THEY EITHER ARE TOO STUPID TO REMEMBER OR THEY ARE LIARS?

WARNING (for the benefit of recent government school graduates who don't know how or don't like to read): LONG POST AHEAD

The media - even so-called "balanced" media (WE inform, YOU decide) - liberal Democrats, Blue Dog Democrats, conservative Democrats, RINOS, moderate Republicans and conservative Republicans want you not to remember this information.

It is as though it never happened...a figment of our imaginations.

But it DID happen, and it's why we're where we are today.

The 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (or CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. § 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low and moderate income neighborhoods.

The Community Reinvestment Act mandates that all banking institutions that receive FDIC insurance, be evaluated by Federal banking agencies to determine if the bank offers credit (in a manner consistent with safe and sound operations) in all communities in which the bank takes deposits.

In 1994 a class action lawsuit was filed as follows:

United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois - CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.0 (Chicago)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:94-cv-04094
Buycks-Roberson, et al v. Citibank Fed Svg Bk
Assigned to: Hon. Ruben Castillo
Demand: $0
Cause: 42:1981 Job Discrimination (Race)
Date Filed: 07/06/1994

You can see the whole thing here.

One of the signatories to this lawsuit (the fourth one down in the right hand column) was Barack H. Obama...remember him?

Here is a Case Summary: Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982.

Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.

U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the Plaintiffs’ suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995).

Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-bank’s loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).

On September 30, 1999, the New York Times had this to say: "Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980’s."

In October of 2008 there was this : "Radical groups like ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) to abuse the law by forcing banks to make hundreds of millions of dollars in “subprime” loans to often uncreditworthy poor and minority customers.

Any bank that wants to expand or merge with another has to show it has complied with CRA - and approval can be held up by complaints filed by groups like ACORN.

In fact, intimidation tactics, public charges of racism and threats to use CRA to block business expansion have enabled ACORN to extract hundreds of millions of dollars in loans and contributions from America’s financial institutions."

Yesterday I read this by Los Angeles Times writer, Joseph J. Ellis: "...In the ongoing banking crisis...the removal of government regulations permitted major banks to assume unconscionable amounts of debt, much of it in the form of toxic investments that still remain on the books.

It has been obvious that the banks needed to be temporarily nationalized to force them to purge bad debts from their portfolios."

"Temporarily nationalized?" Isn't "nationalization" something President BO has denied doing?

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were early casualties of this boondoggle, although the most exceedingly honorable Maxine Waters, Barney Frank and others claimed nothing was wrong.



You've been told that part of the problem was the lack of federal regulation and oversight on the part of congress.

In fact, in 2008, the Bush Administration proposed an extensive overhaul of how the federal government regulated the banking system. The Democrat congress refused to go along, so regulations were not put in place.

Remember...this was because Democrats in congress did not want regulations on lending institutions!

Here is a chart showing the sequence of events:


















So here we are, about to trust our health care to the same gaggle of goons who gave us the housing bubble, the bursting of the housing bubble, economic crisis, massive bailouts for insurance companies, banks and the auto industry, cash for clunkers, and a myriad of other fiscal insanities.

I cannot understand why you would trust them with health care.

What on earth makes you think they can get this one right when they got all of the others wrong?