Constitutional Emergency

The cause of our country's economic problems

   I am just wondering how many have noticed of late how many of the democratic operatives have been repeating the statement "The republicans want us to return to the failed policies of the past that caused the financial collapse and mortgage problems we are suffering through now." I don't know haw many times I have heard this but it would number in the hundreds. Yet I have heard none of the of the talking heads or leading republicans rebut it. Why do we on the right let them preach such garbage without saying, Wait a minute there! It is to easy to explain that the actual reason for the economic woes we are facing were caused by the forcing of banks to make the bad loans to people who could not pay them back. Who started all that, none other than democrat Bill Clinton. Who refused to rein in Freddy and Fannie? Barney and his fellow democrats. Who has spent trillions under the guise of repairing our economy on failed projects like Solyndra, that would not have helped our economy anyway? Obama.

   When the democrats are making this statement it is always in the context to lead you to believe that the problems we are having were caused by tax cuts and deregulation. If you tell a lie enough times, especially without rebuttal, it soon will become seen as the truth.

   I would urge that everyone contact your Reps. and Senators and tell them to point out the facts behind our economic problems before the democrats manage to implant their story in the minds of those who would not know better.

Views: 313

Comment by Twana Blevins on June 22, 2012 at 9:51am

Front page Magazine

 

Fannie, Freddie, and the Left By: John Perazzo
FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, October 13, 2008  <----- note the date


As evidenced by Barack Obama’s rise in the polls immediately following the financial collapse of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, few Americans understand that for many years Fannie and Freddie have been, first and foremost, tools of Democratic politicians, funders of the Democratic Party, and, in the words of a former Fannie CEO, the intimate “friends” and “family” of the Democratic Party’s left wing.

Nor are most Americans aware that Fannie and Freddie, through their eponymous grant-making foundations, have funneled literally hundreds of millions of dollars in recent years to a host of leftist groups and causes that work to promote Democratic agendas, causes, and policies. To set the record straight, it is worthwhile to examine the connections between Fannie, Freddie, and the Democratic Party.

A full account of the recent financial collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac must consider the role of the Clinton administration. As early as 1993, Clinton’s first year in office, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Henry Cisneros and Attorney General Janet Reno expressed dismay over reports that the rejection rate of black mortgage applicants nationwide was considerably higher than that of their white counterparts. In response, Reno warned that thenceforth “no bank” would be “immune” to an aggressive Justice Department campaign to punish such “discrimination” in the lending market. For emphasis, then-Assistant Attorney General Deval Patrick pledged to work for the elimination of all racial disparities in mortgage lending rejection rates.

A careful look at the facts revealed, however, that those disparities were not actually due to discrimination of any kind. Instead, they reflected the realities of borrowers’ credit-worthiness, as determined by such objective factors as credit history, debt burden, income, net worth, age, and education.

But the political champions of “racial justice” in the Clinton White House were not interested in these facts. So instead of permitting this information to change their outlook on the issue of mortgage lending, they moved ahead with their crusade to inject new energy into the so-called Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, which, according to President Clinton, had failed to live up to its potential as a vehicle for increasing minority homeownership. Thus began the government policy of forcing lenders, under threat of severe sanctions, to make subprime loans to high-risk borrowers who failed to meet traditional loan criteria. It was a policy guaranteed to create a crisis. The only question was when.

Now that the crisis has arrived, Democratic finger-pointing has become the order of the day. Leading the charge, Barack Obama not only blames Republicans, but tacitly blames capitalism as a whole, referencing it by the pejorative code name of “trickle-down” economics. Yet, Obama makes no mention of the fact that the Bush administration exhorted Congress for years to set up an agency to regulate lending institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Nor does he mention that John McCain demanded similar oversight, only to be rebuffed by Democrats like House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, who continued to favor the issuance of the subprime loans that have now caused the mortgage market to collapse.

Since the 1990s, indeed, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been in the Democratic Party’s hip pocket. From 1991 to 1998, for example, Fannie Mae was headed by James Johnson, a longtime aide to former Democratic vice president Walter Mondale. While dutifully following the Clinton administration’s aforementioned mandate, and thereby helping to run the mortgage lender into the ground, Johnson himself earned tens of millions of dollars in his Fannie Mae post, including $21 million in 1998 alone. Johnson made headlines this past summer when Barack Obama tapped him to chair his vice presidential selection committee. Johnson had to resign in disgrace from that position when it was revealed that he had taken at least five below-market real estate loans totaling more than $7 million from Countrywide Financial Corporation.

