Media falsely claim Frank did not answer question asking if he bore any responsibility for financial crisis
SUMMARY: Several media figures falsely claimed Barney Frank did not answer a student's question asking how much responsibility he bore for the financial crisis. In fact, Frank did provide a substantive response to the question.
During the April 8 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough falsely claimed, repeatedly, that Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) would not give an answer to a student's question: "[H]ow much, if any, responsibility do you think you have" for the financial crisis? Similarly, on the April 8 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy falsely claimed Frank "never answered" the student's question, and on the April 7 edition of his Fox News television program, Sean Hannity asserted that Frank "had a little trouble answering a very simple question last night." Contrary to their claims, Frank did provide a substantive response, which none of them mentioned or aired.
Scarborough, Doocy, and Hannity all played clips of the exchange between Frank and a student at an event at the Harvard University Kennedy School of Government. But none of them noted that Frank said, "The answer is, yes, I do take responsibility for something," or that he later added that after filing "a bill in 2006 when I was still in the minority to say that hedge funds should be registered," in 2007, he "was approached by people who said, 'No. No. You can't do too much regulation,' and I backed off. I wish I hadn't." Frank also noted that he did, in fact, work on legislation to deal with mortgage lending, stating that in 2007 his committee passed restrictions on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and on subprime lending.
From Frank's comments:
FRANK: You're entitled to be critical, but I'm entitled to answer. The answer is, yes, I do take responsibility for something. In 2006 the Republican appointed chairman of the SEC, who was forced out by George Bush because he was too much of a regulator, Bill Donaldson, tried to get control of -- tried to make hedge funds register. The courts overturned him. They were right because he was bending the statute. He was right on public policy, wrong on the law.
I immediately filed a bill in 2006 when I was still in the minority to say hedge funds should be registered. In 2007 I was approached by people who said, "No. No. You can't do too much regulation," and I backed off. I wish I hadn't.
But as far as your question, that the subprime thing happened on my watch, I think it's fair to ask, what is it you think I should have done? In -- you said, well, I was critical of a stimulus bill a year later, but that didn't cause the subprime crisis. My criticism of the stimulus bill? I mean, people said, "Oh my God, he's being critical. Let's default." I mean, I don't understand.
The point -- excuse me. Here is what happened on my watch. I became chairman on January -- and this is the right-wing attack on liberals to try and stop regulation that you are repeating -- on January 31 I became the chairman; on March 28 the committee passed a very tough Fannie/Freddie bill, which the Bush administration liked; later that year, in November, we passed a bill to restrict subprime lending. Because we did the subprime lending restriction, Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, did what Alan Greenspan refused to do, and said, "OK, I'll do that."
So, I do want to ask you, when you suggest that I should apologize for something or take responsibility, what is it you think I should have done that I didn't do?
From the April 8 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe:
WILLIE GEIST (co-host): Barney Frank, chairman of the --
MIKA BRZEZINSKI (co-host): Oh, yes --
SCARBOROUGH: Good friend -- good friend --
GEIST: -- House Financial Services Committee --
SCARBOROUGH: -- of Mike's.
GEIST: --was at the Kennedy School of Government this week --
BRZEZINSKI: Oh, good. That's a great place to go speak.
GEIST: -- speaking before some students -
BRZEZINSKI: Yeah.
GEIST: -- including some law students, and he was asked point blank by one of the law students there, "Do you accept responsibility, given the position you held on the Financial Services Committee, for what has happened in this country?"
SCARBOROUGH: Oh. I'm sure he does. He's a stand-up guy.
BRZEZINSKI: Yeah.
GEIST: Quite an exchange here, watch this.
[begin video clip]
FRANK: What is it you think I should have done beginning in January 31 of 2007 -- which is when I became chairman -- that I didn't do?
JOEL POLLAK (Harvard Law School student): Well, first of all, you pushed a stimulus bill through Congress that included several provisions that you later attacked as profoundly wasteful and so on --
FRANK: Who did? Not me.
POLLAK: -- like AIG bonuses.
FRANK: But you're talking about the subprime crisis, then you're talking about a bill in 2008 or --
POLLAK: And in 2008, in October, you accused critics of the stimulus plan of being racist and so on.
