world

Bush scraps comments on financial crisis

100 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

100 Comments
Login to comment

george bush understands the economy just about as good as John McCain. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I always knew that Mr. Bush would do for America what he did for Harken Oil.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Now we know what an idiot Bush really is. He is saying nothing because he has nothing to say. All that this guy has done is start useless wars and destroy American human rights. It was under his administration that the ghost of Milton Freedman was allowed to run rampant.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, that's leadership to calm nervous markets.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush is not to blame foor this crisis.

This was started by the greedy banks and shareholders.

The Bush administration was poweless to stop this, they are totally blameless.

The road to economic growth is the Bush doctrine of prudent spending and tax cuts to the hardest working folk. McCain will continue with these policies, and the country will be fine.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush is not selfish, greedy,arrogant and corrupt ? Blame it on the monkeys with suits !!!!! John McCain and Obama cannot repair this problem. The future will only get worse !!!! BILLIONS OF TAXPAYER dollars went to IRAQ, AFGANISTAN,PAKISTAN and ETC. WHY DID YOU PEOPLE ( BUSH SUPPORTERS ) VOTE FOR THIS BUFFOON ? NANDE ???? WHYYYYYYYY ??????

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The reason why he won't say anything is our economy is hanging by a thread !!!!! Wall Street is full of monkeys !!!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is better keep your mouth shut and have people think you are stupid, than to open it and confirm their suspicions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The economy is poodling along just fine, this is just a hic-cup, these things happen in a market economy. it really is no big deal.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Im guessing since he doesnt have any good news he doesnt say anything. Those who dont understand finance blame it on the president and try to tie it to this and that, bu tthe truth is this was started in the clinton years and was pushed to become by the greedy banks, and the idiot people who bought homes with money they didnt have. The money the US is putting into the war doesnt take away money from anything at all involved in this. Infact the goverment bailed out too many of them already..

But hey lets blame everything on a president and not really look at the problem, its much better that way..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yeah !!! But he could have used the Iraq money for education in America. Or do something to REAllY HELP PEOPLE. His people, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE !!!! But he didn't !!! Alot of middle class people and lower class people are HOMELESS NOW !!! Borrowing money from China to buy OIL. Yes, he did a great job !!!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bu tthe truth is this was started in the clinton years

It started earlier than that. Last December I downloaded this piece, which appeared in various US publications before being reprinted overseas (where it's still available online). It's remarkably prescient as a federal bail-out for AIG is being readied:

Once upon a time, all through the nineteenth century, financial panics -- often precipitating more widespread economic slumps -- were a commonly accepted, if dreaded, part of "normal" economic life. Then the Crash of 1929, followed by the New Deal Keynesian regulatory state called into being to prevent its recurrence, made these cyclical extremes rare.

Beginning with the stock market crash of 1987, however, they have become ever more common again, most notoriously -- until now, that is -- with the dot.com implosion of 2000 and the Enronization that followed. Enron seems like only yesterday because, in fact, it was only yesterday, which strongly suggests that the financial sector is now increasingly out of control. At least three factors lurk behind this new reality.

Thanks to the Reagan counterrevolution, there is precious little left of the regulatory state -- and what remains is effectively run by those who most need to be regulated. (Despite bitter complaints in the business community, the Sarbanes-Oxley bill, passed after the dot.com bubble burst, has proven weak tea indeed when it comes to preventing financial high jinks, as the current financial meltdown indicates.)

More significantly, for at least the last quarter-century, the whole U.S. economic system has lived off the speculations generated by the financial sector -- sometimes given the acronym FIRE (for finance, insurance, and real estate). It has grown exponentially while, in the country's industrial heartland in particular, much of the rest of the economy has withered away. FIRE carries enormous weight and the capacity to do great harm. Its growth, moreover, has fed a proliferation of financial activities and assets so complex and arcane that even their designers don't fully understand how they operate....

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IL11Ak04.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Seven years of superb LEADERSHIP !!!!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Leadership of Silence.

Authored by George W. Bush, 17 September, 2008

0 ( +0 / -0 )

HankHillUSA - "The Bush administration was poweless to stop this, they are totally blameless."

They had complete power and full ability to tweak the financial industry regulatory system.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nippon5 - "The money the US is putting into the war doesnt take away money from anything at all involved in this."

Completely and patently false.

The $1 trillion + the Bush administration has spent on Iraq has utilized funds that could have been otherwise spent on shoring up these financial institutions, not to mention the $200 billion the US spends per year on debt servicing that has been growing rapidly due to rising war costs - all of which are sucking money out of the US economy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushSake3; You are misinformed. The money spent on Iraq was agreed by republicans and Democrats.

