This video is awesome. For those of you, who, like me, don’t really understand how this whole financial crisis really started, or even if you think you DO understand it, you should watch this. Even though it’s obvious which way the creator of the video leans, it’s hard to argue with the evidence he lays down.
Anyway, it was too awesome not to share. Besides, I co-own this blog. So mnaaa!
Its on Youtube it must me legit…when we start passing classic propaganda like this off as fact, we are all in trouble. Do some real research and post that.
Spoken like someone who didn’t bother to watch the video which is filled with source data. How about you post some actual facts to refute it?
Ohhhh - too busy just calling Sarah names in other threads. I see.
(insert rolling eyes here)
Flashing articles that may or may not pertain to a subject does not an argument make.
And citing Wikipedia? Credible!
Also, “And you’ll never guess?” is not a question.
It was clear to me it was not someone spewing off. The sources for the facts were listed. Besides I had already read about a lot of this before. Not on You Tube either. Most all is public record if you go look for it. So it would appear to me that someone is Anonymously posting here without verification.
Well since you agree with it, it must be true. Verification enough?
Boy, you demis take no responsibility at all do you? Reminds me of my 7 year old when he causes havic and points the finger at someone else. They should call you the Ostrich party cuz you just stick your head in the sand. There is a reason that Democrates are most likely to be unhappy with their lives (actual poll). Get off the Hate train people.
Mandating loans to people with little income and sketchy credit is akin to mandating that people in wheelchairs be hired as firefighters……disaster will result, and it won’t take long. This video provides a very good chronology of what transpired, and who is to blame.
I don’t think it’ll come as any shock to anyone that anonymous, aka douchebag bob, still hasn’t come up with an actual ARGUMENT to the video.
Don’t expect him to. That would require actual thought.
http://www.keatingeconomics.com/
Yeah, McCain has a bit of economic explaining to do, as well.
Also, Obama didn’t get to the Senate until 2004, while the housing bubble had been ballooning long before that. How you can blame the policies of someone who hadn’t even gotten to Washington is beyond me.
Rachel, did you watch the video? The criticism of Obama had nothing to do with his “starting the bubble”, it had to do with the fact that Obama fought to kill every legislative effort to rein in Freedie Mae/Mac, and slow down the irresponsible lending practices that led to the banking meltdown that we have today. He was a leading recipient of donations from the banks who were making the sub-prime loans and from the institutions that mandated the loans.
First of all, Rachel - that video isn’t a “See - this is Obama’s personal fault” video. It’s mostly an attack on democratic policies, which he AGREES with and HAS agreed with.
Re: the Keating stuff - you know what that video conveniently forgets to point out?
It conveniently leaves out the fact that McCain was explicitly exonerated from doing anything wrong. It conveniently leaves out that Democrats decided not to release McCain for political reasons even though they knew he was free of guilt. It conveniently leaves out that the same attorney who appears in that video (Bennett) has recently appeared on TV totally undermining the entire premise of the video.
It conveniently leaves out that McCain sought to re-regulate the subprime market mess. It leaves out the stuff that the first video points out rather well, which is that Democratic regulations forcing banks to issue sub prime loans actually caused the crisis.
The video you linked shows the committee report saying McCain used “poor judgment” but it does not show the part of the report that explicitly exonerates McCain from all wrong doing. Interestingly, it was only Democratic senators who were found to have acted improperly - and, SHOCKER - all three chose not to re-run.
If this isn’t a pro-McCain, anti-Obama video, what’s the last bit there for? Flavor?
Wow, some Douchebag has the same last name as me. What are the odds.
Bye the way it’s http://www.google.com to search for documentation to verify the facts of the video. Or you could just wait for someone else to do it for you.
As I clearly stated, it’s obvious which way the creator of the post leans. If you would like to argue the content, do it. But there’s no reason to point out that it doesn’t put Obama or democrats in a favorable light - that’s obvious.
Can you refute any of the points?
It doesn’t appear that ANYONE has so far.
I am thoroughly finished with being entertained at the MockDock. Thanks, but no thanks. This political blog did it for me. If it was a piece of comedy by Lisa Nova or SNL, it would’ve been fine. I respect your opinions (and yes, I did watch the whole thing), but I prefer to watch something I expect to be funny and not meant to “change my vote.”
And that is your opinion. As Mock said in the beginning, she is the co-owner, and she can do whatever she wants. Just because you frequent the site and comment a lot doesn’t mean that you own any part of it. If you are offended, fine. There are no ties keeping you here. As much as it stinks to lose readers, it’s going to happen. Everyone knows that, it’s a fact of blogging.
So, if you don’t like what you read, you don’t have to read it anymore, right? It’s free speech people, and you have the right whether or not you expose yourself to something you don’t like.
Stop whining.
Mocking comes in different flavors and sometimes mocking hypocrisy is one of them.
I suppose Mock will have to hold her breath and turn blue (such an unfortunate choice of color) until the naysayers can actually refute any of the factual elements of the video. It would seem that perhaps the reason for this lack of rebuttal lies in an inability to read. This would make sense based on their inability to decipher Mock’s own disclaimer to the video.
To the blues out there…try to get your arms around this bit of hypocritical Democratic rhetoric that has been pushed on every minority group (women, afros, hispanics,). You have been told for 70+ years that the Republican party is behind big business and the Dems are for the common man, yet of those senators listed on the campaign contributions from Countrywide 7 of the 12 were Democrats, and so were the top 3 on the entire list.
As a side note for those that might call me a Republican propagandist or apologist…I wouldn’t vote for either of these men or the parties they represent.
Vote in the only way that will make any difference…LIBERTARIAN! The popular vote is worth so much toilet paper. With everything that goes on behind the scenes in D.C. and in state politics, do you really think that a Republican elector will vote Democratic if that is how his constituency votes or vice-versa? If enough people will vote third-party then it is Constitutionally guaranteed that they will start to receive a portion of government campaign contributions, and as the video makes abundantly clear the only way you can get politicians to pay attention to anything is by giving them money or by taking it money.
Sorry, had to get that off of my chest.
last sentence edit “…giving them money or by taking it AWAY.”
Since the Democrats and Republicans are in equal abundance in the Senate, there would have to have been assistance from Republicans in order to get these policies enacted. And who controls the Executive branch, may I ask? Ah, the Republicans. I find it ridiculous that the failure of the economy has blamed on the Democrats and their “mortgage issues”, but it’s convenient that this video leaves out the fact that we’ve spent BILLIONS on a Republican-sponsored war. The Democrats aren’t the party in power, so stop trying to spin the mistakes of the Republicans and turn the Dems into scapegoats.
Also, if you don’t like the way the economy is going, Ms. Mock, it would probably not help to vote for McCain, since he has a penchant for voting in line with Bush (90% of the time).
Finally, as you admitted, you don’t know much about this financial crisis or how we got to be here. It’s probably not best, then, to use a Youtube video with obvious political bias as your only source of information. I’m guessing you get your news from Fox, too, eh?
Wow Mock!!! I love it when you talk all politiculous and stuff!
Rachel, you act as though it’s youtube which sourced the information. The entire video is FILLED WITH OUTSIDE SOURCES. Youtube is just a stage. The information in it, though, is from like a zillion other sources which are right there for you to look at. It’s not like it’s a video of some guy just SAYING these things into a video cam.
Really. You can do better than to just spout Obama’s commercial lines (90% voting, etc.) I guess this is the part where I’m supposed to say, “OH YEAH? Well, at least he bothered to vote instead of just saying ‘present’”!!” I think that’s how the typical script runs, right?
These issues have nothing to do with the war. I love how you put “mortgage crisis” in quotes, as if it’s some sort of silly claim that doesn’t hold water.
Off to do business in DC. You guys finish out this chat and I’ll catch up with you all tomorrow.
To Captain AnaBanana - sorry to disappoint. I just gotta be me.
Obama didn’t get to the Senate until 2004? Wow. He’s qualified to be President, then! Awesome. He should’ve made Spencer Pratt his running mate, as that would be so cool and MTV-like.
And, Rachel - that Republican-sponsored war thing? I have at least one friend over in Iraq who tells me of great work that has been done to help women like you not be mistreated or considered property. We’ve implemented educational programs and created jobs and have helped the people help themselves. My friend has an MBA from Harvard and chooses not to make a ton of money over here in the States, but to serve his country, so people like you can sit home in their warm homes and bitch about how ****ty America is and how we’re a bunch of warmongers. But, I digress. I’m sure you’ve done more for your country than just bitch about it while you get on the Mockdock in your warm home, on your cool little new laptop, able to speak your mind as a free and equal female. May I remind you that your rights and your ability to snark and speak your mind are solely due to the people before you - and the people now (that you obviously have no problem looking down upon) - who FOUGHT for you to do that?
Seriously. Wake up.
Daisy - you freakin’ rock!
Mock - Thanks for breaking your own rule because if you hadn’t I may have never seen this video and had the capability to forward it on to others!
I was initially taken back by this. I thought to myself, “why is this not talked about in other places?” so I did some research and realized why. I have attached the following link. http://www.newsweek.com/id/162789
I am neither democrat or republican. I am an American increasingly frusterated by paritsan attacks. truth be told neither Dem or Rep are blameless. The reality of life is when we make choices there are consequenses, good and bad. This is not the problem, people in power make powerful desicions that affect many people. The problem comes from espousing only one point of view (I and my party are always right and you and your party are always wrong). Truth is it is easy to sit on the sideline and critisize. I choose to see politicians as imperfect people in a imperfect system making imperfect choices. So you see its is neither Obama’s or McCain’s fault. They made choices they felt were the right thing to do in the moment. Our job is to judge them based on intelligence, vision and character. I respect those difficult choices and hold the line that America will be fine we have seen big challenges before and will see them again.
Now on with the mocking.
I frequent another site that is entirely democrat, with devout followers. A site that leans toward conservativism is refreshing!
I’ve started looking at the President as sort of a figure head. The Senate is who really makes all the decisions and influences the President’s opinions. EVERY Presidential hopeful (and President!) lies. They all say these wonderful things about reform and such.
My HUGE fear at this point is health care. I know many of you are for socialized health care, but honestly, it scares the bejeezus out of me. My son is about to have open-heart surgery, and it scares me to think that if we had socialized health care, I would not be able to choose the best surgeon or hospital for him. We would all be appointed a PCP, and told who to see for specialists. I work at a doctor’s office, and I would love to see Obama and McCain work there for 1 day. They would get a healthy dose of what is wrong with health care, and would see that tax dollars are paying for welfare people (NOT ALL) to have fancy cars, name brand purses, and cell phones, instead of paying for health care for their children. You know what really burns me? These people pay for TATTOOS instead of health care for themselves or their children! Now I have tattoos, and let me tell you, I’m a true hillbilly, and get them for my birthday from family members. I don’t choose to pay for something frivolous and not necessary things for my kids. Anyway, you know that the rich would be able to choose who they see for their health care needs, unlike those of us, who would be forced to make do with whoever the government tells us to see. I don’t really expect to change anyone’s opinion here, but I had to put in my 2 cents worth! I just hope I get someone to think about what health care means to them, and that as a taxpaying citizen, I think you should be able to see whoever you want. It is your right. I think ALL children should be covered no matter what until the age of 18, and for that, I’d be willing to pay more taxes. All adults should be responsible for themselves, unless they are incapacitated mentally or physically and are unable to work. I get a lot of “disabled” people coming into my office, and they make me sick to think others can’t get disability who need it desperately.
Gunner - I appreciate SO MUCH what you wrote and agree with much of what you say, but need to bring some reality back to the link you posted.
No one denies the dereliction of duty, greed and lack of ethics among the mortgage lenders, the bankers, and the assorted financial types taking advantage of gullible buyers (even so, gullibility has to have limits: if a person BELIEVES in a Free Lunch, that person doesn’t really deserve that much sympathy). Now here’s the important part. When the income of Fanny Mae/Freddie Mac executives was directly proportional to the number of mortgages insured (and same with mortgage brokers), there was EVERY incentive to push the subprime loans, regardless of the client’s ability to pay, regardless of lack of the most basic documentation. When the Republicans tried to reel Fannie and Freddie in, the Democrats (still in a minority in the Congress at the time), filibustered the proposed legislation, killing it, assuring the American public that all was well with those institutions. Then, when they became a majority, they stopped any attempts to regulate - Dodd, Frank, Schummer, etc. kept on letting Fannie and Freddie insure the bad loans. In exchange, these outfits gave THOUSANDS of dollars to Obama and others. That is the simple truth - Newsweek is just avoiding it. Not to mention the fact that Frank’s gay lover was raking money in WHILE being employed by Fannie, the very institution SUPERVISED by Frank himself.
Sound criminal? Good call.
Newsweek is conveniently, like the Keating video posted earlier, leaving out key data.
I hate to break this to you Gunner, but this article from Newsweek is a feeble attempt to shift the blame to everyone. The CRA started the fire, and it was the accelerant that caused it to burn out of control. It was the vehicle by which liberals where able to apply pressure (by legislative and other means) to lenders to make loans to un-creditworthy individuals. Sure, there were unregulated lenders who jumped on the bandwagon, but they were just iceing on the disaster. The CRA set the tone for lenders that they were only doing what they were pressured into doing by legislation and even lawsuits driven by legislators (including Obama). So when the sky started to fall, of course thay have to be bailed out, because after all…..they can claim (with ample justification) that it was the government who started the dirty snowball rolling.
