Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

51 posts / 0 new
Last post
Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

Bill H.R. 3808, the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2010, which was discussed yesterday, and which according to both Reuters and the NYT may have a material impact on mitigating the impact of the High Freq Signing scandal, at least on the servicers, is now open for public comments at the white house.

Those wishing to tell the president how they feel, may do so at the following link:

I hope everyone writes these morons.  Link:

It is absolutely appalling to think that our Moron-n-Chief was elected on a platform of kicking the lobbyrats off the Hill. Years later, the banks pay attorneys money to buy illegally falsified documents to use in foreclosure court cases. All because they were too stupid and cheap to file the paperwork in accordance with the law.

535 paid prostitutes change the law for the banks. Not a whisper in the mainstream press.

237 of these prostitutes are millionaires. Now our prostitute-n-chief will sign this into law. Like I speculated in my last write on this:  Fraud-Doc Foreclosures - Are No-Doc Foreclosures Coming?

My prediction on this is that the Lobbyrats will bribe the Empirical Bread & Circus Rats (Congress) to turn a "TBTF (Too Big To Fail) law passing trick" allowing banks to conduct "No-Doc" forecloses which will supersede the "Fraud-Doc" foreclosure factory that we just uncovered.

 "Homeowner" gets post card from bank - bank gets property.

I hope everyone clicks on that link and lets Obama know that he and America's law makers are nothing but paid prostitutes, turning whatever tricks the lobbyrats order them to preform. 

 

 

 

docmims's picture
docmims
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2009
Posts: 644
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

Good news. Wall Street Journal just put up and article that says Obama is issuing a pocket veto on this bill today.  Maybe the heat was too much?

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

I'm glad my prediction about Obama signing this bill was wrong:

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama won't sign into law an overlooked piece of legislation that critics say would make it easier for banks and others to process foreclosure proceedings without human signatures, a person familiar with the matter said.

Mr. Obama hasn't yet issued a veto during his presidency. In this instance, he will send the bill back to Congress using a process known as a "pocket veto."

His decision comes amid growing complaints from lawmakers that the administration and regulators haven't done enough to intervene in a scandal tied to thousands of foreclosures that critics argue were processed with improper documentation.

The bill is called the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2009 and it was authored by Rep. Robert Aderholt (R., Ala.). A spokesman for Mr. Aderholt didn't immediately return a call for comment.

The bill was co-sponsored by Reps. Bruce Braley (D., Iowa), Michael Castle (R., Del.), and Artur Davis (D., Ala.).

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704696304575538131744705958.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories

Needless to say, the four extortionists mentioned above -- two DemonRats and two PukeLickins -- who attempted this grand larceny should be run out of office on a rail.

They belong in a penitentiary, not a parliament. Burn their careers to toast! And don't forget Senator Leahy (up for re-election this fall), who helped wave this atrocity through the Senate.

Make these degenerate chiselers and swindlers pay for their crimes against the people!

 

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
machinehead wrote:

I'm glad my prediction about Obama signing this bill was wrong:

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama won't sign into law an overlooked piece of legislation that critics say would make it easier for banks and others to process foreclosure proceedings without human signatures, a person familiar with the matter said.

Mr. Obama hasn't yet issued a veto during his presidency. In this instance, he will send the bill back to Congress using a process known as a "pocket veto."

His decision comes amid growing complaints from lawmakers that the administration and regulators haven't done enough to intervene in a scandal tied to thousands of foreclosures that critics argue were processed with improper documentation.

The bill is called the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act of 2009 and it was authored by Rep. Robert Aderholt (R., Ala.). A spokesman for Mr. Aderholt didn't immediately return a call for comment.

The bill was co-sponsored by Reps. Bruce Braley (D., Iowa), Michael Castle (R., Del.), and Artur Davis (D., Ala.).

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704696304575538131744705958.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories

Needless to say, the four extortionists mentioned above -- two DemonRats and two PukeLickins -- who attempted this grand larceny should be run out of office on a rail.

They belong in a penitentiary, not a parliament. Burn their careers to toast! And don't forget Senator Leahy (up for re-election this fall), who helped wave this atrocity through the Senate.

Make these degenerate chiselers and swindlers pay for their crimes against the people!

