Video never gets old - Barney and Maxine at there best. Maxine most corrupt member of Congress. Was a shareholder and husband was Director of OneUnitedBAnk which had virtually all their assets in Fannie and Freddie preferred stock. She directed millions of taxpayers money to prop the small mismanaged bank up. From the taxpayer to the bank to her pocket.
-
-
"We do not have time for this kind of silliness."
**Flies to Chicago to do the Oprah show**Comment -
Hopefully this will all be irrelevant shortly.,Comment -
Obama
His birth cerf is fake people are saying? Huh HowComment -
Barack Obama is less of a person than an image— a brand. People see whatever they want as they do on a Rorschach test. But does anyone really know him?
In fact, he is:
An empty suit.
A man who was deserted in childhood by his biological father.
A man whose birth records, both in the United States and Kenya, are sealed by government order.
A man whose childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, spied on U.S. military installations in Hawaii for the Soviet Union, edited a communist newspaper, authored pornographic novels, and wrote poetry in praise of Joseph Stalin.
A man mentored by and still supported by radical Muslims.
A man who promised transparency in government, but has spent over a million dollars in legal fees hiding information that would determine his eligibility to be President.
A former drug user.
A man whose academic records are sealed from kindergarten through law school.
A man who arrived in New York in June of 1981 without enough money to get a hotel room, but one month later flew to Indonesia and Pakistan.
Why did he go?
Who paid his expenses?
A man who traveled to Pakistan when it was illegal for U.S. citizens to do so. So what country’s passport did he use?
A man whose Law School Admission Test scores and grades at Columbia University are known to have been mediocre, but was admitted to Harvard Law School through the intervention of a Saudi named Khalid al-Mansour.
A law review editor who never published an article in any law review.
A lawyer with no significant accomplishments in the law and no reputation in the legal community.
A former State and U.S. Senator, who never authored a piece of legislation.
A disciple of the Marxist Saul Alinsky.
A product of the Chicago political machine—the most corrupt political organization in America.
A man who selects Marxists, corrupt politicians, and criminals as his close political associates and personal friends.
A man whose presidential candidacy was endorsed by the Democratic Socialists of America, the Socialist International, and the Workers International League.
A man lauded for the literary brilliance of two memoirs, both of which were ghostwritten by others.
A so-called Christian who says that knowing when human life begins is “above his pay-grade,” but somehow knows that abortion is permissible at any stage.
A man who thinks “waterboarding” is immoral, but that partial-birth abortion is moral.
A man who publicly laments slavery in America—which was abolished 150 years ago—but praises Islam, which still practices both slavery and the sexual mutilation of young girls.
A man who speaks endlessly about helping the less fortunate, but gives almost none of his sizeable income to charity—not even to his half-brother, who is living in squalor in Kenya.
A man who had the most left-wing voting record in the United State Senate, but was predicted by the press to “govern from the middle.”
A man who has never created a job, met a payroll, or even operated a lemonade stand, but wants to tell Detroit how to make cars.
A President who has never before served as an executive in either the private or the public sector.
A Commander-in-Chief who doesn’t know how to shoot a rifle, throw a hand-grenade, drive a tank, fly a plane, or con a ship.
A Commander-in-Chief who has publicly divulged some of our nation’s most important intelligence secrets.
A man who has been put in charge of the largest economic engine that ever existed, but has never invested in the stock market and admits total ignorance of it.
A President who says that science will guide his administration, but has no education in the sciences.
A man who is proficient in reading what is written for him on a teleprompter, but jerks and stammers his way through any off-the-cuff speaking.
A man whose health records are sealed from childhood to the present day.
A man whose educational records are sealed from childhood through law school.
A man who spent 20 years in a church whose pastor espouses Marxist Liberation Theology, anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Semitism, but claims he never heard his pastor utter anti-American, and anti-Semitic statements.
A man who added more to the National Debt in 100 days than all other Presidents did in the past 220 years, yet feels qualified to lecture Americans about “fiscal responsibility”.
A man who publicly expressed disdain for the U.S. Constitution on a Chicago radio station because it limited the government’s ability to “redistribute wealth.”
