If you have "no place to go," come here!

Obama said to be "bored" by foreclosure crisis

DCblogger's picture

President Obama, Bored With the Foreclosure Crisis. That Explains A Lot, Actually.

it tells you everything you need to know about Romney that Obama still has a slight lead with the worst economic record of my lifetime.

No votes yet


Submitted by ubetchaiam on

The $25B settlement was the signal that the Obama Admin had 'moved on' re the fraud and wrongdoings associated with the millions losing their homes; except for the 'service members' who are getting the 'gold' treatment but no one is examining which of the volunteers is actually getting the monies; those who have been above the paygrade where they don't have to be out in front getting shot at or those who don't really make enough money in their first years to afford a house and use the housing allowance to pay for their family's housing.

Submitted by Hugh on

Most people still have great difficulty in accepting how deeply, coldly, callously criminal the rich, the elites, and the corporations really are. Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Jamie Dimon, Lloyd Blankfein, our political and financial classes in general, are the great villains of our age. But to recognize them as such would mean we would have to become outraged. We would have to act. But we do not want to act. So we choose not to see their criminality. When we see something like Obama's boredom we think of it as strange, unsettling, even distasteful, but we do not trace it back to his criminal intent. Our looting classes dislike any reference to the suffering caused by their looting. They express hurt at the thought, they blame their victims, they say the discussion bores them. These are perfectly natural defenses for the looters. They only seem strange to us because we refuse to call them on the criminal looting which gives rise to the need for such defenses. Recognize the criminality and what our leaders do and how they say they feel about it becomes both predictable and clear.

Submitted by hipparchia on

can't remember if i saw the actual column or if this is an apocryphal story or what, but the following exchange is reputed to have been published in one of ann landers' advice columns:

teenage advice seeker: dear ann landers, my mom keeps nagging to clean up my room, do my homework and take out the trash. how do i get her to stop?

ann landers: dear teenager, clean up your room, do your homework and take out the trash.

i can just see it now...

president obama: dear ann landers, the public is boring me to tears with their whining; they want me to stop the foreclosures and evictions and give them more cramdown and loan modifications. how do i make them stfu?

ann landers: dear president obama, [i bet you can fill in the blanks here]

Submitted by lambert on

I'm very pleased that people remember this, and take on the responsibility of propagating it.

In blogs with more tender sensibilities than ours, one might say that Obama suffers from a bad case of "recto-cranial inverstion," for which he should seek treatment.

"I'm b-o-r-e-d!" Jeebus.

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on

They seem to forget that the social compact is really meant to keep their asses from being lined up against a wall and shot. That is the other half of it.

My Obamafan cohort doesn't like that there are unsourced anecdotes in that article. THERE IS NO FORECLOSURE CRISIS BECAUSE WHO CARES ABOUT SOME UNPROVEN ANECDOTES!

Submitted by lambert on

So I guess we'll just have to go by performance.

And it should be easy for them to dig up a quote or two that shows how excited he is, no? And if they can't.... Easy things that don't happen, don't happen for a reason.

twig's picture
Submitted by twig on

That's the reply from the Fox-watching, low-information (or whatever they're called these days) crowd. They've been saying this for years. The same people who think anyone who gets anything from the government is a Cadillac-driving deadbeat who's out to ... I'm not sure what it is they're supposedly out to do, but these people are sputtering mad because it's obvious the deadbeats are up to something nefarious and wasteful and it's going to cost these hard-working citizens their hard-earned dollars.

They never once look up toward the top of the ladder and see that it's the banksters and politicians who are robbing them blind. No, no, no -- it's those gotdam libruls giving handouts to people who are too lazy to get a job, that's the problem, right there in a nutshell.

Okay, I'm done, back to my plant-filled lair.

Submitted by lambert on

1. The banksters get free money (borrowing at 0% and lending at X% is nice work if you can get it. So why shouldn't people get free houses?

2. What's wrong with making a decision to walk away from a mortage? Businesses do it all the time. And corporations are people, my friend!

3. The banks are stealing people's homes with fraud. That's what robosigning is all about.

4. Banks work out better payments all the time. Why not now?

twig's picture
Submitted by twig on

Unfortunately, I've had no success using them with this crowd. They go bug-house crazy and start on the stories, usually about someone their neighbor's daughter used to go to school with who knew someone else who lived down the street from somebody with a 5,000 square foot house and three cars and no job and who do you think was paying for it, Miss SmartyPants? Apparently, it was them. Or maybe it was me, I honestly don't know.

