everything is broken #17 and #24

by russell

Just to follow up on seb's post....

Via the the powder blue satan, a pretty good introduction to the hideous train wreck that is the mortgage industry today.

The article is not very long, and is well worth a read (as are the supporting articles, links to which are included in the article).  But the very very short form is this:

Garbage in, garbage out

Mortgage originators wrote loans to any warm body they could find.  In addition, as it turns out their clerical skill and accuracy, shall we say, was often slipshod. 

These loans were sold off and bundled into securities, where they were sliced and diced n five thousand creative ways, and then the securities were sold off. 

The mortgages themselves are managed at a hands-on level by service organizations that have no interest in the note per se, they are just working for a fee.

Uh oh.  Millions of these mortgages are being foreclosed on each year.

This creates two problems (at least):

1. The sheer volume is driving service organizations to not do due diligence when foreclosing.  So, folks are having their homes foreclosed on fraudulently.

2, The paper itself - the documentation that is bundled into the security - is turning out to quite often be crap.  As in, the note itself - the promise to pay by the buyer - isn't there.

So at some point somebody allegedly promised to pay for the loan, but we can't prove it, but they're not paying now, so the security that the mortgage part of is turning into crap, so we want to reclaim the property.  But this is happening to so many loans that the servicers don't even have time to look at the docs for each one, and even if they did the paper might be garbage.  So they're forging the docs and we're setting up special courts to fast-track the whole mess, but folks are starting to catch on and demanding to see the note.

Is anybody in this scenario happy?  This will take years to sort out.

In the meantime, what is the status of the property?  Who owns it?  Can they sell it?  Would you want to buy it?  If you are holding the security that contains the mortgage, and the note isn't there, how are you going to get your money?

And the most fun question of all: who is responsible?  Who is going to end up holding the hot potato?

Buckle up, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

Updates

Foreclosure fraud part 2, part 3, and part 4.

h/t Atrios, and kudos and thanks to Michael Konczal and Rortybomb for the series.

More updates

FUBAR

Comments

[Countme?]

A. The government shouldn't have forced the mortgage bankers and the downstream hedgers and quants to make all of those clerical errors. I mean, this IS the government's fault, no?

B. The mortgage companies, of all sorts, shouldn't have downsized, rationalized, and outsourced all of their private "bureaucrats" who kept the paperwork straight.

[GoodOleBoy]

'this IS the government's fault, no?'

Easy money! And now we will see more. And who benefits? The banks, of course, especially the big boys. Now the Fed will print (create) billions and lend it to the banks for nothing, who will then invest in T-Bills so the government can stimulate the economy. And what do the rest of us get. Higher taxes.

I bought a big ticket electronics item these week and the retailer offered to finance it with zero interest for 36 months. For kicks, I let them take my application to see what terms I would get. With a credit score over 800 and no debt except one mortgage, I was approved. But if I'm late on one payment by one day, the entire initial debt will revert to 25.9% annual interest. Since the bank holding the debt is paying nothing, it seems easy enough for them to do this, and count on some percentage of defaults. Since I can't really get much for the cash I'm holding, I said no thanks and paid cash. Wouldn't want to take a chance on missing a payment for any reason.

BTW, isn't the government the big promoter of home ownership and over the past few decades haven't they done any number of things to support this policy, without even counting the income tax deduction for interest paid on a mortgage?

[GoodOleBoy]

I really didn't mean default, but rather just making a scheduled payment late.

[russell]

isn't the government the big promoter of home ownership and over the past few decades haven't they done any number of things to support this policy

I figured somebody would go there, although I didn't think quite so quickly.

The short answer is "yes".

The relevant question I ask in return is whether the government actions you allude to were the cause of any of the things described in my original post.

The floor is yours.

And, you did well to pay cash for your big ticket electronics item. The lenders will cut your throat if it will get them a dime.

[efgoldman]

Is anybody in this scenario happy?

Oh the lawyerses! The lawyerses have a great precious!

Who is going to end up holding the hot potato?

Sorry, russell. As much as I respect you, I can't believe you would even ask this hypothetically and rhetorically. Who ALWAYS, ALWAYS ends up holding the proverbial sh1t end of the stick?

Hint: Its not Goldman or BofA!

[Tony P.]

But if I'm late on one payment by one day, the entire initial debt will revert to 25.9% annual interest.

GOB, is that some kind of government regulation? Or is it just another example of predation in the free market?

--TP

[Chris J]

"GOB, is that some kind of government regulation? Or is it just another example of predation in the free market?"

No, no -- it's the efficiency of the free market.

[Countme?]

As I understand it, Sharia law wouldn't permit the government to force GOB to sign a contract with a private company which stipulated usurious interest rates in the event that he missed a payment.

Turns out even an 800 credit score is a pre-existing condition.

Well, he had the sense to pay cash and follow Sharia law.

Get thee to a mosque!

[Countme?]

Not about mortgages .... but since people will believe anything told them by Republican and corporate vermin demagogues .... speaking of bumpy rides ....

First, the government gave them healthcare and then sent them to the camps for remedial delousing, a little preventative dentistry, showers, gassing, and naturally, the ovens.

From Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone, the infamous Nazi, Stalinist, Maoist, but Beatleley, house organ:

"Scanning the thousands of hopped-up faces in the crowd, I am immediately struck by two things. One is that there isn't a single black person here. The other is the truly awesome quantity of medical hardware: Seemingly every third person in the place is sucking oxygen from a tank or propping their giant atrophied glutes on motorized wheelchair-scooters. As Palin launches into her Ronald Reagan impression — "Government's not the solution! Government's the problem!" — the person sitting next to me leans over and explains.

Related Obama in Command: The Rolling Stone Interview — In an Oval Office interview, the president discusses the Tea Party, the war, the economy and what’s at stake this November.

"The scooters are because of Medicare," he whispers helpfully. "They have these commercials down here: 'You won't even have to pay for your scooter! Medicare will pay!' Practically everyone in Kentucky has one."

A hall full of elderly white people in Medicare-paid scooters, railing against government spending and imagining themselves revolutionaries as they cheer on the vice-presidential puppet hand-picked by the GOP establishment. If there exists a better snapshot of everything the Tea Party represents, I can't imagine it."