 

+1 and I'm thankful my prediction was wrong! These morons who did this bill should be tried for treason along with the rest of the idiots who have run amok. 

goes211's picture
goes211
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 1114
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
docmims wrote:

Good news. Wall Street Journal just put up and article that says Obama is issuing a pocket veto on this bill today.  Maybe the heat was too much?

How much do you want to bet that if this did not become public, he would have signed it.  Our bipartisan congress critters tried to pull a fast one over the regular folk and got caught.  Because none of them are actually on record voting for this, they are all going to claim ignorance. 

It would be nice if sometimes Washington would do the right thing without having to get caught, but as long as shame works, we need to use it.  The way things are going, it won't work for much longer.

Will's picture
Will
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 27 2008
Posts: 81
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

I looked up the definition of a pocket veto on the C-Span congressional glossary.

 

A Pocket Veto is when the President fails to sign a bill within the 10 days allowed by the Constitution.

Congress must be in adjournment in order for a pocket veto to take effect.

If Congress is in session and the president fails to sign the bill, it becomes law without his signature.

 

If this is correct, unless Congress is in adjournment in the next 10 days it will become law.  I looked up the Congressional schedule and they are targeted to adjourn on Friday, 10/8, so the pocket veto would be effective in killing this insane bill.

Wendy S. Delmater's picture
Wendy S. Delmater
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 13 2009
Posts: 1982
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

The co-sponsors are despicable human beings, and I will give money to their opponents in their respective races.

Michael Castle (R., Del.), BTW, LOST his primary bid. Jerk.

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
safewrite wrote:

The co-sponsors are despicable human beings, and I will give money to their opponents in their respective races.

Michael Castle (R., Del.), BTW, LOST his primary bid. Jerk.

Human beings? Rats. Dammed rats. Filthy disease carrying rats.

ao's picture
ao
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2009
Posts: 2220
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
Davos wrote:
safewrite wrote:

The co-sponsors are despicable human beings, and I will give money to their opponents in their respective races.

Michael Castle (R., Del.), BTW, LOST his primary bid. Jerk.

Human beings? Rats. Dammed rats. Filthy disease carrying rats.

You are too harsh on the rodent world.  I would classify them as cesspool sediment.

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
ao wrote:
Davos wrote:
safewrite wrote:

The co-sponsors are despicable human beings, and I will give money to their opponents in their respective races.

Michael Castle (R., Del.), BTW, LOST his primary bid. Jerk.

Human beings? Rats. Dammed rats. Filthy disease carrying rats.

You are too harsh on the rodent world.  I would classify them as cesspool sediment.

Okay, this doctor is akin to a Lobbyist and this rat is a congress rat...video on page.

land2341's picture
land2341
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 20 2009
Posts: 402
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
safewrite wrote:

The co-sponsors are despicable human beings, and I will give money to their opponents in their respective races.

Michael Castle (R., Del.), BTW, LOST his primary bid. Jerk.

Yes,  but poor delwareans!!  Their option now is Christine O' Donnell?!?!?!  Seriously there was nothing better in delaware to run that that?!?!    My ten year old knows more about politics and government that that (thing I cannot say because forum rules won't allow).....

ao's picture
ao
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2009
Posts: 2220
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
Davos wrote:
ao wrote:
Davos wrote:
safewrite wrote:

The co-sponsors are despicable human beings, and I will give money to their opponents in their respective races.

Michael Castle (R., Del.), BTW, LOST his primary bid. Jerk.

Human beings? Rats. Dammed rats. Filthy disease carrying rats.

You are too harsh on the rodent world.  I would classify them as cesspool sediment.

Okay, this doctor is akin to a Lobbyist and this rat is a congress rat...video on page.

Holy Frankenrat!  I don''t know whether to laugh or cry when I see something like that. 

LogansRun's picture
LogansRun
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2009
Posts: 1443
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

Maybe that's what congress needs is people that DON'T know anything other than their own lives.  I'm not an O'Donnell fan...in fact, I'm not a fan of any politician...but IMO, anything is better than what's in there right now.  I highly doubt O'Donnell would have pulled the stunt that Castle did.  How much do you think he got for pulling this one?  But he has a nice cushy job waiting for him at one of those firms.......bets anyone?

land2341 wrote:
safewrite wrote:

The co-sponsors are despicable human beings, and I will give money to their opponents in their respective races.

