Another Nail in the Coffin of the Bush Legacy

[Joseph Burkeson, CMI]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423963,00.html

White House Defends Federal Takeover of AIG
Wednesday, September 17, 2008

WASHINGTON —

The White House gave a newly nuanced description Wednesday of the U.S. economy, calling it a mixed picture and saying it ultimately will weather the current turmoil.

Press secretary Dana Perino, President George W. Bush's chief spokeswoman, also defended the extraordinary federal takeover of sinking insurance giant American International Group Inc., while not ruling out further private-sector bailouts by Washington.

Perino told reporters that help for other endangered corporations would be considered by the government on a "case-by-case basis."

Among those pleading for Washington's help, for instance, is the struggling U.S. auto industry, which has suffered massive losses but remains a backbone of the economy. A bill before Congress would give the companies $25 billion in federal loans, a program established but not funded under an energy bill passed last year. Perino said the White House would not comment on that prospect until Congress decides whether to go ahead with approving the money.

You are doing a Hellava job Brownie:

Perino refused to repeat the White House's standard line about the U.S. economy, often used by Bush, who has said that its "fundamentals are strong." Republican presidential candidates John McCain used that phrase Monday, earning him ridicule from Democratic opponent Barack Obama as being out of touch. McCain later clarified that he meant that the fundamental strength of the American worker remained strong.

With those accusations and counteraccusations swirling in an election-campaign environment, Perino suggested Wednesday that this assessment no longer stands.

"It's not clear-cut," she said, because of a proliferation of both positive and negative economic indicators, sometimes coming on the same day.

"We are in a position of strength to be able to deal with this crisis," Perino said. "It will take us awhile."

As recently as July 31, Bush said: "I believe the foundations of this economy are strong." In an Aug. 2 radio address, Bush prodded Congress to expand the energy supply so that "our economy remains the strongest, most vibrant and most hopeful in the world."

In the most far-reaching intervention into the private sector ever for the Federal Reserve, the government stepped in Tuesday to rescue American International Group Inc. with an $85 billion injection of taxpayer money. The government will get almost an 80 percent stake in the company.

Perino framed it as another move to protect the economy and save people from further harm.

Given AIG's size and scope, the possible failure of the company appeared to pose a greater risk than the $85 billion loan, she said. But while Perino said the terms require taxpayers to be paid back first, when asked whether taxpayers may not get their money back at all, she said, "That is true."

Bush agreed with the loan for AIG at the White House on Tuesday after being presented with a recommendation from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke during a meeting of economic advisers. Perino said it is more appropriate to describe Bush's role as consulting on the move rather than approving it.

She said she understands why Americans would be confused that the government would be willing to put taxpayer money at risk for some companies and not others, and that putting federal money into the private sector might be seen as at odds with Bush's conservative, free-market economic philosophy.

"We are dealing with very challenging times," Perino told reporters. "You have a government that is willing to lead, act where appropriate, and govern to make sure that we limit broader financial harm to the economy."

The president has been silent about the market turmoil since Monday. He canceled previously announced plans to talk about it on Tuesday, and Perino said he would not be heard from on the topic on Wednesday, either.

Perino said the president is reluctant to hold a news conference because he believes reporters would try to draw him into the daily back-and-forth between the Democratic and Republican candidates to replace him and that that would be inappropriate.

"I grant you, you haven't heard from him in a while," she said.

Bush has not held a full news conference in two months. His last formal question-and-answer session was abbreviated and permitted only limited questioning more than a month ago in Seoul, South Korea.

And the last time he took any questions from reporters was on Sept. 7, in a brief interview with Fox News Channel's "Fox & Friends."

[Michael Larson]

Joey, I'm not defending the administration because I think it only delays the inevitable but if you think an Obama administration would have done any less you need to come up for air.

Maybe this little list will help you see that. I guess you get what you pay for.

[William J. Decker]

Not, Bush.

Carter pushed the Community Recovery Act which was heavily enforced by Clinton (hey, you want a bank merger? Show us how many poor people (i.e., people who can't actually pay back the loan) you gave mortgages to) and Fannie and Freddy kept bad books (when they were run by a former Obama advisor.)

Oh, and BTW: When Obama was working as a community organizer, for ACORN, his salary came through a grant under this act.

Meanwhile, McCain was calling for reform of Freddy and Fannie as far back as 2005.

Guess some people are noty interested in looking any father than their own agenda.

Here it is, all, for you. Laied out and reserched. Check and verify for yourself.

BTW, Joe: It's a video, so you won't have any throuble reading it.

http://townhall.com/video/TheFivewit...450_091708Five

Hope this helps;

[John McKenna]

Obama One of Leading Recipients of Fannie/Freddie Political Contributions
While McCain was trying to reform the corruption.

September 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago....

FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM ACT OF 2005

The United States Senate
May 25, 2006

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation.

If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation.

Alas, thanks to the Democrat Party and the special interests of the left, both of these attempts to reform the banking system were still born.

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/b...ousing-finance

But isn’t it funny how our watchdog media have missed
these two stories? Hmmm.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME ...

Obama One of Leading Recipients of Fannie/Freddie Political Contributions

The top three U.S. Senators getting big Fannie and Freddie political bucks were democrats and number two is Senator Barack Obama. Now, remember, he has only been in the Senate four years but still managed to grab the number two spot ahead of John Kerry...

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/...tributions.php

This was all confirmed by Rush Limbaugh today.. Funny.

McCain was trying to reform the corruption, while Obama was milking it for big bucks.

[Nick Gromicko]

George W.'s legacy has yet to be written. It is pretty bad for the Pres now. His approval rating is only about 3 times better than that of our Congress.

It all boils down to Iraq. If they end up like S. Korea, Germany, or Japan (other countries we attacked)... George W. will go down as one of the best Presidents we ever had.

[Brian E. Kelly]

Germany and Japan either attacked us and or declared war on us first, and North Korea attacked South Korea to start that war.

Not even close Nick.

[Nick Gromicko]

and North Korea attacked South Korea to start that war.

Not even close Nick.

And Sadahm attacked his own citizens with chemical weapons of mass destruction.

I'd say that is pretty close.

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by bkelly2

Germany and Japan either attacked us and or declared war on us first, and North Korea attacked South Korea to start that war.

Not even close Nick.

No... the U.S. did not like what the Germans were doing to our buddies in Europe,
so we picked a fight with them.

If you think all our wars have been after someone punched us in the nose, you
may want to read behind the stories you have heard.

By the time any war starts, it has been well under way for some time.

BTW... radical Islam has declared war on the U.S. for some time now.
They have been killing our people all over the world.

New maps have already been drawn up for the parking lots, malls and burger
kings that will be built in the middle east.

German Declaration of War against the U.S.

The Government of the United States having violated in the most flagrant manner and in ever-increasing measure all rules of neutrality in favor of the adversaries of Germany and having continually been guilty of the most severe provocations toward Germany ever since the outbreak of the European war, provoked by the British declaration of war against Germany on September 3, 1939, has finally resorted to open military acts of aggression.

On September 11, 1941, the President of the United States publicly declared that he had ordered the American Navy and Air Force to shoot on sight at any German war vessel. In his speech of October 27, 1941, he once more expressly affirmed that this order was in force. Acting under this order, vessels of the American Navy, since early September 1941, have systematically attacked German naval forces. Thus, American destroyers, as for instance the Greer, the Kearny and the Reuben James, have opened fire on German submarines according to plan. The Secretary of the American Navy, Mr. Knox, himself confirmed that American destroyers attacked German submarines.

Furthermore, the naval forces of the United States, under order of their Government and contrary to international law have treated and seized German merchant vessels on the high seas as enemy ships.
The German Government therefore establishes the following facts:

Although Germany on her part has strictly adhered to the rules of international law in her relations with the United States during every period of the present war, the Government of the United States from initial violations of neutrality has finally proceeded to open acts of war against Germany. The Government of the United States has thereby virtually created a state of war.

