The Republican Thread

[southsider2k5]

I get what you're saying. As usual I have a slightly different perspective of the motivation though.

 

In my view...most of the official documents put out by the finance industry are designed to make it impossible for an average person even with a good education to figure them out. That way, you can get a whole lot of people to take deals that are terrible for them without them even realizing it. From the other side...even if you know the basics like you're saying people don't...what good is that if you can't figure out how to convert the language in the documentation into simple terms like you're saying people aren't taught?

 

What legal document have you ever seen written in simple terms, in any industry?

[Balta1701]

What legal document have you ever seen written in simple terms, in any industry?

If I have a basic understanding of say, health...I can look at the side of a box/can of food and pretty easily figure out how likely that item is going to be to kill me.

 

If I take out a mortgage tomorrow, I'm going to be 1/2 scared that the bank will find a way to foreclose on me as punishment for making my payments. Scoff at that if you want, but you know I can find stories of that happening in the last 4 years.

[NorthSideSox72]

If I have a basic understanding of say, health...I can look at the side of a box/can of food and pretty easily figure out how likely that item is going to be to kill me.

 

If I take out a mortgage tomorrow, I'm going to be 1/2 scared that the bank will find a way to foreclose on me as punishment for making my payments. Scoff at that if you want, but you know I can find stories of that happening in the last 4 years.

 

1. No, you can't find stories like that, because that would be absurd even if the banks were as evil as you make them out to be. They'd lose money.

 

2. If you take out a mortgage tomorrow and don't have an attorney sitting next to you like you are supposed to (one who knows about real estate law), then you were stupid - and needed a class in finance as I noted earlier.

 

3. By nature, an instrument like a mortgage is IMPOSSIBLE to fully reduce down to a cereal-box-side page. If you did that, you'd eventually have the opposite problem - that suddenly the banks could do things not even written in the documents.

 

[southsider2k5]

If I have a basic understanding of say, health...I can look at the side of a box/can of food and pretty easily figure out how likely that item is going to be to kill me.

 

If I take out a mortgage tomorrow, I'm going to be 1/2 scared that the bank will find a way to foreclose on me as punishment for making my payments. Scoff at that if you want, but you know I can find stories of that happening in the last 4 years.

 

Those two things aren't similar at all. More accurate would be a full health care policy, or federal regulations on health. What you are talking about is more akin to going on a banks website and seeing their rates and basic exclusions.

[southsider2k5]

http://www.southbendtribune.com/sbt-fake-s...,0,181597.story

 

SOUTH BEND - Minus suspected fakes, then Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama likely fell short of the number of signatures needed to appear on the 2008 Indiana primary ballot, and it's possible his opponent, Hillary Clinton, did as well, according to information obtained by The Tribune as part of an investigation into suspected ballot petition fraud.

 

Trent Deckard, Democratic co-director of the state Election Division, in an e-mail Thursday told The Tribune Obama's 2008 petition for primary ballot placement in the state contained just 534 certified signatures in the 2nd Congressional District. Clinton's petition contained 704 certified signatures, he said.

 

Related

Party leaders supporting investigation Party leaders supporting investigation

Find out if your signature ended up on Clinton's petitions Find out if your signature ended up on Clinton's petitions

Suspicious petitions got a stamped signature Suspicious petitions got a stamped signature

 

Presidential candidates must collect at least 500 signatures in each of the state's nine congressional districts to appear on the statewide primary ballot in Indiana.

 

As reported Sunday, The Tribune, in conjunction with Howey Politics Indiana, has uncovered scores of fake signatures on both the Obama and Clinton petitions in the 2nd Congressional District and specifically St. Joseph County.

 

Dozens of people whose signatures appear on the Clinton petition have told The Tribune they did not sign the document, and Erich Speckin, a forensic document analyst hired by the paper and Howey Politics identified at least 19 suspected fake Obama petition pages.

 

Those Obama pages account for more than 100 signatures, meaning, minus the fakes, the former senator likely would not have qualified for ballot placement in the state.

 

Whether Clinton, a former senator and now secretary of state under Obama, would have qualified is harder to determine. The Tribune has identified 35 fake signatures on her petition in the district at this point.

