Weren't the republicans in charge until two years ago? So Bush couldn't get his people to do anything very effective leadership there.

 

The Bush Administration isn't completely innocent. To the extent that they did not or could not change the behavior of the others involved, they deserve blame. However, the primary blame goes to those primarily involved in the activity that caused the problem i.e. those closest to the problem deserve the lion's share of the blame.

This stuff started in the 90's during the Clinton administration. We've posted link after link after link and noone seems to care. Then you guys come in here with the "Bush didn't crackdown" mantra, but don't want to mention that Barney Frank and the Dems did nothing either, and in fact encouraged the behavior. Its growing extremely tiresome.

The blame should be assigned (in this order):

 

• The individuals who accepted a loan they could not repay
  
• The banks who were willing to loan money to people who could not repay it
  
• Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac who backed loans they knew (or should have known) were questionable.
  
• Congress who passed laws which encouraged (forced?) banks to loan money to persons of questionable resources, failed in their duties to perform proper oversight and resisted tighting of regulations by the administration(s)
  
• The Federal Reserve who lowered interest rates which made it economically advantageous (in the short run) to loan money.
  
• The regulators who were aware of the potential problem and instead doing the right thing caved to politcal pressure from Congress and the banking industry and allowed the risky practices to continue.
  

 

Of course it's much easier and politically advantageous to blame Bush.

 

:thumb: Yes , correct.

Is there inaccurate reporting in this story? Or are we dismissing it simply because "blame Bush fatigue" has set in? The report is based on a review of regulatory documents from the years leading up to the current credit crisis/mortgage meltdown.

Is there inaccurate reporting in this story? Or are we dismissing it simply because "blame Bush fatigue" has set in? The report is based on a review of regulatory documents from the years leading up to the current credit crisis/mortgage meltdown.

 

No, not ignoring it at all, in fact there are valid discussion points in the article. However, like so much of the "journalism" of today, it is selective in its content and completely fails to mention what the Bush White House has done over the years to address the problems in this area. In fact the title of the article is a total failure of responsibility in fair reporting.

No, not ignoring it at all, in fact there are valid discussion points in the article. However, like so much of the "journalism" of today, it is selective in its content and completely fails to mention what the Bush White House has done over the years to address the problems in this area. In fact the title of the article is a total failure of responsibility in fair reporting.

 

 

Such as?

H, you feel Barney Frank and Obama are guilty as well?

Such as?

 

See the link per post #11

 

or

 

check the following out

 

http://americanelephant.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/bush-and-mccain-each-tried-to-reform-fannie-mae-democrats-blocked-them-both-times/

 

or

 

Simply keep your eyes on the news, where there have been numerous clips shown of Bush actually warning Congress over the past several years of the coming FM/FMac disasters.

H, you feel Barney Frank and Obama are guilty as well?

 

 

Honestly, what power do they have compared to the President when it comes to establishing regulatory policy and priorities within agencies such as the Federal Reserve, SEC, and Treasury?

Honestly, what power do they have compared to the President when it comes to establishing regulatory policy and priorities within agencies such as the Federal Reserve, SEC, and Treasury?

Yet they are guilty as well. Why give them a pass?

Yet they are guilty as well. Why give them a pass?

 

How are they "guilty"? Everything Congress does is done as a collective body. There is very little power vested in individuals that is not subsequently filtered by the body as a whole.

Ignore it and it will go away. I can see their reasoning there.

How are they "guilty"? Everything Congress does is done as a collective body. There is very little power vested in individuals that is not subsequently filtered by the body as a whole.

 

And that doesn't happen in the Executive Branch?

Honestly, what power do they have compared to the President when it comes to establishing regulatory policy and priorities within agencies such as the Federal Reserve, SEC, and Treasury?

Apparently you skipped the threads of Congressional oversight hearings at which regulators were berated for being too tough on Freddie and Fannie. Regulatory policies are based upon laws originating in Congress. If Congress did not like the way those laws were being enforced, it was free to amend the underlying laws. Never happened.

Apparently you skipped the threads of Congressional oversight hearings at which regulators were berated for being too tough on Freddie and Fannie. Regulatory policies are based upon laws originating in Congress. If Congress did not like the way those laws were being enforced, it was free to amend the underlying laws. Never happened.[/QUOTE]

 

I agree! During Bush's two terms who held the majority in congress in each by-term?