• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bubble Bubble. can you spot the bubble [W:153]

Bush's multiple attempts to pass strict regulatory action were either ignored or fought off by Democrats...This is something VERN and his others like him Continually ignore...

2001

April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."

2002

May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003


January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that "although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations," "the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them." As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. ("Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO," OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)

September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO's review found earnings manipulations.

September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004

February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)

June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005

April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)

2007

July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.

August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)

September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.

September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.

December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)

2008

January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.

January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.

February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.

March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)


VERN can't name one DEMOCRAT initiative to try and stop the coming collapse of the Democrat Mandated Bubble.
 
And out come the 'therapeutic' and discredited 10,000 word posts from Fenton. Fenton, here's a crazy idea, why not address the graphs of what a bubble looks like? Did you see the 'dramatic' increase in home prices in 2004? probably not.
 
And out come the 'therapeutic' and discredited 10,000 word posts from Fenton. Fenton, here's a crazy idea, why not address the graphs of what a bubble looks like? Did you see the 'dramatic' increase in home prices in 2004? probably not.

HAHAHAHA Fenton just owned you on just about every point, and just like a liberal (and not a "slight" one at that), you just brush that reality aside.

You might as well have just posted "I know you are, but what am I?"
 
HAHAHAHA Fenton just owned you on just about every point, and just like a liberal (and not a "slight" one at that), you just brush that reality aside.

You might as well have just posted "I know you are, but what am I?"

oh velvet, he's just reposting the same false narratives and cherry picked quotes that satisfy his need to believe its everybody's fault but Bush. But as I've proven, the Bush Mortgage Bubble started in late 2004 because of Bush's policies and regulation. I've dealt directly with his false narratives. he avoids the facts I've posted. Hey velvet, how come all the things Fenton posted, he couldn't post Bush forcing Freddie and Fannie to buy more low income home loans? He seems to be blaming the GSEs. And it seems like its pretty significant since the Bush Mortgage Bubble started late 2004

In April (2004), HUD proposed new federal regulations that would raise the GSEs targeted lending requirements. HUD estimates that over the next four years an additional one million low- and moderate-income families would be served as a result of the new goals.

HUD Archives: HUD DATA SHOWS FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC HAVE TRAILED THE INDUSTRY IN PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN 44 STATES

see how I posted Bush's HUD press release? I'm not posting editorials and youtube videos.
 
OK, lets just get along:)

In any contest between real life experience and a chart, the chart will win every time. After all, its a chart.:roll:

Let me give a sample of one property. In 1976 sold new for $37,500. By 1999, $65K. By 2001 $85K by 2003 $140K by 2005 $225K (by 2010 $40K) as of today $60K. You can make of this what you will.

I don't care who takes what blame. Clinton, despite some really awful sleaziness, was my favorite president of my life, which starts with Eisenhower. I've voted Republican, Democrat and third party. Clinton was so awesomely intelligent, I actually enjoyed listening to him. Bush was the opposite, I couldn't wait for him to go. Obama seemed that way at first and I welcomed him but by the last election I voted 3rd party. I don't have a "side". I'm not a joiner.







Speckle, its not what I think. Its what I’ve proven. Prices didn’t rise “dramatically” until 2004. The graph shows it. The rise you claim you saw in 1999 didn’t look any different before 1999 or after 1999. It looked ‘dramatically’ different in 2004. And the graph is identical to the Las Vegas specific data: steady appreciation and then shots up 2004. And speckle, I’m not just mindlessly posting a graph and saying “see this one metric proves it started [put any year here when Bush was not president]”. I posting facts. The graphs in this thread are just but a small piece of the overwhelming evidence that the Bush Mortgage Bubble started in 2004 because of Bush’s policies and regulators.


I’m wasn’t telling you to post a link. I’m just pointing out that your version is not only not supported by the facts, its refuted by the facts.


Er uh speckle, I find cons often argue something I didn’t post. “inflating values” being evil is Dn’s narrative. I have posted consistently about “lower lending standards” and I’ve proven it.


