So It was Bush's Fault, Eh? Obama Pushed Banks For Subprime Loans


Well we have become accustomed to hearing how the all of Barack Obama's failures are George W. Bush's fault. Obama has yet to take responsiblity for any of his policy failures. However, what some people have forgotten is he was part of the problem, even when George W. Bush was in office.

The Daily Caller reports,

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices.

As few as 19 of those 186 clients still own homes with clean credit ratings, following a decade in which Obama and other progressives pushed banks to provide mortgages to poor African Americans.

The startling failure rate among Obama’s private sector clients was discovered during The Daily Caller’s review of previously unpublished court information from the lawsuit that a young Obama worked on as an attorney for the lead plaintiff.

In 1994 Barack Obama was a plaintiff in a class action lawsuit that alleges that Citibank had engaged in practices that discriminated against minorities. This lawsuit forced Citbank to ease its lending policies.

But that's not all, he continued to pursue the same kinds of lending policies once he entered the White House.

While there are many things that George W. Bush can be blamed for, the housing market is not one of them. According to Jim Hoft of the Gateway Pundit, the White House, under the Bush Administration warned Congress over and over again about the problems of the relaxed policies in home lending. Here are the ones Hoft cites:

** 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

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

** 2003

January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.” As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)

September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations.

September: 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.

October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

November: 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 called 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: 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)

June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called 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: Treasury Secretary John 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)

** 2007

July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.

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)

September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.

September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.

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

January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.

January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.

February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says “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: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.

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 of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.

So, I suppose it really wasn't Bush's fault!

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.






Comments

comments

  • Rennisami

    Home ownership and President Bush, PLEASE WATCH! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8

    Understand, that I'm not blaming Bush for trying to HELP the poor and I'm certainly not blaming Obama for trying to HELP 186 people, because I know exactly what happens when there is no HELP. I also know that HELP is good. It's sad watching all of you destroying whats left. Everyone is to blame and everyone is going to pay. Whether you adobt Obama's agenda where we all pay and not just the poor or elderly, etc. or not.

    It's interesting how I don't hear you people discussing the reasons why these people all at once, suddenly couldn't pay for their homes, or should I say their dreams.

    Imagine if you can, how many people benefited from these loans. All the different trades, from real estate to the companies and corporations that supplied the parts to keep the machinery operating, and on and on and on and on. Imagine if you can, how many years of income programs like this one here bought you, again, if you can.

    If you can't imagine these things, then look around and see if you're not all alone. Then ask yourself where your knowledge of right and wrong has you now.

    Maybe spend your time seeking God? Figure God out instead! So that maybe, just maybe in a hundred years or a million years or a billion years from now, humanity will find it's salvation.

    G'luck

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jennie-Maroney/100000103701068 Jennie Maroney

    When is the MSM going to start talking about this?

  • darkcyder

    Problem is that by 06, we had Democrativc congress, and house, and they were in bed with Barney Frank and his boyfriend. They were too busy passing the offering plate around and removing healthy quantities of cash.

  • Don

    When the housing market crashed, the economy went with it ! Those responsible for this have yet to take responsibility for it. Those involved should be criminally prosecuted. So many lenders lost thousands of dollars on loans that could not be paid.Loans at 125% were issued to unqualified borrowers using the balloon loan. They could barely make the payments for the first five years and walked out when the payments increased. They didn't even wait for foreclosure in some cases, taking the kitchen and everything out of the home. AIG held mortgage insurance on these loans and was losing 65 million dollars day on them. Two Democrats were involved with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack and ran this charade costing the US tax payers millions of dollars in bailouts. This was used as a weapon to ruin the economy and blame it on the Republicans to gain power in the house and senate ! The truth must be exposed once and for all ! Bush was not to blame for this mess. Mr.Obama and his buddies were all involved in this disaster !
    Our economy is so bad that the dollar is having trouble competing with the Chinese Yuan.The more deficit spending,the more the US dollar declines.At this rate,with in a year, we all will be in the toilet !Kiss your retirements funds good by ! And watch out for your gold, they will try to confiscate that to !

  • servant

    NO! How dare we cast dispersions upon the ONE who can walk on water, Chris Walker's President, our MR: ACORN, that lovable nut!
    He is not known as our "Liar-IN- CHIEF" for nothing, right?
    http://www.longlifechoices.blogspot.com 4 truth

  • http://www.facebook.com/walter.williams.56027 Walter Williams

    This catastrophe started with the New Deal and has grown out of control with every president sinse; with some more than others. Many of our politicians have helped or allowed this to happen by doing nothing against it.

