August 14, 2004
Why I'm Voting For Bush...
... because he's NOT John Kerry! Sounds like a dumb reason, huh?
Actually, I have a ton of reasons. The fact that Bush isn't Kerry is just a bonus.
I'll be gone today.
Open Thread:
Why are you voting FOR Bush?
or
Why are you voting FOR Kerry?
I want the actual "for" reasons not the stupid he's not the other guy reasons.
Posted by rosemary at August 14, 2004 09:39 AM | TrackBackHERE are at least 1,470 reasons I am not voting for Bush.
Posted by: Maria at August 14, 2004 09:46 AMOh wait! That's not what you asked! ;o)
Okaaaay. Some reasons I will vote for Kerry instead of Bush:
Kerry's proposed economic policies;
Kerry's proposed foreign affairs policies;
Kerry's proposed education policies;
Kerry's position on stem cell research;
Kerry's position on energy and the environment;
Kerry's stance on civil liberties;
Kerry's ideas on handling national security and terrorist threats; and finally, but not least of all
Kerry's stance on taxes for the wealthy, social security and health coverage.
Oh yeah, and one last reason:
JOHN EDWARDS INSTEAD OF DICK "Go F**k Yourself" CHENEY!
Posted by: Maria at August 14, 2004 10:07 AMWhy I'm voting for Bush:
1. He's got the right idea for winning the War On Terrorism: "We will make no distinctions between the terrorists and the countries that harbor them."
2. He backed the Federal Marriage Amendment, recognizing that judicial activism made a constitutional amendment necessary.
3. He's firmly anti-abortion, and his record reflects that.
Those are the main points.
Posted by: Robin Munn at August 14, 2004 10:16 AMWhy I'm voting for Bush
1) He is winning the war on Terror as opposed to Kerry's secret plan.
2) He will follow through on the promises the US has made to the Iraqi and Afghan people and not flip-flop and run.
Kerry will not cut Planned Parenthood funding.
Plus the Bush family has been in my life way too long. Our current president 4 years. His father 12 years and I lived in Florida when Jeb was elected. Nevermind Cheney. That is just too much time. Need different dynamics and ideas.
Posted by: Friday at August 14, 2004 10:57 AMOops my name is Frida not Friday! :)
Posted by: Frida at August 14, 2004 10:58 AMI know what Rose means, and the negativity sucks, unfortunately being against the incumbant (or at least not being For him) is only the start of being FOR Kerry. If you are FOR Bush, even a little bit, you need go no further and negativism is the natural reaction to the challenger.
1.) Health Care: I have to say that, not knowing who Kerry was until late last year except as an automatic "no" vote to any GOP proposals, I've been pleasantly surprised that I can indeed support him. He's liberal enough and knows the DC game well enough to push through meaningful health care reform and not drop the ball the way the Clintons did. I have more hope that he can do it because I believe that Bush is done trying to tinker with the broken system, evenwith a hostile congress. The GOP has had 4 years to fix the appalling state of the administration of the finest health care professionals in the world and I am singularly unimpressed with their efforts to date.
2.) International Good Will: I am for Kerry because we need a break on the diplomatic front, and POTUS has used up his "benefits of the doubts" reserves on the world statge and I believe that his unilateral abbrogation of strategic treaties like the ABM was reckless and the breaking of or opposition to the anti-proliferation treaty, the test ban treaty, and the antio-landmine treaty, the chemical weapons ban has made us a global pariah, Ditto on environmental treaties and trade agreements. I am for Kerry because we need his foreign policy expertise, patient study of complex issues, and intellectual curiousity coupled with the good will he will engender internationally so that we not only are the most powerful natioin, but a leader the free world is willing to follow.
3.) Economy. Eat the Rich! Well, maybe not that severe, but it would be nice not to see so much crony capitalism and just the plain old dog-eat-dog kind of capitalism where the playing field is more level. I am for Kerry because I think he will be more willing to curb the deregulation movement which has continued unabatted since Reagan and has created S&L fiascos, energy company piracy and consentration of the media into the hands of rich partisans. Never have no many media outlets been controlled by so few, and their influence on our culture and politics is disproportional to their numbers.
4.) Taxes. Eat the Rich! OK, OK, how about just some responsibility on the spending side. At least I've seen a plan for deficit reduction by Kerry. I am for Kerry because of the reasons he DID vote against the imfamous $87 Billion. The plan he wanted insisted that the government make appropriate cuts to pay for it. I found that singularly responsible handling of my security with my money.
5.) Education. I am for Kerry because I believe that he will actually give teachers the tools they need and not merely the pressure of additional tests by fully funding NCLB.
6.) The War. Yep, that's the biggie isn't it. I am for Kerry because he will get Rumsfeld's resignation. More importantly he will change the overall diplomatic dynamic by being more sensitive (yep, that's a good thing) to the interests of the major acters in the Middle East, not so much to cow-tow to them but to co-opt them into assisting in re-establishing stability in the region. He will bring more realistic expectations to what is possible there because his political future does not depend on a quick sucess, just stability, because he can blame the other guy for much of the mess in the first place.
7.) Leadership. I am for Kerry because I believe he has the ability to become a statesman and not merely a politician. When he says "folloow me" my first instinct is not to scoff or find fault with his plan, but to get out of my chair and say, "OK, Where to?" I am for Kerry because he is not an embarassment to his native language and speaks with a gravitas and conviction that makes me believe he thinks he's doing his best for me and not what is best for folks like him. I am for him because he is dignified and intelligent, well read and willing to listen.
8.) That certain je ne se qua.: I am for him because I admire his record of a lifetime of service to this nation. I admire his courage in battle and his courage after coming home to stand up against what he believed in his heart to be great evil. I admire his ability to attract rich African-American women to fund his lifestyle instead of cashing in on his positioni and connections. I think that Americans are more sophisticated than the reckless cowboy image the world has of us, and we deserve a leader who will gain the respect of the world as a the product of the most advanced civilization ever created.
9.) And yes, he is not Bush. I would never bothered with the analysis of Kerry if I was not deeply unsatisfied with out president.
Reasons to vote FOR Bush? Hmmm....
1) He at least partly recognizes that we are at War for our very survival as a free nation and civilization.
2) The FMA was despicable, but it's off the table for now. Marriage is still in the hands of the states, as it must be. If Bush proposes or supports another FMA or such, the Democrats will at least be more likely to oppose it merely because it is supported by a Republican. If Kerry is President however, he will cave in to the Santorumites at every turn, and his Democratic sycophants will give him a free pass every time on the grounds that electing more Democrats and promoting their shallow economic issues are supposedly more important. Expect a Federal Anti-Privacy Amendment in exchange for more federal government handouts.
3) Kerry is a Communist traitor who stabbed his fellow soldiers in the back and is continuing to do so. I used to merely loathe him but I now hate him.
4) I love Condi.
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping gun-loving selfish aesthete at August 14, 2004 12:26 PMWhy I will vote for Bush:
1) He has expanded School Choice, and is still working to bring us Social Security Choice.
2) Because cutting taxes during a recession, even if it runs up the deficit mildly, is sound fiscal policy that every Democrat President from Roosevelt to Kennedy would have acknowledged.
3) He has the right idea on fighting the war, and gave us the liberation of Iraq, the greatest humanitarian intervention in U.S. history and the absolute right step in reforming the Middle East.
4) He's a good, honest, humble man who cares more about the ideas he believes in than partisanship. I trust him and believe in him.
Why I am voting for Bush:
Kerry's proposed economic policies;
Kerry's proposed foreign affairs policies;
Kerry's proposed education policies;
Kerry's position on stem cell research;
Kerry's position on energy and the environment;
Kerry's stance on civil liberties;
Kerry's ideas on handling national security and terrorist threats; and finally, but not least of all
Kerry's stance on taxes for the wealthy, social security and health coverage.
Being as Kerry has detailed practically none of these, has weaseled on all of them, and has no record of success at any of them.
Bush came into office a proven and popular leader, having beaten out Texas' most popular governor ever in his first attempt. He took the office of the Presidency with good grace, attempted to work with the Democrats and seemed resigned to being a fairly lame-duck President. He was tolerant of the childish sour-grapes antics of the Democrats in Congress, particularly in the area of post confirmations. He proved himself a national leader on 9/11 and since. He has NOT allowed other countries to weaken American sovereignty. Bush has lowered taxes and thusly aided in one of the fastest economic recoveries ever. He has pushed for a real space program, that encourages private development. He embodies real civil liberty principles rather than demagogic race-baiting. He has directed forces which now have somewhere between half and two-thirds of the top leadership of al Qaeda imprisoned or dead. He removed Saddam Hussein from power. And he drives moonbats absolutely nuckin' futz.
Posted by: John Irving at August 14, 2004 01:47 PMOn the international front, I was just reading through the archives of my mother's online journal, and it struck me that she noted quite a few instances of 'Hate America First' abroad when Clinton was President.
IOW, the more things change, the more they stay the same... :)
Posted by: B. Durbin at August 14, 2004 03:25 PMI am voting for Kerry because he's NOT Bush! Sounds like a dumb reason, huh? Actually, I have a ton of reasons. The fact that Kerry isn't Bush is just a bonus. There!
Posted by: marko at August 14, 2004 05:17 PMI am leaning more towards Kerry for several reasons.
1. Divided government. Republicans will be more true to their priniciples if dumb ideas have a D after them instead of an R. They will not receive the arm twisting they have been now, as well. Kerry will be prevented from doing his worst ideas due to newly found Republican backbone, and Kerry will prevent the bad ideas of conservative statists from taking place. These are definite pluses.
2. Bush would have nothing to lose in his second term. Kerry would, being his first term. Kerry would be less likely to push bad ideas if he might pay for them the next election. Bush does not have another election.
3. The GOP will put someone better up in 2008, and we would have a chance to move the GOP away from the Satanorumite statist direction it has been moving in.
4. Kerry can stop there from being a President Hilliary, a plus in and of itself.
5. I want a Republican in there, not a less crusty version of LBJ, as E J Dionne of the Washington Post would say. Some people give away the depths of Democratism in their soul when they speak of how past Democrats would approve of Bush's policies. Disgruntled Democrats should go back to their party and take their fellow LBJ disciples in the GOP with them. Telling me why he is like a Democrat is the best way to win my disapproval of Bush.
6. The GOP needs new leadership. A Kerry presidency would be the opportunity for more Republican minded, in the older Republican sense of it, not the disgruntled Democratic sense, men and women, to push for GOP to regain territory it had lost, and would stop the mindless push for the last remaining conservative Anglo Democratic regions, a push that has cost us more than what we have gained.
7. Lastly, cleanup of some of the mess that has occurred under Bush's watch (some does go back to Clinton, as well) can be cleaned up during the Kerry term. That gives the GOP a little more space in the blame game. The Dems having some power will have to contribute to the process. If it is not cleaned up, both will have some blame, not just one side. A good atmosphere to get it accomplished.
It is not merely who is, in the abstract, better, but who, given the current political situation, in the world, the nation, and the two parties, will be the best fit to fulfill the role of president in such a place? This includes how he or she would act, given the current political divisions, but it also includes how the other branches and the two parties shall react with him or her in office. Right now, it would appear more to be Kerry.
Posted by: Edmond the Libertarian at August 14, 2004 06:29 PMThere are a few people who rank up there with the moonbats that Kerry drives "absolutely nuckin' futz," as well. Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping gun-loving selfish aesthete knows who I am referring to. ;-)
Posted by: Edmond the Libertarian at August 14, 2004 06:46 PMi love you lizzy aka mrs k
Posted by: amy at August 14, 2004 07:53 PMEdmond the Libertarian:
You have just given me the _ONLY_ good argument for voting for Kerry that I have ever heard! Too bad nobody said any of that during the entire Democratic convention.
Posted by: Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping gun-loving selfish aesthete at August 14, 2004 08:28 PMFor me, it comes down to Foreign Policy. There is a clear and distinct difference between the two candidates. We know what Bush's FP is like. And I support it. I liken Kerry's to be a more "European" style of Foreign Policy. And after watching Europe's weakness in the face of political adversity in both the Sudan and Iran, I fear that a Kerry Administration would be a threat to the future American security.
Posted by: Gilly at August 14, 2004 08:48 PMI'll for President Bush because quite simply he is a man...of honor, of substance and positive values.
Posted by: Roy at August 14, 2004 11:33 PMYet another one of the reasons I won't be voting for GBW:
Via Usuallyunusual.com
"Ten Senior Military Officials Condemn Bush and Cheney's Personal Attacks on Kerry
WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 /U.S. Newswire/—Ten senior military officials released the following statement today in response to the Vice President’s attacks on John Kerry today:
“We are deeply disappointed by the tone and tenor of President Bush and Vice President Cheney’s personal attacks on John Kerry, a decorated combat veteran who served his country with courage and honor. John Kerry is talking about his plan to address the most pressing issues facing our nation—jobs, the economy, health care, the war on terror, the war in Iraq. George Bush and Dick Cheney have chosen take their campaign to the gutter. We call on President Bush and Vice President Cheney to stop the irresponsible personal attacks and tell us where they want to take the country. Tell us how they plan to win the peace in Iraq. Tell us how they plan to get us back on track with the war on terror. Tell us where they plan to lead the country. The American people and our troops deserve better.”
Signed by:
Admiral William J. Crowe (United States Navy, Retired)
Admiral Stansfield Turner (United States Navy, Retired)
General Wesley K. Clark (United States Army, Retired)
General Merrill “Tony” A. McPeak (United States Air Force, Retired)
General Joseph Hoar (United States Marine Corps, Retired)
General Johnnie E. Wilson (United States Army, Retired)
Vice Admiral Lee F. Gunn (United States Navy, Retired)
Lieutenant General Claudia J. Kennedy (United States Army, Retired)
Lieutenant General Donald Kerrick (United States Army, Retired)
Lieutenant General Edward D. Baca
One of the funniest taped responses of Bush. It's about Tribal Sovereignty. I almost peed in my pants laughing.
http://www.majorityreportradio.com/weblog/archives/000581.php (click on "having a nervous breakdown")
Reporter: What do you think Tribal Sovereignty means in the 21st century and how do we resolve conflicts between tribes and federal government.
Bush: Tribal Sovereignty means that it's sovereign. You're a...you're a...you've been given sovereignty and you're due as a sovereign entity.
Reporter: Ok
Bush: And therefore the relationship between the federal government and tribe is one between sovereign-neneties.
And this is who you call POTUS? I guess this what happens when he doesn't have his writers to help him out.
Mark-O- hit it on the head, The guy is a mindless boob (and in the right context, I like boobs, especially when they come in pairs.) Here's a pair of Bushisms just from this week:
1.) "They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.."
2.) "In a changing world, we want more people to have control over your own life."
He's maddnening. It stopped being cute years ago. It's as if Dan Quayle's retarded brother dressed up and played president.
"What a waste it is to
lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful." Aarrgghhh.......
I have no problems admitting that I'm voting for the lessor of two evils. After all, what's the alternative...the GREATER of two evils? Might as well just vote for Cthulu, then.
Hell, my mom claims she hasn't voted for anybody since Truman.
Bush has bungled his job so badly---weak on al Qaeda, a disaster for the economy, trying to add homophobic Jim Crow to the Constitution, and starting a for-profit war to benefit his campaign contributors---that almost anybody would be an improvement.
Posted by: Don Myers at August 15, 2004 01:37 PM(Via www.usuallyunusual.com)
[Bush the UNITY conference on Aug.6/04]
“Now, in terms of the balance between running down intelligence and bringing people to justice obviously is—we need to be very sensitive on that.” (Bush Delivers Remarks at the Unity, Journalists of Color Conference, 8/6/04)
Dick Cheney on Aug.12/04):
“Senator Kerry has also said that if he were in charge he would fight a ‘more sensitive’ war on terror. America has been in too many wars for any of our wishes, but not a one of them was won by being sensitive.” (Cheney in Dayton OH today)"]
Does Cheney have his own agenda? My question to the people who are voting for Bush. Are you voting for Bush as the Prez with Cheney as the VP or Cheney as the Prez and Bush as the VP?
Posted by: marko at August 15, 2004 02:32 PMDespite my fiscal and social misgivings with Bush, I'm voting for him for only one reason.
John Kerry is going to get American civilians killed in America.
Posted by: Jimmie at August 15, 2004 02:49 PMJimmie: "John Kery is going to get American civilians killed in America."
The US government has been doing that all this time.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/may2002/ins-m25.shtml
Thousands of Americans die each year because they can't afford private health insurance. That's more American people killed by our own government than Al-Qaeda.
Posted by: marko at August 15, 2004 03:12 PM"?Senator Kerry has also said that if he were in charge he would fight a ?more sensitive? war on terror. America has been in too many wars for any of our wishes, but not a one of them was won by being sensitive.? (Cheney in Dayton OH today)"]
Absolutely true.
Marko asked:
"Does Cheney have his own agenda? My question to the people who are voting for Bush. Are you voting for Bush as the Prez with Cheney as the VP or Cheney as the Prez and Bush as the VP?"
I'll vote for Cheney. Cheney is _much_ better.
Steven Malcolm: "I'll vote for Cheney. Cheney is_much_better."
No surprise there. We all know Cheney is the one pushing the buttons in the White House. He is the puppeteer, Bush is his puppet. :)
Posted by: marko at August 15, 2004 04:03 PMAccording to this article
http://entertainment.msn.com/celebs/article.aspx?news=166510
Barbie is running for president.
Is that Barbie or Ann Coulter? I can't distinguish between the two.
Mark Adams, you'll get the boobs you've wanted for a Prez after all. Mattel has been listening to you. ;)
Excellent!!
Posted by: Mark Adams at August 15, 2004 09:12 PMBecause he takes the war seriously, and Kerry doesn't. "I would have done it differently". Really? How? "Wellllllll".
Please.
Honestly folks, if Bush had laid off of Iraq, where do you think the polls would be right now? If we were still "Hans Blixing" our way through this, it wouldn't even be close. Kerry would have at least a double digit lead.
That's enough for me. And an awful lot of the middle, who look at Bush as the lessor of two, as someone remarked earlier.
They don't necessarily like the guy, but they know who is putting the rough men on the wall.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at August 15, 2004 09:29 PMI'm voting for Kerry because I believe he would be less likely to take us to war, more likely to build coalitions, AND he served in Vietnam. Also, Kerry doesn't support a Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Kerry also supports allowing gays to serve openly in the military.
Also, Kerry didn't lie about tax cuts. Bush claimed that the vast majority of his tax cuts went to the lower brackets. I can't find anywhere that Bush retracted his lie. I support Kerry/Edwards proposals to roll back tax cuts for the wealthiest.
Posted by: Joel Thomas at August 16, 2004 01:22 AMSimple, Lieberman isn't running. Given every opportunity to pick the best man for the job - Joe Lieberman - the Democrats instead decided to indulge in demagoguery and pander to the hard core leftists and the American haters in the party. Not only will I be voting for Bush this time around but I doubt I'll even consider the Democrats again until they excise their loonies like the Republicans did with the Buchananites.
Posted by: Maynard at August 16, 2004 02:43 AM"... because he's NOT John Kerry! Sounds like a dumb reason, huh?"
Maybe not -- so far, "I'm not President Bush" is the only intelligible reason Kerry has advanced on his own behalf.
Posted by: Geoff Brown at August 16, 2004 10:07 AMI’m voting for John Kerry because I love my country and my children. They will both pay far too dearly for another four years of Bush administration policy and decision-making.
Posted by: shep at August 16, 2004 11:47 AMGeoff Brown, that might be very well true, that that is all Kerry has given us as reasons. However, there are reasons to vote for him at the current moment, reasons Kerry could or would never give. One is not limited to voting for Kerry or for Bush by the reasons that the two candidates have given us, any more than one is limited to either opposing or supporting Gulf War: Episode II to the reasons respectively given by the war protestors and adminstration apologists.
The GOP has not excised all of the loonies. Unfortunately, some are trying to bring in more loonies to replace the ones that left, as well as trying to maintain influence in the party for the loonies who have left.
When Wieker was defeated by Lieberman, a number of conservatives were very happy, including those at the National Review. Such people are not Republicans, they should not pretend to be, and they should not be labeled as such. They are really conservative Democrats and should admit it.
If more older style Democrats who are not supporting their party would all go back, they would have a good chance of breaking off the loonies they complain of. This would also allow the GOP to be free of its remaining loonies, as well as free of the influence of other external loonies, and go back to being the Party of Lincoln, upholding classical, historic Republican principles. It would be good for both parties.
Posted by: Edmond the Libertarian at August 16, 2004 11:56 AMGeoff Brown wrote:
""... because he's NOT John Kerry! Sounds like a dumb reason, huh?"
Maybe not -- so far, "I'm not President Bush" is the only intelligible reason Kerry has advanced on his own behalf."
Oh, no! Senator (oops! not supposed to mention that!) Kerry given us a number of reasons to vote for him:
1) Did you know that he was born in the West Wing?
2) Did you know that his initials are JFK?
3) Did you know that he was in Viet Nam?
4) He will try to do even more than Bush has to spend more money and to bring the schools and police and doctors under federal government control.
The reasons he did not give, the , yes, I repeat, ONLY good reasons for even thinking about voting for Kerry rather than Bush are those given by Edmond the Libertarian.
Dean Esmay embodies what the Democratic party used to stand for, and Rosemary Esmay (The Queen of All Evil) and Edmond the Libertarian embody what the Republican party used to stand for. It is time for these heroes to take back their respective parties.
Steven the selfish:
"yes, I repeat, ONLY good reasons for even thinking about voting for Kerry rather than Bush are those given by Edmond the Libertarian."
Well, here's a few more for those who are still able to understand them:
Did you know he’s spent his whole life in public service?
Did you know he can say “nuclear”?
Did you know he didn’t squander his Ivy league education drunk and jacked up on cocaine?
Did you know that when called he showed up and put his life in grave and imminent danger for his country?
Did you know that he has personally put criminals in jail as a state prosecutor?
Did you know he’s written (personally, not his favorite lobbyist/contributor) actual legislation.
Did you know he’s voted against cutbacks in the F-18 fighter and Seawolf nuclear submarine programs and in favor of missile defense, increased military pay and defense and State Department appropriations by Republicans Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, John Warner and Floyd Spence totaling more than $1.2 trillion?
Did you know he believes in government transparency and accountability?
Did you he chooses policy based upon science and fact rather than policy based upon religion and belief?
Did you know he thinks it’s morally wrong that tens of millions of Americans have none or insufficient access to medical care?
Did you know that he thinks that $half-trillion annual deficits for the foreseeable future because we drastically lowered taxes on the richest of us are unconscionably mortgaging our children’s future.
Did you know he knows how to work WITH people, even those with whom he disagrees?
Did you know that he knows enough about war and the world to not get us into tragically expensive wars because of unfounded fear or pie-in-the-sky ideology?
There are more reasons to choose John Kerry over George Bush that Rosemary’s ISPs has megabytes of drive space.
Did you know the Viet Nam Human Rights Act passed the Congress by 410-1 only to have it blocked in committee in the Senate where Kerry prevented it from being released to voting by the full senate ?
Kerry was sent to Viet Nam where he spent six months in charge of the electrical department on a ship that sailed up and down the coast of VN far from any military action. Only later did he get into a swift boat but it wasn't scheduled military action duties until Admiral Zumwalt changed his mind.