FRANK: No. Excuse me --
POLLAK: I'm still waiting -- I'm still waiting for a very simple answer to a question.
FRANK: And I'm waiting for -- I'm waiting for you to tell me what you think I should have done. I didn't say you were racist.
POLLAK: No. You're a public representative. I'm a student. I'm asking you how --
FRANK: Oh, so which allows you to say things that you don't back up.
POLLAK: I'm asking --
[...]
FRANK: You've made an accusation that is wholly inaccurate. I --
POLLAK: I didn't accuse you of anything. I'm asking how much responsibility, if any --
FRANK: Sure.
POLLAK: You can say none. That's fine.
FRANK: You -- I think you're being disingenuous, to be honest, when you say you haven't made an accusation. You said it happened on my watch. Rarely -- I've never heard anybody say, "Good for you, it happened on your watch." That's accusatory. You're entitled.
[...]
FRANK: This is an example of the right-wing's effort, frankly, to try and change the subject from getting regulation.
UNIDENTIFIED STUDENT: Stop labeling him -- just answer the question.
FRANK: No, I am labeling -- I think labels are important. And I think there's a systematic right-wing attack to try and divert the blame for their deregulation.
[end video clip]
SCARBOROUGH: God --
BRZEZINSKI: Wow.
SCARBOROUGH: -- that is sad.
GEIST: No -- no answer to the question. Now you do -- you do have to say a kid -- a conservative kid standing up at a Harvard University and facing off with Barney Frank -- that's pretty courageous in its own right, but again, he didn't answer the question.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, and I -- that's the thing that strikes me. You know, I went to two state schools, and even when I stood up in those type of groups, if you would even express a moderate to conservative viewpoint, you would be booed down and hissed down, because, of course, most professors are far left -- other than Harold Ford. And so students try to follow along and try to -- so this young guy stands up, and he brings up the fact -- and it is a -- and, of course, Barney didn't want to answer it, Mike.
But Barney had said when people challenged him on his blind support of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac back in 2002, 2003, and earlier -- I think, last year -- that Republicans opposed Fannie Mae because they hated black people.
MIKE BARNICLE (MSNBC contributor): Yeah, well, that clip doesn't do Barney any favors -
BRZEZINSKI: No.
BARNICLE: -- and Barney didn't do himself any favors there by labeling the young man a right-winger when he was just asking a question.
SCARBOROUGH: He was trying to get facts out. And Barney -- and isn't that a great question to ask a public servant? Because I've -- I admit when I make mistakes. I admit, I was part of the subprime crisis -- everybody was part of it. What kind of example does that set when a student asks a man who was one of Fannie and Freddie's biggest advocates, do you bear any responsibility, and he won't answer that question?
[...]
SCARBOROUGH: That is sad. I mean --
GEIST: It's a simple question, John. Isn't it?
SCARBOROUGH: -- the student -- the student is right.
JOHN RIDLEY (MSNBC contributor): Yes or no, answer the question. Don't wait for the translation. Yeah, it's like a scene out of Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country --
GEIST: You're such a nerd.
RIDLEY: -- if I remember my references correctly. You know, look, its one of those things [inaudible] humor goes a long way, and I think in those situations, not that you shouldn't have a good answer, and he's clearly a very intelligent man -- first time I met you, Joe, we were on a show with the Representative. But one of those things when you start to get belligerent with an individual who may be slightly informed but is coming from an underdog situation, that's where it gets to be a little difficult.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, and that's the problem. If you're a conservative student at Harvard in that type of crowd, you're standing alone and you have an elected representative pounding you, not answering a very basic question, which is very simple. Yes, I messed up. We all messed up. That's the answer.
BRZEZINSKI: We're all to blame here.
SCARBOROUGH: We're all to blame. And he can't do that.
RIDLEY: I think taking just a little bit of ownership -- and I think you're right, Joe -- saying, look, it's not just me, it's everybody. There are some things I think I did correctly, let me correct the record on this or that.
BRZEZINSKI: Sure. It's a conversation.
RIDLEY: But it's tough for a lot of people -- and I'm not putting this on him -- it's tough for a lot of people, when you're on the spot, to go, "Oh, yeah, you know, I thought this was the correct answer," as opposed to getting defensive about it.
