DISQUS

AMERICAblog: Bush blames crisis on events from ten years ago

  • tbhull · 1 year ago
    I am a Texan and I remember Bush 10 years ago and he was a stupid cocky dry drunk idiot back then.
  • Naked Bunny with a Whip · 1 year ago
    Well, what was poor Dubya to do? He's just one guy, ya know? He had his hands full protecting us from the scary brown people. Well, not that one day, but he was busy reading about a goat that day, give him a break!
  • Eric · 1 year ago
    The sad part is that he's partially right. The blame for getting this started is with Alan Greenspan. However, after 9/11 when the stock market crashed, Bush and Greenspan decided to exacerbate the problem by flooding the market once again with cheap credit (just like Ben Bernanke is doing now). Clinton had the luxury of presiding over a bubble economy, but I wouldn't blame him specifically for inflating those bubbles. The federal reserve has control of interest rates (and they don't have to answer to congress) so they're the real decision makers.
  • pdxprobert · 1 year ago
    What total rubbish to once again use the blame it on the Clinton's and the Democrats ruse... why is it most if not all of these bad decisions to give loans to people who couldnt pay them back, were given out in the last 6 years...I know people who got home loans in the last 6 years that never even had to prove their income levels.. in fact, on October 15, 2002, President Bush boasted in a press meeting how some programs were recently put in place so his administration could boost minority home ownership.,.and then went on to further boast how his administration was responsible for that increase... I sure hope the Democrats stand up and say something in response to this latest event to rewrite history by the republicans.. the only people responsible for this mess are the ones that failed in their oversight duties.. all those oversight positions were appointed by this republican administration.. I'd like someone to point out where its written that people with bad credit were to be given loans that had explosive rate jumps built into them that would make the loan recipient unable to pay back their obligation?

    an excerpt form that October 15, 2002 press conference.. this is all noted on the whitehouse.gov website..NOTE: it starts out "FREDDIE MAC RECENTLY BEGAN..."

    "Freddie Mac recently began 25 initiatives around the country to dismantle barriers and create greater opportunities for homeownership. One of the programs is designed to help deserving families who have bad credit histories to qualify for homeownership loans. Freddie Mac is also working with the Department of Defense to promote construction and financing for housing for men and women in the military. "

    President Hosts Conference on Minority Homeownership
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10...
  • JayDog · 1 year ago
    I don't understand how Bush walks around with his lower intestine draped over his head. History has already been written for this period but it wasn't the decisions that were made on Wall Street ten years ago. It was decisions that were made in the halls of congress when Phil Gramm and Tom Delay and the rest of the Returdlicans broke down the barriers that created this mess. Those who fail to study and understand history are bound to repeat it.
  • tbhull · 1 year ago
    Repubs and dems alike are to blame for the financial meltdown.
  • pdxprobert · 1 year ago
    Will you elaborate on your position please... explain the roles the dems played in the last 6 years of loans being given to people who shouldnt have qualified for the types of loans they were being sold... the majority of loans in default were sold since 2002 and through 2006 into 2007 ... who was in full charge of the senate, house, WH in those years? and which party appointed the people in charge of the oversight agencies, thus took direction from their party heads... please respond .. thanks in advance... Pay particular attention to my phrase "who shouldnt have qualified for the types of loans they were being sold"
  • tbhull · 1 year ago
    Clinton signed Gtaham's legislation that allowed credit default swaps to be exempt from securities or insurance regulatory oversight. Dodd and Frank actively pushed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into extending credit to those not worthy of credit and then bailed outy these rancid insolvent pieces of shitfor several billions.

    Dodd still has problems with his Countrywide associations and enjoys what appears to be a VIP loan from Countrywide, a Coutrywide that last year the FDIC and Feds forced Bank of America to swallow. No problem though, Congress less than a year latere delivered billions of taxayer dollars to Bank of America via the bailout to help clean up the skidmarks and mupuddles on BOA's balance sheet caused by eating the Countrywide pig.

