Barney Frank
-
And Harvard Student is much dumber than I'd hoped.
But what do y'all think? Fark seems to be about 50/50 on who 'won' this little 'debate'.
-
Yeah, Barney Frank won the debate, but it does not mean he didn't contribute to the crisis:
"Let the Inquisition Start With Frank"
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.a...321237362312361QUOTEIt was Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two so-called Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs), that lay behind the crisis. After regulatory changes made to the Community Reinvestment Act by President Clinton in 1995, Fannie and Freddie went into hyper-drive, channeling literally trillions of dollars into the housing markets, using leverage and implicit taxpayers' guarantees.
In November 2000, President Clinton's Housing and Urban Development Department would trumpet "new regulations to provide $2.4 trillion in mortgages for affordable housing for 28.1 million families." The vehicles for this were Fannie and Freddie. It was the largest expansion in housing aid ever.
Still, from the early 1990s on, many people both inside and outside Washington were alarmed by what they saw at Fannie and Freddie.
Not Barney Frank: Starting in the early 1990s, he (and other Democrats) stood athwart efforts by regulators, Congress and the White House to get the runaway housing market under control.
He opposed reform as early as 1992. And, in response to another attempt bring Fannie-Freddie to heel in 2000, Frank responded it wasn't needed because there was "no federal liability there whatsoever."
In 2002, Frank nixed reforms again. See a pattern here?
Even after federal regulators discovered in 2003 that Fannie and Freddie executives had overstated earnings by as much as $10.6 billion in order to boost bonuses, Frank didn't miss a beat.
President Bush pushed for what the New York Times then called "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." [found here http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...agewanted=print ]
If it had passed, the housing crisis likely would have never boiled over, at least not the extent it did, taking the economy with it. Instead, led by Frank, Democrats stood as a bloc against any changes.
"Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not facing any kind of financial crisis," Frank, then the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee, said. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."
It's hard to say why Frank did all this. It could be his close ties to the Neighborhood Assistance Corp., a powerful housing activist group based in Boston, which controls billions in loans. Or that he received some $40,100 in campaign donations from Fannie and Freddie from 1989 to 2008. Or that he has been romantically linked to a one-time executive at Fannie during the 1990s.
http://www.politickerma.com/jeremyjacobs/1...eilly-second-adQUOTEIn his second ad of the election cycle, Congressman Barney Frank criticizes Republicans for being at the root of the current financial crisis.
“The right wing is losing control,” the narrator says, as footage of Frank’s recent appearance on Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor plays. “For 12 years the Republic majority refused to regulate the financial system. Last year, Barney Frank became chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and started working on the subprime mortgage crisis, outrageous CEO compensation and other Wall Street abuses.”
W T F, the previous article said numerous people tried to regulate/reform Fannie/Freddie and he was always against it. I realize any Republican reforms probably had problems and could be legitimately opposed, but it was wrong for him to say there was no financial crisis with Fannie/Freddie that needed to be fixed.
Video:
http://patdollard.com/2008/10/blatant-marc...ank-with-video/QUOTE“I think at this point there needs to be a focus on an immediate increase in spending, and I think this is a time when deficit fear has to take a second seat…I believe later on there should be tax increases. Speaking personally, I think there are a lot of very rich people out there whom we can tax at a point down the road and recover some of this money.”
-Barney Frank
AP story out of Boston:
http://patdollard.com/2008/10/bawney-fwank...rd-with-videos/QUOTERep. Barney Frank said Monday that Republican criticism of Democrats over the nation’s housing crisis is a veiled attack on the poor that’s racially motivated.
The Massachusetts Democrat, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said the GOP is appealing to its base by blaming the country’s mortgage foreclosure problem on efforts to expand affordable housing through the Community Reinvestment Act.
He said that blame is misplaced, because those loans are issued by regulated institutions, while far more foreclosures were triggered by high-cost loans made by unregulated entities.
“They get to take things out on poor people,” Frank said at a mortgage foreclosure symposium in Boston. “Let’s be honest: The fact that some of the poor people are black doesn’t hurt them either, from their standpoint. This is an effort, I believe, to appeal to a kind of anger in people.”
Frank also dismissed charges the Democrats failed on their own or blocked Republican efforts to rein in the mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The federal government recently took control of both entities.
"Lawmaker Accused of Fannie Mae Conflict of Interest"
http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_st...,432501,00.htmlQUOTENow that Fannie Mae is at the epicenter of a financial meltdown that threatens the U.S. economy, some are raising new questions about Frank's relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannie’s assistant director for product initiatives. Moses worked at the government-sponsored enterprise from 1991 to 1998, while Frank was on the House Banking Committee, which had jurisdiction over Fannie. . . . In 1991, the year Moses was hired by Fannie, the Boston Globe reported that Frank pushed the agency to loosen regulations on mortgages for two- and three-family homes, even though they were defaulting at twice and five times the rate of single homes, respectively.
Three years later, President Clinton’s Department of Housing and Urban Development tried to impose a new regulation on Fannie, but was thwarted by Frank. Clinton now blames such Democrats for planting the seeds of today’s economic crisis. -
So I was going to respond to that all at once but there's just too much of teh fail. So instead I'll highlight it and try and explain myself.QUOTEIt was Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two so-called Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs), that lay behind the crisis.
Well, yes, there were and are fundamental problems with those two institutions but some quick research reveals that nobody agrees with that 100%. And stating such a controversial concept as fact is disingenuous of the author. Which means he's probably going to start lying soon.QUOTEHe opposed reform as early as 1992. And, in response to another attempt bring Fannie-Freddie to heel in 2000, Frank responded it wasn't needed because there was "no federal liability there whatsoever."
In 2002, Frank nixed reforms again. See a pattern here?
This ignores the times where he supported tougher regulations, and also ignores the contents and substance of the regulations proposed. Not an outright fabrication, just lying by omission and then suggesting a pattern.QUOTE(re: bush's regulations) If it had passed, the housing crisis likely would have never boiled over, at least not the extent it did, taking the economy with it. Instead, led by Frank, Democrats stood as a bloc against any changes.
Sure. If only the ranking democrat on a republican majority committee had ok'd their reforms then they would've made it through the house and congress which are also republican majority, and then we'd all be safe and warm and really really rich. I'll buy that... yeah.QUOTEIt's hard to say why Frank did all this. It could be his close ties to the Neighborhood Assistance Corp., a powerful housing activist group based in Boston, which controls billions in loans. Or that he received some $40,100 in campaign donations fromFannie and Freddie from 1989 to 2008. Or that he has been romantically linked to a one-time executive at Fannie during the 1990s.
"It's hard to say why Frank did all this, so we will spew every right wing talking point about the subject that we can squeeze into a paragraph." Not to say those activities were not fishy. Just saying, when they turn on the shit-fire-hose instead of making targeted pointed comments, I believe they are pulling stuff out of their asses.QUOTERep. Barney Frank said Monday that Republican criticism of Democrats over the nation’s housing crisis is a veiled attack on the poor that’s racially motivated.
Not sure why you bolded this. It was a stated strategy of the republican party since Nixon. They realized then that they couldn't win elections without having the racists on board. But since you can't throw around the N word and win elections, they have to pussy foot around issues that marginalize the poor (read black) people in this country. Not a secret.QUOTEHe said that blame is misplaced, because those loans are issued by regulated institutions, while far more foreclosures were triggered by high-cost loans made by unregulated entities.
It's a [citation needed], but it's true. Do you know what percentage of this country's foreclosures were the result of an underregulated Fannie and Freddie?
It's fair to question why Frank didn't do more at his position. It's equally fair to question why, in the 12 years they held the legislature (many of those years under a like party president) did the republicans do nothing as well? And why do none of the publications that place the blame squarely at Frank's feet mention that fact? The final and most important question on this topic is how.
How did Barney Frank, as a minority in the house, single handedly block the valiant efforts of republican regulators? How did that blocking (which I contest is complete crap because even if the man opposed it 100% he simply didn't have the power or the votes) translate into toxic assets in Fannie and Freddie. And how much of our current crisis is bundled up in those organizations?
None of these questions are addressed above because if they are they fuck up the narrative.
-
QUOTE (Evestay @ Apr 8 2009, 11:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Everything you said is true, but the whole point is that Frank is not squeaky clean and I think you agree with that.
If you can name a politician that is, I'll be extremely impressed. -
QUOTE (Jedd @ Apr 8 2009, 12:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>If you can name a politician that is, I'll be extremely impressed.
And this is why all the wharrgarbl about Frank is borderline libel/slander. The right wing may well succeed in getting a smart man voted out of the house for little more than being gay and talking funny.
edit: This morning on Bill Bennett's Morning in America, 6 callers chimed in (in a matter of 5 minutes) to talk about whether treason charges could be brought against the man. This is out of control and irresponsible at this point. -
I didn't know he was gay, but I remember him following the Republican line. Did I miss something here?
-
QUOTE (Jedd @ Apr 8 2009, 12:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>If you can name a politician that is, I'll be extremely impressed.
Do I even need to name him? -
QUOTE (Governor @ Apr 8 2009, 02:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Do I even need to name him?
lol. Fair enough. Which is why I'm amazed he isn't out on the street begging for cash.
Jedd: What do you mean "following the republican line"?
Yes he's gay as sunshine.
Informatione de Wiki:QUOTEFrank resides in a studio apartment complex in Newton, Massachusetts. His boyfriend, Jim Ready, 39, is a surfing enthusiast whom Frank met during a gay political fund raiser in Maine, where Ready still lives. His sister, Ann Lewis, served as a senior adviser in Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign.
Frank came out as gay in 1987, "prompted in part by increased media interest in his private life...." Frank's announcement had little impact on his electoral prospects. Another Congressman from Massachusetts, Gerry Studds, became the first openly gay federal legislator in 1983 when he was outed.
He used to be more of a pussy, but that's a symptom of being in the house minority (notice the republicans turning into whiny bitches on January 3rd 2007) But he has done such awesome things as reform immigration law to prevent any "sexual preference exclusion" from occurring and saying this:
"In a free society a large degree of human activity is none of the government's business. We should make criminal what's going to hurt other people and other than that we should leave it to people to make their own choices."
The man is one of my favorite politicians and has been for the past 4 years that I've been paying attention. It pisses me off to see him so systematically attacked for no reason other than it being too damn easy to paint a target on his back and let the republican base fire shots at him. -
QUOTE (Governor @ Apr 8 2009, 02:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Do I even need to name him?
Pretty sure there's not a person on the planet that is completely perfect./wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />
-
QUOTE (Scabdates @ Apr 9 2009, 03:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Pretty sure there's not a person on the planet that is completely perfect.
"squeaky clean" != "completely perfect"
Ron Paul is scandal free, which I'd define as squeaky clean. But not completely perfect, because the man is an absolute nutcase.
/a lovable nutcase, a smart nutcase, but you live in the nuthouse for too long and you end up losing half your brain, being smothered with a pillow and carried out of a window busted out with a sink by a large native american.
//FACT. -
QUOTE (ANunes @ Apr 9 2009, 09:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>"squeaky clean" != "completely perfect"
Ron Paul is scandal free, which I'd define as squeaky clean. But not completely perfect, because the man is an absolute nutcase.
/a lovable nutcase, a smart nutcase, but you live in the nuthouse for too long and you end up losing half your brain, being smothered with a pillow and carried out of a window busted out with a sink by a large native american.
//FACT.
Are you suggesting that Ron Paul is Jack Nicholson? -
QUOTE (Jedd @ Apr 9 2009, 10:05 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Are you suggesting that Ron Paul is Jack Nicholson?
"Is that crazy enough for ya'? Want me to take a shit on the floor? " -
QUOTE (ANunes @ Apr 8 2009, 03:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Jedd: What do you mean "following the republican line"?
I missed this when I came here last. Disregard that comment. I was thinking of another Rep. when I made that statement. There was a few TV interviews I was remembering him give. A few of 'not him' were mixed in my mind. For the life of me, I can't remember who I was confusing him with... his voice is quite unique. -
Meh, it's not like we have a shitload of politicians spouting their mouth off in our faces all the time, not to mention pundits masquerading as politicians also spouting their mouths off at us when they can't get a real politician on their program.
Can't fault a guy for mixing some of them up every now and again.
This discussion has been closed.
← All Discussions Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!