On 'Today': Rove Takes Obama to Task On Mortgage Mess

Photo of Geoffrey Dickens.
  • Bookmark and Share

Karl Rove was invited on Tuesday's "Today" show to discuss Obama's stimulus plan and NBC's Matt Lauer pressed the former Bush senior adviser about the one-sidedness of the vote on the bill by the GOP as he pressed Rove: "219, if you add up the House and the Senate we have what, 219 Republicans. All but three of them voted against this plan...do those 216 Republicans run the risk of being on the outside looking in, if this starts to work?" Lauer also went on to cite Obama's senior adviser David Axelrod ridiculing any member of Bush administration for offering economic advice as Lauer doubted: "Do you have credibility on this subject... would you say that the eight years of the Bush administration were lax on regulation?"

However this prompted Rove to hit back, in the following exchange, as he noted Democrats like Barack Obama were the ones who stood in the way of the Bush administration regulating some of the main culprits behind the mortgage mess - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac:

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

MATT LAUER: You've come out and talked about it in your, written about it in your op-ed, you've spoken about this statement which prompted a comment from David Axelrod, the current senior adviser to the President. And I'm paraphrasing here Karl but he basically said, "Why do we need advice from any one attached to the Bush administration over the last eight years? Look at the economy as a result of that administration." How do you respond to that? Do you have credibility on this subject?

KARL ROVE: Well, first of all, look I'm not giving them advice. I'm commenting on what they're doing. I'm sure even this White House would say that people have a right to offer an opinion. Frankly, I thought it was interesting. The biggest accelerant in this economic difficulty was the failure of the government to rein in Fannie and Freddie. It was the Bush administration trying to rein in Fannie and Freddie. A new senator came to the United States Senate in January 2005 and refused to join the reform efforts, in fact, joined a filibuster effort to, to on the, on the bill that the administration offered up to rein it in. That senator was-

LAUER: That senator was?

ROVE: -Barack Obama of Illinois. He could have come and said, "You know what, I agree with the administration, we ought to rein in these imprudent lending practices that are getting us into difficulty." Do you know that, that it took 30 years for Fannie and Freddie to buy $2 trillion worth of mortgages? It took them five years to buy another trillion dollars worth of mortgages. After we tried to regulate them in 2005 it took them two-and-a-half years to get another trillion-two, mostly imprudent loans that they bought up.

LAUER: But, but you bring up this as an example but overall would you say that the eight years of the Bush administration were lax on regulation?

ROVE: No, no! Look, we, we, we were the administration that said this needs to be regulated. This is too big, too dangerous. A Clinton era regulator, Armando Falcon came in, in 2001. He had a term, so he was in office while Bush was in office and briefed the White House on this. And we agreed and began to move to regulate Fannie and Freddie. And it was, again I repeat, Democrats led by Chris Dodd and helped by the new senator from Illinois who blocked it in 2005.

The following is the full interview with Rove as it occurred on the February 17 "Today" show:

MATT LAUER: Alright, Savannah, thanks very much. Savannah Guthrie at the White House this morning. Karl Rove was the senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush. He is now a contributor to Fox News. Hey, Karl, good morning, good to have you here.

[On screen headline: "Rove On Stimulus, Is GOP Gambling On Obama Failing?"]

KARL ROVE: Good morning to you.

LAUER: About $800 billion, that's what this package is all about. It's gonna get signed today. This is the kind of legislation that normally in Washington takes months and months to pass. They got this in one month. Does part of you admire that and does part of you worry about that?

ROVE: Well, it's, it's a great accomplishment. 667 hours and 10 minutes, that's how long the President has been President, and they got this bill done in less than that time. On the other hand it was rushed at the end, and as a result, people's confidence in this bill is necessaribly, necessarily shaken.

LAUER: But rushed? When you started to hear the jobless numbers, when you started to hear Admiral Dennis Blair, the chief of national intelligence, saying the economy right now in its current condition is the biggest threat we face, more so than al-Qaeda, doesn't it seem that quick and bold action was necessary?

ROVE: Well, quick and bold was necessary, but let's step back a minute. December 18th was when Barack Obama's advisers went to Capitol Hill and said to the, to the members of Congress, "We would like to have a package of roughly $850 billion. We're not gonna give you a detailed plan. We're gonna describe 200, less than $200 billion of that. You go write the rest." And they said, "We would like it to be temporary, timely, and targeted." And we got, we got it timely, that is to say a big bill done quickly, but there is a real question as to how targeted and how stimulative this bill really is gonna be.

