« | »

AP Rewrites: Bank Crisis All Bush’s Fault

Some shameless revisionism from the DNC’s Associated Press:

AP IMPACT: US diluted loan rules before crash


WASHINGTON (AP) — The Bush administration backed off proposed crackdowns on no-money-down, interest-only mortgages years before the economy collapsed, buckling to pressure from some of the same banks that have now failed. It ignored remarkably prescient warnings that foretold the financial meltdown, according to an Associated Press review of regulatory documents.

“Expect fallout, expect foreclosures, expect horror stories,” California mortgage lender Paris Welch wrote to U.S. regulators in January 2006, about one year before the housing implosion cost her a job.

Bowing to aggressive lobbying — along with assurances from banks that the troubled mortgages were OK — regulators delayed action for nearly one year. By the time new rules were released late in 2006, the toughest of the proposed provisions were gone and the meltdown was under way

The administration’s blind eye to the impending crisis is emblematic of its governing philosophy, which trusted market forces and discounted the value of government intervention in the economy. Its belief ironically has ushered in the most massive government intervention since the 1930s…

In 2005, faced with ominous signs the housing market was in jeopardy, bank regulators proposed new guidelines for banks writing risky loans. Today, in the midst of the worst housing recession in a generation, the proposal reads like a list of what-ifs:

— Regulators told bankers exotic mortgages were often inappropriate for buyers with bad credit.

— Banks would have been required to increase efforts to verify that buyers actually had jobs and could afford houses.

— Regulators proposed a cap on risky mortgages so a string of defaults wouldn’t be crippling.

— Banks that bundled and sold mortgages were told to be sure investors knew exactly what they were buying.

— Regulators urged banks to help buyers make responsible decisions and clearly advise them that interest rates might skyrocket and huge payments might be due sooner than expected.

Those proposals all were stripped from the final rules. None required congressional approval or the president’s signature

Federal regulators were especially concerned about mortgages known as “option ARMs,” which allow borrowers to make payments so low that mortgage debt actually increases every month. But banking executives accused the government of overreacting.

Bankers said such loans might be risky when approved with no money down or without ensuring buyers have jobs but such risk could be managed without government intervention…

One of the most contested rules said that before banks purchase mortgages from brokers, they should verify the process to ensure buyers could afford their homes. Some bankers now blame much of the housing crisis on brokers who wrote fraudulent, predatory loans. But in 2006, banks said they shouldn’t have to double-check the brokers

California-based IndyMac also criticized regulators for not recognizing the track record of interest-only loans and option ARMs, which accounted for 70 percent of IndyMac’s 2005 mortgage portfolio. This summer, the government seized IndyMac and will pay an estimated $9 billion to ensure customers don’t lose their deposits…

The comptroller of the currency, John C. Dugan, was among the first to sound the alarm in mid-2005. Speaking to a consumer advocacy group, Dugan painted a troublesome picture of option-ARM lending. Many buyers, particularly those with bad credit, would soon be unable to afford their payments, he said. And if housing prices declined, homeowners wouldn’t even be able to sell their way out of the mess.

It sounded simple, but “people kind of looked at us regulators as old-fashioned,” said Brown, the agency’s former deputy comptroller.

Diane Casey-Landry, of the American Bankers Association, said the industry feared a two-tiered system in which banks had to follow rules that mortgage brokers did not. She said opposition was based on the banks’ best information.

“You’re looking at a decline in real estate values that was never contemplated,” she said.

Some saw problems coming. Community groups and even some in the mortgage business, like Welch, warned regulators not to ease their rules.

“We expect to see a huge increase in defaults, delinquencies and foreclosures as a result of the over selling of these products,” Kevin Stein, associate director of the California Reinvestment Coalition, wrote to regulators in 2006. The group advocates on housing and banking issues for low-income and minority residents.

The government’s banking agencies spent nearly a year debating the rules, which required unanimous agreement among the OCC, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., Federal Reserve, and the Office of Thrift Supervision — agencies that sometimes don’t agree…

Grovetta Gardineer, OTS managing director for corporate and international activities, said the 2005 proposal “attempted to send an alarm bell that these products are bad.” After hearing from banks, she said, regulators were persuaded that the loans themselves were not problematic as long as banks managed the risk. She disputes the notion that the rules were weakened.

