Blogs and Stories
The GOP's Misplaced Rage
AP Photo; Getty Images
Leading conservative economist Bruce Bartlett writes that the Obama-hating town-hall mobs have it wrong—the person they should be angry with left the White House seven months ago.
Where is the evidence that everything would be better if Republicans were in charge? Does anyone believe the economy would be growing faster or that unemployment would be lower today if John McCain had won the election? I know of no economist who holds that view. The economy is like an ocean liner that turns only very slowly. The gross domestic product and the level of employment would be pretty much the same today under any conceivable set of policies enacted since Barack Obama’s inauguration.
Until conservatives once again hold Republicans to the same standard they hold Democrats, they will have no credibility and deserve no respect.
In January, the Congressional Budget Office projected a deficit this year of $1.2 trillion before Obama took office, with no estimate for actions he might take. To a large extent, the CBO’s estimate simply represented the $482 billion deficit projected by the Bush administration in last summer’s budget review, plus the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, which George W. Bush rammed through Congress in September over strenuous conservative objections. Thus the vast bulk of this year’s currently estimated $1.8 trillion deficit was determined by Bush’s policies, not Obama’s.
I think conservative anger is misplaced. To a large extent, Obama is only cleaning up messes created by Bush. This is not to say Obama hasn’t made mistakes himself, but even they can be blamed on Bush insofar as Bush’s incompetence led to the election of a Democrat. If he had done half as good a job as most Republicans have talked themselves into believing he did, McCain would have won easily.
Conservative protesters should remember that the recession, which led to so many of the policies they oppose, is almost entirely the result of Bush’s policies. According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the recession began in December 2007—long before Obama was even nominated. And the previous recession ended in November 2001, so the current recession cannot be blamed on cyclical forces that Bush inherited.
Indeed, Bush’s responsibility for the recession is implicit in every conservative analysis of its origins. The most thorough has been done by John Taylor, a respected economist from Stanford University who served during most of the Bush administration as the No. 3 official at the Treasury Department. In his book, Getting Off Track, he puts most of the blame on the Federal Reserve for holding interest rates down too low for too long.
While the Fed does bear much responsibility for sowing the seeds of recession, it’s commonly treated as an institution independent of politics and even the government itself. But the Federal Reserve Board consists of governors appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
Because the president appoints the board, he has primary influence over its policies. This is especially the case for chairmen of the Fed appointed by Republicans because they often have ties to Republican administrations. Chairman Ben Bernanke was originally appointed as a member of the Fed in 2002, serving until 2005, when he became chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers in the White House, a position that made him Bush’s chief economic adviser.
As early as 2002, a majority of the seven-member Federal Reserve Board was Bush appointees, and by 2006 every member was a Bush appointee. While many critical decisions about monetary policy are made by the Federal Open Market Committee, the board’s position always prevails.
The Treasury secretary also has had breakfast with the Fed chairman on a weekly basis for decades. Consequently, most economists generally believe that every administration ultimately gets the Fed policy it wants. Therefore, one must conclude that if there were errors in Fed policy that caused the current downturn, it must be because the Fed was doing what the Bush administration wanted it to do.
Stars Celebrate the Super Bowl
The Daily Beast is dedicated to news and commentary, culture, and entertainment. We carefully curate the web’s most essential stories and bring you original must-reads from our talented contributors.
How Rich People Smoke Pot
Paul Schrodt is a writer living in New York City. He has contributed to New York magazine, Radar, and Esquire.com.
The Supply-Side Pariah Returns
Bruce Bartlett helped develop supply-side economics while on the staff of Rep. Jack Kemp in the 1980s. In 2006 he was fired by a conservative think tank for writing a book critical of George W. Bush from a conservative point of view, Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy. His new book, The New American Economy: The Failure of Reaganomics and a New Way Forward, was published Oct. 13.
Obama's Clueless Liberal Critics
Bruce Bartlett helped develop supply-side economics while on the staff of Rep. Jack Kemp in the 1980s. In 2006 he was fired by a conservative think tank for writing a book critical of George W. Bush from a conservative point of view, Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy. His new book, The New American Economy: The Failure of Reaganomics and a New Way Forward, was published Oct. 13.
MsMarple
Excellent piece. I shall keep a copy to refer to whenever some sore loser starts whinging about Obama's high cost of fixing a derailed economy.
allonfla
I am about to bookmark this also. I belong to a few forums peppered with "confused" people.
tasppa
This is the most excellent article have ever seen..
honestly this Guy deserve a congratulation for being honest and explaining the situation clearly.I must keep a copy of this as reference whenever i will have a talk with friends.
tasppa
sweeteddy
you are absolutely correct, tasppa. I've long held that there are honest conservatives with sound logical arguments. Even when I disagree I enjoy a well built, reasonable argument. There were many conservative economists who were warning unsustainable lending and 'growth'. There are also people who don't want to face facts so they change the subject (point at Franks, not that Barney was any kind of saint though this) or otherwise misdirecting the focus from the problem.
mikealtan
Nice try you closed minded, leftist hack. The people are not upset about the cost of fixing a derailed economy in so much as when they oppose the Democratic plan, which no Democrat can even articulate clearly, they are peronally attacked. The people's anger emanates from when they do oppose, like Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton recommended during the Bush administration, they are called Nazis, fake protesters, brown shirts, stupid, plants and a myriad of other names by the leaders of the Democratic party. Real intelligent. What happened to Obama's "bringing both parties together" idea? I guess when the Democratic's utopian plan of supplanting personal responsibility with getting taken care of by big daddy Government for the purpose of gaining votes, principles along with the Constitution get thrown out the window. Thank God the masses of people are now seeing how the Democrats handle being in power. Thank God we have elections coming up next year!
quick2no
mikealtan - Hard to bring us together since Bush TRASHED our economy, closed-minded rightest hack. Masses of people are looking at idiots like you and seeing the light every day. You are the ones who lost credibility in the election and will continue to lose Republicans in Congress and health reform will go forward, you kicking and screaming all the way, because you have no plan, as usual. Lovin' watching you naysayers squirm. Lovin' it.
sippewissett
What an ugly rant. When you let go such venom that it reflects on you, not on the target of your anger.
