How policies initiated by Clinton and pushed by the Democratic Party ruined the US economy.
Here's a little item that the MSM seems to continue (deliberately) to miss. The National Bureau of Economic Research has recently released a study (not an opinion) that shows policies pushed by Bill (Bubba) Clinton did, indeed, cause the housing market collapse. The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), actively pursued by Bubba, was a primary factor in the housing market crash specifically, and the overall economy in general.…
Article comments
26 - troll
...seems to me that one thing the CRA did do contributing to the crisis was starting in '95 allow (read 'encourage' due to the profit factor) securities to be used to satisfy its quotas
institutions like Goldman Sachs and Lehman Bros hardly had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the mbs game I guess and didn't I read somewhere that they along with hedgers cut deals with the gov to remain unregulated under the act?
27 - Not the liberal actor
Re: comment #15, Doc, you say, "And what is the persistent use of Obama's middle name, for reasons regarding which Warren protests innocence but is perfectly well aware of, if not obnoxious?" Well, the use of "Hussein" may be obnoxious to you, but that is his middle name. I did not name him. Besides, by using "Hussein," I am poking fun at John McCain, who said, in 2008, that his middle name should never be used or mentioned.
Re: comment # 21 , Jet, you say, "Every one of Warren's Articles are basically the same-We all should hate the elected President of the United States." I have NEVER said I hated Obama.
You continue, "Warren is like waking into a bar and having to listen to the same song on the jukebox over and over and over again to the point of finally walking out." I can see how you feel that way since ALL of my articles have come from Obama's inconsistencies, outright lies, and hypocrisy. I don't have to make ANYTHING up.
Re: comment # 25, Doc, in response to me saying, "I'm sure that you can cite some (even one) reference of some "whining right-wing blogger" that I copy." you say, "Certainly. Here's one. Here's another. And for balance, here's a discussion of the question by some sensible people." The only "problem" is that the three sources you provide refer specifically to Snopes rather than some "whining right-wing blogger." I'm still waiting.
My "honey-do" list is also quite long, so more analysis of your comment as time permits.
28 - Dr Dreadful
Well, the use of "Hussein" may be obnoxious to you, but that is his middle name. I did not name him.
Nor did you name George Bush, Bill Clinton, Jamie Gorelick or anyone else you've ever mentioned in your articles, yet I've never seen you use their middle names.
Besides, by using "Hussein," I am poking fun at John McCain, who said, in 2008, that his middle name should never be used or mentioned.
That's not why you do it and you know it.
The only "problem" is that the three sources you provide refer specifically to Snopes rather than some "whining right-wing blogger."
Warren, I'm trying to be nice, but your comprehension problems make it difficult...
My original challenge to you was to "explain (in your own words, for a change, rather than those of a whining right-wing blogger) exactly what makes Snopes a 'blatantly leftist' fact-checker".
To which you responded: "I'm sure that you can cite some (even one) reference of some 'whining right-wing blogger' that I copy".
Whereupon I provided two examples of "whining right-wing bloggers" that you might turn to for argument. Of course it is Snopes that they are whining about. That is what we are discussing.
29 - Jet Gardner
But... But... Doc, you missed his point... again.
30 - Jet Gardner
Doc you missed that Warren early-on mentioned Clinton's middle name, which I firmly believe that he does ignorantly believe IS "Bubba"
31 - clavos
Hm
32 - clavos
No, Bubba is only his nickname, bestowed on him because he's the quintessential southern redneck.
33 - Zingzing
I do not think you know what "quintessential" means.
34 - Glenn Contrarian
Clav -
No, Clinton is not the "quintessential southern redneck". While such a redneck is not afraid of hard work in the hot sun, loves nothing more than a cold beer in the bass boat on the lake, and may or may not be very intelligent, "quintessential" also denotes "racist".