In the past year, with Congress scrambling to stanch the bleeding in the financial industry, regulators have tightened rules on risky mortgages.

Congress is considering further tightening, including some of the same proposals abandoned years ago.

Indeed, the revisionism here is positively Stalinesque.

The Bush administration tried numerous times to clamp down on these dangerous mortgage practices, starting in 2001.

President Bush pushed for a whole new regulatory agency in 2003. He called for reform 17 times in 2008 alone.

There is abundant proof that Bush and other Republicans (including John McCain) tried to call attention to the looming crisis and wanted to do something about it.

We even have video of the top bank regulator, Armando Falcon, director of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, before the Congressional banking committee.

We can see how he was slapped down and insulted for even suggesting that anything needed to be done.

Compare all of that to this suddenly discovered laundry list of proposals which the AP now claims to have unearthed.

But even the AP seems confused as to exactly what these proposals were supposed to be.

Were they new regulations, or were they just calling for maintaining the existing rules? The AP writer does not seem to be able to make up his mind.

Sometimes these proposals are described as crackdowns. Other times they are calls to not ease up on the rules.

Speaking of which, here is another risible claim from the AP:

Community groups and even some in the mortgage business, like Welch, warned regulators not to ease their rules.

Yes, of course we believe this. You see, ACORN and La Raza and their compatriots were trying to crack down on these terrible lending practices — but the evil Bush regime just wouldn’t let them.

Moreover, is there any evidence that these proposals ever existed? Let alone that they were made to someone who could do something about them?

Where are the documents? Why doesn’t the Associated Press quote from them Why don’t we have photos of them and pdf files?

Are they classified as top secret? (No, then the AP certainly would publish them.)

We have only the AP’s word that these documents even exist.

And we know that they will tell any lie, no matter how outrageous, for their Democrat masters.

That is what they call journalism.

This article was posted by Steve on Monday, December 1st, 2008. Comments are currently closed.

38 Responses to “AP Rewrites: Bank Crisis All Bush’s Fault”

  1. BillK says:

    The only question is what took the press so long?

    I’d normally say that historians will someday look back at the press’ reporting with jaws agape and not believe the reporting.

    But since the left will write that history, they’ll simply wonder why Bush wasn’t impeached.

  2. nuthingbettertodo says:

    I saw that photo not too long ago with a caption that read: “Don’t worry, the rubes will never catch on”

  3. RightWinger says:

    ““Expect fallout, expect foreclosures, expect horror stories,” California mortgage lender Paris Welch wrote to U.S. regulators in January 2006, about one year before the housing implosion cost her a job. “

    Who is Paris Welch? I did a Google and Yahoo search for her and outside of how quickly this AP propaganda piece rose to the top of the search engines, I could not find anything for this person. Other than somebody who wrote a book.

    So who is Paris Welch? Sounds like the obscure college professor from some obscure community college that the AP will dig up in order to have a collaborating quote for their propaganda piece.

  4. proreason says:

    Passingly strange report from the AP, particulary considering the Joint Economic Committee, chaired by Jim Saxson, has issued a detailed report titled “Congressional Blunders Largely Caused the Global Banking Crisis”. The words “Bush” and “administration” don’t even appear in the 4-page document.


    Surprisingly, you would have a devil of a time finding the report in Google. Even with the seemingly obvious search “global financial crisis”. Gee, I wonder why that might be.

    One of many interesting passages “On October 31, 2000, the U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development issued affordable housing regulations for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac during the years 2001 to 2004. These regulations significantly increased the goals at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for purchasing residential mortgage loans to low income households.” Was Bush in office in October 2000? Must have been.

  5. crosspatch says:

    The article, was written by Matt Apuzzo, not “AP” and Matt Apuzzo should be held responsible for the content. Apuzzo works for the San Francisco Chronicle and AP apparently picked up the story from the Chronicle. What people CAN do is go to places like newscred and post the inaccuracies there:


    If the inconsistencies are posted … what was written and what the reality is … it is one way to hold the actual journalist responsible for their writing. They take notice of places like newscred but it isn’t a place for random bitching about someone because you disagree with their opinion. But if you can show where what they wrote is just plain wrong … that is one of the vehicles that are available to keep these “journalists” feet to the fire for what they write.

