Everything in a Nutshell

pettyfog · Sep 30, 2008

An 11 minute viral video nutshell:

Money for Nothing/Burning Down the House
{Note: relinked for new post of non-infringing video. just imagine those two songs in background}
Yep... Don's gonna HATE THIS.

Watch Don prevaricate, bring up something else. Hopefully not that old, tired "Bush is Evil" crap. Boring!

But he cant dismiss the screen scrapes. Cause Google still allows you to find it for yourself.

HatterDon · Sep 30, 2008

If you had a particular video for me to lie about, it didn't show up. All I got was an invitation to join U-Tube.

Oooooh; is this an example of me bringing up something else? How socialist of me! Sorry

pettyfog · Sep 30, 2008

Well. well...
"This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Universal Music Publishing"

In a subsequent version he says that networks tried to take it down. Evidently the ObamaTruthers got to him through the soundtrack. He should have known better.

You'll have to settle for this, it's far less brilliant, until he gets the vid reposted with no music..

OTOH: Cant beat his for 'cute': The William Ayres Chorale

HatterDon · Sep 30, 2008

Oh, I see. It was a partisan conglomeration of guilt by association. Thanks for posting. And I'll have to accept that the original was more entertaining than the snooze-fest that you posted under "settle for this."

Riddle me this, though, Mr. Expert on Everything. If you really believe that Obama had more power over the economy as a Freshman Senator for four years [two years of which his party was in the minority] than the President of the United States had for eight years [six years of which his party was in the majority], then why in the world would he want to swap the highly influential position of Junior Senator from Illinois for the [evidently] less influenctial position of President?

oh, and since we're so fond of links, here's one I found that speaks to the innuendo in your link:

http://www.businessweek.com/investing/i ... reinv.html

And what does the dangerously socialist publication Business Week say about the link between CRA and subprime mortgages?

The Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977, requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits. Just the idea that a lending crisis created from 2004 to 2007 was caused by a 1977 law is silly. But it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that most subprime loans were made by firms that aren’t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations.
Click to expand...

By the way, the article began:

Fresh off the false and politicized attack on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, today we’re hearing the know-nothings blame the subprime crisis on the Community Reinvestment Act — a 30-year-old law that was actually weakened by the Bush administration just as the worst lending wave began. This is even more ridiculous than blaming Freddie and Fannie.
Click to expand...

But I guess I'm just changing the subject again, if just not outright lying.

pettyfog · Sep 30, 2008

Well, 'Mr Read it to suit..'

HEre''s what I had to say about the CRA, before I saw that:

..
But something happened, starting 30 years ago, which set the ball rolling towards the easy mortgage credit. It created a new model for housing credit and seemed to work really well.. so congress kept fooling with it to make it even more utilized.

Then financial instruments were created so that those loans that were seen as 'risky' could be distributed along with sound loans and every bank and investment house could share the risk load. Still all well and good. It was voluntary after all and a wise funds manager would make sure that their company wasnt overexposed in case of a severe economic crisis.

It was about this time that the person counseling the buyer no longer cared whether or not the buyer could pay. Their job was to put through as many loans as possible. That loan was not going to be held at the local bank, or even administered by a local bank. It was in some far away place.

Of course, if you're not changing and advancing you're falling back and every so many years and administrations there was someone who wanted to make sure no one was left out of the American dream so somehow regulations were forged that FORCED loan offerers to write more and more risky loans.
Now, if you wanted to play in the pool at all you had to play all the games, and you didnt get to make up your own rules.

So more and more risky loans... more people thought they could get away with being house-poor a few years and when that ARM came time to uptick, they'd have the money/income to refinance.

OR when that balloon payment which was the stick to that low interest 5 year loan came due, they'd just get a new one.. or a different loan.

All this time, demand is overheating the housing market and prices are getting out of hand.
Meantime, the pool of available house hunters with any credit worthiness at all ran out just at the same time.
Click to expand...

You'll note that I didnt point fingers or name names there? Is there anything I got wrong? I never said CRA 'caused' the problem.. nor did the video I linked to. I said the lending model started there. And the video implies that, and that it was a good thing.
Think "If some is good, more is better..." usually causes this sort of thing.

