Clinton is largely responsible for the destruction of our housing market...

repubs have taken advantage also.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/business/13lend.html

 

Yeah, another typical thread here.
Yeah, Republicans suck but Democrats are saints!

Of course, Clinton and Carter before him didn't do anything wrong either.
I acknowledge that the Bush's have screwed things up and I can't wait til George W is out of office.

 

No..not another typical thread. I have given you undeniable proof that the collapse of the mortgage industry started with Clinton and his administration. How is that "typical"?

This is in direct contradiction to everything the democrats are preaching from the campaign trail.

The report I listed above should be distributed to everyone you know so that they too can see the truth.

 

Never said they didn't. As a matter of fact, I criticized the Bush administration for allow this mess to continue after he took office. It still started with Clinton.

 

Salty, My comments weren't directed at you, we are on the same page.
It seems like every post a few posters have written are all anti-republican and totally pro-democrat.
I said typical because the responses to your post were typical.
Republicans are bad, Democrats are good for instance.

If you excuse me I have to get back to my Michael Moore movie!:lol::grin:

 

:grin:

I was replying to the last line of your post where you acknowledged that Bush screwed things up. In this case, he didn't screw it up..the stinking democrats did. Bush just left things screwed up when he should have fixed them.

No offense meant Sdman...you know I love ya...:grin:

 

There is a long way from a dem idea in the 90's to expand home ownership (correctly stated, a good idea) to a direct result of private mort. companies pedaling mortgages that won't be paid back, out of a private company, many now bankrupt, involvement from rating agencies, appraisers, and brokerages selling this stuff, and then taking billion dollar write downs of THEIR funds.

i have never heard of the linkage.

 

Thats the thing Salty right there.
I am willing and always have been that the Republicans and Bush have and did screw up.
The Republican Congress got corrupted and along with Bush spent money like they were liberal democrats and now the democrats use that against us which is fair game.

I just want someone like Reagan in the white house.
Someone who isn't ashamed to be a conservative republican and has the back bone to challenge the democrats and go to the American people and call out the problems in government such as politicians who stand in the way.
Someone that will defend his policies.

Part of myself feels sorry for Bush and our wonderful country.
Can you imagine how things could've been totally different if 9/11 wouldn't have happened?
I have thought long and hard about this and Iraq.
I wish we would've never gone into Iraq under the circumstances.
Hindsight is 20/20 but I think that was a bad idea but in no way did I go with the Dems on losing the war.
America right or wrong, I want to kick ass and win because we leave all countries better than we found them except Vietnam.
You can think the politicians for that one, Dems for starting the war and bombing empty forrests.

On the other hand Bush didn't defend many of his positions and why he did certain things, he left that up to his supporters so part of me doesn't feel sorry for him.
I said I will be glad when he is gone because 8 years of him has been too much, 8 years of anybody other than Reagan is too much.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to de-rail your thread.

 

Just a small point here.

Do you Political gurus really have to defend your party to the point that you point out every fault of the other, or defend every issue of your own?

Point being, and please do not take this personal anyone,

Salty starts a thread with a considerable amount of evidence that the mortgage crisis had beginnings during the Clinton administration. The information has some merit for sure, even though I think it is a bit silly to assume that promoting home ownership is a bad thing in anyway, it appears to hold water in the large scope of things.

Then Several come to the defense of the Democrats, Clinton, like he is not allowed some areas of error. I liked Clinton a lot. Not because I'm a huge Clinton fan, but because his 8 years in office were one of the most financially successful stretches in the history of the USA. However I would be a fool to assume that because I liked him and would gladly have him back that he didn't screw a few things up too.

I just don't see the point of the idea that either side has to be 100% right all the time like some seem to defend to the bone.

Anyway, carry on with your conversation, I was just making a small observation. I do learn a lot from some of you hard headed SOB's even if it may be biased one way or the other.

 

It's not that they just wanted to expand home ownership. You're right, that's a commendable idea. What I am trying to point out is they (The Clinton administration) threw out all common sense with the way they went about it. How many times did that HUD paper mention breaking down barriers? Almost every safeguard, which had been in place for decades, was disregarded in the name of minority and underprivileged home ownership. They wanted to bolster the economy..and they certainly did, but at what cost?

If the Clinton administration hadn't taken off the regulatory restraints, we probably wouldn't be in this mess. Bush should have stopped it. He didn't. He didn't start it though..so it's not right that the blame be put on him.