Bush faults Democrats on housing crisis, energy and taxes

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush on Wednesday criticized Democrats in Congress for their approach to dealing with the nation's housing crisis and soaring energy prices and called anew for an extension of expiring tax cuts and government wiretapping authority.

He pledged to veto a broad housing rescue package moving through the House. The White House contends it is a burdensome bailout that would open taxpayers to too much risk, even though the bill includes some elements the administration supports. Instead, he pushed for an alternative bill backed by Republicans.

[Pudintain]

I doesn't mater if you like George or not you have to admit that if there was more supply there would be lower fuel prices. It is economics 101. You Democrats need to push you leadership on this. We have enough oil on our land to last over 60 years. If Clinton would not have vetoed the ANWAR bill there would billions more barrels of oil today.

[death and taxes]

Different year, same blame game !

[Real Republican]

Maybe people losing their jobs to outsourcing can't pay their bills anymore.

[Pudintain]

Pudintain wrote:

I doesn't mater if you like George or not you have to admit that if there was more supply there would be lower fuel prices. It is economics 101. You Democrats need to push you leadership on this. We have enough oil on our land to last over 60 years. If Clinton would not have vetoed the ANWAR bill there would billions more barrels of oil today.

Everthing I stated above is text book fact yet you mark me as nuts and clueless. If you all are really this stupid than I guess you do need the government to run your life.

[Monorprise]

As strange as it sounds, it is the Democrats in control of both house of congress that have the only control over theses things government does have.

Presidents can’t make laws, nor can they repeal laws already made, nor do they control taxes.

To be quiet frank with you a president’s power’s are practically non-existents in all such areas.

And if you want to be HONEST and FAIR bush has been Telling you this was coming senses 2000. he’s been practical screaming at congress every state of the union we have to drill we have to build more refineries, our supply and energy supply is going to be compromised.
Congress chooses to do nonthing, because of its antiroyalist sections encompassing the entirety of the Democratic Party and significant portions of the republican party.

The current congress just as the last congress had all the power and more importantly WARNING in the world to fix this, and again it has still chosen not to.

If you want to fault Bush for this, that’s your choice, but it won’t do anyone any good.
It certainly won’t make or allow gas prices ever go down. Lol if anything it will empower the very people in congress who are at fault to keep doing what they are doing, just as it has been. Ever notest how ALL the presidential candid’s are of that same group?

By Bashing bush you have effetely empowered them, you left us with no political solution to this problem.
You left the environmental law Oil Bottle neck securely in place. And the price you pay is going to continue to get worse, because of it.

[Florian]

Pudintain wrote:

<quoted text>
Everthing I stated above is text book fact yet you mark me as nuts and clueless. If you all are really this stupid than I guess you do need the government to run your life.

Maybe it's just that people are not as gullible as you would like. Or maybe you’re a bit thin skinned.

You write something, put it out there for others to read, knowing it will be judged, then you cop an attitude when people think you are off base, topping it off by calling the entire rest of the world stupid.

In your world you write ‘the truth’ and the rest of us should just be glad to benefit from your wisdom. In your mind no one has need for their own opinion …. if you want their opinion you’ll give it to them.

I’m sorry for you that you can’t see that the problem is your ego.

[Boy Scout]

Monorprise wrote:

As strange as it sounds, it is the Democrats in control of both house of congress that have the only control over theses things government does have.
Presidents can’t make laws, nor can they repeal laws already made, nor do they control taxes.
To be quiet frank with you a president’s power’s are practically non-existents in all such areas.
And if you want to be HONEST and FAIR bush has been Telling you this was coming senses 2000. he’s been practical screaming at congress every state of the union we have to drill we have to build more refineries, our supply and energy supply is going to be compromised.
Congress chooses to do nonthing, because of its antiroyalist sections encompassing the entirety of the Democratic Party and significant portions of the republican party.
The current congress just as the last congress had all the power and more importantly WARNING in the world to fix this, and again it has still chosen not to.
If you want to fault Bush for this, that’s your choice, but it won’t do anyone any good.
It certainly won’t make or allow gas prices ever go down. Lol if anything it will empower the very people in congress who are at fault to keep doing what they are doing, just as it has been. Ever notest how ALL the presidential candid’s are of that same group?
By Bashing bush you have effetely empowered them, you left us with no political solution to this problem.
You left the environmental law Oil Bottle neck securely in place. And the price you pay is going to continue to get worse, because of it.

