This lie of yours already got demolished by the facts. Would you like to retract it now or have me embarrass you again?
That wasn't a lie, it was the truth. You right-wingers have gotten to the point where you actually can't tell one from the other.
De-regulating banks was a Republican idea. Yes, Clinton signed off on it, but the bill is called Gramm-Bliley-Leach, which stands for Jim Leach (R - Iowa), Phil Gramm (R - Texas) and Tom Bliley (R - Tobacco).
You're even more mixed up than I thought. Perhaps you forgot about CRA? A big piece of the puzzle no doubt, although not the critical piece. As far as the repeal of the glass-steagall act, it has merely been surmised that it exacerbated the housing crisis - far from being the cause. But for your own sake, pay attention this time so I don't have to repeat it again in another thread:
1. The risky lending behavior leading up to the housing crisis would never have occurred
if the government had not interfered with the natural flow of the market by requiring fannie and freddie to take on greater subprime lending, while simultaneously knowing that they are implicitly backed with taxpayer dollars. We all know that the ring leaders in this were Barney Frank and Chris Dodd along with other prodigies of the leftwing Keynesian liberal mindset. Bush also decided to not only allow this to happen without attempting to stop it but he actually encouraged it with bills of his own -- one of the decisive moves contributing to making his presidency so bad - because he went directly contrary to fiscal responsibility and free market principles.
2. What happened is tantamount to the government telling a private business to take on riskier practices while simultaneously guaranteeing the added insurance risk for those practices. It was a win win situation for both commercial banks, through FDIC (through which there is so much bank failure funding) and fannie and freddie. The banks were given a nothing-to-lose scenario. Like any other business they engaged in behavior that was profitable and in their best interest by selling the bad loans to fannie and Freddie en masse, who were taking them on because... WHY? THE GOVERNMENT TOLD THEM TO
. The government was even buying stock in fannie and Freddie to encourage more public trust in them as “infallible” institutions.
Even the liberally slanted Washington Post is compelled to confirm the facts: "“Eager to put more low-income and minority families into their own homes,the agency [DHUD] required that two government-chartered mortgage finance firms purchase far more "affordable" loans made to these borrowers. HUD stuck with an outdated policy that allowed Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to count billions of dollars they invested in subprime loans as a public good that would foster affordable housing."“Markets assume that the taxpayer will if necessary take on the burden of all their mortgages because they underpin the whole U.S. mortgage market. If they were to collapse, mortgages would be harder to obtain and much more expensive. U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has said the government's primary focus is in supporting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in their current form.”
-- Statement by Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, 2008-07-11
So let's be clear. People with your mindset are in favor of Keynesian big-government interference behavior that creates things like the housing crisis. People with my mindset believe that it should just be left alone.