If we did not liberate Iraq, the cost of securing our borders would have been more than 1 trillion. America would be a fortress, a less free place to live. we had to take the battle to the enemy, or another 9/11 would have followed shortly.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

HankHillUSA - "If we did not liberate Iraq, the cost of securing our borders would have been more than 1 trillion."

America has been spending billions securing the borders as well as trillions in Iraq.

Your argument is null and void.

"The money spent on Iraq was agreed by republicans and Democrats."

You mean the money that the Democratic party has been fighting tooth and nail to stop being misappropriated to Iraq for the past few years?

I'm sorry, but your blatant misguided patriotism does not substitute for facts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Seems even bush himself has given up on his own support. Can't blame him... there's simply nothing more to say in his defense. And yet there are still very very few who try to pretend he is not the worst president in history... hahaha.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think a better headline would read "Bush Scraps Economy."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The U.S. economy in tatters - Bush's Mission Nearly Accomplished :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

See Implicaions - http://www.seriworld.org/03/wldKetV.html?&mn=E&mncd=0302&key=db20080721001&pubkey=db20080721001&seq=db20080721001&kdy=E5JjH5a6=&sectno=3

Even the Koreans think that this economic struggle was assisted by george bush.

I think george bush took the high road on this. If you don't have something nice to say, you just don't say anything at all. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The U.S. economy in tatters - Bush's Mission Nearly Accomplished :-)

I like YOUR brand of patriotism,comrade. Until now I couldnt understand why you described repubs,with all their "country first" stuff and their disdain for Europe, as "anti-american."

Saul

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Saul, you will understand if you take a quick look at the pillaging of the US economy - $6 trillion down in just 8 years, bush's tax cuts that benefit the rich, an emptying of the pyblic purse to fill the bank accounts of defence companies supporting the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the freezing of spending on domestic programs, cutting of benefits to the poor, these latest eye-watering bailouts of banks (whose money is all going where?), the ever-growing US debt to China, etc, etc.

It's 'trivial' things like this that are behind my belief that any U.S. citizen who supports the policies of the bush adminsitration that have resulted in this carnage is "anti-American."

But if some people want to hide behind 'Country First' signs and banners while completely ignoring the issues that are right in front of them, that is, of course, their choice.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

like bush, almost all of his few remaining supporters can't even bring themselves to his defense. Hahahaha!! TRULY the worst president in the history of the US.

The funniest part is watching all Bush's die-hard support now switching their tunes to, "b-b-b-b-but... well... McCain will do BETTER!", as though that were an excuse for Bush doing so badly.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm with you, comrade sushisake. The WHOLE system needs destroying. And BArack is the One. The repubs deserve all the economic justice they have coming.That wealth needs redistributing!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Whats there to say he's only got to skate for a few more months and then TA TA and good luck.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush can't even hide his own embarrassment anymore. Are there any youTube shots of Bush dashing off the stage? I would love to see his sour puss red with shame and embarrassment, as it is and deserves to be.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And Barry Obama spends the evening sucking up to the Hollywood crowd at a $28,500 per plate fundraiser. Obama feels our pain...after all, remember his dismay at the rising price of arugula at Whole Foods?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush has said many times that capital markets are resilient and the economy will bounce back. He ain't lyin' - it always has and it always will.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The economy is poodling along just fine, this is just a hic-cup,

A hiccup? More like waking up in bed with a cheap hooker, a wicked hangover and a blank where the previous night should be. (Not speaking from experience, of course.)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If we did not liberate Iraq, the cost of securing our borders would have been more than 1 trillion.

...Spent in the US. Not spent overseas fattening up Cayman Island shell corporations like Halliburton that pretend to be American while dodging taxes with overseas P.O. boxes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake3 said:::

Nippon5 - "The money the US is putting into the war doesnt take away money from anything at all involved in this."

Completely and patently false.

The $1 trillion + the Bush administration has spent on Iraq has utilized funds that could have been otherwise spent on shoring up these financial institutions, not to mention the $200 billion the US spends per year on debt servicing that has been growing rapidly due to rising war costs - all of which are sucking money out of the US economy

Should goverment save all businesses that dont do well... Maybe in your country SushiSake3 But not in America.Your talking about money that wasnt there for bailing out business and it has nothing to do with it....