America is dead within five years. Effing dead.

By it's own ignorant, but invisible, hand.

[GoodOleBoy]

'The relevant question I ask in return is whether the government actions you allude to were the cause of any of the things described in my original post.'

1. FRB easy money policy for most of the last decade facilitated the bank credit policies which allowed the housing price bubble.

2. Bank regulation over the last few decades allowing consolidation to the point where these banks are not really competing in anything resembling a free market and they are 'too big to fail'.

I don't know exactly how this relates to the disaster going on in the documentation arena but it almost looks like the banks can do whatever they decide and the government has their back. Who are the people who will actually pay 25% to 29% interest on a credit card? I can remember in the late seventies as the prime rate rose to historically high levels, credit cards had an 18% rate that seemed to be an industry standard. Then as rates receded the credit card rate stayed at 18%. Then as the economy remained relatively strong and growing, some of the credit card rates climbed and reached these high twenties while some of the banks would actually offer a rate lower than 18% for good credit risks who actually asked for a lower rate. I have 2 checking accounts with credit line overdraft protection where the rate is 18% if I use it. This in an economy with basically a zero cost of money for the banks and I have never defaulted or been late on any debt. It defies any logic I can muster.

For those who know my posts, this is the reason I don't like 'big' anything. For almost any institution I can imagine, it leads to an out of control condition.

[Countme?]

As you leave, ladies and gentleman, please turn in your oxygen tanks, scooters, and whatever stents, colostomy bags, and titanium hip joints you ignorant Republican parasites have stolen from me over the years.

Because we just cut the effing budget and the private sector has lost your paperwork.

Crawl to your cars and breath whatever noxious, polluted air you can and return to your homes.

If you have the strength, kiss my liberal a#s. Ladies first, in the name of all that sacred and patriotic.

If we can find the notes on those ill-begotten domiciles, we're coming to take those too.

Unless the government says we can't, which it won't, because President Death Palin is now heading up the death Palin.

[Countme?]

Bank regulation over the last few decades?

You make good points, GOB.

But you did mean, lack of bank regulation, did you not?

Because if there had been MORE bank regulation, that would have been BIG government.

It's confusing, isn't it?

[russell]

1. FRB easy money policy for most of the last decade facilitated the bank credit policies which allowed the housing price bubble.

2. Bank regulation over the last few decades allowing consolidation to the point where these banks are not really competing in anything resembling a free market and they are 'too big to fail'.

I have no disagreement on either point.

To your list I would add the decision to not regulate financial derivatives like credit swaps etc. Phil Gramm was the cheerleader on that, but responsibility falls pretty broadly.

it almost looks like the banks can do whatever they decide and the government has their back.

No argument with this, either.

[Slartibartfast]

Seemingly every third person in the place is sucking oxygen from a tank or propping their giant atrophied glutes on motorized wheelchair-scooters

That's reality-based reporting, right there. I'm sure he has photos. They're worth a thousand words, I hear.

Taibbi has, evidently, some mental generalization of what the Tea Party is all about, goes and finds a hypocrite or two that reinforce his preconceptions, and jumps all the way to QED from there.

There's a phrase for that, I think. Selection bias, maybe.

[cleek]

Taibbi has, evidently, some mental generalization of what the Tea Party is all about, goes and finds a hypocrite or two that reinforce his preconceptions, and jumps all the way to QED from there.

mind reading. ten yards, loss of down.

[bobbyp]

2. Bank regulation over the last few decades allowing consolidation to the point where these banks are not really competing in anything resembling a free market and they are 'too big to fail'.

Interesting. A standard issue defender of 'free markets' observes market failure, collusion, and monopsony behavior--and claims this is the government's responsibility because they didn't regulate enough. The mind reels.

We are on the edge of our seats waiting for the next "Good Ol'" installment--the full throated roar of righteous anger at the size of the Defense Department.

[GoodOleBoy]

'mind reading. ten yards, loss of down.'

about as good as NFL referees.

Taibbi is a smart guy, but he needs to work on reporting facts (actually) instead of relying on his on vitriolic viewpoint (seemingly).

Medicare is not welfare. It may be an ill-conceived and underfunded insurance plan but benefit recipients have made their government mandated premium payments into the system and should be able to avail themselves of the benefits without being accused of being on welfare and hypocritical.

Being employed by the government as a tax assessor is not partaking of government largesse.

Rand Paul, a physician, should be able to receive a reasonable fee for providing medical services to medicare recipients, not some reduced amount offered by bureaucrats just because that's all the funding they have in the system. His position is not necessarily in conflict with his political statements.

Matt Taibbi is who deserves the penalty.

[wj]

GOB, just to be clear, some Medicare recipients made payments into the system, for some period of time. (Albeit virtually nobody for Medicare Part D.) And the payments made are generally related to the then-current expenses, not to the amount that would have to be charged if the premiums were going to pay for the eventual care.

Which means that it is not, in fact, "insurance". (No matter whether it "says so right on the label" or not.) In this, it is just like Social Security. And all the statements of all the politicians will not change the reality.

[Hogan]

Then as the economy remained relatively strong and growing, some of the credit card rates climbed and reached these high twenties

One of the joys of federalism: 50-state regulatory arbitrage. It made sense for Citibank et al. to move their operations to South Dakota, which has no usury laws to speak of, since after 1998 they could charge whatever rate they wanted no matter where their customers were. I'm sure South Dakota state government is happy to have the economic activity, jobs and tax base; now other states have to consider whether they want to give up that business or join the race to the bottom.

[Slartibartfast]

mind reading. ten yards, loss of down

s/"Taibbi has, evidently, some"/Taibbi has, it seems to me, some"

Better?

[hairshirthedonist]

Where's Jimmy Stewart when you need him? I think a 2010 version of "It's a Wonderful Life" would be much shorter. He would jump off the bridge, and that would be that. The world has been left to mean, old Mr. Potter.

[Eric Martin]

Being employed by the government as a tax assessor is not partaking of government largesse.

Why that? Is the person a private sector employee?

One of the odd things about the Tea Party movement is the prevalence of people on Govt. payroll, and with Govt. assistance. See, ie, Glenn Reynolds.

Here's a funny chart about Georgia's primary employers. Contrast with Georgians' attitudes re: government:

http://bit.ly/9SgKFn

[cleek]

One of the odd things about the Tea Party movement is the prevalence of people on Govt. payroll, and with Govt. assistance. See, ie, Glenn Reynolds.

also, Mrs Clarence Thomas.

[GoodOleBoy]

'Why that? Is the person a private sector employee?'

Words have meaning. Tabbii used the term largesse to describe the job of the man he interviewed. Is there not a difference between performing assigned duties for pay and having gifts of money bestowed, regardless of the source?

[Eric Martin]

That is a valid point GOB.

Still, the level of disconnect between people who draw checks from the Govt., even for honest work, and their repeated calls to drastically slash spending and curtail Govt.'s Constitutional ability to even employ them for the appointed tasks is staggering.

People just think, as the couple in the Taibbi column, that the Govt. is lavishing large sums of money on lazy, out of work welfare recipients.

Which is, of course, NOT the case. And if the cuts they are clamoring for do, in fact, come, many will be either out of work, or find themselves with smaller SS and Medicare benefits.

Dissonance.

[Hogan]

Taibbi is a smart guy, but he needs to work on reporting facts (actually) instead of relying on his on vitriolic viewpoint (seemingly).

This is, of course, a magazine that used to publish Hunter S. Thompson. I'm not sure they see it the way you do.

[cleek]

can someone tell me which facts Taibbi left out or got wrong ?

he went there, wrote about what he saw, relayed interviews he did, etc.. which part of what he wrote is untrue ?

[Tom M]

...I would add the decision to not regulate financial derivatives like credit swaps etc. Phil Gramm was the cheerleader on that, but responsibility falls pretty broadly.
Let's not forget the Prez's chief economics advisor(ex)

GOB: it almost looks like the banks can do whatever they decide and the government has their back.
Do you mind differentiating between the banks which caused most of the housing bubble, those would be investment banks, and other banks?
Most of the sub-prime mortgages handed out weren't handed out by banks but by investment banks like Goldman, Lehman, Bear, Merrill, etc. I include Citi in this category (IB and Insurance)
See:
13 Bankers: The Wall Street Takeover... (Simon Johnson)
The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine (Michael Lewis)
A Colossal Failure of Common Sense... (Lawrence MacDonald with Patrick Robinson)-Lehman Brothers
Too Big To Fail (Andrew Ross Sorkin)
Fool's Gold (Gillian Tett)-JP Morgan
In Fed We Trust (David Wessel)
House of Cards (William Cohan)

All about Wall Street and the sub-prime fail.
Notice that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not mentioned because until mid-2007, the underwriting standards at both required no more than 80% LTV i.e, no sub-prime mortgages.
See also Texas.

[Eric Martin]

Cleek: I think the suggestion that Medicare was welfare and that being employed by the government was in receipt of govt. largesse. A bit unfair, really.

[cleek]

Eric,

really?

GoB: "Taibbi is a smart guy, but he needs to work on reporting facts...instead of relying on his on vitriolic viewpoint "

Slarti sounded like he was accusing Taibbi of inventing what he reported: "That's reality-based reporting, right there. I'm sure he has photos. They're worth a thousand words, I hear." "...finds a hypocrite or two that reinforce his preconceptions, and jumps all the way to QED from there"

so, what did Tiabbi invent? what facts did he leave out? what was the reality of the situation that Tiabbi failed to report because of his preconceptions?

[Jacob Davies]

russell: 2, The paper itself - the documentation that is bundled into the security - is turning out to quite often be crap. As in, the note itself - the promise to pay by the buyer - isn't there.

And, when that turns out to be the case, the banks have been engaging in rampant forgery and perjury by creating documents that purport to be the legal record of the transfer of the loan, backdated, with false statements made as to the knowledge made by the submitter of the affadavit, with notarization stamps added in many cases by persons not the actual notary.

And the courts receiving these documents were devoting 30-90 seconds to reviewing them and then rubber-stamping them, in the certain knowledge that the documents submitted were forgeries and that the person standing in front of them was committing perjury.

Because hey, banks gotta get the houses back from these deadbeats one way or another.

One law for them, another for you and me. Try submitting forged documents to a court even once as a private citizen and you'll probably wind up in jail. If you're BofA, it's just fine though.

[McKinneyTexas]

One law for them, another for you and me. Try submitting forged documents to a court even once as a private citizen and you'll probably wind up in jail. If you're BofA, it's just fine though.

Probably not. If wholesale forgery is being committed (there are multiple ways of proving up the terms of a note--they are almost always recited in the body of the mortgage instrument itself which, in turn, is a matter of public record) then a lot of people are going to prison. There are a host of remedies for an aggrieved victim of forgery.

[Slartibartfast]

I did try to respond to cleek yesterday afternoon, but the blog ate my homework. Let's see if I can encapsulate clearly and responsively, here:

I didn't accuse Taibbi of lying, but his reporting does smack of selection bias. I totally buy that he believes his own opinions and is reporting on them truthfully and accurately, and also that he actually spoke to the people he reported speaking to.

But the notion that he's accurately sampled (and, subsequently, typified in print) Tea Party membership by attending the National Quartet Convention and finding a hypocrite or two to make fun of just isn't finding any traction over here. You're of course free to agree with Taibbi, just as I'm free to disagree.

[cleek]

But the notion that he's accurately sampled (and, subsequently, typified in print) Tea Party membership...

i don't think he claimed to be a pollster, so terms like "accurately sampled" don't really apply.

on the other hand actual pollsters have determined that teabaggers:
a) are generally older
b) are very conservative
c) want "smaller" government and demand cuts in government spending
d) nevertheless believe they, personally, deserve their SS and Medicare
e) hold the delusional belief that the deficit can be fixed by "cutting waste"

Taibbi says that what he saw at that convention looks like a good snapshot of the tea party as a whole.

sounds right to me.

about the only place Taibbi differs from the polls is that teabaggers apparently think Palin is unqualified to be President. of course Taibbi only says they "cheer" for Palin (which they do), not that they want her to be President - so that's not much of a stretch.

[Rob in CT]

And, when that turns out to be the case, the banks have been engaging in rampant forgery and perjury by creating documents that purport to be the legal record of the transfer of the loan, backdated, with false statements made as to the knowledge made by the submitter of the affadavit, with notarization stamps added in many cases by persons not the actual notary.

And the courts receiving these documents were devoting 30-90 seconds to reviewing them and then rubber-stamping them, in the certain knowledge that the documents submitted were forgeries and that the person standing in front of them was committing perjury.

If this is accurate, it's absolutely earthshattering (or at least us-shattering).

Maybe I still have too much faith left in our system, but I can't quite believe this.

[Jacob Davies]

Read for yourself - naked capitalism has been all over this for a year or more.

This is a good example, look at the price list: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/10/4closurefraud-posts-docx-mortgage-document-fabrication-price-sheet.html

[Slartibartfast]

about the only place Taibbi differs from the polls is that teabaggers apparently think Palin is unqualified to be President

So, naturally, Taibbi goes to where Palin is a guest speaker to meet him some Tea Party archetypes.

This doesn't seem like anything better than a carelessly written hunk of propaganda. It seems to have found a certain resonance, though.

[Eric Martin]

This doesn't seem like anything better than a carelessly written hunk of propaganda. It seems to have found a certain resonance, though.

If you look at the actual polling data compiled by actual pollsters regarding the Tea Party movement, you'll get an indication of why this piece resonates. It finds corroboration therein.

[Eric Martin]

PS: Tea Partiers might, or might not, think she's qualified to be POTUS, but they tend to have very positive feelings about her regardless. Which is fine in terms of attending a speaking engagement. As Cleek points out.

[Slartibartfast]

Sure. The poll data says that Tea Partiers are obese public servants who kvetch about socialist programs whilst riding around on publicly-funded scooters, and are fervent supporters of Sara Palin. And Gospel music quartets!

Doesn't it? Or maybe it says that Tea Partiers tend to be wealthier and older than the norm, as well as more predominantly male and white.

[Eric Martin]

Yeah, either Taibbi's article perfectly encapsulates every leading indicator of the Tea Party movement, or it is a carelessly written hunk of propaganda that only resonates with the wildly misinformed.

[cleek]

Sure. The poll data says that Tea Partiers are obese public servants who kvetch about socialist programs whilst riding around on publicly-funded scooters, and are fervent supporters of Sara Palin. And Gospel music quartets!

not a big fan of metaphor and symbolism, i bet.

[Jacob Davies]

I suggest also reading this post on why this matters:

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/10/why-foreclosure-fraud-is-so-dangerous-to-property-rights/

Here's a deposition taken from an an employee of a foreclosure mill attesting to the practice of affadavits being signed by people who had not reviewed them (in the numbers of hundreds a day), signed in other people's names, notary stamps being passed around the office and used to notarize forged signatures on affadavits, and so on.

That's just one firm but clearly these practices were common. Ritholz has links to another deposition in which a Chase employee admitted to signing 400 affadavits a day attesting to her verification of their contents. This is how it worked and everyone knew it.
http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Bombshelltranscript.pdf

A [The affadavits] would be stamped and signed by a notary or not. Per floor we had a designated spot to place them and Cheryl [the only person authorized to sign] would come once a day and sign them.
...
Q Would these notaries be there watching her as she signed?
A No.
Q She would just sit there and sign stacks of them?
A Correct. As far as notaries go in the firm I don't think any notary actually used their own notary stamp. The team used them.
Q There were just stamps around?
A Yes.
Q And you actually saw that?
A I was part of that.
Q You did it? Are you a notary?
A No, I'm not.
Q Did you sign as a witness?
A I did not. I signed as a witness on one document and after that I decided that I didn't want to put my name as a witness anymore.
Q Tell me about the stamps. You stamped them?
A Yeah, I had stamps. Each team had a notary on them or notaries that I was aware of. Whether they were or weren't wasn't --
Q You had stamps?
A Correct. We would stamp them and they would get signed.
Q Stamp them in blanks?
A Yes.
Q Who would sign them?
A Other people on the team that could sign the signature of the person or just a check on there or whatever.
Q Was that common practice?
A Yes.
Q Did anybody else sign with the firm for the banks?
A Yes.
Q Who was that?
A There were people that were responsible for signing Cheryl's name. Cheryl, Tammie Sweat, and Beth Cerni. Those were the only three people that could sign Cheryl's name. If you ever look at assignments you'll see that they are not all the same.
Q Did they practice Cheryl's signature?
A I would assume so.
Q Did you ever see them?
A Not practicing but I've seen them sign it.
Q Did you see somebody sign Cheryl's name?
A Yes.
Q That wasn't Cheryl?
A Yes. All the time.
Q Did Cheryl know about this?
A Yes.
Q Was it at her direction?
A Yes.
Q Do you know when these assignments were
executed if Cheryl one, two, or three ever read them?
A No, they were never read.
Q They were just signed?
A Correct.
Q How many a day do you think?
A Oh goodness. Each floor would probably produce two, two-fifty a day.
Q So somewhere between four and five hundred a day easy?
A There's eight floors I believe.
Q And each floor did two to two-fifty?
A Then we would get an email saying come get your files, they've been signed by Cheryl.
Q So this was an assignment signing table?
A Correct. Assignments or Affidavit A's that she was signing.
Q What's an Affidavit A?
A The indebtedness affidavit.
When Cheryl was out of the office Tammie would sign them or Beth would go sign them.
Q Beth would sign but it would say Cheryl Samons?
A Correct.
...
I guess there was a problem where the notary date didn't match the date of the assignment being initiated. There were basically three dates on there. The dates were all different.
Q So those attorneys knew this was going on?
A Yes.
Q Can you give me the names of the attorneys that knew?
A Every attorney in the firm.

[Slartibartfast]

Yeah, either Taibbi's article perfectly encapsulates every leading indicator of the Tea Party movement, or it is a carelessly written hunk of propaganda that only resonates with the wildly misinformed.

I'm opting for a little of each.

not a big fan of metaphor and symbolism, i bet

Don't bet the house. But at the symbolism/reality intersection, maybe this is why I'm not so much a fan of Michael Moore.

[GoodOleBoy]

'about the only place Taibbi differs from the polls is that teabaggers apparently think Palin is unqualified to be President.'

the use of the descriptive term 'teabaggers' is indicative of cleek's commitment to accuracy, little to none.

