Comments for FullPolitics.com http://fullpolitics.com Learn. Articulate. Debate Wed, 17 Mar 2010 05:45:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 Comment on The Cause and Origin of our Financial Crisis, from News Sources. by cyborg http://fullpolitics.com/2008/09/22/the-cause-and-origin-of-our-financial-crisis-from-news-sources/comment-page-1/#comment-27 cyborg Mon, 22 Sep 2008 21:59:29 +0000 http://fullpolitics.com/?p=81#comment-27 The Obama campaign and far left web sites are blaming this law for the current economic problems. They are pointing to the first vote which was mostly along party lines but ignore the second vote which was almost unanimous. If you examine the wikipedia entry on the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act it tells how one of the compromises that Democrats insisted upon was a strengthening of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA).The CRA was the first step to this crisis because even with unified banks, if sound and ethical financial practices were used all would have been fine. The Obama campaign says that re-unifying the banks and “deregulating” is what caused this and capitalism is what caused the economic problems of today, yet other countries have unified banks and don’t get these problems so what is the real problem? The Community Reinvestment Act, in the name of fighting “racism” and “redlining” forced banks to make riskier loans in areas less economically stable or viable. Banks said it was risk management, Democrats said it was racism. This increased the risk to the banks for these loans so in essence in some cases they were forced to make bad risk loans.This risk banks were subjected to was amplified greater because loan customers wanted fixed rates and depositors wanted a variable rate. The banks had to keep enough liquid assets to cover loans. This limited the number of loans that a bank. So how did they get around this?Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were created as a partially private corporation backed by the US Government to buy loan bonds or buy the mortgages outright from banks. Congress created a regulation and monitoring agency called the OFHEO that reported to the Banking Committee’s in the Congress and exempted them from reporting to the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC).This was step two that led to this crisis. The CRAforced banks to make more loans available that carried more risk, so banks were eager to sell these higher risk loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Withthe housing boom the inflated value of the houses it had as collateral for the loans on paper made it look like Fannie and Freddie had more collateral assets than reality could bear. With the housing market inflating do to easy loans and low interest rates making it TOO EASY to get a loan for a new home, demand for loans went up. Fannie and Freddie started buying loans at a furious rate. The more loans they bought, the more income on paper they could claim, but more and more people were defaulting on the bad loans….Political appointees (not financial guru’s) were placed in charge of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; people like Franklin Raines, Jeff Johnson and former Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick. Did you GET this part? It explains how Obama, that slimeball who accuses McCain of "DISHONORABLE" campaigning, when this shows he is either TOO STUPID, or TOO MUCH OF A LIAR (more likely, all Dems say he's smart) to be President. Not ONLY is he using the Worst Financial Scandal in U.S.History as a Political Chip, a tool, a hammer with which to try and hit McCain, but it is HE, OBAMA, who will be hit with it, along with Dodd, Barney Frank, and other Democrat Money-Grabbers of Fannie, Freddie, and Banks. Did you know, with only THREE YEARS in the senate, Obama was the NUMBER TWO HIGHEST RECIPIENT OF FANNIE/FREDDIE LOBBYIST DOLLARS? Mmmmmmmmm, I just loooooooove that "Hope and Change" he's shovelin'! I gots to git me some o' dat!!! The Obama campaign and far left web sites are blaming this law for the current economic problems. They are pointing to the first vote which was mostly along party lines but ignore the second vote which was almost unanimous. If you examine the wikipedia entry on the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act it tells how one of the compromises that Democrats insisted upon was a strengthening of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA).The CRA was the first step to this crisis because even with unified banks, if sound and ethical financial practices were used all would have been fine. The Obama campaign says that re-unifying the banks and “deregulating” is what caused this and capitalism is what caused the economic problems of today, yet other countries have unified banks and don’t get these problems so what is the real problem? The Community Reinvestment Act, in the name of fighting “racism” and “redlining” forced banks to make riskier loans in areas less economically stable or viable. Banks said it was risk management, Democrats said it was racism. This increased the risk to the banks for these loans so in essence in some cases they were forced to make bad risk loans.This risk banks were subjected to was amplified greater because loan customers wanted fixed rates and depositors wanted a variable rate. The banks had to keep enough liquid assets to cover loans. This limited the number of loans that a bank. So how did they get around this?Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were created as a partially private corporation backed by the US Government to buy loan bonds or buy the mortgages outright from banks. Congress created a regulation and monitoring agency called the OFHEO that reported to the Banking Committee’s in the Congress and exempted them from reporting to the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC).This was step two that led to this crisis. The CRAforced banks to make more loans available that carried more risk, so banks were eager to sell these higher risk loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Withthe housing boom the inflated value of the houses it had as collateral for the loans on paper made it look like Fannie and Freddie had more collateral assets than reality could bear. With the housing market inflating do to easy loans and low interest rates making it TOO EASY to get a loan for a new home, demand for loans went up. Fannie and Freddie started buying loans at a furious rate. The more loans they bought, the more income on paper they could claim, but more and more people were defaulting on the bad loans….Political appointees (not financial guru’s) were placed in charge of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; people like Franklin Raines, Jeff Johnson and former Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick.

