PDA

View Full Version : Bill Clinton agrees with Fox News: Democrats responsible for crisis


Angus
09-25-2008, 01:07 PM
Fox News Blames Democrats for Financial Crisis, Bill Clinton Agrees

By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
September 25, 2008 - 11:25 ET

Going very much against the media meme that the current financial crisis is all George W. Bush and the Republicans' fault, Bill Clinton on Thursday told ABC's Chris Cuomo that Democrats for years have been "resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac" (video available here, relevant section at 2:45).

Whether he knew it or not, Clinton was going against virtually all press outlets that have been pointing fingers at Republicans since this crisis began, and likely much to the dismay of such folk actually agreed with a Fox News segment aired on Tuesday's "Special Report" (video embedded right):

BRIT HUME, HOST: In the recent spate of government bailouts, buyouts and rescues, the federal takeovers of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are arguably the biggest of them all. And those two firms are also arguably the biggest reason for the credit crisis in the first place. So the question arises -- how did this come to be? Chief Washington correspondent Jim Angle reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JIM ANGLE, CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): There is one nagging question behind all the debate over how to get out of this mess.

CHRIS DODD (D-CT), SENATE BANKING COMMITTEE CHMN: American taxpayers are angry and they demand to know how we arrived at this moment.

ELIZABETH DOLE (R), NORTH CAROLINA SENATOR: My constituents, and indeed taxpayers across the nation are asking how we arrived at this crisis. It is infuriating.

ANGLE: But Senator Dole and others think they know the answer, and it's something the Senate tried to fix three years ago but was thwarted.

DOLE: To the mismanagement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which was made possible by weak oversight and little accountability.

MEL MARTINEZ (R), FLORIDA SENATOR: A lot of what we're dealing with today has its origins in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

ANGLE: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, backed by the federal government, buy mortgage loans from the lenders who make them. But four years ago, both were in trouble over shoddy accounting. Fannie Mae Chief Franklin Raines, President Clinton's former budget director, was fired. To placate those in Congress who watched over them, Fannie and Freddie promised to do more to help poor people get mortgages. That led them to buy riskier and riskier home loans from private lenders creating incentives for everyone to make shakier loans.

PETER WALLISON, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: The problem is that they encouraged very bad mortgages to be made by banks and other institutions, because Fannie and Freddie would buy them.

ANGLE: Eventually, they bought trillions of dollars worth of mortgages, a substantial portion of them based on poor credit, then resold many of them to financial institutions who thought they were safe because the federal government was behind them.

WALLISON: As a result of this appearance that they were backed by the government, people never paid very much attention to the assets they were acquiring or the risks they were taking.

ANGLE: And so shaky mortgages spread throughout the system. But in 2005, the Senate Banking Committee, then chaired by Republican Richard Shelby, tried to rein in the two organizations bypassing some strong new regulations.

WALLISON: Which would have prevented Fannie and Freddie from acquiring this bad -- these bad mortgages. It actually gave a new regulator for Fannie and Freddie the kinds of powers that a bank regulator had.

ANGLE: All the Republicans voted for it. All the Democrats, including the current chairman, Senator Chris Dodd, voted against it, and that was after Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan had issued a stark warning to senators that Fannie and Freddie were playing with fire. Greenspan said without stronger regulations, "We increase the possibility of insolvency and crisis. Without restrictions on the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, we put at risk our ability to preserve safe and sound financial markets in the United States."

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANGLE: Which turned out to be exactly right, but because Democrats blocked it, those new regulations never got consideration by the full Senate and died. So that's how we got into this mess, and how we missed a chance to avoid it. Getting out of it now, of course, will be a lot more difficult -- Brit.

HUME: Oh, boy. Thanks, Jim.

Two days later, former President Clinton agreed:

CHRIS CUOMO, ABC NEWS: A little surprising for you to hear the Democrats saying, "This came out of nowhere, this is all about the Republicans. We had nothing to do with this." Nancy Pelosi saying it. She signed the '99 Gramm Bill. She knew what was going on with the SEC. They're all sophisticated people. Is that playing politics in this situation?

BILL CLINTON: Well, maybe everybody does that a little bit. I think the responsibility the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Imagine that!

Kudos to Cuomo for asking the question, and kudos to Clinton for being so honest, especially in an election year.

The only question remains whether other news outlets will follow suit and begin telling the American people just how many proposals Republicans have made in the past decade to impose tighter regulations and oversight on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and how such efforts were routinely thwarted by Democrats.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/09/25/fox-news-blames-democrats-financial-crisis-bill-clinton-agrees

canters
09-25-2008, 01:08 PM
He is subtly trying to undermine Barry.

MilesAustinforMVP
09-25-2008, 01:11 PM
I love how Clinton tries to throw all the Dems under the bus then say "But not me!" What a dip ****.

trickblue
09-25-2008, 01:12 PM
He is subtly trying to undermine Barry.

I agree wholeheartedly...

I love how Clinton tries to throw all the Dems under the bus then say "But not me!" What a dip ****.

Shouldn't surprise you... he's always done that...

vta
09-25-2008, 05:07 PM
He is subtly trying to undermine Barry.

I think so too.
You know the Clinton's want to be in the White House in 2012 and they're not going to get there with Obama winning this term.

He's playing quite the bi-partisan fence mender lately, with a message of unity. He might really believe it, but I wouldn't doubt his and his wife's ambition.

MetalHead
09-25-2008, 06:56 PM
I agree wholeheartedly...



Shouldn't surprise you... he's always done that...

Slick Willie at work.

punchnjudy
09-25-2008, 07:12 PM
I think the responsibility the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Regardless of his intentions, is this part of his statement true?

ABQCOWBOY
09-25-2008, 07:14 PM
I love how Clinton tries to throw all the Dems under the bus then say "But not me!" What a dip ****.


I agree. He is a dip, but, he's also right. This is no real surprise. There have litterally been hundereds of threads saying the same thing on this board but it falls on deaf ears because it's too easy to blame Bush.

I'd imagine that this too will be spun in such a way as to discredit it.

Americans often look at whats going on and they blame politicians, and I'm not excusing myself from this behavior just so we are clear, but it's true, politicians are very dishonest a great deal of the time. But if your really honest with yourself, do you not know that your being lied to? Yet, we back that Candidate or that party to our last breath.

It's amazing to watch.

ABQCOWBOY
09-25-2008, 07:20 PM
I think the responsibility the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Regardless of his intentions, is this part of his statement true?

I can't see how it would be. Too many people around him made too much money. Too many people close enough to know what was going on ended up dead by some accident. He back doored the Senate and the House by changing lending policies, mandating loans to certain financial classes of browers and threatened lending agencies with withdrawl of federal money if they didn't adhear to these profiling tactics. No, I think he kept silent about it all the way through. He could have come out at any time during the last 8 years and made these statements. Only now that people are intent on knowing why 700 Billion is needed is he telling the story.

Know, I don't believe that that part of the story is true.

jrumann59
09-25-2008, 11:00 PM
I love how Clinton tries to throw all the Dems under the bus then say "But not me!" What a dip ****.

Please take the blue state colored glasses off, if you are so biased to the fact that YOUR party is cannot be responsible, when the former leader of your party is calling down blame then conservatives could give you a million in gold bullion to vote republican and you would still vote democrat thinking the democrats will give you 2 million with out you asking.

Apefist
09-25-2008, 11:10 PM
So, FOX and Clinton blame the Democrats. The Republicans (or at least some journalist) blames CLinton. But Bill O'Reilley blames Bush. And Gramm was responsible for the deregulation which led to this crisis.

Take a few steps back and look at that paragraph, and it should be obvious who's fault it is. The names of those responsible should begin to change color to be more easily recognizable. (see below)

Yep, just what I thought:

So, FOX and Clinton blame the Democrats. The Republicans (or at least some journalist) blames Clinton. But Bill O'Reilley blames Bush. And Gramm was responsible for the deregulation which led to this crisis.

trickblue
09-25-2008, 11:17 PM
So, FOX and Clinton blame the Democrats. The Republicans (or at least some journalist) blames CLinton. But Bill O'Reilley blames Bush. And Gramm was responsible for the deregulation which led to this crisis.

Take a few steps back and look at that paragraph, and it should be obvious who's fault it is. The names of those responsible should begin to change color to be more easily recognizable. (see below)

Yep, just what I thought:

So, FOX and Clinton blame the Democrats. The Republicans (or at least some journalist) blames Clinton. But Bill O'Reilley blames Bush. And Gramm was responsible for the deregulation which led to this crisis.

How do those that have benefited most not make your list...

Apefist
09-25-2008, 11:56 PM
They do, I was merely culling a partial list from those who were named in this thread. That by no means was a complete list...

burmafrd
09-26-2008, 01:15 AM
Pretty much everyone except for a few that have been in Washington over the last 15 years.

BrAinPaiNt
09-26-2008, 06:45 AM
Pretty much everyone except for a few that have been in Washington over the last 15 years.

Yep...and you know a group that seems to be getting a pass in this mess?

Some of the people taking out these loans who are already stretched to thin to think they can actually pay them off before they die.

It seems it is a mess from the top to the bottom.

ABQCOWBOY
09-26-2008, 10:45 AM
Yep...and you know a group that seems to be getting a pass in this mess?

Some of the people taking out these loans who are already stretched to thin to think they can actually pay them off before they die.

It seems it is a mess from the top to the bottom.


I posted this earlier but in short, I don't know how this can not be expected. We can blame those who took out the loans all day long but we can't say that it was not to be expected.

If you have poor credit already, then you probably have a problem to begin with. If a person who has poor credit is given the opportunity to get a loan, what do you expect they will do? I'm not saying all of them but I am saying a decent margin of them will do what they did before. They will not pay there bills. They already have bad credit. The majority are not going to approach i from the point of view of fixing there credit or keeping the house.

If you show somebody who can't afford a loan for 150K but is approved for a 300K home, what do you think he will buy? He won't buy a 150K house, he will buy the 300K house and fail on the loan. He will view the home the same way he would an appartment. It's not perminant but it's a lot nice then an appartment so why not get the house for as long as I'm able and then just walk away for the deal? It was a flawed plan from the beginning. To force lenders to give the loans in the first place was wrong IMO. Just asking for trouble.