Bush to help hurt homeowners avoid foreclosure

How much money did Roland Arnall, current ambassador to the Netherlands (wonder if he speaks their language),founder of Ameriquest, biggest subprime lender being sued for predetory lending practices - donate to Bush? If I'm not mistaken, he was one of the biggest contributors.

I doubt if he worries about all those predatory loans he snookered families into since Bush is in his back pocket.

Steal Big and you're in the clear.

Steal Small and you go to jail.

These CEOs who own politicians (not just republicans) and then defraud the American people always skate away, a look that says, "Who, me," on their faces. It is disgusting. Doesn't anyone remember the Savings and Loan scandal? What, they thought interest rates would stay low forever?

I knew, and most other savy investors knew, years ago that this day would come. Real estate kept this economy going for years, but it was artificial, it was an economy built on lies. Now the lie is catching up to us and there is little we can do. A housing crunch, high gas prices...

We are in trouble.

How much money did Roland Arnall, current ambassador to the Netherlands (wonder if he speaks their language),founder of Ameriquest, biggest subprime lender being sued for predetory lending practices - donate to Bush? If I'm not mistaken, he was one of the biggest contributors.

I doubt if he worries about all those predatory loans he snookered families into since Bush is in his back pocket.

Posted by: RomanB | August 31, 2007 2:59 PM

In much the same way that Bill Daley (Emperor Daley's brother) and Bill Clinton rammed through NAFTA - which screwed the common union worker to the nth.

Read below......

"Happy" Friday the 13th -- the Day Bill "NAFTA-czar" Daley Was Announced Likely Commerce Secretary
From Lori Wallach, Global Trade Watch, 13 December 1996
The news coming out of the Singapore WTO Ministerial Meeting is bad news. Current media accounts are mentioning how the U.S. rammed through its priority technology trade plan, but also ultimately capitulated on labor standards. Despite yeoman's efforts by our labor allies, the bottom line on labor rights for the WTO Singapore declaration is:

NO LABOR WORKING GROUP: The U.S. did not even get its initial request for a working group on the relationship between labor standards and trade on the table. (Which in a perverse way may not be entirely bad given that the parallel WTO working group on environment has turned into an operation for identifying and eliminating green policies that inhibit trade and considerable work has been required to halt its most egregious proposals.)
NO "HOLD HARMLESS" PROVISIONS FOR ILO: ICFTU (the international confederation of national trade union federations such as AFL-CIO) certainly got nowhere with its "social clause" proposal for core International Labor Organization standards to trump conflicting WTO terms.
NOT EVEN A WTO STUDY ON LABOR ISSUES: The recent U.S. endgame "compromise" of requesting a WTO study on labor standards and trade was also rejected.
BAD NEW LANGUAGE ON LABOR: While the U.S. advocated that labor standards be considered at WTO, industry and major developing countries have strongly pushed for labor issues to be only at the ILO (with weak enforcement capacity, unlike WTO.) The Singapore statement supports this ILO-is-the-place position, among other unfortunate things.
A Wall Street Journal article, says the Administration's WTO labor rights push was a "ploy" to get labor support for fast track to expand NAFTA and the WTO, given the uphill fight fast track, NAFTA expansion and other trade plans could otherwise face. If there was any truth to this article in the first place, the ugly outcome at Singapore -- particularly the juxtaposition of the labor rights disaster versus the technology pact being pushed through -- has one bright side:

Even if the Administration wanted to pursue this strategy and it could have found labor leaders so inclined, after this Singapore labor rights debacle, the Administration is revealed not to have pushed all so hard or like the technology deal, it would have happened. Thus, even if anyone in labor was inclined to cut some such deal, there is not one iota of cover to do so.

FYI: The Teamsters issued a statement making clear their fast track opposition is (and will remain) solid.

That's our Georgie, way ahead of the curve once again, tackling problems before they arise.

So much for republicrites' belief in personal responsibility. Regardless of whether you are a dumb homeowner, or a dumb hedge fund manager, if you make a big enough mistake, earboy wants the Federal government to make the problem go away for you. How far the apple has fallen from the tree. Another quaint myth about conservatives has been proven false.

First Former Leftist, then JFK Democrat, then Sierra, then Damen, and now Bone? BRUCE you are becoming desperate. Just deal with the fact you are a fringe radical and many Republicans are disgusted by your brand of knuckledragging politics. No matter how many alter egos you create John D and Paulo are the only scoundrels who share your out of touch, divorced from reality based ideas.

"a resettling of rates have caught these mortgage holders".
"they bought more than they could afford".
"We are here to help you"

HORSE FEATHERS!!!
Who do you think started this?
Do you think that sky rocketing energy prices have anything to do with it?
Do you think that our all driving hemi's and 29MPG "economical" hybrids have anything to do with it?
Do you think our key legislators being "in the pocket" of these industry terrorists & lobbyests have anything to do with it?
How about our deouble digit cost of living because of our elected officials blinders. Does that have anything to do with these Americans loosing their homes??

AWAKE, America. Reality beckons us all.

So bush will veto additional funding for children's health insurance but generously bail out his campaign contributors when they make bad loans? That will make a great campaign slogan for Republicans next year:
"Millions for my cronies, but not one dime for sick children".

Wrong move by President Bush. If you bail them (lenders and borrowers)out now, they will not correct their risky behavior, they will repeat it.

This is a slap at everyone who manages their money properly and does not live beyond their means.

Terry,

Can we now say Mr. Bush's economy was built on the same kind of shaky foundation you say the Clinton economy was? Maybe it wasn't those trickle down tax cuts that did it, maybe it was the artificially cheap credit that's been pumped into the economy ever since September 11.

[quote]
How much money did Roland Arnall, current ambassador to the Netherlands (wonder if he speaks their language),founder of Ameriquest, biggest subprime lender being sued for predetory lending practices - donate to Bush? If I'm not mistaken, he was one of the biggest contributors.
[/quote]

I'll bet that it's way more than the $45,000 that Hsu gave to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.

I was right:

"Arnall and his immediate family made $2,079,891 in contributions to federal candidates and party committees during the 2000, 2002 and 2004 election cycles. Of that total, $942,500 went to Democrats and $1,136,141 went to Republicans, including $8,000 to the two Bush campaigns. Separately, subsidiaries of Arnall’s company, Ameriquest Capital Corp., contributed a total of $1,000,000 to the president’s second inaugural committee.

But these impressive figures do not take into account Arnall’s fundraising heft. Along with his wife, Dawn, Arnall was listed as a Bush Ranger for the 2004 campaign, and the Washington Post reports that the couple has raised at least $12.25 million for the president since 2002, making the couple the president’s single largest fundraisers. Additionally, Dawn Arnall contributed $5 million in 2003 to a pro-Bush group known as the Progress for America Voter Fund."

http://www.opensecrets.org/bush/ambassadors/arnall.asp

DV,

I don't recall ever saying the economy of the 90's was built on a "Shaky foundation" - nice strawman though. I have said that the 90's economy was built on the back of a technology explosion - namely the internet and personal computers and the increased productivity that they brouught to businesses.

As far as the lower tax rates, money in the hands of those that earned it is a better thing. Who better to spend the money you earn - yourself or the gov't? Tax cuts grow an economy.

I’m not for the government bailing out these people. Once again, it will be responsible people paying for those who live beyond their means. On the news last night they had a story of a couple who were trying to make us feel sorry for them that they won’t be able to make the mortgage payment. They decided to move into a brand new house, bigger than what they needed in a fantastic neighborhood.

We could have afforded a 250K+ loan for a house, but being responsible we decided on a neighborhood that didn’t have NAME STATUS, but wasn’t to bad. We found a house that was around 150K because we were forward thinkers. The questions we asked: if one or both of us lost our job, would be still be able to afford the house payment if we had to work at McDonald’s, Wal-Mart, etc. We also took into consideration that taxes ALWAYS go up. We would have loved to move to Frankfort, Naperville, etc., but knew in the long run that we wanted to live within our means.

The same people that want government to bail them out have big homes, drive fancy cars and have big screen TV’s. They were the ones that took out these mortgages/2nd mortgages and ran up their credit cards so they can keep up with the Jones.

Would the government be willing to help me and 90% of others who are responsible with our mortgage payment – of course not, because we are the suckers who live within our means, but we will be paying for those who don’t!

Tom O,

You got it right. We have to save Bush's "house of cards" economy, not for the kids, but for his "base":

http://www.slate.com/id/2172872/fr/flyout

As far as the lower tax rates, money in the hands of those that earned it is a better thing. Who better to spend the money you earn - yourself or the gov't? Tax cuts grow an economy.

This is a slap at everyone who manages their money properly and does not live beyond their means.

Well, based on the subject of the thread, apparently even people aren't managing their money properly. I guess they are taking lessons from earboy, who is responsible for the current deficit (oh please spare me the war on terror analogies, there was NO THREAT FROM HUSSEIN) and wants billions more to send more decent Americans to their death.

Anonymous,

If you don't want financial analysis, don't read this.

The past few years, after the 2003 Bush Tax Cuts, revenues have been pouring intop the Treasury at a double-digit rate and the deficit has been decreasing in spite of the spending on the war on terror. The spending on the war on terror will not be at this level in future years, so as long as the rest of the gov't spending is held under control (unlike what has happened the past 6 years), the deficits will decrease and become surpluses. Gov't expenditures should only grwo at the rate of population growth and inflation and not these twice the rate of inflation growth rates we have had recently.

It's not that complicated. Bush bashing aside. It really is just about personal responsibility. We the taxpayers should not have to pay for others financial irresponsibilty. Let the market adjust and caveat emptor.

I too think the Feds should back out of this. I see the homes they are building where I grew up. All start at $450K and go up from there. These people buy these 4,500sqft homes for 2 adults and 2 kids, more than half don't have kids. So why would you need such a big house? Status Statement. So I say let them loose their homes, variable rate mortgages have been around for years. When I got my first mortgage 16yrs ago we were pulled into that type of mortgage with out knowing. We were told that we qualified for a fixed rate, yet at closure we were told they put us in a variable rate. I wanted to walk out but was told if we did then we would be sued. Did the government come help me?? Hell no!!!
This all follows the idea that people of this country are not responsible for their own actions. Just like now when you buy a car it has an on-board tire pressure monitor, why? cause people are stupid and take no responsiblity for themselves. I am really glad that Bush's term is over, he has been a real disapointment to me... I only wish I had a venue to let him know.