Bush and bailouts

[Anon]

Bush is really going all out for this bailout, including buying banks.

I really don't want to hear from the "I hate Bush" people...but from a standpoint that Bush overall wasn't a horrible president (but just had horrible congress and horrible situations to deal with) I am trying to figure out the politics behind his decisions here.

[trc123]

He's trying to leave at least some positive legacy I suspect.

[deafnva77]

I don't hate Bush and I know he is trying the best he can. I disagree with some of the things he did, but I can understand from his viewpoint.

[Guest Guest]

overall wasn't a horrible president (but just had horrible congress and horrible situations to deal with)

Yep! So VERY true! Thanks Suzy for saying this. :thumb GWB was given a bum deal. I doesn't take a genius to figure that one out. Well said, sister.

Thinking...

[John81]

Bush is desperate to try and give the appearance the economy is stabilized and getting better before the elections.

First off, the Republican leadership is pressuring him to do something to make the economy look better in order to help McCain's chances come election day.

Second, Bush wants the economy to appear as if it's not so bad when he leaves office.

What he is doing is terrible for the country, not to mention unconstitutional, and is setting the stage for further government encroachment. As well, the moves Bush has put into place have set a large precedent for many companies to consider that if things get really bad, they can cry to the government and receive some form of bailout.

It's also a shame that while Bush had decried a few other leaders for their government taking control of part or all of certain industrires, Bush is now doing the exact same thing.

Sadly, Bush has advanced socialism and the police state to such proportions any future president would find it rather easy to move America into full-blown socialism.

[Guest Guest]

Yeah...but, can we blame Bush completely for this? I get sick of the president getting blamed for everything in this country all the time. He is but one man. You know?

[John81]

Yep! So VERY true! Thanks Suzy for saying this. :thumb GWB was given a bum deal. I doesn't take a genius to figure that one out. Well said, sister.

Thinking...

I wasn't going to comment upon this part, but since someone else has...

It needs to be remembered that Republican President Bush had a Republican controlled congress for six years. It was the Republican controlled congress that gave Bush a blank check to wage war, passed pork-filled, outrageously large funding bills which skyrocketed American debt, passed the socialistic and police state aspects of the Patriot Act into being, created the largest departement in the federal government in decades (with vast intrustive powers, which is unconstitutional), etc.

Like all presidents, not everything Bush has done is bad. Immediately following the incidents of 9-11-2001, Bush conducted himself very well. Bush did a great job of calming the publics fears and assuring them something would be done. However, the damage he has done will likely never be erased.

[John81]

Yeah...but' date=' can we blame Bush completely for this? I get sick of the president getting blamed for everything in this country all the time. He is but one man. You know?[/quote']

No, there is plenty of blame to go around, but that never excuses a president from doing that which isn't in the best interests of the country.

It doesn't matter who the president is, they serve as the point man and thus receive the bulk of the blame or credit for what is happening.

Clinton received credit for a booming economy though the main reality of the economy being good was the fact he did nothing! Having a Republican congress that opposed much of what he would have liked to do at that time prevented him from doing things that likely would have soured the economy some.

Reagan was blamed for the terrible economy during much of his first term. He inherited this mess but since it hit hard while he was in office he received the blame. To his credit, Reagan refused to put forth "quick fixes" for the economy as so many within his own party pressured him to do. Reagan stuck to his sound economic plan, and even though it took several years, his sound plan began to show results in time for the economy to pick up and he won a second term.

Sadly, Bush doesn't have the same principles in this areas as did Reagan who was willing to risk being a one-term president rather than to opt for "quick fix" economic policies that were not in the best interest of the country.

[Guest Guest]

This is not privy to the public...but, oh well. Here goes. I doesn't matter now. GWB has 7 Christian men (kinda private information) that help him with all of his decisions. He sends out a monthly newsletter and questionare to these men for feedback. He has help! How do I know? I personally, know one of the men on this committee. I have seen invitations to White House events. This man is also an ambassador to 2 foreign countries. :smile "Proof"??? You'll have to shoot me first. :Green

[John81]

This is not privy to the public...but' date=' oh well. Here goes. I doesn't matter now. GWB has 7 Christian men (kinda private information) that help him with all of his decisions. He sends out a monthly newsletter and questionare to these men for feedback. He has help! How do I know? I personally, know one of the men on this committee. I have seen invitations to White House events. This man is also an ambassador to 2 foreign countries. :smile "Proof"??? You'll have to shoot me first. :Green[/quote']

Not sure what this has to do with the subject, but either these seven Christian men are giving him bad advice or he's not heeding their advice.

Every president has a plethora of advisors and those who attempt to influence him, etc.

Early on, Bush had a cadre of neo-cons bent on the idea that America could and should change the world into its own image by use of economic and military power. These people (including Cheney and Rumsfeld, among others) were convinced they would reap a swift victory in Iraq, followed by an American-loving peace. They planned to expand upon this by attacking Syria and/or Iran next in order to achieve the same results.

Bush has been following the neo-con plan during his presidency, which amounts to liberalism/socialism with a cover of conservatism.