    Please do no delude yourself by thinking this leveraged financial fiasco that looks like it will cost US taxpayers into the 14 figures (double digit trillions) to undo was simply a repub and repub only creation. Remember, one party, two faces with each face immersed in the trough's deep slop represented by taxpayer dollars feeding daily and always needing and passing more.
  • cole3244 · 1 year ago
    as usual the party that promotes personal responsibility for everyone else doesn't take responsibility for anything they do, at least they are consistent here as they are in blaming everything and anyone but the con agenda and policies for the strife it inflicts on america and its citizens, party first continues to be the gops all encompassing legacy at the expense of everything else.
  • Older_Wiser · 1 year ago
    And sadly, many Dems were snoozing through all of this, too. After all, many of them were making plenty of money as well.

    Still, Worst. President. In. History. He'll make even Hoover look like a financial genius...
  • Georganne · 1 year ago
    Anyone notice that Bush admitted that St. Ronnie disgraced the office of the president (when he ignored the growing AIDS epidemic for the first six years of his presidency)?

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081201/ap_on_go_pr...
    (third paragraph)
  • bob_h · 1 year ago
    Bush took an oath twice to defend us against "all enemies". foreign and domestic. He didn't protect us from either.
  • SCLiberal · 1 year ago
    Didn't Clinton sign the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999? This act separated investment and commercial banking activities. He does bear some of the responsibility but Bush bears more.
  • JohnInTexas · 1 year ago
    A decade before George became president? So it is Daddy Bush's fault, he was president 10 years before George was.
  • tbhull · 1 year ago
    Was it daddy's fault? Well hell yeah it was. Look at that walrus in pearls that is Georgie Jr's disgusting mommie. Skinny little yes man daddy should have known nothing good would come from putting the Bush staff into this mess.
  • TomJoad · 1 year ago
    Wasn't the bugaboo to help poor people QUALIFY for loans?
    Qualify means be able to pay back.

    They can't have it both ways. There have ALWAYS been people that wouldn't be able to pay back their loans wanting a loan. The gatekeepers were supposed to be the free market companies acting responsibly. They found a pyramid scam that they perpetuated and constantly tried to rope in more unqualified borrowers.

    And they are STILL scamming us...with our money. And our government is still just forking over our money but without any demands whatsoever.
  • Bluestocking · 1 year ago
    What Bush and his many toadies among the American people fail to understand is that in the end, pointing fingers at Clinton for everything that's gone wrong does not by itself ultimately absolve Bush from taking responsibility for what he has contributed to this crisis. As Aldous Huxley once said, "the facts don't go away simply because they are ignored". The fact that Bush doesn't want to take responsibility for this crisis doesn't by itself mean that he hasn't contributed anything to it -- all it means is that he and his toadies are either in denial or lying through their teeth. They also don't realize that by blaming Clinton, they only end up undercutting the image they've tried so hard to project of Bush over the last eight years. If Bush truly was as strong and as competent a leader as they have purported him to be for the last eight years, then why was he apparently incapable of undoing the damage which Clinton allegedly left behind him -- especially considering the fact that the Republicans held the majority in both houses during two sessions of Congress? Whether they realize it or not -- and I'm certain that they do not -- the suggestion that even a Republican trifecta was not enough to prevent the problem only serves to suggest that Bush is much weaker and much less competent than he was portrayed as being. If they are unwilling to accept this, then the only other logical explanation is that Bush and Republicans in Congress had no particular objection to it at the time and saw no reason to do anything about it -- which in turn suggests that they weren't really smart enough to see it coming and as a result were at least passively complicit. No matter how they might try to package it, trying to saddle Clinton with the lion's share of the blame for this financial crisis does absolutely nothing except prove to the discriminating eye how desperate they are to pass the buck, how little nobility of character they collectively possess, and the fact that all their pontification on the importance of taking personal responsibility is by and large nothing more than an exercise in hypocrisy.
  • Mark-NC · 1 year ago
    I've been watching Republicans try to say that all of the real problems with the stock market and the housing/banking started when the Dems took over Congress. What horseshit - but excellent Republican!

    Bush's comments at least acknowledge that it went right through his tenure (with the default implication that he sat and did absolutely NOTHING to address or prevent the problems).
  • Lindsay · 1 year ago
    As he leaves office, Bush said he felt responsible for the economic downturn because it's occurring on his watch, but he added: "I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so" before he became president.