You dont like Bush WOW we are suprised at that, but maybe you can take off your hate glasses and see life for what it is, goverment had nothing to do with the demise of these companies except when Clinton and the congress of that era created the loopholes they are using, Could the goverment bail out all these greedy fat companies_??? Yes but as an American I dont think I should be bailing out a company that has a ceo making more in a year then this whole boards members make in a life time..

So please tell me what they do in your country for failing companies, maybe like the ones here in Japan that sell rotted rice, or maybe the pipe company here that sold pipe for natural gas that wasnt hydro tested???? Did the govement bail them out when they failed because of thier greed....????

So once again your just misinformed and very wrong, sorry but thats the truth..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Arbusto'd.

Bush is a Miserable Failure. Heh, I can't believe people are rallying around to elect the guy that Bush beat in 2000. What a joke.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Madverts; The president deserves a little more respect, don't you think?

McCain is the right guy, he is not a Washington insider, he is a true maverick.

Bush hes steered the economy through hard times with skill and GDP has incresed year on year, as it will this year.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The president deserves a little more respect, don't you think?"

No.

Harken energy and the week after Bush left speaks volumes of his economic prowess.

The man is a muppet.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Madverts; The guy is the CIC, and we are fighting a war on terror, against the biggest threat since the Nazis.

His is not a muppet, he is brave and stands firm to his beliefs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hank, I remember when those doing the right-wing impersonations were actually funny.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No single president will be able to pull out of this financial crises. The US economy is in a tail spin. The global economy is also unable to pull out of this one. The economic fundamentals underlying this mess are the almost the same as those that created the Great Depression. The only real difference is that now the amount of debt owed by the public is far far greater than it was back then.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

taniwha; Reports have stated that the US is in a good position to weather the economic crisis. Bush has ensured that teh fundimentals of the economy are strong. The dip in the economy is forcast to be reversed by the beginning of next year.

Don`t panic folks, Bush knows what he is doing, his legacy is safe.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alinsky4prez - "The WHOLE system needs destroying."

Why do you think so?

On a side note, the crumbling of these major financial houses is all the proof we need to see that the current free market system (that bush and others have been advocating for years) isn't working.

I want to know what john mccain plans to do about it considering how often he has been shrieking on about bringing change to Washington lately but not saying what kind.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The president deserves a little more respect, don't you think?

Respect is earned. Or not, in his case.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The man is a muppet"

Hey, no dissin' the Muppets! Nyuk nyuk nyuk!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The US economy is in a tail spin"

Bye bye, world economy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nippon5 - "Should goverment save all businesses that dont do well..."

No. However, goverments should seriously consider saving companies whose failure may bring down an industry.

"Your talking about money that wasnt there for bailing out business and it has nothing to do with it...."

It has everything to do with it. The money that the US government is currently spending to bail out these companies (in case you missed it, the US government has just injected $85 billion to save AIG) isn't there in no small part because it has been wasted on stupid ventures such as the Iraq war, which, like these recent bailouts, is being completely funded using borrowed money.

A bit of economic common sense wouldn't go astray here...

"You dont like Bush WOW we are suprised at that, but maybe you can take off your hate glasses and see life for what it is."

What has not liking bush got to do with this? It's simple economic common management.

"goverment had nothing to do with the demise of these companies except when Clinton and the congress of that era created the loopholes they are using."

Gotta love it - it's the "Look over there - it's Bill Clinton!" line again :-) Blaming Bill Clinton is pointless and clueless.

Despite your stubborn refusal to acknowledge reality, Bush and his government has had 8 long years to fine tune regualtory practices that have been fundamental to this financial industry meltdown.

"So please tell me what they do in your country for failing companies."

They go under.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

HankHillUSA - "McCain is the right guy, he is not a Washington insider"

Patently wrong. McCain is the epitome of the Washington Insider - he's only been one for a quarter century :-)

"he is a true maverick."

If he has voted in lockstep with bush 91% of the time, that must make bush a bit of a maverick too, ha ha.

America deserves better than the mccain muppet show (no disrespect intended to muppets.)

Oh, and HankHillUSA, you must have forgotton to get back to me about where you saw that poll you mentioned that had mccain with a 'big lead' over Obama.

Sorry, I can't find it.

Does it even exist? :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

moderateguy2008 - "Reports have stated that the US is in a good position to weather the economic crisis. Bush has ensured that teh fundimentals of the economy are strong. The dip in the economy is forcast to be reversed by the beginning of next year."

moderateguy2008 - can you please provide links - any links - to back up your assertions above?

Otherwise, no sane person is going to believe you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That's right. It's 'bye bye world economy' as we have known it.