Michael Castle (R., Del.), BTW, LOST his primary bid. Jerk.

Yes,  but poor delwareans!!  Their option now is Christine O' Donnell?!?!?!  Seriously there was nothing better in delaware to run that that?!?!    My ten year old knows more about politics and government that that (thing I cannot say because forum rules won't allow).....

Sam's picture
Sam
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 5 2009
Posts: 51
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

The system is functioning exactly as it was designed by vermin like Hamilton and Marshall. Anyone who believes that voting in different "public servants" is going to change anything is simply suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

docmims's picture
docmims
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2009
Posts: 644
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
Sam wrote:

The system is functioning exactly as it was designed by vermin like Hamilton and Marshall. Anyone who believes that voting in different "public servants" is going to change anything is simply suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

You may be right Sam, but I like to think if we vote them out the special interests will be out a lot of money trying to buy the new pols. Tongue out

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Lobbyrats FROM NATE'S SITE

From Nate's fine site:

Is The Senate Adjourned? (HR3808)

 
Is it actually adjourned?
 
4closurefraud is reporting that The Senate session is still formally open, and if so, our President may have just lied - directly - to The American People.
 
The word is out that Pres. Obama’s pocket veto of the Digital Robo-Signing Act was actually a trick.  Sen. Harry Reid didn’t actually adjourn the U.S. Senate.  The Senate has been kept in session by a little understood ruse and the bill will become lawtonight at midnight without the President’s signature.
The big banks will file suit after the election to have this bill declared to be law.
 
Article I, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution seems to support this view.
 
Some drunken bankers were already bragging about this an some major news outlets, including Fox News have reported on this.
 
If we have been intentionally bamboozled by this President for the purpose of legalizing the theft of homes he must be impeached immediately.
 
This is incredibly important to stop, it is a disgusting slap in the face to the American People if we let the banks cover up their FRAUD yet again.
 
I urge everyone to please call the White House Switchboard IMMEDIATELY. Make it clear that you want President Obama to stop HR 3808 in its tracks and that you EXPECT HIM TO HOLD THE BANKS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR OWN FRAUD! Let him know in no uncertain terms that you will hold him to account should a procedural end-run be performed!
 
The number to call is: 202-456-1111
Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

LINK TO WHITE HOUSE

What I sent these morons.

If this link is factual then it means that you people are inept or you are paid whores to bank lobbyists and this pocket veto was just another trick turned by a slimy politician who just lied to us. I truly would like to believe that this link has an error in it. 

http://4closurefraud.org/2010/10/08/action-alert-is-pres-obamas-pocket-v...

JustinChase's picture
JustinChase
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 31 2010
Posts: 18
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

I'm trying to understand the anger here, is it because they tried to pass legislation "secretly", or are people mad because they believe this law would somehow allow banks to commit some sort of foreclosure "fraud?"  if the latter, can someone explain how they think that would work?

 

thanks

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
JustinChase wrote:

I'm trying to understand the anger here, is it because they tried to pass legislation "secretly", or are people mad because they believe this law would somehow allow banks to commit some sort of foreclosure "fraud?"  if the latter, can someone explain how they think that would work?

thanks

The banks jacked up the paperwork when they decided to blow up the economy with subprime loans. Jacked up as in: botched up getting the notes - the borrower IOU's stuffed into the trusts. That caused them (servicers and attorneys) to forge court papers.

My anger is two fold: 

  1. If the banks can't abide by the law then TFB. Write it off, go BK. 
  2. Congress should be going after the criminals not weakening the title system to protect criminals.
  3. Obama should try to grow a pair and veto it, not this pocket cutesy BS veto.

Also, you might want to read the other side of this mess, as in the selling of the derivatives. The banks have jacked this entire thing up, from blowing up the economy to blowing up pension funds. 

Ken C's picture
Ken C
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 13 2009
Posts: 753
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

I just tried to call the White House. I was too late to comment on the phone so I sent an email. I sure hope this is not another back door scheme by the bankers to rape the people.

earthwise's picture
earthwise
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2009
Posts: 846
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
Ken C wrote:

I just tried to call the White House. I was too late to comment on the phone so I sent an email. I sure hope this is not another back door scheme by the bankers to rape the people.