From the April 8 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:
CARLSON: It's definitely a place that Barney Frank thought that he would have a very comfortable audience at, I think. So, he goes there to give a speech at the Kennedy School of Government. There he is. The only thing is there was this pesky student.
DOOCY: A conservative.
KILMEADE: They call him a conservative.
DOOCY: A conservative.
CARLSON: A conservative pesky student, who had some questions for Barney Frank, some questions he didn't really want to answer. Let's listen.
[begin video clip]
POLLAK: I'm still waiting for a very simple answer to a question.
FRANK: And I'm waiting for -- I'm waiting for you to tell me what you think I should have done. I didn't say you were racist.
POLLAK: No. You're a public representative. I'm a student. I'm asking you how --
FRANK: Oh, so which allows you to say things that you don't back up.
POLLAK: I'm asking -- it does -- it does allow me to ask you a question. I'm waiting for you to explain --
FRANK: OK. I'll give you the answer.
POLLAK: -- how much, if any, responsibility do you think you have?
FRANK: Well, I will take this. First of all, you are a student. Students are entitled to full constitutional freedom of speech under the First Amendment. You've made an accusation that is wholly inaccurate. I --
POLLAK: I didn't accuse you of anything. I'm asking how much responsibility if any --
FRANK: Sure.
POLLAK: You can say none. That's fine.
[end video clip]
KILMEADE: It is a great question.
DOOCY: Yeah.
KILMEADE: He didn't accuse him of anything. He said, can a student ask a congressman, who works for him --
DOOCY: Sure.
KILMEADE: -- a question? And the question was: What responsibility do you think you have in this crisis?
DOOCY: And a lot -- if you believe the stories talking about the congressional responsibility leading to the deregulation of all these crazy derivatives and stuff like that.
KILMEADE: Fannie and Freddie, and there is no problem --
DOOCY: Sure. And the real estate -- yeah. Absolutely. It's a great question. That kid was great to stand up and continue to pester him on it and needle him.
KILMEADE: Right.
DOOCY: And from what we've heard, he never answered it. What's up with that?
From the April 7 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
HANNITY: And finally tonight, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank, had a little trouble answering a very simple question last night. Now, Congressman Frank gave a speech at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, and during the question-and-answer session, he was asked this brain teaser by a student in the audience about his role in the economic crisis.
POLLAK [video clip]: What I would like to know is if you acknowledge any responsibility at all for what's happened.
HANNITY: Now Congressman Frank didn't take too kindly to that question. As you know, he's not big on the whole taking responsibility thing, and after rambling on and on and on about the sins of the Bush administration, the student went at him again.
Let's take a look.
[begin video clip]
POLLAK: I'm still waiting for a very simple answer to a question.
FRANK: And I'm waiting for -- I'm waiting for you to tell me what you think I should have done. I didn't say you were racist.
POLLAK: No. You're a public representative. I'm a student. I'm asking you how --
FRANK: Oh, so which allows you to say things that you don't back up.
[...]
FRANK: Well, I will take this. First of all, you are a student. Students are entitled to full constitutional freedom of speech under the First Amendment. You've made an accusation that is wholly inaccurate.
[end video clip]
HANNITY: All right, stellar performance, Mr. Chairman, berating a student for asking a simple question. That is definitely the kind of accountability that we're looking for in our elected officials.
since when did neo con's support recycling? oh wait must only count towards their BS talking points.
Yep, their motto is "Don't confuse me with the facts. My mind is made up."
ok i watched the clips and read the transcript. No where did the student ask for an apology. He asked a very simple question and in typical Barney Rubble fashion Frank was anything but. He even coached Frank that he could simply say "none" but dear Frank is not smart enough to know when to shut up.
The first rule of holes - when in one stop digging. All the student did is keep throwing shovels his way. LOL.
Excavator, heal thyself.
Your response is typical - critical without any basis in reality but the diatribe of a lemming as he goes over the cliff's edge. If you support what Barney is doing then your moniker is a biography!
I agree with MrR but "excavator , heal thyself" is pretty good.
What? What do you think assigning blame is about if not either getting an apology for wrongs committed or seeing that someone won't accept blame and won't apologize?
And Frank did answer the student. That's already been documented above.
