ILongyou

The Times’ 'Expose' of Countrywide Lacks Any Evidence

Interesting other side of the coin article but doesn't necessarily make it the correct side either!

"(We’ve included writers’ name and location with permission)"

You seem to have inserted this to try and make YOUR article look a little more reliable to your readers compared to the NY Times article.
Who do you think would be willing to put their name and location on record, someone who is pumping up her employer or someone who is dumping off on the employer? No surprise there that NY Times sources wanted to remain anonymous whereas yours were probably jumping up and down to be fully identified on record for their employer to see (did they also provide their employee id numbers to you?)... especially the employer who is trying to decide which 20,000 to let go :)

BTW, did you also get any responses that were negative on the CW and unsupportive of the defense you have forwarded? I would be surprised if you didn't. Have you also decided to be selective about your facts like that other reporter you are talking about?

And about that lack of evidence, I leave it as a homework to find recent research reports that show CW to be one of the main accused in causing minorities and financially naive borrowers to get rates much higher than their credit history and financial situation would deserve. You see, not everyone is a financial reporter like you, Mr. Brown. Not everyone knows how to... how did you put it?
"it’s incredibly easy for prospective borrowers to rate shop."
No it is not. Have you looked at the forms and tiny disclosure print size? Financially naive portion of the population does not have any idea on what points and ARM mean... they don't know how two mortgage products compare... they just look at the initial monthly payment to make their decision... just like buying a car! Ask around your own family (uncles, aunts, grandpa, ...) and you would know.