You are not disagreeing with me, you are ignoring the facts I’ve posted. And because of the posts of yours that I’ve read, I was surprised you would look at something that clearly shows prices didn’t rise “dramatically” until 2004 and then not see it.
 
Bubble Bubble. can you spot the bubble

I gotta go with Vern on this one. Lots of programs have always been in place to encourage home ownership, etc, but the absolutely insane stuff came when the banks basically have up on lending standards.

I'm not real clear who's fault this was- I'm sure the underpinnings of Fannie/Freddie played a role, and basic structure of US housing (which Dems and the GOP played a part in) had a foundational role, but its clear from my experience and observation that the massive deregulation was the primary cause.

But I have a feeling both parties were happy to look the other way as long as everyone was making money.
 
Sorry Arbo,

There was no need to respond. But your response did affirm my original statement in terms of the purpose of this thread.
 
There was no need to respond. But your response did affirm my original statement in terms of the purpose of this thread.

You're right arbo, there was no need for you to respond. You said nothing the first time and even less the second. I dont think there is some hidden agenda in me pointing out the Bush Mortgage Bubble started in late 2004. that was the same year bush implemented his toxic housing polcies. Me posting Bush’s policy of preempting all state laws against predatory lenidng for the explicity stated purpose of increasing subprime lending must have upset you. The facts I post do seem to upset people so they tend to post about me instead of the facts . You realize in addition to the graphs showing the bubble in 2004, I posted Bush telling you his bubble "was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007."

Hey Arbo, check out how fannie mae’s mortgage data perfectly delineates the decline in mortgage standards. (don’t forget, Bush increased the number of low income home loans the GSEs had to buy. See post #30). wow, their bad mortgage data lines up perfectly with the graphs of prices in the bubble states and the timeframe bush told us. amazeballsfnma.JPG
 
You're right arbo,

Yes, I know. You are stuck in the 'all things Bush are bad, and he is to blame for all things bad' mentality. It is unfortunate so many similarly wear the same blinders.
 
oh velvet, he's just reposting the same false narratives and cherry picked quotes that satisfy his need to believe it
s everybody's fault but Bush. But as I've proven, the Bush Mortgage Bubble started in late 2004 because of Bush's policies and regulation. I've dealt directly with his false narratives. he avoids the facts I've posted. Hey velvet, how come all the things Fenton posted, he couldn't post Bush forcing Freddie and Fannie to buy more low income home loans? He seems to be blaming the GSEs. And it seems like its pretty significant since the Bush Mortgage Bubble started late 2004

In April (2004), HUD proposed new federal regulations that would raise the GSEs targeted lending requirements. HUD estimates that over the next four years an additional one million low- and moderate-income families would be served as a result of the new goals.

HUD Archives: HUD DATA SHOWS FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC HAVE TRAILED THE INDUSTRY IN PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN 44 STATES

see how I posted Bush's HUD press release? I'm not posting editorials and youtube videos.

In 2004 VERN Fannie Mae's regulator gave a warning to Congressional members, right around the same time those Democrats were sitting un front of Republican run Comitee's lying about Fannie and Freddie's health.

Youv'e never countered one thing I've posted with the exception of your pathetic Bush Blame.

Sure Fannie went into High Gear in 2004, as Franklin Raines and Democrats swore up and down Fannie disn't need to be regulated.

Mel Martinez, Bush's HUD secretary managed to at least increase their Capital Requirements to 10% but it didn't stay their long as Barney Frank and the Democrats argued it back down to 5%.

When Bush was trying to push regualtory change on Fannie and Freddie the Democrats at Fannie dove into NINA loans.

So post your nonsense one more time. Youv'e NVER been able to post one DEMOCRAT iniative to get Fannie And Freddie under Control during Bush's Term.

Not too mention Obama's currently building up a new bubble through Ginnie Mae and Fannie Mae, pushing for the same things that caused the Democrat Mandated Bubble.
 