  6. Steve says:

    “So who is Paris Welch? Sounds like the obscure college professor from some obscure community college that the AP will dig up in order to have a collaborating quote for their propaganda piece.”

    I had Googled her, too, and reached the same conclusion.

    So typical of the AP — always propagandizing.

  7. Liberals Demise says:

    Caption missing under photo:
    “Will the real liars please smile or raise your hands”.

  8. Chinnubie says:

    Until journalism gets back to some semblance of fairness and proper reporting there will never be any written words that most informed people will ever believe. Hopefully the liberal papers and networks will continue on the path of utter destruction. I am amazed that these CEO’s are allowing these horrible articles and broadcast reports to be published & written knowing that most of the information is made up or can not be backed up. If this continues they are going to need and probably get a bailout from BHO because he won’t want to lose the favorable coverage not to mention the easy questions during press conferences.

    What absolutely slays me is the fact that Barney Fwrank and Chris Dodd have been able to hold onto their seats in Congress because if anyone is to blame over all of this mess these two should be castrated and I’m being nice! If there were a Republican to blame over this everybody knows they would have been hung out to dry. I would love to see hearings on this matter but I am afraid nothing will ever come of it because when you are a Democrat in Congress as long as there is no dead girl or live boy in your bed you get away with it every time!!!

    How do we go about breaking away from the Federal Government like the South in 1860???

  9. EvaTheFrisbeeDog says:

    Ok, so some chick named Paris who sells mortgages in California wrote a letter to some unnamed regulators and the AP expected bells and whistles to go off, but when the Bush administration wrote Congress in 2001, 2003, and 2005 that the collapse of the ever growing Fannie and Freddie could have dire economic consequences, it wasn’t a big deal?!

    Alright, so here’s my warning: EvaTheFrisbeeDog says that nationalizing the private sector and bailing out the UAW will only prolong the economic downturn; moreover, it may lead to the same “lost decade” scenario Japan expereinced during their 1990s economic depression.

  10. take_no_prisoners says:

    Chinubie wrote–“…when you are a Democrat in Congress as long as there is no dead girl or live boy in your bed you get away with it every time!!!”–
    I don’t know about a dead girl in a democrats bed but I do know of a certain democrat senator from Massachusetts who got away with a dead girl in his car!

  11. proreason says:

    “that is one of the vehicles that are available to keep these “journalists” feet to the fire for what they write.”

    thanks crosspatch…..but there are no “journalists” anymore, only propagandists like Mr. Apuzzo.

    and if it were possible to hold the propagandists’ feet to the fire, we would have a different president elect, and the world wouldn’t look anything like it is today

  12. U NO HOO says:

    Paris Welch, a well known grape juice heiress.

    Dead girl, Gary Condit.

    Live boy, Gary Stubbs…

  13. retire05 says:

    Do you not understand what is happening here? The economy is not going to get any better under the direction of “The One” so the stage must be set to make sure that for the next four years, Bush takes the blame. So for the next four years, be ready to hear “It’s all Bush’s fault” just as we have for the last 8 years.

    But here is a couple of papers that you might be interested in reading:




    Professor Liebowitz, along with another professor, wrote a paper (in 1998 I believe) stating that the racial biased that was claimed by a report from the Boston Fed to be in the housing market was bogus. But it was that very Boston Fed report that put the Community Reinvestment Act on steroids and had the rules for rating banks set up by none other than Barney Frank’s ex-lover (the boy in the bed?).

    Now, as with the last two years, those who consider themselves journalist but are no more than political shills, will rewrite history to favor those who were actually at fault for the current economic crisis.

    Can anyone imagine how many Congressional/Senatorial hearings we would be having if Barney Frank and Chris Dodd had been Republicans? Henry Waxman would be absolutely apoplectic and the American taxpayer would be on the hook for millions spent on investigation after investigation to run those politicians responsible out of D. C. on a rail after they were tarred and feathered. But not now. The same liars and crooks are now in charge. The foxes are now guarding the hen house once again.

    But don’t worry, friends and neighbors, the economy will seem like small potatoes when bombs start going off in our cities because radical Islam realizes that we just elected the weakest person possible when it comes to our national security.

