Democrats trying to do it again......

This really isn't an apples-to-apples, if you read up on it some more.

Banks got overly cautious after '08, in the other direction. They were denying loans that should reasonably have been allowed, and cut off a lot of folks who should otherwise have been able to purchase homes.

But beyond that, the circumstances are completely different from the Clinton years. That was a time of prosperity, and having a bad or below-average credit rating at that time was not at all like the present day, when many people had credit setbacks due to the recession, but are otherwise hard-working and not the kind of credit risks that those with poor credit ratings in the '90's represented.

Holding those kinds of borrowers back will only hurt the economy. It may be a fine line, but it's not necessarily irresponsible if there are some checks in place.
 
Barney did have specific authority for oversight of SEC related and told Congress there were no problems 2 weeks before things hit the fan.

Well come on in his defense he was running a Male brothel out of his congressional office, those things took up a lot of his time.
 
This really isn't an apples-to-apples, if you read up on it some more.

Banks got overly cautious after '08, in the other direction. They were denying loans that should reasonably have been allowed, and cut off a lot of folks who should otherwise have been able to purchase homes.

But beyond that, the circumstances are completely different from the Clinton years. That was a time of prosperity, and having a bad or below-average credit rating at that time was not at all like the present day, when many people had credit setbacks due to the recession, but are otherwise hard-working and not the kind of credit risks that those with poor credit ratings in the '90's represented.

Holding those kinds of borrowers back will only hurt the economy. It may be a fine line, but it's not necessarily irresponsible if there are some checks in place.

Stop using facts and reason with conservatards!
 
You never called Bush an Emperor, so what has Obama done to deserve him the term that Bush didn't do? Remember, Bush used executive orders more often than Obama, so that can't be used to claim Obama is an Emperor.

That is a horrible argument, as in Bush didn't use them in the same scope as Obama has, please attempt to be serious!
 
This really isn't an apples-to-apples, if you read up on it some more.

Banks got overly cautious after '08, in the other direction. They were denying loans that should reasonably have been allowed, and cut off a lot of folks who should otherwise have been able to purchase homes.

But beyond that, the circumstances are completely different from the Clinton years. That was a time of prosperity, and having a bad or below-average credit rating at that time was not at all like the present day, when many people had credit setbacks due to the recession, but are otherwise hard-working and not the kind of credit risks that those with poor credit ratings in the '90's represented.

Holding those kinds of borrowers back will only hurt the economy. It may be a fine line, but it's not necessarily irresponsible if there are some checks in place.

And they defaulted. So was the process working ? Yes until the b anks were "encouraged" to write the loans anyway.
 
That is a horrible argument, as in Bush didn't use them in the same scope as Obama has, please attempt to be serious!
Oh baloney! You just don't like Obama.

Bush took us into two full fledged occupations without a declaration of war, so shut up about Obama being an Emperor, plus with Bush we got Every Child Left Behind and The Patriot Act, so please, refrain from telling us how Obama is an Emperor.

Bush was the Emperor with no clothes!
 
Well come on in his defense he was running a Male brothel out of his congressional office, those things took up a lot of his time.

He was busy running cover for.his owners Gaines and wall street. As was Dodd. And oddly enough a junior senator from Illinois who was #2 recipient of Fannie Mae campaign money.
 
Well come on in his defense he was running a Male brothel out of his congressional office, those things took up a lot of his time.
You are misrepresenting the situation, lying is a sin, patriot, the investigation cleared Frank's, he was not aware that his home was being used as a brothel.

Shame on you for not telling the truth.

Franks kicked the young man out of his home when he became aware of the activity.

Now, next time you spread this lie it will be a willful character smear, which is a sin, bearing false witness against your neighbor.

http://time.com/
 
Back
Top