The German Government, consequently, discontinues diplomatic relations with the United States of America and declares that under these circumstances brought about by President Roosevelt, Germany too, as from today, considers herself as being in a state of war with the United States of America.

December 11, 1941

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar...y-declares.htm

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

No... the U.S. did not like what the Germans were doing to our buddies in Europe,
so we picked a fight with them.

If you think all our wars have been after someone punched us in the nose, you
may want to read behind the stories you have heard.

By the time any war starts, it has been well under way for some time.

BTW... radical Islam has declared war on the U.S. for some time now.
They have been killing our people all over the world.

New maps have already been drawn up for the parking lots, malls and burger
kings that will be built in the middle east.

Nice article John but it does not say the US decalred War on Germany first in WWII. Because that is not how it happened.

Perhaps you would be better off sticking to the god talk.

Now that was just an easy reason why the bs fight in Iraq in no way compares to ANY of the conflicts Nick mentioned.

There are many more reasons, but if you can't even get historical dates correct, the other reasons will be lost on you.

1941: Germany and Italy declare war on US
Germany and Italy have announced they are at war with the United States. America immediately responded by declaring war on the two Axis powers.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/3532401.stm

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by bkelly2

Nice article John but it does not say the US decalred War on Germany first in WWII. Because that is not how it happened.

Your exactly right. The U.S. did not declare war first, but started
fighting Germans anyway. We started fighting Germans before
they declared war, contrary to your post.

Perhaps you would be better off sticking to the god talk.

Perhaps if you knew God, you would talk to him also.
A little prayer might help you.

Now that was just an easy reason why the bs fight in Iraq in no way compares to ANY of the conflicts Nick mentioned.

History may disagree with you.

There are many more reasons, but if you can't even get historical dates correct, the other reasons will be lost on you.

Show me a date that is incorrect.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/3532401.stm

Read my post again very slowly before you comment.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by bkelly2

Germany and Japan either attacked us and or declared war on us first, and North Korea attacked South Korea to start that war.

And with that you demonstrate the shallowness of your argument.

You:

Ignore all the violated U.N. resolutions.

Ignore Saddam's attempts to control significant portions of the worlds oil supplies.

Ignore the data and conclusions of numerous intelligence agencies.

Ignore the atrocities committed by Saddam and his willingness to use WMD.

Ignore the world, congressional and public support for the action.


Your attempt to rewrite history to your own liking makes me think you live somewhere where it is still prior to 9/11/2001

[William J. Decker]

Originally Posted by gromicko

George W.'s legacy has yet to be written. It is pretty bad for the Pres now. His approval rating is only about 3 times better than that of our Congress.

It all boils down to Iraq. If they end up like S. Korea, Germany, or Japan (other countries we attacked)... George W. will go down as one of the best Presidents we ever had.

Attacking other countries, premptively, has a long U.S. history. Jefferson, the so-called Father of the Dems, started our first war by premptively attacking the Barbury Pirates. We also premptively attacked in the Mexican-American and Spanich-American wars.

Also, Truman had almost as low approval ratings, but he is now being lionized.

JFK was very polular, but is legacy defines him as not as perfect as everyone used to think (started and escalated Vietnam, Affairs, etc). Don't get me wrong, he also did good stuff (lowered tax rates from 94% to 71%, just like Reagan and Bush have).

You need at least 40 years to gain some perspective

[Joseph Burkeson, CMI]

Originally Posted by wdecker

You need at least 40 years to gain some perspective

Of course, right after... Drill Here, Drill Now. Decker is once again speaking out of both sides of his face in a vain attempt to sound wise.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by jburkeson1

Of course, right after... Drill Here, Drill Now. Decker is once again speaking out of both sides of his face in a vain attempt to sound wise.

At least he tries

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

JB, do you ever do home inspections? Seems all I ever see from you are political rants.