LAUER: 219, if you add up the House and the Senate we have what, 219 Republicans. All but three of them voted against-

ROVE: Right.

LAUER: -this plan.

ROVE: Well, I'd like to look at it a different way. Twice as many Democrats voted against the President's plan as Republicans voted for it.

LAUER: Oh but let's, let me look at it my way for a second okay? 216 Republicans seem to have placed a bet on failure. Isn't that safe to say?

ROVE: No, no. What they bet on was this was not the right way to stimulate the economy. The one, the interesting thing was, in both the House and Senate, the Republicans went out of their way to offer alternatives and to discuss items with the White House and with their Democrat colleagues when they were allowed to. In the House they weren't allowed to talk at all.

LAUER: But even, but in the, in the op-ed you wrote in the Wall Street Journal, you said this will have some impact on, on the economy. And part of it will happen by its own due course anyway.

ROVE: Right.

LAUER: But do those 216 Republicans run the risk of being on the outside looking in, if this starts to work?

ROVE: It, it depends, it depends. If they go out and adopt the rhetoric that this is a, that the, that the economy is gonna go to Hell in a hand basket, then they're gonna have a problem. But if on the other hand, they say, "You know what, there are better ways to do this and we didn't need all this pork, we didn't need all this special interest spending, we wanted a bill that worked right now." There's gonna be more money spent under this bill between 2011 and 2019 that will be spent this year. That's, that's pretty remarkable for a bill that's supposed to stimulate the economy today.

LAUER: You, you, you've been, you've come out and talked about it in your, written about it in your op-ed, you've spoken about this statement which prompted a comment from David Axelrod, the current senior adviser to the President. And I'm paraphrasing here Karl but he basically said, "Why do we need advice from any one attached to the Bush administration over the last eight years? Look at the economy as a result of that administration." How do you respond to that? Do you have credibility on this subject?

ROVE: Well, first of all, look I'm not giving them advice. I'm commenting on what they're doing. I'm sure even this White House would say that people have a right to offer an opinion. Frankly, I thought it was interesting. The biggest accelerant in this economic difficulty was the failure of the government to rein in Fannie and Freddie. It was the Bush administration trying to rein in Fannie and Freddie. A new senator came to the United States Senate in January 2005 and refused to join the reform efforts, in fact, joined a filibuster effort to, to on the, on the bill that the administration offered up to rein it in. That senator was-

LAUER: That senator was?

ROVE: -Barack Obama of Illinois. He could have come and said, "You know what, I agree with the administration, we ought to rein in these imprudent lending practices that are getting us into difficulty." Do you know that, that it took 30 years for Fannie and Freddie to buy $2 trillion worth of mortgages? It took them five years to buy another trillion dollars worth of mortgages. After we tried to regulate them in 2005 it took them two-and-a-half years to get another trillion-two, mostly imprudent loans that they bought up.

LAUER: But, but you bring up this as an example but overall would you say that the eight years of the Bush administration were lax on regulation?

ROVE: No, no! Look, we, we, we were the administration that said this needs to be regulated. This is too big, too dangerous. A Clinton era regulator, Armando Falcon came in, in 2001. He had a term, so he was in office while Bush was in office and briefed the White House on this. And we agreed and began to move to regulate Fannie and Freddie. And it was, again I repeat, Democrats led by Chris Dodd and helped by the new senator from Illinois who blocked it in 2005.

LAUER: Let me end on a completely different subject. There is a report in the New York Daily News this morning that former Vice President Dick Cheney is furious at former President Bush for not pardoning Scooter Libby, that he went back and back in person and on the phone trying to get that pardon for his. his former aide, Scooter Libby, and it didn't happen and he's furious. What do you know about this?

ROVE: Well I know that he felt strongly about this, but I think the tabloids tend to get these things overblown. These are two very close men who have, who had, who have a long and enduring relationship that' good and positive.

LAUER: Hasn't been soured because of the lack of a pardon?

ROVE: Look, look, no. I don't, I don't detect that at all. It's obviously something Dick Cheney feels strongly about, but the President laid out in his commutation of Scooter Libby the grounds on which he was making his decision.

LAUER: Karl Rove. Karl thanks for coming in.

