Shocking news: Bush held gun to heads of home buyers!!

from JoeUser Forums

Shocking news!!!  It has been proven, oh wait, not proven, just accussed...  that President Bush personnally held a gun to the heads of home buyers that are now victims of the 'mortgage mess'.  After all, if he didn't do that, they would never have bought more homes than they could afford, and wouldn't have gone with sub-prime mortgage gimmicks that helped them get more home than they should have, right?

Yeah, it's all Bush's fault that the home buying public is made up of people with the intellect of the clueless one.  People that are too 'st00pid' to see that you don't get something for nothing, and that buying homes priced at several hundred thousand dollars when you are only making tens of thousands of dollars in income yourself is a very, very bad idea.

Now where the heck is that smokin' gun that Bush was walking around with?  Ooooh, I know, he must have given it to Dick Cheney so he could go off and shoot another friend with it.

politics
3,991 views 9 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Did anyone else notice that the term "sub-prime mortgage" was never heard of until the democrats and the media started parading it around?


Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top

Did anyone else notice that the term "sub-prime mortgage" was never heard of until the democrats and the media started parading it around?

I'm still trying to figure out why having a mortgage at a rate lower than prime would even be an issue??

Oh, wait, I know why -- because these mortgages weren't so much 'sub-prime' as they were 'interest only' or 'balloon' payment mortgages that left the home buyers paying for homes they never should have been in, unable to actually make those big fat payments when they were supposed to.

The people that should have been hurt by sub-prime mortgages, and should really be the only ones hurt currently, were the mortgage companies that were handing them out like a pedophile tries to hand out candy to young kids.  These companies made bad loans.  They knew it going in, but they did it anyway because they were far more concerned about profiting now, rather than worrying about whether they'd ever see the money later.  If the mortgages failed, they figured that the government would come in and make things right, which is exactly what the clueless one seems to be calling for.

He continues to amaze me.  He cries that we are spending too much and not taking enough in, but then demands that we hand out more, more, more.  Where the frack does he think all of that money will come from?  Oh, wait, in liberal-land we get money out of thin air, right?

SoundPackager - Customize the Windows sound scheme
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Oh, wait, in liberal-land we get money out of thin air, right?
End of quote


Yup. Don't have enough? Just print more!
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
He continues to amaze me.  He cries that we are spending too much and not taking enough in, but then demands that we hand out more, more, more.
End of quote


Number one reason why nobody takes him seriously.


Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
Actually, I have no issue with Bush on this one. I see this as Greenspan's baby. I especially love the cheerleading wh***s at CNBC who to this day tell us that the time to invest is now!!!!  
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
First, if this triggers a major recession the cost to this country will be far greater then to help refinance the Sub-Prime Mortgages. People will still be required to pay off their mortgages it is just the cost to convert the sub-prime and designer mortgages to fixed 30 year mortgages at reasonable rates that will enable many people to avoid default.

Second, the two reasons these mortgages exist is the rapid increase in Real Estate prices and the lack of regulation in the Mortgage business. We hear that "Let the market place deal with things” That is true in the oil business, mortgage markets and the energy business. In all three the market took care of the companies and their profits at the expense of the overall economy and country! Companies put their increased profits above ALL ELSE and there are numerous examples how that harms both individuals and the country overall!
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top

Gene, Karl Marx would be proud of you.

 

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
In all three the market took care of the companies and their profits at the expense of the overall economy and country!
End of quote


i thought it was the mortgage companies that were failing,
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

I see this as Greenspan's baby.

I think that is still shooting the messenger.  I dont blame anyone other than those who do not know, or refuse to learn, how to set a budget and live within it.  50 years ago, this would be a non-issue (and was), because people were expected to live with their mistakes.  today, it is a made up crises because some (not even close to a majority) figured they could do anything, and Uncle Sam would bail them out.

Oh, there is tangental blame to go around.  LIke Congress changing laws to make sure that poor could afford houses.  The laws were created with best intentions, but with no more foresight than a lemming headed to a cliff.

In the end, anything done, even this little bit, is unfair.  But instead of being unfair due to bad decisions on the part of the individual, this one is drawing another arbitrary line in the sand and saying "You we are bailing out, You we are not".  And the only crime of the ones that are losing out?  Better planning on their part.