posted on December 3, 2003 07:21:23 AM new
I like David Gergen. If you don't get US News, here's his December editorial.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/031208/opinion/8edit.htm
___________________________________
The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then gets elected and proves it.
-- P. J. ORourke (Holidays in hell, 1989)
posted on December 3, 2003 08:46:38 AM new
That was a good article and I like the term Short-termism...
But when the President wants to make budget cuts, liberals scream holy murder about their social programs being cut...
The first place that should be cut.
People need to get off their lazy azzes and help themselves...
posted on December 3, 2003 09:57:53 AM new How will George W. Bush be remembered?
He will be remembered as a dangerously ineffective president and a liar.
The latest duplicitous message, for example, is that we shouldn't show weakness and we can't cut and run -- while there is no effective policy in Iraq (weakness) and Bush is, in fact, planning to leave...in 6 months.
posted on December 3, 2003 12:13:21 PM newOn the homefront, the president is shaping his political campaign around the notion that we shouldn't show weakness and we can't cut and run. Meanwhile, it's clear to pretty much everyone in Iraq that we're doing both.
good link helen, thanks!
___________________________________
The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then gets elected and proves it.
-- P. J. ORourke (Holidays in hell, 1989)
posted on December 3, 2003 12:57:56 PM new
Most of the statements in your article profe, I disagree with.
Bush is not a 'short-termer'. And he'll have time to prove that in the next 5 years.
On some of the items mentioned in your article:
America's signature to the Kyoto treaty on global warming. The administration promised that it would come up with an alternative; it never has. Still has 5 years to go. He's acting in what is American's best interest. Kills those who are for this ONE WORLD concept thinking. If he had agreed to this our ecomony would be in even worse shape than it was [at that time]. And we wonder why other nations are so angry with us[/i]. I don't know....are all you ONE WORLD people also angry at Russia, who has also refused to sign this agreement?
---
The administration's decision to impose a steel import tariff of as much as 30 percent was cut from the same cloth: Sure was....trying to give our steel industry a chance to regroup. Heaven forbid that we weren't ready to totally let that industry be taken down. I watched an interview of one of the COEs of the steel industry, this week, who when asked if he's concerned about the possibility that Bush may reverse this decision, because of International pressure, said he wasn't. He felt Bush would come up with a workable alternative. AND he said it did give the three major steel companies the time they needed to regroup.
the administration's support of farm subsidies--a clear play for the farm vote.
Just more anger from the left. Jealousy too, that Bush works to keep ALL American interests in mind when making decisions. The Dems must think they're the only ones who have concerns for our farmers and that they have full exclusive rights to all the farm votes....but they don't.
Wasn't it the Democrats who were the party of "spend and spend, elect and elect"?
They STILL ARE....More jealously that Bush at least did SOMETHING for our poor and elderly when clinton couldn't get anything passed in his eight years. And give me a break......many of the dems opposed it, not only because they didn't want Bush to get any credit for this bill, but because they felt it didn't provide ENOUGH benefits.
We learned last week that the economy is growing at the fastest rate in nearly 20 years, and consumer confidence is up sharply. The president rightly claims that his tax cuts and spending increases are partly responsible.
Yes....and how many here were saying just the opposite was going to happen? His tax cuts are showing a benefit...and will continue to do so as more of them fall into place up until 2010, I believe.
The deficit can quickly be taken down when the economy continues to improve. Just like we saw it do during the last two-three years of the clinton administration. Much of this deficit was the result of the aftermath of 9-11 and the war on terrorism.
And calling Bush a 'short term guy' on that, just isn't so. You've all complained about how he'll have us in wars forever.... now you're reversing that thinking?
I probably missed a couple other points your article addressed.
