Bush tried to warn Congress starting in 2001 about financial meltdown!

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
You can find clips and soundbites of anyone saying almost anything if you look hard enough. I don't get how you deregulate and increase regulations at the same time. I guess Bush was alright after all and the Dims are to blame for this mess.

Must watch:>>>>

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

[edit on 7-2-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by mental modulator

Originally posted by soldiermom
Starred and flagged. This shines some light into the dark corners the democrats didn't want the light of day to touch.

Of course, the people that think Bush is evil will still see him that way even though he isn't, much the same way Obama fans think he's a knight in shining armour even though he isn't.

Truth doesn't always matter to some people.

Are you nuts???

All of a sudden in this ONE circumstance BUSH became a LIBERAL?

BUSH further deregulated electricity, military supply, insurance companies, public works , nuclear standards, pollution standards, lead in water standards......



BUT.....

ALL of a sudden BUSH said WAIT - I think I will regulate the mortgage and financial industry while we are in the middle of a boom...


GOD you guys are way past funny....\

Look, I understand that you probably dont have a whole lot of formal education in the business world or in economics and these fields are often over simplified by people who try to explain them. I hope my explanation may provide you with a little more insight and I mean that in a sincere way.

As a general rule, when you DONT have the government telling you that there is a certain restriction on a product that makes it more difficult to produce that product the net result is positive in sales.

For example, the engineer doesnt have to rework a design so that it makes less emisions. Which in turn means that the company doesnt have to pay the engineer for all the extra work which = money saved. It also means that the product is easily manufactured at a lower cost which means the volume of that product can be supplied more easily and at a cheaper cost.

hence nuclear deregulation, electric, pollution, etc. can do what it does more easily.

In economic terms, the supply curve has shifted to the right. (look up supply and demand curves.)

Now, when you give loans or give money to people who can never pay it back, the net result is a loss and the result initiates a chain reaction. The bank got the money from somewhere and they are unable to pay it back. the result travels through the financial markets. Now, when people are nto being paid for their products/services they stop producing. This creates a downturn in the economy. This is a business minded thought process and this was what bush was thinking when he did all these things. It is really common sense.

Here's the funny thing.

THIS WOMAN was saying nearly the same thing more than 50 years ago.

...You are moving toward disaster, until and unless, all the welfare state conceptions have been reversed and rejected...It is precisely these trends which are bringing the world to disaster, because we are now moving towards complete collectivism, or socialism- a system under which everybody is enslaved to everybody...

...I am for the separation of State and Economics...

...it sprang up from the same source as the abuses, if by abuses you mean the legislation which originally had been established to help industries, which was already a breach of free enterprise...

...capitalists with government help are the worst of all economic phenomena...

...You know that both parties today are for socialism in effect...for control...

...all depressions are caused by government interference and the cure is always offered- so far- to take more of the poison that caused the disaster...

[edit on 8-2-2009 by loam]

she is right and until sheeple stop confusing Capitalism with free enterprise and yelling save Capitalism from the roof tops ,,this circus will never leave town

The white house wanted to regulate and oversee the two companies. The now chairman "blocker" wanted to not regulate it nor bail them out if a problem arose.
That's how it's supposed to be it's unconstitutional for a reason.

Thia ia too odd....Why would bush NOW, say he tried to warn of this mess? He had 8 years to go on national, inernational, live broadcast, cable to warn.....this soudns like a way for him to get the public back on his side,....afterall, he is part of the NWO, and the draconian laws and bills he made, as obama is trying to make public, why would he change his heart now? make no sense...

Bush doesn't want to go down as the worst President in history. His ego won't let him do that. There's no telling how low he'll go to get the public back on his side.

When I clicked the OP's youtube link, this Ron Paul clip was there. It was posted 12 March 08. Seems Ron Paul must be psychic or maybe he had his freaking eyes open unlike the rest. He's a force to be reckon with.

Originally posted by ZindoDoone
I recieved this from a friend, its very interesting!

The video clip that was not allowed in the USA!


This video shows that Bush tried to warn Congress starting in 2001 that this economic crisis was coming, if something was not done. But congress refused to listen, along with Barney Franks.

Fox News, Jesus that was enough for me to stop the video after 5 secs. As for Bush, Ha Ha Ha, that's so funny. The very Bush administration that protected predatory lending. Consider the financial crisis and panic bail out. No one should think the crisis was unforeseen. Eliot Spitzer back in Feb 08 in one of his last acts as Governor of New York warned about the impending crisis created by predatory lending and revealed that the Bush Administration was BLOCKING State efforts to deal with it. His warning in the Washington Post of 14th Feb 08 is worth quoting, "Several years ago State Attorney Generals and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem the Bush admin looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact the Government chose instead to align itself with the Banks that were victimizing consumers. Several State legislatures including New Yorks enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices. Not only did the Bush admin do nothing to protect consumers it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent States from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the Federal Government was turning a blind eye. The Bush admin accomplished this feat thru an obscure Federal (Treasury) agency called the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The OCC has been in existence since the Civil War. Its mission is to ensure fiscal soundness of National Banks. For 140 years the OCC examined the books of the National Banks to make sure they were balanced but a few years ago for the first time in its history the OCC was used as a tool against consumers. In 2003 at the height of the lending crisis the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all State predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented States from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against National Banks. The federal Governments actions were so egerious and so unprecedented that all 50 State Attorney Generals and all 50 State Banking Superintendents actively fought the new rules. The unanimous opposition of the 50 States did not deter the Bush admin in it's goal of protecting the banks". In fact says Spitzer when my Office opened an investigation of possible discrimination in mortgage lending by a number of banks the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to stop the investigation. Spitzer submitted his op-ed to the Post on 13th Feb, if it had an impact it was not the one Spitzer hoped for. On 10th March the New York Times broke the story of Spitzers encounter with a prostitute. It is remarkable that the mainstream media found Spitzers private life to be big news but not his charges that Paulsons Treasury was prolonging the financial crisis. Later the Fed for the very first time in it's history loaned a selected coterie of banks one fifth of a trillion dollars to guarantee these banks mortgage backed junk bonds. The deluge of public loot was an eye popping windfall to the very banking predators who have brought 2 million families to the brink of foreclosure. One is sruck by the similarities with the Savings and Loan scandal which was allowed to continue thru the Regan years long after it became apparent that deliberate bankruptcy was being used by unscrupulous profiteers to amass illegal fortunes at what was ultimately public expense.

Wow the incompetence I see on this thread is laughable. This was a great piece of Republican propaganda that Fox News put out to further divide us. PEOPLE THIS IS A TWO TWO TWO TWO PARTY CRIME FAMILY!!!!! What Fox News doesnt tell you and they made a point not to tell you is the REPUBLICANS controlled the congress from 2001-2006. They didnt NEED Barney Franks corrupt $%# to sign on with anything. I think most of us here know Barney Frank is corrupt there is no surprises there. But so are most of those fools. They ALL need to be tried for treason and hanged.

Also when are you people going to realize those hearings are just dog and pony shows. When has ANYTHING been done about ANY of these hearings. You neocons and you left loons are both equally crazy because you drink the kool aid the criminal cabal in Washington feed you. This thread right here is getting nominated for sheeple thread of the year. Congratulations.

Edit to add BTW the people of Mass should be ashamed of themselves for continually voting in Barney Frank. There really must be some loopy un informed sheeple up there. Id like to throw Chris Dodd in the mix also up there in CT

[edit on 8-2-2009 by tjeffersonsghost]

Originally posted by invisiblewoman
she is right and until sheeple stop confusing Capitalism with free enterprise and yelling save Capitalism from the roof tops ,,this circus will never leave town

You said a lot there. Many don't realize that to many top dog capitalists types big and small, its a win or lose game. They really don't aspire to higher ideas than this.

Buyer beware is what capitalism really is. You better watch your ass out there!

Capitalists really hate unions for example becouse they have the gas to believe they can barter their labor or skill like any other business men. But capitalists don't respect the fact that the working man just wants to be a capitalist as well. This is not to say that unions cant go overboard becouse they do.

And its not a free market when your up against industries that protect themselves with laws and regulations made to keep the competition down.

Socialists want wealth to serve the masses. They are no better really as they have their own definition of the capital game. You make it they spend it. Its a candy shop.

wow fox news?

2 real estate companies and you can make the basic assumption that bush knew the recession coming up?

The idiot is part of the oil industry, he's always knew that the oil industry will prosper and economic crisis will not be a problem for them.

Truth is, no one could have predicted the recession to be so serious and timely as peter schiff.

Originally posted by die_another_day
2 real estate companies and you can make the basic assumption that bush knew the recession coming up?

Please tell me you didn't just equate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to just "2 real estate companies".



[edit on 8-2-2009 by loam]

[edit on 8-2-2009 by IlluminatiKarate]

Give the man credit where its due people.

Originally posted by Darkchao
Give the man credit where its due people.

Who? Bush? You're joking right?

Originally posted by tjeffersonsghost
I think most of us here know Barney Frank is corrupt there is no surprises there. But so are most of those fools. They ALL need to be tried for treason and hanged.

So who do you think hurts the country more, Bush or these asshats in Congress? We can conveniently blame Bush for everything that went wrong and give him zero credit for what went right, but we still have Congress FULL of incompetent people that stay there for decades. As we look at Frank and his cronies that pushed to give loans to those who could not pay them back we start to see the tip of the iceberg of this mess that Bush was not a part of, but we still blame him when in fact Congress has been dropping the ball for decades.

So who is to blame for this mess? I put most of the blame on Congress, for that is who decides what is regulated and what is not. They are also who decides where our tax dollars go. Also the crap hit the fan so to speak during Bush’s second term, which just happens to be when the Democrats took over the majority in Congress. So let’s redistribute the wealth, let’s give loans to those who can never pay them back, let’s build a stimulus plan of trillions while putting only 30% of it towards any stimulus.

Let’s destroy this country one ear mark and one totally incompetent congressman at a time….



[edit on 8-2-2009 by Xtrozero]

reply to post by Xtrozero


Well said! The incompetance of both houses and both parties are at fault here and to blame the figure head who was there for the short time he was, in comparison to the decades of some in our congress, seems to be ignored by the masses. I'm realy interested to see who gets the blame when our total collapse happens under the 'NEW and IMPROVED' government we have just had thrust upon us!

Zindo

Originally posted by ZindoDoone
Well said! The incompetance of both houses and both parties are at fault here and to blame the figure head who was there for the short time he was, in comparison to the decades of some in our congress, seems to be ignored by the masses. I'm realy interested to see who gets the blame when our total collapse happens under the 'NEW and IMPROVED' government we have just had thrust upon us!
Zindo

To be real honest, I wish Congress was a one time six year term. This would create a system where those elected would put the country’s best interest first and not their reelection. There are also a lot of smart and competent people out there that would do a good job for those six years while effectively eliminating the professional politician.

reply to post by Xtrozero


I have always been for term limmits as where our forefathers who signed our constitution. It's just that now, with the media the way they are, any small skeleton in someones closet would be blown out of purportion and good people with real skill won't bother having their lives disected like rats in the lab. Its just not worth the trouble!

Zindo

I've toyed with the idea that legislative posts would work like Jury duty,just a thought ,still democratic saves billions in campaign costs


I 'm sure on some level a version of an idea like this would transform government