Stanley Kurtz hit it out of the park with his article on NRO:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjRjYzE0YmQxNzU4MDJjYWE5MjIzMTMxMmNhZWQ1MTA=   

Daniel Gross counters with the following on Slate:

http://www.slate.com/id/2201641/

Despite the class warfare and race-baiting argument put forth by Mr. Gross in Slate, the current global financial crisis has its roots squarely in Washington politics.  In truth, real political pressure was brought to bear on otherwise free markets to relax credit standards with a politically correct goal of increased home ownership.  This Federal public policy - facilitated primarily by Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac, which are government sponsored enterprises ["GSEs"] that buy & re-package over 50% or all US mortgages - resulted in the creation of exotic "sub-prime" loan programs that were major contributors to this crisis (borrow up to 125% of home value, no money down, consideration of welfare payments as qualifying income, etc.).  The systemic deterioration of mortgage credit standards were abetted by the disappointingly poor performance of the credit rating agencies and disreputable lenders - on this point I would concur with Mr. Gross.  That said, the key point that Mr. Kurtz detailed is irrefutable: liberal advocacy groups like ACORN, with the help of Democrats in Washington, were directly targeting those institutions that could advance their liberal social agenda while playing race & class warfare cards against any who opposed this influence.  Their success in these efforts set the stage for this financial crisis.

So long as home values continued to appreciate, these dubious mortgages were propped up by the increased equity controlled by the borrowers.  Re-Fi, cash out, and repeat. However, when housing values started to fall and marginal borrowers were faced with making payments based solely on free monthly cash flow and, in some cases, staring down balloon payments and/or rate increases, the house of cards began to fall.  As recently as June of this year, Congressional Democrats were strident in their opposition to any restrictions or additional oversight on Fannie/Freddie (proposed by both the Bush Administration as well as prominent Congressional leaders, including Sen. McCain) and in fact, denied that there was any cause for concern.

Watch this and then tell me who is being honest about this travesty:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

Note that Franklin Raines - former Fannie Mae CEO, Obama economic advisor and major campaign contributor - actually says, "These assets are so risk-less…."  Shocking!  It is noteworthy that Mr. Raines walked away from the burning wreckage that is Fannie Mae with millions in his own pockets while the tax payers are left holding the bag.  For their efforts, Reps. Frank and Waters just flat out deny any problems exist and, for good measure, Rep. Clay inserts race into the debate by calling the inquiry a "political lynching."  That's choice.  And then Mr. Gross attempts to make this same argument with historical mortgage default statistics - from a time, ostensibly, in which rational credit standards were the norm.  Sorry, but the argument rings hollow right about now.  

Mr. Gross further states that the CRA did not force lenders to make these exotic loans, but he's not being truthful here.  Federal oversight provisions of the CRA became the hammer with which Democrats in Congress could apply pressure: Federal approvals for potential mergers or expansion plans concerning these financial institutions were withheld until commitments for relaxed lending standards could be extracted, thereby advancing liberal social policies in the process.  And it doesn't matter whether you are directly regulated by the Feds or not - a lender would not likely originate a loan that they could not sell on the secondary markets.  By creating the strong demand for "sub-prime" debt on the secondary markets, and contributing to the spread of that debt throughout the financial system in the form of increasingly complicated financial derivatives, Freddie/Fannie helped make this domestic real estate bubble a global financial crisis. 

In reality, I would love to hear Mr. Gross and Mr. Kurtz debate.  I'd bet that it'd be a short fight.  However, it appears that we are not likely to witness any truthful public discourse until - at least - Nov. 5th.  In the past few months, for example, the Obama campaign has orchestrated several attempts to silence critics (including Mr. Kurtz) who were appearing as guests on public forums, i.e. Chicago talk radio.  These efforts employed the use of tactics similar to denial of service attacks and were coordinated explicitly by the Obama campaign itself.  If this counts as any foreshadowing, one could expect the "Fairness Doctrine" to be resurrected in the next Congress and quickly signed back into law.  That's progress, I guess. In light of the current polling trends, I will shortly begin reading Liberal Fascism, by Jonah Goldberg, to prepare for the next administration. You might want to pick it up, too.