I grew up among them, remember. I've done a lot of redneck things (including being very conservative, being a homophobic racist, fishing with a cane pole, eating chitlins, attending a church homecoming right beside the church cemetery, hunting (once), et cetera, ad nauseum), but I don't really qualify as a redneck. Neither does Clinton (heck, his Rhodes scholarship in and of itself probably disqualifies him). His brother probably did (remember 'Billy Beer'?), but not William Jefferson Clinton himself.
35 - roger nowosielski
@33
From one English major to another?
36 - Clavos
"quintessential" also denotes "racist".
Sorry (I'm not really) but I disagree. I've personally traveled throughout the heart of the south for years on business, have known plenty of rednecks and good ol' boys. Not all of them, not even the majority of them, have been racists.
The one exception might be that sorry state you come from.
37 - Clavos
@33:
I don't care.
38 - Clavos
His brother probably did (remember 'Billy Beer'?)
Oh, yes. He was my seat mate in First Class on a flight from Atlanta to Memphis once. In the space of about an hour, he managed to down no fewer than four bourbons. I got him to sign the back of one of my business cards; to this day, I can't explain (even to myself) why.
39 - Zingzing
"I don't care."
Great. Looks stupid, but do what you will. I don't care, but words do have meanings, and unless the south is populated by Rhodes scholars who play sax and cigar white house interns while brokering peace in the middle east and bombing eastern europe, you've got a problem in your vocabulary. As a grammar nazi, you should be sentenced to standing on the rim of a toilet, pantless, shitting upon a toilet full of your own pants. It's symbolic of your transgression.
"that sorry state you come from"
Come on now... Judging somebody by the state they were born in is pretty juvenile. Judge somebody by the state they live in. Flarda has issues, as I'm sure you'll admit.
40 - clavos
Judging somebody by the state they were born in is pretty juvenile
Yes it is. But that's not what I was doing: you should brush up on your reading skills; I said nothing about Glenn, I was trashing the state (which is trashy -- Glenn says so himself), not him.
And you're right about Florida: it's full of old farts, refugees and crazies, makes for interesting living.
41 - Glenn Contrarian
Clav -
I agree that I'll be first in line to trash Mississippi - I always say it's a great place to be away from - but I suspect that the ones you consider rednecks are not the same as the ones I consider rednecks.
For one thing, Florida and its people are not part of the Deep South - and while your state has issues with racism (see the voter suppression efforts this past election), it simply doesn't compare to the racism found in the small towns and countrysides of MS, AL, and LA, and to lesser extents in the other former confederate states. What's more, you traveled in different - and more socially-respectable - circles than I...and while that might give you an advantage in many arguments, this particular argument isn't one of whether the bird's-eye view is better than the worm's-eye view, but of who knows the lives and attitudes of the worms better.
But in my experience, MS is certainly the worst of the lot. That statement may be due to familiarity-breeds-contempt bias, but I've seen nothing to indicate otherwise.
42 - clavos
I pretty much agree with your #41, Glenn, but please understand that I in no way compare Florida to other states located in the south. With the exception of a few pockets in the Panhandle, Florida is decidedly NOT a southern state; in fact, to a significant degree, it no longer even is an American state.
43 - clavos
And when I traveled the south on business all those years, I visited a LOT of small towns as well as the larger towns (the only real city in the south is Atlanta; New Orleans isn't really southern, and all the rest are too small to be cities in the northern sense). My criterion was that if a town had even one travel agency, I went there at least twice a year, and I thus hit towns like Shuqualak (pop. 500) as well as some of the larger towns, like Starkville (pop. 25,000), home of Mississippi State Univ.
I also traveled both Carolinas, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, and Arkansas similarly, and visited them all regularly for 30 years.
I have a pretty good handle on the rural (and urban) Deep South.
44 - Zingzing
I do not think you know what "city" means.
45 - Glenn Contrarian
Clavos -
One can travel quite a bit through the South, but as with anywhere else, one won't really get a handle on what the people are like unless one has lived there.