  14. proreason says:

    “Do you not understand what is happening here? The economy is not going to get any better under the direction of “The One” so the stage must be set to make sure that for the next four years, Bush takes the blame.”

    and / or……”so the stage must be set for the government to end private enterprise and implement total government control of the economy”

  15. SandLCommenter says:

    The proposal was a joint proposal of the federal banking regulators, entitled Interagency Guidance on Nontraditional Mortgage Products, and is online at http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/federal/2005/05joint1229.html, among other places. Comments made to the FDIC are at http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/federal/2005/05comguide.html. Some of the comments were made only to other regulators and are not on that page, including the comment from Washington Mutual and the comment from the mysterious Paris Welch. The proposed guidance would have provided additional consumer protection and reduced lender risk for nontraditional mortgage products. The guidance was adopted, but in weaker form.

    The Bush administration’s steps to seek additional regulation of government-sponsored enterprises, cited in the post, had no relevance to these nontraditional mortgage products.

  16. Lipstick on a PIAPS says:

    Heard it all before, American Civil War-Bush’s fault, Bombing of Pearl Harbor-Bush’s Fault, Sinking of the Titanic-Bush’s Fault, and the Ending of the Cretacaous Period Dinosaurs Extinction-Bush’s Fault. Heard it ALL before. Don’t forget to mention Halliburton in there some times also.

  17. 12 Gauge Rage says:

    You forgot to mention the crucification of Christ because God had to send His beloved son to redeem that worthless sinner George W. Yeah I know it’s a stretch but give them time and the liberals will accuse our president of that too. Assuming of course that they’re willing to admit the existence of a supreme being.

  18. Right2thepoint says:


    Just the Facts: The Administration’s Unheeded Warnings About the Systemic Risk Posed by the GSEs

    For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted. Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President’s repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.


    April: The Administration’s FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is “a potential problem,” because “financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity.”


    May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)


    January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.

    February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that “although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations,” “the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them.” As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. (“Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO,” OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)

    September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO’s review found earnings manipulations.

    September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact “legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises” and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

    October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.

    November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any “legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk.” To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have “broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards” and “receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)


    February: The President’s FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator.” (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

    February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to “not take [the financial market’s] strength for granted.” Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by “ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator.” (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, “Keeping Fannie And Freddie’s House In Order,” Financial Times, 2/24/04)

    June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying “We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System.” (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)


    April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying “Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system.” (Secretary John W. Snow, “Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee,” 4/13/05)


    July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.

    August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying “first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options.” (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)

    September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.

    September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.

    December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying “These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I’ve called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon.” (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)


    January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.

    January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.

    February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says “A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully.” (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

    March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.

    March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and “move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

    April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and “modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

    May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.


    “Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)

    “[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator.” (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)

    “Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans.” (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

    June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying “we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

    July: Congress heeds the President’s call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.

  19. crosspatch says:

    “but there are no “journalists” anymore”

    Sure there are. UPI is much better these days and is now owned by the same investment group as the Washington Times. They have, for example, been picking up stories by bloggers such as Bill Roggio and running them on their wire. The Washington Times is pretty good. I just found a new small paper called The Epoch Times this weekend which had a couple of fascinating articles I had not seen anywhere else.

    And there are literally hundreds of small newspapers across this country that sometimes carry locally written content and commentary that is worth reading. They don’t have much hard copy circulation but they are world accessible via the Internet.

  20. platypus says:

    # U NO HOO
    December 1st, 2008 at 5:26 pm

    Live boy, Gary Stubbs…

    That last name was Studds, a name I always thought was a fake since a real stud would not be queer.

  21. proreason says:


    What exactly are the qualifications to become a “journalist”. I mean besides being pretty and/or gay. It looks to me that anybody who looks good and can use a spell-checker can be a journalist.

    The career path seems to be….go to ultra-liberal college….absorb Marxism, America-hatred, and Bush Derangement Syndrome….alter appearance with plastic surgery….graduate cum laude like everybody else….begin making stuff up.

    What am I missing?

