal government on lenders, and on Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac to buy these risky mortgages from the lenders,
Barney Frank blamed the resulting collapse of financial markets and
the economy on everybody except Barney Frank.

In February 2009, as chairman of the House Financial Services
Committee, Congressman Frank summoned the heads of some of the biggest
banks in the country before his committee. In the words of the Los
Angeles Times, these bankers "endured hours of hectoring" by
"indignant lawmakers" on that committee.

These bankers were in no position to talk back to members of this
committee, much less point out how committee members -- including
Chairman Barney Frank -- had themselves promoted laws and policies
responsible for the current economic disaster.

This is a committee with the power to promote legislation detrimental
to this heavily regulated industry. That in turn gives the committee
the power to force others to sit there and take it, when they are
demonized on nationwide TV.

Congressman Barney Frank has never hesitated to use his power
ruthlessly. On one occasion, he threatened bankers with summoning them
before his committee and forcing them to reveal their home addresses
-- which would of course put their spouses and children at the mercy
of any kooks that might come along.

Meanwhile, Congressman Frank could piously invoke "social justice" in
defense of similarly ruthless community activist groups like ACORN
[ http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/g...asp?grpid=6968 ] or
National People's Action, which had in fact besieged the homes not
only of bankers but also of public officials who dared to oppose their
agendas. In Barney Frank's words, these groups were simply people who
"cared about equity" and who were just "trying very hard to preserve
some equity and some social justice."

But the harassment and shakedown activities of such groups were
perhaps best captured by the words of a leader of one of these groups,
who addressed her followers by saying: "We want it. They've got it.
Let's go get it."

These were not just idle words. The dirty little secret that few in
the media seem to want to discuss is that community activists,
including Jesse Jackson, have over the years extracted literally
billions of dollars from financial institutions, as the price of peace
and of not challenging these institutions in hearings before federal
regulators, as these groups are empowered to do under the Community
Reinvestment Act.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/10_...on_dollar.html
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/v...ory.asp?id=809

Much of this money has been extracted in the form of risky mortgage
loans of the sort that have been at the center of the housing boom and
bust, and its repercussions in financial markets and in the economy as
a whole.

Among others who have been at the heart of the risky lending behind
the financial meltdown are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, whom
Congressman Barney Frank has also championed and protected. When
federal regulators uncovered irregularities in Fannie Mae's
accounting, and in 2004 issued what Barron's magazine called "a
blistering 211-page report," Barney Frank lashed out -- not at Fannie
Mae, but at the regulators who uncovered Fannie Mae's misdeeds. He
said "a leadership change" in the regulatory agency was "overdue."

Politicians who say we need more regulation almost never mean
regulation in the sense of impartially enforcing explicit rules, such
as the accounting rules that Fannie Mae was violating to cover up its
own risks. They mean regulation with arbitrary powers, such as those
under the Community Reinvestment Act, which enable regulators to carry
out the agendas that politicians give them.

When Congressman Jim Leach tried to get stronger regulation of Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac back in 1992, and when President George W. Bush
did so in 2004, Barney Frank opposed them.

=-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM --=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw...eature=related

A reining in of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would be a reining in of
Barney Frank's power. But he can't stop the voters from reining in his
power, unless he can once more get by this election year with pious
rhetoric to conceal his cynical actions

http://www.tsowell.com
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...ing_crash.html

LIAR! Clearly you want to rewrite history so your little failure Chimpy
comes out squeaky clean. There no room for fascists in the USA, maybe in
WISCONSIN where the eat people.

On Oct 23, 10:13*am, "Pug Bitch" wrote:
"Chas. Chan" wrote in message

http://www.tsowell.com
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...ing_crash.html

LIAR! *Clearly you want to rewrite history so your little failure Chimpy
comes out squeaky clean. *There no room for fascists in the USA, maybe in
WISCONSIN where the eat people.

Let's see, in 15 minutes:
You read his entire post,
clicked all the associated articles
and watched all the video links,
changed the newsgroup distribution list
and replied with JackAss Communist Party propaganda

ALL IN FIFTEEN (15) MINUTES?
bwaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
....

