[NeedKarma]

So this is what right-wing thinktanks do? LOL

[speechlesstx]

So this is what right-wing thinktanks do? LOL

One has to put it in terms liberals can understand.

[talaniman]

What part of the middle class is broke is it you guys are not understanding? Walmart doesn't understand either.

Walmart Losing Business, Looks to Retool - DailyFinance

Wal-Mart customers are losing too much money, says retailer

[speechlesstx]

What part of the middle class is broke is it you guys are not understanding? Walmart doesn't understand either.

Walmart Losing Business, Looks to Retool - DailyFinance

Wal-Mart customers are losing too much money, says retailer

What part of Obama's failed economic polices are you not understanding?

[tomder55]

That's OK... there is always personal retirement accounts to plunder
Retirement Savings Accounts Draw U.S. Consumer Bureau Attention - Bloomberg

[speechlesstx]

that's ok ....there is always personal retirement accounts to plunder
Retirement Savings Accounts Draw U.S. Consumer Bureau Attention - Bloomberg

What could go wrong?

[talaniman]

Wall Street and the banks tanking the global economy again, or have you forgoten so quickly?

[smoothy]

Don't forget Bill Clinton's, and the Dem's involvement with forcing the banks to give loans to minorities and others with horrible credit to be "fair" to them... being the root cause of the Banking problem as well as the Housing bubble.

And What happened here wasn't the cause of the OTHER countries who had even BIGGER problems of their own making, All we were doing is making it possible to run their own Ponzi schemes longer than they should have lasted.

[Wondergirl]

Don't forget Bill Clinton's, and the Dem's involvement with forcing the banks to give loans to minorities and others with horrible credit to be "fair" to them...being the root cause of the Banking problem as well as the Housing bubble.

That wasn't what happened, and the Dems weren't the cause of those credit problems. It was the 1% wanting more.

[smoothy]

That wasn't what happened, and the Dems weren't the cause of those credit problems. It was the 1% wanting more.

You can't possibly believe that crap... because that's all that is... and its WELL documented.

Obama in the only court document (a Docket) ever discovered with his name on it as a lawyer... has his fingers on the early petitions leading to the courts forcing banks to give money to people who were not qualified to get it.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/03/do...action-claims/

[Wondergirl]

Do you have a link or a reputable news report?

[smoothy]

I linked one... probably while you were still posting

Take that info and Google plenty of other sites... there is even a photo of a specific court docket... this has been around for more than a few years... it was ignored by the Obama whorshipers during his FIRST election. Was right out there with the ACORN frauds... after he claimed he had nothing to do with them and it was proven he was... this was back when he was working hand in hand with Acorn

[tomder55]

Yes it's indisputable that Zero was a lead lawyer /community activist in the early days of the events that lead to the housing bubble. His landmark anti-discrimination case against Citi 1995 helped set the stage for the lowering of mortgage requirements. They settled the case and then began doling out mortgage approvals with virtually no qualifiers .

Of course he could give a rat's @ss that almost all of the folks he represented have had their homes go into foreclosure.
Now they sing a different tune .

“If you see some people don’t make enough money to afford the mortgage, why would you give them a loan?” asked Obama client John Buchanan. “There should be some type of regulation against giving people loans they can’t afford.”

Obama pushed banks to give subprime loans to Chicago blacks | The Daily Caller

It is also true that the Clintonistas were largely behind the national movement to ease mortgage standards. One of the main villains is now the Guv of my State. Andrew Coumo who was Sec HUD at the time.

The progressive newspaper 'Village Voice' explains :

Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country's current crisis. He took actions that—in combination with many other factors—helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments. He turned the Federal Housing Administration mortgage program into a sweetheart lender with sky-high loan ceilings and no money down, and he legalized what a federal judge has branded "kickbacks" to brokers that have fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans.

Andrew Cuomo and Fannie and Freddie - - News - New York - Village Voice

[tomder55]

Woodward set the record straight on the sequester in an op-ed posted late yesterday. The Compost made sure it made the Friday evening information dump hoping most of the sheeple will not read it.

Bob Woodward: Obama’s sequester deal-changer - The Washington Post

The president and Lew had this wrong. My extensive reporting for my book “The Price of Politics” shows that the automatic spending cuts were initiated by the White House and were the brainchild of Lew and White House congressional relations chief Rob Nabors — probably the foremost experts on budget issues in the senior ranks of the federal government.

Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved.

At the Feb. 13 Senate Finance Committee hearing on Lew's nomination to become Treasury secretary, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) asked Lew about the account in my book: “Woodward credits you with originating the plan for sequestration. Was he right or wrong?”

