digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Clinton Campaign Mgr(Williams) connected w/ Sub-prime Crisis

chicagotribune.com — Maggie served on board (paid, of course) of failed sub-prime loan co. Fair Finance Watch calls Delta "the most aggressive company". Practices included penalties for early payment (!!)(something HRC 'decries'), enormous closing costs, huge interest rates...But let's remember: ****BILL CLINTON'S BANKING DEREGULATION actually made all this possible!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • Gabberwok, on 03/31/2008, -9/+34This is pretty outrageous. I already had enough reasons not to vote for her.
    • chrissku, on 03/31/2008, -6/+4I wouldn't vote for Hillary if the killer monkey in my closet threatened my life.
      • badqat, on 03/31/2008, -1/+2Don't you mean the evil monkey in your closet...he wasn't always evil, you know...
    • jabberwolf, on 03/31/2008, -5/+2YES - the sub prime is all ONE person's fault. Not that people made bad and greedy gambles, and so did banks.
      And while it's ONE person's fault, I think she knew Hillary some distant way, so Hillary caused the subprime crisis !!!!

      OMFG can you reach any ***** further? Why not blame AIDS on Hillary while your at it? Oh wait, Obama's preacher already did !
      • JavanSClark, on 03/31/2008, -1/+1Or even better, you could admit that skin color is the major reason you support a confirmed liar, cheat, and all around deceitful person over someone who has shown much more transparency in the same amount of time. If not, then that would mean you just prefer dishonest people. Nice try with Rev. Wright btw, ever heard of Tuskegee? I'm sure you are going to add that dto your talking points the next time you deny the Holocaust.
    • fluoro, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Yeah, you already had enough reasons. So don't imply that this is an additional reason. Make your decision to note vote for her because of the things that SHE has said, and because of the things SHE has done. Not because of her campaign manager's past. Clinton gives us plenty of reasons to not vote for her that we don't need to resort to guilt by association attacks. Let's reserve those for her to use against Obama, because that's about all she has on him it seems.
  • Rotzooi, on 03/31/2008, -19/+7Obviously, Bill Clinton is to blame for the mess our country is in. In the meantime, I'm going to stock up on tin foil.
    • CryRightardCry, on 04/01/2008, -2/+2Don't you love how they blame Clinton for the banking deregulation pushed by the Republicans?
      No matter what the GOP does, they blame the other side.
      In this case Clinton is at fault for allowing the heavily lobbied GOP to push the lax banking rules through.
      Figures the rightards would pretend to forget that.
      Nothing like being a dishonest right wing piece of *****.
  • motivatedmama, on 03/31/2008, -7/+11But... but....she's black! Don't look at the facts! Hillary looooves African Americans!
  • swrostmore, on 03/31/2008, -3/+23Guess who else is connected with the Sub-prime Crisis? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/29/mccain-gu ...
    Maybe that's what Hillary meant by the "Commander-in-Chief Threshhold."

    • pintomp3, on 03/31/2008, -2/+10wow, the keating five and now this? mccain sure likes to be connected to economic crises.
    • boonesfarm, on 03/31/2008, -2/+2This post is a response to that post.... maybe you missed that.
      Also linked to the subprime mortgage mess: the people who signed those loans and overborrowed. It's amazing how we point to people with $30,000 worth of credit card debt and call them idiots, but people who signed on with preditory lenders are "victims". Theoretically, the value of the home is supposed to go, but that's not always the case... kind of like with stocks and other investments.
  • swrostmore, on 03/31/2008, -10/+17I buried this as inaccurate for the statement "BILL CLINTONS BANKING DEREGULATION actually made this possible!"
    I know its fashionable to bash the Clintons, but it is important not to simply accept right-wing talking points just because you don't want Hillary to get the nomination. Look at the facts:
    After the Clinton presidency (In 2000), 2% of US mortgages were subprime. Under Bush's policies, the number skyrocketed to 13% as of 2006.
    • bjerickson, on 03/31/2008, -5/+6In 1995 The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 was modified, laying the groundwork for the sub-prime mortgage mess we are in today. If I remember correctly it was under Clinton's Administration that this happened. It wasn't deregulation that caused the problem, it was actually regulation. Also burying for the "Bill Clinton's Banking Deregulation"
      • CryRightardCry, on 04/01/2008, -1/+2Maybe you could do the work and look into WHO pushed for it?
        That's right clueless, the GOP.
    • YankeesSuck, on 03/31/2008, -2/+5True, but Slick Willy revoked the Glass Stegall act.
    • jforjools, on 03/31/2008, -0/+7The quote is that Bill Clinton's deregulation policies "made all this possible". You're simply not old enough (or too old) to remember. Bill called himself a 'moderate for many reasons...and corporate america loved him for it. I don't give Dubya a free pass on this.

