How do you know you've got Progressives in a corner? They cry "let's not be partisan."
Bloomberg has a rundown of the last part of the history of the financial crisis, from its turning point in 2005 to now.
The problem actually goes back at least to the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (CRA), if not all the way to 1938 with Franklin Roosevelt's creation of Fannie Mae, but it'll have to wait for another time.
There's a claim going around now that says "nobody knew this was coming."
It's simply untrue. In 2005, Democrats killed by a party-line vote, an effort by Republicans to try to control a situation that was becoming increasingly dangerous.
One of three sponsors of that bill - one of the three people who saw the problem and took action to prevent it - was Senator John McCain (R).
What was Junior Senator Barack Obama (D) doing? He was protecting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. While one might suggest it was for the huge pile of cash they had been giving him, he may have actually done it for ideological reasons - Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were instruments that allowed the government to socialize the mortgage and lending industry.
Even when it has become abundantly clear that bad regulations got us into this mess, Mr. Obama derides the idea that we need less regulation. In fact, one is hard pressed to find a single topic - other than leaving abortion survivors to die on the operating table - where Mr. Obama is in favor of less governmental control and coercion.
Full disclosure - because astroturfing is an appalling act (a sentiment not shared by Mr. Obama's Chief Media Strategist David Axelrod) - the writer of the article is one of John McCain's men.
That said, while Mr. Obama simplistically snorts, "capitalism! deregulation! bah!" Kevin Hassett actually explains how we get from Point T to Point Z. (He isn't telling the whole, long, sordid story from Point A.)
If there's a Progressive argument that can't be boiled down to, "capitalism: bah!" and actually shows a chain of causation starting from the development of the secondary mortgage market to its rapid expansion in the 90s, one which explains why the laws were passed, and exactly why corporations made the choices they were making (such as being forced by the CRA to give loans to bad credit risks, or why Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were gobbling up bad paper which would appear as assets on its balance sheets, thereby increasing the bonuses of the Democrats who ran the quasi-governmental corporations), this writer hasn't seen it.
Were there Republicans who opposed fixing the problem when we had a chance? Of course there were. But don't cry for bipartisanship. Watch for who was at the helm of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - look at who supported them, who profited from their existence, including outside organizations like ACORN, known for its election fraud and its association with Mr. Obama and Chicago politics, and you will see an overwhelming preponderance of Democratic fingerprints.
Good theories make disprovable predictions. Here's one: in the coming days, weeks and months, you'll find far less coverage on the causes of this from the left-leaning media than we did on ENRON, and you will see a lot of articles playing Name That Party. If the Republicans were chiefly to blame for this, you'd see more in-depth coverage, and you'd see the little (R) next to the names of the people responsible.
Comments
It is refreshing to see SOMEONE is getting it.
And to hear Pelosi and Schumer wanting, now get this, MORE OVERSIGHT on the bailout. MORE OVERSIGHT! What happened to their oversight on the markets? Where was Chris Dodd? Where was Barney Frank? (dont answer that please, i dont want to know)
Great Timing and Good to Read someone has some sense. Most Americans are being convinced that the Wall Street crisis is because of big business and their CEO's.(And thus greedy capitalistic Republicans) It's not. Bottom line ... its about the government forcing lenders to lend to folks who couldn't conservatively qualify for a regular loan and then those people bailing out of their (not mine,nor any other taxpayers) financial responsiblities. I am sick of Obama spouting off and fibbing constantly.
In 2005 the party makeup of cingress was as follows
U.S. Senate-Republicans 55, Democrats 45, Other 1
House of representatives-Repulicans 231, Democrats 202, Other 1
How does the minority party stop an issue with a srtrict party line vote unless Republicans to stop it?????
Because it requires a strict party line vote on both sides, assuming you can get enough out of both houses and committee?
If the assumption is that because 45 Democrats and 6 Republicans makes this a bipartisan lack of effort, I'm sorry, but that isn't going to sell to anyone who isn't trying to avoid the implications. Keep it in mind the next time the converse happens, where almost all Republicans and a few Democrats cause something to against your way. There are very few truly party-line votes. Many jump back and forth.
Better question: why does Mr. Obama keep insisting that this is Bush' economics when Congress has far more opportunity to create and implement laws?
Even better question: where have the Democrats been these last two years? Until this blew up in our faces, they didn't even propose any oversight. As a matter of fact, very few Democrats have ever supported any oversight on the matter, except during the Clinton administration when they were pushing to make greater (read: more leveraged) use of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Hilarious. Democrats and Liberals are to blame for everything?
Ever meet a mortgage broker?
I have. No one forced them to issue No Doc and NINJA loans - they Lived for Such Loans, since that's where the money was...was.
Truth is: Fannie and Freddie bought loans on the back end, in good faith, from unscrupulous people on the front lines - including brokers and property inspectors who visited and rubber stamped unworthy borrowers and overvalued properties specifically to force the highest interest bearing loans through at all hazards.
I personally know the President/CEO of one of the largest Mortgage Houses in the States - which closed its doors this past month.
And you know what?
These people deserved to go out of business. They were shifty, dishonest, hyper-aggressive closers who made unworthy loans just for the money they would get flipping them to Fannie and Freddie.
So where do Fannie and Freddie fit into all this?
Frankly, Fannie and Freddie were just doing their job.
They were undermined by everyone they trusted to behave ethically in the field.
Last time I checked mortgage brokers only provided the services for getting a loan and were not the actual lender. If the loans are made available by lending institutions (Fannie and Freddie) you can't blame the broker. That would be like killing the messenger.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!