There has to be some willingness to change one's mind or be open to new ideas, which these people are not. As others have pointed out, that has to be part of the popularity of Fox News, Limbaugh, etc., to serve as echo chambers where these people can hear slight variations on what they already believe, but nothing that threatens those beliefs. They cannot tolerate ambiguity of any kind and would never ever admit they are wrong.

There's some of that on the left, too, but the right is so unbelievably mean. I was actually told not to include statistics showing how prevalent this or that is among the population because "our readers don't care about other people, they only want to know how it affects them." And yet at the same time, they insist they're Christians. Ooooookay.

This is why I don't talk to conservatives any more. Even good, rational arguments are lost on them.

Submitted by Lex on

I always like to note that the "red" states tend to be takers in terms of federal tax dollars while the "blue" states tend to be givers to the federal coffers. So it's rather amusing to listen to the deadbeat parasite line being recited by people i could easily argue are deadbeat parasites.

There's also almost always an undercurrent of racism in these attacks, while completely ignoring that the majority of aid recipients in America are white, rural, and God-fearing.

I particularly enjoy (and i hear them with my own two ears) the rants against librul socialism by people who haven't worked in a decade and somehow manage to have houses, kids, cars, food and Christmas.

Submitted by lambert on

... we either have to reach them, or enough of them, or separate ourselves. "A house divided," you know.

Submitted by JuliaWilliams on

approach lately. After years of evidence-based discussion, and attempts to win people over with a head-on approach, with little to no success (see this for one reason I may not have been successful), I'm finding I'm making some small inroads using the sideways technique of not immediately engaging in debate, but drawing out the person's beliefs and reasoning, and simply asking questions (to which of course I know the answers, and which I can-generally- guide). It's not foolproof, and I am not very good at it yet, (and I find greater success in person than online), but using this, I've fallen away from many egregious habits. I think it lends to a more respectful conversation initially, since the other person sees that you are listening, and anecdotally, I'm seeing less heat and more light in my exchanges.

Submitted by lambert on

... and i slip into the clash of values all too easily.

Point to remember. I've also been turning culture clash (national and international) over in my mind and your idea seems to apply there too.

How would you recast my answers as questions?

Submitted by JuliaWilliams on

person you're engaging. For example, a statement like "What do want us to do, give people free houses" would generate a question like "Well, I'm not sure-BTW, do you know anyone who's lost their job recently?" If no, then how about someone who lost their pension/401k/health, etc, until you get to a 'yes' (shouldn't be more than one question i'm sure). Then-well, how are the jobs looking around where you're at? What do you think we should do with people who can't find a job, and are out of their 99 weeks? Or the person who lost their job because they were sick?, etc. This is a process, and can take a while-which is why it's so much harder than pelting people with facts (and why it's so much harder to be a good teacher, BTW)

Submitted by JuliaWilliams on

this article a good explication of why the Socratic method can work:
"It wasn’t me thinking. It was just me saying things I had heard so long from people I thought were interesting and just came to believe for some reason, without really understanding it. I understood it enough to talk about it but not really enough to have a conversation about it.”

twig's picture
Submitted by twig on

It does seem like it could work, because as you point out, it'll only take a question or two to get the person to say 'yes'.

In fact, that's the remarkable thing about the situation -- most of the people talking trash about 'deadbeats' etc., are themselves one paycheck or less away from ruin, and most of them have been totally screwed over in some way or another -- pension, 401k, housing, health insurance, the list goes on.... So there's some common ground, maybe even a chance to change someone's mind. Worth a try!

jest's picture
Submitted by jest on

Most people have succumbed to the Edward Bernays spell, so they don't think rationally to begin with. The irrational left is even harder to deal with because they swear they have fact based arguments, when often they are not. Even when they come with facts, it's really noise and irrelevancies presented as fact.

I think humor and emotion based tactics work better for people like that. Playful mocking of the idea (not the person), ala Jon Stewart, seems to get people to take an idea more seriously, ironically.

okanogen's picture
Submitted by okanogen on


Here is the actual source of this quote, Jean Braucher:

Folks in Washington tell me there is a general sense of “foreclosure fatigue” in our nation’s capital. It’s just so boring to keep thinking about all the people losing their homes year after year. Can’t we move on to something new? This attitude goes along with a failure to do anything meaningful to get out of the five-year-old mortgage crisis, still very much with us. More charitably, the people who would like to do something see no political opening in an election year.

So, actually, this title about Obama is incorrect, and in fact the quote is a lot more even-handed. This basically is the attitude of our entire ruling class in Washington, so yes, sourcing, and, if it quacks like a duck.

It is telling that someone (for political reasons?) repurposes this to be "Obama said to be bored", there is nothing directly indicating Obama specifically at all, except that he is a "folk" from Washington.