      From the March 28th Mother Jones article, "it's the Deregulation, Stupid":
      Yet Bill Clinton, elected in large part because of that recession (a la James Carville's "It's the economy, stupid"), was talking about deregulation before he was even inaugurated. The National Review reported that "Bill Clinton embraced at least one Reaganesque idea at the Little Rock economic summit" he held in December 1992: "banking deregulation."

      http://digg.com/politics/It_s_the_Deregulation_Stu ...

      This just popped up on a quick google...I was using my memory when I wrote the subtitle for this article....but I'm happy to report that my memory, at least on this matter, is better than Hillary's reguarding her 'experience'.

      • swrostmore, on 03/31/2008, -2/+2Not old enough to remember the specifics, but I'll grant you it's arguable. Neoliberal policy is almost as dangerous economically as neoconservative policy is militarily. My point is, even if he did loosen regulations, under Clinton it was not a sub-prime free-for-all, whether that was because he actually prosecuted predatory lenders or some other reason. The bubble that just collapsed wasn't created in the 8 years of the Clinton presidency, it was created under Bush.
    • sanman, on 03/31/2008, -2/+1Neither is the banking system, nor are the common business practices of borrowing and lending, controlled by the Bush administration. Nobody told people to take out mortgages in a reckless way. You might as well be blaming Bush for the divorce rate.
      • Pherdnut, on 03/31/2008, -1/+3These were predatory lending practices. These people were conned. They didn't come up with the idea. They were cold-called and sold on it.
        • sanman, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1A fool and his money are soon parted. How exactly does one claim to be conned on getting a loan? Where do claims of being conned reasonably stop? It's called not taking responsibility for your own actions. "B-b-but, they told me that stock was going to go up! I swear! I didn't know that stocks can go down!"
      • swrostmore, on 03/31/2008, -2/+2Prosecution (or lack of it) for predatory lending practices is done at the discretion of the Justice Department which is staffed by Bush appointees that "serve at the pleasure of the president." And we know from congressional investigation that the DoJ was not at all independent under Bush, to the extent that a witness testified that she "took an oath to the President." When pressed by Sen. Leahy she repeated this statement. She in fact took an oath to the Constitution.
  • chrissku, on 03/31/2008, -6/+6Obama has won the nomination. It's over for Hillary. Someone needs to wake her up to this fact.
    • bingobongony, on 03/31/2008, -7/+1He has?

      Someone needs to wake you up to the way things work.
    • fluoro, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1I hope he wins it at this point, but to be totally fair you're wrong. He has not won it yet. Technically I don't think John McCain has won the Republican one yet, although there's no doubt that he will. You could say "it's as good as over" maybe, but strictly speaking it's not yet over.
  • headzoo, on 03/31/2008, -4/+14Clearly an administration isn't the president alone. It's also the people they choose to be their advisers. If this is the kind of people that Clinton is choosing, then we would be in deep trouble if she was the president.
  • Look4Truth, on 03/31/2008, -3/+5No surprise here, they're all criminals.
  • uberAileen, on 03/31/2008, -4/+6everyone and their moms are linked to the sub-prime crisis. this isn't a big deal. it is a big deal though that she only earned $200,000 doing it, as the director too. thats just embarrassing lol
  • vinnyvenus, on 03/31/2008, -8/+6This article is inaccurate.
    • jforjools, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3Absolutely accurate. If you're talking about he Bill thing, educate yourself:


      From the March 28th Mother Jones article, "it's the Deregulation, Stupid":
      Yet Bill Clinton, elected in large part because of that recession (a la James Carville's "It's the economy, stupid"), was talking about deregulation before he was even inaugurated. The National Review reported that "Bill Clinton embraced at least one Reaganesque idea at the Little Rock economic summit" he held in December 1992: "banking deregulation."

      http://digg.com/politics/It_s_the_Deregulation_Stu ...

      This just popped up on a quick google...I was using my memory when I wrote the subtitle for this article....but I'm happy to report that my memory, at least on this matter, is better than Hillary's reguarding her 'experience'.
  • Enron1985, on 03/31/2008, -5/+5Hilary's campaign phone #: 703.469.2008 (from her website)
    call and demand an explanation.
    • bingobongony, on 03/31/2008, -6/+1Let's GIT her!