Why would they use the back door when the front door, in broad daylight even,  serves them so well.

jhart5's picture
jhart5
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 25 2009
Posts: 89
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

More Rats:

JustinChase's picture
JustinChase
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 31 2010
Posts: 18
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
Davos wrote:

The banks jacked up the paperwork when they decided to blow up the economy with subprime loans. Jacked up as in: botched up getting the notes - the borrower IOU's stuffed into the trusts. That caused them (servicers and attorneys) to forge court papers.

My anger is two fold: 

  1. If the banks can't abide by the law then TFB. Write it off, go BK. 
  2. Congress should be going after the criminals not weakening the title system to protect criminals.
  3. Obama should try to grow a pair and veto it, not this pocket cutesy BS veto.

Also, you might want to read the other side of this mess, as in the selling of the derivatives. The banks have jacked this entire thing up, from blowing up the economy to blowing up pension funds. 

I guess I'm still confused.  How would allowing one state to accept a notarized document from another state that has less stringent rules about notarizing documents weaken the title system?

I don't see anywhere in what I've read of this bill where it would allow forged or faked on not notarized documents become legally binding.  It only appears to allow/mandate that notarized documents from one state be acceptable in another state.

it's not as if this would allow the foreclosure process to happen without the correct paperwork being filed (and notarized), as far as I can see.  Or suddenly allow foreclosures to happen by "sending a postcard notifying you your house has been foreclosed on", or allow servicers to forge court papers.  if a notary was found to have notarized something they didn't actually witness, that is still illegal, and I don't think this changes that, does it?

I agree that Wall Street caused this whole mess with the subprime orgy over the last decade, but I fail to see where this bill allows banks to "not abide by the law".

r's picture
r
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 2 2008
Posts: 262
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

From Ozymanithrax:

"The Constitution has this to say:

Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a law, be presented to the President of the United States; if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the objections at large on their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a law. But in all such cases the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the journal of each House respectively. If any bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their adjournment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a law.

 

Under the Constitution, the President must return the bill to the House that originated it. HR3808 originated in the House of Representatives... Since the bill can not be returned to the House of Representatives because they have adjourned, the pocket Veto will work. Let the Bankers take it to court."

and

Look, I know the Constitution is only a piece of paper...

that Bush probably wiped his Tush with.

But I will stand by it, even in the face of "Some Web Sight."

Davos's picture
Davos
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 17 2008
Posts: 3620
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
JustinChase wrote:
Davos wrote:

The banks jacked up the paperwork when they decided to blow up the economy with subprime loans. Jacked up as in: botched up getting the notes - the borrower IOU's stuffed into the trusts. That caused them (servicers and attorneys) to forge court papers.

My anger is two fold: 

  1. If the banks can't abide by the law then TFB. Write it off, go BK. 
  2. Congress should be going after the criminals not weakening the title system to protect criminals.
  3. Obama should try to grow a pair and veto it, not this pocket cutesy BS veto.

Also, you might want to read the other side of this mess, as in the selling of the derivatives. The banks have jacked this entire thing up, from blowing up the economy to blowing up pension funds. 

I guess I'm still confused.  How would allowing one state to accept a notarized document from another state that has less stringent rules about notarizing documents weaken the title system?

I don't see anywhere in what I've read of this bill where it would allow forged or faked on not notarized documents become legally binding.  It only appears to allow/mandate that notarized documents from one state be acceptable in another state.

it's not as if this would allow the foreclosure process to happen without the correct paperwork being filed (and notarized), as far as I can see.  Or suddenly allow foreclosures to happen by "sending a postcard notifying you your house has been foreclosed on", or allow servicers to forge court papers.  if a notary was found to have notarized something they didn't actually witness, that is still illegal, and I don't think this changes that, does it?

I agree that Wall Street caused this whole mess with the subprime orgy over the last decade, but I fail to see where this bill allows banks to "not abide by the law".

Clearly I need to ask you: Did you watch the video(s) I posted? Did you catch the x number of notaries signing off on y number of documents? & Yes, this bill, from what I've read, would allow them to change that.