The people Down South will give the shirts off their backs to help a stranger. They'll happily share what they have to those in need. They have a cultural respect for elders that's uncommon in the rest of the country. And - if you're there for long enough for them to think they know you well enough to trust you - they'll tell you what they really think.
There's things I really love about the South, about the culture, the food, the weather, the land...but the racism so permeates the way of life there that it seems normal. My comments about racism in the South have been compared to how some ex-smokers' attitudes towards smoking...but smoking is still bad, and ex-smokers can still easily smell it. Same thing with racism - I can just about smell it everywhere I go - it's all so obvious to someone who's lived it.
It's getting better - I'll give you that. I've seen two biracial couples there in the past couple years. Two is a laughable number anywhere else in America, but it's two more than I'd ever seen before there.
I went to MSU for a year back in 1980 - flunked out badly (it's a long story).
46 - Dr Dreadful
and I thus hit towns like Shuqualak (pop. 500)
Wouldn't it be funny if Shuqualak's main employer was an explosives factory, and the town became affectionately known as "Boom" Shuqualak?
47 - Jet Gardner
They could open a resturant and call it Che' Boom Shuqualak's
48 - Not the liberal actor
Re: comment # 28, Doc, in reference to my use of "Hussein," you say, "That's not why you do it and you know it." Wow! Are you now a mind reader? Does BlogCritics know what a valuable asset it has in you?
I make one (count it, one) reference to Snopes, and you say, "Of course it is Snopes that they are whining about." Sorry, but my article was not whining, copied from "some whining right-wing blogger," or about Snopes. The article, in case you didn't bother to read it, presented the opinions reached after a study rather than some knee-jerk opinion, as well as the FACT that Obama did participate in Buycks-Robertson v. Citibank.
Re: comment # 43, Clavos, you say, ... and I thus hit towns like Shuqualak (pop. 500) as well as some of the larger towns, like Starkville (pop. 25,000), home of Mississippi State Univ." I am genuinely impressed - no sarcasm here. I attended (and graduated) from MSU in 1971 (reference Glenn's comment # 45). I passed through Shuqualak many times.
I also find it rather difficult to conduct "debates" with people who offer rants (lengthy or otherwise), then insist that their rants are relevant to the topic(s) offered in my articles, or that their rants offer much more than their opinions.
49 - Dr Dreadful
I make one (count it, one) reference to Snopes, and you say, "Of course it is Snopes that they are whining about." Sorry, but my article was not whining, copied from "some whining right-wing blogger," or about Snopes. The article, in case you didn't bother to read it, presented the opinions reached after a study rather than some knee-jerk opinion, as well as the FACT that Obama did participate in Buycks-Robertson v. Citibank.
Warren, I both read your article and responded to several of its points, not just the Snopes passage.
Among those points, I challenged you to make a case for why Snopes is liberally biased and why their article about Obama's involvement in Buycks-Roberson employs contorted logic, which thus far you have wriggled out of doing. I can only surmise that this is because you are unable to back up these assertions.
I didn't accuse you of plagiarizing "whining right-wing bloggers" for your article (although others may have, in which case your response should be to them): I anticipated that you might simply cite said bloggers in support of your claims about Snopes rather than make your own case.
I'm sorry that you think I'm fixating on that one aspect of your article, but if you can't even provide evidence for something you regard as so obvious, why should we take any of your other arguments seriously?
50 - Dr Dreadful
May I just add that on re-reading a few of our respective comments I think we're talking at cross-purposes regarding the "whining right-wing bloggers".
Your position is that you'd like me to show where you copy such bloggers in general. Mine is that I'd like you not to copy them in demonstrating the bias of Snopes.