      What is your phone number, internet tough guy?
      • bjornski, on 03/31/2008, -0/+4You never pass up an opportunity to be a dick, do you?
        • bingobongony, on 03/31/2008, -3/+1Being a dick is the caveman mob mentality shown in the original post, you ***** idiot. IF Enron 1985 was a REAL man, he would have no problem posting his phone number so people who disagree with him to call him.

          You never pass up the opportunity to stalk me, do you? Your life REALLY sucks.
        • iainc, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1http://digg.com/odd_stuff/Bingobongony_Trolls_all_ ...
  • monsterCable, on 03/31/2008, -6/+2Hillary Clinton eats little babies for lunch. Oh my god.
    Vote for Obama!
  • bjerickson, on 03/31/2008, -6/+1In 1995 The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 was modified, laying the groundwork for the sub-prime mortgage mess we are in today. If I remember correctly it was under Clinton's Administration that this happened. It wasn't deregulation that caused the problem, it was actually regulation. Also burying for the "Bill Clinton's Banking Deregulation"
  • boingbonk, on 03/31/2008, -5/+4I just called and spoke with Hillary. She promised she and her husband never lie...I dunno I think she convinced me. "rolleyes"
  • ThinkFr33ly, on 03/31/2008, -3/+4This isn't entirely correct. While Clinton did sign in to law a bill in 1999 that essentially paved the way for the sub-prime mess, it was a bill pushed through by Republicans will a veto-proof majority.

    The bill also had some elements that were pretty good, so rather than take an unpopular stand on a bill he couldn't stop anyway, Clinton signed it.
    • bingobongony, on 03/31/2008, -1/+2Yeah...THAT's what hapened! Clinton HATED this bill. He knew this would happen. But poor wittle Billy was unable to stop it. So he didn't experess any concerns whatsoever.

      Honestly...I think Bill learned his lesson 12 years ago. You will NOT be chosen as his next Monica. So you can stop kissing his ass. And remember...he didn't even let HER swallow.
    • jforjools, on 03/31/2008, -1/+3It IS entirely correct to say that "bill clinton made all this possible."

      Do a little more research. Here's one to start with:
      http://digg.com/politics/It_s_the_Deregulation_Stu ...
    • heystoopid, on 03/31/2008, -1/+1Actually it was a load of clap trap and gobbledegook with much window dressing and no substance when all is said and done !
      • jforjools, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Heystoopid, your name is well-chosen. ..Nah, that's too easy. I take it back.

        This is very, very mainstream info on Bill. (And I'm not a GOP...I'm a precinct chair in MN.) Please do a little reading (in mainstream places). You will be surprised.
  • JointVenture, on 03/31/2008, -10/+3McCain is beating Obama in the polls.
    • dmadiedo, on 03/31/2008, -1/+3And that point, sir, has nothing to do with this article.
    • heystoopid, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2Nice to see the wish fairies are flying high today !
  • BannedTwice, on 03/31/2008, -7/+3First McCain then Clinton... News flash... THEY"RE ALL THE ***** SAME.
  • gigasquid, on 03/31/2008, -2/+3The Greedy Piggy Cult is alive and well. Just waiting to screw any sucker within reach.
  • patpl22391, on 03/31/2008, -3/+2Look at Edwards, he held a job between his 2004 and 2008 run at a hedge fund, it was of course, to learn about poverty. LOL! Bash Edwards please, but of course you will all love him once he endorses Obama, or hate him if he goes the other way.
  • diggdallas, on 03/31/2008, -2/+2In Soviet Russia, subprime crisis connects you
    • sanman, on 03/31/2008, -1/+2In Socialist Amerika, Clintons lead vast right-wing conspiracy against you!
  • winnestow, on 03/31/2008, -9/+3good thing obama's pastor's 1.5 million dollar house didn't need a subprime loan on it. louis farakhan paid for it.
    • papipablo, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Keep spreading the lies. They show you for the brainwashed dumbass you are.
  • kburns, on 03/31/2008, -1/+0shocking
  • jeffalbrecht, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2How people can make a living ripping off the poor is beyond me. Must be a complete lack of conscious, and psychotic bravery. Eventually a victim will retaliate.
  • Khast, on 03/31/2008, -2/+0We vote with our hearts, ignore the facts. Politicians win with words, rather than actions. It's not what you *did* it is what you say you did. It's not who you are, it is who you say you are.

    Once elected, they often times take off their mask, and what you voted for, isn't what you got.
    • Pherdnut, on 03/31/2008, -0/+3Have you been paying attention? People saying what they did when it wasn't what they did hasn't been working out too well for anyone this election.
      • Khast, on 03/31/2008, -2/+0Oh yes, I have been paying attention. I am noticing the Wicked Witch of the South-East writhing in pain after being caught in an outright lie.

        Don't worry, she'll be back for you, and your little dog, Toto too.

        Seriously, how many presidents have we had in the last 40 years which made all sorts of campaign promises....and once they got in...played dumb. (No offense Bush...I know YOU weren't acting.)
  • bingobongony, on 03/31/2008, -2/+1Gee...first McCain, and not Clinton...all "connected" in a roundabout way to the crisis caused by idiots buying houses they couldn't afford.

    I WONDER whose campaign is "leaking" this information.

    Of course, if there is anyone out there that doesn't think that a connection similar to the ones with this one and McCain's guy could be made to someone on Obama's staff, then you are a ***** naive idiot.
  • callampa, on 03/31/2008, -1/+1teh internets do not like lady clinton
  • heystoopid, on 03/31/2008, -1/+3Or how soon we forget the initiatives to rescind the Glass - Steagall Act , which was in fact replaced by the Gramm- Leach Bliley Act in 1999 who's sponsors were all repukes operating in a repuke dominated house of congress and senate way back in 1999 as many people have appeared to have deliberately forgotten !

    As part and parcel this act rescinded the Glass Steagall act and replaced it which in effect allowed the US Banks to self regulate within the confines of the extremely lax guidelines of the Federal Reserve which in effect was under total control of the Banks involved in these lending fiasco's !

    And guess who relaxed the controls on the Federal Reserve in January 2000 , none other then the DC Chimp ands team of retards and cactus turds , as he needed the money to fund his own pork barrel feeding trough !

    Thus from 2000 onwards most of the then current and now senior banks boards , directors and top management , collectively and simultaneously shot themselves in the head , the heart , the spine and various other nether regions in their collective greed and total stupidity and thus found it impossible to self regulate as greed always over rules sanity in chasing the god almighty dollar thus blowing at least upwards of 100 % of the stock market margin price(difference between paid up share capital and market demand share price) on chasing a non existent pot of gold at the circular rainbow ending , with no reserves to finance any sudden market collapse or reversal when the porous leaking dam finally breaks !

    Place the blame where it truly lies on the heads and shoulders of the repukes themselves absolutely , but sadly we were warned about this collective stupidity within senior management in 1969 !
    • Pherdnut, on 03/31/2008, -1/+2I think you got a little overly creative with the terminology there. I'm not even 100% sure who you're talking about half the time and even though I probably agree with you, I find it a bit juvenile and don't really want to be associated with it.
  • Swift2, on 03/31/2008, -3/+1No, no, the Clintons are the apogee of evil in the world. All the bad things the Republican Congress did do not exist except as part of the evil Clinton plot. That's why Hillary's proposals to help people in this financial crisis are actually more progressive, and smarter, than Obama's. It's part of the plot! Uh, somehow.
    I think the horrifying thing is, without this portrait of the Clintons as EVIL, there's absolutely no reason to vote for an inexperienced Blue Dog Democrat.
  • DarkReign16, on 03/31/2008, -2/+2Just because you hate Hillary, doesn't mean every negative article about her is true, or accurate.
    • NelsonR, on 03/31/2008, -1/+1You mean there are some Americans who truly like Hillary and all the lies associated with her? How can that be? Must be awaiting a reward, favor, job or something for nothing if she gets in. Reminds me of James Carvel who's job prospects are diminishing daily and he has to keep Madeline happy.
      • bjornski, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1It helps make your point when you can correctly identify the people you're talking about.

        His name is James Carville, and his wife's name is Mary Matalin.

        But yes, watching him jump when his wife says "jump" is pretty sickening to watch.

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblog/archive/Mary ...

        She's a witch, and that's being polite.
  • tschlink, on 03/31/2008, -2/+2wait, so now we're mad at political leaders for DE-regulating something?

    I...I....just want to make sure I digg the right stuff this week

    whats happening to this site?
  • 55mph, on 03/31/2008, -1/+1is this bitch still running?
    • bjornski, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Not very aware of your surroundings, are you?