Did you GET this part? It explains how Obama, that slimeball who accuses McCain of “DISHONORABLE” campaigning, when this shows he is either TOO STUPID, or TOO MUCH OF A LIAR (more likely, all Dems say he’s smart) to be President.
Not ONLY is he using the Worst Financial Scandal in U.S.History as a Political Chip, a tool, a hammer with which to try and hit McCain, but it is HE, OBAMA, who will be hit with it, along with Dodd, Barney Frank, and other Democrat Money-Grabbers of Fannie, Freddie, and Banks. Did you know, with only THREE YEARS in the senate, Obama was the NUMBER TWO HIGHEST RECIPIENT OF FANNIE/FREDDIE LOBBYIST DOLLARS?

Mmmmmmmmm, I just loooooooove that “Hope and Change” he’s shovelin’! I gots to git me some o’ dat!!!

]]> Comment on The FULL TRUTH, the CONNECTION, between Obama and William Ayers by cyborg http://fullpolitics.com/2008/09/18/the-full-truth-the-connection-between-obama-and-william-ayers/comment-page-1/#comment-26 cyborg Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:46:08 +0000 http://fullpolitics.com/?p=77#comment-26 SO, Democrats? Don't you think WE, the American People, have a RIGHT to know Barack's ANSWER to these questions? A man who would be king? A man, who is running for the MOST IMPORTANT JOB IN THE WORLD? And he REFUSES to answer any more questions, about his 20-plus year freindship with this Unconvicted Radical America-Hating Pentagon Bomber? Isn't there ONE Democrat on this site with a SHRED of Decency? Have not ANY of you have any SHAME? To support a Presidential Candidate with freinds like THIS? WHEN, in American History, has such a FLAWED Candidate been allowed to even RUN, let alone be Nominated! Only in the Democrat Party, I guess. We, as a country, are almost dead. The America I knew as a boy is DEAD. Feel free to comment. SO, Democrats? Don’t you think WE, the American People, have a RIGHT to know Barack’s ANSWER to these questions? A man who would be king? A man, who is running for the MOST IMPORTANT JOB IN THE WORLD?

And he REFUSES to answer any more questions, about his 20-plus year freindship with this Unconvicted Radical America-Hating Pentagon Bomber?

Isn’t there ONE Democrat on this site with a SHRED of Decency? Have not ANY of you have any SHAME? To support a Presidential Candidate with freinds like THIS? WHEN, in American History, has such a FLAWED Candidate been allowed to even RUN, let alone be Nominated! Only in the Democrat Party, I guess. We, as a country, are almost dead. The America I knew as a boy is DEAD.

Feel free to comment.

]]> Comment on Hello, Again, Members,and What do YOU Think, 7 Years Later? by Grind http://fullpolitics.com/2008/09/12/hello-again-membersand-what-do-you-think-7-years-later/comment-page-1/#comment-25 Grind Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:43:44 +0000 http://fullpolitics.com/?p=71#comment-25 fullLOLitics.com fullLOLitics.com

