PROOF that Libs lied about Fannie and Freddy

Werbung:
NO Obamanation said:
Thats a good one :)

but that would kill them and I really am against death. I dont like killing babies or killing prisoners or even liberals.
Click to expand...

Babies? NO! Prisoners? If they've been sentenced by a jury of their peers, NO PROBLEM! Liberals? Only as many as I can before Wal-Mart runs out of ammunition.

Besides, like I said, it's not as if they're using them. After all, they're so "open minded" that their brains have fallen out!
 
BigRob said:
Well, since no Liberal on the board has the balls or stomach to put up a counter-argument I will do so for the sake of debate.

So bear with me because I personally do not buy into this argument, but here it is:


1) Yes, Republicans were pointing out problems with oversight and government regulation regarding Fannie/Freddie before this meltdown.

2) This however glosses over the bigger problem that these two companies alone are not responsible for the meltdown.

Fannie and Freddie certainly followed the market into higher risk loans, but were stopped from going full-bore into the subprime paper business by their charter and conforming loan limits. They were allowed, by the Government, to keep less capital on hand to offset risk. And they were woefully under supervised by their government regulators. And they (acting like an investment fund) acquired lots of private label MBS’ backed by toxic mortgages.

3) While Republicans were attacking Fannie/Freddie, the housing bubble was being pushed to the limits by other banks, that would have maintained and burst the bubble, even if Fannie and Freddie did not exists.

4) This crisis could have been avoided if regulation was placed on outside investment banks as much as it was placed on Fannie/Freddie, to prevent them from getting to heavily involved in the sub-prime debacle.

5) In 1999, Congress passed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which abolished “all of the significant rules put in place at the time of the Great Depression designed to prevent a repeat.” Specifically, this act “destroyed the Depression-era barrier to the merger of stockbrokers, banks and insurance companies.”

It was this deregulation that spiraled "predatory" lending practices by de-regulated banks, who felt secure knowing that they could package these loans together and sell them off to government backed Fannie/Freddie.



As I said, I don't buy this argument, but since none of the libs here want to give a shot, for the sake of debate, here it is.
Click to expand...

You know, it's not that there isn't some merit in some points of this "argument." The Republican majority in Congress, along with the Presidency since 2001 should have helped clean a few issues up. There were warnings going up enough to warrant action.

The videos from this guy, NakedEmperorNews, are phenomenal. I know there is a bit of creative license involved, but it's pretty insignificant. One of them (which?) showed that one action out of committee never came to the floor to vote, because the Republican leadership felt they couldn't pass it.

Duhhhhh! Now THAT is why the Republicans lost control in 2006 - because of their lack of conviction and adherence to Conservative principals.

Congratulations on being able to put into words, in such a civil manner, the irrational rationalizations of the Obama-Libs. Great evidence that you must understand your enemy....well, somewhat anyway....
 
NO Obamanation said:
I believe in the Death P. only in extreme and rare cases like Ted Bundy

Live is so valuable and also there are some religous reasons.
Click to expand...

I believe life is so valuable, that those who would take life without cause should be forfeit of theirs. After all, the vast majority of death row inmates are second time offenders. Meaning we caught them, we charged them, and yet we allowed them the opportunity to murder again. That innocent blood is on our heads for not doing something the first time.

Gensis 9:6 Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man, shall his blood be shed.

Pual speaking of government...
Romans 13:3 Do you want to be unafraid of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.

Sword in the text was taken literally, and was a reference to capital punishment.

Supporting texts are:
Jesus spoke to Peter
Matthew 26:52 Put up your sword in it's place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword. (no matter how unjust the arrest of Jesus was, Peter had no right to commit murder)

Leviticus 24:17 Whoever kills any man shall surely be put to death.

You can correlate the murder rates in America directly to our moving away from this divine statement. As authority has abrogated it's duty to wield the sword, evil has been unabated.
 
TruthAboveAll said:
You know, it's not that there isn't some merit in some points of this "argument." The Republican majority in Congress, along with the Presidency since 2001 should have helped clean a few issues up. There were warnings going up enough to warrant action.