      Please tell me you're not that dumb.
  • NelsonR, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2Why is that anytime you are a politico in our two party system it seems that salaries are always over 100,000.00 dollar with the best perks available. Hillary says she's for the down and trodden, don't think so, yet the average struggling American who supports her fails to read her historical record of crony behavior rewarding those surrounding her with their idol worship. You regular average Americans that support Hillary, how much have you gotten? I will tell you squat unless you figure in NAFTA, the Iraq War and on and on. Hillary is for Hillary, hell she's not even for Bill but she sure is fast running through those hail of bullets and artillery!!
    • scamper22, on 03/31/2008, -2/+0Yeah, I'm no Obama fan, but one truth is does point out that is very inconvenient for 'tradtional democracts' is that the civil service is in the upper class.

      Just look to social security reform where Barack wants to raise the limit so people's earnings over 100k are taxed.
      Barack Obama makes the correct observation that people who make over 100k are the upper class. I won't claim stats, but I'm sure it's in the top 5-10%.

      Sadly in places like New York, police officers, teachers, some other civil servants.. are all in that range (the upper class). It's an inconvenient truth for many democrats.
      • jforjools, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1WRONG. His plan helps the old folks out that make $50,000 --- not 100k, as you said.
        • scamper22, on 03/31/2008, -0/+0what are you talking about?
          I'm not saying he is helping those making over 100k.

          His plan deals with how to fund social security...to make sure it is fully paid for and sustainable.

          Right now, your contributions are capped at like 97K or something like that. If you make 120k, you pay no more in social security than someone making 97k. His plan would raise the social security limit to say 120k (or some number). So the person making 120k would now pay more in social security taxes than the person making 97k.

          Clinton opposes this plan, as it would be a tax that would effect a large number of her supporters (teachers, civil servants... who make good money especially in states like NY). Obama RIGHTLY recognizes no matter how you spin in, these people are the upper-class. Clinton is unwilling to state the obvious.

          That's the point, and I'm not sure how you misinterpret that to start talking about Obama's 'no-tax' for seniors makign under 50k. it's totally different...and that plan is just ludacris. Why give a tax break to senior making under 50k, and not the young person making under 50k. It's a blatant vote grab. The young person probably has more costs too (house, children....)...
  • Konrad9, on 03/31/2008, -1/+1Complain about Hillary as much as you want, but try to remember Bill left us with a very large SURPLUS.
    As in, we had more money than we needed.
    A lot more.
    • scamper22, on 03/31/2008, -1/+1yeah, had nothing to do with the huge rise of tech during the late 90s.

      A surplus is not 'we had more money than we needed'
      A surplus is the the government has taken more money from you than needed.

      The ideal is a balanced budget.
      Surplus - the government has taxed you too much. It has take in more money than it actually need. They should refund it or cut taxes
      Deficit - the government has taken in too little money. They need to raise taxes / cut services / or pray the economy grows :P

      A surplus is nothing to be proud of.
    • jforjools, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Bill left us with a ton of crap. The good financial years, while he was in office had waaaay more to do with the regular old business cycle, along with a technology boom. He left us with a legacy of policy that did not immediately cause implosion (and who would expect that anyway) but laid the path for terrible things to come...even his electricy deregulation was a necessary item for Enron to occur.
  • dwhitbeck, on 03/31/2008, -0/+0People used to think that banks looked out for them. Banks are no different from any other greedy blood suckers. Guess who bails them out after they have failed in the business of ripping people off? the taxpayer, of course, the very same people ripped off once already.
  • yeswecan, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1This absolutely proves Hillary Clinton's hypocrisy or her campaign's. Hillary is a true definition of a democrat which in my terms means a person who just figures out problems w/o proposing a solid solution. Hillary should drop out of the race as all the math is in favor of obama. For example in the month of march, 19 superdelegates endorsed obama as compared to 4 for Hillary. She has a lead on superdelegates due to 160 superdelegates endorsing her b4 the month of january when Obama didnt have as much momentum as he has now and this lead I bet can be recovered probably before the indiana primary.
    Yes We Can
  • gkiltz, on 03/31/2008, -0/+0Duuuuh!
    What's the opposite of PROGRESS?

    CONGRESS!
  • URnotheonly1, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2imagine if the Clinton's had tried to stop to bubble bursting in 2000. Of course they didn't try to stop it, they just let it happen
  • Codee, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2We can choose our chief campaign manager.
  • jforjools, on 03/31/2008, -0/+1Yes, we can choose our chief campaign managers and we can choose our husbands.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.