American Citizens News Network

July 18, 2008

The Facts

The citizens of San Francisco, California will be voting on whether or not to rename their water pollution control plant the George W. Bush Sewage Plant. Supposedly this action is a way to publically voice their disgust with the presidency of George Bush.

My View

If you are familiar with ancient history, you may already know there were several occasions where a new ruler and his subjects would destroy all monuments, writings, and/or symbols of a past ruler. Ancient Egypt is probably best known for this, although there are records of other civilizations doing the same thing. The declared purpose of this by modern man is the new ruler was trying to destroy any evidence that the past ruler even exist. This may very well be the case, but in light of our own political leaders over the past few decades, I wonder if there may have been a different reason. Just like our illustrious CEO’s who are well rewarded financially for poor performance & complete failure, we Americans insist that monuments be built to our political leaders whether they were good leaders or not. All this makes me wonder if ancient leaders had another purpose in mind when they had all those monuments destroyed. Could they have possibly been thinking “I may not be able to rewrite history and make the person not exist, but I’m certainly not going to allow monuments to exist giving praise to a tyrant, a failure, and a destroyer”.

Only a small percentage of Americans think much of George W. Bush. He has been such a terrible president that his own political party, including the presumptive Republican Presidential nominee, are trying to distance them selves from him during the Presidential campaign. Of course, once the election is over, all that will change, but they know Bush is a terrible liability now. As for me, I really thought Bush would be a very good president, so I voted for him the first time. But I darn sure didn’t the second time, and the only reason he won his second term is because of the lies and attacks on John Kerry in 2004. That being said, I don’t know if I would go so far as to name a sewage plant after Bush, but he certainly doesn’t deserve any monuments of praise. But you can bet millions, if not hundreds of millions (possibility even billions), of taxpayer dollars will be spent building those Bush monuments once he’s out of office. And we can’t depend on the Democrats to prevent that from happening; they want to do the same thing for their failed leaders also.

July 16, 2008

The Facts

Since the price of oil has increased so dramatically over the past several months, there’s been a lot of lobbying to open up restricted areas for drilling and oil production. President Bush has not failed to mention this each and every time he gets in front of a microphone. Many Democrats are against this, as are most of the environmentalists. Without fail, those who are in favor of opening up the restricted areas justify the need by proclaiming we, America, must become independent of foreign oil, and bring down the price.

My View

Earlier this month I wrote a post entitled “Why Oil Prices Are What They Are” where I addressed the absence of competition in the oil industry. One of the reasons for this absence is that all the crude oil produced in the world goes into a single “bucket”, where the price is set to all countries and customers, regardless of who produced it. With that fact in mind, just exactly why are we suppose to believe America will become independent of foreign oil if we start producing more oil here in America? And just exactly how will this bring down the price of crude oil here in America if foreign countries like China and others continue to increase their consumption?

I worked in the oil and gas industry for many, many years, and just about all of that time was spent offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. And there is one thing I can personally attest to; safety and environmental records have improved so much since the early-to-late 1980’s that it’s almost a non-issue, and will continue that way if current regulations continue to be imposed on the oil companies, including the smaller oil producers. By comparison, onshore plants, refineries, and facilities can only dream of being as good. Therefore, I can not oppose to opening up restricted areas if those same laws are applied AND enforced. But Bush, Chaney, nor any other advocate can convince me we will become independent of foreign oil or the price will come down just by opening up these areas. That argument is nothing but a smoke screen to give the oil companies access to more product so they can grow bigger and wealthier. This fact is more evidence this administration and their supporters are working only for the oil companies and other big business, and have absolutely no concern for the middle and lower class. It’s also evidence they have absolutely no problem lying to the public in order to achieve their goals. Remember their resistance when Congress pushed to curtail adding crude oil to our reserves while the prices were so high? Remember how they said our reserves would dwindle and we couldn’t afford that? Well, the price of crude oil dropped $6 per barrel today when the new numbers came out. Crude oil stocks rose by 3 million barrels; gasoline was up 2.4 million barrels; and distillate rose by 3.2 million barrels. And that’s with refineries operating at just over 87%. Just more evidence of the lying. But why should the lying surprise us; this administration has demonstrated on many occasions they have no problem lying about anything to achieve their objectives. And to think we (including me) called Bill Clinton the biggest liar of them all. Thank God Bush didn’t have sex in the oval office, or we’d really be upset with him.