ROVE: Thanks for having me.

LAUER: Good to have you here. Appreciate it.

—Geoffrey Dickens is the senior news analyst at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Again....

...isn't it interesting how yet another MSM mouthpiece continues to express his/her concern about how the GOP is being seen as obstructionist and is isolating itself?

The Dems have free rein to pretty much do what they want, yet there is so much concern about the GOP not joining in.

Interesting.

Oh, Mr. President, since I, like so many 10s of millions of my fellow citizens, did not overextend myself on my mortgage and didn't gamble on an Option ARM, what sort of financial aid will I be getting from the stimulus package?

Oh, I don't get anything?

Thought so.

"The truth is treason in the empire of lies"

www.campaignforliberty.com

No--you get something

You get to watch your "investment" in your house disappear from all the other houses around you going to hell or going empty.

 

CNBC...

....had an investigative report called "House of Cards" about the whole sub-prime mess and it is well worth watching.

I really like the info on the guy who saw a couple of years ago that this was going to blow up and made his hedge fund something like $1+ billion by betting against the housing market.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/28892719/

Oh, don't worry about THAT!

Coming to a neighborhood near you:

THE HOMELESS!  Yes, ladies and gentleman,  those big bad banks are just holding on to empty houses while there are actual HOMELESS people out on the streets.  So, in the name of fairness, we are keeping track of these empty homes and carefully placing poor, sad, hungry, homeless people in them.  How DARE the banks be allowed to try to recapture some of the money that they lost when people defaulted on their mortgages?  And lest you think that said charity will buy or rent these empty homes, thus LEGALLY providing homes for the homeless, think again....

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-12-10-homesquatters_N.htm

 

isn't it interesting how

isn't it interesting how yet another MSM mouthpiece continues to
express his/her concern about how the GOP is being seen as
obstructionist and is isolating itself?

No kidding; I thought about this yesterday when someone else framed it the same way: don't Republicans risk being seen as obstructionist?

As if they wouldn't just love it if Democrats got to hog all the credit. 

How about Don't Democrats risk being seen as recklessly ramming through a one-sided, partisan bill?

Yeah, like that'll happen.

 

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson

Doh Matt

When losing an argument, change the subject..

...to another losing

...to another losing argument:)

Shhh!!! Shh!!!

In his swank Manhattan pervert palace, Bathtub Boy, watching on his small TV is splashing around in his large whirlpool tub surrounded by his inflatable women preturbed at the notion that Karl Rove had the nerve to explain the real cause of the financial crisis. Rising from the sea of rubber ducks floating above the jets is Shuster, gasping for air....

Ew.

2010: A GOP Hill

What good does it do to talk

What good does it do to talk to these libtards?  They don't give a scat about facts.  Their only purpose is to push the libtard agend through the propagation of lies.

I agree with you!

This is the best comment I've seen in a while!

You're right...

Our folks are being interviewed and reported on by a public relations firm for the Democrat Party.  

It's that simple. 

 

MSM = PR firm for the Democrat Party

I caught part of this

I caught part of this exchange this morning and it was a wonderful thing :o)

We need more of Rove and whoever else has a functioning brain to get out there and talk rings around the idiots in the media. 

Me - "The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years - the cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil."

Balance

Karl, just tell Lauer that the Republicans were excercising the "Fairness Doctrine" in bringing diverse opinion into government.

So according to Lauer, all the Republicans except Snowe, Collins and Specter were wrong and ALL the democrats but 11 were right.

No need for Newsbusters with all this unbiased journalism, huh!

These people in the MSM wouldn't know unbiased jounalism if it hit them squarely in their reproductive organs. 

How revealing

LAUER: Oh but let's, let me look at it my way for a second okay? 216 Republicans seem to have placed a bet on failure. Isn't that safe to say?

Lauer's way of looking at things is to accuse the Republicans of voting for or against this bill strictly based on how it will appear during the next election. His way of looking at things is that they didn't care how the bill actually performs; instead, it's all mere show for the cameras. That tells you several things.