I gotta go with Vern on this one. Lots of
programs have always been in place to encourage home ownership, etc, but the absolutely insane stuff came when the banks basically have up on lending standards.

I'm not real clear who's fault this was- I'm sure the underpinnings of Fannie/Freddie played a role, and basic structure of US housing (which Dems and the GOP played a part in) had a foundational role, but its clear from my experience and observation that the massive deregulation was the primary cause.

But I have a feeling both parties were happy to look the other way as long as everyone was making money.

If your'e going with VERN youv'e just ignored about 10 pages of data I just got through posting.

Throughout Bush's Presidency he and the Republicans tried to pass strict regulatory actions on the Democrat run Fannie and Freddie.

The Democrats fought them off the entire time and behind the scenes started getting into more risky loans.

If your'e going with VERN, your'e purposely ignoring massive amounts of data that counters his ignorance.
 
Bubble Bubble. can you spot the bubble

If your'e going with VERN youv'e just ignored about 10 pages of data I just got through posting.



If your'e going with VERN, your'e purposely ignoring massive amounts of data that counters his ignorance.

No, I'm specifically ignoring you and your bull**** ACORN stuff.

You lost all credibility with posting that, Mr. Beck..errr, Fenton.
 
No, I'm specifically ignoring you and your bull**** ACORN stuff.

You lost all credibility with posting that, Mr. Beck..errr, Fenton.

LOL !!!!

Of-course your'e ignoring it, it's the truth. How pathetic. " My Credibillity"..


VERN ignores it too. History that is. There influence in the crafting and perpetuating of the root cause of the Sub-Prime Collapse. Lower lending standards. Clintons multiple Executive Orders that among other things lowered the GSEs capital requirements from 10% to 3%. You'll ignore Clintons apointing of corrupt Democrats to run the GSEs, and the National Economic Bureau of Research's study on CRA and its influence on the Sub-Prime Collapse.

Mandated by Democrat policies. Wow, your'e going to side with lies and misinformation because it suites your twisted ideology.

I tell you what, you come up with some sources to counter what I posted. Ok ?

If your'e capable that is.
 
This thread reminds me of the low info liberal voter. They hate trickle down economics because it's not right now. Maybe that's part of their entitlement mind set to have it all right now. They can't even imagine a bubble might take 10-20'years to blow up and burst even when they show the evidence of it themselves.
 
Yes, I know. You are stuck in the 'all things Bush are bad, and he is to blame for all things bad' mentality. It is unfortunate so many similarly wear the same blinders.

that's pretty funny arbo. I'm posting facts. You haven't disputed one fact I've posted or even acknowledged them. You've just flailed at the very thought I could blame bush. And you then have to 'imagine' I'm blaming him for all bad things. focus on what I post. Humor me Arbo, look at the graphs of the bubble states and post what you year it looks like a bubble started. Be honest and just say what year it looks like home prices increased 'dramatically'.
 
I tell you what, you come up with some sources to counter what I posted. Ok ?

If your'e capable that is.

Oh fenton, as far as your endless string of quotes of Dems saying "nothing wrong with Freddie and Fannie" why cant you post the quote of Bush's treasury secretary telling everybody there is nothing wrong with Freddie and Fannie (cue the hypocritical and false screams of cherry picking)

Testimony from Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS concerning the 'regulation’ of the GSE’s

Mr. Frank: ...Are we in a crisis now with these entities?

Secretary Snow. No, that is a fair characterization, Congressman Frank, of our position. We are not putting this proposal before you because of some concern over some imminent danger to the financial system for housing; far from it.

- THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT'S VIEWS ON THE REGULATION OF GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTERPRISES

Yep, he said "far from it" If you read the testimony, you'd see he reiterated that position. And then you'd see one of the reasons Snow said why they would like the regulation would be to better enforce the housing goals (you remember the goals bush raised over the objections of everybody, post #30). Lets see how those housing goals worked out for Fannie Mae
We have made significant adjustments to our mortgage loan sourcing and purchase strategies in an effort to meet the increased housing goals and subgoals. These strategies include entering into some purchase and securitization transactions with lower expected economic returns than our typical transactions. We have also relaxed some of our underwriting criteria to obtain goals-qualifying mortgage loans and increased our investments in higher-risk mortgage loan products that are more likely to serve the borrowers targeted by HUD’s goals and subgoals,

http://www.fanniemae.com/ir/pdf/annualreport/2006/2006_annual_report.pdf

HOLY COW! Bush forced them to lower their standards. If only somebody had warned us that Bush's policies would hurt Freddie and Fannie. Wait, somebody did. Strangely this doesn't make Fenton's list of quotes either.

Fannie, Freddie to Suffer Under New Rule, Frank Says

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would suffer financially under a Bush administration requirement that they channel more mortgage financing to people with low incomes, said the senior Democrat on a congressional panel that sets regulations for the companies.

http://democrats.financialservices....s/112/06-17-04-new-Fannie-goals-Bloomberg.pdf

So if your narrative is "GSEs are to blame" then you have to blame bush
 
Bubble Bubble. can you spot the bubble

I tell you what, you come up with some sources to counter what I posted. Ok ?

If your'e capable that is.

Nah. I can see from your hyperpartisan-ness that it will be like playing a game of chess against a pigeon. Don't need that.
 
Oh fenton, as far as your endless string of quotes of Dems saying "nothing wrong with
Freddie and Fannie" why cant you post the quote of Bush's treasury secretary telling everybody there is nothing wrong with Freddie and Fannie (cue the hypocritical and false screams of cherry picking)

Testimony from Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS concerning the 'regulation’ of the GSE’s



- THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT'S VIEWS ON THE REGULATION OF GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTERPRISES

Yep, he said "far from it" If you read the testimony, you'd see he reiterated that position. And then you'd see one of the reasons Snow said why they would like the regulation would be to better enforce the housing goals (you remember the goals bush raised over the objections of everybody, post #30). Lets see how those housing goals worked out for Fannie Mae


http://www.fanniemae.com/ir/pdf/annualreport/2006/2006_annual_report.pdf

HOLY COW! Bush forced them to lower their standards. If only somebody had warned us that Bush's policies would hurt Freddie and Fannie. Wait, somebody did. Strangely this doesn't make Fenton's list of quotes either.



http://democrats.financialservices....s/112/06-17-04-new-Fannie-goals-Bloomberg.pdf

So if your narrative is "GSEs are to blame" then you have to blame bush


That's all you have VERN, quotes taken out of context and your ridiculous attempts to conect them
 
Oh fenton, as far as your endless string of quotes of Dems saying "nothing wrong with
Freddie and Fannie" why cant you post the quote of Bush's treasury secretary telling everybody there is nothing wrong with Freddie and Fannie (cue the hypocritical and false screams of cherry picking)

Testimony from Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS concerning the 'regulation’ of the GSE’s



- THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT'S VIEWS ON THE REGULATION OF GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTERPRISES

Yep, he said "far from it" If you read the testimony, you'd see he reiterated that position. And then you'd see one of the reasons Snow said why they would like the regulation would be to better enforce the housing goals (you remember the goals bush raised over the objections of everybody, post #30). Lets see how those housing goals worked out for Fannie Mae


http://www.fanniemae.com/ir/pdf/annualreport/2006/2006_annual_report.pdf

HOLY COW! Bush forced them to lower their standards. If only somebody had warned us that Bush's policies would hurt Freddie and Fannie. Wait, somebody did. Strangely this doesn't make Fenton's list of quotes either.



http://democrats.financialservices....s/112/06-17-04-new-Fannie-goals-Bloomberg.pdf

So if your narrative is "GSEs are to blame" then you have to blame bush


That's all you have VERN, quotes taken out of context and your ridiculous attempts to conect them to your 4 year Bubble.