“It's a little more complicated than that,” Lew responded, “and even in his account, it was a little more complicated than that. We were in a negotiation where the failure would have meant the default of the government of the United States.”

“Did you make the suggestion?” Burr asked.

“Well, what I did was said that with all other options closed, we needed to look for an option where we could agree on how to resolve our differences. And we went back to the 1984 plan that Senator [Phil] Gramm and Senator [Warren] Rudman worked on and said that that would be a basis for having a consequence that would be so unacceptable to everyone that we would be able to get action.”

In other words, yes.

But then Burr asked about the president's statement during the presidential debate, that the Republicans originated it.

Lew, being a good lawyer and a loyal presidential adviser, then shifted to denial mode: “Senator, the demand for an enforcement mechanism was not something that the administration was pushing at that moment.”

That statement was not accurate.

In other words Lew lied under sworn testimony .

Now here is the key point.. Read it carefully .

In fact, the final deal reached between Vice President Biden and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) in 2011 included an agreement that there would be no tax increases in the sequester in exchange for what the president was insisting on: an agreement that the nation's debt ceiling would be increased for 18 months, so Obama would not have to go through another such negotiation in 2012, when he was running for reelection.

So when the president asks that a substitute for the sequester include not just spending cuts but also new revenue, he is moving the goal posts. His call for a balanced approach is reasonable, and he makes a strong case that those in the top income brackets could and should pay more. But that was not the deal he made.

[excon]

Hello again,

I just want to make SURE I understand the right wing position... BEFORE Obama was EVEN a state senator, he FORCED the banks to LOSE all their money.

Right...

excon

[talaniman]

A house is an American dream pushed by many in Washington for years. That has nothing to do with the bank shenanigans that occurred during that time, coming up with schemes and trick and traps that caught people up. How easy for the banks would have to inform the consumers especially first time buyers that a 50 thousand dollar house was more affordable than the 100 thousand dollar one was for them? They didn't. Instead they came up with ARM loans and back loaded the loan with inflated balloon payments, making them impossible to maintain even though had for a number of years in many cases paid the mortgage.

So lets not let the banks off the hook just yet since many of them are still being investigated for fraud, and never owned the houses, or the mortgages in the first place. And lets not forget how lenders in collusion with builders and appraisers often, and I do mean OFTEN inflated the value of newer homes and produced fraudulent paper work for the older ones, raising the prices higher than need be.

Negotiating a hefty fine that people don't seem to have gotten (state governments did but did not pass the money to consumers for discrimination, and fraudulent lending practices) doesn't mitigate the criminal acts along the way, and its was still ROBBERY by mortgage banking institutions, and even the rating agencies were a major player when the banks were bundling those fraudulent mortgages as part of a financial product sold to investors here, and to other countries.

Now you defenders of vulture capitalism defend the rights of other capitalists to rob whomever they please, and keep the money the filched. Sure they got bailed out,and repaid the government at a profit I might add, but that's only part of what should be a comprehensive process of dealing with the intransigence of the banks.

Blame everybody but the crooks is par for the course with you righties. The banks didn't lose their money, they lost everybody else's money.

there would be no tax increases in the sequester

Closing loopholes is not a tax increase and only a capitalist sees it as one. Semantics to your advantage since you guys are the recognized experts at moving the goal posts.

[tomder55]

Closing so called 'loop holes' without a rate reduction is indeed a tax increase. The President got his tax increase on the 'millionaires and billionaires' already . Time to live up to his end of the bargain.

[talaniman]

I disagree and the congress should be doing their part in mitigating this sequester also and not just putting it on the executive branch. Are you forgetting that congresses inability to do their job led to this sequester in the first place?

Not only did they fail in the debt ceiling debacle, but the super committee as well.

[speechlesstx]

Woodward set the record straight on the sequester in an op-ed posted late yesterday. The Compost made sure it made the Friday evening information dump hoping most of the sheeple will not read it.

Bob Woodward: Obama’s sequester deal-changer - The Washington Post


In other words Lew lied under sworn testimony .

Now here is the key point.. Read it carefully .

Speaking of Lew, I heard when he was at NYU he steered students to Citibank for loans... then went to work for them. Nothing cozy there.

And did you know Obama threatened to veto anything that would stop his sequester cuts?

[excon]

Hello again, righty's:

All this is SMALL BALL.. Who invented it, doesn't matter. Who disavows it, doesn't matter. Who blames the other guy, doesn't matter.

Who the PUBLIC blames DOES matter, and right now it's the Republicans... Obama 2.0 is WINNING. Arguing that Jack Lew STARTED it AIN'T going to save your right wing hide. You'll be lucky to HAVE a party in 2014.

excon