Chas. Chan wrote:
=-- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4&feature=related--=

Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam


Nobody cares. Everyone shares the blame for the collapse. For one
faction to point fingers at another is ludicrous.

On Oct 23, 12:18Â*pm, wrote:
...

By republican deregulation---the area of dabbling in "bundling"
mortages into larger and larger chunks was not attributable to
Democras---it was solely republican caused.

...


1) Securitization for residential mortgages was invented in 1970 by
Ginnie Mae. It was expanded by government sponsored enterprises (e.g.,
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) and private institutions through the 1980s
and '90s to include a wide range of financial assets. 2) Congress has
consistently eliminated regulatory obstacles to securitization with
the Secondary Mortgage Market Enhancement Act (SMMEA), Real Estate
Mortgage Investment Conduits (REMICs), Financial Asset Securitization
Investment Trusts (FASITs), and Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act. 
3) The Riegle Act also instructed federal
regulators to reduce risk-based capital requirements for bank holdings
of small business loan securities.
http://www.nado.org/loansales/securitization1.html

"In 1992, Congress mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their
purchases 
of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers.
Operating under 
that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been
aggressive and 
creative in stimulating minority gains."
"The two companies are now required to devote 42% of their portfolios
to 
loans for low- and moderate-income borrowers"
http://articles.latimes.com/1999/may/31/news/mn-42807

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0

On Oct 23, 12:12Â*pm, wrote:
...

Stick that in your ass.


'In analyzing the mortgage crisis, economist Walter E. Williams has
written: “Starting with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, that
was 
given more teeth during the Clinton administration, Congress
started 
intimidating banks and other financial institutions into
making loans, 
so-called sub-prime loans, to high-risk homebuyers and
businesses.
“The carrot offered was that these high-risk loans would be purchased
by 
the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac..
Anyone 
with an ounce of brains would have known that this was a
prescription 
for disaster but there was a congressional chorus of
denial,� he added.
“The financial collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is not a
failure 
of the free market because lending institutions in a free
market would 
not have taken on the high-risk loans,� said Williams.
“They were forced 
to by the heavy hand of government.� '
"In 1992, Congress mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their
purchases 
of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers.
Operating under 
that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been
aggressive and 
creative in stimulating minority gains."
"The two companies are now required to devote 42% of their portfolios
to 
loans for low- and moderate-income borrowers"
http://articles.latimes.com/1999/may/31/news/mn-42807

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nU3f...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfoTo...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSqhr...1&feature=fvwp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CgJq...layer_embedded

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYz1rbB5V1s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivmL-...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALAIEYq5Y00
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjYDzyQNqX8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CcFdjXvjvE&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6ZHOxJLUGI&NR=1
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...123BF932A2575A...
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...153EF933A0575A...
http://americanfuturefund.com/2008/0...locks-reform-a...
• 1) Securitization for residential mortgages was invented in 1970 by
Ginnie Mae. It was expanded by government sponsored enterprises (e.g.,
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) and private institutions through the 1980s
and '90s to include a wide range of financial assets. 2) Congress has
consistently eliminated regulatory obstacles to securitization with
the Secondary Mortgage Market Enhancement Act (SMMEA), Real Estate
Mortgage Investment Conduits (REMICs), Financial Asset Securitization
Investment Trusts (FASITs), and Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act. 
3) The Riegle Act also instructed federal
regulators to reduce risk-based capital requirements for bank holdings
of small business loan securities.
http://www.nado.org/loansales/securitization1.html


political donations
Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*Democrats Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*Republicans

2010 Â* Â* Â*69% Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*31%
2008 Â* Â* Â*75 % Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* 25%
2006 Â* Â* Â*63% Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*37%

2004 Â* Â* Â*62% Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*38%
2002 Â* Â* Â*66% Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*34%
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summ...?id=d000000085

regulation derivatives
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut/370925
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syN3r...eature=related
Find out moe about the CRA
http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/...4/vmck4-94.pdf
--
The CRA tells a financial institution that if
it moves into such an area, financial regu
latory agencies and community groups will
dictate how its “community� will be
defined, how its performance will be
judged, and most importantly, how it will
make its lending decisions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivmL-...x t=1&index=2

http://www.subprimemortgageplan.com/...e_Crisi s.php

Werner wrote:
On Oct 23, 12:12 pm, wrote:
...