[cleek]

i merely echo their words, gob.

don't like it? launch your own stupid GOP rebrand.

[Slartibartfast]

i merely echo their words, gob.

"They" being composed of one or two signs, echoed endlessly in the left blogosphere until it almost becomes a blip on the Google radar.

Ok, then. Everyone even notionally associated with X organization is as dumb as the dumbest member of X, by these rules. The only smart ones are the loners and rebels.

Oops, they're members of the loners and rebels group, and are practically guaranteed to be idiots.

[russell]

Everyone even notionally associated with X organization is as dumb as the dumbest member of X, by these rules

In which case I'm in deep doo-doo, I'm a drummer.

FWIW, I appreciate the tea party folks' anger at the collection of freaking messes we all get to wake up to each every day.

My issues with them are:

1. They don't seem to have very good information
2. IMVHO their anger is directed at the wrong targets, and to a counter-productive degree

I have yet to hear anyone claiming to speak for the tea party articulate a coherent and constructive program for addressing all of the many things they are angry about.

Government is too large. OK, what do you cut out? And what replaces the function of whatever part of government you just cut out?

Taxes are too high. OK, what taxes do we eliminate? And how do we address the loss of revenue? What do we get back in return for the lost revenue, and how does cutting taxes make that wonderful thing happen?

The feds have overstepped the bounds of their legally enumerated powers. Which ones? Why those particular cases, and not the 10,000 other things government does that do not explicitly appear in Article I section 8?

To me, the Tea Party movement seems like a kind of Constitutional Pol Pot-ism. Only without the mass slaughter, thankfully. But I think you get my point.

"Burn it down and start over" doesn't usually work out that well. It seldom gets past the "burn it down" part.

I don't care if they're young or old, work for the government or not, receive entitlement benefits or not, whatever. I just don't care.

I just want them to think a little more, and a little harder. To be perfectly honest, I'm not seeing a well developed thought process there. That's not a comment about their intelligence, it's a comment about their sense of responsibility (or lack thereof), and about how seriously they take their own project.

I get that they're pissed off. Everybody's pissed off, join the club.

My two cents, FWIW.

[cleek]

"They" being composed of one or two signs...

... which were held by the first of their ilk to receive public notice. and the name stuck. yes, it's an insult - but what can you expect from a latte-sipping, Volvo-driving (Audi, actually), socialist, terrorist-aiding, America-hating, east-coast, liberal, elitist ?

and maybe you'll forgive me if i don't want to elevate the GOP's 2010 relaunch (now with 50% more civic illiteracy!) to the level of one of the iconic moments of American history. these people have no claim on the name "Tea Party". they are ignorant frauds. yes, every single one of them.

[Slartibartfast]

I have yet to hear anyone claiming to speak for the tea party articulate a coherent and constructive program for addressing all of the many things they are angry about.

Yeah, this is one of the few reasons I've taken any trouble at all to collect for not taking any part in this whole phenomenon.

[ral]

Jacob, you remind me of the first time I read what I knew to be a lie in a deposition transcript. It wasn't shocking, exactly (I'm from New York, after all :-) but testimony like what you just posted still gives me a chill.

[Marty]

"I have yet to hear anyone claiming to speak for the tea party articulate a coherent and constructive program for addressing all of the many things they are angry about."

This is the inevitable challenge with any movement. The Tea Party is not a Party in the traditional sense, lots of people purport to speak for the Tea Party and NONE of them do.

Movements are almost always against something, often something nebulous, and the focus for the Tea Party is EXACTLY the same focus as the Obamaphiles. Washington is broken and we want it fixed.

They don't know how, neither do you.

They want a knowledgeable and conscientious Congress and President to figure it out or they want to keep changing those people until they find someone who will.

Even the President accepts that for the last two years he has failed to seperate himself from the old tired policies of the tax and spend Democrats:

In the magazine article, Mr. Obama reflects on his presidency, admitting that he let himself look too much like “the same old tax-and-spend Democrat,” realized too late that “there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects” and perhaps should have “let the Republicans insist on the tax cuts” in the stimulus.

So, instead of impuning the intelligence and intent of the broad baes of people that form a movement, perhaps we should apply some intelligence to help everyone have more confidence in the government, portray it effectively and as effective, and make everyone across the spectrum a little more confident of our future.

[cleek]

the tax and spend Democrats:

as opposed to the spend and spend "conservatives" ?

[GoodOleBoy]

'They want a knowledgeable and conscientious Congress and President to figure it out or they want to keep changing those people until they find someone who will.'

Well said Marty. Exactly my sentiments. And, any given voter cannot expect every representative elected to have views coincident with that voter, but they should expect all representatives to learn about the issues on which they are asked to vote legislatively and to do so with the actual sense that they are doing the right thing. This would mean, for example, that they would not be asked by leadership to vote on bills without the opportunity to know what they are voting on.

And, again, one of my issues with 'big', or trying to deal with too many diverse issues, is that it inhibits the ability to actually do the above.

[russell]

Overall, I think you make a good point.

I have two comments regarding this, specifically:

They don't know how, neither do you.

First, I agree, I don't think they do know how. But they think they do. They think the solution is:

1. Lower taxes
2. Cut back the size and scope of government
3. Strictly observe the language of the Constitution

What I'm saying is that they haven't really thought through what any of that means.

Second, I also agree that I, personally, don't "know how to fix Washington". Among the very long list of reasons why that is so is the fact that not all of the problems we face are located in Washington.

What I do feel very comfortable saying, based on everything I've heard or read by or about the tea party, and/or every conversation I've had online or in real life with anyone who self-identifies as being part of that movement, is that I personally am bringing a lot more information to the table than your average tea partier.

I'm no superman, I just try to pay attention, and I try to have a little self-awareness. That is what I would like them to do, and what I expect them to do. It ain't a lot to ask.

Identifying with the "tea party" is not just a matter of being mad as hell and not willing to take it any more. It's a predisposition to a very definite menu of solutions.

What I have yet to hear is anyone espousing those solutions think through the consequences.

That is my point.

[Hogan]

cleek: actually it's "borrow and spend Republicans."