Johnson’s successor as Fannie Mae’s head, Franklin Raines, had previously served as a budget director to President Bill Clinton. During his years at Fannie’s helm between 1999 and 2005, Raines, while continuing the ill-advised policies that ultimately would bankrupt the company, pocketed nearly $100 million in compensation before leaving under a cloud of scandal. It seems that Raines had manipulated profit-and-loss reports so as to enable himself and other senior executives to earn enormous bonuses on top of already-high salaries – in 2003 alone, Raines received $16.8 million in cash compensation – even as the financial empire he oversaw was imploding.

Another Fannie Mae luminary was Jamie Gorelick, who served as vice chair of the mortgage lender from 1998 to 2003. Prior to that, she had been Janet Reno’s Deputy Attorney General during precisely those years when the Clinton Justice Department was aggressively compelling banks to make subprime loans to unworthy borrowers. That experience gave Gorelick valuable training for her future post at Fannie Mae, where she ultimately would increase her personal net worth by $26 million.

While the foregoing Democrats collected obscene sums of cash as reward for their complicity in the subprime mortgage debacle, by no means were they the only beneficiaries of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac money. Between 1989 and 2008, no fewer than 354 members of Congress received funds from Fannie and Freddie. Of those, 209 were Democrats who pulled in a combined $4.84 million. The leading recipient of Fannie/Freddie money was Connecticut Democrat Chris Dodd, the Banking Committee Chairman who collected more than $165,000. Dodd opposed oversight of Fannie and Freddie and pushed hard for the continuance of subprime mortgage loans. In second place was Barack Obama, who, in just three years in the U.S. Senate, raked in $126,000. Third was Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry, with $111,000.

Republicans, too, deserve a measure of criticism. Some 143 of them received Fanny and Freddie funds totaling just under $3.02 million. Utah Republican Robert Bennett, a Senate veteran, led the GOP with $107,999 in total contributions from the mortgage giants. Two independents also took in over $28 thousand.

As further evidence of the Democrats’ role in the credit crisis, consider Fannie Mae’s intimate relationship with the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), which represents the far-left of the Democratic Party. At a 2005 ceremony, Fannie Mae’s interim CEO Daniel Mudd told the CBC (of which Barack Obama was a new member) how deeply he valued “the friendship and partnership between Fannie Mae and the Congressional Black Caucus.” Mudd referred to the CBC not only as “good friends to Fannie Mae and our mission,” but also as Fannie Mae’s “family” and “the conscience of Fannie Mae.” (For a video of Mudd’s remarks, click here.)

Such ties represent merely the tip of the iceberg. To gain a fuller appreciation for just how closely the mortgage companies were allied with the Democratic Party and its surrogates, one might look at the grant-making arms of Fannie and Freddie — specifically, the Fannie Mae Foundation and the Freddie Mac Foundation. The former was established in 1968, the latter in 1991. Together, they hold combined assets exceeding $285 million, and each year they give tens of millions of dollars (nearly $89 million in 2006 alone) in grants to predominantly leftwing organizations that promote a host of pro-Democrat agendas. Among the groups supported by Fannie and Freddie are the American Civil Liberties Union; the NAACP and the National Urban League; left-wing financier the Tides Foundation; pro-illegal immigration groups like the Mexican American Legal Defense & Education Fund, the National Immigration Forum, and the National Council of La Raza; pro-Democratic community activist groups like the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Center for Community Change, and the Alliance for Justice; feminist organizations like National Organization for Women and the National Women’s Law Center; and former president Jimmy Carter’s Carter Center. A comprehensive list of liberal, leftist, and pro-Democratic Fannie and Freddie grantees would fill an entire book.

During last week’s presidential debate, John McCain made a point of observing that Senator Obama and his fellow Democrats had long “defended what Fannie and Freddie were doing” and had blocked all efforts at reforming the now-notorious institutions. Obama parried the charge by insisting that American voters were “not interested in hearing politicians pointing fingers.” Obama’s defensiveness is understandable. If Americans took the time to examine the issue, they would discover that much of the blame for the current crisis belongs to the Democratic Party.


John Perazzo is the Managing Editor of DiscoverTheNetworks and is the author of The Myths That Divide Us: How Lies Have Poisoned American Race Rela.... For more information on his book, click here. E-mail him at WorldStudiesBooks@gmail.com

 