]]> Comment on My Thoughts after 7 Years, and “911 was an Inside Job” by cyborg http://fullpolitics.com/2008/09/11/my-thoughts-after-7-years-and-911-was-an-inside-job/comment-page-1/#comment-24 cyborg Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:47:33 +0000 http://fullpolitics.com/?p=69#comment-24 Oh, sorry, the "911 was inside job"- I saw and heard the usual nuts and wackos this morning, disgracing themselves and making the somber occasion in New York a zoo. They were shouting in megaphones "911 was inside job!" I wonder where this one guy got his info. He said tapes have been released, showing how Bush planned it all. Gee, that's funny. Dan Rather couldn't find any, before he got fired! Neither could CNN, ABC, NBC! Anybody want to take a GUESS what Political Party these Nutjobs belong to? Haaaaaaahahahaha! Oh, sorry, the “911 was inside job”- I saw and heard the usual nuts and wackos this morning, disgracing themselves and making the somber occasion in New York a zoo. They were shouting in megaphones “911 was inside job!” I wonder where this one guy got his info. He said tapes have been released, showing how Bush planned it all. Gee, that’s funny. Dan Rather couldn’t find any, before he got fired! Neither could CNN, ABC, NBC!

Anybody want to take a GUESS what Political Party these Nutjobs belong to? Haaaaaaahahahaha!

]]> Comment on Democrat’s Incredible Fear by cyborg http://fullpolitics.com/2008/09/09/democrats-incredible-fear/comment-page-1/#comment-23 cyborg Tue, 09 Sep 2008 23:08:23 +0000 http://fullpolitics.com/?p=67#comment-23 I welcome your input! I welcome your input!

]]> Comment on Obama defends his experience by SR http://fullpolitics.com/2008/09/01/obama-defends-his-experience/comment-page-1/#comment-22 SR Thu, 04 Sep 2008 01:53:29 +0000 http://fullpolitics.com/?p=63#comment-22 Obama spent 145 days in the Senate before he began to run for President. As a state senator he was a joke. He accomplished nothing, not voting more than supporting or opposing anything. He's never had any executive experience, he's never actually run anything other than his campaign. There isnt any legislative accomplishments to reference, there arent any accomplishments of his life to mention. Quoting other smart people or friends is NOT a defense to how unqualified Barak Hussien Obama is. Thats like taking an 11 yr old girl and saying "She's ready to lead the US Army... her mommy told me so." Only fools would put an entirely unqualified person into the office of the Presidency. Youre the one who brought up common sense. And Obama is no Lincoln. SR Obama spent 145 days in the Senate before he began to run for President.

As a state senator he was a joke. He accomplished nothing, not voting more than supporting or opposing anything.

He’s never had any executive experience, he’s never actually run anything other than his campaign.

There isnt any legislative accomplishments to reference, there arent any accomplishments of his life to mention.

Quoting other smart people or friends is NOT a defense to how unqualified Barak Hussien Obama is. Thats like taking an 11 yr old girl and saying “She’s ready to lead the US Army… her mommy told me so.”

Only fools would put an entirely unqualified person into the office of the Presidency. Youre the one who brought up common sense. And Obama is no Lincoln.

SR

]]> Comment on Obama defends his experience by midcan5 http://fullpolitics.com/2008/09/01/obama-defends-his-experience/comment-page-1/#comment-21 midcan5 Wed, 03 Sep 2008 12:05:19 +0000 http://fullpolitics.com/?p=63#comment-21 The republicans think he does. "Well, Abraham Lincoln served two years in the U.S.House, and seemed to do all right." Newt Gingrich, commenting on Obama's experience "He [Obama] has ten years experience in public office, more than the two other leading Democratic candidates, Hillary Clinton (six-plus years as Senator from New York) and John Edwards (six years as Senator from North Carolina). Barack's first eight years spent in the Illinois senate before his two years (and counting) of service in the U.S. Senate, should not be forgotten. Far away from the Washington spotlight, he introduced, voted on and passed bills, debated with his colleagues—something that was missing in Washington, where everything is settled in the backroom—and arduously worked to satisfy his constituents. Most important of all, he learned that how to work across the aisle, and get stuff done. "When you come in, especially as a freshman, and work on something like ethics reform, it's not necessarily a way to endear yourself to some of the veteran members of the Illinois General Assembly," said state Sen. Kirk W. Dillard, a Republican who became a friend. "And working on issues like racial profiling was contentious, but Barack had a way both intellectually and in demeanor that defused skeptics."" http://www.obamapedia.org/page/Does+Barack+Obama+have+enough+experience+to+be+president%3F?t=anon The republicans think he does.

