Cheney: GOP Senators are Hooverites; White: Cheney is a Chavezite
From the NYTimes (By STEPHEN LABATON and DAVID M. HERSZENHORN):
The Bush administration said on Friday that it was prepared to intervene to prevent the collapse of General Motors and Chrysler after Republican senators blocked a compromise proposal to rescue the automakers.
The decision came after a tense standoff this week in which senior White House officials pleaded with Senate Republicans not to block the measure, including a warning by Vice President Dick Cheney that they would be remembered for decades as the party of Herbert Hoover if the industry collapsed.
Herbert Hoover?! Excuse me, Vice President Cheney but... ummm... who was it that fired former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill for supporting balanced budgets?
Stupid me! I thought your irresponsible fiscal policy was a component of Bush's failed economic policies.* Nope. I guess I was wrong. Dick Cheney's China-funded war in Iraq has nothing to do with the current state of the American economy.
What is it? 38 days left? I wonder if I could take a nap for 38 days?
Good riddance.
The NYTimes continues:
But while Senate Republicans stood their ground — in open revolt against President Bush — it was the White House that gave in...
After refusing for weeks to tap the $700 billion financial rescue fund, the administration suggested it would dip into the fund to at least permit the companies to continue their operations until the new Congress and new administration arrive next month.
Anybody happen to remember all those safeguards added to the $700B Bailout $850B Bailout? You know... those safeguards that required the money be "invested" in toxic mortgage-backed securities?
In fairness to the Dem Congress though, my understanding is that Senate Rs voiced more concern about union concessions than opposition to Bush's new ideology taken from his mentor Hugo Chavez. And while there is merit to the GOP argument, it's still an acceptance that nationalizing private enterprise will work.
Of the Gang of 535, I may be able to count on one hand the number who even have the critical faculties required for a vigorous debate on economic policies. What a joke. Our government is a complete joke.
Tim White
* America's failed economic policies include monetary policy... and that failure dates back to at least 1913.
5 comments:
Tim; I think you are completely off base in comparing Bush and Cheney to a Latin American dictator.
There are many fine, upstanding politicians who favored the socialist control of previously private industry, however
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_Atlee
Attlee's government also carried out their manifesto commitment for nationalisation of basic industries and public utillities. The Bank of England and civil aviation were nationalised in 1946. Coal mining, the railways, road haulage, canals and cable and wireless were nationalised in 1947, electricity and gas followed in 1948. The steel industry was finally nationalised in 1951. By 1951 about 20% of the British economy had been taken into public ownership[9]
There are many fine, upstanding politicians who favored the socialist control of previously private industry
Is this a serious comment or said tongue-in-cheek?
FWIW, I can think of many politicians who favored the socialist control of previously private industry, but I thought using Bush's contemporary was being most kind.
Well, it was sorta tongue in cheek. Attlee was, by all accounts, an honorable man and a reliable ally in the Cold War. He was just horribly misguided on economic policy and it took almost 40 years to undo the damage he unintentionally inflicted on the UK.
The reason Attlee is a better comparison is that 1951 when he lost an election to the Tories he voluntarily turned power back over to the Tories. I do not expect Chavez to step down unless an AK-47is pointed at his noggin.
The reason Attlee is a better comparison is that 1951 when he lost an election to the Tories he voluntarily turned power back over to the Tories.
George Washington and Cincinnatus are widely reputed to be the only two national leaders to have been offered absolute power by their constituents... and refused it.
Accepting a peaceful transfer of power despite one's wishes and wishing for a peaceful transfer of power are two very different things.
(Ignoring the 1860s) Thankfully, since Geo Washington, America hasn't had to discuss that.
It's a problem I see in too many Chief Executives... they begin to believe they are truly wonderful... partly a result of their usual error in surrounding themselves with YesMen.
And if I recall correctly, during the past eight years Cheney invoked Reagan's 11th Commandment.
Ignoring the above comments... I'm still glad Cheney will soon be gone.
Post a Comment