The videos from this guy, NakedEmperorNews, are phenomenal. I know there is a bit of creative license involved, but it's pretty insignificant. One of them (which?) showed that one action out of committee never came to the floor to vote, because the Republican leadership felt they couldn't pass it.

Duhhhhh! Now THAT is why the Republicans lost control in 2006 - because of their lack of conviction and adherence to Conservative principals.

Congratulations on being able to put into words, in such a civil manner, the irrational rationalizations of the Obama-Libs. Great evidence that you must understand your enemy....well, somewhat anyway....
Click to expand...

First, yeah, but Democrats control both the Senate and House currently, and they controlled the Senate in 2001-2003. Plus, having a one or two vote majority isn't really having complete control. When the size of your lead in only 1 vote, it's not like you can pass whatever you need without the other side. However, I do see what you mean. Remember, not all republicans and in fact Republicans. Jumping Jim Jeffords? "RINO"

Second, there is a large difference between, seeing the need to pass something yet realizing that your political opponents are simply not going to allow it, and having a lack of conviction or adherence to conservative principals. When you know that you will be thwarted, sometimes it's better to pick a battle you can win, than fight something you know you can't.

Third... with the above said... I don't buy it. I think they should have tried it anyway, and forced a vote on it. That way they can say they tried and were stopped. Just like Welfare reform. They passed it 3 or 4 times, and Billy vetoed it each time. It built my faith in them at the time.
 
Andy said:
First, yeah, but Democrats control both the Senate and House currently, and they controlled the Senate in 2001-2003. Plus, having a one or two vote majority isn't really having complete control. When the size of your lead in only 1 vote, it's not like you can pass whatever you need without the other side. However, I do see what you mean. Remember, not all republicans and in fact Republicans. Jumping Jim Jeffords? "RINO"
Click to expand...

Doesn't that statement kind of deflate the entire argument that the inaction of this Congress is not due to the Democrats, since they only hold a tiny majority in the senate.

Second, there is a large difference between, seeing the need to pass something yet realizing that your political opponents are simply not going to allow it, and having a lack of conviction or adherence to conservative principals. When you know that you will be thwarted, sometimes it's better to pick a battle you can win, than fight something you know you can't.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

Third... with the above said... I don't buy it. I think they should have tried it anyway, and forced a vote on it. That way they can say they tried and were stopped. Just like Welfare reform. They passed it 3 or 4 times, and Billy vetoed it each time. It built my faith in them at the time.
Click to expand...

I agree it should have been pushed harder. It is hard to push for that however when the economy is running along in a strong manner though.
 
Andy said:
I believe life is so valuable, that those who would take life without cause should be forfeit of theirs. After all, the vast majority of death row inmates are second time offenders. Meaning we caught them, we charged them, and yet we allowed them the opportunity to murder again. That innocent blood is on our heads for not doing something the first time.

Gensis 9:6 Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man, shall his blood be shed.

Pual speaking of government...
Romans 13:3 Do you want to be unafraid of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.

Sword in the text was taken literally, and was a reference to capital punishment.

Supporting texts are:
Jesus spoke to Peter
Matthew 26:52 Put up your sword in it's place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword. (no matter how unjust the arrest of Jesus was, Peter had no right to commit murder)

Leviticus 24:17 Whoever kills any man shall surely be put to death.

You can correlate the murder rates in America directly to our moving away from this divine statement. As authority has abrogated it's duty to wield the sword, evil has been unabated.
Click to expand...

Do you know who the son of Sam is? David Berkowitz. I am sure you probably do. When he was arrested it was right after they abolished the Death Penalty in New York State, so he was never given it. Had the death penalty been an option he would have gotten it and would have been dead within a year or so. But since it was not an option, he just stayed in prison for the rest of his life.

For the first few years he said he felt crazed and possessed. There was one guy in prison who felt like he should reach out to him. David refused to talk to the guy and was bitter and angry for the first few years. He said after a few years he felt compelled to talk to the guy but still treated him badly. After a number of years he had a total change of heart.