  1. This is how they intend to report it. Lauer's way of looking at things is to portray Republicans as evil. They will punish the GOP for this ... disloyalty. Look for stories that emphasize their meme that the GOP doesn't care about the country, and only act out of partisan, bitter opposition.
  2. At least Lauer is upfront about it - he intends to smear Republicans. The fact that the Democrats all voted for it, almost as unanimously as the Republicans opposed it, and are therefore just as partisan, is just not part of his way of looking at things.
  3. Forget any chance of a report that shows the stimulus not to have succeeded spectacularly. The liberal media is now as invested in the "success" of this boondoggle as is Obama. They will not, despite any and all facts to the contrary, report that the boondoggle was a boondoggle. To use a phrase that's become far too trendy, the boondoggle is too big to fail.

That was no slip of the tongue. Lauer told us what he sees, and that's what he's going to report.

KC, as to your 3rd point,

 It doesn't matter if it succeeds or not (actually it would probably help if it didn't) the MSM will paint this porkulus package as one of the great accomplishments of the Obamessiah administration.

REAL conservative in '12... PLEASE!!!

Where are those ads?

Back in 2005 or so, when the Fannie and Freddie problem was brought up by President Bush and the Republicans, we were immediately flooded by TV ads against regulation of F&F. Remember the ads with a little girl carrying a teddy bear being led by her mother out of their (foreclosed?) home, and the voice instructing the lemmings to 'call your Congressman and tell him to keep their hands off of our affordable housing', or something like that?

Someone needs to dig up those ads, highlight who paid for them and produced them, and re-air them. It might open some eyes among those voters that call themselves independents.

That is why

To use a phrase that's become far too trendy, the boondoggle is too big to fail. 

Geithner will be back on the Hill in no time asking for more Trillions

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

Here's what I really think will happen

Reporters will report what they expect to see, whether it's there or not. They've already written the story, and all that remains is the formality of playing the game. But ...

  • Remember the start of the Iraq War? Everyone was convinced that Saddam would hole up in Baghdad, lobbing chemical weapons at our troops. The US military prepared for a siege. All of the weapons were siege-oriented (tanks, no armored humvees, etc.). The embedded reporters were equipped with chemical suits. To quote Donald Rumsfeld, you go to war with the equipment you got. Remember all that? We soon discovered how wrong we were.
  • Insurgency? Where did that come from? We expected to kill all the trouble-makers during a long siege.
  • As the military teaches, plans go to hell as soon as the first shot is fired. You find out that a lot of your assumptions are wrong, and the situation adapts to your actions with reactions of its own. The battlefield evolves. To succeed, a commander has to adapt to changing circumstances.

Obama has just signed off on massive meddling in areas that no one understands, just as if it was a military invasion into unknown territory. But unlike the military, our invasion force has no flexibility, no adaptability, precious little battlefield intelligence, and worst of all ... the invasion is being run by people who are ideologically-driven. They're shooting guns where an ideology tells them to shoot, not because they actually see a target. Twelve hundred pages and trillions of dollars are being committed to an unpredictable sequence of events and responses, by people who are only looking to see what they expect to see.

I think that within a few months of this, the chaos (yes, chaos theory) will reflect how stupid we are now.

Forget any chance of a

Forget any chance of a report that shows the stimulus not to have succeeded spectacularly. 

KC, I've said for a long time that sooner or later the economy will begin to recover, and regardless of the truth of it, this "stimulus" package will get the credit for it.  

As for the fact that it was Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Maxine ("Fannie Mae...under the outstanding leadership of Frank Raines") Waters who caused this easy-to forsee disaster, it is, to Democrats, "An Inconvenient Truth." 

Therefore, down the Memory Hole it goes.

 

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson

The recovery

MB, I'm now convinced that the stimulus package is one, giant, irrelevant nothing. The only thing that matters is how we address the finance problem. If we fix that, everything else falls into place. If we don't fix that, everything falls into ruin. The stimulus doesn't address that, so it's irrelevant.

  • Obama says that the measure of recovery is jobs. So, he's pushing through a program that will artificially create jobs. It's an artifical bubble. Now, that's not a bad idea to help families in the interim, until the economy rebounds. But this strategy only works if you have a plan to rebound the economy in the meantime.
  • If not, then this temporary bubble is just an excuse to artificially inflate numbers, hoping to fool the voters into believing that you did something positive. It's an artificial political bubble - and that's only if it works at all. It may not even work as that!

And where's that plan to fix the economic infrastructure? Geithner's plan is, um, well, you see, it's uh ... it'll be here any day now. Like the Music Man's band uniforms.