 

That said, Speckin identified a number of suspected fake Clinton petition pages as well.

 

Clinton narrowly defeated Obama in the Indiana primary, and Obama won the state in his general election victory over John McCain.

 

Even if Obama had not been on the ballot in Indiana, it would not have changed the outcome of the primary election. The former senator and current president won the Democratic nomination for president despite losing to Clinton in Indiana.

 

There is no evidence Clinton or Obama knew about the fake signatures. Voter registration offices across the state certified both candidates' petitions, as did the Election Division.

 

No one challenged the petitions at the time.

 

Responding to the ballot question, state Republican Party Chair Eric Holcomb said in a statement Thursday: "I've consistently said Barack Obama earned his narrow victory in Indiana. If these new allegations are true, that's no longer the case. He wouldn't have visited the state 48 times and aired countless commercials because he wouldn't have even been on the primary ballot."

 

Holcomb, who has called on the Department of Justice to investigate the Clinton and Obama petitions, also responded to a report that the suspected fake Obama petition pages passed through the county voter registration office on days when the Republican member of the office was out.

 

"The evidence currently suggests this was clearly not a clerical error or simple oversight," Holcomb said. "Multiple crimes have been committed in a brazen violation of the public trust against the people of Indiana and our electoral process."

 

As reported by The Tribune on Wednesday, the pages in question bear the stamped signature of Republican Linda Silcott. That indicates Silcott, who missed a number of days of work in early 2008 because of the death of her husband, was out at the time the documents passed through the office.

 

"With this latest development that the Republican board member was not even present to confirm the validity of these fraudulent signatures, yet another set of questions is raised," Holcomb said.

 

"Were the forged forms purposely shepherded through the process knowing she was out of the office and approval would come easily? Where did the vetting process break down or was it meant to? ... What knowledge did the Obama and Clinton campaign teams have of the effort to collect fraudulent signatures?"

 

Holcomb also suggested St. Joseph County Prosecutor Mike Dvorak, whose office is looking into the Obama and Clinton petitions, "recuse himself from any investigation being conducted by his office."

 

"Believing Prosecutor Dvorak is a victim of this crime, it's essential to maintain complete impartiality in investigating this important case," he said. "Therefore he should step aside and cooperate with those assigned to the investigation."

 

Dvorak's name and signature appear twice on the Clinton petition. He told The Tribune one of the signatures is his but did not respond to a question about the validity of a second signature sent to him a few days later, saying the matter was now under investigation.

 

The state Democratic Party declined to comment on the ballot question Thursday. It did, however, question the Election Division's signature totals for Obama and Clinton in the 2nd District.

 

In an e-mail, the party provided to The Tribune an electronic file of a report released by the division a day before the deadline to file in 2008. The report, generated by a Statewide Voter Registration System petition module, indicates 580 total signatures for Obama in the 2nd District and 734 for Clinton.

 

In a previous statement, party Chair Dan Parker said he supported an investigation into the fake petition signatures but emphasized that, even without those signatures, both Clinton and Obama would have qualified for the ballot.

 

"Both had their signatures in well in advance of the deadline," he said. "Both had more than enough signatures. Both would have qualified. If you look at every petition, both would have had more than 500 signatures."

 

Even 580 Obama signatures, though, would not be enough to make up for more than 100 signatures the handwriting expert says were not legitimate. It will take further analysis to determine whether there are enough faked signatures to push Clinton's legitimate total below 500.

 

Would ’08 May ballot have been different?

Possible fake signatures may mean Obama didn’t actually qualify in Indiana

By ERIN BLASKO

Tribune Staff Writer

 

SOUTH BEND - Minus suspected fakes, then Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama likely fell short of tahe number of signatures needed to appear on the 2008 Indiana primary ballot, and it’s possible his opponent, Hillary Clinton, did as well, according to information obtained by The Tribune as part of an investigation into suspected ballot petition fraud.