You are absolutely correct, whenever Franks is questioned on this subject , he goes on the attack and rarely will answer the question asked of him. Anyone with functional eyes and ears can hear Frank on numerous videos on utube, taken directly from the C-span telecasts. Frank and other dems blocked Fannie and Freddie reregulation through the early years of the Bush admin. It is a simple fact. These videos have been posted on MM many times and the libs here will ignore them every time. It was only after Fannie and Freddie imploded that Franks did anything. Notice how he only refers to the period after he was made chairman, he forgets about his part in earlier years, perhaps he should watch the videos too. . http://theworldsombudsman.blogspot.com/2009/04/financial-crisis-ombudsman.html Read what Rep Davis of Alabama has to say http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122342293714213269.html Here is the great organization and it's CEO that he was protecting. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14462-2005Mar30.html
You should hear them on WABC in NY at 10am.
When Mika dares disagree with Joe, he will raise his voice and hammer the same talking points over and over until she sits in silence. It's a borderline abusive relationship. If I was Mika's husband I would have had a long chat with Joe by now.
Looking down the list of topics today -- I am wondering, is there a drinking game one could play while watching or listening to the screammachine's puppets?
That's right there is one alcoholism. And I am betting you would still end up owing a shot or two at the end of the day.
Frank is pathetic, and became flustered when a citizen questioned him and dodged it all over the place. And then he tried to lie out of what he said back in October of those who criticized his opposing regulations of fannie mae "“They get to take things out on poor people.” ”Let’s be honest: The fact that some of the poor people are black doesn’t hurt them either, from their standpoint. This is an effort, I believe, to appeal to a kind of anger in people.”. If that is accusing them of being racists I don't know what is. for mmfa to defend him is even more pathetic, he is an irresponsible hack, good for Mr. Pollack, too bad the media isn't more like him.
”Let’s be honest: The fact that some of the poor people are black doesn’t hurt them either, from their standpoint. This is an effort, I believe, to appeal to a kind of anger in people.”
That would be them appealing to racists, not necessarily doing anything racist themselves.
if that isn't accusing them...
So he's accusing some people who are poor as being black...and then people in power take things out on poor people and secretly the blacks as well because they are poor.
I can see where there is a connection to his accusation in his comment...but I think that it is a very small piece of the much much larger pie that is known as the sub-prime loans meltdown
it's all connected in his condescending, weasly non answers to the questioner, who had every right to demand an answer to all his questions, and not to be told it was just "right wing" efforts to change the subject. These politicians are so used to be questioned by the media who doesn't dare ask them anything tough, when one does get through they whine and obfuscate their way through it. and mmfa defends this type of crap just because they are a Democrat, amazing, absolutely amazing.
james, that is well said. Frank is someone who does not deserve to be defended. He shares some blame in the mess and should of did the right thing and resigned as the chairman. This economic crisis is the fault of both parties. Enough with the partisan garbage.
ANyone who defends Frank needs to have their head examined. As a leader (OK I know that is stretching it for Barney Rubble here) he should be using his time and words to mend bridges, repair confidence inthe system and quit blaming everyone but himself (even if it is true that all are to blame). As a Senator and as Chairman he is at best PATHETIC!
As a leader ...he should be using his time and words to mend bridges, repair confidence inthe system and quit blaming everyone but himself (even if it is true that all are to blame). - WorldlyMrR
I could think of several Republican Senators who should do the same thing...
And with their mouths shut.
You are a student of being "Frank". Ignore the main point and deflect to the republicans. By doing so I note you agreement that Barney is Pathetic in his actions and words.
Nice try. You cannot twist someone's words to represent the exact opposite of what that person was trying to convey. You said that as a leader, he (meaning Frank) should be using his time and words to mend bridges, etc. I only pointed out that there are Republican Senators who should do the same thing. Am I wrong? Should the Republican Senators be held to a different standard? Do Republican Senators not have the same responsibility as Frank, to use their time and words to mend bridges, repair confidence in the system and quit blaming everyone but themselves (even if it is true that all are to blame)?