 

doorwarrior's picture
doorwarrior
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 13 2009
Posts: 166
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

I am not sure how this will affect the pocket veto and the 10 day period but the Senate's website says they will convene for a pro forma sesssion on Oct. 12

http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/d_three_sections_with_teasers/calendars.htm

doorwarrior's picture
doorwarrior
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 13 2009
Posts: 166
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

This whole "pocket veto" is just to confusing. There have been several Supreme Court cases that have ruled  differently. The main theme is what constitutes when Congres is out of session. Some seem to think congree needs to adjournment sine die. Others think if its for a short period or intersession and intrasession adjornments. However congress can still appoint agents to receive the veto even when they are out of session.

Either way a pocket veto seems to be a cowards way out. Obama should just veto the bill and return it to Congress where it origanated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocket_veto

Ken C's picture
Ken C
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 13 2009
Posts: 753
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!
doorwarrior wrote:

Either way a pocket veto seems to be a cowards way out. Obama should just veto the bill and return it to Congress where it origanated.

Which makes me think that Obama is in on the end run of possibly making this a law  in spite of the "Pocket Veto"

He too wants to be able to have the cover of not approving the bill but "somehow" it became law anyway.

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

The authoritative Library of Congress site which tracks the status of legislation now states about H.R. 3808:

Latest Major Action: 10/8/2010 Vetoed by President.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/thomas

Enter 'H.R. 3808' in the search box at the above link. 

Don't ask me about the legal details of adjournment (maybe it suffices for the House to be in adjournment). But I would be shocked if the Library of Congress and the president's blog were wrong about the veto. That would be a major embarrassment for them.

Ken C's picture
Ken C
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 13 2009
Posts: 753
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

After re-reading several of these comments (including mine) it really is a sad situation to think that many people (me too) have so little trust in the government now that we look to see how they are trying to screw us again and pretend not to be at fault.

I have never seen trust in government at all levels to be at such a low point.

 

JustinChase's picture
JustinChase
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 31 2010
Posts: 18
Re: Lobbyrats 3 Americans 0 - WRITE This Wrong!

 

Yes, I did watch the video, did you?  it says that 8 notaries notarized thousands of documents.  firstly, over the course of the last few years, that's not at all surprising, but more importantly, so what??

This bill simply requires states with stringent notary requirements to accept notarized documents from states with less stringent requirements.  I does not allow them to accept forged documents, or un-notarized documents, as far as I can see.

exactly how does that allow servicers and banks to foreclose by sending postcards after the fact?? it isn't changing the legal requirements to foreclose.

I get that you're really mad that the banks made stupid loans to people and are now foreclosing as fast as they can by "robosigning", but there's nothing in this bill that I can see that allows them to skirt due process and notification processes.  the guy in the video claims that the banks made loans that were not "conforming" because so many are now going into foreclosure.  I'm not really sure what he thinks they should be "confirming" to, but if you remember, the vast majority of these "toxic assets" were sub-prime loans, which by their very definition, are non-conforming.  if the people buying the securitized pools didn't take the time to understand the loans that made up the investments, isn't that their fault?  If I bought a "rusty nail baby chew toy" fund, without understanding what the product was, and a made a great return for years while everyone else was buying the same fund, but suddenly it was discovered that rusty nail chew toys were causing children to get sick and the fund tanked, should I get a refund on my purchase?  or should I have to suffer the consequences of making a purchase of a bad product that I didn't fully understand?

yes, the bill was passed too quickly, and somewhat secretly, which concerns me, but going from that to allowing banks to foreclose willy nilly just doesn't fly with me.

if you care to explain to me how this bill give the banks some new powers to "steal" peoples homes, or to commit, or legalize "foreclosure fraud", I'd very much like to hear it.

if you want me to watch more people on the stupid box talking about all the other problems with the past policies and procedures (which, btw, have NOTHING to do with this new bill or this thread), I'd rather not.  I actually do understand what happend with the lending done over the last 10 years, how it happened and what is currently happening with the robosigners.  the current news is all derived from people not personally verifying the contents of the paperwork they were signing.  That is wrong, but it does not change the fact that 95% or more of the foreclosures filed were filed based on correct information.

I'm not so sure you understand these things yet, as you seem to be somewhat blinded by your anger.

none of this is to say the public should not be upset about the past (and current) practices of the lenders; but this bill is a non-starter for me; unless someone can explain how it does as I question above.  it only seems to allow acceptance of notarizations from other states.

Comment viewing options

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