 

Trent Deckard, Democratic co-director of the state Election Division, in an e-mail Thursday told The Tribune Obama's 2008 petition for primary ballot placement in the state contained just 534 certified signatures in the 2nd Congressional District. Clinton's petition contained 704 certified signatures, he said.

 

Presidential candidates must collect at least 500 signatures in each of the state’s nine congressional districts to appear on the statewide primary ballot in Indiana.

 

As reported Sunday, The Tribune, in conjunction with Howey Politics Indiana, has uncovered scores of fake signatures on both the Obama and Clinton petitions in the 2nd Congressional District and specifically St. Joseph County.

 

Dozens of people whose signatures appear on the Clinton petition have told The Tribune they did not sign the document, and Erich Speckin, a forensic document analyst hired by the paper and Howey Politics identified at least 19 suspected fake Obama petition pages.

 

Those Obama pages account for more than 100 signatures, meaning, minus the fakes, the former senator likely would not have qualified for ballot placement in the state.

 

Whether Clinton, a former senator and now secretary of state under Obama, would have qualified is harder to determine. The Tribune has identified 35 fake signatures on her petition in the district at this point.

 

That said, Speckin identified a number of suspected fake Clinton petition pages as well.

 

Clinton narrowly defeated Obama in the Indiana primary, and Obama won the state in his general election victory over John McCain.

 

Even if Obama had not been on the ballot in Indiana, it would not have changed the outcome of the primary election. The former senator and current president won the Democratic nomination for president despite losing to Clinton in Indiana.

 

There is no evidence Clinton or Obama knew about the fake signatures. Voter registration offices across the state certified both candidates' petitions, as did the Election Division.

 

No one challenged the petitions at the time.

 

Responding to the ballot question, state Republican Party Chair Eric Holcomb said in a statement Thursday: "I've consistently said Barack Obama earned his narrow victory in Indiana. If these new allegations are true, that's no longer the case. He wouldn't have visited the state 48 times and aired countless commercials because he wouldn't have even been on the primary ballot."

 

Holcomb, who has called on the Department of Justice to investigate the Clinton and Obama petitions, also responded to a report that the suspected fake Obama petition pages passed through the county voter registration office on days when the Republican member of the office was out.

 

"The evidence currently suggests this was clearly not a clerical error or simple oversight," Holcomb said. "Multiple crimes have been committed in a brazen violation of the public trust against the people of Indiana and our electoral process."

 

As reported by The Tribune on Wednesday, the pages in question bear the stamped signature of Republican Linda Silcott. That indicates Silcott, who missed a number of days of work in early 2008 because of the death of her husband, was out at the time the documents passed through the office.

 

"With this latest development that the Republican board member was not even present to confirm the validity of these fraudulent signatures, yet another set of questions is raised," Holcomb said.

 

"Were the forged forms purposely shepherded through the process knowing she was out of the office and approval would come easily? Where did the vetting process break down or was it meant to? … What knowledge did the Obama and Clinton campaign teams have of the effort to collect fraudulent signatures?"

 

Holcomb also suggested St. Joseph County Prosecutor Mike Dvorak, whose office is looking into the Obama and Clinton petitions, "recuse himself from any investigation being conducted by his office."

 

"Believing Prosecutor Dvorak is a victim of this crime, it’s essential to maintain complete impartiality in investigating this important case," he said. "Therefore he should step aside and cooperate with those assigned to the investigation."

 

Dvorak’s name and signature appear twice on the Clinton petition. He told The Tribune one of the signatures is his but did not respond to a question about the validity of a second signature sent to him a few days later, saying the matter was now under investigation.

 

The state Democratic Party declined to comment on the ballot question Thursday. It did, however, question the Election Division's signature totals for Obama and Clinton in the 2nd District.

 

In an e-mail, the party provided to The Tribune an electronic file of a report released by the division a day before the deadline to file in 2008. The report, generated by a Statewide Voter Registration System petition module, indicates 580 total signatures for Obama in the 2nd District and 734 for Clinton.

 

In a previous statement, party Chair Dan Parker said he supported an investigation into the fake petition signatures but emphasized that, even without those signatures, both Clinton and Obama would have qualified for the ballot.

