Its about the office of the Presidency and the 2 successors to that office.I respect the office even if the american people put bozos in them To the bozos credit they do keep us safe from foreign attacks and invaders
Carter left Reagan with a nearly balanced budget not a trillion dollar deficit and 2 wars.If you want to blame Carter for some of Reagan debt ok but it wasn't anything like a trillion dollar deficit and 2 wars and a bad economy SS needs to be fixed now but from its creation until now it has ran a surplus and never a deficit
LOL!!!! Yeah we need a fucking army to protect the likes of Dick Cheney, Nancy Pelosi, joe biden, and boehner, Hahahaha What would America do if we had an incredible loss of talent like these four.... Not to mention the rest of the monkeys running the house/senate. The country might just go into a tailspin if any of these idiots went down..... oh wait we are already there...
Their military issue praetorian guard is there more out of need to protect them from angry citizens than from terrorists.
clinton did not leave bush we a great economy ak... go back do the research. clinton left bush with a economy in the dumps partially because of the collapse of the tech bubble. tax revenues dropped of the cliff for govts so greenspan and his banker buddies engineered a real estate bubble. how anyone could get that wrong on trading site is beyond me.
An office which could be inhabited by anyone with a pulse. I wish you'd tell them that, maybe they'll stop the invasion from Mexico.
The economy was not in the dumps when Clinton left office,it was cooling off but not in the dumps and certainly not like the one Obama received and there wasn't a trillion dollar deficit and 2 wars I would think The Bush tax cuts played a part in tax revenues dropping off of the cliff How could anyone have been a birther on a trading site is beyond me
q1 q2 and q3 - had a negative gdp in 2001. http://money.cnn.com/2002/08/07/news/economy/bush_cheney/ Those are facts... you speak in b.s.
Did you forget that it was Frank and Dodd who shot down Fannie Mae and Freddic Mac reform in 2003-2005? The lending practices came into question during this time and Bush admin tried to address it but dems would not change the course. They felt that there was nothing wrong with the way Fannie and Freddie were evolving. If Fannie and Freddie were taken care of during this time, much of the housing collapse could have been averted. BOTH parties caused this mess, let's not pick on one.
In September of 1999, an article in the New York Times predicted with amazing accuracy the financial collapse that began in 2006. --------------------------------------------- NEW YORK TIMES Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending By STEVEN A. HOLMES Published: September 30, 1999 WASHINGTON, Sept. 29â In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders. The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring. Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits. In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans. ''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.'' Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market. In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's. ''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.'' http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html