In fact I dont recall reading any serious blogger, or even unserious blogger flatly stating that 1977 CRA 'caused it'.

So ONCE again you dodge the subject.

Saying that Fannie Mae ANd freddie MAC had NOTHING to do with the current problems is a LIE. MAybe not YOUR lie, but you have your head up your ass to post some funknut that said it didnt.

It certainly did and it didnt have to have direct financial ties to affect the market.
But are you SURE this guy is right:

University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations.
Click to expand...

Do you want to stake your rep on what he seems to be saying there?

I mean he MAY be right... who knows right now? I somehow dont think that is the whole truth as 'implied'.

So YEAH... YOU ARE CHANGING THE SUBJECT!

Bradical · Sep 30, 2008

HatterDon said:

If you really believe that Obama had more power over the economy as a Freshman Senator for four years [two years of which his party was in the minority] than the President of the United States had for eight years [six years of which his party was in the majority], then why in the world would he want to swap the highly influential position of Junior Senator from Illinois for the [evidently] less influenctial position of President?
Click to expand...

Well said, Don, quite dialectic.

pettyfog · Sep 30, 2008

Now for a humor intermission!

In comments on Ed Morrissey piece about the 'Burning Down the House' video maker having to keep taking down the video due to copyright infringement complaints:

Did you hear about the new hot dog over at Fenway, it’s called Barney’s Frank, and if you don’t like it, you can shove it up your ass!
Click to expand...

Now back to the blather: Here's the non-infringing video without Money for Nothing or Burnoing Down the house. Only boring elevator music from your local opera house.

HatterDon · Sep 30, 2008

pettyfog said:

So YEAH... YOU ARE CHANGING THE SUBJECT!
Click to expand...

Not really; watch your own video again. And by the way, posting a comment in which the author said that blaming the entire mess on Freddie and Fannie was incorrect, is NOT the same as saying that they played no role, nor does it mean that I am lying.

I'm laying off the fact that the SOLE purpose of the video you linked was to show Obama and the Black Caucus linked with people the right is supposed to make us afraid of. I'm laying off the fact that EVERYTHING that the right-wing is coming out with these days is designed to give the message: "Obama is for black people, Obama is for black people" because I don't want you think that I'm calling you a racist and have you go into a three-week tizzy about it. SO STOP CALLING ME A LIAR when I'm not lying about anything.

thin kew

pettyfog · Oct 1, 2008

Uh... and no it wasnt.

It was meant to show who was kow-towing to what special interest group.

Again the point is that if FM/FM had not had such a bizarre set of operating rules and agenda, the problem wouldnt be nearly as bad.

pettyfog · Oct 1, 2008

Bradical said:

HatterDon said:

If you really believe that Obama had more power over the economy as a Freshman Senator for four years [two years of which his party was in the minority] than the President of the United States had for eight years [six years of which his party was in the majority], then why in the world would he want to swap the highly influential position of Junior Senator from Illinois for the [evidently] less influenctial position of President?
Click to expand...

Well said, Don, quite dialectic.
Click to expand...

WAIT A MINUTE!!!!!

WTF did I say that? did the video say that? And certainly it WAS 'Dialectic'* of Don..... because I never FUCKING SAID THAT!

And Certainly that COULDNT be construed as 'Changing the Subject' could it!!!

* in general use: confrontation of an issue, fact or idea with an exposition of the greater and overlying 'Truth'.

Forum	Title	Date
Miscellaneous	everything old ...	Jan 21, 2008
Miscellaneous	Surfer-Dude Unifies Everything	Nov 16, 2007

Everything in a Nutshell

pettyfog Well-Known Member

HatterDon Moderator

pettyfog Well-Known Member

HatterDon Moderator

pettyfog Well-Known Member

Bradical Member

pettyfog Well-Known Member

HatterDon Moderator

pettyfog Well-Known Member

pettyfog Well-Known Member

Share This Page

About Us

League Standings

Useful Searches

Everything in a Nutshell

pettyfog Well-Known Member

HatterDon Moderator

pettyfog Well-Known Member

HatterDon Moderator

pettyfog Well-Known Member

Bradical Member

pettyfog Well-Known Member

HatterDon Moderator

pettyfog Well-Known Member

pettyfog Well-Known Member

Share This Page