  22. crosspatch says:

    Actually it is often the editor that decides who will be successful. A journalist might write 10 articles and only 2 are published. The goal of the journalist is to be published. The editor decides what gets published and the journalist learns what the editor wants and begins to write articles that win that approval. The job of the editor is to select articles that further the political agenda of the publisher (owner) of the paper. It has been that way since Benjamin Franklin forged fake “letters to the editor” to make certain things seems more or less popular than they really were.

    The difference was that in the past a region had several papers. There were Republican papers and there were Democrat papers. What we have now are the publishers who push the Democrat agenda being the only paper in town in many places or owning chains of papers (Times, Tribune, etc). There are very few publishers left with a Republican agenda.

    So while it might seem that the press has moved to the left, what has really happened is that the right has vacated the field. What we need is a very wealthy person who can absorb a loss for a decade or two to start a paper in a major metro like Los Angeles or Chicago and can publish the sort of articles we would like to see. The editor would select the articles and the journalists would write whatever it is that gets them published. Though it might make them persona non grata at cocktail parties of their peers at the other papers.

    NOTE: I was married to a journalist for over 10 years.

  23. bobbys says:

    I believe bush caused this, After all he killed all those poor folks with Katrina, caused 911,Infected the AIDS virus on judy garland and johnny mathis albums, Tortured poor prisoners at Gitmo, broke Ann coulters jaw, picked out a bad toupee for the Donald, caused global warming,The left kept saying how dumb is is but i tell ya i think hes a pretty smart cookie to go back in time with a computer to trick Dan rather and make him look foolish, My only wish is he gets impeached before Bob woodward writes another book.. Right now bush is laughing at BHOs picks of has been Clinton folks but im telling you right now BUSH i want to see CHANGE still on the white house keyboards before you slink out with your tail between your legs, Well ok take the BOs with you everyone needs a little fun.

  24. Phil Byler says:

    Most of the “press” should be treated as what they are — socialist propagandists. The treatment given in the AP story of the financial situation is Stalinesque.

  25. 1sttofight says:

    This is a prime example of “journalist writting” in one of my local papers.
    See how many mistakes you can spot.
    BTW, Bryant and Dawson are about 40 miles apart.

    Inmate found in DeKalb
    By J.D. Davidson
    The Times-Journal

    Published December 1, 2008

    A woman serving a six-month sentence for perjury apparently walked away from a work release program in Madison County and was found in Bryant, according to DeKalb County Sheriff Jimmy Harris.

    Last week, according to Harris, Brandy Nicole Cook, left the parameters of her program without permission. Madison County confirmed Cook could be in DeKalb County.

    Harris said local authorities get a warrent for Cook’s arrest.

    Deputy Gary Hill received information Cook was in the area, and he arrested her County Road 696 in the Dawson Community near Crossville on Sand Mountain. She was charged with violation of work release.

    Cook, 27, was serving a six-month work release program on a sentence she received in Madison County in July 2008 on charges of first-degree perjury. On October 30, Cook had apparently left the work release program without permission of work or jail supervisors and came to the Dawson area, where she reportedly has family, Harris said.


  26. 12 Gauge Rage says:

    The brainwashing of liberalism begins very early in one’s youth. When I was in high school during the Reagan/Carter election I had a few friends who were so enmeshed into the defeatism brought about by the Carter administration that they saw Ronald Reagan as a greater evil than the Iranians who were holding our fellow Americans hostage. As one of my classmates stated: ‘Reagan is going to build up our military and get us into a nuclear war with the Russians and then we’re all going to die.’ Of course if it wasn’t Reagan then I’m sure they would’ve found some other conservative to blame for all of society’s ills. Just like they do now.

  27. BillK says:

    12 Gauge Rage, I attended a very liberal college, and the brainwashing continues there.

    I remember the campus covered with spray-painted messages on sidewalks reading “Reagan ’84 = (mushroom cloud graphic) ’85.”

    I also readily admit I was a liberal in my younger (read: Junior High School) days; growing up watching M*A*S*H will do that to you.

    (When I catch a rerun now and then I simply can’t believe how hard left that show was and how many of my political opinions of the time were based on what Hawkeye thought of the military, the war and the world in general.)

    I clearly remember chastising my Dad when he told me he voted for Reagan in 1980 because “he’s going to get us into a nuclear war!” and asking why he didn’t vote to re-elect Carter.