2005
Snow testifies...." Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risk posed by the GSEs..."

Bush administration
 
Oh fenton, as far as your endless string of quotes
of Dems saying "nothing wrong with
Freddie and Fannie" why cant you post the quote of Bush's treasury secretary telling everybody there is nothing wrong with Freddie and Fannie (cue the hypocritical and false screams of cherry picking)

Testimony from Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS concerning the 'regulation’ of the GSE’s



- THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT'S VIEWS ON THE REGULATION OF GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTERPRISES

Yep, he said "far from it" If you read the testimony, you'd see he reiterated that position. And then you'd see one of the reasons Snow said why they would like the regulation would be to better enforce the housing goals (you remember the goals bush raised over the objections of everybody, post #30). Lets see how those housing goals worked out for Fannie Mae


http://www.fanniemae.com/ir/pdf/annualreport/2006/2006_annual_report.pdf

HOLY COW! Bush forced them to lower their standards. If only somebody had warned us that Bush's policies would hurt Freddie and Fannie. Wait, somebody did. Strangely this doesn't make Fenton's list of quotes either.



http://democrats.financialservices....s/112/06-17-04-new-Fannie-goals-Bloomberg.pdf

So if your narrative is "GSEs are to blame" then you have to blame bush


That's all you have VERN, quotes taken out of context and your ridiculous attempts to conect them to your 4 year Bubble.

2005
Snow testifies...." Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risk posed by the GSEs..."

Bush administration in 2004...from his FY05 Budget.
" This Administration hzs determined the Safety and Soundness Regulators of the Housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibillities and therfore should be replaced with aa STRENGTHENED REGULATOR."

Want me to post the additional 15 quotes so you can ignore them ?

In 2004 right when Fannie and Freddie were heading into NINA loans the Bush administration was calling for a stronger regulator.



What were the Democrats doing VERN ?

Cmon, you can do it ? What was their response to a stronger 3rd party regulator ?
 
Nah. I can see from your hyperpartisan-
ness that it will be like playing a game of chess against a pigeon. Don't need that.

You just admitted your'e dumber than a pigeon.

Because this pigeon asked you to offer up data and you ran off and made some idiotic quip about hyper partisanship as you ignore a mass of data that counters your stand on the Sub-Prime Collapse.
 
Bubble Bubble. can you spot the bubble

You just admitted your'e dumber than a pigeon.

Because this pigeon asked you to offer up data and you ran off and made some idiotic quip about hyper partisanship as you ignore a mass of data that counters your stand on the Sub-Prime Collapse.

No, because I envision a debate as a chess game with me setting up thought out ideas, you cutting and pasting ACORN!!!!, this functionally strutting across the chess board, knocking over the pieces, ****ting all over the board, and then flying off declaring victory.
 
No, because I envision a debate as a chess
game with me setting up thought out ideas, you cutting and pasting ACORN!!!!, this functionally strutting across the chess board, knocking over the pieces, ****ting all over the board, and then flying off declaring victory.

Lol...do you actually know how to play Chess ?

I'll give you a hint. It has nothing to do with ignoring posted factual data and making stuff up as you go along .

ACORN, and groups like it had a measurable effect on policies that lowered standards by pushing the false narrative of " redlining".

You don't remember Janet Reno threatening banks ? I do.

I gave page after page of documented evidence to support my position, you responded by posting intelligble rants about Pigeons playing chess.

I suppose if we WERE playing Chess my next response would be " Checkmate".

You know the old 3 move checkmate that begginers fall for where my Queen moves twice ?

You need a bit of practice.
 
that's pretty funny arbo. I'm posting facts. You haven't disputed one fact I've posted or even acknowledged them. You've just flailed at the very thought I could blame bush. And you then have to 'imagine' I'm blaming him for all bad things. focus on what I post. Humor me Arbo, look at the graphs of the bubble states and post what you year it looks like a bubble started. Be honest and just say what year it looks like home prices increased 'dramatically'.

Uh, no. Pointing out your bias is quite enough.
 
Back
Top Bottom