He also applied for return to USA after he found out the rule that three injuries qualified for early department. Those scratch wounds sure came in handy.
Then Kerry went stateside and applied for six months early out of his military obligation to run for Congress. After permission was granted, he joined the Hanoi Jane parade and generally pissed and shit on the military veterans still on active duty and at the same time faked throwing his medals away.
Did you know that he favors partial birth abortion
the procedure where the child comes down the birth canal far enough for an abortion doctor to punctured its cranium so they can suction out the contents thereby rendering procedure a success ?
And he still will not release his military records.
Some voters believe he is a duplicitious schmuck
and UNFIT FOR COMMAND.
Catch 22:
“Did you know that he favors partial birth abortion”
By that logic, as a Bush supporter, you “favor” the slaughter of innocent women and children in Iraq as well as illegal, backroom, coat hanger abortions that kill desperate young women who don’t have access to the safe and legal kind.
Catch 22:
“Some voters believe he is a duplicitious schmuck and UNFIT FOR COMMAND”
Some voters should have to prove their rationality before being allowed anywhere near a voting booth.
Shep,
Go for it babe! I have plenty of space - I pay extra for it!!! ;-)
Posted by: Rosemary the Queen of All Evil at August 16, 2004 07:26 PMshep, you'd never be allowed to vote.
Posted by: John Irving at August 16, 2004 07:47 PMOK Rosemary,
The first one's a cheap steal and I'm hittin' the tip jar to help out. Let me know how much more space I have to work with:
Attitude: Not-so-Curious George (Bush)
President Bush claimed in an interview a while back that he does not read newspapers. His wife, Laura, later told a reporter that the president was fudging and that, in fact, he did actually peruse the press.
In matters involving the Bush family, it is generally wise to take Laura's word. And we were inclined to do so - until the president's latest pronouncement about the benefits that have supposedly come America's way as a result of occupying Iraq.
The man, who more than a year ago declared that the heavy lifting in Iraq was done, only to discover that the fight had barely started, is now back with another over-the-top pronouncement. "Today," Bush said last week, "because America has acted and because America has led, the forces of terror and tyranny have suffered defeat after defeat, and America and the world are safer."
By any measure, the president is wrong. Capital Times Monday July 19, 2004
Attitude: The 'don't blame me' president
THE IDEA that an administration would conveniently direct the finger of blame at one of its agencies with respect to matters so important as war and peace is manifestly immoral.
When Harry Truman was faced with miscalculations regarding the Korean conflict, his attitude was: "The buck stops here." And when John Kennedy was faced with the Bay of Pigs fiasco, he took full and unqualified blame. These men lived with the aftermath of their mistakes and blamed them on no one else.
George Bush must assume responsibility for the intelligence failures and all other mistakes made on his watch. And he must do so without qualification. That is what honorable men do. If they cannot or will not, they are not worthy of the offices they hold. Boston Globe Thursday July 15, 2004
Attitude: To Err Is Human, to Flip-Flop Divine
NEW YORK -- President Bush is working hard to convince the American people that John F. Kerry has a fatal flaw: He changes his mind. Or, in the current political lexicon, he "flip-flops." But isn't a willingness to change course -- even to admit error -- an asset in a leader?
Throughout U.S. history, important decisions, some of monumental proportions, came about because presidents changed their minds. In his first political statement, in March 1832, the 23-year-old Abraham Lincoln said, "Upon the subjects of which I have treated, I have spoken as I thought. So soon as I discover my opinions to be erroneous, I shall be ready to renounce them." LA Times Tuesday July 06, 2004
Attitude: Arrogance, big-time
TO TAKE the measure of a man's character, so the saying goes, apply a little pressure. Anyone can behave well when life is easy. The true test comes when the going gets tough.
So, while the X-rated insult Vice President Dick Cheney hurled Tuesday at Vermont Democrat Patrick J. Leahy might be forgiven by the senator as the product of a "bad day," it fits so well into a broader pattern of arrogance as to be indicative of the inner life of the man who plays an enormous role in running this country. Baltimore Sun Sunday June 27, 2004
Attitude: Bush jokes about search for WMD, but it's no laughing matter
President George Bush sparked a political firestorm yesterday after making what many judged a tasteless and ill-judged joke about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Mr Bush made the joke at a black-tie event for radio and television journalists in Washington on Wednesday night. He narrated a slide show, described as the White House election year album, making hay of the administration's reputation for secrecy and strained relations with European allies. But it was the joke about the war in Iraq that drew attacks. Guardian Friday March 26, 2004
Attitude: Bush's ugly cynicism
George W. Bush will deliver his State of the Union address this evening and, no doubt, he will talk about how he wants to unite America and Americans. But the president's comments should be viewed in the context of his recent actions. Last Thursday, while on a fund-raising trip to Atlanta, Bush inserted himself into the celebrations marking the 75th anniversary of the birth of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. In doing so, the president upset the schedule of planned local events, but he got what he wanted: an opportunity to be photographed placing a wreath on the grave of the slain civil rights leader. Capital Times Tuesday January 20, 2004
Attitude: Mourning in America
It is wrong, both morally and for the good of his political future, for the president to keep skipping funerals for fund-raisers. NY Times Wednesday November 19, 2003
Attitude: American hypocrisy on democracy
With bombs going off in Iraq and Saudi Arabia, and skirmishes raging in Afghanistan, George W. Bush is championing democracy for Muslims as an antidote to terrorism. But, as usual, he tells only half the truth. Toronto Star Thursday November 13, 2003
Attitude: A Willful Ignorance
According to The New York Times, President Bush was genuinely surprised to learn from moderate Islamic leaders that they had become deeply distrustful of American intentions. The report on the "perception gap" suggests that the leader of the war on terror has no idea how badly that war -- which must, ultimately, be a war for hearts and minds -- is going. Mr. Bush's ignorance may reflect his lack of curiosity: "The best way to get the news," he says, "is from objective sources. And the most objective sources I have are people on my staff." Two words: emperor, clothes. NY Times Tuesday October 28, 2003
Attitude: One Reason Not to Like Bush
This is not a policy disagreement. Or rather, it is not only a policy disagreement. If the president is not a complete moron -- and he probably is not -- he is a hardened cynic, staging moral anguish he does not feel, pandering to people he cannot possibly agree with and sacrificing the future of many American citizens for short-term political advantage. Is that a good enough reason to dislike him personally? Washington Post Friday October 24, 2003
Attitude: Bush fails to recognize middle ground, resorts to either-or thinking
Either you're with us or against us.--George W. Bush America--Love It or Leave It.--bumper sticker common in the 1960's. The two statements above are examples of Aristotelian or two-valued logic, also known as either-or logic: i.e., left/right, war/peace, evil/good. Either you're with US or against US. Love US or leave US. The flaw in this system should be obvious: it recognizes no middle term, no grey area. What of those citizens who are neither for nor against? Andrew Williams Sunday October 05, 2003
Attitude: Bush equates pacifism with "doing nothing"
Pacifism does not have to translate into just doing nothing. Either-or-thinking, such as Either we attack or we do nothing, is just lazy, selfish and dangerously limited. Emma Goldman once said, It takes less mental effort to condemn than to think. The world and human beings are a lot more complicated than the 0 or 1 parameters we feel so comfortable imposing. psst! Sunday October 05, 2003
Attitude: Hubris leads Bush to use out of date intelligence to justify war
It is an act of extreme hubris for this administration to repeatedly justify its invasion of Iraq by citing Iraq's attacks on Iran decades ago and its use of banned weapons in that war. Those old charges won't suffice for a world demanding hard and more recent evidence supporting the need for a preemptive attack. Daily Times Sunday October 05, 2003
Attitude: Bush characterizes German anti-war behavior as undemocratic
The Americans have been furious with the Germans since last autumn's general election campaign when Gerhard Schroeder adopted a rather critical attitude towards Bush's policy on Iraq. Schroeder was well behind in the polls until he emphasised that Germany would not cooperate with the Americans in attacking Iraq. This struck a chord in the German people, because the campaign turned around and Schroeder's coalition won re-election. Yet this is depicted in Washington as undemocratic, which says more about the Bush administration than anyone else. Irish Examiner Saturday October 04, 2003
Attitude: Bush's "stupid and arrogant" behavior raise questions about ability to wage war
Through a combination of sheer stupidity and contemptible arrogance, the Bush administration has been making a mess of the public relations battle, which raises the most serious questions about its competence to wage a war. Irish Examiner Saturday October 04, 2003
Attitude: Bush insists on getting his way, even if democracy suffers
Now we should be asking if George W Bush understands democracy, not just because of his attitude towards the Germans, but also after what happened during the election count in Florida when he showed little concern for due process. He wanted his way regardless of the democratic implications. Irish Examiner Saturday October 04, 2003
Attitude: Oval office lacks humility, practices hubris and deceit
Perhaps the administration's parlay of hubris and deceit can be made right. These are still early days. George W. Bush said before his election that as the world's sole superpower, the United States should be willing to show some humility in international affairs. It was a good point, and this is a good time for it. And the Oval Office would be a good place to start. The Charlotte Observer Friday August 01, 2003
Attitude: Hubris leads Bush to "nation building"
The faction that focuses on foreign policy has four core principles: Preserve U.S. sovereignty and freedom of action by marginalizing the United Nations. Reserve military interventions for reasons of U.S. national security, not altruism. Avoid peacekeeping operations that compromise the military's war-fighting proficiencies. Beware of the political hubris inherent in the intensely unconservative project of nation-building. Seattle Post Intelligencer Sunday July 27, 2003
Attitude: Bush uses "faith-based" intelligence to support preconceived notions
Greg Thielmann, who worked until last fall as a proliferation expert in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, explains, This administration has had a faith-based intelligence Attitude: 'We know the answers, give us the intelligence to support those answers. Counter Punch Saturday July 26, 2003
Attitude: Arrogrance leads to fantastic predictions for Arab world
The Bush administration will now attempt to refashion Iraq as a U.S. ally in the Arab world, democratic and globalized, friendly to Israel, dotted with U.S. bases, open to foreign ideas, institutions, and missionary efforts. But the neocons' Achilles heel is arrogance. Counter Punch Saturday July 26, 2003
Attitude: Bush shifts blame for bad intelligence
So does GB2 step up to the plate and take responsibility for his deceptions, hubris, and Oedipal obsessions? No, he pins it on the CIA. It was George Tenet?s fault, who is obligated to publicly apologize. Liberal Slant Friday July 25, 2003
Attitude: Administration has "bullyboy" attitude
But it's a larger issue, and here's where the Bush people are so vulnerable. Given that their bullyboy, in-your-face attitude had worked so well, in their hubris they really thought they could do and say anything and get away with it forever. So they told all sorts of whoppers about why Iraq supposedly was an 'imminent' danger to the U.S., and grossly manipulated non-existent facts to generate pro-war hysteria in time to meet the go-date for the bombing and invasion - which, of course, had been set a half-year before. All of that was so blatant and obvious, it was no wonder millions of protesters took to the streets, and the European leaders and the U.N. would have nothing to do with the Bush Administration and even shouted at them in public. Democratic Underground Friday July 25, 2003
Attitude: Bush lacks vision, focuses on "evil"
George W. Bush, who has a problem with the vision thing that causes his father's confusion over the matter to pale in comparison, is the man of these people. They didn't mind his inability to name the leaders of foreign countries when he was put into office, and now they don't mind the way he whips up frenzies through an incessant talk of evil. Liberal Slant Thursday July 17, 2003
Attitude: Bush exhibits "unfathomable hypocrisy"
This is an eerie moment in American political history. George W. Bush was defeated in the popular vote by his more liberal opponent but rules from the most extreme wing of his party. He campaigned as a fiscal conservative but has pushed tax cuts that will create a deficit larger than any in US history. As a candidate, he articulated the need for a humble foreign policy but now conducts it with a degree of hubris that makes Lyndon Johnson look like the Dalai Lama. His hypocrisy, in other words, is so great as to be almost unfathomable, and yet he has somehow managed to convince the media to admire him for his moral clarity. The Nation Thursday April 17, 2003
Attitude: Bush exhibits "perils of hubris"
As Richard Helms, the CIA director for much of the Vietnam War, said in 1981, "We were dealing with a complicated cultural and ethnic problem which we never came to understand. In other words, it was our ignorance or innocence, if you will, which led us to misassess, not comprehend, and make a lot of wrong decisions, which one way or another helped to affect the outcome." This time out, the nation is more fortunate: the perils of hubris have become evident within days of the first attack. The Nation Monday March 31, 2003
Attitude: Bush and Cheney try to stop 9/11 investigation
You do remember that both Bush and Cheney quietly asked the then-leaders of the House and Senate, Gephardt and Daschle, not to investigate the pre-9/11 period for reasons of national security. Perhaps one of the things they'd like to keep hidden was the fact that they were warned by the outgoing Clinton Administration specifically about the enormous dangers posed by Osama bin Laden/Al Qaida, but, in their arrogance, the incoming Bush Administration decided not to pay any attention to those warnings; instead, they said they were going to set up their own commission to look into terrorism, with Dick Cheney as head. Cheney -- too busy putting together an energy policy with Kenneth Lay's Enron and the other energy companies -- did nothing and the promised report on terrorism never materialized. The Crisis Papers Thursday February 06, 2003
Attitude: Bush ignored NASA warnings about shuttle dangers
Given this arrogant, we-know-it-all attitude, there was no reason, then, for Bush and his subordinates to listen to the technical experts who warned early last year (1), and even as recently as last August (2) about the disaster-in-the-making for the Space Shuttle and its crews unless certain procedures and processes were fixed. These NASA experts were ignored by Bush and his advisors, and removed from their positions. The Crisis Papers Thursday February 06, 2003
Attitude: Bush squanders 9/11 sympathy with arrogant behavior
After the 9/11 attacks, the United States enjoyed an enormous wellspring of sympathy from people around the world. Bush has squandered this support by projecting an unfortunately all-too -typically arrogant attitude toward the world. Seattle Post Intelligencer Saturday December 07, 2002
Attitude: Bush and Rumsfeld arrogantly refuse to provide WMD evidence
This has not stopped our national misleaders from insisting that they are our ticket to security. But for that assertion there has been as little evidence offered as there has been for the claims that Saddam Hussein is a threat to Americans or that he had anything to do with al-Qaeda. "We don't need no stinkin' evidence" is the attitude that oozes from President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The Future of Freedom Foundation Wednesday December 04, 2002
Attitude: Bush's promise of "humble" foreign policy becomes preemptive war
Dangerous days lie ahead, thanks to Mr. Bush and his new strategic doctrine of global preventive war. Things were supposed to be different. Does anyone remember that day ages ago when then-candidate Bush promised a "humble" foreign policy? I guess to Orwell's "War is Peace" and "Freedom is Slavery" we may now add Bush's "Arrogance is Humility." The Future of Freedom Foundation Wednesday December 04, 2002
Attitude: Bush's "bullying drumbeat"
Angered by what she views as the Bush administration's bullying drumbeat, Thomas referred early and often to her own hatred of war, quoting from poets and politicians to bear down on President Bush and his colleagues. Helen Thomas, speech Wednesday November 06, 2002
Attitude: Bush threatens and bullies Europe over ICC
After months of threats and bullying, the Bush administration has apparently backed down in its confrontation with Western Europe over the newly formed International Criminal Court (ICC). World Socialist Web Site Saturday July 13, 2002
Attitude: US's bullying attitude abroad may have "distrous consequences"
Now, having said that, we must point out that the institutions in this country -- the Constitution, the courts, the legislative bodies, civil liberties, the Bill of Rights, the press, etc. -- are in as much danger as they've ever been in. And the U.S.'s bullying attitude abroad may well lead to disastrous consequences for America down the line. Counter Punch Saturday June 01, 2002
Attitude: Arrogance of power leads to assaults on critical thinking and dissent
They are clear that Washington's arrogance of power and reckless global war is leading to assaults on critical thinking and democratic dissent. American Friends Service Committee Sunday April 14, 2002
Attitude: Bush seeks global domination through nuclear arsenals
Stephen Hadley, one of Condolezzia Rice's senior deputies reports that, not unlike the elder Bush's New World Order, this Bush Administration seeks a whole new world, U.S. global domination based ultimately on its nuclear and high-tech arsenals. American Friends Service Committee Sunday April 14, 2002
Attitude: Bush fails to see that all our lives are interrelated
President Bush did an excellent job in rallying the country against the perpetrators of the September 11 atrocities but we must not forget that all our lives are interrelated, that we are all citizens of this planet, that we need a new way of thinking different from 'linear thinking,' and that humanity comes first. Mario deSantis Tuesday September 25, 2001
Democracy: Suppress the Vote?
The big story out of Florida over the weekend was the tragic devastation caused by Hurricane Charley. But there's another story from Florida that deserves our attention.
State police officers have gone into the homes of elderly black voters in Orlando and interrogated them as part of an odd "investigation" that has frightened many voters, intimidated elderly volunteers and thrown a chill over efforts to get out the black vote in November. New York Times Monday August 16, 2004
Democracy: Will The Gang That Fixed Florida Fix the Vote in Caracas this Sunday?
Hugo Chavez drives George Bush crazy. Maybe it's jealousy: Unlike Mr. Bush, Chavez, in Venezuela, won his Presidency by a majority of the vote.
Or maybe it's the oil: Venezuela sits atop a reserve rivaling Iraq's. And Hugo thinks the US and British oil companies that pump the crude ought to pay more than a 16% royalty to his nation for the stuff. Hey, sixteen percent isn't even acceptable as a tip at a New York diner.
Whatever it is, OUR President has decided that THEIR president has to go. This is none too easy given that Chavez is backed by Venezuela's poor. And the US oil industry, joined with local oligarchs, has made sure a vast majority of Venezuelans remain poor.
Therefore, Chavez is expected to win this coming Sunday's recall vote. That is, if the elections are free and fair.
They won't be. Some months ago, a little birdie faxed to me what appeared to be confidential pages from a contract between John Ashcroft's Justice Department and a company called ChoicePoint, Inc., of Atlanta. The deal is part of the War on Terror. Greg Palast Tuesday August 10, 2004
Democracy: Time's up inÝblame game
Politics in Washington works in strange ways. A case in point is theÝSenate Intelligence Committee's decision to divide its investigation of the US invasion of Iraq into two parts. The first part dealt with the reasons for intelligence failure, or false intelligence, governing that decision. That congressional report, issued on Friday, damned the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in asserting that the invasion was carried out on false intelligence.
However, conclusive statements on the second part - regarding the culpability of the administration of President George W Bush, whether it went to war for the wrong reasons, by creating disinformation about the weapons of mass destruction-related capabilities of Saddam Hussein and his intentions toward the United States - will come out after the November presidential elections. Yet that is the most important part of the investigation. Asia Times Thursday July 15, 2004
Democracy: Don't even think about it
OFFICIALS OF the Bush administration are said to be pondering what power they have -- or should seek -- to postpone national elections in November in the event of terrorist strikes aimed at disrupting the democratic process.
The Bush people should drop the idea, lest the hint that terrorism could curb the rights of Americans be an added incentive to our enemies. SF Chronicle Monday July 12, 2004
Democracy: U.S. control of Iraq betrays founding fathers
Whatever the founding fathers had in mind as the definition of democracy when they approved the Declaration of Independence 228 years ago today, it cannot possibly have been the condition that has developed under American control in Iraq today.
There, under the mantle of democracy-making, a bloody, tawdry, secretive, tragic and sometimes farcical condition exists. The events of the past week demonstrated as much. Baltimore Sun Sunday July 04, 2004
Democracy: US lawmakers request UN observers for November 2 presidential election
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Several members of the House of Representatives have requested the United Nations to send observers to monitor the November 2 US presidential election to avoid a contentious vote like in 2000, when the outcome was decided by Florida.
Recalling the long, drawn out process in the southern state, nine lawmakers, including four blacks and one Hispanic, sent a letter Thursday to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan asking that the international body "ensure free and fair elections in America," Yahoo News Friday July 02, 2004
Democracy: Bush's Vatican strategy
BUMPER stickers saying ``Bishops for Bush'' may soon be coming. It seems that the president who admits few faults and confesses no shame but invokes God in policy decisions to a grating degree for many Americans pandered to the pope in his recent trip to the Vatican. The National Catholic Reporter, an independent newspaper, published an article that said Bush asked Vatican officials to help him in the American culture wars. Boston Globe Tuesday June 15, 2004
Democracy: Bush is melding the war in Iraq with the war to win tax relief on stock dividends.
It is a shameless exploitation of a military victory with the goal of intimidating Republican holdouts on Capitol Hill. Just as Bush crushed Democrats in last year's congressional elections with appeals to patriotism, he is now turning the big guns on his own party. MSNBC Sunday April 18, 2004
Democracy: Bush promises Palestinians democracy, as long as they don't elect Arafat
Bush II promised Palestinians democracy - provided, of course, they didn't re-elect Yasser Arafat. Big Eye Saturday October 04, 2003
Democracy: Preemptive, undeclared war is generating resistance among some rank-in-file soldiers
military personnel who are not pacifists or conscientious objectors. Joined by military families and 12 members of the U.S. Congress, a group of U.S. service men and women recently challenged Presidential abuse of power. Common Dreams Monday April 07, 2003
Democracy: Bush angry at Turkey for exercising democratic will
U.S. reaction to the weekend news that Turkey's parliament had rejected a proposal to accept the basing of U.S. troops for an Iraq war only confirmed what has long been obvious: The Bush administration believes democracy is wonderful -- so long as it doesn't get in the way of war. Common Dreams Monday March 03, 2003
Democracy: Huge protests are "irrelevant" to Bush
When asked about his reaction to the hundreds of thousands of Americans who rallied on Feb. 15 to oppose a war, Bush brushed them off as irrelevant. To pay attention to the largest worldwide political event in recent history, he said, would be like governing by focus group. Common Dreams Monday March 03, 2003
Democracy: In trade, commerce trumps democracy
The U.S. government employs a double standard by trading with one-party communist regimes in China and Vietnam, affirming that commerce may open the way for political freedoms, while shunning Cuba, said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a leader of a new 40-member congressional bloc seeking an easing of tensions with Cuba. Blackpool and Fylde Cuba Solidarity Campaign Sunday March 02, 2003
Democracy: For Bush, democracy is really imperial hegemony
In Bush-speak, democracy has been perverted to mean U.S. imperial hegemony: nations run by puppet rulers who make all the right noises, like Afghanistan's U.S.-installed figurehead, Hamid Karzai, while following Washington's orders to the letter. Common Dreams Sunday March 02, 2003
Democracy: Bush has little interest in democracy, jokingly says he prefers a dictatorship
Bush pushes for democracy abroad as part of his war on terror, but diminishes it at home. Critics believe he has no real interest in democracy, only getting rid of terrorists: George W. Bush says he wants to attack Iraq to install democracy. But as he explained on 2002-12-18: "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." Common Dreams Sunday February 23, 2003
Democracy: Bush places unrealistic demands on Palestinians
With a straight face, Bush asked the Palestinians to remove their existing leaders, create a functional democracy with separation of powers, write a constitution, and implement a market economy. No state in world history, and certainly not one under foreign occupation, has ever done this in three years. After a half-century of independence, none of the Arab states satisfy the Bush criteria. According to the cynics, Bush knows that the Palestinians can never meet these criteria, and thus a Palestinian state will never be created. Taking us to war based on lies is a clear abrogation of democracy. Counter Punch Friday July 05, 2002
Democracy: Bush concentrates executive power by establishing military tribunals
Bush issued of an Executive Order on November 13th, establishing a system of military tribunals to try accused terrorists. The degree to which the Order concentrates power in the hands of the Executive is breathtaking. Center for Constitutional Rights Wednesday July 03, 2002
Democracy: Bush's democracy based on money --Fidel Castro
For Mr. W, democracy only exists where money solves everything and where those who can afford a $25,000-a-plate dinner an insult to the billions of people living in the poor, hungry and underdeveloped world are the ones called to solve the problems of society and the world --. Fidel Castro China Daily Thursday June 06, 2002
Democracy: The White House has assumed vast new powers for internal repression
establishing by executive order an Office of Homeland Security that is not subject to either congressional oversight or any vote on the personnel appointed to run it. WSWS Friday March 08, 2002
Democracy: FCC appointee result of nepotism, not qualifications
Bush's appointee to head the FCC is the son of Colin Powell. A more experienced, less-partisan person would have better protected the public airwaves, which are essential to a functioning democracy. The Guardian Monday October 29, 2001
Democracy: FCC Chair promotes corporate-friendly agenda
After nine months in office, Powell does appear hellbent on pursuing a corporate-friendly agenda that can only result in a further torrent of mergers in the media industries. The Guardian Monday October 29, 2001
Economy: Bush's Own Goal
A new Bush campaign ad pushes the theme of an "ownership society," and concludes with President Bush declaring, "I understand if you own something, you have a vital stake in the future of America."
Call me naive, but I thought all Americans have a vital stake in the nation's future, regardless of how much property they own. (Should we go back to the days when states, arguing that only men of sufficient substance could be trusted, imposed property qualifications for voting?) Even if Mr. Bush is talking only about the economic future, don't workers have as much stake as property owners in the economy's success?
But there's a political imperative behind the "ownership society" theme: the need to provide pseudopopulist cover to policies that are, in reality, highly elitist. New York Times Friday August 13, 2004
Economy: Painting the Economy Into a Corner
President Bush reacted decisively to this month's shockingly bad employment report - by quickly changing the topic to terror. The Federal Reserve chairman, Alan Greenspan, also focused elsewhere, namely on rising oil prices. Mr. Greenspan used inflationary energy costs as the rationale for raising interest rates a quarter point, despite the drastic slump in hiring and a recent slowdown in productivity growth.
What neither man seems ready to acknowledge outright is that policy makers have run out of tools for stewarding an economy that - nearly three years into a recovery - has yet to flourish and may even be downshifting to neutral. The president's fiscal policies, mainly high-end tax cuts, have resulted in a record federal budget deficit without spurring hiring or income growth. If Mr. Bush continues on the tax-cut path, continuing high deficits will further threaten job creation and living standards. New York Times Thursday August 12, 2004
Economy: Bush Says National Sales Tax Worth Considering
NICEVILLE, Fla. (Reuters) - President Bush said on Tuesday that abolishing the U.S. income tax system and replacing it with a national sales tax was an idea worth considering.
"It's an interesting idea," Bush told an "Ask President Bush" campaign forum here. "You know, I'm not exactly sure how big the national sales tax is going to have to be, but it's the kind of interesting idea that we ought to explore seriously." Yahoo News Tuesday August 10, 2004
Economy: Economic realities
WASHINGTON -- THE LATEST news about the sagging American economy confirms two important trends:
The alleged recovery from the recession more than three years ago is sputtering, and the big shots in the financial and political world have neither seen the slowdown coming nor been able to explain it to worried Americans.
Instead, they have been caught with their Pollyanna pants down. The spike in the economy's total output that occurred a year ago has been decelerating ever since, and the spike in private sector job creation that occurred in March has also been decelerating ever since. It was equally alarming on Friday that the government lowered its estimates of job creation in May and June even as it was reporting that barely 40,000 new jobs had been created in July. Boston Globe Sunday August 08, 2004
Economy: Few new jobs/Symptom of failed policy
As a general rule of political economy, the prudent citizen draws a bright line between developments in the marketplace and events in Washington, D.C. The vast American economy can respond to forces quite beyond the control of politicians, and the behavior of politicians can respond to -- well, who knows?
But the dismal employment report released Friday by the Labor Department makes it impossible to sustain that distinction -- not with an election just three months away. The disappointing numbers should be deeply chastening for the campaign of President Bush and deeply troubling for voters who have suffered the most incompetent economic stewardship in memory. Star-Tribune Saturday August 07, 2004
Economy: U.S. Adding More Oil to Emergency Reserve
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration said on Friday it was adding more oil to the U.S. emergency petroleum reserve, despite record high crude prices and strong oil demand.
The U.S. Interior Department said it awarded contracts to ChevronTexaco Corp. and Royal Dutch/Shell Group's Shell Oil to deliver more than 100,000 barrels of crude a day to the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Reuters Friday August 06, 2004
Economy: A Record Deficit
THE BUSH administration announced last week its revised figure for this year's budget deficit: $445 billion. This, or so the spin goes, is good news, because the original forecast was even higher -- $521 billion. But outside budget experts had warned that the forecast was inflated, which tarnishes any celebration of the new number. Not that the administration was deterred. "This improved budget outlook is the direct result of the strong economic growth the president's tax relief has fueled," crowed Office of Management and Budget Director Joshua B. Bolten.
Mr. Bolten's argument makes little sense: Economic growth has been no faster than the administration anticipated when it predicted the higher deficit. In any event, $445 billion marks the highest deficit ever (though the administration seems to be setting the stage for a new round of better-than-expected numbers just before Election Day). Only in the administration's upside-down economic world could a deficit $70 billion higher than last year's be hailed as progress. Washington Post Thursday August 05, 2004
Economy: Deficit rule No. 1: If you're in a hole, stop digging
WASHINGTON ‚ Bad economic news presses from all sides. The recovery is faltering. The stock market is in a funk. Consumers are being squeezed between stagnant incomes, rising costs of buying credit, and maxed-out credit cards.
Deficits of all kinds are growing. The federal budget deficit is projected at $5 trillion (that's trillion, as in 5,000,000,000,000) over the next 10 years. The federal government's unfunded liabilities, mainly for retirement and healthcare, are $72 trillion. This will show up later in budget deficits as the baby-boomer generation ages. The trade deficit - the difference between what the US exports and what it imports - was $46 billion in May, the latest month for which figures are available. That's a rate of $552 billion a year, the measure of the obligations to foreigners incurred by the US.
Doing something about the budget deficit and its cousin, the unfunded liabilities, is simply being put off in the hope that they will go away until somebody else is in charge. CS Monitor Thursday August 05, 2004
Economy: The Administration's Efforts to Make Harmful Deficits Appear Benign
Today, the Office of Management and Budget released new projections stating that the budget deficit will grow to $445 billion in fiscal year 2004.Ý This is $70 billion larger than the 2003 deficit, which stood at $375 billion.Ý Despite the recovery, the deficit has continued to rise significantly.
The $445 billion projected deficit also is more than $700 billion worse than what the Administration projected for fiscal year 2004 in its first budget, submitted in February 2001.Ý At that time, the Administration forecast a $262 billion surplus for 2004.
In the face of this dramatic fiscal deterioration, the Administration is now attempting to downplay the deficits and is citing the new figures as evidence it is making progress on the fiscal front. ÝIn spinning the new deficit numbers, the Administration and others have made several dubious claims. CBPP Sunday August 01, 2004
Economy: I.R.S. Says Americans' Income Shrank for 2 Consecutive Years
The overall income Americans reported to the government shrank for two consecutive years after the Internet stock market bubble burst in 2000, the first time that has effectively happened since the modern tax system was introduced during World War II, newly disclosed information from the Internal Revenue Service shows.
The total adjusted gross income on tax returns fell 5.1 percent, to just over $6 trillion in 2002, the most recent year for which data is available, from $6.35 trillion in 2000. Because of population growth, average incomes declined even more, by 5.7 percent. New York Times Thursday July 29, 2004
Economy: Red ink more severe in first three quarters, figures show
The government's deficit ballooned to $326.6 billion in the first nine months of the 2004 budget year, according to a snapshot of U.S. balance sheets released Tuesday.
That's more than 20 percent larger than the $269.7 billion shortfall for the corresponding period last year. For the current budget year which began Oct. 1, this spending has totaled $1.73 trillion, 6.4 percent more than the same period a year ago. Revenues came to $1.40 trillion, 3.5 percent more than the previous year. SF Chronicle Thursday July 15, 2004
Economy: Help wanted
THE CHANCES are minuscule that Congress will reauthorize the Workforce Investment Act before the fall presidential election, leaving job training in political limbo.
Partisan jousting in the House and penny-pinching by President Bush undermine the hopes of 8.2 million unemployed Americans who need education and training to compete in the job market. NULLBoston Globe Monday July 12, 2004
Economy: Bye-Bye, Bush Boom
When does optimism -- the Bush campaign's favorite word these days -- become an inability to face facts? On Friday, President Bush insisted that a seriously disappointing jobs report, which fell far short of the pre-announcement hype, was good news: "We're witnessing steady growth, steady growth. And that's important. We don't need boom-or-bust-type growth."
But Mr. Bush has already presided over a bust. For the first time since 1932, employment is lower in the summer of a presidential election year than it was on the previous Inauguration Day. Americans badly need a boom to make up the lost ground. And we're not getting it. NY Times Tuesday July 06, 2004
Economy: More jobs, less pay
A LEADING consumer confidence index hit a two-year high last week, and polls show that President Bush's approval ratings have been hurt by Iraq but helped by a growing belief that the economy is improving. Certainly, there are more signs of that now than in the first three years of Mr. Bush's administration. The economy has been adding an average of more than 300,000 jobs a month since March, the unemployment rate has fallen over the last year from 6.3 percent to 5.6 percent, and consumer spending set a record in May.
All for the good -- but not everything is so good. Beneath the surface lurks disquieting fragility: Baltimore Sun Sunday July 04, 2004
Economy: Bush's Tax Cuts Hurt Schools, Spur Local Tax Hikes
June 23 (Bloomberg) -- Al Strazzullo, a retired regional manager for the U.S. General Accounting Office, got the good news first. President George W. Bush's $330 billion cut in personal income taxes put an extra $177 in his 2003 government pension.
In March, Strazzullo, 76, got the bad news. The gain was wiped out by a $538 increase in property taxes on his three- bedroom, brick-veneer house in Virginia Beach, Virginia. The bill went to $3,283 from $2,745. Bloomberg Wednesday June 23, 2004
Economy: Factory Bush Touted Closes; 1,300 Ohioans Jobless
Last April, President Bush visited a Timken Company manufacturing plant in Ohio to press for passage of new tax cuts that he said would spur the economy. During the speech Bush said that "the future of this company is bright and therefore, the future of employment is bright for the families that work here". Less than a year after the tax cuts for the wealthy passed, that same factory is shutting down -- putting about 1,300 people out of work and inflicting a "devastating" blow to the Canton community. With the White House pushing even more tax cuts for the wealthy and supporting outsourcing of American jobs, Ohio has lost more than 200,000 manufacturing jobs since President Bush took office. Misleader Tuesday May 18, 2004
Economy: PASSING DOWN THE DEFICIT: FEDERAL POLICIES CONTRIBUTE TO STATE FISCAL CRISIS
The state fiscal crisis has been deep and prolonged. States have struggled to close deficits that have totaled approximately $190 billion over the past three years. And, as states debate and enact budgets for fiscal year 2005 (which, in most states, begins on 2004-07-1), they are facing deficits of roughly another $40 billion for that year. Federal policies, which have reduced state revenues and imposed additional costs on states, have played a significant role in enlarging these deficits and are impeding states' fiscal recovery. These federal policies have contributed significantly to the need for states and localities to make expenditure cuts and enact tax increases to bring their budgets into balance. CBPP Wednesday May 12, 2004
Economy: New Report Questions Effectiveness, Design of Bush Tax Cuts
A new study of three years of Administration tax cuts, issued by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, finds adverse fiscal, distributional, and long-term economic effects from the tax cuts. CBPP Saturday April 24, 2004
Economy: The GOP is portraying moderate-tax-cut Senate Republicans as Francophiles
April 18 - More than 60 percent of Americans say large tax cuts now are not needed, yet President Bush is making support for tax cuts a test of party loyalty and patriotism. MSNBC Sunday April 18, 2004
Economy: Bush's job-training proposal empty
"A dagger pointed at the jugular of the unskilled." That's how economist and free trade advocate Jagdish Bhagwati recently described the effect of technological change and churning jobs in the world economy on America's workers. Or, as President Bush put it just last Monday to an audience in North Carolina: "We're not training enough people to fill the jobs of the 21st century." In his speech, the president announced he would seek to revamp federal job training programs to double the number of people trained every year. Trouble is, job training isn't cheap. The president's proposal doesn't offer a single dime of new funding -- it just reshuffles the already inadequate funding. Seattle PI Thursday April 08, 2004
Economy: Bush's Goal of Affordable, High-Speed Internet Access for All Americans Contradicts Administration Policies
(Washington, D.C.) -- President Bush's much-publicized goal of providing affordable high-speed Internet access to all Americans by ensuring "plenty of choice" in broadband service contradicts Administration policies that actually have strengthened cable and phone monopolies which have led to higher prices and less choice in broadband, Consumers Union and Consumer Federation of America said today in a letter to the president. Consumers Union Tuesday March 30, 2004
Economy: Snow: Outsourcing Can Help the Economy
CINCINNATI (AP) -- Treasury Secretary John Snow says outsourcing of American jobs, a hot issue in the presidential campaign, can help make the economy stronger. "It's part of trade," Snow said. "It's one aspect of trade, and there can't be any doubt about the fact that trade makes the economy stronger.""You can outsource a lot of activities and get them done just as well at a lower cost," Snow said after being asked about the issue during a stop here Monday. NY Times Tuesday March 30, 2004
Economy: Bush Economic Team Draws Fire Over Jobs
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrats are pouncing on a series of stumbles by President Bush's economic team, claiming it's evidence the administration doesn't have a credible strategy to deal with a flood of U.S. manufacturing job losses. The latest misstep occurred Thursday when the administration's first choice as point man on manufacturing issues withdrew from consideration after Democrats attacked his decision to set up a manufacturing plant in China. NY Times Friday March 12, 2004
Economy: Critics Tackle $10B Request for Missiles
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democratic senators Thursday criticized the administration's budget request for the missile defense program, questioning anew whether the system will ever work. Supporters urged continued funding for the program still in development. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., called the request for $10.2 billion "truly staggering" -- the largest single-year funding request for any weapon system in history -- and questioned the program as "rudimentary and uncertain." NY Times Thursday March 11, 2004
Economy: White House Forecasts Often Miss The Mark
President Bush last week caused a stir when he declined to endorse a projection, made by his own Council of Economic Advisers, that the economy would add 2.6 million jobs this year. But that forecast, derided as wildly optimistic, was one of the more modest predictions the administration has made about the economy over the past three years. Two years ago, the administration forecast that there would be 3.4 million more jobs in 2003 than there were in 2000. And it predicted a budget deficit for fiscal 2004 of $14 billion. The economy ended up losing 1.7 million jobs over that period, and the budget deficit for this year is on course to be $521 billion. These are not isolated cases. Over three years, the administration has repeatedly and significantly overstated the government's fiscal health and the number of jobs the economy would create, but economists and politicians disagree about why. Washington Post Tuesday February 24, 2004
Economy: Bush Threatens to Veto $318B Highway Bill
WASHINGTON (AP) -- States would get an additional $100 billion over the next six years to build roads, repair bridges and improve public transit under a Senate-passed bill that the White House says is extravagant in an age of record deficits. The Senate voted 76-21 Thursday to approve the $318 billion surface transportation bill, a winning margin that would be enough to override a presidential veto threatened by the administration. AP Friday February 13, 2004
Economy: Homeland Security Spending Under Fire
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration's proposed $6 billion increase on homeland defense spending is a shell game undermined by cuts to other law enforcement programs, four Democratic senators charged Wednesday. The four said that it's disingenuous to tout increases in homeland security spending while at the same time trying to cut programs like the Community Oriented Policing Services, or COPS program, which provides grants to state and local authorities for hiring more police officers. AP Wednesday February 11, 2004
Economy: Bush report: Sending jobs overseas helps U.S.
WASHINGTON -- The movement of American factory jobs and white-collar work to other countries is part of a positive transformation that will enrich the U.S. economy over time, even if it causes short-term pain and dislocation, the Bush administration said yesterday. The embrace of foreign "outsourcing," an accelerating trend that has contributed to U.S. job losses in recent years and has become an issue in the 2004 elections, is contained in the president's annual report to Congress on the U.S. economy. Seattle Times Tuesday February 10, 2004
Economy: Mr. Bush's Revisionism
Just as he did on Iraq and national security, President Bush laid the economic foundation for his re-election campaign during a television interview broadcast Sunday. In a preview of how his campaign will respond to complaints about the huge deficit and overall job losses, Mr. Bush defended his tax cuts as ways to stimulate the economy, blamed Congress for not getting spending under control and made vague promises about avoiding catastrophic red ink in the long run by reforming Medicare and Social Security. None of what we heard made much sense. NY Times Tuesday February 10, 2004
Economy: Senators Deride Domestic Security Cuts
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush's new budget would not devote enough money to domestic security, senators said Monday, noting big cuts in funds for firefighters, police and others who would respond to a terrorist attack. "A stunning 30 percent cut ... for first responders is the latest alarming evidence of shortchanging the homeland side of the war against terrorism," Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., told Homeland Security Security Secretary Tom Ridge. "We have a long way to go yet before we fulfill the promises that we made to the American people in those dark days following the 9-11 attacks to adequately secure the homeland," Lieberman said at a budget hearing before the Senate Committee on Government Affairs. AP Monday February 09, 2004
Economy: Misspending Military Dollars
"The strong defense everybody wants will not come from throwing ever larger sums into the wrong weapons."If the Bush administration were at all serious about fiscal responsibility, it would have sent Congress a Defense Department budget that reflected the real costs of military operations, cut out cold-war-era programs and focused on the things the military needs in the 21st century. Regrettably, none of that happened. The budget plan is inaccurate, anachronistic and laden with pork, and Congress is only likely to make things worse. Mr. Bush is proposing to increase basic Pentagon spending by more than $20 billion over last year's budget, and that does not even count operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, which could add a further $50 billion when the bill is presented to Congress after Election Day. Add that money and the nuclear weapons programs run by the Energy Department to the Pentagon's $402 billion request, and the total will approach half a trillion dollars. NY Times Thursday February 05, 2004
Economy: Bush cuts rich in, leaves rest out
"the poor are to exist on faith and charity, for such programs as low-income housing, heating assistance, jobs and unemployment insurance are all starved"Budgets, as the president said in his Saturday radio address, are a matter of priorities, of making hard choices. The president's madcap tax-and-borrow policies have run up a staggering $500 billion deficit -- without creating the jobs needed to keep the economy going. Profits are up, but so is poverty. The Bush administration is building schools in Iraq, but not in the United States. How do we get out of this box?The president's budget reveals his priorities, what he truly cares about. It is not a reassuring picture. The president's first priority remains tax cuts, largely for the wealthy. Millionaires are pocketing $30,000 a year in tax breaks from this president. The president wants, first and foremost, to make his tax cuts permanent -- no matter what that means for the deficit, for investments in our future, for already obscene extremes of inequality in what once was a middle-class nation. Chicago Sun Times Tuesday February 03, 2004
Economy: State of the Union at Home
When the president delivers his State of the Union address, we like to listen respectfully and respond politely. It is always easy to find things worth applauding. Last night, for instance, President Bush mentioned job retraining, immigration law reform and programs to help newly released prisoners re-enter society. The impulse is always to split the difference -- to decry the ideas we disagree with and then note the ones we like. This time, such evenhandedness seems impossible. The president's domestic policy comes down to one disastrous fact: his insistence on huge tax cuts for the wealthy has robbed the country of the money it needs to address its problems and has threatened its long-term economic security. Everything else is beside the point. NY Times Wednesday January 21, 2004
Economy: Weak labor market results in second consecutive year of job loss
According to today's report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the nation's payrolls expanded by only 1,000 jobs last month, a marked deceleration from recent gains over the past five months.Unemployment fell from 5.9% in November to 5.7% in December, but this drop was wholly due to a contraction in the labor force, which declined by 309,000. That left the labor force participation rate at 66%, the lowest it has been since December 1991. Economic Policy Institute Friday January 09, 2004
Economy: I.M.F. Report Says U.S. Deficits Threaten World Economy
WASHINGTON, Jan. 7 -- With its rising budget deficit and ballooning trade imbalance, the United States is running up a foreign debt of such record-breaking proportions that it threatens the financial stability of the global economy, according to a report made public today bythe International Monetary Fund. In nearly 60 pages of carefully worded analysis, the report sounded a loud alarm about the shaky fiscal foundation of the United States, questioning the wisdom of the Bush administration's tax cuts and warning that large budget deficits posed "significant risks" not just for the United States but for the rest of the world. NY Times Wednesday January 07, 2004
Economy: Soaring trade deficit threatens to destabilize U.S. financial markets
A trade deficit must be financed by net borrowing from other countries. The United States was effectively spending 5% more than it was producing last year, but cannot continue to borrow at such a high rate indefinitely. Worse yet, the trade deficit is growing each year as a share of GDP. Some government officials have suggested that such high levels of foreign borrowing do not pose a problem. Treasury Secretary John Snow recently said that "our current account deficit in large part reflects the attractive investment environment and high growth of productivity in the United States" (Senate Banking Committee on 2003-10-30). This statement ignores a serious problem resulting from the rising U.S. trade deficit: a growing dependence on lending by foreign governments bent on maintaining large trade surpluses with the United States. Economic Policy Institute Wednesday January 07, 2004
Economy: Out of Their Anti-Tax Minds
It's hard to overstate Norquist's importance in contemporary Washington. He is head of Americans for Tax Reform, is an intimate of Karl Rove, the president's chief political aide, and has easy access to the White House. He presides over a weekly meeting of important Republican activists and lobbyists where the agenda -- at least Norquist's -- is to ensure that taxes are reduced to a bare minimum, the government is starved and everyone, the rich and the poor, is taxed the same, which is to say almost not at all. The Bush administration has mindlessly applied this doctrine. It has three times reduced taxes -- mostly on the rich -- careening the federal budget from a surplus to a deficit without end. The rich, who can afford their schools or health care, will not suffer. But the poor and the middle class will hurt plenty -- and state and local taxes, often the most regressive, will go up. Washington Post Tuesday January 06, 2004
Economy: Bush Readies Budget As Spending Balloons
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Conservatives wait warily as President Bush makes final decisions about his election-year budget, three years into an administration on whose watch spending has mushroomed by 23.7 percent, the fastest pace in a decade. While Bush has emphasized repeatedly the need to rein in spending, overall federal expenditures have grown to an estimated $2.31 trillion for the budget year that started Oct. 1. That is up from $1.86 trillion in President Clinton's final year, a rate of growth not seen for any three-year period since 1989 to 1991. AP Monday January 05, 2004
Economy: The $500 billion bender
In just the last few months, Congress, at Bush's request, has doled out $87 billion to rebuild and secure Iraq and Afghanistan; approved a $401 billion defense appropriation bill, the largest ever; completed a $1 trillion tax cut on top of the $1.35 trillion reduction the president won in 2001; and approved a Medicare prescription drug benefit that will cost at least $400 billion over the next decade. If the energy bill is revived next year, add to the list at least another $26 billion in tax cuts for energy companies. All of this, it's worth remembering, comes when the federal government has already logged its largest deficit ever -- some $374 billion last year, $84 billion more than the previous record held by Bush's father, George H.W. Bush. SF Chronicle Saturday December 06, 2003
Economy: Looting the Future
One thing you have to say about George W. Bush: he's got a great sense of humor. At a recent fund-raiser, according to The Associated Press, he described eliminating weapons of mass destruction from Iraq and ensuring the solvency of Medicare as some of his administration's accomplishments. Then came the punch line: "I came to this office to solve problems and not pass them on to future presidents and future generations." He must have had them rolling in the aisles. Paul Krugman NY Times Friday December 05, 2003
Economy: Editorial: Big spenders/Bush & Co. remortgage nation
Someone recently called President Bush "the mother of all big spenders." It wasn't Howard Dean or any of the other Democratic presidential candidates. It wasn't a Democratic member of Congress. It was fiscal analysts for the conservative-libertarian Cato Institute. Why the harsh rhetoric for George W. Bush from what should be a sympathetic corner? Because Bush has simultaneously shrunk the revenue flowing to the federal government through a string of tax cuts while increasing federal spending like there was no tomorrow, literally. Star Tribune Sunday November 30, 2003
Economy: Energy Tax Breaks Go to Industries
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Two-thirds of the $23 billion in tax breaks in the Republican-drafted energy bill would go to the oil, gas and coal industries. Democrats criticized the legislation as "a hodgepodge of subsidies for the politically well-connected." AP Monday November 17, 2003
Economy: Debt crazy/Reality check on Bush's budget
When the White House reported Monday that the federal deficit for 2003 came in below expectations -- a mere $374 billion -- President Bush's aides were quick to celebrate. "We can put the deficit on a reasonable downward path if we continue progrowth economic policies and exercise responsible spending restraint," budget director Joshua Bolten told the Wall Street Journal. This outlandish spin is an insult to the nation's taxpayers and suggests that the White House is reading its own budget documents as badly as it read the prewar intelligence on Iraq. A new report by two respected budget watchdogs -- the probusiness Committee for Economic Development and the hawkish Concord Coalition -- shows that the federal budget outlook is now the worst in the nation's history and that the Bush administration is doing absolutely nothing to fix it. Star Tribune Thursday October 23, 2003
Economy: Bush claims that he inherited the recession, but it didn't begin until later
Bush opened his final radio address of the year this way: In 2002, our economy was still recovering from the attacks of September the 11th, 2001, and it was pulling out of a recession that began before I took office. Bush concluded 2002 with the same dishonesty that defined his economic policy throughout the year--a mendacity that ranged from denying the tax cut had anything to do with the re-emergence of the deficit to arguing that the terrorism insurance bill would create 300,000 construction jobs. In fact, there is no evidence that the economy was in recession when President Bush took the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2001. Bush Watch Sunday October 12, 2003
Economy: Bush ignores humanitarian needs, spends it on Iraq
By focusing global attention on an economic crisis that does not really exist, America has diverted public attention from serious crises that do. Consider the battles against AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. About eight million people will die of these preventable and treatable diseases in 2004. In 2001, the world created a global fund to fight them. Yet for fiscal year 2004, the Bush administration is committing just $200 million to that fund. For every one of these dollars, the administration is committing $350 to Iraq. These are grotesquely distorted priorities. Miami Herald Wednesday October 01, 2003
Economy: The rich get richer by 10% over the past year
America's richest people have seen a 10 per cent increase in their net worth over the past year, the latest list of individual fortunes in Forbes magazine reveals. The improving fortunes of those on the list also reflected the largesse being shown to the richest Americans by the Bush administration. . . .They are the main beneficiaries of tax cuts that will pump $100bn into the economy - most of it into the pockets of the top 1 per cent - this year alone. They have also benefited from measures such as the repeal of estate taxes and the lifting of various government regulations on industry and large businesses. The Independent Friday September 19, 2003
Economy: CBO projects huge budget shortfalls through 2011
The CBO also predicted the annual budget shortfalls would total $2.3 trillion through 2011, a stunning reversal from the 10-year, $5.6 trillion surplus the CBO forecast in 2001. But Walker, who heads the General Accounting Office, said even those daunting figures do not convey the scope of the problem because conventional government accounting leaves out the impact of promised benefits for veterans' health, Social Security, Medicare and other programs. "These additional amounts total tens of trillions of dollars," he said. "They are likely to exceed $100,000 in additional burden for every man, woman and child in America today, and these amounts are growing every day," he said. Seattle Post Intelligencer Thursday September 18, 2003
Economy: Bush says disappearing surplus "incredibly positive news"
What does "reducing the size and scope of government" mean? Tax-cut proponents are usually vague about the details. But the Heritage Foundation, ideological headquarters for the movement, has made it pretty clear. Edwin Feulner, the foundation's president, uses "New Deal" and "Great Society" as terms of abuse, implying that he and his organization want to do away with the institutions Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson created. That means Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid -- most of what gives citizens of the United States a safety net against economic misfortune. The starve-the-beast doctrine is now firmly within the conservative mainstream. George W. Bush himself seemed to endorse the doctrine as the budget surplus evaporated: in August 2001 he called the disappearing surplus "incredibly positive news" because it would put Congress in a "fiscal straitjacket." New York Times Sunday September 14, 2003
Economy: Unfunded federal mandates a burden on states
[U]nfunded federal mandates are driving up the costs of running the cities and making it impossible to balance state budgets. SOHO Daily News Wednesday September 03, 2003
Economy: Bush trade practices favor China over US
Bush's trade practices are driving Americans out of jobs and manufacturers out of business, while giving huge advantages to China and other countries. NY Times Monday August 18, 2003
Economy: Bush claims $1.7 trillion tax cuts will help economy; deficit caused by other factors
Bush has said that war, recession and the costs of securing the nation after theSept. 11 terrorist attacks in 2001 have contributed to the federal budget deficit. The $1.7 trillion in tax cuts he signed into law have reduced the impact of the recession his administration inherited, he said. Bloomberg Wednesday August 06, 2003
Economy: Bush's 2004 budget fails to include costs of Iraq war
This makes it hard to believe the administration's $475 billion deficit estimate for 2004--or the steady improvement it is forecasting through 2007. The fiscal 2004 estimate again excludes any additional costs for the U.S. military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, even though there is no doubt that they will be incurred. And as usual, it is based on a decidedly optimistic economic scenario. Gov Exec Wednesday August 06, 2003
Economy: Bush tinkers with deficit esti
Posted by: shep at August 16, 2004 09:28 PMWake me up when it's over.
Posted by: Big Dan at August 16, 2004 09:36 PMOops. Seems there's a posting limit, Rosemary. So I'll give credit here:
http://www.thousandreasons.org/listB.html
(hat tip: Maria)
and continue:
110. Economy: Bush tinkers with deficit estimates
There were some reports after the midsession review was released that the administration had intentionally overestimated the 2003 deficit by considerable amounts in the midsession review so that it would be able to provide what it considered to be good news when the fiscal year was actually over. Gov Exec Wednesday August 06, 2003
111. Economy: Bush's 2003 budget fails to allow for Iraq war, even though it is imminent
When its budget was released earlier this year, the White House refused to project any additional spending for the war with Iraq--even though it was considered highly likely to happen. Like all presidential budgets, this one used an optimistic economic forecast. Gov Exec Wednesday August 06, 2003
112. Economy: Trade deficit continues to widen
In their recent road trip, top Bush economic officials heard that China's absorption of American jobs is killing local economies. America's trade deficit with the rest of the world continues to widen. Common Dreams Wednesday August 06, 2003
113. Economy: Deficit projections consistently understated
Most media coverage overlooked the increasingly obvious truth that the 2004 deficit could be $100 billion or more above what the White House projected, and that its long-term estimates could be equally out of whack. Gov Exec Wednesday August 06, 2003
114. Economy: Budget deficit makes it difficult to handle baby-boom retirement
The swelling budget deficit, projected by the White House to reach a record $455 billion this fiscal year, "will make it even more difficult to cope with the aging of the baby-boom generation, and will eventually crowd out investment and erode U.S. productivity growth," the IMF said. Bloomberg Tuesday August 05, 2003
115. Economy: Bush's job record worst since Herbert Hoover
The nation has lost jobs in 25 of the 31 months that President Bush has been in office, making for the worst jobs record at this point in a presidency of any administration since Herbert Hoover. Including last month's loss of 44,000 positions (when economists had predicted a 10,000-job increase), our economy has shed more than 2.5 million jobs and 3.2 million private-sector jobs since the president took office. AFL-CIO Tuesday August 05, 2003
116. Economy: Foreclosures set record highs during Bush recession
Foreclosures are at a record high. Information Clearing House 5 Saturday June 21, 2003
117. Economy: 2003 spending shows highest federal borrowing rate since WWII
The latest budget projections from the Congressional Budget Office indicate that one out of every three dollars the federal government spends this year outside of the self-funded Social Security system will be paid for by borrowing. This will be the highest share of deficit-financed spending since World War II. Citizens for Tax Justice Wednesday June 11, 2003
118. Economy: Bush ends "double taxation"
Bush ends "double taxation" of dividends as unfair even though most things are taxed multiple times Under our system, the same dollar is taxed multiple times as it moves through the economy, from an employer to an employee to a gas station and then on to the next employee, ad infinitum. Singling out dividends for exemption from this process is unfair to those who have little or no dividend income. United for a Fair Economy Friday June 06, 2003
119. Economy: Bush "Jobs and Growth Act" have little stimulus value, are a giveaway to the rich
On May 28th, President Bush signed into law the so-called "Jobs and Growth Act," a tax cut package. This tax cut targets its benefits toward the wealthiest Americans. For that reason alone, this tax cut is not an economic stimulus -- the only thing this tax cut "stimulates" is more economic inequality in the U.S. United for a Fair Economy Friday June 06, 2003
120. Economy: Job shrinkage greatest of any post-WWII recession
Private-sector payrolls are down 260,000 this year and are down by 3.1 million, or 2.8%, since the recession began in March of 2001, the largest percentage decline in any post-WWII recession. Economic Policy Institute Friday June 06, 2003
121. Economy: During first two years of Bush administration, unemployment up, jobs disappearing
Unemployment has averaged 5.8% over the past year, and most recently hit 6.1%, two points above the 2000 rate of 4%. Since then, over 3 million more persons have been added to the ranks of the unemployed. Economic Policy Institute Friday June 06, 2003
122. Economy: Jobless recovery hurting working families
Despite the fact that the economy has been expanding for over a year, our labor market remains mired in a jobless recovery, and these conditions are now hurting the living standards of working families. The President and the Congress claim to have done so with the passage of the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Actof 2003 , but as our testimony argues, this plan is unlikely to provide the boost the economy needs. Economic Policy Institute Friday June 06, 2003
123. Economy: Median earnings down for the last four quarters
Persistently high unemployment has caught up with wage growth; for the first time since the 1990s, real median earnings fell for the last four quarters in a row. Economic Policy Institute Friday June 06, 2003
124. Economy: Tax cuts of this nature will not create jobs
Second, the tax cuts are directed in ways that are very ineffective at creating jobs. Nearly all economists agree that excluding taxes on dividends and capital gains will have very little effect on job growth in the near-term. Tax breaks for business expenses will also not create jobs. Businesses have the funds to invest in new equipment and credit is readily available at very low interest rates. Yet, there is very little investment now. The reason is that we have substantial overcapacity. What business needs is more customers people to sell to. As demand grows, so will jobs and investment. Economic Policy Institute Friday June 06, 2003
125. Economy: Tax cuts will lead to deficits
The recently passed package of tax cuts follows a misguided approach to creating jobs in the near future. First, it contains permanent, or semi-permanent, tax cuts when the need is for temporary one-time tax relief. The consequence is that the plan is far more expensive than is needed and will lead to chronic deficits, which ultimately will end up destroying jobs ten years from now. Economic Policy Institute Friday June 06, 2003
126. Economy: Tax cuts favor the wealthy
Third, as is well known, the personal income tax cuts are largely directed at high-income families--according to estimates by Brookings/Urban Institute Tax Center, 62% of the cuts go to households in the top 5% of the income scale. Since these families have higher saving rates -- spend a lower share of their income -- the income tax cuts will be less effective at generating spending than tax relief aimed at low-income and middle-income families. Economic Policy Institute Friday June 06, 2003
127. Economy: Tax cuts sold as a "jobs" plan, but millions of jobs have failed to materialize
The administration argued that its tax cut would lead to the creation of 1.4 million new jobs by the end of 2004. But it is not widely recognized that according to their own projections, these new jobs are expected in addition to the 4.1 million jobs the economy would generate on its own without the tax cuts. Economic Policy Institute Friday June 06, 2003
128. Economy: Bush falsely claims that economists say tax cuts will help economic growth
President Bush proclaimed that a report by leading economists concluded that the economy would grow by 3.3 percent in 2003 if his tax cut proposals were adopted. No such report exists. Gordan Livingston Tuesday June 03, 2003
129. Economy: Tax cuts driven by Republican ideology that will force program cuts
Republican ideology is now focused on creating artificial fiscal crises that will "force" program cuts, without ever stepping up to the plate and owning up to the program cuts they want to make. Why? Because it's electoral suicide. Calpundit Tuesday May 27, 2003
130. Economy: Republicans switch sides, now claim deficits don't matter
In recent months, Republicans who for years decried federal imbalances have minimized their significance, arguing that they were manageable in an economy whose size exceeds $10 trillion. CBS News Monday May 12, 2003
131. Economy: Manufacturing loss of "catastrophic proportions"
The release today and Friday of rising unemployment numbers for April revealed that the 33-month erosion of U.S. manufacturing employment has reached catastrophic proportions and is now undermining the entire American economy, the United Steelworkers of America (USWA) said here today. United Steelworkers of America Monday May 05, 2003
132. Economy: Republican Congress making bad system worse with retirement benefits
The U.S. Congress adjourned last year after failing to address the faults in a pension system that has been laid bare by catastrophic 401(k) losses for thousands of workers, the tumbling stock market, and high-profile corporate abuse of retirement plans. Congress is now setting itself up to make the system even worse. Economic Policy Institute Wednesday April 09, 2003
133. Economy: Bush's "strong dollar" rhetoric hurting small business
The president's continued cheerleading for the "strong dollar" is pricing small domestic producers out of international markets while creating windfalls for companies that can move overseas to produce goods for sale in the United States. Economic Policy Institute Tuesday March 04, 2003
134. Economy: Tax code gives billions to companies that send factories overseas
The current tax code gives billions of taxpayer dollars in subsidies to companies that export factories, outsource production, and then hide in offshore tax shelters. Economic Policy Institute Tuesday March 04, 2003
135. Economy: Bush excludes workers' rights from free-trade negotiations
And [Bush's] relentless effort to exclude worker and environmental rights from negotiations on the proposed Free Trade Agreement of the Americas and the current "Doha Round" at the World Trade Organization is creating competitive advantages for companies that shirk social protections. Economic Policy Institute Tuesday March 04, 2003
136. Economy: Federal government not delivering promised 9-11 funds to states
Despite $7 billion in federal spending promised over two fiscal years, the federal government has yet to spend a penny reimbursing hard-pressed state and local governments for costs they've absorbed since Sept. 11, 2001. Seattle Post Intelligencer Monday February 10, 2003
137. Economy: States to lose $41 billion from Bush tax cuts
Thus, if these [tax cut] provisions were enacted, states would stand to lose $23 billion between 2004 and 2008. As the proposed savings accounts grow in cost over time, so would the state revenue loss. The state revenue loss would rise to more than $41 billion over the subsequent five years from 2009 to 2013. Center on Budget and Policy Prioities Tuesday February 04, 2003
138. Economy: Bush tax cuts play a significant role in turning surplus to defecit
[The 2001] Bush tax cut combined with a weakening economy and the Sept. 11 attacks to eliminate the surplus and create a $157.8 billion deficit. Slate Tuesday February 04, 2003
139. Economy: Bush proposes allowing 50% pension cuts
Reflecting a deep and growing concern about Americans' retirement security, more than 200 bipartisan members of the House and Senate wrote to President Bush Thursday calling on him to withdraw proposed regulations that, if allowed to go into effect, would permit companies to cut long-time employees' pensions by as much as 50 percent. Committee on Education and the Workforce Thursday January 30, 2003
140. Economy: School week shortened to offset budget cuts
As The Washington Post reported, more than 100 school districts in seven states have shortened the school week to four days in order to offset budget cuts. Tom Paine Wednesday January 29, 2003
141. Economy: Successful programs being cut in K-12 education because of budget cuts
Innovative K-12 programs enacted during stronger economic times have been hacked, and even basic programs for school-aged kids are being downsized. Tom Paine Wednesday January 29, 2003
142. Economy: State budget shortfalls lead to college tuition increases
Huge state budget shortfalls have already begun to eat away at funding for education, health care and higher education. University tuition has increased by more than 10 percent in over one-fifth of states. Tom Paine Wednesday January 29, 2003
143. Economy: Bush tax cuts include deduction for SUVs
One of Bush's proposed tax cuts would raise from $25,000 to $75,000 the amount small business owners -- including doctors, lawyers and financial advisers -- can write off when buying an SUV for business purposes. Tom Dispatch Friday January 24, 2003
144. Economy: Tax cuts go to the rich, who distort democracy through lavish political gifts
Find the Urban-Brookings charts published in the Jan. 7 New York Times showing who gets how much of this tax cut. You can barely see the lines that measure the relief until you get above the 99th percentile. . . . The problem is that the rich are screwing up our democracy. Less than 0.1 percent of the U.S. population gave 83 percent of all itemized campaign contributions for the 2002 elections, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Common Dreams Wednesday January 15, 2003
145. Economy: Bush late in extending unemployment benefits
"For the 750,000 or more unemployed workers whose benefits will be terminated onDecember 28, the President's support is welcome although it comes painfully late," said Robert Greenstein, executive director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "Had the President weighed in while Congress was in session, these 750,000 jobless workers almost certainly would not have to go several weeks during the holiday season with neither a paycheck nor an unemployment check." The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities Saturday December 14, 2002
146. Economy: Bush administration allows hidden funds to to remain so
With one hand the administration will release the rich from their tax obligations, with the other it will choke off enforcement, allowing hidden funds to remain so. St. Petersburg Times Sunday December 01, 2002
147. Economy: US loses $70 billion annually to offshore companies
We should also thank the Republicans in the House for protecting the interests of all those turncoat companies that have relocated to Bermuda or Barbados with little more than a post office box, to avoid U.S. taxes. The maneuver costs our treasury $70-billion annually. St. Petersburg Times Sunday December 01, 2002
148. Economy: Once fully effective 52% of Bush tax cuts will go to wealthiest 1%
According to Citizens for Tax Justice, when the Bush tax cuts are fully effective, 52 percent of the cuts will go to this country's richest 1 percent. And even if by some miracle of responsible governance they are not made permanent after 10 years, the total amount of tax cuts already going to the richest 1 percent will total $477-billion -- each taxpayer in that rarified category receiving an average of $342,000 worth of cuts. St. Petersburg Times Sunday December 01, 2002
149. Economy: S&P 500 shows biggest 18 month drop of any presidency since Herbert Hoover
George W. Bush is shattering records for the worst first 18 months in office for a U.S. president as measured by the benchmark Standard & Poor's 500. In his first year-and-a-half in the White House, Bush presided over a 36.9 percent decline, almost twice the percentage drop of Herbert Hoover, the president who led the nation into the Depression. Consortium News Tuesday July 23, 2002
150. Economy: Bush chooses "star wars" funding over education
I strongly support America's war against terrorism. But as a teacher, I believe we also have to "do the math." When we're all being asked to sacrifice, when we've gone beyond trimming the fat to slicing the bone by laying off almost 200 teachers in just one school district alone, should the Pentagon really budget $8.3 billion, for example, on an elaborate and unproven Star Wars system that can neither stop a suicide terrorist nor educate one sixth-grader? Common Dreams Friday February 15, 2002
151. Economy: Bush offers tax cuts as a solution to every problem
"They have one unchanging, unyielding solution they offer for every problem: tax cuts that go disproportionately to the most affluent." This, too, mirrors majority opinion; 54 percent last summer said the tax cut would mainly benefit the wealthy. Tom Daschle ABC News Friday January 04, 2002
152. Economy: Ending the inheritance tax leads to command based on inheritance rather than merit
According to William H. Gates, Sr., father of the richest man in the world, if we eliminate the inheritance tax, we "pass down the ability to command the resources of the nation based on heredity rather than merit." It appears that the Bush administration agrees. Tom Paine Monday April 09, 2001
153. Education: Rhetoric for kids, money for war
IT WAS EASY to get the mistaken impression that the 50th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision by the Supreme Court to outlaw segregated schools was a really big deal on Capitol Hill, even to Republicans. The presumptive Democratic candidate for president, John Kerry, flew to Topeka, Kan., the site of the case, to say: "We honor the legacy of Brown by reaffirming the value of inclusion, of equality, and diversity in our schools and in our life all across this nation, by opening the doors of opportunity so that more of our young people can stay in school and out of prison." Boston Globe Friday May 21, 2004
154. Education: US education suffers in waste of Iraq war
IN 2002, President Bush said the Supreme Court's 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision outlawing segregated schools was "the right decision." He said we "can't have two systems, one for African-Americans and one for whites." Last month, Bush's education secretary, Rod Paige, said in a speech at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government: "Such division was wrong in 1954, and it is wrong today. It is immoral. It is unjust." The proclamations made by Bush and Paige are eerie in the dwindling of their meaning -- assuming that there was much meaning to start with. Boston Globe Boston Globe Wednesday May 05, 2004
155. Education: Math Class vs. Sex Class
President Bush proposes some important new expenditures for Education: $100 million for reading programs to help middle and high schoolers who still struggle to sound out Seuss-simple words; $40 million to help professionals in math and science make the transition to teaching; $52 million to bring Advanced Placement classes to more high schools. Yet all these added together would be eclipsed by the $270 million the president would devote to a school program promoting sexual abstinence, despite there being little evidence that such programs reduce teen sex or pregnancies. LA Times Monday March 08, 2004
156. Education: Rod Paige Calls Teachers Union a "terrorist organization"
WASHINGTON - Education Secretary Rod Paige called the nation's largest teachers union a "terrorist organization" during a private White House meeting with governors on Monday. Democratic and Republican governors confirmed Paige's remarks about the National Education Association. "These were the words, 'The NEA is a terrorist organization,'" said Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle of Wisconsin. "He was making a joke, probably not a very good one," said Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania. "Of course he immediately divorced the NEA from ordinary teachers, who he said he supports." Yahoo News Monday F