 

"Both had their signatures in well in advance of the deadline," he said. "Both had more than enough signatures. Both would have qualified. If you look at every petition, both would have had more than 500 signatures."

 

Even 580 Obama signatures, though, would not be enough to make up for more than 100 signatures the handwriting expert says were not legitimate. It will take further analysis to determine whether there are enough faked signatures to push Clinton’s legitimate total below 500.

 

Copyright © 2011, South Bend Tribune

[Balta1701]

Those two things aren't similar at all. More accurate would be a full health care policy, or federal regulations on health. What you are talking about is more akin to going on a banks website and seeing their rates and basic exclusions.

And how many times were banks able to shunt people onto sub-prime loans when they would have qualified for prime loans? Seeing the bank's rates and basic exclusions is like seeing the U.S. recommended daily allowances but having no trust in the actual numbers presented. It's like dining at a fast food place.

[Balta1701]

2. If you take out a mortgage tomorrow and don't have an attorney sitting next to you like you are supposed to (one who knows about real estate law), then you were stupid - and needed a class in finance as I noted earlier.

Then why the Hell doesn't the law require a person to consult with a qualified person beforehand?

[southsider2k5]

Then why the Hell doesn't the law require a person to consult with a qualified person beforehand?

 

Because the law doesn't require that for anything. Or will their be a lawyer present when we are all required to sign up for health insurance under penalty of the law?

[Balta1701]

1. No, you can't find stories like that, because that would be absurd even if the banks were as evil as you make them out to be. They'd lose money.

Stop. Giving. Them. Credit.

Despite Mark Conca's slipping commissions and dwindling savings he never missed a mortgage payment and when Bank of America told him to skip some to receive loan modifications, he refused.

 

That didn't stop B of A from foreclosing on Conca's Caldwell, NJ home, threatening him with eviction, and destroying his credit.

 

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-conca-...8#ixzz1alKKQEgi

2

Bank of America told this couple that their house would go into foreclosure on Christmas Eve, which came as something of an anti-Christmas Miracle to them considering they had never missed a single mortgage payment.

3

For the past 30 days, Kendra and Todd Parker have been trying to figure out what to tell their four children, fearing that they, like millions of other Americans facing foreclosure, could be tossed out of their home.

 

But unlike the vast majority of homeowners in their predicament, Kendra Parker says she can prove she and her husband have not missed a single mortgage payment.

 

And these aren't ones who were told to start making a different payment.

[CrimsonWeltall]

Then why the Hell doesn't the law require a person to consult with a qualified person beforehand?

 

I guess legislators didn't think people would treat 6-figure financial transactions like website TOS agreements: scroll to the bottom, hit accept.

[Balta1701]

Because the law doesn't require that for anything. Or will their be a lawyer present when we are all required to sign up for health insurance under penalty of the law?

And you guys don't understand how everything you've just said means that actually purchasing a house even with a legal team is an insane decision?

[southsider2k5]

And you guys don't understand how everything you've just said means that actually purchasing a house even with a legal team is an insane decision?

 

And you don't seem to understand that this is exactly how it is in any legal situation these days.

[Balta1701]

And you don't seem to understand that this is exactly how it is in any legal situation these days.

Clearly then having people simply take classes in basic financial management in high school won't do jack squat, because if you can't actually manage your own finances without a $5 million a year legal team, knowing how to balance your checkbook won't stop you from being screwed over by that industry.

[southsider2k5]

Clearly then having people simply take classes in basic financial management in high school won't do jack squat, because if you can't actually manage your own finances without a $5 million a year legal team, knowing how to balance your checkbook won't stop you from being screwed over by that industry.

 

Nice to see we have gone from having a lawyer present, to a five million dollar legal team. Nice.

 

[Balta1701]

Nice to see we have gone from having a lawyer present, to a five million dollar legal team. Nice.

Nice to see that you agree there will be no benefit to having people take financial management courses as required in high school.

 

If having a lawyer present is 100% necessary as you say it is...then it ought to be a requirement. Perhaps we should establish some sort of consumer bureau dealing with the financial industry who could come up with those requirements, for the protection of consumers when they are entering agreements in financial products.