July 8, 2008

The Facts

Henry Waxman, Democratic Representative, is considering legislation that would ban federal money to pay for positions in the White House such as the one that Carl Rove held during President Bush’s first term in office. Waxman says Rove was in charge of campaign politics for the Bush administration, and taxpayers should not have to pay for this kind of position. Waxman said “can you imagine the reaction if each member of Congress had a campaign person paid for with taxpayer dollars?”

My View

Only George Bush and other radical extremist Republicans would have the gall to place a position like that in the White House paid for by taxpayer money. I use to think the Democrats were an underhanded political party, but they are angels now compared to what the radical extremist Republicans have pulled over the past fifteen plus years. Rove’s position was tagged as an “aide”; therefore it could be passed off as a necessary position paid with tax money. But I noticed he left the job after Bush was reelected. I guess he wasn’t needed anymore.

Karl Rove has redefined dirty politics to its lowest form and set a new standard of just how low people will stoop to obtain a goal. We should all be very proud of that. Political office, especially the oval office, has so much uncontrolled power that the likes of Karl Rove will stop at nothing to get elected. If history is honestly written it’s not going to be very kind to Rove. He has had more than his 15 minutes of fame, and he has basked in that glory. Somehow, he has managed to convince himself that the lie’s he spreads is ok, as long as “it’s in the best interest of the country” (which really means in the best interest of the party). When the time comes for his life to end, if he is aware that his time is near, he is going to have a miserable death. However, I say that on the basis that he has a conscious, and it’s hard for me to believe he has one. But most people who live a life without one seem to suddenly acquire a conscious when they are on their death bed.

Over the past six years I have paid close attention to the disinformation and outright lies put out by both major political parties, and the Republican Party and their spokespersons can take great pride in the fact they have won hands down by such a large margin it is immeasurable. They come in form of emails, letters, ads, and in live forums with friendly host who will not challenge them. As much as I despise the people who make up the Democratic Party, I find myself asking if I really want a party in power that has published so many lies. Let’s face it; if they will tell that many lies about their own party and their opponents party in order to get elected, just how honest can I expect them to be once in office; enter George Bush.

June 30, 2008

The Facts

Last year President Bush convinced the Democratic controlled congress to authorize sending Special Ops forces into Iran to “gather information”, according to the latest issue of The New Yorker Magazine. Most top military leaders are concerned about this, in that they are afraid Bush will use this opportunity to authorize an air strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Even Defense Secretary Robert Gates warns of the consequences if Bush stages a preemptive strike. He said “We’ll create generations of jihadists, and our grandchildren will be battling our enemies here in America”.

My View

In a post I wrote back in May of this year, I said I believed Bush is intent on destroying America before he leaves office. And the more I learn about this man, the more convinced I become that he is willing to do so. He is the scariest President this country has ever had, and although that isn’t limited to just his stance on war, it certainly is the worst.

Not even his most dedicated supporters are agreeing with him on the way he is handling Iran. Typically we think of the military as being the one who wants to shoot first then talk, and for this reason they are kept in check by the President. That’s how our democracy was set up. But in this case, it’s the military that’s advocating taking the diplomatic approach. It’s Bush and Cheney who are beating the drums of war, and it has been their policy to fire any military leader who disagrees with them. However, all we have to do is take an unbiased look at who has (and still is) benefiting from the Iraqi war, and it’s easy to see why Bush and Cheney like going to war.