    Yes, I have apologized to my Dad about that since then, in fact several thousand times. :-)

  28. proreason says:

    “So while it might seem that the press has moved to the left, what has really happened is that the right has vacated the field. ”


    The left has captured the universities. Journalism schools are a hotbed of liberalism / Marxism. It is impossible to complete a “journalism” curriculum and not be a leftist. By the time you get out, it’s in your blood. Disbelievers are hounded out of the schools.

    Then the mainstream media deselects those not indoctinated enough. By that time, they don’t even know how biased they are. Shep Smith, the famous Fox news reader (anybody reading this can do his job, if you are pretty enough) is contemptuous of the myth of press bias. How can all his friends be biased? In his mind, it’s impossible. He and his friends “reflect” the public. Could that be a closed loop? And he is the head news reader for the only network with a semblance of balance.

    “vacating the field” has nothing to do with it. Except for a handful of newspapers, and Fox News, nobody but an uber-leftist can get a job or move up in the field (since you couldn’t call it a “profession”. Professions have standards.). Small local newspapers have some exceptions (in the sports and business departments), but the general rule holds true. Toe the liberal line, or find another line of work.

    I agree that we need more Murdoch’s to step up. There is obviously a market for true news reporting rather than news-oriented propaganda.

    The leftist press selected Obama. “Educators” get the kids first, then “journalists” hammer in the propaganda. Unless conservatives attack that core problem, alternative views will continue to be more and more marginalized.

  29. proreason says:

    BillK: “I clearly remember chastising my Dad when he told me he voted for Reagan in 1980 because “he’s going to get us into a nuclear war!” and asking why he didn’t vote to re-elect Carter.”

    me too. I declared I would leave the country if Reagan was elected.

    It wasn’t until the mid 90’s that I began to think for myself.

    I didn’t attend a particularly liberal college, but I look back at the reading assignments, and there was nothing with an alternative viewpoint. I thought Cronkite was the soul of objectivity.

    Besides, we were all busy working and trying to become adults. I didn’t have time to think about political issues. Didn’t care. I had already been handed my opinions and I was stickin to em.

    And I know very smart young people today who are exactly the same way. I have a brilliant 40 year-old friend who “knew” Sarah Palin (he viscerally hates her) thought Africa was a country, but didn’t know that Obama’s coming out party was in Bill Ayers home. When I pointed it out, he was blase. He was for Obama, period. He also doesn’t think the Democrats have anything to do with the financial crisis. He hates Bush, period.

  30. crosspatch says:

    “Phil Byler
    December 2nd, 2008 at 6:48 am ”

    Newspapers have always been propaganda since the beginning of our country. Expectations that they should be anything different might be the source of your frustration. The problem seems to be that Republicans tend to look at things in more of a business sense and when a paper loses money, they either fold it or sell it. Democrats tend to look at the press in more ideological terms and are willing to take an economic loss for political gain.

    December 2nd, 2008 at 10:57 am ”

    “The left has captured the universities. Journalism schools are a hotbed of liberalism / Marxism.”

    True in many cases but there are plenty of colleges with a more conservative faculty. Those colleges tend, for whatever reason, not to offer journalism courses. But the military even has schools in journalism and has reporters, TV news anchors, various “public affairs” offices, etc. So there are alternative ways for people to gain experience outside of the conventional newspapers. And there are plenty of small town local papers left with a more conservative view.

    And as I mentioned in an earlier comment in this thread, UPI picked up articles from bloggers such as Bill Roggio. I would also consider Michael Yon and Michael Totten to be journalists.

    What is stopping YOU from being a journalist? Have you attempted to write any balanced articles and publish them on the web or submit them to a paper for publishing? Go to a local community college and start taking composition courses, etc. I know I could benefit from such a thing. We all probably could.

  31. proreason says:

    “What is stopping YOU from being a journalist?”


    I respect honor and integrity. I couldn’t tolerate being around “journalists”.

    Yon and Totten are two who are what journalists ought to be. Why do you think nobody knows who they are?

    By the way, if I wanted to debase myself, I wouldn’t need to take any classes. Like anyone reading this web-site, I was as capable as TV anchors when I reached the age of 12. We didn’t have spell checkers then, so I would have had a 30 second learning curve to become a print “journalist”. As a potential “journalist” today, I could get off on the right foot by lying about my “training”, but I’m not pretty enough to get a job. And somebody would check background, since I’m not “diverse” enough either.