Sooner or later, American entrepreneurs are going to get tired of waiting around for Obama's system to work. They're going to come up with other ways to finance their business, if this one isn't working. I can't help but remember the John Wayne movie "Chisum," where his rival owns the only bank in town. John Wayne's answer? He'll start a new bank. Why not? All you need is money. 

Watch the Democrats try to take credit for that. They just hope it'll happen in time for the 2010 elections.

Lauer vs. Rove

ROVE: No, no! Look, we, we, we were the administration that said
this needs to be regulated. This is too big, too dangerous. A Clinton
era regulator, Armando Falcon came in, in 2001. He had a term, so he
was in office while Bush was in office and briefed the White House on
this. And we agreed and began to move to regulate Fannie and Freddie.
And it was, again I repeat, Democrats led by Chris Dodd and helped by
the new senator from Illinois who blocked it in 2005.

LAUER: Let me end on a completely different subject. ....

Oops. Looks like Lauer let a few facts slip through in the interview. Just not as fast on his feet these days. It's curious that Today is now willing to interview Rove at this point in time. Anyone have any thoughts on why this would be?

Queen..

Exactly. Every time. Every reporter. If their agenda is challenged - change the subject (I'm also thinking of Couric's interview of Obama on the subject of his illegal aunt in Boston - ha).

Sept. 17, 2007 - Brian Williams NBC news nightly anchor (sounds almost fearful asking the question - then the answer opens up number two door - and he runs from it):

BRIAN WILLIAMS: Who or what do you think is to blame for this current mortgage and credit crisis?  Who do we see about that?

BARACK OBAMA: Well, I think there are a lot of folks who ought to take some responsibility.  The original idea was a good one, which was that let's see if we can distribute this more broadly and make it easier to provide loans to people who otherwise might be-- not be able to get a mortgage loan.

Over time, what ended up happening was that the appraisers started loosening their standards.  The mortgage brokers started playing around with their standards.  Then, the people who were buying these securities weren't really checking  very carefully to see whether the underlying mortgage could support the loans that were made.

And so, over time, you had everybody I think conspiring to just do what felt good and what was making a lot of money.  The problem was that a lot of homeowners were induced to take out loans that they could afford only if home prices continued to go up.

Wow - now here is door no. 2. What an opening for an actual discussion on the issues at hand.. but no........ 

BRIAN WILLIAMS: Let's talk about the campaign which I understand you've been spending some of your free time doing.  To-- what's the surprise?  What is it, seven months into it?

Obama also said this someplace else during 2007 (I transcribed it from a tape?):

When we look at the sub-prime mortgage fiasco that's taking place today. Subprime lending started off as a good idea. Helping Americans buy homes who previoulsy couldn't afford to. Financial institutions created new financial instruments that could securidize these loans, slice them into finer and finer risk categories and spread them out among investors and around the country as well as around the world. In theory this should have allowed mortgage lending to be less risky and more diversified.

Yup - and time is about to proove you wrong once again, Mr. Obama new kid on the block.

Thanks, Gary. Good stuff.

Thanks, Gary. Good stuff.

Let me end on a completely different subject

Translation..., "since you're obviously too well versed on this subject for me to push the agenda Snuffaloganous told me to push, let's move onto something else I'm suppose to push..."

I am just surprised the msm

I am just surprised the msm would have their Satan on as a guest!

 

When is he getting his news show a la Stephie?

You Betcha

I'll bet Matt and Katie and George Snuffaluffagus, and all their play-time friends working the Midway of the MSM, have huge blisters from those buckets of water they've been a-carryin' for Hussein.  But it's all for the ''good of the country'', doncha know.

That's because . . .

the libidiots have successfully changed the definition of patriotism from love and respect for country to love and worship of government and globalism. The new patriotic mantra can sadly be found at http://www.bornagainamerican.org/index.html.  It's all very homey and musically geared to stir your emotions . . . but . . . when you did deep enough you realize that it was started by Norman Lear and his ilk; and his speech about God is just disgraceful and pure fable.

So, the liberals have co-opted patriotism and turned it into something unrecognizable, and blasphemed and libeled God Almighty; and you expect them to give a rip about conservatives? Heck, they don't have to tolerate anyone who disagrees with them . . . and, like the Nazis, they claim THEY are the spotless examples of "tolerance" when all they really want is to increase power to massive and permanent levels. Do not fear. Their hatred will destroy them . . . very soon.