On a Christian note, Bush has taken the liberal route as well. Several times Bush has proclaimed that Christianity and Islam are equal religions. He's further proclaimed that not only do Islam and Christianity lead to heaven, but that both followers pray to the same God and he went further by including other religions into this as well. Bush also placed a copy of the Koran in the White House library out of respect for that honorable religion.

[Guest Guest]

Not sure what this has to do with the subject, but either these seven Christian men are giving him bad advice or he's not heeding their advice.

Yep! That is what I think. GWB has a whole different way of approaching things than any other president. What I do really DO like about him is that he is NOT a politician. That is fairly obvious. BTW, I didn't and don't care for his dad. Now...he is a politician!

I just wanted to point out that GWB has a commitee (as such), and he is NOT responsible for all the errors that have taken place over the last 8 years of his presidency. Supposedly, he is the only president that has set up his presidency in this fashion. So?? It is something for me to think about, anyway.

On a Christian note' date=' Bush has taken the liberal route as well. Several times Bush has proclaimed that Christianity and Islam are equal religions. He's further proclaimed that not only do Islam and Christianity lead to heaven, but that both followers pray to the same God and he went further by including other religions into this as well. Bush also placed a copy of the Koran in the White House library out of respect for that honorable religion.[/quote']

Now...this is the ONE thing that has me miffed about GWB. I will...and, have said that before. YES, I agree...John. :amen:

[Anon]

What nobody seems to be mentioning is that alot of this spending is a result of 9-11. We didn't ask for terrorist attacks, and we didn't ask for a war...but something had to be done, and that something cost money.

Some of the spending was started by the Clinton administration. Bush did lower taxes and for that I commend him. He worked on repealing the death tax...which is GREAT. He did work on passing abortion bills, and I think he would have signed more had they reached his desk.

I think if Clinton, America's beloved President, had gotten these past eight years in office. the national debt would be even worse, the war would be even worse, and possibly we would have even seen more terrorist attacks on our soil. But since it was Bush, he gets to be the scapegoat.

We have to think these things through, and not just accept what the media sources are telling us.

[John81]

What nobody seems to be mentioning is that alot of this spending is a result of 9-11. We didn't ask for terrorist attacks, and we didn't ask for a war...but something had to be done, and that something cost money.

Some of the spending was started by the Clinton administration. Bush did lower taxes and for that I commend him. He worked on repealing the death tax...which is GREAT. He did work on passing abortion bills, and I think he would have signed more had they reached his desk.

I think if Clinton, America's beloved President, had gotten these past eight years in office. the national debt would be even worse, the war would be even worse, and possibly we would have even seen more terrorist attacks on our soil. But since it was Bush, he gets to be the scapegoat.

We have to think these things through, and not just accept what the media sources are telling us.

Much of what Bush did in the aftermath of 9-11 was unnecessary and harmed our economy. Rather than taking common sense approaches to the security issues, Bush hampered the airlines with burdensome rules and put forth a police state right in the airport where American citizens are treated like criminals. All of this caused economic problems for the airline industry and other industries affected throught them.

One thing Obama has right is that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11 and if we were going to war it should have been full out against the Taliban and Al Quida in Afghanistan. The war in Iraq was unnecessary and the billions of dollars as well as the lives lost in Iraq could have been avoided.

Yes, Bush lowered some taxes, and that's always a good thing. :thumb However, he only signed one anti-abortion law that even most of its supporters admit won't save a single baby because of the loopholes. During his eight years he has failed to rally support to save babies lives. He's done the same thing previous so-called pro-life presidents have done...gave a few nods towards pro-life groups on a few occasions but done nothing.

We have no way of knowing how any other person as president during this time would have handled things. It would all be speculation that may or may not be correct with no way for us to know. However, we can see what Bush chose to do and what he chose not to do. Like it or not, whoever is president and whatever Party they belong to, they take the bulk of any blame just the same as they receive the bulk of any credit during their time in office for the bad and the good.

[Guest Guest]

Yes, Suzy. Let's not forget that Clinton rode on Reaganomics for 8 years. The man had to shine with Reagan and his conservative presidency. Clinton overspent for 8 loong years...and, most importantly is FULLY responsible for 9-11. The Cleveland schools all got IBM computers (4 of them) in each classroom. Each teacher got an IBM laptop, too (on loan.) Now...where did that money come from? haha. And, how many other inner-city school districts? The Comer Method..."It Takes a Village to Raise a Child." Uhhm, "NO...it takes 2 parents to raise a child."

I would challenge anyone to read Hillary's book...I forget which one. However, an excerpt appears in Time Magazine a few years ago, too. Bill Clinton sent a bomb over to one of Osama Bin Laden's camps...and missed. This was to get the media hype off of him and Monica Lewinsky. Hillary says this herself. She spells it out...plain and simple. Then...the 2 of them hid out on Onasis' boat in the Mediterranean for several days (pictures and all.) :lol

We are paying for the Clinton years. Oh...and, let's NOT forget about the Dem's beloved Jimmy Carter. Habitat for Humanity and all. :roll

[Guest Guest]

We went into Iraq because it was more neutral to deal with Saddam and his maniac sons than it was to deal with Afghanistan, Syria, and Iran. We would have lost more troops going that route. Saddam was a pacifist compared to the others.