And the author’s assertion that mortgage loans to low income people aren’t inherently risky because “micro-loan” programs have been successful is as laughable as anything I’ve ever read. Most of these micro-loan programs have been done in Africa and involve small amounts of money to people to start and grow small businesses. The NYC loan program he referenced is administered and creditors qualified in a way that is so different from subprime mortgages that it has absolutely no relevence to the issue at hand.
-Nice try though.
Socialized medicine would be a nightmare. Why do you think Canadians (who DO have socialized medicine) come to America to get the surgeries they need?
How bad is it going to be for the medical field when neurosurgeons and cardiothoracic surgeons make the same amount as family practice doctors? Our quality is going to go way down.
While I agree that dems and republicans both have problems….I guess I lean toward the conservative side because they parallel my moral values a lot closer!
Well, I tried. Thanks Mockarena for the Kudos. I will still frequent your fun snarky site of course, but I can’t help but be a little sad at how everyone starts with their bias (human nature) and tilts the lens to fit their vision of the world. It brings us comfort to think we have it all figured out, but the reality is we know so little and assume so much. I wish we could do better at looking at both sides of the coin and becoming informed before reaching a conclusion. I posted the link not to say, “Here you all are wrong!” rather for people to say, “Maybe I don’t have all tha facts and you know, the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle.”.
Love love love the site keep up the good work!
Nice try to pin down those at fault, but the fact remains that this debacle was an orgy that many people took advantage of. Upon arriving here in Las Vegas 6 years ago, our mortgage broker insisted we get someone to say they were renting our unsold house in Oregon. That would be fraud. The real estate agent supported it.
As prices began to rise, appraisers would inflate their value estimates to enable bigger loans. As prices rose further, flippers bought houses on interest only. Prices were rising, home stock got down to 300 units, but 1 in 7 houses were empty. Speculators. NOt low income buyers. I watched our neighborhood turn from 5 year old Camrys when our house was $184k to new Jags and Mercedes when our value went to $375K.
McCain’s campaign head was a lobbyist for Fannie Mac; his firm received $15,000 per month as late as August. The gray train involved all sides, people large and small.
Yes, Anonymous, this is all true, and greed and lack of ethics are not limited to one political grouping; but as to the scale of the matter, witness the PROLIFIC left-wing donors, the Sandlers, who speculated to the tune of 24 billion dollars (of course, as they are of the rabid left, we must not hold them responsible of any misdeeds and must absolve them of any responsibility).
But the main point is this: when attempts were made to clamp down on Fannie and Freddie, it was the Democrats who repeatedly torpedoed the efforts, either by filibustering or by outright blocking of bills. And just earlier this year Mr Frank assured us that Fannie and Freddie are “fundamentally sound” and that he, Frank, would be inclined to “roll the dice” toward continuing to provide home ownership to subprime borrowers.
-Just like Ole Barney decided to “role the dice” and let his homosexual lover run a full service prostitution ring out of his D.C. apartment. He’s progressed from the 80’s when he mostly concentrated on taking male interns into the restrooms in Congressional office buildings.
Mock, thank you very much for posting this video! :o)
No problem, Bimmer!
See folks - for every Captain Ana Banana - there’s a Bimmer, and a wayne, and a Gunner, and and and…..
O’Bama says doesn’t know Frank Raines let alone consult him…The video is pure political drivel. The Community Reinvestment Act, which started under the republicans, was a cover for bank consolidation and merger activity starting in the 80s , and it was set up under the idea of redressing the unethical and damaging practice of “Red lining” urban communites which existed a generation before which help lead to the rise of crack infested urban neighborhoods around the country. “Enterprise Zones”, an extension of the CRA concept, and the gumption of the good people in those communities, actually succeded in turnig a lot of these areas around such as Harlem NY for example, where my family owned a great deal of property; Harlem is beatiful again.
A big part of the of the CRA budget was in adverising, and marketing to the minority community that the banks cared about them. That’s what the cover or scam was, so they ran ads in minority media, and they spent money doing community out reach-PR-but relatively few people ever got real morgages.
The vast majority of unqualified minorities ended up getting morgages for the same reason unqualified whites got morgages; greedy ass morgage brokers making commisions and having to hit their year over year numbers/quotas and the investment community which rolled these worthless morgages into real estate securities and sold/traded them to unwise investors-and it was profitable…to blame the fall of Bear Sterns, Goldman Sachs, WaMu, blue chip brands, on the CRA is silly and by-the-way O’Bama, nor McCain had nothing to do with any of this, nor could they have done anything to remotley stop it. Whats stupid is trying to connect this cultural ‘movement of greed’ to any one individual or candidate…Its Kool Aid-I guess Kool Aid is fun to drink depending how thirsty you are for it, but don’t start thinking its any thing real.