The were wrong. In fact, as I suggested, moving Fannie and Freddie out of buying up MBSs from other sources would have solved the problem more than any changes and Bush moved them towards buying up more of those. You do understand this don’t you?

—By the way, Obama represented ACORN in the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 1994 suit against redlining

Are you for redlining? Generally decent human beings aren’t, but perhaps you have a novel take. Redlining is illegal so I have no idea what you are attempting to say here.

===ACORN was the driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the Clinton Administration that greatly expanded the CRA and laid the groundwork for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac borne financial crisis we now confront.

Wow, this must be very embarrassing for you. If you bothered to know a fucking thing about the subject you are trying to talk about, you’d know how incredibly dumb you sound right now–or even if you had read down one post.

CRA has nothing to do with our current problems. CRA covered institutions are the ones that are most stable currently and it is secondary institutions, not banks that are the primary source of bad loans. CRA isn’t even strictly about subprime lending, it’s about lending in underserved areas–a very different issue. Not understanding this suggests to me you are another conservative who espouses markets, but doesn’t know the first thing about them. CRA loans also have failed at far lower rates than the loans that have created the problems so empirically you are just wrong. What’s funny is that you had no clue about the CRA before a week or two ago.

Furthermore, you don’t even understand what got Freddie and Fannie into trouble. The loans originated under Fannie and Freddie products have much lower rates of default than those by other institutions. The problem of Fannie and Freddie is they bought MBSs from the private market that included the bad loans and that severely hurt them–the loans originated under their products continue to perform well and generally still valuable on the market.

Do you have a cite that actually mentions the default rate for homes bought through ACORN Housing programs? Because one thing you don’t seem to get is that the loans they arrange are often far better screened than the loans that are causing the problems and credit counseling and budgeting classes are the best prevention for defaults in general so your conspiracy theory kind of falls apart when it meets reality.

By the way, Obama represented ACORN in the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 1994 suit against redlining. Most significant of all, ACORN was the driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the Clinton Administration that greatly expanded the CRA and laid the groundwork for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac borne financial crisis we now confront. Barack Obama was the attorney representing ACORN in this effort. With this new authority, ACORN used its subsidiary, ACORN Housing, to promote subprime loans more aggressively.