Why the double standard? Or are you just throwing barbs and misrepresenting others' statements because you're a pr!ck?
what about when.....god i can't remember his name off the top of my head.....he one of the panelists on lou dobbs last night dared to say on camera "we have a president who hates america" and then when he got called out about it lied about it and had the never to say he never said that.
how's that for obfuscation and avioding the question
i don't know who you are talking about, or why it is relevant here, but I would say that panelist is also an idiot.
i point it out for the simple reason that you said frank avioded answering the question....this chuckelhead on lou dobb's show did near the same thing when he got asked about his statement, and ive seent the guy before he is a republican strategist.
and what is michelle bachmann eh? an enlightened individuall?
no, an idiot
well, im glad we agree on something.
my problem is, aside from her obvious delusions......why is no one in the republican party trying to get her to stop this? she says what she says and no one in her own party seems to be willing to tell her to knock it off
Bachman is a disgrace. She is hatefilled, too bad she won the election. Hopefully in 2010 she will lose. This country has no place anymore for hateful politicians.
Both Frank and Pollak are pathetic, but Frank is far more so.
Frank is a boiling kettle who has been getting disingenuously dragged through the mud for months by right-wing professional liars as being single-handedly responsible for the financial crisis. I feel that Frank was unprofessional by allowing a student to expend his fuse and set him off on a tangent of “right-wing attack” rhetoric. Pollak was courageous enough to question an elected representative in front of a crowd that was seemingly sympathetic to Frank (judging by the laughter). Frank most definitely could have been more respectful and avoided the political bloviating.
As to the point of the item, however, Frank did answer the question of how much responsibility he takes:
“The answer is, yes, I do take responsibility for something… I immediately filed a bill in 2006 when I was still in the minority to say hedge funds should be registered. In 2007 I was approached by people who said, ‘No. No. You can't do too much regulation,’ and I backed off. I wish I hadn't.”
Is that not an answer to the question? Or is it just not the answer the right-wing wants? (i.e. “Yes, I did it, the whole mess is entirely my fault.”)
Pollak was just plain dishonest…
He makes accusations:
“you pushed a stimulus bill through Congress that included several provisions that you later attacked as profoundly wasteful and so on … And in 2008, in October, you accused critics of the stimulus plan of being racist and so on.”
Then he denies making accusations:
"I didn't accuse you of anything."
Oh, BTW...
If you want the media to be more like Pollak, then is it safe to assume that you want more dishonesty in the media?
huh???? Pollack did not get a straight answer to his question, he did not accuse Frank of anything, he merely asked him about his accusation of racism from last October. And Frank dodged it six ways to Sunday and then turned it around on the guy by calling it rightwing distractions or some nonsense. It was sickening. Defend him if you want, I could care less. If you hold students questioning politicians to the same standards as politicians, that is very sad.
I did say it was AN answer, not THE answer. It simply isn't the answer you're looking for (i.e. “Yes, I did it, the whole mess is entirely my fault”). I'm not vouching for the accuracy of Frank's answer, but I don't know how much more "straight" it could be.
"It was sickening. Defend him if you want, I could care less. If you hold students questioning politicians to the same standards as politicians, that is very sad."
Of course, my compliments toward Pollak for his courage go unnoticed by you.
But what I like about Sen Frank, is that he is willing to call a spade a spade.
If you regurgitate Republican talking point that neither forward the conversation or hold any truth, than by all means call people out on it. He might not have known which political party the questioner was affiliate with...but the questioner was more than happy to continue asking the Republican talking points and Sen. Frank. just called him on it.
so it's a Republican talking point to ask clarification why you accused someone of racism? Frank was caught, and he knew it. So he spinelessly tried to wiggle out of it and turn back on the guy. you people are like sheep when it comes to Democrats, amazing.
Veiled charges of racism are a long standing tactic of Frank and other Dems also, not to mention Acorn. It was the cornerstone of their defense of Fannie and Freddie and the dems opposition to Rep proposals for regulation.