[Uncle Kvetch]

They want a knowledgeable and conscientious Congress and President

With "knowledge" and "conscience" as exemplified by people like Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, and Carl Paladino. Sorry, no dice.

[cleek]

Hogan: my bad!

[russell]

Also, from the NYT piece Marty links to:

President Obama said that he expected Republicans to offer him more cooperation after November’s elections, no matter the outcome.

The mind reels.

[Marty]

"1. Lower taxes
2. Cut back the size and scope of government
3. Strictly observe the language of the Constitution"

Every movement has slogans. CSNY had a great song that has the lines:

"What a field day for the heat, a thousand children in the street, Singing songs and carrying signs, mostly say hooray for our side"

I think you may have thought through this more than many other people, on both sides, carrying signs.

Hooray for our side.

[cleek]

CSNY Buffalo Springfield

[Marty]

"CSNY Buffalo Springfield"

I liked the version on 4 Way Street the best, I like live albums.

[cleek]

The mind reels.

i no longer believe he's playing 11-D chess.

[russell]

Leaving the tea party aside for the moment, here is more entertainment on the mortgage industry from Felix Salmon.

To me, the dumbest guy in the room right now appears to be Alan Greenspan:

I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organisations, specifically banks and others, were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms

Shocked - shocked! - to find that self-interested greed can make people behave badly.

[Phil]

Apropos of nothing, turns out that some News Corp. shareholders are less than sanguine about what ol' Rupert has been spending their money on. Whoops.

[Jacob Davies]

Aff*I*davits aff*I*davits aff*I*davits. Not affadavits. That's one of those words like banananas that I can never spell.

Most of the guys responsible for this are probably not going to end up in jail. But the housing bubble and collapse was a colossal crime, a fraud, a scheme to pump non-existent profits into the hands of bank executives and then dump the bankrupt shells of the bank on the state.

That is exactly what they did, in full knowledge that that was what they were doing, and those who did it are walking free and wealthy.

Most likely a few patsies at these law firms and a few middle managers at the banks will go to jail, the execs will walk free with the cash, and we'll all keep paying for it. We might even have one more round of bank bailouts to go on this one.

[Gary Farber]

50 States Start Foreclosure Inquiry.

Earlier: Foreclosure Crisis: 23 States Halt Foreclosure As Officials Review Bank Practices:

[...] Officials at some big banks now admit that so-called "robo-signers" were signing off on thousands of foreclosures a day without actually looking at the details of any of the cases.

State Official Moonlights as Robo-Signer

ABC News obtained a copy of multiple signatures attributed to a Florida lawyer moonlighting as a robo-signer. She had a day job in the Florida Attorney General's office, she somehow managed to vet some 150,000 mortgages in three years. If she worked every day of every year, that would amount to over 130 mortgages a day.

"It appears that most of the mortgage (companies) in fact did use robo-signers," said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Analytics. "It was a way to try to facilitate the process. They've been overwhelmed by the foreclosed properties, and this was their way of trying to get through those problems as fast as they could."

Or meet Jeffrey Stephan:

[...] Fitzgerald was referring to Jeffrey Stephan, a foreclosure specialist with GMAC Mortgage, one of the nation's largest and most troubled home lenders. In a sworn deposition, Stephan has said that he signed about 10,000 foreclosure affidavits per month without personally verifying the documents associated with the case.

Etc.

[Slartibartfast]

I personally am bringing a lot more information to the table than your average tea partiervoter

Adjusted, slightly. I think russell is smarter than your average voter of either party.

With "knowledge" and "conscience" as exemplified by people like Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, and Carl Paladino. Sorry, no dice.

I thought we dispensed with the Sarah Palin issue in this very thread, didn't we?

Doesn't the D party encompass a certain amount of idiots? Are D voters typified by those idiots?

[Nate]

How many of the D party "idiots" have news reporters breathlessly talking about their every tweet and Facebook update?

[Countme?]

Good God!

Do you mean to say that idiocy is now off the table for discussion and bloviation?

That should free up some bandwidth!

What's next?

A porn-free internet? Jim Cramer having his tongue pulled out by the roots? Vassar Bushmills at Redmurder keeping his own fascist counsel?

[Countme?]

Looks like Pat Sajak has had the last idiotic word.

[cleek]

do the teabaggers have a single stand that isn't fundamentally idiotic ?

i mean, there's a case to be made for "smaller government!" and "less waste!" but making the case involves specifics - which they do not provide, or seem to even understand. hence: idiotic.

[Uncle Kvetch]

Doesn't the D party encompass a certain amount of idiots? Are D voters typified by those idiots?

Sigh. Whatever, dude. You're rubber, we're glue.

Slarti, given your (deserved) reputation as one of the "reasonable" righties here, sometimes your choice of battles really mystifies me. It's hard to see where you're going with this beyond "If libs attack, I must defend."

Or, what cleek said.

[Hogan]

Doesn't the D party encompass a certain amount of idiots? Are D voters typified by those idiots?

D voters who vocally and actively support idiots can be said to be typified by those idiots, yes. Your point being?

[Marty]

I think that the impact of the Tea Party/Obamaphiles from all sides(except maybe the far left) on the last few elections is being underestimated.

The Dems are defending against all sorts of challenges but the Reps are suffering huge turnover as part of the same voter unhappiness.

The point here is that neither the Dems or Reps (including Tea Partiers) are offering detailed ssolutions to our biggest problem, restoring trust in the government.

That said, lower taxes, smaller government and Constitutional adherence shouldn't be bad goals. Just like clean energy, better education and improved healthcare aren't bad goals.

The problem is that each side is interested in achieving their half of those goals.

What *I* want is a government doing its best to maximize all of those things in a way that creates a better society overall. If anyone convinces the general public that they understand all of those goals, and are working toward all of them, then we can quit having this, to steal a phrase, idiotic discussion about the Tea Partiers

"making the case involves specifics - which they do not provide, or seem to even understand. hence: idiotic"

Tell me one solution that any Democrat talks about in detail on a day to day basis to fix the deficit and stimulate the economy? I am talking about your average Joe guy down the street. Does she understand the impact of an ever growing deficit? Does he realize how little money will be collected by raising taxes on people who make 250k? Is she able to support the policy positions in detail on jobs, energy etc.?

The answer is no, but somehow Tea Partiers are supposed to have this capacity or they get mocked. Do we really think the overwhelming majority of people that voted for Obama were doing it due to a clear set of implementable solutions that he presented and they studied and understood?

No, they voted for "Change We Can Believe In".

Hooray for our side.

[cleek]

Marty,
has the Joe Average Democrat Party been the subject of innumerable media stories over the last two years? does the Joe Average Democrat Party have a Mission Statement ? is there a news network devoted to fluffing the Joe Average Democrat Party ? do Joe Average Democrats feel that they are a revolutionary vanguard who are going to TAKE THIS COUNTRY BACK, yadayadayada ?

no?

but the teabaggers do all that. and they have been loudly proclaiming for the past two years, that they have the answers. but they don't. they have slogans and rhetoric and fawning TV coverage.

what does Joe Average Democrat have?

[Countme?]

"what does the average Democrat have?"

We don't have a million Spewmans funded by Citizens United vermin.

http://www.stopspewman.com/

[Marty]

"what does Joe Average Democrat have?"

The biggest bully pulpit in the world and control of Congress. hmmmmm. Seems like they get plenty of press.

[cleek]

The biggest bully pulpit in the world and control of Congress

say wha?

[Countme?]

"The biggest bully pulpit ..... "

Right. Democrats in power are a species of idiot.

But they are no match for the zombie vermin idiots recruited by the alien, anti-American Republican Party.

Zombie News Vermin: "Today, ladies and gentleidiots, we have Democrat Party spokesman Wonky Positionpaper with us to explain the new, extremely complicated, and some might say, socialist health insurance legislation, dubbed Obamacare.

First off, Representative Positionpaper, is it true, as some say (zombie news vermin winks into the camera) that the european-style (another wink) Obamacare is a complete government takeover of our free market health care system and may jeopardize, shall we say, the well-being of our senior citizens who, lo these many years, have paid their own way for colonoscopies, brain bypass surgery, and tongue-docking."

Rep. Positionpaper: "No, I would characterize that as an exaggeration. Rather, may I say ...."

Zombie News Vermin: .... "no, you may not. We've only a few moments to explore this vital issue in depth, so let's bring former Governor Lady Twittwitter Cleavage into our little debating society here.

Hello Governor, you look stunning today!"

Governor Twittwitter, blowing a bubble (which pops like a single shot from an AK-47) with her gum: "Thank you so much, zomb. Fun party at Roger's house last night, huh?"

Zombie News Vermin: Yes, yes. Now, could you tell us what the vast majority of freedom-loving Americans can expect from this top-down imposition on the best health care system in the world?"

Governor: "Say goodbye to Grandma. The dark evil one and his pickaninnies in the White House have the Death Panels revved up and ready to snuff your parents. Not only that, but the thug bureaucrats over at the IRS are going to be outside your door come January stealing your money to pay for health care for children who refuse to work for a living and who are in the unfortunate, but justifiable position of having a pre-existing condition, which they should have known about, the little jack-booted commies. I've got a remedy for them at the Second Amendment Drugstore."

Zonbie News Vermin: "That's all we have time for, folks. Next up, our panel of experts will fellate one of the founders of the John Birch Society. Stay tuned."

[Marty]

"But they are no match for the zombie vermin idiots recruited by the alien, anti-American Republican Party."

I think you are wrong, these guys can play with the worst

On Face the Nation over the weekend, Bob Schieffer asked Obama adviser David Axelrod if he had any evidence that the foreign money the Chamber gets is anything other than “peanuts” for an organization with a $200 million annual budget. Axelrod shot back a killer rejoinder, “Well, do you have any evidence that it’s not, Bob?”

And so the White House has embraced an epistemological standard worthy of the birthers.

[Hogan]

And so the White House has embraced an epistemological standard worthy of the birthers.

Not hardly. There's plenty of evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii; it's just that the birthers want more, or at least claim to want more. There is no evidence that the CoC is or isn't spending foreign money on political ads, because the CoC, which is the only one with access to all the relevant evidence, won't produce any.

[cleek]

is "peanuts" a legal term ?

but officer, i only have like 20 grams of pot in this duffel bag. that's peanuts, compared to the amount of oregano i have packed around it!

[Countme?]

"We're back! Our special guest Idiot Iott will explain for you how the SS was actually the humanitarian wing of the Nazi Party which in Adolf Hitler's wisdom, was tasked with eliminating the Communist menace in Eastern Europe and beyond (too bad they couldn't be here to help us with Harvard and the State Department, bwa-ha-ha).

Then, our rove-ing correspondent Samantha (Goose) Step will untangle the knotty little conundrum of how so many Jews and Gypsies and others of the homosexual persuasion found themselves caught up in Mr Hitler's very American-like scheme to free the world of collectivism. Hint: The German word for "communist" is the same as the German words for "Jew" "Gypsy" and "homosexual". Oops!"

We'll be right back to tell you some other words that mean "communist" too.

[Countme?]

Yeah, boy, that Axelrod is a hard case.

Let me know when he's ready to be handed a baseball bat and see if he can crush zombie skulls with the big boys.

He's a regula Senator McCarthy, leastways in the eyes of the foreigner-hating scum (well, those who live outside the heartland of the homeland) at National Review.

It was a big mistake not pouring salt in the mouth of William F. Buckley's corpse and sealing it with hot pitch.

Has Rich Lowery permitted Christopher Buckley back on the NR premises, or is the former still wanking off to the already-dispensed-with Sarah Death Palin's every tweet?

[liberal japonicus]

Sorry, Marty, some other time, you might have had me expressing my concern that the Dems were fighting fire with children's sparklers, but after watching Maddow and then Stewart on this, all I can say is boo-fricking-hoo...

[Countme?]

Let freedom ring!

From Washington Monthly:

"* And in a rather classic example of why I think the notion of conservative populism is silly on a fundamental level, Glenn Beck urged his followers today to start sending donations directly to corporate interests so the U.S. Chamber of Commerce can buy more elections for far-right candidates. The minions took their orders well -- the Chamber's online donation page crashed today after regular folks tried to give their money to the already-extremely-wealthy business lobby."

Soylent Green is people and people are clamoring to build more Soylent Green processing plants.

Even people must eat.

I'm hungry. Children are tasty.

[russell]

Not to be piling on the tea party folks, but the latest issue they appear to be upset about is the fact that there was no Social Security COLA this year.

Maybe these folks aren't the real Tea Party folks. Maybe there are no real Tea Party folks. Maybe it's all a figment of somebody's imagination.

But whoever the hell they are, I wish they'd get their story straight.

[GoodOleBoy]

'But whoever the hell they are, I wish they'd get their story straight.'

When Obama was elected this same person was rejoicing that they wouldn't have to worry about putting gas in the car or paying the mortgage.

[Countme?]

"When Obama was elected this same person was rejoicing that they wouldn't have to worry about putting gas in the car or paying the mortgage."

Which same person? The person who wrote the Tea Party article Russell linked to?

The one who quotes the fascist anti-American kochsuckers at NewsMax?

The murderers at NewsMax shedding tears over Grandpa eating dog food because SS cost-of-living raises have been suspended is like Pol Pot weeping over the fall-off in business for optometrists in Cambodia.

GoodOleBoy, the least you can do is congratulate the Federal Reserve for conquering inflation so that entitlement growth could be halted.

President Obama, for his part, should identify all Tea Party individuals in the United States and by executive order halt every cent of transfer payments to them.

When those parasites are dead, the United States economy can thrive.

[cleek]

the latest issue they appear to be upset about is the fact that there was no Social Security COLA this year.

Stop spending! Don't Spend! Stop! Don't! Stop! Don't Stop! Don't Stop! Don't Stop Spending!

[GoodOleBoy]

'Which same person? The person who wrote the Tea Party article Russell linked to?'

'this same person' was used to generically typify those who have little understanding of topics they expound on. That's not the person who wrote the article who was reporting the facts that no COLA was forthcoming and that many Social Security beneficiaries are distressed by that fact. These beneficiaries are likely equally distributed among supporters of both major parties and not themselves all Tea Party supporters. Nothing suggests how large this number is or that most people don't understand that no COLA is justified, just as most understood very well that Obama's election did not mean we would not need to pay for gas and housing.

Lots of agitation building among the regulars here and the competition is building rapidly for the silliness award. That arrogant confidence recently on display is waning.

[cleek]

...just as most understood very well that Obama's election did not mean we would not need to pay for gas and housing.

ok, i give up. who (actually, literally, furreals) thought Obama's election meant free gas and housing ?

[liberal japonicus]

I really didn't understand the free gas and mortgage thing, but apparently, it's a observation originating from the ole Perfesser from _2008_. Finding the video in another place, it seems like it was edited abruptly and what the woman was trying to say was that seeing candidate Obama (or perhaps more specifically, a black man with a chance to be president) made her forget about any mundane troubles she had.

To claim that the woman was thinking that Obama was going to deliver jerrycans of unleaded to her door and rip up her mortgage is more than a bit racist. To carry that incident around as an example for 2 years suggests that the name GoodOleBoy as being more appropriate that you think...

[Countme?]

Everything is broken #1 thru #16, #18 thru #23, and #25 thru infinity:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/10/15/910536/-Is-Wall-St.-Imploding,-Again-Krugman:-Its-very,-very-bad.

Rick Santelli will return from behind the curtain in a moment to continue demonizing his deadbeat and homeless neighbors. The rest of you, keep chanting the words "gummint" and "deadbeat."

He needs a moment to find their mortgage paperwork. Let's see, hmmm, the mortgage was packaged together with several hundred turds and dozens of underwater betting slips and is now a book-entry, a blip of light, in Zurich , or was it Dublin ... has anyone seen the f#cking title?

First, Obama ordered the explosion of a drilling rig in the Gulf, and then he ordered the boyz in his hood to lose all of the mortgage paperwork.

I happen to know that the Community Reinvestment Act stipulated in its very first paragraph, and I quote: "the party of the first part should then lose the party of the second part's paperwork. The parties of the third, fourth, and fifth parts will never notice."

Look ... over there ... Muslims!

[cleek]

lj... ah. her. here's a transcript.

sounds to me like she's saying "things are going to get better" (ie. exactly the same argument all political supporters make for their candidate).

[cleek]

oops. here is a better link.

[Countme?]

I think the guy who wrote this email is the guy who lost your mortgage paperwork:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/198666/trading-desk/john-derbyshir

It's going to be fun asking a Joe Pesci character if he could just, pretty please, look one more time for that mortgage paperwork no one can seem to find.

"Come wid me, yeah, oveh heah, in the waehhouse wheah we keep youah paperwoik. Go ahead, stand on that plastic sheeting theah ... dat's right!

Boys, find the nice man's title foah him.

I'm tellin ya, da gummint made me do dis to ya"

[Marty]

"There is no evidence that the CoC is or isn't spending foreign money on political ads, because the CoC, which is the only one with access to all the relevant evidence, won't produce any."

Nor does the Sierra Club or any of thousands of organizations who have this protection so their membership doesn't feel at risk from retribution. Obama is attacking the CoC for not doing something that is specifically protected by law and done by just as many liberal organizations as conservative.

Yes that is worthy of the birthers.

[Phil]

Gee, Marty, funny you should bring that up:

Last, Citizens United argues that disclosure requirements can chill donations to an organization by exposing donors to retaliation. Some amici point to recent events in which donors to certain causes were blacklisted, threatened, or otherwise targeted for retaliation. [...] The examples cited by amici are cause for concern. Citizens United, however, has offered no evidence that its members may face similar threats or reprisals. To the contrary, Citizens United has been disclosing its donors for years and has identified no instance of harassment or retaliation.

[...] A campaign finance system that pairs corporate independent expenditures with effective disclosure has not existed before today. [...] With the advent of the Internet, prompt disclosure of expenditures can provide shareholders and citizens with the information needed to hold corporations and elected officials accountable for their positions and supporters. Shareholders can determine whether their corporation’s political speech advances the corporation’s interest in making profits, and citizens can see whether elected officials are “ ‘in the pocket’ of so-called moneyed interests.” [...] The First Amendment protects political speech; and disclosure permits citizens and shareholders to react to the speech of corporate entities in a proper way. This transparency enables the electorate to make informed decisions and give proper weight to different speakers and messages.