51 - Not the liberal actor
Re: comment # 1, Doc, here is my response to your "Snopes left-wing and tortured logic" point. Please try not to move your lips too much if you bother to read it,
Using the Snopes article YOU cited, Snopes says, "The 1994 case of Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank had nothing to do with with requiring lenders to do business with people 'who could not show proof that they could pay the money back'." Snopes continues, "The lawsuit sought to end the practice of redlining, ...." While Snopes may be "technically" correct, the practice of redlining was (and is) an effort by businesses to avoid losses. So Snopes tries to hide behind a technicality, while ignoring (on purpose?) what Citibank, et al, was trying to avoid - losses. If that isn't an example of Snopes using "tortured logic," then I don't know what is.
Snopes continues, "He [Obama] was a junior member of an eight-lawyer team that worked on the case." I guess Snopes equates "junior member" with "being slightly pregnant." So Snopes, by trying to minimize Obama's role in the lawsuit and protect him, showed its left-wing credentials.
52 - Dr Dreadful
Warren, your argument is as feeble as I expected it would be.
The lawsuit had nothing to do with compelling lenders to do business with people who couldn't pay the money back. Redlining is the practice of denying loans to people based solely on where they live, without bothering to assess their repayment ability to begin with. That's discrimination, and because it disproportionately affected clients who lived in majority African-American neighborhoods, it amounted, in this case, to racial discrimination, which is illegal under federal law.
The argument that Buycks-Roberson forced banks to make bad loans is as daft as saying the government forced you to give up driving because it passed a law mandating the use of seatbelts.
And frankly, if Citibank as a business was incapable of devising any other means of avoiding losses than redlining, then it deserved all the subsequent financial trouble it got itself into.
The "urban legend" that Snopes was debunking goes further than identifying Obama as a member of the legal team: it claims he led it, which he demonstrably didn't.
53 - Jet Gardner
Warren, your argument is as feeble as I expected it would be
For God's sake Doc-You've missed Warren's point...AGAIN. Facts and logic don't exist unless yours agree with his!
Sheesh... Just ask Clavos
54 - Igor
FNMA and CRA were both well-run when they operated under their original charters as Government Supported Entities run by civil service employees, and they both failed when we attempted to ¨privatize¨ them. They were victims of the ¨privatization¨ craze started in the Reagan era. Introducing private ownership into them had the result of increasing corruption by changing the goal from aid-to-homeowners to profits-for-banks.
Thereby, public assets were converted to private pelf.
The lesson to be learned is that it? a mistake to try to convert public agencies to private companies. Privatization doesnt work.
55 - Dr. Joseph S. Maresca
There is simply no getting around bolstering the Section 8 housing to provide basic living quarters for the poor. The Section 8 program simply does not have the downside of lending large amounts of money to poor and lower income people who may not be able to afford to pay back the loans.
56 - Dr Dreadful
Section 8 is spectacularly underfunded. Wait time for a voucher can be 10 years or more, and that's if you can even get on the waiting list in the first place - most housing authorities' lists are usually closed.
Even better than basic Section 8 - it costs more in the short term but can lead to big payoffs in the longer term - would be to expand the Family Self-Sufficiency program, in which the issuance of a voucher is tied to services designed to equip tenants so that they can break out of the cycle of poverty and no longer have to depend on government benefits. FSS participants are assigned a coordinator who sits down with them to work out goals and a plan to achieve them: for example, deciding on a college or vocational training course and applying for grants, scholarships or other sources of funds, things that the tenant wouldn't have known how to do on their own.
Participants who've boosted their earned income enough can even opt to have the government's portion of their rent deposited into an escrow account, to be saved towards a down payment on a house.
57 - Igor
The Reagan policy of "privatization" ruined the economy in several ways:
1-replaced agencies under political leadership responsive to voters with private divisions of private companies responsive only to BoD demands for profits.
2-replaced a hard-won structure of professional Civil Service management with an insecure and irresponsible private structure.
3-inflated subcontract costs by replacing employees with private company departments.
4-negated benefits of competition with sole-source contracts instead of subcontract competition.