  • nax777

    The truth is it took decades of voter apathy to give someone
    like Obama some much space to work with and so many anti-American supporters,
    legal and illegal immigrants.

    And the Pubs in both Houses are still handing more power
    over to the Executive Branch today! While still giving lip service to the decade’s
    long genocide going on in America (abortion) and now most of them have no
    problem with increasing the decades long invasion (legal and illegal
    immigration).

    Look at the post’s here, especially any responses to this
    post. Many are Pub voters and demonstrate the voters hand and power in all this
    yet blame not the voter!

    http://www.goooh.com you will
    still be welcomed and needed in 2015.

  • wolmoon7

    What you failed to show in your article were several videos of Congress and Barney Frank making Bush out to be a racist idiot to even think that Freddie and Fannie were in trouble. They categorically said Bush was way off base and his views were founded in racism and that nothing was wrong with Freddie and Fannie.
    Maybe you could come up with the links for these videos to shed even more light on Bush's 6 years of warning the United States about the coming mortgage and financial crisis.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      Bush was the President of the United States. His party controlled the House of Representatives.

      What possible difference could it make what Barney Frank thought or did?

    • jorland428

      The 2008 election left the Senate with 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans and two Independents that always caucused with the Democrats.
      The Democrats controlled the majority in the lower house from the 2006 election. They increased their majority in the 2008 election. Bush may have been President, but he was at the mercy of the two houses that were controlled by the Democrats. When Obama was elected President he was backed by a majority in both houses. He did not loose that majority until the 2010 election. Only at that point did the Republicans gain a majority in the lower house only.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      Bush was President from Jan 2001. He had a majority in the House. He controlled the SEC. He controlled the Treasury Department. He controlled the Justice Department.

      And Barney Frank had the power to make investors buy bonds backed by loans to 'people who can't pay them back'?

    • cesium62

      Ooh, I hate it when the majority gets loose.

  • 2War Abn Vet

    It's Bush's fault! It's the Congressional Repubs fault! It's the Tea Party's fault! To hear the Dems whine, it's the fault of everyone but those actually causing the problems.
    Through it all nobody mentions that monstrous Dem dream called the Community Reinvestment Act. You know, the thing that started the entire debacle.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      How on earth can the CRA force investors to buy bad loans? Do you know how markets work or do you just endlessly repeat talking points you hear on talk radio.

      Assume banks were 'forced' to make bad loans to undeserving Democrats. Assume Barney Frank was able to force Fannie and Freddie to buy those bad loans. Assume that the Treasury Department, the SEC, and the Justice Department were powerless in the face of Barney Frank.

      How did Barney Frank force investors to buy those bonds issued by Fannie and Freddie?

    • 2War Abn Vet

      That was the purpose of ACORN and community organizers like Obama. The object was to put maximum pressure on lenders to make loans to folks who couldn't possibly afford them. All that followed resulted from trying, and failing, to put a finger in the dike.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      Okay -- so ACORN forced banks to lend to "folks who couldn't possibly afford them". Let us assume that is a true statement.

      How did ACORN force investors to buy securities backed by those mortgages?

      If investors are dumb enough to buy those mortgages -- that is their problem. Not the problem of the US taxpayer. So why did GW Bush bail out those investors???

    • 2War Abn Vet

      Surely, in Chicago, you can't pretend to be unaware of the forces that put pressure on all of these institutions. Furthermore, please note previous comment re. finger in dike. It certainly helped that a number of Dems were getting rich on the schemes.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      How did the Democrats force investors to buy securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

      How can a minority party (or a majority party for that matter) put pressure on anyone to buy mortgage securities they know are bad?

    • 2War Abn Vet

      Didn't important Dems, including Barney Frank's boy toy Herb Moses make millions at Fannie Mae doing just that?
      Incidentally, type the words "Fannie Mae scandal" into Google and you'll get nearly six million hits.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      The number of Google hits doesn't answer the question -- how did Barney Frank force investors to buy Fannie Mae paper?

      It is 2006. I am an investor. I have $100 million to invest in bonds. How one earth is Barney Frank going to decide my investment? How can he force me to buy Fannie Mae paper backed by 'loans to people who can't pay them back' if I don't want to do it?

      You guys have no idea how free markets work.

    • 2War Abn Vet

      I’ve noticed a curious phenomenon lately. Liberals will comment on a short post demanding background data, substantiation, or otherwise casting doubt on the original comment. This is in line with the new lib tactic of “SWATing”; basically doing mischief whenever possible for the simple joy of doing so.

