National debt has increased $4 trillion under Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

1 Enforcement

1.1 Regulations

2 History

2.1 Legislative revision history
2.2 Original act
2.3 Legislative changes 1989
2.4 Legislative changes 1991
2.5 Legislative changes 1992
2.6 Legislative changes 1994
2.7 Regulatory changes 1995
2.8 Legislative changes 1999
2.9 Regulatory changes 2005
2.10 Regulatory changes 2007
2.11 Legislative changes 2008
2.12 CRA reform proposals

3 Controversies and criticisms

3.1 Effectiveness
3.2 Sound practices and profitability
3.3 Housing advocacy groups
3.4 Predatory lending
3.5 Relation to 2008 financial crisis

The CRA was one of a number of factors that caused the housing bubble and financial collapse. I blame both political parties over decades for causing the problems. But it would be less than astute to deny that the CRA was part of the problems.

EACH change in the CRA increased the pressure on lenders to make loans or suffer the consequences of not lending.

 

Oh, I have read the text of the CRA. Have you ever read the text of the Constitution? Redlining is not illegal. The government has no authority to tell a bank where they MUST invest THEIR money. If I'm wrong cite chapter and verse of such Constitutional authority...

Redlining is the act of not investing in a certain area. It has nothing to do with discrimination based on "...race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status or handicap..." as the Fair Housing Act so states. Even the Fourteenth Amendment is all about equal protection under the law for INDIVIDUALS, not for an area of land. To make it so Leftists must once again BEND THE LAW to make it fit into their mental machinations.

 

You can blame BOTH parties if you like, but Republicans hardly did anything to cause the collapse, and what they did either could not have been done without other Democrat violations of the Constitution, or would have little to no effect in a Democrat Constitutional violation free environment.

 

The court system is rigged after Democrat FDR threatened the Supreme Court so they would stop ruling his "New Deal" unconstitutional. Why did he have to so threaten the Supreme Court if the government could do ANYTHING it wanted? Democrat achievements are based on lies, threats, and coercion, not Constitutional governance.

If the CRA "had NOTHING to do with forcing banks to make loans to unqualified persons" why did Clinton start quotas in 1995 when he changed the enforcement of the CRA? See, you are just repeating a Leftist Lie! Leftists always use that quote from the text of the CRA that says that banks don’t have to make loans that would be risky, but never talk about Clinton’s quotas making their argument absolutely fraudulent and faulty, as is the entire Left! It did not take long for banks to run out of actual "qualified" people living in the hoods of America so they lowered standards to make Democrat Clinton enforced quotas. Study up on reality to give your posts credibility!

 

No idea .. Got a link for this statement.

Yup .. Insanity .. hard choices must be made and he has yet to choose much.

What part of "Clinton gave Bush a balanced budget did you not understand" ?

 

I really want to reply to Iriemon's post 155, but I feel the above points need to be addressed and replied to first. Redlining has nothing to do with individual discrimination unless you can show again some "white" guy living in the ”hood” (redlined area) that got a loan, and then show a "black" guy living in the same "hood" (with the same credit and down payment trying to buy a similar house) that did not get a similar loan. What groups like ACORN did when they sued was claim that "white" people in CHICAGO were getting loans while similarly qualified "black" people again living in CHICAGO (not the poorest of neighborhoods of Chicago, but CHICAGO) were not getting loans. The argument never addressed tiny patches of the hood that no one in their right mind would invest money. Why would anyone invest money in an area with a very high murder and arson rate, and where drugs are openly dealt on street corners? That is what Democrats sought to force banks to do. Banks started making the loans and the whole system eventually collapsed.
This thread is called "National debt has increased $4 trillion under Obama.” Things that create deficit spending are relevant to the thread like the causes of the financial collapse that some feel caused the need for "stimulus" spending.

 

Yes, I do have a link:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...308l15492l0l15604l8l8l0l7l0l0l120l120l0.1l1l0

What part of BUSH DIDN'T CAUSE THE RECESSION, SO THEREFORE THE BURNING SHIP GIVEN TO OBAMA WAS NOT BUSHES FAULT do you, my friend, not understand?

 

"What part of "Clinton gave Bush a balanced budget did you not understand" ?

Once again for those who do not understand how our government works. CONGRESS decides how much money will be spent and where. The president is required to submit a budget PROPOSAL. Congress is not required to follow it.
For the upcoming fiscal year 2012, the Republican controlled House ignored odrama's proposal and passed their own budget, months ago, and sent it to the Senate. The Democrat controlled Senate has YET to take up the House budget, OR, discuss a budget of their own. 36 days until the new fiscal year begins. But they also rejected odrama's proposal by a vote of 97-0. We can certainly call that a bi-partisan rejection.

Back to:
"What part of "Clinton gave Bush a balanced budget did you not understand" ?

When Clinton had a balanced budget, both Houses of Congress were controlled by the Republican Party. So Republicans could rightfully make the claim that it was Republicans that had the balanced budget, and Clinton only signed it.

But the truth is that Clinton and Gingrich, then Speaker of the House, worked TOGETHER for the good of the nation. odrama may have a higher IQ than either of those men. Maybe higher than both of them put together to listen to the incredible claims of obamalamaloopas. But the fact is that each of them is much wiser and more capable than odrama will ever hope to be.

They're combined wisdom and competence makes odrama look like a mosquito larvae in a mud puddle.

 

The truth is, the Clinton/Democrat passed tax increase in 1993 (which every single Republican opposed) couple with lower military spending because of the "peace dividend" were the major reason we got to a balance budget. The deficit was already falling like a stone when the Republicans took Congress.

Gringich tried to force Clinton to accept massive tax cuts. But contrary to your claim about Congress setting the budget, Clinton used his veto power (never heard about that, eh?) to thwart Gringich.

I used to give the Republicans a fair amount of credit on the surplus. But they showed their true colors as soon as they got one of their own in the WH, squandering the golden opportunity of a surplus within a couple years of Bush taking office.

 

Fact: US law says CONGRESS will decide what to spend.

Fact: Clinton was president.

Fact: Congress was controlled by the Republicans.

Fact: we had a surplus.

Rewrite history any way liberals like, the facts remain the facts.