Stick that in your ass.


'In analyzing the mortgage crisis, economist Walter E. Williams has

One of Limbaugh's butt boys. LMAO!!!

On Oct 23, 6:30*pm, China Blue Police Box
wrote:
In article ,

*Werner wrote:
written: “Starting with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, that
was

You mean the law that outlawed racism in lending.

--


No, it would be the law that outlawed sensible lending and borrowing.
Now you see the consequences of Politics as Usual.
http://www.EndIt.info

"China Blue Police Box" wrote in message
...
In article
,
WR wrote:

your kids or pets. No one in their right mind believes it. The market

Tea partiers believe it.

Teabaggers believe what they're told to believe. Don't try to make sense of
any of it in the light of history or reason.

Jim
--
Well, ****, you confused me. More than normal
-- Beldin

On Oct 23, 8:53Â*pm, WR wrote:
On Oct 23, 1:05Â*pm, Werner wrote:



On Oct 23, 12:12Â*pm, wrote:

...

Stick that in your ass.

'In analyzing the mortgage crisis, economist Walter E. Williams has
written: “Starting with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, that
was 
given more teeth during the Clinton administration, Congress
started 
intimidating banks and other financial institutions into
making loans, 
so-called sub-prime loans, to high-risk homebuyers and
businesses.
“The carrot offered was that these high-risk loans would be purchased
by 
the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Anyone 
with an ounce of brains would have known that this was a
prescription 
for disaster but there was a congressional chorus of
denial,� he added.
“The financial collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is not a
failure 
of the free market because lending institutions in a free
market would 
not have taken on the high-risk loans,� said Williams.
“They were forced 
to by the heavy hand of government.� '
"In 1992, Congress mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their
purchases 
of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers.
Operating under 
that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been
aggressive and 
creative in stimulating minority gains."
"The two companies are now required to devote 42% of their portfolios
to 
loans for low- and moderate-income borrowers"
Â*http://articles.latimes.com/1999/may/31/news/mn-42807

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-...utube.com/watc....
andhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CgJq8OYEl0&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp...utube.com/watc......
Â* Â* Â* Â* • Â* Â* 1) Securitization for residential mortgages was invented in 1970 by
Ginnie Mae. It was expanded by government sponsored enterprises (e.g.,
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) and private institutions through the 1980s
and '90s to include a wide range of financial assets. 2) Congress has
consistently eliminated regulatory obstacles to securitization with
the Secondary Mortgage Market Enhancement Act (SMMEA), Real Estate
Mortgage Investment Conduits (REMICs), Financial Asset Securitization
Investment Trusts (FASITs), and Riegle Community Development and
Regulatory Improvement Act. 
3) The Riegle Act also instructed federal
regulators to reduce risk-based capital requirements for bank holdings
of small business loan securities.http://www.nado.org/loansales/securitization1.html

political donations
Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*Democrats Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*Republicans

2010 Â* Â* Â*69% Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*31%
2008 Â* Â* Â*75 % Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* 25%
2006 Â* Â* Â*63% Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*37%

2004 Â* Â* Â*62% Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*38%
2002 Â* Â* Â*66% Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â* Â*34%http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summ...?id=d000000085

regulation derivativeshttp://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut/370925http://www.youtube.com/wat...
Find out moe about the CRAhttp://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv17n4/vmck4-94.pdf
--
The CRA tells a financial institution that if
it moves into such an area, financial regu
latory agencies and community groups will
dictate how its “community� will be
defined, how its performance will be
judged, and most importantly, how it will
make its lending decisions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivmL-...List&p=361DB6B...

http://www.subprimemortgageplan.com/...ent_Act_Subpri...

- A 1977 law kicked off the subprime bubble????
- You people are pathetically stupid.

WR,

The first step in 1977 and . . .
Many Years of Incrementalism followed;
up to the present time . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incrementalism
-remember- Rome Was Not Built In A Day . . .
and the converse is true too ~ RHF