    Um, a "decade or so" *before* he became president, his dad was president...he may have *meant* to blame it on Clinton, and in fact, Clinton may bear some responsibility, but he actually is blaming it all on Bush 1.

    The headline on my local paper this morning reads "U.S. ignored meltdown warnings". Similar to "ignored warnings about al quada", "ignored warnings about hurricane approaching New Orleans", and how many more?
  • atlliberal · 1 year ago
    It's almost as if Bush thinks the last 8 years never happened!
    We could only wish they didn't.
    To Republicans, personal responsibility means "It's the Democrat's fault" They are never responsible for anything.
  • TNObamaFan · 1 year ago
    a decade or so BEFORE he became President would have been his daddy.
  • katiec · 1 year ago
    Bush and the republicans refuse to face or accept responsibility for what they have done to our country these last eight years.
    They have started fund raisers to fight the "left agenda" proving
    they care nothing about our country and are only, as usual, out
    for theirselves.
    The Democrats need to get strong, make sure that all actions
    by the pubs are made public and, hopefully start criminal
    proceedings against those who are guilty. It is time for fighting
    back.
  • Aibi · 1 year ago
    "I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so"

    GW isn't blaming Clinton, who was president for the 8 years prior; citing a decade and more - he's blaming his father and Reagan for starting this financial fiasco - and rightfully so. But the idiot is being too modest; he is the one who crashed it.
  • woodroad34 · 1 year ago
    I didn't do the math, but you're right. Still, if he had all this insight, why didn't do some kind of pre-emptive strike--I understand he's good at that -- or was that bad intelligence as well?
  • woodroad34 · 1 year ago
    Oh, wow! Economic analysis from a "Gentleman's 'C'" MBA. OOOO, I'm so impressed. So, knowing all this potential disaster happened before he became President and yet he did nothing about it -- how un-preemptive of him.
  • judybrowni · 1 year ago
    This is red meat for the wingnuts, who I've seen try to blame Clinton for anything -- ANYTHING -- that this administration fucked up.

    Just this sort of comment has come up in threads on websites that attract wingnuts, as well as the sane, for some time now so it's probably a line that's been fed to them through the right sausage machine (Limbaugh, Fox, etc.)

    (Im)plausible deniability.
  • Hal Sigerson · 1 year ago
    I put the blame on the Community Reinvestment Act (proposed by Carter) strengthened by the Clinton Administration and the effects of which were ignored or lied about by Congressional Democrats then and now.
  • Mike_G · 1 year ago
    I put the blame on the Community Reinvestment Act

    Then you would be a lying Repig hack. CRA was responsible for less than 1% of subprime. Try getting your economic news from someone other than a drug addict on the radio.

    Bush WH Ignored Market Meltdown Warnings

    http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/12/bush-admin...

    A brutally damning article about the warnings the Bush administration received and ignored was published this morning by the Associated Press. The AP summed up the philosophy of the Bush White House, writing: “The administration’s blind eye to the impending crisis is emblematic of its governing philosophy, which trusted market forces and discounted the value of government intervention in the economy. Its belief ironically has ushered in the most massive government intervention since the 1930s.”

    Excerpt:

    The Bush administration backed off proposed crackdowns on no-money-down, interest-only mortgages years before the economy collapsed, buckling to pressure from some of the same banks that have now failed. It ignored remarkably prescient warnings that foretold the financial meltdown, according to an Associated Press review of regulatory documents.

    Bowing to aggressive lobbying — along with assurances from banks that the troubled mortgages were OK — regulators delayed action for nearly one year. By the time new rules were released late in 2006, the toughest of the proposed provisions were gone and the meltdown was under way.

    Bank regulators had proposed new guidelines for writing risky loans in 2005, but were rebuffed by the White House. The proposed regulations might have avoided the worst fo the housing and credit crisis, had they been enacted.

    What was so especially damning was these proposals were all stripped from the final Administrative rules by the Bush White House. None required congressional approval or even the president’s signature
  • sparrow · 1 year ago
    Republicans are enamored with blaming Clinton for absolutely anything and everything to cover their own complicity. It's become a tradition with them much like the yearly screening of "It's a Wonderful Life" around Christmas, only with them done much more frequently. Republicans: The Party of Personal Responsibility. It a running joke.