The first American President to bow before a foreign head of state—a Muslim dictator.
A man who sits and listens submissively while his country is castigated by Daniel Ortega—a Communist thug whose own daughter accused him of raping her.
A narcissist who gave the Queen of England a present from the United States—an iPod containing recordings of his own speeches.
A so-called Christian who officially declared “Pride Month” for a lifestyle that the Bible calls an abomination.
A man who wanted Americans to ignore his Muslim name during his election campaign, yet boasts of his Muslim name when he travels to Muslim countries.
A man who can name hundreds of America’s shortcomings, yet none of its great accomplishments.
A President who claims the moral high ground by closing Gitmo yet supports the transfer of terror suspects to countries where horrific torture is certain.
A President who scoffed at being called a socialist yet acted to nationalize the auto industry, the banking industry, and the insurance industry . . . and now seeks to nationalize the healthcare industry.
A President who violates private property rights, the sanctity of contracts, and the rule of law—three essential principles that go back over a thousand years in the Common Law tradition.
A man who promised 95% of all Americans a tax cut, but is increasing taxes on 100% of the population through inflation—the cruelest tax of all.
A lawyer who represented ACORN—an organization now indicted in several states for voter fraud—whose stated goal is to get as many people on welfare as possible in order to destroy our financial system.
A President who cheated GM’s bondholders by giving their property to the UAW in a political payoff.
An American President who frequently criticizes his own country when speaking in foreign countries, but never praises America’s generosity, goodness or greatness.
A President whose Secretary of the Treasury cheated on his taxes—as did several other appointees and advisors.
A President who, despite the current federal debt of 100 trillion dollars, wants to add the greatest debt ever by nationalizing healthcare.
A President who scoffs at being called a socialist, yet has appointed 28 “Czars” to circumvent constitutional government, including:
A “Science Czar” who has advocated compulsory abortions for American women and the “surrender of sovereignty” to a “comprehensive Planetary Regime.”
A self-professed communist as his “Green Jobs Czar”.
A “Pay Czar” to regulate the pay of corporate executives.
A President who swore an oath to “preserve, protect and defend the constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic,” yet has nominated a domestic enemy of the Constitution to the Supreme Court.
A President whose Homeland Security Chief classified pro-lifers, veterans, and supporters of traditional marriage as terrorists.
A President who stood silent while the Iranian government hacked unarmed protestors to death with axes, because it was an internal matter, but freely offers his opinions about the internal affairs of Israel and Honduras.
A President who decreed that true acts of terrorism must now be described as “man-made disasters.”
A President who cracks hurtful jokes about Special Olympians.
A President who refused to intercept or inspect a North Korean ship virtually certain to be carrying Weapons of Mass Destruction to Burma.
A President who wants to cancel all missile defenses while rogue nations are developing long-range ballistic missiles.
An American President who blames the violence in Mexico on America.
A Commander in Chief who claims to have been unaware that Air Force One was taken on a terrifying, low-level photo-op over Manhattan.
A President who berates American CEO’s for flying in private planes at private expense on company business, but whose wife spends hundreds of thousands tax payer dollars flying to Paris for a shopping spree.
A President who promised a transparent administration, but requires all questions be screened before “impromptu” appearances.
A man who freely admitted that his energy policies are designed to bankrupt the American coal industry.
A President who has presided over the loss of 14.7 million jobs and whose “energy policy” will cause the loss of another 1 million jobs.
A President whose “energy policy” will increase the average American’s utility bills by over $2,000 a year in the middle of the Great Recession.
A man about whom liberal journalist Tom Brokaw said, “There’s a lot about him we don’t know.” . . .just one week before the election.
The vast majority of Americans do not know who he is, but someone surely does. Someone paid for his travel expenses to Pakistan and Indonesia. Someone engineered legal challenges to all of his election opponents for the State Senate and had them disqualified. Someone straightened and leveled his path to the U.S. Senate when a Democrat Judge made public the child custody records of his Republican opponent. When he was a candidate for the U.S. Senate, someone arranged for him to speak at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. Someone saw to it that all of his records were sealed, both at home and abroad. Someone assembled the massive organization for his run for the Presidency. Someone knows all about him.
Who?Comment -
i want to see obummers death certificateComment -
People that vote for Obama for a second term, are just as blind and ignorant as the people that voted Bush for as second term.Comment -
deuce: nice fear mongering paste and post...
Comment -
He finally released it but who knows if its even real. Governments do shady things.Comment -
Mayan, it makes you wonder. Mayan, I didn't make any of that shit up.Comment -
Hopefully someone with some actual experience, its just too bad he has a reality tv show. The dems tied Bush to McCain and that cancelled a lot of voters off because they had been watching 8 years of bush jokes on CNN and the Late Shows and started believing them. So without a doubt if Trump runs he will constantly be refered to as a "reality star," and sadly that is going to work on a lot people subconscously. When people think of "reality" tv they get this elitist feeling that they are smarter than the person they are watching. People think paris hilton is stupid or an idiot but in reality any who thinks that is the real idiot. They are watching too much reality tv and not paying attention to her real life financial moves.
Watching the daily show last night you can see a peasant like Jon Stewart saying "i hope this guy runs," when referring to Trump. Watching the whole clip I can only imagine he is referring to the idea of Trump being a terrible candidate and would surely lose. But the reality is donald trump could run circles around Obama in any area of economics and he did.
Why isn't Obama a billionaire? Its not because he didn't want it, its because he doesn't have a clue how to achieve it.
Trump would be a great president, someone who actually EARNED their way, they didn't grow up in politics like our last (how many know?) presidents.Last edited by brooks85; 04-28-11, 03:26 PM.Comment -
Republicans are a disgrace to humanity, anyone who follows their negative, bitter and wreckless agenda is not smart at all.Comment -
i am sure that releasing his birth certificate - official long form certified and attested to will answer alll the right wing p.a. questions and there will be no further efforts to bring race baiting into the picture - you know things like how did he get to be head of the harvard law revue, or graduate magna *** laude from harvard law. if the right didnt have division and race baiting they would have nothing at all.Comment -
I dont think you can get anymore wreckless than to what led us here now and as much as they love telling you, it wasn't the bush tax cuts. It started with Reagan, Clinton decided to completely **** it up, Bush/gop tried to fix it but were called racist, and now Obama added more debt in 2 years than bush did in 8.
Both parties are working for higher powers but at least the gop tried to avoid the mess we are in today, not ignore it.Comment -
I am pretty neutral in politics but it makes me smile when I see democratic banter about the release of his certificate being a republican smear tactic. If you think back, Hillary Clinton was the one that brought it to light not to mention the democrats shedding light onto W's university documents. Mind boggling.Comment -
Also john McCain had an issue because he was born on a foreign AFB and he had it resolved with a quickness, he didnt hide it like obama and then wait 2 years.Last edited by brooks85; 04-28-11, 03:27 PM.Comment -
see, it's responses like above that proves you're a neocon kook and not the free thinking independant you profess to be.
barney frank, maxine & cuomo had NOTHING to do with the mortgage crash. it had EVERYTHING to do with phil gramm deregulating banking (at the bequest of his large donors from the banking industry) allowing them to take on massive amounts of subprime debt and bush passing the worst housing welfare program in history.
it crashed because bush & sec allowed the top us investment banks to take on $4 trillion in subprime debt during 2003-7.
numerous studies have absolved gse of any wrong-doing and blame yet you neocon kooks keep harping about it in an obvious attempt at deflecting blame from the real culprits: phil gramm, bush & republicons. had cuomo not done what you claim and barney frank & maxine not did what you claim they did, THE REAL ESTATE MARKET WOULD HAVE CRASHED REGARDLESS!
the republicans controlled house of reps, senate, white house and every committee during this period yet passed NO legislation to prevent this crisis, they did the direct opposite: made if far worse by deregulating banking, passing housing welfare programs giving downpayments to the poor and reversing anti-predatory lending laws.