He now has a ministry and helps others who come to prison. Because of the laws during the time of his conviction he must go in front of a parole board every year. He always lets them know that he doesn’t want out, and he is sure they don’t want him out and he is happy to stay and keep his ministries going. He says he does not deserve to be free when he has taken other people’s lives.

Today David Berkowitz is a saved man. His soul is redeemed. Had he died right after conviction via the death penalty we as a society would have killed his body and soul. I am not willing to meet my Maker with him knowing I supported that.

Anyways, I hope you understand where I am coming from. I do understand where you are coming from and respect it completely
 
Andy said:
First, yeah, but Democrats control both the Senate and House currently, and they controlled the Senate in 2001-2003. Plus, having a one or two vote majority isn't really having complete control. When the size of your lead in only 1 vote, it's not like you can pass whatever you need without the other side. However, I do see what you mean. Remember, not all republicans and in fact Republicans. Jumping Jim Jeffords? "RINO"
Click to expand...

Agreed, definitely. My question is, why are there RINO's, but no DINO's? Watching the Senate or House in action on C-Span, I can sometimes only shake my head in wonderment (dismay?) that THESE are who we send to Washington to make laws and guide our country? I'm wondering if it's something found in coastal waters... at least north of the Mason-Dixon line.

Second, there is a large difference between, seeing the need to pass something yet realizing that your political opponents are simply not going to allow it, and having a lack of conviction or adherence to conservative principals. When you know that you will be thwarted, sometimes it's better to pick a battle you can win, than fight something you know you can't.
Click to expand...

Again, I agree for the most part. This issue is huge though, and seems that it HAS been known to be huge for quite some time. Anyone on the correct side on this one and standing against mismanagement and corruption should have been having sit-ins on the Capitol Building and picketing the Treasury to bring it to light, if necessary. And exactly what battle were they saving their ammo for? They're not there to play nice - they're there to do the job we "hired" them to do.
Third... with the above said... I don't buy it. I think they should have tried it anyway, and forced a vote on it. That way they can say they tried and were stopped. Just like Welfare reform. They passed it 3 or 4 times, and Billy vetoed it each time. It built my faith in them at the time.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I officially became a Republican during the Reagan years. I got VERY enthused again with the Gingrich Revolution, and actually started to support Republicans financially as well as with my vote. Since 2003, my enthusiasm has gone steadily downhill. I support them in essence, as corporately they are still the closest thing to conservatism in a viable party.

They didn't lose power in 2006 because of the war, or because of things like welfare reform that they'd passed but been unable to implement. They lost power because they've forgotten what their CORE principles MUST be. Without commitment to them, to WE the PEOPLE, they're no better than the Dems. Without the voting record to prove their principled stance, they have nothing to offer.

On the side - we had a RINO in the House for our district in 2006. I worked hard getting him defeated in the primary, to get a true Conservative on the ballot. Thankfully, he won. He's facing a hard re-election campaign right now, and I'll support him any way I can due to fact he's proven himself and earned my trust and support.
 
Andy said:
You can correlate the murder rates in America directly to our moving away from this divine statement. As authority has abrogated it's duty to wield the sword, evil has been unabated.
Click to expand...

Exodus 35 verse 2:
For six days work may be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a holy day, a sabbath of complete rest to the LORD; whoever does any work on it shall be put to death.

I'm Glad we don't follow that divine statement...

Not sure what any of this has to do with Freddie and Fannie though.
 
Werbung:

Similar threads

asur
Fannie Mae Bailout and Obama
Replies
2
Views
1K
Libsmasher
L
asur
Obama in Corrupt Pocket of Freddie Mac, Sallie Mae
Replies
13
Views
5K
Pandora
Pandora
Real News Links
How Democrats, Not Dubya, Destroyed the Economy in 2007
Replies
13
Views
568
Boris Norris
B
Little-Acorn
Why is Obama punishing Wall St, when Dems in Govt caused the 2008 crash?
Replies
8
Views
2K
Boris Norris
B
Little-Acorn
"Saving Our Economy"
2
Replies
29
Views
5K
Phoenix68
Phoenix68
Back
Top