      I have neither the time nor the inclination to continue playing
      “silly boogers” with you. Look up the history of the Act from Jimmy Carter’s day onward, and educate yourself, and quit bothering me.

      That, or confirm my finding that Nothing is closed quite as tightly as the
      liberal/socialist mind.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      You can't offer a simple explanation of how Jimmy Carter or Barney Frank had the ability to force investors to by paper issued by Fannie or Freddie.

      You apparently have no idea of how capital markets work.

      God Bless America.

    • cesium62

      I've noticed a curious phenomenon lately. Conservatives will repeat an unfounded statement from their favorite conservative pundit with no background data, substantiation, or any reason to believe the statement is true, except that their favorite pundit said it. An open mind continually looks for more evidence. A closed mind simply repeats what they've heard before. Thanks for confirming that Nothing is closed quite as tightly as the conservative/fascist mind.

    • 2War Abn Vet

      Back under the bridge, Troll.

    • jorland428

      No one was forced to buy the bad motgages (derivatives). Some, the ones who got in early, made a lot of money while the others lost. They were not bailed out with the TAREP money. The banks were. the banks were forced to give loans to home owners who could not afford them. When the home owners defaulted, the banks were bailed out.

    • nancy

      They FRAUDULENTLY packaged the BAD loans with the good loans. That was the problem. Investors were used to SOLID, stable mortgage investments previously in their dealings with American banks and we sold them a bill of goods. The banks and government got in bed together and FRAUDULENTLY bundled the bad loans with the good loans and then sold them on false pretenses.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

    Wait a minute. Are you guys suggesting that somehow the Democrats forced investors to buy Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paper? On what planet do you guys reside?

    Every bond / note / pass through security issued by Fannie and Freddie since 1970 had in big black (sometimes RED) disclaimers that the paper was NOT guaranteed by the US government and that Fannie and Freddie were NOT agencies of the US government.

    The disclaimers weren't in fine print. They were the first lines and last lines in the prospecuts.

    If GW Bush has the testosterone to stand by those words, no taxpayer money would have been lost.

    Instead, GW Bush took $200 billion of taxpayer money and handed it to the investors of Fannie / Freddie paper. And Bush wanted states to fund sub prime loans !!!!

    Not only that, Hank Paulson handed C and BAC each checks for $250 billion in taxpayer funds to cover losses on mortgage securities that they purchased.

    We have met the enemy and it is the GOP.

    • Chuck

      The sub prime standards were a product ot Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd, and to the best of my recollection, they were both Demoncraps!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      Okay -- Barney Frank and Chris Dodd created subprime loans.

      How did Barney Frank and Chris Dodd force investors to by securities backed by those loans?

    • metheoldsarge

      The power was given to them in 1977 when Jimmy Carter signed the Community Reinvestment Act. It gave liberal politicians like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd the teeth to force banks to grant home loans to people that couldn't pay for them. All you have to do is check the records of the Illinois State Legislature during the time Obama was in there and see how he pushed it then. He also pushed it as a Senator. It is all there in the Congressional Record. Go ahead and research it yourself. It was Obama, Dodd, Frank and others like them that actually caused the collapse of the housing market that they are blaming on Bush. Don't take my word for it. Do your own research. The writing has been on the wall for many years and the voters still refuse to read it.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      Again, how did the Community Reinvestment Act force anyone to buy a mortgage security?

      Assume that we are insane and Congress can enact legislation that forces banks to make bad loans. What power on earth can compel anyone to buy those loans from banks?

    • metheoldsarge

      Part correct. The enemy you refer to is the Federal Government and that includes both parties. You obviously have no idea what the government can do and the powers they have. I'll leave it at that.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      How did the Federal government force anyone to buy bonds against their will?

      I've traded in markets for most of my adult life. The government can do many things -- however they can't force people to buy bonds. Anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant / lying or both.

    • metheoldsarge

      “How did the Federal government force
      anyone to buy bonds against their will?”

      The same way they can make a law to force you to buy health care
      insurance if you want to or not.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      There is a law that investors have to buy bonds as directed by the federal government?

      Are you saying that the CRA forces investors to buy bonds? Can you cite anything in that law that states that?

    • Tnmike

      I don't believe anybody said that anybody was forced to invest - it was apparently misinformation about the credit ratings of the secondary security vehicles (MSB's). Or maybe it was just stupidity on the investors. What is an investor, but a gambler dressed in a three piece suit (tic)? They fell into the pit of "high risk = high rewards" forgetting that higher risk also means greater chance of failure. And no amount of sophisticated financial engineering (i.e. - risk passing) can overcome it.