“Well, Abraham Lincoln served two years in the U.S.House, and seemed to do all right.” Newt Gingrich, commenting on Obama’s experience

“He [Obama] has ten years experience in public office, more than the two other leading Democratic candidates, Hillary Clinton (six-plus years as Senator from New York) and John Edwards (six years as Senator from North Carolina). Barack’s first eight years spent in the Illinois senate before his two years (and counting) of service in the U.S. Senate, should not be forgotten. Far away from the Washington spotlight, he introduced, voted on and passed bills, debated with his colleagues—something that was missing in Washington, where everything is settled in the backroom—and arduously worked to satisfy his constituents. Most important of all, he learned that how to work across the aisle, and get stuff done.

“When you come in, especially as a freshman, and work on something like ethics reform, it’s not necessarily a way to endear yourself to some of the veteran members of the Illinois General Assembly,” said state Sen. Kirk W. Dillard, a Republican who became a friend. “And working on issues like racial profiling was contentious, but Barack had a way both intellectually and in demeanor that defused skeptics.”"

http://www.obamapedia.org/page/Does+Barack+Obama+have+enough+experience+to+be+president%3F?t=anon

]]> Comment on Obama defends his experience by SR http://fullpolitics.com/2008/09/01/obama-defends-his-experience/comment-page-1/#comment-20 SR Wed, 03 Sep 2008 06:12:08 +0000 http://fullpolitics.com/?p=63#comment-20 So youre not going to try and defend the extensive experience of Barak Hussien Obama? Your solution is to elect a completely unqualified person to be the Commander In Chief? The Chief Executive? The most powerful office in the world? We're fighting two wars, we face islamic extremism world wide, a theocratic islamic nation intent on getting nuclear weapons, higher energy prices, a soft economy, and because you hate republicans you would desire to put Barak Hussien Obama, who's only experience he claims to have, to be the President, is that he's running for President? And you want to talk about having good sense? SR So youre not going to try and defend the extensive experience of Barak Hussien Obama?

Your solution is to elect a completely unqualified person to be the Commander In Chief? The Chief Executive? The most powerful office in the world?

We’re fighting two wars, we face islamic extremism world wide, a theocratic islamic nation intent on getting nuclear weapons, higher energy prices, a soft economy, and because you hate republicans you would desire to put Barak Hussien Obama, who’s only experience he claims to have, to be the President, is that he’s running for President?

And you want to talk about having good sense?

SR

]]> Comment on Obama defends his experience by midcan5 http://fullpolitics.com/2008/09/01/obama-defends-his-experience/comment-page-1/#comment-19 midcan5 Tue, 02 Sep 2008 23:59:34 +0000 http://fullpolitics.com/?p=63#comment-19 The past 20 to 30 thirty years have proven one thing republicans can gain voters from single issues: taxes, abortion, teaching creationism/evolution, prayer, gay rights, etc. they can win this ragtag group but their leadership has been a failure in almost every category one can name. Should they win again they will fail again, no one ever said good sense was necessary trait for voting. The past 20 to 30 thirty years have proven one thing republicans can gain voters from single issues: taxes, abortion, teaching creationism/evolution, prayer, gay rights, etc. they can win this ragtag group but their leadership has been a failure in almost every category one can name. Should they win again they will fail again, no one ever said good sense was necessary trait for voting.

]]> Comment on Harriet Myers and Sarah Palin by SR http://fullpolitics.com/2008/08/29/harriet-myers-and-sarah-palin/comment-page-1/#comment-18 SR Tue, 02 Sep 2008 01:45:43 +0000 http://fullpolitics.com/?p=59#comment-18 The problem for democrats is the Palin and Obama are about the same when it comes to being qualified to be president, the only difference is one is running for president, and one isnt. ? Do democrats want to run their presidential nominee against the republicans VP pick? lol Lets make it all about experience and being ready that puts Obama vs McCain, i wonder who wins that competition? SR The problem for democrats is the Palin and Obama are about the same when it comes to being qualified to be president, the only difference is one is running for president, and one isnt.

?

Do democrats want to run their presidential nominee against the republicans VP pick? lol Lets make it all about experience and being ready that puts Obama vs McCain, i wonder who wins that competition?

SR

]]>