Comments on: Eric Cantor: Let’s Not “Overreact” to the Economic Crisis

By: HemmD

HemmD — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 16:17:04 +0000

JayDickB

Talking points aren't necessarily constructed from objective truth.

Fanny and Freddy got into sub-primes late in the game. They held about 15% of the sub-primes issued. That leaves 85% to the private sector who actively lobbied the Bush administration for loosened standards in loan requirement standards through Phil Graham, who was instrumental in getting these laws changed.

If your talking points are supposed to do more than obscure the truth and make Republicans blameless, let me know.

By: JayDickB

JayDickB — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 14:44:49 +0000

As in this case, current Republicans often have good points to make but are completely inept in making them.

For conservatives, the Democrats have overreacted in the sense that they have taken many actions in the name of correcting the financial downturn that will do nothing to improve the economy and will probably make it worse.

"Overreaction" is not a good word to describe this situation. A better way do describe it would be to say that Democrats took a bad situation and made it worse.

Republicans should also press the point that Democrats had a very large role in creating the financial downturn by insisting that mortgages be issued that could not be repaid and by making it very profitable for banks and mortgage companies to originate such mortgages without any of the risks normally associated with originating bad mortgages. When banks found that they could sell sub-prime mortgages (or derivatives backed by such mortgages) to Fannie and Freddie (and others) and make a lot of money, what would you expect them to do?

Other parties also had roles in this mess, but the Democrats' hands are not clean. The public needs to be reminded of this, frequently, but the Republicans don't seem to be able to do it. A largely hostile press doesn't help any.

By: DaGoat

DaGoat — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 03:38:59 +0000

For me the one "tired policy of the past" I'd like to see go is fiscal irresponsibility, something the GOP dropped the ball on and the Democrats seem eager to perpetuate. I think many fiscal conservatives see the 2000-2008 period as a failure and abandonment of basic economic responsibility, and the Democrat's proposals represent a worsening of that rather than a change for the better.

If the Democrats are talking about better oversight on banks, brokerages, hedge funds, mortgages, etc then those are changes that make sense and I could get behind It seems to me though Democrats are using the "tired old policies" excuse to spend a lot of money they don't have. I understand the need for stimulus spending but face it the new budget is a lot more than that.

What happened to the Democrats criticisms of widening deficits and commitment to pay-go? Were they just campaign rhetoric? When you say "tired old policies" could you be more specific, because the tired old policies I'd like to see go may not be the same ones you're talking about.

By: elrod

elrod — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 02:17:52 +0000

The problem with the “overreacting” comment is that it sounds like “nation of whiners” and “fundamentals of our economy are strong.” It may be true, in Republicans' opinion, that the Democrats are exploiting this crisis to advance a radical agenda. But when you use terms like “overreacting”, you run the risk of looking out of touch.

By: D. E.Rodriguez

D. E.Rodriguez — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 02:05:57 +0000

I keep hearing and reading about this latest Republican mantra of “overreacting” more and more, after they themslves–with Limbaugh and Hannity leading the GOP Pac and pack–have been shouting from the rooftops that the sky is falling, that the country and the economy are going to smithereens.

They are up to something, as ususal.

By: Don Quijote

Don Quijote — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 02:01:10 +0000

What crisis?

We have cheap labor, getting cheaper by the hour, and cheap money, what could be better? Oh yeah, lots of cheap assets hitting the market…

Heaven, if you have money…