<!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} -->
Pete you have it correct; both Frank and the student are quite far off the mark regarding this. The student clearly is attempting to make a point that Frank (and the Democrats) are somehow more responsible for the current banking crisis than Republicans. I have to say that it seems pretty obvious that ALL politicians want to blame other people or parties for the mess. Frank's answer is pathetic. He is most likely not so stupid as to really believe that the 2006 bill to have all hedge funds register with the SEC would have done anything to prevent the current banking / credit crisis. First of all, 70% of hedge funds are already registered with the SEC. Madoff's fund was registered and regulated by the SEC. So implying that would have done diddly dork is either stupid or ingenuous. Secondly, 90% of the measly 2 trillion in assets hedge funds had prior to the credit crisis were invested in equities and had nothing to do with this credit meltdown. Hedge funds had nothing to do with this and he knows it. The two biggest hedge funds that did have mortgage securities went to zero (Bear Sterns funds) and were liquidated long before the problem blew up. FNMA, Freddie, Lehman, AIG were the blow up. All were regulated entities as are all the banks and investment banks. FNMA and Freddie were in fact highly regulated and nearly government run even prior to the blow up. Frank didn't answer the question but neither have any of the collective politicians that are really responsible for the entire problem. That is beginning with Bush, Greenspan, the Democrats and the Republicans that all encouraged FNMA and Freddie to blow the real-estate bubble into trillions of securities that ultimately the Government is now on the hook for.
The problem has it's seed in the CRA although in my opinion that is not to blame. The blame starts with relaxed lending standards implemented by the dems during the Clinton years. And the rep sponsored deregulation that occured during the same period. This deregulation was largely unopposed by the dems. When Bush came into office he tried , along with other reps to reregulate Fannie and Freddie, the dems blocked it sucessfully until they became the majority in Congress. Both parties must share in the blame, the dereg was the policy of the reps and while they tried to reregulate, they were not successful. You are absolutely correct in stating that the hedge funds had nothing to do with this and Frank is only blowing smoke as he usually does. The invention of Credit Default Swaps by Wall St and their non-regulation was also a major factor as was the bogus rating given many of the mortgage backed securities. Greenspan actually warned of catastrophic consequences if Fannie and Freddie were not addressed but then foolishly kept interest rates too low, fanning the flames. There is much blame to go around in this mess but it is best summed up by saying that the problem was caused by fat cats in all walks of life, our politicians, our business people and even everyday people who became house flippers and real estate experts as opposed to homeowners. It was a big game of musical chairs ( or maybe houses) and unfortunately the music stopped.
Exactly correct Fairliberal. However, I will tell you I think Barney Frank is onel of the worst actors in all of this because he was very close to Fannie and Freddie compounded by the fact he publicly said that warnings about them were unfounded. Now he wants to place himself in the savior roll. It seems like giving a drunk the keys to the abulance at the scene of a horrific traffic accident.
"When Bush came into office he tried , along with other reps to reregulate Fannie and Freddie, the dems blocked it sucessfully until they became the majority in Congress."
BULL***T
Two words: "Ownership Society"
The blame starts with relaxed lending standards implemented by the dems during the Clinton years.
Liar. Who was in control of Congress during Clinton's terms?
What question did he not answer?
I think he did answer the question.
read or listen to the entire exchange, he dodged and tried to turn it back on the student. Frank should be ashamed of the way he treated this questioner, he is a pompous, arrogant a$$
Is there a way to watch the entire exchange without all the flash/jump-cuts?
I think we may have our answers there
Not hard to find. It simply wasn't the answer you wanted, which is partially why your undies are in a twist.
The question was...
"[H]ow much, if any, responsibility do you think you have"
The answer was...
“The answer is, yes, I do take responsibility for something… I immediately filed a bill in 2006 when I was still in the minority to say hedge funds should be registered. In 2007 I was approached by people who said, ‘No. No. You can't do too much regulation,’ and I backed off. I wish I hadn't.”
I take responsibility for something..."I did in fact not take the trash out at my home back in October". There was an awful smell that would not go away for a month.
Get outha here!!!! He DI NOT answer the question NOR will he EVER answer THAT question with the answer that we already know...
No offense but if you think you "already know" the answer then the only way he can answer to your satisfaction is to agree with you. Disagreeing with or not believing his answer doesn't mean he didn't answer.
And if they want to parse the answer, then let's parse the question...
"[H]ow much, if any, responsibility do you think you have"
I appears Barney told him what he thinks and then some.
Exactly. That's the 'gotcha' question...
And Frank didn't fall for it.
Just as I said, it's not the answer you're looking for. I'm not vouching for the accuracy of what Frank said.
Frank possesses no backbone - he is spineless and like a snake when approached he shows his fangs, and when that doesn't stop the questioner, he strikes.....only thing is with each and every speech he becomes an albatross around Obama's and Pelosi's necks.
More ridiculous nonsense from the stupefyingly provincial Mr R.
At least I have opinions I am willing to offer and facts, not twisted or parsed statements, to back those opinions- something which you rarely ever do. It is far easier to just call people names - which you do constantly and consistenlty. And your retorts are clearly indicators, without a doubt, of your mental age.
So I'll play nice since my mom said it is disrespectful to pick on the "slow" (i.e. ETRW) ones. LMAO
PS> I see I have graduated in the MMFA system that I now have you as a handler. I note every time i now write something within minutes you are posting a name calling reply. If I was as bad as you say, and if you were as smart as you think, you would just ignore me.
"It is far easier to just call people names"
I guess you'd know best...
"spineless"
"snake"
"albatross"
Ohh my other handler. Sorry I wasn't clear in my statement about the liberalites parsing and twisting statements. Yes it is true I used those names - to express my feelings about Barney Rubble after describing why I was using the term. You, like wingnut, want to try and use that to somehow justify that what you are doing is what I am doing. But you are dead wrong. I noted that all Wingnut could do was call other bloggers that did not share his views names. I thank you for pointing out that i needed to make this much more clear for the "slow" ones - ooops there i go I guess i did it too. My apologies to the mentally challenged left.
"handler"
"slow ones"
"mentally challenged"
But somehow, it's all "justified."
Easy is an Idiot. He stops in, throws a few names around, and then leaves. He never backs up anyhting he says, and always argues on a third grade name calling level. He is what he is.
"throws a few names around"
like...
"idiot"?
A-men!
What interview were you watching?? The "kid" got the best of him. He made Frank look a fool.
Right, bringing up TARP in the middle of a conversation about the subprime crisis was a genius move. It's pretty obvious he was lacking in focus, to put it lightly.
All he did was spin Frank around and showed his label. Awah, Awah, Awah. "See what had happened was..."
I knew the bull was coming when he started out like that...
Frank didn't answer the question. I am surprised he didn't call the kid a homophobe.
Your assumption is that attacking the basis for a question is inherently unfair. Frank's question was valid. If there's a question of what blame he is supposed to assume, it's fair for him to ask what that blame is supposed to be for.
The kid asked a respectful direct question, he did not get a respectful direct answer. He was combative right from the start. The student displayed alot more class than Frank did. This reminds me of Joe the plumber, how dare anyone question one of our liberal icons about policy and accountability.
It actually is a loaded question. If there's nothing to blame him for, specifically, then the question makes no sense. Saying "you could say you're not to blame" is ridiculous because the presumption of the question still remains. You have to know what you're denying.
As for respectful, I might buy that if he didn't go off on a completely unrelated topic as if it had some relevance to the original question. That indicated to me that he knew he couldn't back up his question, and he felt the need to shift to some other line of attack.
Obama answered Joe's questions, so I'm not sure what your point is there. The only reason his name is even known is because McCain brought him up in the debate.
He still didn't answer the question. I find it arrogant of him to act the way he did. Just for your information, some of us (myself included) blame just about everyone in politics for the economic downfall. Democrats in the house and senate, President Bush, bankers, Wall Street and the way it isn't regulated, speculators, etc. Barney Frank shouldn't have either said, "I take no blame" or "I take a little blame and the blame is..." No, he threw a childish hissy fit. Made democrats look stupid and gave a lot of ammunition for republicans. Whatever happened to the really cool-minded Democrats like Bill Clinton? Smile, convolute the topic, move on gracefully.
Again, it's a loaded question. I don't think there's a problem with blaming everyone to some degree, but you should have some sort of rationale for it. If you're going to ask that question, you should be able to expand on what you think the fault is.
I agree that Frank should have been more calm, but the idea that this was some kid asking a question in good faith is ludicrous. Pollak also could have just responded "I don't know what else you should have done", right? He didn't have to go off on tangential attacks.
He still didn't answer the question...
Answer me on this if you would - have you stopped beating your wife?
I'm not married. See how easy that question and answer were?
That's not a "yes or no" answer.
Did the student say he is a conservative or have the media matter's lemins and the drive by media just assume he is?
He said he was a conservative. It's in the video link.