Not really. It's morons like yourself that feed into the blame game of demo vs repubs, when it takes a majority from both sides to pass anything or, there are ways where just enough from one side or the other votes in favor, to get it passed, that way different people are the bad guys at different times, with both sides playing the game on all the idiot americans like you.

You are helping to destroy america.

[Florian]

Monorprise wrote:

As strange as it sounds, it is the Democrats in control of both house .......ental law Oil Bottle neck securely in place. And the price you pay is going to continue to get worse, because of it.

Your post is based on a false premise. The President has the power of the legislative veto as part of the “separation of powers” concept. The word 'Veto' in Latin means "I forbid".

The presidential veto can only be overwritten by a 2/3s majority in both houses of congress. The Democrats do not have a 2/3s (66%) majority in either house. The Democrats therefore cannot override a presidential veto. So the President has tremendous power. He can ‘forbid’ any legislation congress passes from becoming law.

Additionally, congress may pass the legislation, but they have little power to enforce. The Executive branch is charged with turning words on paper into action. That, too, is a tremendous amount of power.

You Neo-Cons remind me of a little boy standing in the kitchen with crumbs on your face telling mommy that you don’t know how the cookie jar got empty.

[Pudintain]

Florian wrote:

<quoted text>
Maybe it's just that people are not as gullible as you would like. Or maybe you’re a bit thin skinned.
You write something, put it out there for others to read, knowing it will be judged, then you cop an attitude when people think you are off base, topping it off by calling the entire rest of the world stupid.
In your world you write ‘the truth’ and the rest of us should just be glad to benefit from your wisdom. In your mind no one has need for their own opinion …. if you want their opinion you’ll give it to them.
I’m sorry for you that you can’t see that the problem is your ego.

In an aspect I guess I can agree with you to some point. The fact at all this has been tried before with the Carter term should open some eyes. The Democrats have been screaming we need to get of of mid east oil yet they are the same ones that restrict us from building refineries and drilling here in the US. I don't get how so many can be so blind. I also am not saying the right is 100% correct on their plan however it is not a plan that has already failed once.

[Florian]

Pudintain wrote:

<quoted text>
In an aspect I guess I can agree with you to some point........ however it is not a plan that has already failed once.

Carter? Carter? You gotta be kidding me. Many of the people reading this were not born yet when Carter was president.

Why is it anytime Bush's failed policies come up, republicans drag up yesterday's news as if to say that Bush isn't really to blame because of some ancient history?

You guess you can agree that the president has veto power to forbid legislation passed by congress from becoming law? You might agree that the Democrats do not have the ability to override the president’s veto?

The truth is that the Republican Party had a majority in both houses and a republican in the White House for six years. That gave the Republican Party almost absolute power for six years. The situation we are in now is a result of that imbalance of power.

For six years a republican congress pass legislation that was signed into law by a republican president and the situation we find ourselves in now is the result.

A year and a half of congress passing legislation that was vetoed by the president, or dropping legislation because of a presidential threat of veto, does not change the fact that six years of almost absolute power makes republicans responsible for the mess we are in.

[Carolyn NH-NC]

We have our OWN resources. Untie the hands of America oil companies to retrieve it. No reason to import so much oil. Billions of barrels in America. But we cant touch it because it'll make America look ugly. Scare the deer and elk away. No reason to import most of our products either. Why so China can infect our family will illnesses? Why cant Americans make these products? We dont know how to make a doll? A crayon? Dog Food? Tip anything and everything over if it doesnt say MADE IN USA dont buy it. We wouldnt have to many things in our houses now would we? Why is that? Where are our factories, our workers in these factories? Where did they go? Well the companies are going stong in another country and the Americans that use to work there are now struggling to make ends meet. Yea thats the Big Companies leaving Americans high and dry. I dont care if your Dem. or Rep. WE ARE ALL AMERICANS. Do whats right for AMERICA not matter what your "title" is. America was built by Americans to be the strong self supporting nation and we let it get shipped over seas. BRING IT BACK. TIP IT OVER..MADE IN U.S.A.? PUT IT BACK.find a American company that might have something of that product. There are out there just known as 'Small business " but the products are safely made in USA. To our standards. Thats the only way we will get America back in Americans hands. The sun can power cities if America will allow solar panels. Wind Mills can do the same. Both not imported, a daily natural act can power our nation? But no thats ugly. Its better to go into debt to foreign oil countrys. Way to think America. Paying the Price Now.? Dem. Or Rep. ALL AMERICAN.. stop the sponging in DC. make them earn their pay.

[Pudintain]

Carolyn NH-NC wrote:

We have our OWN resources. Untie the hands of America oil companies to retrieve it. No reason to import so much oil. Billions of barrels in America. But we cant touch it because it'll make America look ugly. Scare the deer and elk away. No reason to import most of our products either. Why so China can infect our family will illnesses? Why cant Americans make these products? We dont know how to make a doll? A crayon? Dog Food? Tip anything and everything over if it doesnt say MADE IN USA dont buy it. We wouldnt have to many things in our houses now would we? Why is that? Where are our factories, our workers in these factories? Where did they go? Well the companies are going stong in another country and the Americans that use to work there are now struggling to make ends meet. Yea thats the Big Companies leaving Americans high and dry. I dont care if your Dem. or Rep. WE ARE ALL AMERICANS. Do whats right for AMERICA not matter what your "title" is. America was built by Americans to be the strong self supporting nation and we let it get shipped over seas. BRING IT BACK. TIP IT OVER..MADE IN U.S.A.? PUT IT BACK.find a American company that might have something of that product. There are out there just known as 'Small business " but the products are safely made in USA. To our standards. Thats the only way we will get America back in Americans hands. The sun can power cities if America will allow solar panels. Wind Mills can do the same. Both not imported, a daily natural act can power our nation? But no thats ugly. Its better to go into debt to foreign oil countrys. Way to think America. Paying the Price Now.? Dem. Or Rep. ALL AMERICAN.. stop the sponging in DC. make them earn their pay.

As long as BOTH REP & DEM cater to group politics. There way to many regulation on Business. It will not get any easier for them with Global Warming BS. The US has just about everything we need on our land but not able to use it. It is crazy to think how many Companies we forced out of the US. The Free Market has been been free for decades. But we also can not force them to stay in America. We don't need to give them incentives either. We need to just remove the many regulations and taxes on them. FREE MARKETS can win.

[Gerry]

The reason for so many jobs leaving the country is cheap wages and globalization. Why would a company pay high wages, healthcare, and pensions when they can wipe most of that out. We are in a period of globalization, and I suppose things like NAFTA speeded it up. Laws should have been in place to send our jobs away on a sliding scale of some 20 years where wages could have risen towards ours.

It is too late now, however, we need to find a way to create jobs here in which will not be subject of going out of the country. One is that we can provide for our own energy. We can create nuclear and clean fired coal FutureGen plants. We may be able to look at high speed rail as we lag Europe, Japan, and China in this area.

The war has been a drain on us. It saps money away from our economy and drains our ability to take care of our infrastructure. We have an administration that believes in low dollar, but this causes problems and adds 30 to 50 dollars to a barrel of oil.

We need an energy strategy and energy council. One who will take the energy problem away from the politicians as both the democrats and republicans have no idea what economics are. The deficits and debt is sapping this country. We have no visionary thinking in Washington. We can reduce the consumption of gasoline just by having plug-in hybrid cars. As long as we have Bush in the White House and a congress that does nothing our problems will keep adding up.

I have been on topix talking about these issues for some 4 years and watching Bush just drives me crazy. Everything he has done in office he has screwed up. I talked about ethanol over a year ago and said this was not good. And yet these problems just add up.

You can't live on an ideology of Reagonomics as Bush has it. To cut taxes and not cut spending and having a war invites deficits, a debt, and a low dollar. Our military is all over the world and we are stretched thin in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many empires have failed by overreaching.

At a time when you have over 10% growth in China and we can't make 1%, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see who the next superpower will be. We bury our head in the sand and you see what you see. Nothing but arrogance, ignorance, stupidity, and incompetence. We have an energy crisis, a monetary crisis, and a food crisis. It is time (as I have been saying all these years) to wake up.

[Gerry]

Here is my answer on the oil problem.

>First you create an energy council. They can cut the red tape and examine future alternatives.
>Second, you need to fix the dollar because we have to compete with other currencies for oil. That will be hard to do.
>Third, you get rid of corn ethanol.
>Fourth, you drill for off shore oil. Only 15% is available at this time.
>Fifth, you pick the two best alternative energies and invest in them.
>Sixth, the last I saw on PBS NOVA the plug in hybrid is the most possible and in fact doable today. You plug your car in at night. The car runs on battery for the first 60 miles and after that gasoline. This would cut out half of the gas we use as most people commute to the store or work on short distances. So if you drive less than 60 miles per day you will never pay for gasoline.
>Seventh, I would give (our government and our tax money,perhaps some oil money) 1 billion dollars to each car company that builds cars in this country. And I would tell them in eight years all cars will be hybrids. The billion dollars will shut them up. This will help get us away from Middle East oil. This will also get the price down with less demand. Other countries will follow and the price of oil will fall further. With the price falling this will help the airlines and anything else that relies on oil.
>Eighth, there are 15 nuclear plants on paper and we also have coal that can be used in FutureGen plants for our electrical grid and the energy council needs to push this fast. But not too fast that you get shoddy workmanship.
>Ninth, the problems include relying on parts for nuclear power from other countries since we don't have those parts. All alternative energies have various problems. All 600 drilling rigs are in use. So at best drilling could only start in 5 years. So with all of this it takes time, even if you start now. That means 5 years, 10 years, 15 years on various aspects of our energy needs.

An assessment will be needed on the amount of copper and other commodities needed in the future for batteries. I have heard other pie in the sky alternatives and there are just too many problems with them, along with supply and demand, pricing, and geopolitical situations.

Now if we could only have a president that knows what he is doing. Unfortunately, the president we have is incompetent.

This is my answer. Even if you start fixing this problem today it would take at least 15 years to see results and frankly I don’t see us lasting 10 years under the present situation, considering the growth of China and other countries.

[Florian]

I think the globalization issue is worth discussion, and I’m not trying to move the discussion off that, but I would like to say something about ‘free markets’.

My dad used to tell a story about Laissez-faire economics.

He said that if you took 100 men and stranded them on a remote island and gave them each 1 dollar, that when you came back in one year 1 man would have 100 dollars.

I think it is precisely the job of our governments to regulate and tax in order to redistribute our wealth so that we do not have 'economic nobility'.

This is more pragmatic then simply hating the rich. It’s a lesson from the monopolies of aristocratic Europe. Concentration of wealth into too few hands resulted in violent revolutions. For some countries it was very unpleasant for a long time and millions died. This theme has been reinforced in Latin America ad nauseam.

The American Ideal is the notion that political stability and social justice are most secure when our nation has the largest possible middle class and very small rich and poor classes. This also entails an economy based on as many small businesses as possible with as few large businesses as possible.

In our history we have had serious problems with large companies establishing monopolies. Northern Securities Company, American Tobacco Company, Standard Oil and AT&T, among others, have been guilty of using unfair trade practices in order to limit competition. Without government intervention, these companies would have stiffeled fair competition essesentially forever.

Without government intervention capital economies revolve in a cycle of capital concentration followed by violent revolution followed by autocratic politics and capital concentration followed by violent revolution and so on.

So it’s not a matter of hating one class or another, or one political party or another; rather it is a matter of a government created by the people using it’s just power to provide economic liberty and justice for all. <insert patriotic music and flag waving in the wind here> ;-)

[Gerry]

Florian wrote:

I think the globalization issue is worth discussion, and I’m not trying to move the discussion off that, but I would like to say something about ‘free markets’.
My dad used to tell a story about Laissez-faire economics.
He said that if you took 100 men and stranded them on a remote island and gave them each 1 dollar, that when you came back in one year 1 man would have 100 dollars.
I think it is precisely the job of our governments to regulate and tax in order to redistribute our wealth so that we do not have 'economic nobility'.
This is more pragmatic then simply hating the rich. It’s a lesson from the monopolies of aristocratic Europe. Concentration of wealth into too few hands resulted in violent revolutions. For some countries it was very unpleasant for a long time and millions died. This theme has been reinforced in Latin America ad nauseam.
The American Ideal is the notion that political stability and social justice are most secure when our nation has the largest possible middle class and very small rich and poor classes. This also entails an economy based on as many small businesses as possible with as few large businesses as possible.
In our history we have had serious problems with large companies establishing monopolies. Northern Securities Company, American Tobacco Company, Standard Oil and AT&T, among others, have been guilty of using unfair trade practices in order to limit competition. Without government intervention, these companies would have stiffeled fair competition essesentially forever.
Without government intervention capital economies revolve in a cycle of capital concentration followed by violent revolution followed by autocratic politics and capital concentration followed by violent revolution and so on.
So it’s not a matter of hating one class or another, or one political party or another; rather it is a matter of a government created by the people using it’s just power to provide economic liberty and justice for all. <insert patriotic music and flag waving in the wind here> ;-)

I think big government-big tax on one side and laissez-faire on the other side create a lot of problems. Big tax and big government takes away from private capital to create the growth needed to create jobs. I wish economics were as simple as you present it. Although I do agree that I like going to Europe with its middle class environment. The problem with to much government is that it never stops. As one who stood in the grocery line and had people before me and after me on food stamps, you have to wonder why you are working if you are going to give your money away. We also saw with big government higher inflation (counterfeit money) that drove up interest rates.

Under laissez-faire we see Bush that turns a blind eye to all of the problems. I do not believe in the theory that everything will just fix itself. We can guide this country into the right direction. However, given the mentality in Washington-I just wonder.

We have seen visionaries in the past. Roosevelt, Eisenhower with the interstate system, Nixon putting in security at the airports, Kennedy with putting a man on the moon by the end of the decade. It is time to have a visionary for an energy policy and for our infrastructure. We also need a president that will support science and embryonic stem cell research. Without science, we will have no future.

I agree with you in that there is a lot our government can do for the common good. We can create an energy policy and fix the infrastructure so that more people can enjoy prosperity together. Even with globalization-we can look at things that will make this country great. Unfortunately, the war and our money supporting the war and our dependence on oil is draining our freedom.

[Gerry]

Florian wrote:

I think the globalization issue is worth discussion, and I’m not trying to move the discussion off that, but I would like to say something about ‘free markets’.
My dad used to tell a story about Laissez-faire economics.
He said that if you took 100 men and stranded them on a remote island and gave them each 1 dollar, that when you came back in one year 1 man would have 100 dollars.
I think it is precisely the job of our governments to regulate and tax in order to redistribute our wealth so that we do not have 'economic nobility'.
This is more pragmatic then simply hating the rich. It’s a lesson from the monopolies of aristocratic Europe. Concentration of wealth into too few hands resulted in violent revolutions. For some countries it was very unpleasant for a long time and millions died. This theme has been reinforced in Latin America ad nauseam.
The American Ideal is the notion that political stability and social justice are most secure when our nation has the largest possible middle class and very small rich and poor classes. This also entails an economy based on as many small businesses as possible with as few large businesses as possible.
In our history we have had serious problems with large companies establishing monopolies. Northern Securities Company, American Tobacco Company, Standard Oil and AT&T, among others, have been guilty of using unfair trade practices in order to limit competition. Without government intervention, these companies would have stiffeled fair competition essesentially forever.
Without government intervention capital economies revolve in a cycle of capital concentration followed by violent revolution followed by autocratic politics and capital concentration followed by violent revolution and so on.
So it’s not a matter of hating one class or another, or one political party or another; rather it is a matter of a government created by the people using it’s just power to provide economic liberty and justice for all. <insert patriotic music and flag waving in the wind here> ;-)

When I ride the trains in Europe, I think some of them are subsidized by the government. In any case, it works. Prices are not bad and the public transportation system takes you wherever you want to go. And wherever I go in Europe, I just see middle class. It's a great environment and I will be leaving Monday again for a couple of weeks, and I can walk anywhere without the fear of going into a slum as opposed to here.

[None in 08]

Pudintain wrote:

<quoted text>
Everthing I stated above is text book fact yet you mark me as nuts and clueless. If you all are really this stupid than I guess you do need the government to run your life.

Well, as I have a rudimentary understanding of economics, I realize you are neither clueless or nuts. It's appalling that so many people believe economics is a four letter word or something that "greedy" CEOs care about.

When will people realize they apply the concepts of economics into their own lives and choices on a daily basis?

[None in 08]

Florian wrote:

<quoted text>
Maybe it's just that people are not as gullible as you would like. Or maybe you’re a bit thin skinned.
You write something, put it out there for others to read, knowing it will be judged, then you cop an attitude when people think you are off base, topping it off by calling the entire rest of the world stupid.
In your world you write ‘the truth’ and the rest of us should just be glad to benefit from your wisdom. In your mind no one has need for their own opinion …. if you want their opinion you’ll give it to them.
I’m sorry for you that you can’t see that the problem is your ego.

The truth the OP is referring to is economics. Most people lack even a basic understanding of the laws of supply and demand and the effect of both on prices. Which is sad, because the world really does work that way.

[None in 08]

Florian wrote:

<quoted text>
Carter? Carter? You gotta be kidding me. Many of the people reading this were not born yet when Carter was president.
Why is it anytime Bush's failed policies come up, republicans drag up yesterday's news as if to say that Bush isn't really to blame because of some ancient history?
You guess you can agree that the president has veto power to forbid legislation passed by congress from becoming law? You might agree that the Democrats do not have the ability to override the president’s veto?
The truth is that the Republican Party had a majority in both houses and a republican in the White House for six years. That gave the Republican Party almost absolute power for six years. The situation we are in now is a result of that imbalance of power.
For six years a republican congress pass legislation that was signed into law by a republican president and the situation we find ourselves in now is the result.
A year and a half of congress passing legislation that was vetoed by the president, or dropping legislation because of a presidential threat of veto, does not change the fact that six years of almost absolute power makes republicans responsible for the mess we are in.

So because most people reading this were not alive when Carter was President will somehow mean that the same things that failed when Carter was President will work now?

Uh, whatever you want to believe, I guess.

And FWIW, on several occasions Congress HAS overcome a Bush veto. What could that possibly mean? Dems and Repubs came together on the issue.

Wow, imagine that, bipartisanship. I know so hard to believe.