on Meet the Press:
MR. RUSSERT: But, Senator, many people opted for those cheaper mortgages. They could’ve had a fixed mortgage at a higher rate, but they opted for a cheaper one. Should they not bear some responsibility?
SEN. CLINTON: Well, Tim, I think all of us should. But I’d say three things about that. The bankers, the mortgage lenders, the brokers, all bear a lot of the responsibility, because many of the practices that were followed were just downright predatory and fraudulent. There is no doubt about that. I started talking about this last March. A lot of people got into subprime loans who frankly could’ve been in a conventional fixed-rate loan. They were basically told that this was a better opportunity for them. Should they take responsibility? Yes, but  look at what will happen if we continue this cascade of foreclosures. Housing values are down. They’re down 6 percent. That’s over $1.3 trillion in housing values in the last year. So everybody bears some responsibility.
 I, for one, bear no responsibility for any part of the subprime mortgage crisis, and I call shenanigans on Hillary Clinton for implying that I do. If anyone can prove otherwise, have at it.
 I think there is plenty of doubt in her claim that practices were predatory and fraudulent; sure, some may have been predatory, and some fraudulent, but I doubt that many were both. If they were fraudulent, borrowers should have no problem demonstrating as much and get back their losses plus damages.
 this “yes, but” clause is mixing issues; the state of nationwide housing values has no bearing on personal responsibility. Should I stop paying my car loan because the price of gas is over $3? Right.
 housing was a bubble anyhow, and the dramatic drops are more a function of that bubble than of 0.3% of houses being foreclosed (not that the foreclosures help the situation).
 Again, I refute this claim on it’s face, and object to any responsibility that Hillary is trying to project on me or my family. It doesn’t take a village to screw up a home loan.