I would also suggest you read http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/01/29/the-death-of-democracy-and-birth-of-mobocracy-in-america/  This website has amazing articles that will help us survive what the liberals have planned for us. Of course, all the liberal women will be wearing burkas, but I'm sure Cher and Whoopi will look terrific in the designer duds :)

We (the GOP) are indeed

We (the GOP) are indeed obstructionist.  At every turn we try to obstruct the mindless and dangerous acts and policies of the idiots with boiled turnips for brains in the WH and the Congress and Senate.

Sure

LAUER: "But do those 216 Republicans run the risk of being on the outside looking in, if this starts to work?"

ME: "Sure. If for the first time in recorded human history this works. When it fails, will you promise to blame the President and the 312 Democrats that drove us off the cliff, and urge their defeat?"

YES!

Brilliantly put, Joe!  Please please please let it be known, when this thing fails, who was really at the helm.

Obviously this is wishful thinking, as the MSM will protest, spin, lie, and distort it all to save their messiah.

2010:  A time for conservative uprising.

 

"Liberate tutume ex inferis, liberal puppets."  Me.

2010?

Why wait...

;)

The left doesn't follow the rules...why should we?

2010: A GOP Hill

By 2010, when Talk Radio

By 2010, when Talk Radio has gone away and Republicans are running against each other, due to redrawn congressional districts, what's it going to matter who was a fault?  How are you going to get the message across to the masses?  Do you think Matt, Katie, Brian, or Harry are going to ever say, "That 2009 stimulus bill was a huge piece of crapola, with very few components to actually stimulate the economy."?

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."  - Sir Winston Churchill

You've got to love Karl Rove

That topic switch when Karl had little Matty on the ropes was a hoot.

What struck me, though was the following (and oh, how I wish there was a video posted so I could actually hear it, but allow me to insert my own interpretation of how Karl actually said this):

ROVE: ...I'm sure even this White House would say that people have a right to offer an opinion.

So while beating Lauer soundly around the head with a cluebat, he kicks him in the shins with subtle digs.  As I said, you've got to love Karl Rove.

 

Bush admin. Most significant regulatory overall proposed

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae "The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." NY Times Sept. 10, 2003.

Do yourself a favor and read the whole thing - especially the last couple of paragraphs. Interesting how the MSM censors history, is it not?

Gasp!...Gary! How dare you....!

Gary, how dare you defend Mr. Bush!  Didn't you get the memos from Maddow, Olbey, and Matthews?  (Dude, you know that Bush is the devil, right?  ALL this economic mess is because of him, that mean old Bush and hisstupid Republicans.)

I shall be gleefully posting this on my facebook page tonight, in the hopes that people actually do read it, as I did, and will form a knowledgable opinion about how the hell we got into this mess in the first place.  Bravo, Gary, bravo.  (applause applause applause)

"Liberate tutume ex inferis, liberal puppets."  Me.

Another nice quote....

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing
any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of
Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services
Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more
pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of
affordable housing.''

 

Choice words there...

Can Matt Lauer Continue to Support Dems?

Karl succinctly described to Matt Lauer and his audience that democrats - including President Obama - are at the root of many of our economic problems.  Karl made it very clear that President Bush and the republicans wanted more regulation of Fannie and Freddie and the democrats not only obstructed these efforts, they blatantly lied for their own political and financial benefit.  Shocking, I know.  

Perhaps Matt Lauer will do some more research this afternoon and come to the conclusion that the liberals have in fact permanently damaged our economy and will continue until it is in ruins.  Ya think? 

Yeah, no.  

Lauer is such a LIBERAL!!!

LAUER: Oh but let's, let me look at it my way for a second okay? 216 Republicans seem to have placed a bet on failure. Isn't that safe to say?

Lauer is such a LIBERAL!!! 

ROVE: And it was, again I

ROVE: And it was, again I repeat, Democrats led by Chris Dodd and helped by the new senator from Illinois who blocked it [fixing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] in 2005.

This is a message John McCain and George W. Bush failed to express to the general public.  You CANNOT rely upon the liberal media to say the truth on this matter.  Lauer is almost rubbing his ears like he never heard this alternative theory before.  Instead the liberal media say what the Dems want them to say, that the economic problems are 100% the fault of capitalism, Wall Street fat cats, and President Bush's failure to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Boy! Did Rove ever set Lauer up - LOL

ROVE: It was the Bush administration trying to rein in Fannie and Freddie.
A new senator came to the United States Senate in January 2005 and
refused to join the reform efforts, in fact, joined a filibuster effort
to, to on the, on the bill that the administration offered up to rein
it in. That senator was-

LAUER: That senator was?