      There is no question that ill-trained and ethically-challenged mortgage
      brokers, NINJA (No Income, No Job or Assets) liar loans, bankers who
      couldn’t decide if they were more stupid or more greedy and finally
      settled on both, and an avaricious Wall Street that packaged trash and
      called it trash internally, but marketed it as gilt, all played their
      role. In short, the soul of the problem is simply buyers with no skin in the game. AND that my tax money is being used to guarantee loans to people who may or may not have the ability or inclination to pay it back.

      Moral hazard rose its ugly head yet again. Institutions (and individuals) not taking
      the full consequences and responsibilities of their actions. In fact many have been enriched or "bailed out" as it may. Once again leaving the taxpayers with the bill. Why not - many originating institutions don't hold the paper - merely sell it, making fees, etc... when doing so. No problem with risky loans - they've passed them to others wrapped in pretty paper.

      I just love the new "walk away" practice of borrowers that have "no skin" in the game! Easier to walk than to work for something of value. I and my family ate a lot of rice and beans to save up the 20% down payment on our very modest house. We have since paid off the mortgage. Now I'm being asked to pay for the greed of others because of my family's hard work and sacrifice - socialism at it's best!

      All started prior to Bush (and I mean GHWB). Greed has been a part of human nature forever (Adam and Eve). However during GHWB there came the Community Reinvestment Act that was heavily modified and liberalized in the ensuing Clinton era, warned about in the George Bush era, and whined about in the bho era.

    • Tnmike

      I don't believe anybody said that anybody was forced to invest - it was apparently misinformation about the credit ratings of the secondary security vehicles (MSB's). Or maybe it was just stupidity on the investors. What is an investor, but a gambler dressed in a three piece suit (tic)? They fell into the pit of "high risk = high rewards" forgetting that higher risk also means greater chance of failure. And no amount of sophisticated financial engineering (i.e. - risk passing) can overcome it.

      There is no question that ill-trained and ethically-challenged mortgage
      brokers, NINJA (No Income, No Job or Assets) liar loans, bankers who
      couldn’t decide if they were more stupid or more greedy and finally
      settled on both, and an avaricious Wall Street that packaged trash and
      called it trash internally, but marketed it as gilt, all played their
      role. In short, the soul of the problem is simply buyers with no skin in the game. AND that my tax money is being used to guarantee loans to people who may or may not have the ability or inclination to pay it back.

      Moral hazard rose its ugly head yet again. Institutions (and individuals) not taking
      the full consequences and responsibilities of their actions. In fact many have been enriched or "bailed out" as it may. Once again leaving the taxpayers with the bill. Why not - many originating institutions don't hold the paper - merely sell it, making fees, etc... when doing so. No problem with risky loans - they've passed them to others wrapped in pretty paper.

      I just love the new "walk away" practice of borrowers that have "no skin" in the game! Easier to walk than to work for something of value. I and my family ate a lot of rice and beans to save up the 20% down payment on our very modest house. We have since paid off the mortgage. Now I'm being asked to pay for the greed of others because of my family's hard work and sacrifice - socialism at it's best!

      All started prior to Bush (and I mean GHWB). Greed has been a part of human nature forever (Adam and Eve). However during GHWB there came the Community Reinvestment Act that was heavily modified and liberalized in the ensuing Clinton era, warned about in the George Bush era, and whined about in the bho era.

  • http://twitter.com/vonrowley von anderson

    This mess was initially caused by Slick Willy

    • joanc

      Acorn pushing their "first black President" Bubba to act on housing for those who couldn't afford it. In fact in 1995 Obama brought a law suit against for discrimination for 186 plaintiffs against Citibank ,to give sub prime mortgages to people who really couldn't afford them. They got what they wanted however, of the original 186, only 19 still have their homes, while the others went bankrupt. There is only so much blame that really belongs to Bush, for now we learn Obama was involved in the sub prime fiasco.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bob-Marshall/100001163952013 Bob Marshall

    More people need to watch Romney Obama the Same? on youtube. Obama's 2008 speech is the same one almost word for word as his 2012 speech. He lied in 2008 and he is lying now. while campaigning in 2008, he made 200 promises and kept not one. Added $5 trillion to the national debt in less than four years. It took Bush 8 years.Took $700 million from Medicare and placed the money in Obamacare.Remember all the failed policies of Obama. He made America even more of a welfare and police state than Bush. As a former U.S. Marine who served three tours in Vetnam, this chaps my rear. He ordered the flag covered when he made a speech. He allowed a Muslim cabinet member to swear in on the Koran. How many of the people who voted for Obama due to ignorance will do so again? Obama is counting on you again as well as felons, the dead and illegals.

    • cesium62

      Was the Muslim cabinet member supposed to swear on the Bible? Would swearing on a book that is not part of your religious beliefs supposed to be convincing? Or should the Muslim cabinet member simply have been taken out and shot? Or maybe we should have just waterboarded him until he said whatever we wanted him to say?

  • awakenow

    The truth is that my Republican President dropped the ball on the whole financial/housing meltdown that largely occurred during his eight years in office. Recall that Bush was still in office on that fateful day in September, 2008, when he and Hank Paulson announced the crisis that was unfolding and what resulted in the TARP program.

    Where was the SEC during all of this? They were missing in action and they did nothing to stop the banks from what they were doing. And, NO, the banks weren't forced to make loans to those who couldn't afford them. They saw DOLLAR SIGNS in their MORTGAGE BACKED SECURITIES SCHEME that turned our mortgages into STOCK CERTIFICATES to be bought as investments on the open market, by hundreds, perhaps thousands of clueless investors.

    These investors thought they were buying AAA rated investments from the banks, when they weren't at all. The banks cooked up this scheme to make a lotta people on K-Street very, very wealthy. The banks took out insurance for the default of these pools of loans they sold off to hapless investors, knowing full well that a great majority of these loans would fail.

    The banks knew that they could count on the government, We the People, would backstop them if needed. And, they know that even now with either Obombya or Mr. RomneyCare.

    Btw, Mr. RomeyCare's top campaign contributors are the very banks we bailed out last time.

    • joanc

      Bush tried to stop Barney Frank's Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae on numerous but Franks wouldn't hear of it and was backed by a Democratic majority. It is time to let Bush off the hook, it is getting old and sickening. Let Obama take credit for what he has don and hasn't done. It long past time for him to take responsibility. In fact November will clear the slate.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      Do you just make up facts as you go along?

      The Republicans controlled the House of Representatives from 1995 to 2005.

      Tell me how Bush tried to 'stop Barney Frank's Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae' -- What does that sentence even mean?

      Why couldn't 'Bush stop Barney Frank's Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae'?

  • guest

    Very laughable to suggest that poor people tanked the market, like they had any power.
    It wasn't the subprime loans that went the market bust, but the ARM's and then loss of US jobs when Bush gave China most-favored-nations trading status. Now conservatives want to blame Obama for not creating jobs when they themselves admit only the free market can do that. Paul Ryan hasn't created any jobs in his district for over 3 terms, highest unemployment in the nation. Where are the jobs, Paul?

    • joanc

      Ask Obama the same question please! Why did he stop the oil pipeline that was ready to go in a deal with Canada, now China is the winner of the jobs and oil? Obama ,was so concerned about the Gulf after the oil spill, he stopped all drilling causing a huge loss of jobs for Americans workers, Instead he gave a huge sum to Brazil and their workers, so they could drill in the same gulf and promised the USA would be their first customer. He pushed for Windmills and got them, only we hear they are responsible for the deaths of thousands of birds caught in the blades, among the dead are a number of endangered species. Where are all the Sierra club and environment lovers while this is going on? Obama, is the President and has more clout then any congress member. Obama has not created one job, except for a huge expansion of Government workers. He promised Shovel ready jobs, but the money went else where, some to test Shrimp on a treadmill and a few other stupid projects. His answer to that question was said with a snicker "The job ready jobs" weren't as ready as I thought. No kidding! You claim Ryan had three terms which amount to almost six years, while Obama with a Democratic majority for two years out of four, did NOTHING in the way of jobs. Where are the Jobs your guy Obama promised??

    • Edward53

      Did you notice that it took Obama about 10 days to even respond to the country about the BP oil spill?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HYNQJXBGQB4REERRUMID4OFZJA sss355

      Absolutely! Not only that, the Kenyan Muslim Terrorist showed no respect for Pakistan's territorial integrity in going after OBL.

      Now, Bush / Cheney, for all their faults, realized that bowing to the will of Pakistan was much more important than going after OBL.

      It is a good thing at least one party knows priorities.

  • gray_man

    once a scumbag, always a scumbag

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Erik-Osbun/100001215333702 Erik Osbun

    ACORN pushed sub-prime lending to Bill Clinton in office. Obama was the legal advisor to ACORN. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would not have existed without Clinton behind it.