Comment by Twana Blevins on June 22, 2012 at 9:55am

Open Secrets.org

OpenSecrets Blog

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Invest in Democrats

By Lindsay Renick Mayer on July 16, 2008 5:27 PM

(For an updated chart that includes contributions from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae's PACs and employees to ALL lawmakers back to 1989, including to their leadership PACs, go here.) and data The federal government recently announced that it will come to the rescue of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, two embattled mortgage buyers that for years have pursued a lobbying strategy to get lawmakers on their side. Both companies have poured money into lobbying and campaign contributions to federal candidates, parties and committees as a general tactic, but they've also directed those contributions strategically. In the 2006 election cycle, Fannie Mae was giving 53 percent of its total $1.3 million in contributions to Republicans, who controlled Congress at that time. This cycle, with Democrats in control, they've reversed course, giving the party 56 percent of their total $1.1 million in contributions. Similarly, Freddie Mac has given 53 percent of its $555,700 in contributions to Democrats this cycle, compared to the 44 percent it gave during 2006.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have also strategically given more contributions to lawmakers currently sitting on committees that primarily regulate their industry. Fifteen of the 25 lawmakers who have received the most from the two companies combined since the 1990 election sit on either the House Financial Services Committee; the Senate Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs Committee; or the Senate Finance Committee. The others have seats on the powerful Appropriations or Ways & Means committees, are members of the congressional leadership or have run for president. Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), chairman of the Senate banking committee, has received the most from Fannie and Freddie's PACs and employees ($133,900 since 1989). Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa.) has received $65,500. Kanjorski chairs the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government-Sponsored Enterprises, and Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs.

Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008

Name

Office

Party/State

Total

1. Dodd, Christopher J

S

D-CT

$133,900

2. Kerry, John

S

D-MA

$111,000

3. Obama, Barack

S

D-IL

$105,849

4. Clinton, Hillary

S

D-NY

$75,550

5. Kanjorski, Paul E

H

D-PA

$65,500

6. Bennett, Robert F

S

R-UT

$61,499

7. Johnson, Tim

S

D-SD

$61,000

8. Conrad, Kent

S

D-ND

$58,991

9. Davis, Tom

H

R-VA

$55,499

10. Bond, Christopher S 'Kit'

S

R-MO

$55,400

11. Bachus, Spencer

H

R-AL

$55,300

12. Shelby, Richard C

S

R-AL

$55,000

13. Emanuel, Rahm

H

D-IL

$51,750

14. Reed, Jack

S

D-RI

$50,750

15. Carper, Tom

S

D-DE

$44,389

16. Frank, Barney

H

D-MA

$40,100

17. Maloney, Carolyn B

H

D-NY

$38,750

18. Bean, Melissa

H

D-IL

$37,249

19. Blunt, Roy

H

R-MO

$36,500

20. Pryce, Deborah

H

R-OH

$34,750

21. Miller, Gary

H

R-CA

$33,000

22. Pelosi, Nancy

H

D-CA

$32,750

23. Reynolds, Tom

H

R-NY

$32,700

24. Hoyer, Steny H

H

D-MD

$30,500

25. Hooley, Darlene

H

D-OR

$28,750

Includes contributions from PACs and individuals.
2008 cycle totals based on data downloaded from the
Federal Election Commission on June 30, 2008.

Comment by Twana Blevins on June 22, 2012 at 10:09am

New York Times

 

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

By STEVEN A. HOLMES
Published: September 30, 1999
 
In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.

''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''

Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.

Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990's. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.

In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for homes increased by 31.2 per cent.

Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag behind non-Hispanic whites, in part because blacks and Hispanics in particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings.

In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups.

The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.

 

Comment by Lois on June 22, 2012 at 10:23am

It's all about wanting to take over this white European Judeo/Christian nation...simply put.  No house can survive spending more than what is taken in.  Debt is but a way for the government to steal, redistribute our wealth.

God said we'd be hated by the world.  Ask why...for our faith, our ingenuity, our success.  The most successful countries in the world have been white Judeo/Christian nations.  They want what we have, and God warned us of them trying to steal it from us.  Satan's minions want to maintain their control...we are a threat to them...they want to turn us into a third world nation for all to be enslaved.

Comment by Harry Riley on June 22, 2012 at 10:47am

You are right Johnny......how soon we forget the truth and roll over........you, Twana, and Golden Eagle sum it all up.......

Comment by Joyce Sutherland on June 22, 2012 at 12:07pm
Every time I think about it, I can't help but compare these thieves to grifters. Sure, maybe they're are elitist grifters, but it's still a con job./jms
Comment by Len Miles on June 22, 2012 at 1:40pm

Lets not forget the Wall Street fantasy financiers, going as far back as 1996, maybe even earlier. They took those toxic mortgages  and sold them as AAA investments with Standard & Poor’s blessing to boot… (also know as CDO's or Credit Default Swaps). Now how can Standard & Poor’s retain their reputation as the top rating firm?  Wall Street  leveraged that trash 32 to 1 and Standard & Poor’s condoned it. And then Standard & Poor’s downgrades the US from AAA to AA+.

Greenspan, Rubin and Summers should all be in jail.