Bush has the lowest approval rating of any President in the history of the United States, and it’s obvious that there is no hope of him salvaging any kind of positive legacy. Therefore, I have no doubt he will do whatever he wants no matter what the cost is to our country and it’s citizens, just as long as it benefits those who are profiting from the war in Iraq.

June 10, 2008

The Facts

Keith Hennessey, Assistant to the U.S. President for Economic Policy and Director of the U.S. National Economic Council, was the morning guest on CNBC’s Squawk Box today. He was pumping up George Bush’s accomplishments relative to the economy, and the latter’s desire to make the tax cuts permanent. But each time he did so, he was very quick to say that it would take 6-9 months before we will see the results. And he was just as quick to say that raising taxes on businesses would not fix our economics problem.

My View

First off, you’ve got to admire Hennessey for leaving the door open for his buddy Bush; “6-9 months before we see the results” of making the tax cuts permanent. That’ll give the old sheriff time to get out of town before everyone knows its all bunk. That little trick has been working for those 3-5 year CEO’s of large companies for 20 plus years now, so why not our President.

Now on to what matters. Let’s understand the difference of “raising taxes on businesses” versus “discontinuing tax breaks”. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE! The first is asking businesses to pay more than their fair share of taxes, which they clearly are not doing when you throw in all those tax loop holes they have. The second is telling businesses that they are no longer going to be on an entitlement program.

I hear so much about how we have to do something about entitlements we are handing out to undeserving people, and no one would agree with that more than I. However, the main difference with me and so many others out there is that I also do not think businesses should be getting entitlements, no matter what kind of “justification” one wants to put on it. Get this through your thick skull; trickle down economics DOES NOT WORK! How many more times have we got to prove that? That’s been tried by every Republican administration since the 1950’s, and some before, and the only thing it accomplishes is making the rich companies richer with near to nothing filtering back into the work place.

That doesn’t make you happy? Ok, let’s do this. Let’s take away all my tax loop holes (which I can’t take advantage of because my income doesn’t qualify me for those) and take away the tax loop holes for big businesses (and the wealthy). Let’s take away all these big business tax cuts that seem to be so important to so many and have one tax law for every individual and every company. Then at the end of every year let’s pass out the same tax forms to everyone, individuals and companies. Now, let’s all do our taxes, but; let’s add an extra box just above the bottom line for big business; and that box will say “deduct 5%”. Now they will be paying 5% less taxes than me. Guess what? I’ll be happy with that. But guess what else? Before the ink is dry on the tax forms, big businesses will be screaming, “no, no, no; let’s go back to the old way and I’ll gladly give up those all-so-important tax breaks”.

Here’s the bottom line; big businesses, Bush, and all those others will not be satisfied until only individuals earning less than $125 thousand a year and small businesses with less than 25 employees are paying taxes in this country. But really, they won’t be satisfied then; after that, they will not want to pay any state taxes, city taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, cost for any environmental damages they cause, etc., etc., etc. I said this many, many years ago; business will not be happy until 100% of gross revenues are coming into the board rooms and 0% is going out. And I have no doubt that, even then, they would be looking for some way to improve on that. But, hey! Don’t misunderstand me here; if you think I am saying that the Democrats are better, you are as wrong as you can be. The only difference between the two is that the Republicans want me to support the wealthy and big businesses and the Democrats want me to support all the worthless people, lazy people, & illegal immigrants in this country, and whole host of other unworthy causes. All I want is a job and for all of us to be treated equally. And trickle down economics, supply side economics, or pro-economy economics, what every phrase you chose to use, has not given anyone below the executive level a job yet.

June 8, 2008

The Facts

On February 7, 2008 a dust explosion in a sugar refinery in Georgia killed 13 people. Since then 52 more dust explosions have occurred here in the United States. There were 281 of these explosions between 1980 and 2005 that killed 119 people and injured 718 more. Democrats introduced “The Worker Protection Against Combustible Dust Explosion and Fire Act - H.R. 5522” that would require OSHA to enforce existing laws, which they clearly are not, and add laws that would accelerate compliance. However, OSHA has advised President Bush to veto the bill when it comes across his desk, and it appears that Bush will do just that.

My View

Two questions; why does OSHA not police these sites and enforce the existing laws, and why would Bush want to veto the new bill? I’m sure a lot of people would have many different answers to the first question, but it’s no secret why Bush will veto the new bill. Anything that’s going to cost big businesses money Bush is going to stop it if he can, no matter what the cost is to the general public, the workers, and the taxpayers. He has demonstrated that policy for seven years now. But I’m sure he will have his propaganda and disinformation experts come up with plenty of “justification” for his actions. And guess what; he will win and the stupid Democrats will back off. They are just as bought off as the Republicans, and all the Democrats are doing is posturing for position for the next election. Wonderful political world we live in, isn’t it?

June 6, 2008

The Facts

During the two day period of June 3rd and June 4th, crude oil prices dropped more than $6. Then over the last two days prices jumped about $16, to more than $138 per barrel. Every news source in the country is talking about this today. On top of all this, the jobs report for last week came out this morning with 49,000 jobs lost last week. That contributed mightily to the Dow dropping nearly 400 points today.

My View

So much for the “supply & demand” excuses for rising oil prices. But that hasn’t stopped the propaganda experts; they know there are still millions out here that are still their puppets and gladly mimic the notion that supply & demand is driving the prices up. Then there’s the scare tactics. It seems that the Deputy Prime Minister of Israel made some off-handed comment today that “bombing Iran’s nuclear sites was unavoidable” and the disinformation experts grabbed onto that as an excuse of rising oil prices. Next I expect to hear the night cleaning lady in the UN building being quoted on the shortage of petroleum related cleaning products as the reason for a huge price increase.

There are a few in the media that is starting to question these excuses. However, some are being careful. One female reporter on CNBC today had a slip of the tongue when she used the word “accelerated” in reference to the price increases, but very quickly corrected herself and substituted the word “upsurge”. Not a whole lot of difference in the definitions of the words, but “accelerated” has more of a sinister sound. And she made it even more suspicious by being so quick to change the words (sure, then there’s the teleprompter). But other reporters such as Mark Haines of CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” is becoming even more skeptical. He doesn’t seem to buy all this “justification” crap. He’s always been one to raise an eyebrow at many of the questionable reports, and he seems to be the only one on that network that isn’t a big business puppet. He often questions some of the things businesses are reporting, and challenges many of the other CNBC reporters.

One CNBC guest this morning, Thomas Higgins of Payden & Rygel, said that for the first time in several years the demand for oil imports have fallen. That doesn’t support the supply & demand theory. He also said that he certainly believes we are in a recession, which doesn’t set too well with the current administration. (Of course, if the Democrats win the White House in November, I fully expect to see the Republican machine come out within the first month or so of 2009 and declare that we are in a recession.)

Another report today put the capacity of oil refineries at only 87%. That can be viewed two ways; either there is not enough oil to refine or there is not a big enough demand for gasoline. I’m sure those who support the supply & demand theory will use the first, and those who say that supply & demand is not the problem will use the latter. But with the nearly 5% drop in the demand for gasoline in the past two to three months, it is easier to believe the latter.

Right along with the increase in the price of oil today, and as mentioned earlier, the Dow dropped nearly 400 points. There were lots of folks willing to offer there opinion today on why that happened. The most popular opinion was the jobs lost report that came out this morning. With the 49,000 jobs lost last week, that brought the total job looses for 2008 to 325,000. With this latest report, this means we have lost jobs every single month for the past two years. And when you take into account that just about all the jobs experts tell us that we need an increase of 100,000 jobs each month just to break even, some might say we have “lost” over 800,000 jobs this year. This brought the unemployment up to 5.5%, which is the highest since 1987. Let’s see now, who had been in the White House for several years in 1987?

I think it’s time to change the “official” definition of recession (and maybe even depression) if we are going to continue to rely on the current definition to determine if we are in a recession or not. Of course, even if that did happen, I wouldn’t expect the Bush White House to acknowledge it. No President, Republican or Democrat, likes to admit to a recession during their watch. But it seems this current Republican President and his diehard supporters are worse than any before.

June 5, 2008

The Facts

Between 2001 and 2003 President Bush managed to get huge tax cuts enacted for big businesses and wealthy individuals. He was able to accomplish this through the Republicans controlled Congress at that time. These tax cuts were made temporary and are due to expire in 2010. Bush and his supporters are trying very hard to sell the American public on the idea that making these tax cuts permanent is a good thing for America and the bottom 90% of working Americans. Presidential candidate John McCain is also in favor of making the tax cuts permanent.

My View

There are literally thousands of web sites that address our tax laws and how taxes are determined. The vast majority of them report on these laws from very biased view points. Few attempt to show both sides. But there is one web site that I consider the very best at pointing out the truth in the pros and cons department. And the articles almost always address the tax laws and facts as they apply to current events. The site is entitled “a taxing matter” 

The owner of the blog is Linda Beale, and after reading her for many months now there is no doubt that she is well versed on tax laws and very aware of what tax laws are good and what tax laws are bad. And she doesn’t just guess at what she writes; she backs up everything with supporting documentation. Linda is a law professor at Wayne State University Law School. Her credentials are unquestionable. If you read all of her posts you will find that she is just as quick to point out the misleading statements by both political parties on tax matters. Her web site is the only one that I have listed on my blog as one of my favorites. So if you are interested in the truth about taxes instead of political propaganda, I suggest you bookmark her site and read it often. I think it is so important, I am putting this second link to her site in this post.

June 4, 2008

The Facts

Scott McClellan, ex-White House Press Secretary to George Bush, recently released his memoires in a new book entitled “What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception”. The book does not speak too favorable of President Bush and many of his insiders. Among other things, McClellan said that “the administration relied on propaganda to sell the Iraqi war”. The radical extremist Republican machine immediately went into action and labeled McClellan as a “disgruntled employee”.

My View

Three friends of mine were recently engaged in a conversation about the current presidential Democratic primary. As each of them expressed their views on the subject, the other two were very attentive to what the other was saying and considered each having excellent views and meaningful comments. At one point, one of them made the comment that had Barack Obama not been getting so many votes from many blacks simply because he was black, Clinton would win the primary. The other two immediately looked at him in amazement. Then one of them declared that he was a racist. From that point on, anything the latter had to say was considered unimportant and not worthy of listening to. He had been tagged as a racist and the other two were going to have nothing to do with that.

It didn’t matter to my other two friends that what the third had said was factual; and that it was based on several credible reports from polls that had been taken during the course of the primary. To them, it only mattered that in their eyes he had made what they considered a racist comment. The ousted friend acknowledged that not all blacks who voted for Obama voted for him just because he was black, but that made no difference. So it is with Scott McClellan. He is now tagged as a “disgruntled employee”, therefore anything he said in his book or anything he has to say now is considered untrue and not worthy of listening to. The justification for it not being true lies in the “fact” that he is disgruntled. The real truth doesn’t matter; the truth has now been labeled as a lie. And with that “fact”, Bush and his ardent supporters have relieved themselves of having to address any questions on the matter.

The fact that these radical extremist Republicans have taken this stand is of no surprise to me; it’s exactly what everyone expected. But what does matter is that there are millions of good Republican voters who will automatically accept this radical extremist explanation and begin quoting this lie as fact. And so once again, “truth becomes a lie simply because I want it to be a lie”.

May 15, 2008

The Facts

“Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along.” This was a statement made by President Bush today as he addressed Israel’s 60th anniversary celebration in Jerusalem. Although Bush denies that his remarks were aimed at Barack Obama, CNN reports that White House aides say the remarks were aimed at the presidential candidates AND others in his own party.

My View

If George Bush is throwing rocks at the Democrats, he needs to clean out his own house first if he truly believes that we shouldn’t be negotiating with Iran and others. His own Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have said we need to sit down and talk with Iran. But Bush seems to be in his own little world. But of course, he’s been in his own little world since he was sworn into office, and probably most of his life.

To be completely honest, I am very concerned about the next seven months that Bush will be in office. I have a genuine, non-biased, non-political concern about what he is capable of doing to our country before he leaves office. I have come to the conclusion that his arrogance is so powerful that he would have no problem with doing something totally irrationally and stupid just to slap the rest of the country in the face, including his own party. Almost weekly now, you can hear some well known Republican expressing concern over what Bush has done to their party and the country. Quite frankly, it’s very scary. I asked the question before if Bush was trying to provoke a war with North Korea. It seems that every time he speaks in public he is very quick to rattle the American sabers.

In Bush’s speech to the Israelis’, he pointed out that Hitler’s Germany was appeased during the 1930’s and that we know what happened there. True; but maybe he needs to think about that “other” war we had during the 1940’s. Japan attacked the US because they truly believed that America was getting ready to attack them. It’s very easy to push for a war when you know that you will be sitting safely away from the killing.

May 2, 2008

The Facts

Today President Bush asked Congress for $70 billion to fund the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The funding would be a bridge that takes the war from October 2008 through the spring of 2009. The latest request would bring the total to $875 billion since 911. Of that amount, over two-thirds have been for the war in Iraq. $2 billion of the requested $70 billion would go to Iraqi security force.

My View

You may recall that Bush and his supporters told the American people at the beginning of the Iraqi war that it would cost no more then $60 billion. He was just a little off there; the same way he was “just a little off” with his campaign promise in 2000 that he would reduce the price of oil at a time when oil was averaging around $25 per barrel. Obviously, Bush is either the worlds biggest liar or completely untrustworthy. Most would probably say both.

In spite of that, the Democratic Congress should pass the bill for Bush’s request without a hitch. By that, I mean they should pass it just as it comes from Bush’s desk without adding or taking out a single thing. Why? So he and the Republican Party can not use that later as an excuse for the war(s) failures. We already know that they have blamed the Democrats for all the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, in spite of the fact that the Republicans controlled Congress the first 6 of Bush’s 8 years in office. The Bush administration has accepted no blame for the failures that have come from the wars although they were the ones calling the shots, and that included all request for money. There’s an old saying that if you take away all the excuses someone has, in the end they can blame no one but themselves when they become a complete failure. As for the additional $70 billion, what’s another 70 going to amount to when we are talking about a trillion dollar war? Our country will be completely bankrupt before we pay that off anyway.

May 2, 2008

The Facts

Time, in partnership with CNN, has published an article entitled “How Much Did Rumsfeld Know?”. The article is an exert from a book that Army General Ricardo S. Sanchez wrote entitled “Wiser in Battle: A Soldier’s Story”. Sanchez says that Rumsfeld showed him a memo in April of 2006 that Rumsfeld had written which said that he, Rumsfeld, has absolutely no knowledge that CENTCOM (Central Command) and CFLCC (Coalition Forces Land Component Command) was to be withdrawn from Iraq in May & June 2003, or that he knew that Sanchez was in charge after the withdrawal. The memo went on to say that neither he, Rumsfeld, nor anyone higher in the administration knew these withdrawal orders had been issued, and that he was dumbfounded when he learned that Gen McKiernan was out of the country and in Kuwait, and that the forces would be drawn down to a level of about 30,000 by September. In the same memo, Rumsfeld admits the withdrawal was one of the biggest strategist mistakes of the war. Sanchez says the memo was nothing more than Rumsfeld trying to cover his own butt, along with President Bush, Condoleezza Rice, George Tenet, Colin Powell, and Vice President Dick Cheney. Rumsfeld wanted Sanchez to sign off on the memo and even tried to bribe Sanchez by suggesting that there was a big job waiting for him immediately after his forced (added) retirement from the Army. Sanchez refused to agree with the memo, and the civilian job was never offered again.

My View

So the Secretary of Defense is trying to tell us that he was not aware that 103,000 troops (71%) of the 133,000 were going to be withdrawn from Iraq? Talk about the epitome of “if you believe that, I’ve got some water front property in Arizona for sale”. But this shouldn’t come as any surprise to us about Rumsfeld. His entire political career has been based on one lie after another, and him finding scapegoats to blame for his failures. That fits right in with his president. Of course, those above him would have been very happy if Rumsfeld could have gotten Sanchez to sign off on the memo.

There have been hundreds of articles written that say that Bush will go down in history as the worse president this country has ever had. I have no doubt that many in his administration will also be included. Those that saw this fact materializing years ago, like Colin Powell, were smart enough to get out.

As of April 21, 2008, Bush had a 22% overall approval level, the lowest of any president in history; even lower than Richard Nixon after Watergate and Jimmy Carter after the Iranian hostage crisis. The vast majority of elected Republicans are distancing themselves from Bush. Over the past three months or so it’s been hard to even find Fox News touting Bush and his administration, although they are still promoting the Republican Party. The silence from the pro-Bush group has been deafening. Even Ed Rollins, famous Republican strategist, said that Bush was the most irrelevant president in his life time.

Bush may be stupid, but he is no dummy, although the latter may be arguable. He’s still out trying to push his agenda for his failed policies. I think he knows his legacy is already engraved in stone as a failure, therefore he’s given up on trying to build a positive one; or he thinks the Republican spin machine will take care of fabricating a positive legacy for him after he leaves office. In either case, each time he speaks in public, he furthers the conviction that he’s an utter fool. And “the Rumsfeld story” is just another chapter to support that.

April 29, 2008

The Facts

George Bush held a news conference today, pre-advertised as him addressing the economy and the high price of oil and gasoline. However, like most advertisements, the “product” didn’t stand up to its promise. He spent his entire opening speech blaming the Democratic Congress for all our economic problems, in which he said the people were looking to Congress for action but were only getting delays. The speech/news conference was nothing more than a partisan political speech, which offered absolutely nothing toward solving our economic problems. Bush, being the idiot that he is and has displayed his entire adult life, accepts no blame for the economy, or anything else for that matter. He expects the public to ignore the fact that the Republicans controlled Congress for the first six years of his presidency, and the economic problems we have today are caused by policies implemented during that time.

In addition to his opening statement, he really never answered one single question he was asked by the news correspondents. He used the “answering” opportunity to continue blaming the Democrats for everything. Any question he was asked that was not relative to the economy, such as the Iraqi war, he just got visibly irritated at the reporter that asked the question; then he chastised them and danced around the question. However, there was one questioner that played right into Bush’s tone of blaming the Democrats for his own failures. The questioner asked if he was frustrated by the lack of corporation by Congress. You could see the satisfaction on Bush’s face for getting that question. Unfortunately, watching on CNBC, the questioner was not identified, but it makes one wonder what side of the political fence that questioner was on.

Bush was pushed on using the “recession” word, but he showed his typical arrogance by denying we were in a recession. He said he didn’t think it was important what word was used, it was only important that the people knew he was aware of their dilemma. However, it’s very obvious that he doesn’t care about our dilemma, even on the off chance that he really is aware of our dilemma.

Naturally, Bush didn’t miss the opportunity, as he always does, to hammer on making the tax cuts permanently before the end of 2010 (got to take care of his wealthy friends with the illusion of trickle down economics).

My View

Nothing to say here; “The Facts” speak for themselves.

April 27, 2008

The Facts

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank has introduced a bill that is intended to help certain homeowners who qualify to stay in their homes. The loans would be funneled through the FHA, but would not be a give-away program. The following is a quote published by CNN. “Only homeowners who have a mortgage-debt-to-income ratio of 35 percent or higher and who entered into a mortgage before January would qualify for the program. For a homeowner to get a new FHA-backed loan, the holder of the current mortgage would have to accept a loss and take a payment totaling no more than 85 percent of the home’s value” (bold added). The first sentence means that a borrower could not get a loan if their total monthly payment exceeded their reasonable ability to make payments. Unlike the Bear Stearns agreement, the government would get a share of the profits when the homeowner sold the home. But the Bush administration is against this, calling it a bailout, which is a word they refuse to use relative to the Bear Stearns agreement.

My View

Obviously George Bush and his supporters have two different definitions for the word “bailout”; one for when the government uses taxpayer money to “help” a major business and a different meaning when the government uses taxpayer money to “help” we the people. The Republican machine has done a good job, as usual, of redefining common words and phrases when necessary to support their agenda. In this case, they have outlasted the public outrage over the Bear Stearns bailout, handing them yet another underhanded victory.

I have already said in two separate posts that I do no believe that taxpayer money should be used to bailout people who knowingly and willingly made a business decision they can not live up to. Those who knowingly allowed themselves to sign an agreement that was falsified and knew they would not be able to make payments when the mortgage was adjusted up are just out of luck as far as I am concerned. However, there are millions of borrowers that were not made aware of what they were really signing, and it is those that I believe should be helped. In most cases, the borrower would have needed a battery of lawyers to explain to them what was in the contract. But you can be sure the mortgage company had their battery of lawyers.

Republican Representative Jeb Hensarling of Texas says that this is a bailout of the large banks that made the ill-advised loans in the first place. Well, he’s right. But I don’t recall him saying anything like this with the Bear Stearns bailout. At least in Barney Frank’s bill some of we the people would be helped along with the banks, the latter which will eventually be saved by the taxpayer’s money anyway, if not already.

The bailout of Bear Stearns left no protection for the taxpayer when that loan defaults. In addition, the bailout made a lot of people wealthier than they already were. Bear Stearns Chairman James E. Cayne made over $61 million by selling his stock at $11 per share after the bailout. You may remember this was at the time JPMorgan was offering $2 per share to buy out Bear Stearns, an offer that would not have been made without the $30 billion government bailout loan. Therefore, without the bailout, Cayne would have gotten zilch, which is what he should have got for leading the company to bankruptcy in the first place. Cayne already had a record of poor leadership. But we’ve already established there is no “punishment and reward” program for the likes of Cayne, only a “reward and reward” program. Bush and his boys have seen to that.

April 25, 2008

The Facts

Christiane Amanpour of CNN has filed a report that suggests that the Bush administration may be trying to scuttle talks between the United States and North Korea. This question comes as a result of the administration just now releasing the pictures and information on the nuclear site in Syria that was bombed by the Israeli’s last September, and purported to be built with the help of North Korea. Many are wondering why this information was not released last year right after it happened.

My View

The problem here is that George Bush and his administration has completely lost the confidence of the majority of the American people. We have a very hard time believing anything Bush says, and for good reason. To many it seems that Bush wants to start another war with someone, and it doesn’t seem to matter with him who it is. However, most of those same people are worried about North Korea, Iran, Syria, and others. There is no doubt that they can not be ignored, but because of his poor record of being honest with us and other countries around the world, it is hard to believe anything that comes out of the Bush White House. The sad thing here is that if Bush is right and we do nothing, we will have to pay the consequences’. And it won’t be the American people who are to blame; it will be George Walker Bush.