those are the FACTS. your attempts at revisionist history is pathetic at best.Comment -
You are so wrong keep googling articles and posting things you know nothing about. I have over 15 years in the Industry. Who signed Phill gramms bill into law??? How about Bill Clinton.Comment -
Bush and the gop actually tried to correct clinton's fuckup and were labeled racist and were denied. I remember it happening.Comment -
I hate to break the bad news to you but it was fools like Barney and the very corrupt Maxine that pushed Fannie and Freddie intogiving loans to people (many of which who were minorities) into giving loans to those peopole, despite the fact that they had absolutely no way of repaying those loans. Those tow were the ones who declared that Fannie and Freddie were in sould financial shape. The Democrats had won control of Congress when the disaster started to form. That was in 2006. Do not try to put the blame on Republicans, when clearly the Democrats in Congress created that mess.Comment -
who drafted it? who introduced it? who fought tooth & nail for it to pass??
even had clinton vetoed it, it would still have passed thanks to neocons controlling congress.
couldn't care less how long you were in the industry. you obviously have no clue why the crash happened if you think a youtube video is "proof" of anything.
answer this: would the crash happened had phil gramm not deregulated banking, bush not passed the worst welfare housing law in history and not reversed anti-predatory lending laws which helped subprime lenders to bypass such safeguards as requiring proof of ability to repay back loans?????
HELL NO.Comment -
Democrats and republicans voted for it, it passed easily CLinton could have vetoed it and killed it he did not, he did insist on strengthning CRA rules - same stupidity who do you think issued most of that sub-prime debt anyway. Still nothing on the trillion dollar commitments.Last edited by philswin; 04-28-11, 04:38 PM.Comment -
Today I am pleased to sign into law S. 900, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. This historic legislation will modernize our financial services laws, stimulating greater innovation and competition in the financial services industry. America's consumers, our communities, and the economy will reap the benefits of this Act.
Beginning with the introduction of an Administration-sponsored bill in 1997, my Administration has worked vigorously to produce financial services legislation that would not only spur greater competition, but also protect the rights of consumers and guarantee that expanded financial services firms would meet the needs of America's underserved communities. Passage of this legislation by an overwhelming, bipartisan majority of the Congress suggests that we have met that goal.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act makes the most important legislative changes to the structure of the U.S. financial system since the 1930s. Financial services firms will be authorized to conduct a wide range of financial activities, allowing them freedom to innovate in the new economy. The Act repeals provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act that, since the Great Depression, have restricted affiliations between banks and securities firms. It also amends the Bank Holding Company Act to remove restrictions on affiliations between banks and insurance companies. It grants banks significant new authority to conduct most newly authorized activities through financial subsidiaries.
Removal of barriers to competition will enhance the stability of our financial services system. Financial services firms will be able to diversify their product offerings and thus their sources of revenue. They will also be better equipped to compete in global financial markets.
Although the Act grants financial services firms greater latitude to innovate, it also contains important safety and soundness protections. While the Act allows common ownership of banking, securities, and insurance firms, it still requires those activities to be conducted separately within an organization, subject to functional regulation and funding limitations.
Both the Vice President and I have insisted that any financial services modernization legislation must benefit American communities by preserving and strengthening community reinvestment. I am very pleased that the Act accomplishes this goal. The Act establishes an important prospective principle: banking organizations seeking to conduct new nonbanking activities must first demonstrate a satisfactory record of meeting the credit needs of all the communities they serve, including low- and moderate-income communities. Thus, the law will for the first time prohibit expansion into activities such as securities and insurance underwriting unless all of the organization's banks and thrifts maintain a "satisfactory" or better rating under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The CRA will continue to apply to all banks and thrifts, and any application to acquire or merge with a bank or thrift will continue to be reviewed under CRA, with full opportunity for public comment. The bill offers further support for community development in the form of a new Program for Investment in Microentrepreneurs (PRIME), to provide technical help to low- and moderate income microentrepreneurs.
The Act includes a limited extension of the CRA examination cycle for small banks and thrifts with outstanding or satisfactory CRA records, but expressly preserves the ability of regulators to examine these institutions at any time for reasonable cause, and does not affect regulators' authority in connection with an application. The bill also includes a requirement for disclosure and reporting of CRA agreements. The Act and its legislative history have been crafted to alleviate burdens on banks and thrifts and those working to stimulate investment in underserved communities. It is critical that depository institutions and their community partners continue efforts that have led to the highest home ownership rate in our history, including a particularly dramatic increase in recent years in minority and low-income home ownership. My Administration remains committed to ensuring that implementation of these provisions does not in any way diminish community reinvestment, and stands ready to remedy any problems that may arise.
Last May, I proposed strong and enforceable Federal privacy protections for consumers' financial information. I am very pleased that the Act provides a number of the new protections that I proposed.
Under the Act, financial institutions must clearly disclose their privacy policies to customers up front and annually, allowing consumers to make truly informed choices about privacy protection. For the first time, consumers will have an absolute right to know if their financial institution intends to share or sell their personal financial data, either within the corporate family or with an unaffiliated third-party. Consumers will have the right to "opt out" of such information sharing with unaffiliated third parties. These protections constitute a significant change from existing law, under which information on everything from account balances to CC transactions can be shared or sold by a financial institutions without a customer's knowledge or consent, including the sale of information to telemarketers and other nonfinancial firms.
Of equal importance, these restrictions have teeth. For the first time, the Act allows privacy protection to be included in regular bank examinations. The Act grants regulators full authority to issue privacy rules and to use the full range of their enforcement powers in case of violations. The Act grants new, and needed, rulemaking authority under the existing Fair Credit Reporting Act. In addition, it establishes new penalties to prevent pretext calling, by which unscrupulous persons use deceptive practices to determine the financial assets of consumers. The Act will specifically allow the States to provide stronger privacy protections if they choose to do so.
Although these are significant steps forward, we will continue to press for even greater privacy protections—especially choice about whether personal financial information can be shared within a corporate family. Privacy is fundamental to Americans, and to my Administration.
The Act also streamlines supervision of bank holding companies and preserves financial regulation along functional lines. Activities generally will be overseen by those regulators who are most knowledgeable about a given financial activity, including the Securities and Exchange Commission for securities activities and State regulators for insurance activities. Given the broad new affiliations permissible under this legislation, I fully expect our regulators to work together to protect the integrity of our financial system. The bill also promotes the safety and soundness of our financial system by enhancing the traditional separation of banking and commerce. The bill limits the ability of thrift institutions to affiliate with commercial companies.
There are provisions of the Act that concern me. The Act's redomestication provisions could allow mutual insurance companies to avoid State law protecting policyholders, enriching insiders at the expense of consumers. We intend to monitor any redomestications and State law changes closely, returning to the Congress if necessary. The Act's Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) provisions fail to focus the FHLB System more on lending to community banks and less on arbitrage activities and short-term lending that do not advance its public purpose.
The Act raises certain constitutional issues with respect to the insurance privacy provisions in title V. The Act might be construed as contrary to Supreme Court decisions that hold that the Congress may not compel States to enact or administer a Federal regulatory program. I interpret section 505(c) of the Act, however, as providing States with a constitutionally permissible choice of whether to participate in such a program. States that choose to participate will gain the powers listed in section 505(c); States that decline will not. I believe that the Congress, in giving States a choice (in section 505(c)) whether to "adopt regulations to carry out this subtitle," intended to allow States to accept or decline all of the rulemaking and enforcement obligations assigned to State authorities under sections 501-505 of the Act. This interpretation is consistent with the explanation in the conference report that both the rulemaking and enforcement roles of State insurance authorities are voluntary not mandatory.
Section 332(b) of S. 900 provides for Presidential appointment of the board of directors of the National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers (NARAB), established by the bill in the event that certain stated conditions occur. Because members of the NARAB board would exercise significant Federal governmental authority under those conditions, they must be appointed as Officers pursuant to the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. Under section 332(b)(1) of the bill, the President would be required to make such appointments from lists of candidates recommended by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. The Appointments Clause, however, does not permit such restrictions to be imposed upon the President's power of appointment. I therefore do not interpret the restrictions of section 332(b)(1) as binding and will regard any such lists of recommended candidates as advisory only.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act is a major achievement that will benefit American consumers, communities, and businesses of all sizes. I thank all of those individuals who played a role in the development and passage of this historic legislation.
WILLIAM J. CLINTON The White House, November 12, 1999
Hey I can google articles too - Still waiting on trillions dollar commitments you keep avoiding
Last edited by SBRAdmin3; 06-27-14, 11:28 AM.Comment -
From the article the Democrats and Clinton made sure the CRA requirements were expaned and added to the bill. More about increasing home ownership and underserved communities
The bill also includes a requirement for disclosure and reporting of CRA agreements. The Act and its legislative history have been crafted to alleviate burdens on banks and thrifts and those working to stimulate investment in underserved communities. It is critical that depository institutions and their community partners continue efforts that have led to the highest home ownership rate in our history, including a particularly dramatic increase in recent years in minority and low-income home ownership. My Administration remains committed to ensuring that implementation of these provisions does not in any way diminish community reinvestment, and stands ready to remedy any problems that may ariseComment -
cra had nothing to do with the crash either.
And yet somehow, the CRA’s actual effect appears to have been the exact opposite: banks that were covered by the CRA were LESS likely to make sub-prime loans than banks that had were unaffected by the CRA. Those independent mortgage companies (unaffected by the CRA) made “high-priced loans” at more than twice the rate of banks governed by the CRA, according to Janet L. Yellen, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. According to the congressional testimony of Michael Barr (law professor at University of Michigan), 50% of the subprime loans were made by non-CRA mortgage companies, and another 25-30% came from mortgage companies only partially regulated by the CRA—-fully CRA-regulated institutions are responsible for “perhaps” one-in-four sub-prime loans. To quote the professor: “the worst and most widespread abuses occurred in the institutions with the least federal oversight.” And even more definitively, the Bank for International Settlements (an international organization of central banks) concluded:Contrary to some media commentary, there is no evidence that the Community Reinvestment Act was responsible for encouraging the subprime lending boom and subsequent housing bust. This Act only applies to depositories, and did not cover most of the important subprime lenders. Depositories showed a lesser tendency to write subprime loans than lenders not subject to the Act (Yellen 2008).
keep grasping at straws.
Last edited by SBRAdmin3; 06-27-14, 11:28 AM.Comment -
It took you a long time to find that one you really had to do a lot of searching, do you know anything about the Author. Janet Yellen -a Berkely Professor served as Chair of Economic Advisors under Clinton. No she is not biased. Do not belielve everything you may read and find on the internet got to understand the source. Keep googling maybe you can find another one of Clintons advisors. But it is wrong read Clinton comments again about removing barriers to underserved markets. Why didnt Clinton veto . Still nothing on trillion dollar commitments.Comment -
here is his ss number 942-68-4425 i am not positive about the 9 but all the other numbers are correctComment -
and? what does that have to do with these facts from law professor michael barr
50% of the subprime loans were made by non-CRA mortgage companies, and another 25-30% came from mortgage companies only partially regulated by the CRA—-fully CRA-regulated institutions are responsible for “perhaps” one-in-four sub-prime loans
and from
Bank for International Settlements (an international organization of central banks) concluded:Contrary to some media commentary, there is no evidence that the Community Reinvestment Act was responsible for encouraging the subprime lending boom and subsequent housing bust. This Act only applies to depositories, and did not cover most of the important subprime lenders. Depositories showed a lesser tendency to write subprime loans than lenders not subject to the Act (Yellen 2008).
btw, gramm-leach-bliley act passed by a 54-44 vote with 100% republicans voting yes and just 1 democrat voting yes.
Last edited by SBRAdmin3; 06-27-14, 11:28 AM.Comment -
gramm-leach-bliley act passed by a 54-44 vote with 100% republicans voting yes and just 1 democrat voting yes
That was the original version you clown - that that was senate you didnt mention House. Democrats then demanded strengthen CRA which did more damage than anything else in the bill and it passed easily. Didnt you notice that in your search. Google some moreComment -
barracks ss number is 942-68-4425 i am not positive about the 9 but all the others are correct 2nd post my 1st disapperedComment -
Oh and you are posting the same quote and claiming it came from a different source do you even read what you google before you post. That is very funny.Comment