View the Frontline episode titled “The Warning”… http://video.pbs.org/video/1302794657/

Comment by Johnny Smith on June 22, 2012 at 1:50pm

The point being in all of this, we as conservatives/republicans/libertarians/tea party etc. need to be refuting the democrats every time they spew the B.S. about the failed policies of the past in reference to the republicans. The folks that are suppose to do our talking for us need to be nudged in that direction quickly.

Comment by Len Miles on June 25, 2012 at 9:45pm

John... Though Clinton signed the bill... Phil Gramm penned it. So it's was a joint effort on both sides of the isle, but it’s true that Clinton signed the bill and that’s where buck stops.  I read about the Gramm-Leachy-Bliley Act as it’s creation was what repealed The Glass-Steagall Act. One of the thoughts behind the GLB Act was that today’s fantasy financier's were much more sophisticated investors then they were in 1929. It was hardly sophistication, but was surely greed followed by more greed. When 2008 arrived the fears that Brooksley Born (CFTC Chair and a derivatives lawyer) had as far back as the late 90’s became reality. Know one but a few mathematicians actually knew how those derivatives worked. An entire school district’s pension plan in Wisconsin was wiped out and I’m sure there are countless stories of the same magnitude. It turns out the salesmen that sold that junk to the Wisconsin School district, actually didn’t know what they were selling due to the complexity of the derivatives...  from the book titled “The Looting of America” by Les Leopold.

The Rothschild name surely pops up quite often when it comes to money. I think they had something to do with the start of the Federal Reserve as well.

The Glass-Steagall Act was responsible for keeping the sanity in the markets after 1929. The GLB bill repealed Glass-Steagall and in 8 short years all the wheels came….so much for sophisticated investors. I agree… the Glass-Steagall should be reenacted and the GLB act should be sent packing.  

Your last paragraph tells me there’s much more to read… thanks.

Comment by Len Miles on June 26, 2012 at 8:36pm

Good lesson from the Icelanders... we should take a page out of that book. All I watch is FOX and CBS for 60 minutes on Sunday. I have to admit, I do watch MSNBC on a rare occasion just to make sure I keep track of what those wing-nuts are up to.

Comment

You need to be a member of Constitutional Emergency to add comments!

Join Constitutional Emergency

About

Twana Blevins created this Ning Network.

This effort is focused on sacrifice to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.

Vinenco

We Must Open our Eyes to Jihad, by Diana West

Sixteen-year-old Ari Halberstam was shot in the head on March 1, 1994. He died four days later.

Nearly 20 years after a Hasidic Jewish boy riding across the Brooklyn Bridge (pictured) was killed by a Muslim fighting jihad, a British soldier was hacked to death and beheaded on the streets of London by Muslims fighting jihad.

Thanks to the happenstance of a passer-by with a video recorder, the world heard almost immediately from one of the two London suspects, Michael [...]

Obama Lied about Islamic Terror Threat

Terrorism analysts are rebutting President Obama’s assertion that the “scale of the threat” from Islamic terrorists has reverted to pre-Sept. 11, 2001, levels.

“This is a total fabrication,” said Steven Emerson, whose Investigative Project on Terrorism tracks radical Islam. “The ‘scale of this threat’ in the 1990s never closely resembled the terrorist attacks post 9/11. This is an outright lie.”

The Heritage Foundation has been cataloguing foiled terror attacks post-9/11 by Islamic groups. The number: 54.

James Carafano, a military analyst at Heritage, said the 1990s’ numbers [...]

Claims of Sharia Law being Enforced in The Hague

There have been calls for an urgent debate in the Dutch parliament about the integration of Muslim immigrants amid claims that one area of The Hague, known locally as “the Sharia triangle”, is being run by a form of unofficial Sharia police.

The claims relate to the district of Schilderswijk, about two kilometres from the city centre, where an almost entirely Muslim population of some 5,000 people surrounds the El Islam mosque, fuelling criticism that the government has failed to ensure a [...]

Tech Notes

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11



HOW TO JOIN YOUR STATE GROUP

1. Click on State Groups tab at the top of the page.
2. Find your State Flag
3. Click on Flag.
4. Look for link to join Your State Group near the top of the State Groups page.
5. Click on it.

Follow the Prompts


How to post "live" URL in posts at PFA............. Adding URLs in blog posts that are not "live" is a waste of everyone's time.....
Here's how....if anyone has better guidance send to me.....
First........type your text entry into the post block to include typing or paste the URL you want us to view........when finished with the text, highlight and copy the URL in the text.......then click the "add hyperlink" tool in the B, I, U box just above the text entry, after clicking, a window will open asking for the URL...paste the URL in the box and click "OK". You have now made the URL "live"...........it shows some code before the post is published, it goes away when you "publish post".......

Events

© 2013   Created by Twana Blevins.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service