ROVE: -Barack Obama of Illinois.

 LMAO!!!!
Rove knew exactly what he was doing.  Would love to have seen Lauer's face drop when the punch-line was the MSM's Unassailable One.

I'm sure Lauer was thinking "WE'RE NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT BARACK!!! WE'RE HERE TO BASH REPUBLICANS!!!"

I also wish it were possible for conservatives like Rove to come on and have their own arsenal of video clips available, say on their iPhone, jacked into the studio's AV system.  So, when Matt does his "Let's watch this clip...", Rove could respond with "Well, Matt, let's watch this clip..." and proceed to show something like Barney Frank, Maxine Waters and the Congressional Black Caucus defending Freddie, Fannie and Franklin Raines back in 2004 while attacking REGULATORS and REPUBLICANS warning of immenent catastrophe.  Republicans bringing their own video is what it would take, too, as you know the networks would never broadcast that on their own. Not in a million years.

 

Does anyone have that youtube link again>?

The video where the actual cause of this mess is elaborated on?

"What you can not enforce, do not command" -Sophocles-

Video of Barney, Maxine and company attacking regulators in 2004

Here ya go.

http://www.youtube.c...

A guaranteed, sure-fire way to shut a liberal up when they try to blame the subprime mortgage crisis on Bush and the big, bad Republicans "eliminating regulation".

Too bad the video has "only" 3 million hits out on youtube.  It should have 60 million considering its significance.

What's amazing in this interview....

...is that when Rove got to the heart of accusing Dodd and Obama of countering regulation of Fannie and Freddie he said "Let me change the topic to the Scooter Libby pardon".  In other words, no acknowledgement of this little known fact that dems DID oppose regulation of Fannie and Freddie.  This is why you can't argue or discuss anything factual with a liberal.  The minute that you're right, they duck it.

"What you can not enforce, do not command" -Sophocles-

Rove is wrong!

 ROVE:  I'm sure even this White House would say that people have a right to offer an opinion.

Obligatory statement if there ever was one

 

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

LAUER: Oh but let's, let me

LAUER: Oh but let's, let me look at it my way for a second okay? 216 Republicans seem to have placed a bet on failure. Isn't that safe to say?

Well Matt, the media and the democrats strategy for the past 8 years was.....

Well said.  A major

Well said.  A major example: the dims and the progagandist media made a vested interest in the failure of America regarding the war on terror against "so-called-terrorists."  America's failure is the dims political gain.

I am sorry, but Matt Lauer

I am sorry, but Matt Lauer is a brain-dead moron.

-Dave

Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.

Rove's a loser

Too bad Rove is an election late and a trillion dollars short. What an ass. That's appropriate because Rove is more a Democrat than anything else. And with the gaseous noises McCain is making, I sure hope he's not going to run for president again. McCain and his very good comrade, John "Jane Fonda" Kerry, are two alligators in the rice paddy.

The current B.S. coming from

The current
B.S. coming from the "conservative" noise machine is that Democrats
were responsible for the sub-prime meltdown. The meme is that Barney
Frank, Chris Dodd, etc. were to blame for this crisis because they the
lead the finance committees -- true now, but not until the Dem's took
over congress in 2007, so the Republicans controlled it during the
meltdown.

See these for the footnotes:
"Fox News: Barney Frank Escaped Blame for Fannie Mae's Problems Because
He Is Gay"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-fiderer/fox-news-barney-frank-esc_b_132347.html

"The Simple Arithmetic of the Mortgage Crisis Debunks Right Wing Media
Narratives"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-fiderer/the-simple-arithmetic-of_b_173204.html

"How Banks Are Worsening the Foreclosure Crisis"
http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/09_08/b4120034085635.htm
3/10/2009 9:01:54 AM on theunion.com

Meanwhile, in an article entitled "Private sector loans, not Fannie or
Freddie, triggered crisis," McClatchy news writes:

"Federal Reserve Board data show that:

"More than 84 percent of the subprime mortgages in 2006 were issued by
private lending institutions.

"Private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and
moderate-income borrowers that year.

"Only one of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006 was directly subject
to the housing law that's being lambasted by conservative critics."

From http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/53802.html