  32. yellarcan says:

    President Bush made me drive while I was three sheets to the wind then he made me run off a bridge into some river I did’t know was there. People have said that a woman was with me. I don’t believe that, I mean look at my mug. If you were a woman with any brains, would you go out with my ugly ass. For those who yes, just leave your phone number here and if I’m not smashed I’ll call you back.

  33. 12 Gauge Rage says:


    No need for apologies for the way you thought in your youth. Even though I voted for Reagan in my first election, I did so because I felt anything was better than Carter. It wasn’t until eight years later that I really began to set down and establish my conservative roots. And this was only because a co-worker of mine who seemed friendly at first suddenly became hateful and spiteful when he found out that I was conservative and pro-life. It was my eye opening moment of just how mean and vindictive liberals can be when you don’t agree with their views. On a funnier note, I remember my late father (a crusty lovable old grouch) deciding to brave the crowds and go out and vote during the Reagan/Carter election. He was gone for over an hour and when he came back I asked him if he got a chance to vote. My father said, “You bet I did boy! I flipped that lever and I voted all those sonsofbitches out of office.” To this day my family still roars with laughter when we remember him saying this.

  34. Trialdog says:

    Gotta share an example of a loan given by one of the fine banks we are bailing out. I’m a lawyer but don’t practice in foreclosures. Nevertheless, this hit my desk as a collateral issue. Bank gives a guy 59.5K in 2004. Interest rate of 11.25%. Payments just shy of $700.00 per month for 59 months, then a balloon for about 58K. At the time, the guy earned about $1700.00 per month. Mortgage is on a 1994 trailer home. The guy was injured on the job, insurance company sent him to one of their doctors who said he was only temporarily injured on the job but has a pre-existing condition that won’t allow him to work at his job so he lost his job, had his worker’s comp cut off, and now receives SSDI of about 1K per month. Naturally, the loan payments stopped. I’m helping the guy on a worker’s comp claim. Whether I win for the guy makes no difference and not the point. The point is why would this loan, secured by worthless collateral (trailer now 14 years old – and they don’t appreciate in value), ever be given? There could never have been a reasonable expectation the balloon could ever be made and no reasonable expectation the trailer could cover a loss in case of a probable default which would have occurred with or without an injury because the value of the trailer to the guy wouldn’t justify paying the mortgage. I cannot imagine why this bank expects any money from the government. Think about it. I really never see this type of stuff. That the first time I do see it just happens now makes me wonder if this example is an anomoly or fairly standard. If this is an example of the loans the banks made and now want to be bailed out on, then we need prosecutions of the bankers and seizures of their assets, not a bailout.

  35. proreason says:

    “why would this loan, secured by worthless collateral (trailer now 14 years old – and they don’t appreciate in value), ever be given?”

    Because that guy’s vote can be purchased by Barney Franks, who hates being a drooling obese obnoxious queer and relishes the opportunity to assuage his self-hatred by ruining the country and sticking it to guys like you and me.

  36. Liberals Demise says:

    proreason…..does this mean you WOULD NOT drink from Barneys’ canteen?

  37. paristhechick says:

    Here I am – I was working for a mortgage banker, in the Quality Control Dept. I subscribed to all these news and industry newsletters…one of the items that came up was a notice by the OCC regarding the “exotic loans”. Personally, I was sick of hearing the Feds talking out of both sides of their mouths. They wanted us to push out more loans, but the refi world was done (for this cycle) – all that was left was, what I call, “crappy credit”. I just read the proposal and stated my opinion, believing that NO ONE would read it – it would be one note of thousands, right?

    The AP contacted me a few months after I posted my comment. At the time I declined and told them to contact me in 18 months, after I got laid off. The AP fellow that wrote the story, Matt Apuzzo, contacted me just about a month ago.

    If anyone wants to contact me, email me at ParisTheChick@yahoo.com.

    BTW – the book that someone found was written by some guy with the same name as mine. I have found 11 other people named “Paris Welch” so far.

  38. Steve says:

    Thanks for stopping by and straightening us out, Paris.

    Sorry for mis-characterizing you based on our Google findings.

    We should know better by now.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »