RedScare Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 (edited) Apparently, Bush intends to take care of the guy who protected Dick Cheney and Karl Rove. It should come as no surprise. In spite of what the pundits said, a president with approval ratings in the mid-20s has nothing to lose by doing so. Having supported the failed immigration reform bill, he risked dropping below 20% if he did not throw his base a bone.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19570081/More to come. Edited July 2, 2007 by RedScare Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwilson Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 The Scooter Libby trial was bogus to begin with.Just as bogus as everything ken Star did during Clinton.Political witch hunts are getting old.Ironically, the Presidents approval ratings are higher than Congress. Though their numbers might have shifted slightly after the defeat of the immigration bill (thank god). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 Ironically, the Presidents approval ratings are higher than Congress. They asked Nancy Pelosi about this and she wasn't happy to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwilson Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 They asked Nancy Pelosi about this and she wasn't happy to say the least.I bet not. She seems like a bitter, angry woman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 (edited) Your right Red, no surprise at all. Not quite the same as when Mel Reynold's sentence was commuted: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m135..._99/ai_70696215 , but Libby still gets off the hook. Edited July 2, 2007 by TJones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumapayam Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 If Libby was guilty, what sort of logic is he using not to punish him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 The last numbers I saw showed the prez at 26% and Congress at 25%. Neither appears to be bragging. One must ask the question, though...Just WHO is the 25-6% approving of any of these crooks? I agree that the trial was bogus in that Libby took the fall for Cheney, and the witchhunts ARE getting old. There IS a solution, though. I found that by turning off the cable news channels, none of this stuff seems that bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 I am already beginning to hear that this is the WORST option that Bush could have chosen. The Democrats will filet him for his disdain for the considered opinion of the jury, and conservatives will be furious that he did not grant a full pardon. Not sure how this will play out, but it may be interesting to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 well...at least he didn't pardon him. i think he would have recieved more backlash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumapayam Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 well...at least he didn't pardon him. i think he would have recieved more backlash.What is commute exactly then, he is still guilty, but he does not have to have a punishment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westguy Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 What is commute exactly then, he is still guilty, but he does not have to have a punishment?There's a $250,000 fine and two-year probabtion. In an article I was looking at, the person who runs his legal defense fund said that he had raised millions. Will that be able to cover the fine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwilson Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 I don't see any guilt on Cheney's part either. So claiming that he took the fall for Cheney is making an assumption. The whole topic was nothing more than a witch hunt to begin with, not just on the part of Libby.Last numbers I saw had the President at 26% and Congress at 19%. But polls are crap, so who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 What is commute exactly then, he is still guilty, but he does not have to have a punishment?his sentence was lessened basically. the prison part was commuted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwilson Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 Oops, looks like Congress is at 14%http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...c=11858&hl= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwilson Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 If Libby was guilty, what sort of logic is he using not to punish him?I suppose the logic is "It was a witch hunt, he was the weakest lamb for the wolves to slaughter, I'll take him out of the firing line".The commutation rather than a pardon was a play to both sides. He let the dems have their victory and the repubs got theirs.It was a close to a win win as you could get now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heights2Bastrop Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 I sure hope the Democrats don't live in glass houses. How quickly they seem to have forgotten about Slick lying to a Grand Jury and getting away with it.And, please save me the rhetoric about what he lied about. If you lie to the Grand Jury about committing a triple murder, or you lie to the Grand Jury about jaywalking, it is still lying to the Grand Jury.Clinton lied. He admitted he lied. He got away with it. The Dems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webdude Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 Whatever happened to the good old days when politicians at least tried to cover corruption.Ahhh, bush and friends, always one controversy after another, better than hollywood crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted July 2, 2007 Share Posted July 2, 2007 I think you misunderstand, H2B. Dems are ecstatic at this development. They can now point to Bush as ignoring the rule of law he claimed to uphold. They can point out that his claim to moral superiority is shot, he values attacking political adversaries over national security, and they will once again be able to remind the public of Bush's promise to prosecute anyone involved with the leak, but that instead of firings and prosecution, he hands out commutations.They couldn't be happier right now...not that you'll hear them say that on TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted July 3, 2007 Share Posted July 3, 2007 They couldn't be happier right now...not that you'll hear them say that on TV.i think hillary could be happier. obama brought home a little more bacon than she did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmainguy Posted July 7, 2007 Share Posted July 7, 2007 I sure hope the Democrats don't live in glass houses. How quickly they seem to have forgotten about Slick lying to a Grand Jury and getting away with it.And, please save me the rhetoric about what he lied about. If you lie to the Grand Jury about committing a triple murder, or you lie to the Grand Jury about jaywalking, it is still lying to the Grand Jury.Clinton lied. He admitted he lied. He got away with it. The Dems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houstonmacbro Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 Bush plan could put $800 in your pocket Economic boost drawing support from both sides of aisle in Congress By PETER BAKER and NEIL IRWIN Washington Post WASHINGTON Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houstonmacbro Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 Bush plan could put $800 in your pocket Economic boost drawing support from both sides of aisle in Congress By PETER BAKER and NEIL IRWIN Washington Post WASHINGTON Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidegate Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 This is going straight into my kid's college fund. God knows she and her peers will be paying the price for this generation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travelguy_73 Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 Postponing the pain by giving people (under certain incomes, mind you) $800 each? WTF?? This isn't Playskool money we are talking about here. We can't just print up more and pass it around without facing the repucussions in the future. We have been sold a bad bill of goods by Greenspan and Bush, as well as their predecessors who helped to permanently link the American economy almost solely to consumer spending. Now we have spent way beyond our means, are pulling back, and the government goes into crisis mode. So they 'give' us money in the hopes that we will spend the economy back to health.If I am eligible for the money, I will take it of course. But I'm still sick to my stomach at the mess we are in, and that our supposed 'leaders' would rather leave the mess to someone else than have the b&^%s to fix it themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 (edited) If I am eligible for the money, I will take it of course.LOL that's the American spirit! Edited January 19, 2008 by musicman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 (edited) 3 words to travelguy...... HY PO CRIT !BTW, does anyone know if they are trying to get this thing out before Jan.31st ? Just asking so I can know whether or not I will be able to use this credit on this years taxes. Edited January 19, 2008 by TJones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westguy Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 Let's buy some junk from China. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 Now here is a thought westguy. Make the $800 earmarked specifically to be spent on "Made in the USA" goods. It would have to be some special kind of new bill made up to distinguish the allotment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 There are many things wrong with this plan, and only a couple of good things. First, most people will not use the money for its intended purpose, spending it on consumer goods. They will save it, or pay down a credit card bill, neither of which will spur the economy. Bush's requirement that it not go to low income workers who do not pay income tax, but do pay Social Security, means that some of the people who would spend the money fastest will not even get it. If the money does not go to those who will spend it quickly, the stimulus effect of the giveaway is lost, meaning the program is worthless, except for its political effect.Additionally, it is not "giving the taxpayers some of their money back" at all. With a $9.4 Trillion national debt, there is no money to give back at all. What Bush should be saying is that he is proposing to increase the credit limit on the national credit card. This $150 Billion "rebate", added to his $200 Billion war spending request, which was not included in the budget, means an additional $350 Billion added to the budget over what Bush claimed. This would increase the deficit to over $400 Billion at a time when the economy is stagnating, or even declining. If the giveaway is not going to increase the economy, why add to the debt?A bigger issue, one that will NOT be addressed during an election year, is whether the economy as it is comprised today, can be sustained. The robust expansion of the last several years was largely comprised of consumer spending financed by home equity loans and increased credit card limits. National savings has been at or below zero for the last several years. Once home values stopped escalating, the home equity market dried up. Additionally, credit lending tightened up. If there is no savings to spend and credit dries up, there is no money to keep consumer spending at its high level. There is no place for the economy to go but down. Is this a bad thing? For the individual consumer, it can be argued that it is not. Too much debt is bad. For those consumers who cannot stop borrowing on their own, a bank's refusal to lend to them is probably good for them in the long run. But, for the overall economy, it is bad.Probably the best thing for the country is to go through the painful process of a shrinking economy to levels that can be sustained by current wages and moderate borrowing. No politician, especially a Republican, wants to preside over a shrinking economy. However, a natural resizing of the economy to sustainable levels is better than a fre fall correction. Currently, Bush is trying to stall the recession until he is out of office. I doubt he can do it, and the sooner we get the deadwood out of the system the better off we will be longterm. An extension of unemployment benefits and food stamps will help the truly destitute, and the money will be spent quickly. Giving away Christmas gifts for political favor will not help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 drew unusual bipartisan praise on Capitol Hill but failed to boost confidence on Wall Street.Investors know better, three times over. A $150 billion economic stimulus package isn't enough to have a dramatic effect. Also the effects are poorly targeted, not only distorting the balance of consumption, investment, and government spending, but also placing most of the stimulus in sectors that aren't hurting.But...this is an election year, and no party wants to be perceived of as weak on economic issues in the midst of near-apocalyptic news coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts