Question concerning forclosure moratorium

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Ps104_33, Feb 14, 2009.

  1. Ps104_33

    Ps104_33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,005
    Likes Received:
    0
    It seems that some banks have capitulated to Barney Frank and other socialists in our government and agreed on a moratorium on mortgage forclosures.

    My question is how will they determine those who legitimally need help, such as those buried in medical bills, from deadbeats who must decide between paying their morgage or their Harley Davidson payment? Is it fair that there may be some who are behind in their mortgage because they squander their money on an abundance of material goods such as boats and HDTV's?

    Also what kind of help will go to those who are behind on their rent payment because of the recession? Why is there preferential treatment given to those buying homes? Arent those renting an apartment or house affected by the recession also? Will they recieve help?
     
  2. windcatcher

    windcatcher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    Note who is first in Time’s line-up in their illustration. Never mind that President Bush tried to reform the financial sector numerous times during his tenure.

    Also note the conspicuous absence of Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd or any of the Democrats who fought tooth and nail against any Fannie Mae reforms. (You can see them in action here.)

    There is also no mention of ACORN or La Raza. Or of Mr. Obama, who did their bidding as an activist and as a lawyer.

    And where is Mr. Obama’s chief of staff, Rham Emanuel, who made $250K in director’s fees from Freddie Mac at the very time they were running amok?

    Indeed, there is no mention at all of the mortgages that were given to people – even illegal aliens – who should have never gotten a mortgage in the first place.

    Maybe Time feels, like Mr. Obama, that these people were “tricked” into getting mortgages.


    The Times blame list is here

    I don't believe this administration has any sincere interest in helping people with foreclosures or restructured loans: I believe they will use this economy, and pick and choose and use a few who's misfortunes have popular appeal...... to impress that something is being done or to get their agendas inplace.... but no real or indiscrimanatory help. Like the communist moral code .......the ends justify the means...... what ever is good for the state or the administration is good for the people...... this is socialism and communism...... There is little difference in the morality of the state.
     
  3. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bush had control of all three branches of government during most of his tenure and the operative word from your discussion is "tried." He just couldn't seem to do anything right could he?
     
  4. windcatcher

    windcatcher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    I suppose you looked at the chart?

    Did you notice that Bill Clinton was ranked not all that far from GWB although he's been gone from office over 8 years?

    And to say Bush had control of all 3 branches of the government means you either don't believe in the constitution or that you believe he was a dictator, or you just enjoy promoting lies.



    Some in the Congress did make an attempt to reel in the over marketing of realestate and sound the alarm about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.... but others wouldn't listen... and opposition was potent from both parties.

    Interesting how some blame Bush for so much that the legislature did or did not do: However much 'in control' the Republicans might have seen, one only has to visit the slew of bills passed during the Bush administration and the breakdown of votes along party lines, and see that those which passed had significant Democratic support:

    Is it not reasonable to think that those bills also contained essentials of interest and benefit to the Democrats?
     
    #4 windcatcher, Feb 14, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 14, 2009

Share This Page

Loading...