Harvdog wrote:Terry in Crapchester wrote:Harvdog wrote:Do you know what cock blocker is? I am sure it has happened to you. Melvyn Watt. He is part of the reason for all these financial issues. See, back in 2003 a guy named...George W. Bush propsed an oversight committee to clean up Fannie Mae. Guess what happend? You got it, cock blocked by the democratic congress and senate. In 2004 Fannie Mae is found to have "cooked the books". At the same time Garelick and raines received $175 million in bonuses.
Uhhh, the Democrats were in the minority in Congress in 2003 and 2004. They couldn't have cockblocked anyone. Tell me you knew.
Ummm Yeah. Where in that quote did I saw that the Democrats had the majority of the senate and house? I said that it was blocked by the democrats in the the house and senate.
You didn't say that the Democrats had the majority, but you certainly implied it. With a minority, particularly in light of the rules the Republicans set when they were in the majority, the Democrats had no power to block anything the Republicans wanted. They couldn't even rely on a Senate filibuster, given the whimsicality of Lieberman and the Blue Dog Democrats.
All in all, Fannie and Freddie had 354 Washington Bureaucrats on the take. The 4 biggest offenders have been listed. Melvin Watt came out and said that by adding "regulations" to Fannie and Freddie, President Bush was blocking the ability for poorer families to get homes. But, you knew this, right? You also know that Clinton was the one that took out the regulations and created Fannie and Freddie in 1998. Of course you did since you know everything.
You've conveniently ignored addressing my point that increased regulation goes against the grain of everything Bush stood for. Your claim that he attempted to impose regulations on Fannie and Freddie is implausible at best, not credible at worst.
As for Clinton, he didn't create Fannie and Freddie, nor did he start the deregulation process (that would be Reagan, at least as to the latter point). But you'll get no argument from me that he was part of the problem. Bill Clinton's greatest fault was that he took Bob Knight's advice and laid back and enjoyed the ass-raping he took from Republicans. He was basically Republican-lite. His governing philosophy, in response to the Republican Party, was essentially, "Me too, but not as much."
In fact, I seem to recall a certain quote from somewhere around 2004, goes something like this:
George W. Bush wrote:I have political capital, and I intend to spend it.
Too bad ol' Smirky McFlightsuit chose to spend his political capital on Terri Schiavo, instead of something that really would have helped people, like regulating Fannie and Freddie. Then again, he was the champion deregulator, so that would have been anathema to him.
You might want to stick to discussions on Texas football. You seem to have some knowledge in that area. You're only two posts in on this discussion, and already it isn't going particularly well for you.
Right, because Texas football has everything to do with the Democrats who fucked up this country.
Actually, I was trying to throw you a bone. Went right over your head, apparently.
Blame Bush for a quote but turn a blind eye to the guy who is running for President that knew Fannie and Freddie were not only going to fail, but they kept putting money errrrr.......capital in his pocket. The deregulation was started by Bill Clinton.
I think they should have pulled the plug on Schaivo. She was gone. But when the president tried to clean up F&F, he was the blame? Right, because if he would have acted in 2003 we would be worse off today??
You're all over the map here. You're trying to blame Obama, when he wasn't even in the Senate in '03 and '04. Meanwhile, you continue to claim, without any supporting evidence, that Bush tried to clean up Freddie and Fannie, when it would have been contrary to his entire political philosophy to do so.