"The people's anger" is in itself fallacious because there is no homogeneous uprising, no matter what the Tea Party crowd would have us believe. There IS a mixture of self-interest and appreciable funding from the insurance industry lobbyists, ordinary people to whom lies are propagated, true conservatives AND people on the other side of the equation who are angry that they are bankrupt from medical bills or can't get coverage from a pre-existing condition or can't afford it. That's why you don't get to speak for everyone, just for yourself. And what's coming out of your mouth right now is ugly, not reasoned so go work on that for a while.
Shane56
Yeah, It's like my ol' Granpappy use to say:
" you can lead a wingnut to the facts but you can't make 'em think!"
Doktorkev
" you can lead a wingnut to the facts but you can't make 'em think!"
I love it,,,
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
Mauiboy
Amen. This will be bookmarked for future reference. I have said for a long time that if you don't like Obama, blame Bush. Bartlett makes a lot of sense on what is going on right now. I think that health care reform would have been a lot easier under Bush than it's going to be under Obama, just like welfare reform was easier under Clinton and the war effort is easier under Obama than Bush. Bruce, please send a copy of this to Larry Kudlow, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity
normthomas2
Mauiboy you are right on target.
timmyboy
Nice try at trying to re-write history. How about going back a little bit and looking at your friend Barney Frank and the Democrats who bullied a Federal employee who testified that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in trouble back many years ago.... Barney said things were great. It was he and the Democrats (Clinton crowd) who pushed for loosening up the lending requirements so their constituents, who could not afford mortgages, could now get them. And then began the slide down the slippery slope.... lending money to people who could not afford to repay it.
So, how about telling the truth.... not just the liberal truth.
innovations
Nice try in trying to make Fannie and Freddie the cause of Bush's Disaster. Nothing like clinging on to ONE thing that you can use to point the finger the other way.Lets be real. Out of so many CBO reports between 2001 and 2008, I dont recall anything about Fannie/Fredie being the cause of this mess we're in. And that's because in 2007 Frank became the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee when the Democratic Party won a majority in the House.
I guess you're high IQ says that before 2007 this country was doing peachy before fannie/freddie.
During twelve years of Republican rule no reform was adopted regarding Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In 2007, a few months after Frank became the Chairman, the House passed a strong reform bill and fiinally got it passed and onto President Bush's desk in July 2008. Twelve years of Republican rule produced no reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Frank did not "pushed for loosening up the lending requirements" to control subprime lending or to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac because in the first case they were never willing to do so, and in the second case, FrankI worked together with Republican Chairman Mike Oxley on the only bill that the Republicans considered during that period to restrict Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the bill was defeated because, in the words of Mike Oxley, the Bush administration gave his efforts 'the one-finger salute.'
NOW YOU WANNA ARGUE THAT WITH ME, TODAY IS MY DAY OFF YOU'RE IN LUCK. I GOT ALL DAY FOR YOUR CRAP.
janeyre
Innovations, you have my Attention. Thank you for your concise input...
odawgo
innovations,
how uncommon- a democrat with a day off on a thursday or my guess would be you have the day off everyday. Except, of course, when you get up off your couch and walk to the mail box to pick up your government check that working people (those who don't have thursdays off) have provided for you through taxation. Thanks for making the conservative point for us! People like you are the problem.
StellaRay
Owdawgo,
Your post is ridiculous. BTW, what are you doing here on a Thursday blogging away. Catching a little down time on the company computer, or what? Or are you retired, living on your government paid social security and medicare?
innovations
Odawgo and Stella Ray, if it's my day off today, that should tell your republican-fathered brain that I work.But enough about me, answer the goddamn reply with some logic and not your concern about my day off. TYPICAL TYPICAL PUKE CRAP.
Bulldoglover100
LOL Notice how the bottom dwellers can only respond to intelligent debate with insults? Causes one to wonder if their parents were breeding for ignorant? or of the genetics behind them are just so swamp filled they never stood a chance.....
I'm a Republican and I KNOW Bush did us in.
odawgo
Lol. Congratulations, you all took the bait - hook, line and sinker. I love it when you all reveal your true colors. Oh, almost forgot, hope you've enjoyed your day off because, if I'm not mistaken, your weekly check should be arriving tomorrow. Try not to break a sweat on your way to your mailbox. Work, work, work........
sophia5
"Until conservatives once again hold Republicans to the same standard they hold Democrats, they will have no credibility and deserve no respect."
If CONSERVATIVE protesters are "mobs," what does that make ACORN ?
Aren't Liberals the ones who created the tradition of mob mentality,
COMMUNITY ORGANIZED ?
Ritarita
Odawgo-
Pathetic response.
You can't even cover your
Own butt competently.
But I was laughing-
So it was worth the read.
You've told all of us that you
Have no argument.
robert0199
I still didnt hear a proper response...Well not everybody has a standard 9-5. Im tired of STUPID republicans. Thats why they dont want education in any of these budgets cuz they depend on the STUPID..No response what so ever and still have the nerve....
marco01
odawgo. Thanks for the great example. You have confirmed everything this author says.
You have fallen into a trap of your own making. LOL
gwizparks
Innovations your reply to timmyboy(we call him tiny BOY) was great and accurate. Facts seem to be krytonite to these uninformed, mis-educated, ignorant tinny boys ... PLS keep up the good fight against supidity!
PhilMcRoin
Did someone say ACORN?!?!? o my god!!! grab the kids and lock the doors!!!!!!
Llplo99
Hey Odawgo, my republican friend is taking today off as well. He is a Sr. VP at a tech firm. Is he a problem as well? Idiot!
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
HGS111
Nice smack down ... I like it
jackie4thapeople
@Innovations, you hit the nail on the head...thanks for standing up, being heard and supporting your debate with facts, not fairy tales...
DreamWeaver
It's Friday and you're back at work. But I just found this article and your response. I'll be back on the Beast now that I'm registered. Thank you for the spirited comment. Made my day. And thanks to the conservative economist Bartlett for the facts. So rare. So needed to help stop the hysteria raging in our nation.
estcruzer
Talk about revising history. When Bush took over the Dot Com bubble burst and Fannie and Freddie almost became irrelevant. It was only the loosening of requirements and dropping interest rates through the floor (both under Bush's control in 2003/2004) that caused the incredible investment in Real Estate you refer to. Bush and the Republicans controlled all of the government not Clinton nor Barney Frank. Try again later, but get your facts straight.
janeyre
Estcruzer, I am having so much fun, reading today... Your comments have added to my enjoyment. Thanks...
innovations
Hey estcruzer, nice to know some people still have a brain. The balls of some people to even try and blame all of this on fannie/barney. It took 3 pages to list all of Bush's wonderful contributions and he left out a few more pages that i can think of, and instead of these morons shutting the f**k up, they try and come back with fannie lmao. GET A F**KING LIFE!!
janet1003mn
According to the July 12, 2009 issue of the Los Angeles Times, a joint study by The University of Chicago and Northwestern University found that "26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic' - that is, calculated economic decisions to bail out of loans by owners who actually have the money to make the payments but can't handle the negative equity they're carrying caused by local property value declines."
Wanna keep up the poor bashing or wanna face the truth, Timmyboy? Maybe you should try leaving history, as you call it, to those who "wrote" it in the first place.
sweeteddy
Janet, I laud your documentation. Anybody can spew opinions. It's refreshing to see a position offered with support.
innovations
You want liberal truth you found me just in time. Here's some lib truth: According to the figures in today's report, the $5.6 trillion ten-year projected surplus inherited by the Bush Administration has become a $3.3 trillion deficit - an $8.9 trillion deterioration. According to these figures, the
nation's debt is projected to rise every year without limit, growing faster than its income CBO--September 24, 2004,
THE PEOPLE WHO RE-ELECTED BUSH ARE TO BLAME. BECAUSE THEY VOTED HIM IN.
djanimaequeen
Here here. Whoever voted for Bush should be thrown in Gitmo. They screwed as over BIG TIME!
Lotto1
Yes you are correct Especially since the first time shame on Bush but the second time shame on the people who voted for Bush. Your figures and historical information is correct but as someone pointed out Denial isn't a river in Egypt ...it is the foundation of the Republican party
innovations
Lotto it's always a river in egypt when i piss and think about these puke morons--the nile river.
missbike
I find it amazing that a certain sort of Big Shot Wanna-Be delusional is always on about Barney Frank instead of looking at reality. And timmyboy you're the typical version spouting the typical nonsense in perfectly memorized quotes.
Apparently, gay bashing and thinly veiled racism are much easier than just dealing with the truth and focusing on now and how to dig out of this mess. It's useless, and utterly repugnant to boot. A lot of the Fox Limbaugh generated hysteria is more about being a small minded bigot than any reality about The currant President or the incompetent last one.
If you don't like the country growing and changing for the more equitable, go to some nasty little dictatorship of the sort the Bush years were becoming. You'll love it! Since the Republican big shots don't actually give a snot about you any way you won't be missed. They'll just vote you anyway, long after you've put on the cement galoshes.
tombaxter
ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!!! Frank had total absolute control over Treasury, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Fed, Greenspan, the FDIC. Barney's evil hating America plans overwhelmed all of them and more, forcing them against their will to become his mind controlled economic policy and sex slaves. Besides electing the greatest military and economic mind, which we did in George W Bush, what can America do to protect herself from those so evil?
dana64
MAYBE the other Dems were wrong...........BUT THIS IS NOT OBAMA's fault.
Actually OBAMA's action SAVED AMERICAN CAPITALISM for now.......
SO, it is totally unfair to Blame OBAMA.
HE is taking the HEAT FOR the DEFICIT............because he saved Capitalism???
honestly how DISHONEST CAN The CRITICS be??
CRITICISM for the sake of CRITICISM is NOT A SOLUTION !!
THIS post is very timely and correct.
enthio
odawgo, yep I'm unemployed and receiving a government check thanks to moronic republican policies which deep sixed our economy and made it impossible to find work. But hey, tomorrow is Friday... payday. Thanks buddy!
aLionHeart
HA HA
enthio
sophia5, yep protesting republicans are mobs, protesting liberals are protesters. Everyone has a right to protest peacefully. When they start making death threats and showing up with guns, that is where the line is drawn. Frankly, the conservative mobs are behaving a lot like... dare I say it... terrorists. Quick, somebody call Homeland Security!
victimcrite
LOL, you might want to Google "George Bush's American Dream Home Ownership Act"
Here's a highlight:
Housing: Help low-income purchasers, and housing developers
Bush's main proposals on housing:
%u2022Creation of an "American Dream Downpayment Fund" to allow low-income families to use HUD rental vouchers to make a down payment on a home. Bush says this could help as many as 650,000 families become homeowners.
%u2022A tax break aimed at real estate investors that would provide them with tax credits of up to 50% of costs, totaling $1.7 billion over five years. This tax credit would provide incentives for private investors to redevelop single-family housing or build new homes for low- and moderate-income Americans. Bush said he expects this plan would build or rehabilitate 100,000 homes in five years.
%u2022Individual development accounts giving tax credits and other financial incentives for low-income families to save money for a home purchase, for education costs, or to start a business.
He promised to give out $450 billion dollars in low income loans to poor people to buy homes with subprime loans, the subprime's that went bad were worth $500 billion, so do the math timmyboy. You might also want to consider that Adjustable Rate Mortgages have terms that are 1,3 or 5 years, and they started going bad in 2007, which meant they were mostly written in 2002 and beyond when republicans controlled the presidency, the congress and the judiciary branches of government. Another fact to consider is that complicated financial instruments that were made possible by Phil Gramm courtesy of the Gramm, Leach, Bliley Act were the actual cause of the financial crisis, the country could easily have recovered from a $450 billion loss. We recovered from the collapse of the savings and loans after Reagan deregulated them, and we could have recovered from Bush's very generous, very Christian act of giving homes to the poor, if the subprime mortgages hadn't been sliced, diced and packaged around the world, and insured by derivatives. Nice try rewriting history, Timmyboy, next time you might want to blame Jimmy Carter and the Community Reinvestment Act of 1978, even though Bernanke has said "the CRA did not cause the current housing crisis", that never stops republicans from blaming poor old Jimmy Carter.
sweeteddy
You've hit it on the head, Vic. Some conveniently forget, or rewrite W's dream home ownership act. Who said he was only interested in helping his big money banker friends? Of course he was just looking out for the poor little guy trying to achieve the American dream. A closet populist. lol
sippewissett
Yes, the Dems have a share of the blame, but they were not the majority who pushed through de-regulation of Wall Street and the banks. They were not the party that thought that lowering taxes on corporations and the rich was the only remedy our economy needed. They were not the administration that started two wars and kept the costs of the wars "off the books" by funding it from an emergency fund (AKA loans from China). And they were not the party that eroded our civil liberties so that the most secretive administration in history could do what they want here and abroad.
So, until Repugs step up and start 'owning' that it was your leadership, your Congressional Reps, and your lobbyists and money hacks who got us into a worldwide recession from which we will be digging for years to come, don't look for much bi-partisan 'mea culpas' from the Dems.
innovations
Bruce that is an excellent breakdown of all the events that led to Obama's inheritance. But even with all that, there are going to be space cadets that are going to out-right tell you that Bush led a wonderful economy and that the 2006 democrat congress screwed it up, even though they had no say so in the matter because Bush vetoed everything they wanted to pass. Welcome to my world.
Carole65
Better read up on the history of Bush's veto pen - he found it in the later years of his presidency. Remember No Child Left Behind or the Medicare prescription bill? The spending created a part of the problem, but timmyboy is right. To conveniently exclude the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debacle, which caused the housing crisis, had more to do with this recession. And there were warnings by Bush and Ron Paul, but the people in charge of oversight in Congress assured everyone that everything was just fine.
Progressive2
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/who_caused_the_economic_crisis.html
The Real Deal
So who is to blame? There's plenty of blame to go around, and it doesn't fasten only on one party or even mainly on what Washington did or didn't do. As The Economist magazine noted recently, the problem is one of "layered irresponsibility ... with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role." Here's a partial list of those alleged to be at fault:
The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.
Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.
Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.
Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.
The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.
Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.
Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.
Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral.
The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.
An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.
Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up.
The U.S. economy is enormously complicated. Screwing it up takes a great deal of cooperation. Claiming that a single piece of legislation was responsible for (or could have averted) the crisis is just political grandstanding. We have no advice to offer on how best to solve the financial crisis. But these sorts of partisan caricatures can only make the task more difficult.
innovations
GEORGE W. BUSH'S VETOES.
George W. Bush
1. July 19, 2006: Vetoed H.R. 810, Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, a bill to ease restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. Override attempt failed in House, 235-193 (286 needed).
2. May 1, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1591, U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007. Override attempt failed in House, 222-203 (284 needed). A later version of the bill that excluded certain aspects of the initial legislation that the President disapproved of... H.R. 2206, was enacted as Pub.L. 110-28 with the President's approval.
3. June 20, 2007: Vetoed S. 5, Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007.
4. October 3, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 976, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 ("SCHIP"). Override attempt failed in House, 273-156 (286 votes needed).
5. November 2, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 1495, Water Resources Development Act of 2007. Overridden by House, 361-54 (277 votes needed). Overridden by Senate, 79-14 (62 needed), and enacted as Pub.L. 110-114 over President's veto.
6. November 13, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3043, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2008. Override attempt failed in House, 277-141 (279 votes needed).
7. December 12, 2007: Vetoed H.R. 3963, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007.[20] Override attempt failed in House, 260-152 (275 votes needed).
8. December 28, 2007: Pocket Vetoed H.R. 1585, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008[21]. A later version of the bill that changed a minor provision of which the President disapproved was quickly passed by Congress (H.R. 4986) and was enacted with the President's approval as Pub.L. 110-181 on 28 January 2008.
9. March 8, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 2082, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.[22][23] Override attempt failed in House, 225-188.
10. May 21, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 2419, 2007 U.S. Farm Bill.[24][25] Overridden by House, 316-108 (283 votes needed). Overridden by Senate, 82-13 (64 votes needed). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-234 over the President's veto. Due to a clerical error, this act was repealed by Pub.L. 110-246.
11. 18 June 2008: Vetoed H.R. 6124, 2007 U.S. Farm Bill, re-passed by Congress to correct a clerical error in HR 2419.[26] Overridden by House, 317-109 (284 votes required). Overridden by Senate, 80-14 (63 votes needed). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-246 over the President's veto.
12. July 15, 2008: Vetoed H.R. 6331, Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act.[27] Overridden by House, 383-41 (283 votes required.) Overridden by Senate, 70-26 (64 votes required). Enacted as Pub.L. 110-275 over the President's veto.
NOW WHAT THE F**K IS YOUR PROBLEM AGAIN?
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
StellaRay
You might find it interesting to read up on Harry Markopolos, the whistle blower on Madoff. He (and most others) says the economy's collapse was based in the banks unregulated 600 TRILLION credit default swap market. He described it like this: "It's like buying fire insurance polices on your neighbors house from five different companies and then burning the house down."
Freddie and Fannie are a symptom, not the root.
innovations
Carole65--hellooo.. knock-knock, brain dead? i listed all of Bush's vetoes of the democrat congress. you was bitching with your mouth open so i dont know wtf you're talking about. but i'm always open to new entertaining info.
Bulldoglover100
It appears that you poor losers picked the wrong Thursday to spread lies on the internet! innovations HAS KICKED YOUR LYING TAILS! LOLOLOLOL
innovations
Progressive2 it is so annoying when i see Clinton's name mentioned when it comes to the questioning of our failed economy. You listed "The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families." Assuming that's the direction you want to really go, keep in mind that the economy was fabulous in Clinton's time. 24 million jobs were created through Clinton. Thats tons of stimulus floating the economy. The Dow Jones rose from 2,000 to 10,000 under Clinton and continued to climb to 13,000 as Bush inherited the best economy in the world only to f**k it up.
Progressive2
in 1998 Clinton allowed(did NOT Veto) I think it's called the glass eagle act that deregulated the banks which makes it part of the collapse.(He didn't Veto the bill).
Note that this bill was passed by a Republican Controlled congress.
whipmawhopma
I'm with Progressive2. Lots of folks contributed to this mess.
innovations
progressive2 here is a list of all clinton's vetoes includuing 1998.
But as stated, the economy was so boomed up that it was ok to extend loans for those who may have had a shady credit score because there were jobs everywhere. I was in my early 20's in the 1st term of Clinton and I was given a $22k credit card on a job paying $9/hr. I max'd out on that card in 3 months but found a 2nd job in 2 days to pay it back. thats how easy it was back then. It wasnt a risk when clinton was in office.
Table 1. President Clinton's Vetoes
Bill Number Date of
Veto Title Override
Attempt
H.R. 1158 06/07/95 Second Supplemental
Appropriations and Rescissions
Act for FY1995
No attempt.
S. 21 08/11/95 Bosnia and Herzegovina
Self-Defense Act of 1995
No attempt.
H.R. 1854 10/03/95 Legislative Branch
Appropriations for FY1996
No attempt.
H.R. 2586 11/13/95 Increase in the Statutory
Debt Limit
No attempt.
H.J.Res. 115 11/14/95 Second Continuing Resolution
for FY1996
No attempt.
H.R. 2491 12/06/95 Budget Reconciliation No attempt.
H.R. 1977 12/18/95 Interior Appropriations
for FY1996
House sustained
01/04/96 by
239-177.
H.R. 2099 12/18/95 Veterans Affairs and Housing
and Urban Development
Appropriations for FY1996
No attempt.
H.R. 2076 12/19/95 Commerce, Justice, and State
Appropriations for FY1995
House sustained
01/03/96 by
240-159.
CRS-3
Bill Number Date of
Veto Title Override
Attempt
H.R. 1058 12/19/95 Securities Litigation Reform Act House overrode
12/20/95 by
319-100, Senate
overrode
12/22/95 by 68-
30. P.L. 104-67.
H.R. 1530 12/28/95 Defense Authorizations
for FY1996
House sustained
01/03/96 by
240-156.
H.R. 4 01/09/96 Welfare Reform Act No attempt.
H.R. 1833 04/10/96 Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of
1995
House overrode
09/19/96 by
285-137. Senate
sustained
09/26/96 by 57-
41.
H.R. 1561 04/12/96 American Overseas Interest Act
of 1996
House sustained
04/30/96 by
234-188.
H.R. 956 05/02/96 Common Sense Product Liability
Legal Reform Act of 1996
House sustained
05/09/96 by
258-163.
H.R. 743 06/30/96 Teamwork for Employees and
Managers Act of 1996
No attempt.
H.R. 2909 10/02/96 Amends Silvio O. Conte National
Fish and Wildlife Refuge Act
No attempt.
H.R. 1469 06/09/97 Flood Relief Bill No attempt.
H.R. 1122 10/10/97 Partial Birth Abortion House overrode
07/23/98 by
296-132. Senate
sustained
09/18/98 by 64-
36.
H.R. 2631 11/13/97 Disapproving Cancellations House overrode
02/05/98 by
347-69. Senate
overrode
02/25/98 by 78-
20. P.L. 105-
159.
S. 1502 05/20/98 D.C. Student Vouchers No attempt.
H.R. 2709 06/23/98 Iran Sanctions Bill No attempt
CRS-4
Bill Number Date of
Veto Title Override
Attempt
H.R. 2646 07/21/98 Education Savings Account No attempt.
H.R. 4101 10/07/98 FY1999 Agriculture
Appropriations
No attempt.
H.R. 1757 10/21/98 Foreign Affairs Reform No attempt.
H.R. 2488 09/23/99 Tax Relief Bill No attempt.
H.R. 2587 09/28/99 D.C. Appropriations, FY2000 No attempt.
H.R. 2606 10/18/99 Foreign Operations Spending,
FY2000
No attempt.
H.R. 2670 10/26/99 Commerce, Justice, and State
Appropriations, FY2000
No attempt.
H.R. 3064 11/03/99 District of Columbia
Appropriations, FY2000 and
Education, Labor, and HHS
Appropriations, FY2000
No attempt.
S. 1287 04/25/00 Nuclear Waste Policy
Amendments Act of 2000
Senate sustained
05/03/00 by 64-
35.
H.R. 4810 08/05/00 Marriage Tax Relief Bill House sustained
09/13/00 by
270-158.
H.R. 8 08/31/00 Estate Tax Elimination Act House sustained
09/07/00 by
274-157
H.R. 4733 10/07/00 Energy and Water Development House overrode
10/11/00 by
315-98. Senate
referred veto to
committee
H.R. 4516 10/30/00 Legislative Branch and Treasury
Appropriations
No attempt.
H.R. 4392 11/04/00 Intelligence Authorization Bill No attempt.
cvillekid
Carol65 hits a trifecta.
1. she agrees with timmyboy
2. She lies about the cause of the housing crisis
3. and she approves of Ron Paul
Progressive2
Just when you think Economists are useless you hit it point by point.
This is a great Article!
milarepa
Just as I pointed out in a previous thread, the Republican fantasy of being the party of "fiscal responsibility" is just that, a fantasy.
This is an excellent article that will unfortunately do nothing to stem the hysterical delusions of the wilfully ignorant. The tea-baggers, the birthers, the town hall hissy fitters, the fundamentalists the so-called "family values" crowd - the whole ignorant lot of them - don't care about the facts.
The truth is, the wilfully ignorant are scared to death. They see a world of change that is leaving them behind. Their only response is hatred and delusional beliefs that make them feel that they are still somehow relevant, the truth be damned.
Since the founding of this nation, the wise have understood that democracy required a well-informed citizenry in order to function and survive. The wilfully ignorant and their cyncial leaders pose a greater threat to this nation than any foreign "terrrorist".
Thank you, Mr. Bartlett, for a clear and honest accounting of how we got into this mess. Sadly, it is precisely the type of clear-headed thinking that the wilfully ignorant will ignore.
djanimaequeen
And thank you for your intelligent perspective. You are right on the mark.
Dobodob
The blame should be on "government" then and now. For the last 76 years, since Roosevelt took office, the govermment has gone deeper and deeper into debt on an annual basis with a few exceptions. And even in the years when there was a surplus, notably in the Clinton years, it was due to a clearly unsustainable economic bubble. It doesn't matter who is in office, the federal government is incapable of fiscal prudence.
To place blame on one president or another misses the point that politicians, especially Obama, pander to the economic interests of their supporters, and now with, apparently, more than half the nation not paying income tax, Obama has secure base of the needy helpless who hope to never pay taxes again.
Obama will leave office in 2013 or 2017 with the federal debt at an all time high, and at near record highs with respect to GDP, and he will still be claiming it would have been worse if he hadn't dug a deeper hole.
Obama cannot borrow his way out of the hole he is in, and solve our economic problems by just giving away money to those incapable of supporting themselves, incapable of buying health insurance, incapable of getting a loan, and incapable of buying a new car. He needs to stop seeking approval from the helpless by giving them a handout, and for once send the more difficult message that for the good of us all, the individual is responsible.
Obama needs to tell his supporters that If they don't contribute to the nation by paying taxes, stop asking the nation to contribute to them. In the words of his hero - "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
Stop looking for a handout - all you need is out there for sale. Earn some money, buy it, and shut up.
milarepa
Well, there you have it. Thanks for self-identifying as WI. Here's your sign.
Dobodob
I believe this expresses well the Obama creed:
"If you who own the things people must have could understand this, you might preserve yourself. If you could separate causes from results, if you could know that Paine, Marx, Jefferson, Lenin, were results, not causes, you might survive. But that you cannot know. For the quality of owning freezes you forever into "I," and cuts you off forever from the "we."
What the creed fails to understand is that the "we" wants the "I" to provide insurance, sick days, vacation time, and retirement benefits. At least a good income ensures one can still be cut off from the "we," a fact Obama is working hard to change. Keep believing "we" are the change we've been waiting for and "I" will continue to take care of myself.
Bulldoglover100
Ya know some of you weiners like to gripe about BIG BAD GOVERNMENT while driving down a road....getting a drink of clean water...mailing a letter or calling the police.....and at the same time you scream that BIG BAD GOVERNMENT should stay our of health care.....yet you will draw Social Security, you will use Medicare and the laws that keep your private insurance from bending you over? Are written by the Government......
Sad thing? Your little heads are soooo squeezed by that tin foil hat you wear that you cant see the forrest for the trees!
treetracker
Well, based on taxfoundation.org: http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1410.html
it appears that those top ten non-tax paying citizens live in the following states:
Mississippi 43% 1
Louisiana 40% 2
Arkansas 38% 3
New Mexico 38% 4
Alabama 38% 5
Texas 36% 6
Montana 36% 7
Oklahoma 36% 8
South Carolina 36% 9
Georgia 36% 10
Perhaps if these states provided a decent education for their citizens, more of them might make a higher income so they wouldn't be getting a full refund. But then again, aren't all these states union free? Just the way employers like it, so they can continue to depress wages.
You are correct in that only once in our history was the government debt free - during Andrew Jackson's presidency. But it didn't last long. You see wars cost money - lots of money and it is never a good idea to invade a country that has not caused you any harm, because you still have to pay for it.
innovations
treetracker, Do u notice all those non-tax paying citizens live in states that voted republican?? NONE OF THOSE STATES VOTED DEMOCRAT. Looks like the republicans take care of their own and tax the hell out of the hard-working tax paying Democrat states.
jackie4thapeople
@Dobodob,
How typical and hypicritcal of you the same...say no one president is to blame, but the first thing comes out of your mouth is blaming and or criticizing President Obama for things...you right-wing nut jobs are flipping hillarious!!!
pacifistgunslinger
You're confused. It's the Republicans who are constantly whining about taxes. Show how tax cuts have created even one job and I'll give you a cigar (if you smoke).
sueb95382
What fairy tale do you live in? People all over this country have lost their homes and their jobs. What jobs are you proposing they get? Do you have one to offer them? Until you are in the same boat as many other Americans, then perhaps you are the one who needs to shut up.
jbjdjbjd
Misplaced rage? This registered "Unenrolled" voter believes Obama wasn't even really elected! IF DROWNING OUT OPPOSING FACTS IS un-AMERICAN THEN IGNORING UNPLEASANT FACTS IS un-AMERICAN TOO
djanimaequeen
Put down the crack pipe and just say no. Did you even read the article or are you just responding to the title? You're a tool.
Bulldoglover100
A perfect example of primates breeding and then enrolling their off spring in a souther school.....
ella04
This is getting tiresome. Of course I understand that the GOP did poorly during their tenure in the majority. I also admit that Bush did a less than stellar job of handling the economy. But trying to push the blame back to House Republicans and G.W. is just a cop-out for failing to hold your own president and congress accountable for porked up spending and rushed legislation.
You all seem to think that the Dems are now invincible...that the death of the GOP is inevitable. However, if you continue to fail so miserably at holding your leaders responsible for their words and actions, you'll find yourself right back in the minority.
Don't be fooled, the drastic measures taken by our Dem leaders were not all necessary to mending our economy. Half of what we've seen coming out of Congress and the WH is simply an attempt to further their own agenda, regardless of what the American people want/need.
Furthermore, seeing how Obama's approval has since dropped to 47% (still a good rating, of course but not as out-of-this world as it was a mere month ago), I'm going to assume it's more than just isolated Right Wingnuts who are dubious about Obama's spending spree.
djanimaequeen
It is tiresome. Your stupidity and hypocrisy that is. Face it. Rethugs are a dismal failure and a waste of space. If I had my way I'd throw you all in gitmo for you did to this country.
Bulldoglover100
Actually ALL polls short of the one Fox News presents have Obama at 60% or above. Try using facts though I know you might find it difficult......
As for Obamas agenda? Honey thats called a MANDATE and everything he has done? since he was elected? Is give the people who voted for him what he promised them.....deal with it.
innovations
ella04, that "spending spree" of Obama is necessary to start stimulus and catch up to our debts. With over 10 million out of work, how do we get the revenue we need to pay our bills?? The govt only gets money through taxes. Do u suggest we go to China AGAIN and borrow more trillions?? I dont even think they'll lend it to us. Obama's cash for clunkers is a success. He took $1 billion of our tax dollar and invested in this plan for the rebates. In one week the $1 billion was gone. We sold 300,000 cars in one week. The rebates were only $3,000 average with $4,500 being the highest payback. People were buying cars costing $20,000-$30,000. Do you think 300,000 customers walked in with cash to pay for the difference? They financed it. That's 300,000 financed loans at 7-9% interest for 48 months. That $1 billion turned into a surplus for us. And this cash for clunker plan ends in November. There's no telling how many more cars we'll sell. And notice Obama did this without being bi-partisan about it. Because Obama is realizing that you cannot work with Republicans. They insult everything you do and then call up FoxNews to have them spread evil lies. If Obama brought the cash for clunkers to congress, that would have been another protest and shouting match. Sometimes you're better off just doing it.
NepaleseTempleballs
Just when I was ready to give up on finding anyone that I could agree with, I found you. Excellent posts, innovations. Up till now, the only person that filled the empty spaces where logic should be was my husband. Thanks for shining a light in this dark night.
pacifistgunslinger
Beanpoop. Bush spent a trillion dollars (so far) in Iraq and what did that expenditure stimulate (except Blacwater and Dyncorp)? For less money, all Americans can have access to quality health care. Gee, aint math great!
sippewissett
You go light on the Bush administration by describing them/him as "did poorly" and "less than stellar job". Try instead "egregious self-interest" and "incompetent and morally bankrupt".
What Obama -- and "We, the People" in herited was an unholy economic, fiscal and foreign stew that he and his Neocons created. It is impossible to UNdo that mess overnight. (Don't forget we're in a worldwide recession where the only countries pulling out of it faster have more stringent controls on their banks!!!)
We are an ADD nation that wants everything solved yesterday and without any pain to our pockets or our small minds. No one here thinks the Dems are "invincible" or 100% right, but there is an earnest attempt to 'right' the Ship of State. And your notion that measures taken were unnnecessary are not backed up,even by conservative pundits or economists like Krugman who think we'd be WAY worse off otherwise, especially considering who would have been in the White House now. (Something you elect to overlook.)
Who the hell cares about Obama's rating (or Bush's) on any given day? The presidency is not a popularity contest. It's a position that demands vision and strategy. Right now the GOP is offering neither and is withering because of its in-fighting and astonishing capacity to stall and balk rather than lead. I'll take the long, slow cure rather than another tax break for corporations as the way out of this mess, with continuing hope that we will uplift a larger segment of the population than the Repugs even know exist.
janeyre
Where is Phil Gramm? Didn't he say, Americans were a bunch of crybabies? There wasn't a Recession... It was all in our heads or something, like that? He has a PhD in Economics... Wonder if they will demand his return of the Degree...
Dobodob
He was right about the crybabies, but he actually said whiners. Whining over a recession is like whining over spilt milk. What's the point, clean it up. You have to admit there is a lot of whining going on, especially here on The Daily Bleat.
I have yet to see a blogger here say "I made a few bad choices in my life and it hurt me. It was my fault, and I would do things differently now. It's going to take a long time for me to climb out of this hole." You sound like a bunch of addicts: "It's not my fault, blame the demon Rum." Too much whining not enough pride - or should I say self respect, it seems more PC than actually being proud of something one has accomplished.
vi-lontano
why not whine when Many of us did the right things financially but were still smacked down by the Repub spending spree...
scriabin
Let me tell you my story: I worked my butt off to get into a good university, and I worked even harder to excel at that university. I studied topics that I thought would help me have a deep understanding of our world and society. That was apparently mistake number one - I should have majored in business. After graduating, I realized that all that knowledge and breadth of knowledge, looking a the big picture, had no market value. I held many jobs, trying to find my way and keep my head above water, living in a world that values profit over knowledge and wisdom. I continued to have an outstanding work ethic and desire to grow. In September of 2008 I was working as a video editor, and my company (which happened to be run by staunch conservatives) began to collapse with the rest of the economy - the majority of the very capable staff was laid off and I was reduced to part time. In November, I was laid off as well, regardless of my work ethic. Life since then has been a horrific, anxious scramble. high unemployment numbers don't just mean a certain percentage aren't working - they mean that companies are firing rather than hiring. Even if I hustle and con my way into another job, there will be 99 other hard working college graduates who don't get that job. That is what a recession means. Whining has nothing to do with it. Was it a mistake not to spend my college years studying business and approach life from a me-first, profit-obsessed mindset? Maybe. But I tell you what - it's a much bigger mistake - and a tragedy - that we have created a world where that should be the case.
sippewissett
" Too much whining not enough pride - or should I say self respect..." How about personal accountability for our behavior? We've become a soft, self-centered spoiled nation of consumers. We outsourced all our manufacturing so corporations could generate more profit and so we consumers could buy more. Well, guess what? Now we have little manufacturing capacity left, huge endebtedness to China and few of us can afford what we outsoureced for. It's time for "sucking it up" and behaving more responsibly economically.
rexbatt
So, this guy is saying that conservatives should be protesting a guy who isn't even in office? I think conservatives did abandon Bush. His approval rating was in the 20's for two years and the Repulbicans took a beating in 2006 and 2008. Obama is the one trying to jam something down the public's throat that the majority of the country doesn't want. How long exactly are we supposed to blame Bush for everything and how exactly people go about protesting him? He's gone and the US fired Republicans. What more do you want? just because Bush was fiscally irresponsible doesn't mean we should allow Obama to be 100 times worse...
djanimaequeen
What we shouldn't allow is mental patients like you roaming around amoung the populice.
rexbatt
So, everyone that disagrees with you and Obama about health care is a mental patient?
Stay classy, liberals...
Bulldoglover100
Compared to people like Rexblat? We are the classy party these days! LOLOLOLOLOL
sippewissett
"Obama is the one trying to jam something down the public's throat that the majority of the country doesn't want." What, precisely -- and based on FACTS -- are you talking about? (And try not to overlook that he won the election and has a mandate for change from the disasterous course we were on.)
If it's health care you're wailing about, Obama is trying to
* Get more people insured so they aren't using the emergency rooms of hospitals as their standard medical care (which in turn costs the rest of us $$),
*Regulate insurance companies so they can't turn away people with pre-existing conditions and
* Expand options in how one buys health care.
The actual legislation is not gelled yet. It's complicated, but we will bankrupt this nation if we don't solve this problem. What about these basic principles do you not get?
Stop listening to Palin and Limbaugh and try facts for a change. With 6 lobbyists to every Congressional Rep, there is plenty of interference between the facts of the legislation and our getting correct information. Be very wary of ads and those who rant the loudest.
MarkEichenlaub
This kind of commentary really reeks of "I wanna be friends with the mainstream media" style of "conservatism.
Obama spends more than Bush, and all other previous presidents combined, in a few months and this guy shrugs his shoulders. What a joke.
scollins149
Well written nonsense. Bush rammed through the bailout...democrats voted it in.Now Obama wants to finish the bankruptcy of the US by adding millions of uninsured to the taxpayers' burden. Thanks, but no thanks. These people already get free health care at ERs across the nation. California is broke, not in some small part because of the cost of health care to illegals. Meanwhile, not one mention of the legal costs associated with health care. If "loser pays" as in UK were applicable here, you might see a precipitous drop off in health care costs. Malpractice insurance has crippled many specialties. Try finding OB care in southern Illinois, or a neurosurgeon.
Loxafiya
And you are a well known economist? How the hell do you know? ER is NOT free!! It get passed down to use through taxes; and why should people have to wait to be seen in the ER when they need healthcare? It might be too late for them then!! What a dumb ass post!
sippewissett
Your astonishing claim that things are okay because there is "free health care at ERs across the nation" is oblivious to the reality that thie "free card" directly impacts those of us paying for a plan.
Do you think that hospitals and plan providers suck up the costs of those getting free care? You know very little of how the current system works if you think we've got a working system now. We are going BANKRUPT. We will not be able to afford our plans 10 years from now at the current rate. Tort reform should be part of the efforts, but in the scheme of things is less the problem than being unable to get coverage for pre-existing conditions. Insurance reform is infinitely more important which is why the lobbyists are supporting negative campaigns.
cvillekid
Do you need a nuerosurgeon, scollins? I'd consider something less invasive to deal with your issues, but hey you can always move.
Seniorita
good point- people keep forgetting how much money Obama has spent in just EIGHT months!!!!!
There are plenty of people to be mad at. Bush and Obama included.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9-2PhChboU
sippewissett
I love your "facts". Bush set the record on spending. Of course, he also set a record for the # of Executive Orders so he could work around legislation passed by Congress. And of course there's that other record: # of days out of the White House. Very admirable.
I'll take Obama ANY day over Bush.
djanimaequeen
Bruce!!!! YOU ARE THE MAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am printing and framing your article!!!!!
ynot4tony2
No. Bruce is not the man. He is a hack. He ignores Congress's role in the economy, and leaves out any effect 9-11 had on the economy.
When you re-examine his analysis while being mindful of the facts I brought up, you realize he's full of crap.
Intelligent people analyze data, then come to a conclusion based on the data. Mr. Bartlett, on the other hand, already had his conclusion. He just fudged the data and facts to match the conclusion.
It's similar to "reverse engineering".
Progressive2
You're a total idiot.
Here's one simple fact
Bush turned a Budget Surplus into a Deficit FACT.
Bulldoglover100
Boy those facts really bother you dont they djanimaequueen?
jcelephant
I agree with the main point that Bush is responsible for growing the government. However, the GOP paid for their largess by losing control of both houses of Congress and eventually the WH.
Voters have already used their vote to punish the overspending and bureaucracy creating laws that the 107th, 108th and 109th Congress' were responsible for.
Since Obama has been in office, he has dwarfed the most egregious spending by Bush. In addition, he has nationalized banks and the auto industry. Those actions are singularly his. Therefore the anger his policies are now receiving are justified.
Just a reminder, blaming Bush is old and stale. He is not on the ballot and his signature has not been on any bill this yr.
sippewissett
FACTS:
* Obama has not spent more than Bush, but our deficit continues to grow because of the interest owed on our debt that ballooned during the last 8 years.
* Obama has not nationalized banks. Several of the banks are already out of the bailout system that Bush started, and of course over-compensating its executives right away while not dispensing the loans that the GOP agreed were necessary in 2008.
* Obama has not nationalized the auto industry. A few of the big buys have just had a profitable quarter, thanks to Cash for Clunkers. The Repugs hate the program because it has been successful in helping the whole automotive supply chain to recover.
It is not "stale" to blame Bush because he sowed and watered this recession. We cannot climb out from the problems he started in a mere six months of effort so take your meds for the ADD you're suffering from and buckle up. It's going to take a long while still before we get on even footing again. Two terms of Obama and we'll get there.
ertdfg
Well lets see, I did complain when Bush thought spending 400 billion dollars frivolously was a good idea.
Now that Obama wants to spend another trillion frivolously, I think that is a bad idea too. And the 2.4% economic downturn from cap & trade? Yeah, I think that's a bad plan too.
Who should I protest about cap & trade? Reagan? Sure he's dead, but you want me to protest a man who isn't in office; why not a dead guy too?
Then we get to TARP2 and Stimulus package #2... I think I'll protest Nixon over those... just to spread around the random protesting of people who are no longer is office.
I wonder if my protests of Bush, Reagan, and Nixon will have any effect on... past Washington... somehow rippling through time to change the past. Seems unlikely, very quantum, but I'm pretty sure conventional knowledge of physics precludes time travel.
Maybe I'd have to try to have an effect on people who either are elected officials now, or will be in the future? Naah, that's crazy right-winger talk... and probably racist too.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.