[southsider2k5]

Nice to see that you agree there will be no benefit to having people take financial management courses as required in high school.

 

If having a lawyer present is 100% necessary as you say it is...then it ought to be a requirement. Perhaps we should establish some sort of consumer bureau dealing with the financial industry who could come up with those requirements, for the protection of consumers when they are entering agreements in financial products.

 

Great. Then will Obama be providing the 30 million lawyers to understand the health care policies that he is forcing people to sign up for?

[StrangeSox]

Great. Then will Obama be providing the 30 million lawyers to understand the health care policies that he is forcing people to sign up for?

 

It'd be much simpler, cheaper and more effective to just go with a single-payer system.

[southsider2k5]

It'd be much simpler, cheaper and more effective to just go with a single-payer system.

 

Why? You'd still have to have lawyers to understand the rules.

[Balta1701]

Great. Then will Obama be providing the 30 million lawyers to understand the health care policies that he is forcing people to sign up for?

Or they could just require that the documents are written in a way where screwing people is legally impossible.

 

Did you consult with an attorney when you received/purchased your current health care policy?

[Jenksismyhero]

And how many times were banks able to shunt people onto sub-prime loans when they would have qualified for prime loans? Seeing the bank's rates and basic exclusions is like seeing the U.S. recommended daily allowances but having no trust in the actual numbers presented. It's like dining at a fast food place.

 

If you're too stupid to realize that a 15% interest rate is worse than 8%, or that an adjustable rate mortgage means that the rate will be adjusted every X amount of years and that payments will go up accordingly, then you shouldn't be buying a home. It's that simple. You shouldn't be able to drive a car without knowing how to operate it, same applies to home ownership.

Edited October 14, 2011 by Jenksismybitch

[NorthSideSox72]

Stop. Giving. Them. Credit.

 

2

 

3

 

 

And these aren't ones who were told to start making a different payment.

LOL, are you serious here? Not one of your three examples is anything like what you were laughably claiming (that banks would build in, and want to, foreclose on paying mortgagees). One is a check lost in the mail, another is a credit rating issue and bank stupidity, and another is a good example of a re-fi assistance program gone horribly awry.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

Or they could just require that the documents are written in a way where screwing people is legally impossible.

 

Did you consult with an attorney when you received/purchased your current health care policy?

 

They're getting there actually. And there are new laws in place concerning the amount of information that you need to be told as you fill out the various mortgage and loan documents.

[NorthSideSox72]

If you're too stupid to realize that a 15% interest rate is worse than 8%, or that an adjustable rate mortgage means that the rate will be adjusted ever X amount of years and that payments will go up accordingly, then you shouldn't be buying a home. It's that simple. You shouldn't be able to drive a car without knowing how to operate it, same applies to home ownership.

That's what I was getting at. You still should have an attorney present on a mortgage closing, because the few hundred bucks that costs you is well worth it against the risk assocaited with hundreds of thousands of dollars. But just going into that closing knowing the basics of what you are doing, would go a long, long way towards avoiding some of the messes people got themselves into.

 

Then of course, Balta takes that, and makes it into needing a $5M legal team to do anything financially.

 

[Balta1701]

LOL, are you serious here? Not one of your three examples is anything like what you were laughably claiming (that banks would build in, and want to, foreclose on paying mortgagees). One is a check lost in the mail, another is a credit rating issue and bank stupidity, and another is a good example of a re-fi assistance program gone horribly awry.

And do you seriously think that none of those are possible results of simply taking out a mortgage in good faith?

 

I did not allege in this case that "Foreclosing" was good for the bank (although it's been a great thing for the foreclosure servicers). I alleged that having the contracts so incomprehensible that even people with legal training can't figure them out gives the bank hundreds of ways to take advantage of the terms. If they lose 1% extra to foreclosures but they can get a higher price on 50% of the contracts when they sell them, then the incomprehensible terms provide them a huge advantage.

[Balta1701]

They're getting there actually. And there are new laws in place concerning the amount of information that you need to be told as you fill out the various mortgage and loan documents.

Just more job-killing regulation.