China has been the other engine for a very short while, and the hope is that it will keep the aircraft in the air until some financial wiz from either McCain or Obama's team crawls out on to the wing and fixes the US engine.

However because its a tail spin there is going to be the inevitable crash. The US can't go down on its own. We are all in this together. Call it the death of Capitalism if you like. This is going to be one long and painful crash. The good news is that it is possible to learn from our mistakes. The tricky part is surviving them first.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taniwha,

Firstly, welcome back.

Secondly, heh, you're a bit of a doom and gloom merchant this mornin' aren't ya? You're not holding out for the birth of global worldwide socialism on the back of this supposed tail-spin are you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's become pretty clear that many Republicans, like their man john mccain, simply have NO IDEA WHATSOEVER about basic economic principles or fundamentals.

It's almost as if that $200 billion (and growing) in debt servicing costs the US is paying each year simply doesn't exist on the Republicans radar screen.

Or the forecast $2-3 trillion cost for the Iraq war will have no effect whatsoever on the future of the US economy.

Or the ballooning national debt and trade deficit with China are irrelevant.

Oh, and money grows on trees and the US economy will remain strong for - like - forever.

Get real Republicans, your man mccain's admitted void of knowledge of economics is one of the biggest dangers to your nation's future.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake3; unlike yourself, i work from home, and am watching the news constantly. Bush has made sure the fundementals of the economy are strong, we will have a slowdown, but hey, taht has happened so many times.

I could tell you where my information was furnished, but you always brush it off as biased.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

moderateguy2008 - So you aren't up to providing links to back up your claims? Last week you said Fox News.

I think we can all take it that you are simply unable and unwilling to back up your claims.

The only conclusion we can reach is that you are making things up to suit your agenda. :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bush scraps comments on financial crisis

legacy boy!

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake3; My claims and predictions have all come true, as my posting history would show you.

There is aglobal economic crisis, and the US is in the best position to avoid recession. These are facts, acknowledged by experts on the economy, not people posting here with their own political agendas.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"No. However, goverments should seriously consider saving companies whose failure may bring down an industry." The Industry will not fail when a few companies go broke.. did Enron make all energy trading companies fail, did Mcgomery Wards make all retail companies go under... Your stretching far to make such outrages statements.

"It has everything to do with it. The money that the US government is currently spending to bail out these companies (in case you missed it, the US government has just injected $85 billion to save AIG) isn't there in no small part because it has been wasted on stupid ventures such as the Iraq war, which, like these recent bailouts, is being completely funded using borrowed money."

The US goverment always borrows money to pay things it doesnt have a bank account to withdrawl from, hasnt in a long long time even when we had a surplus with Clinton we still had a deficiet and borrowed money to pay for things..As far as stupid ventures I think we should add foriegn aid to countries, rebuilding foriegn countries, paying for political ads,and ETC ETC....

"A bit of economic common sense wouldn't go astray here..." Ok you should try some it would make it easier to understand the US economy if you did

"What has not liking bush got to do with this? It's simple economic common management."

Always blaming problems on Bush is your trade mark on here and not actually using the facts its not the presidents job to run private companies in America , I know thats hard to understand but thats the way it is.

"Gotta love it - it's the "Look over there - it's Bill Clinton!" line again :-) Blaming Bill Clinton is pointless and clueless.

Goto love the it cant be CLinton even though Clinton was the president at the time when the bill (modified by Clintons office) was passed and caused the loophole called subprime loans, I guess we cant blame Bush for going to war in Iraq under your logic... If Clinton was a Rep you would be all over him for the mistake, but your glasses cloud your vision again.

"Despite your stubborn refusal to acknowledge reality, Bush and his government has had 8 long years to fine tune regualtory practices that have been fundamental to this financial industry meltdown."

Goverment shouldnt and cant regulate business in the way you want unless you want all Americans to be called Comrade.

"They go under."

Just like the ones in the states should because its not the goverments job to maintain the business of the country, Goverment can insure a persons money in a bank, but they dont insure the bank...

Thank you for proving your whole logic was wrong with that final statement that in your country the goverment doesnt bail out the company because the goverment isnt running the business therefore the goverment doesnt have a direct effect on the companies misuse of money nor a responsibility to fix them as they cause their own failure....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mad, Hey, thanks for the welcome. Although I am trying to keep in character here, things are serious but that doesn't translate to doom and gloom necessarily. It is going to be bloody on Wall Street though. For those who are not yet members of the financial elite, that's most of us, things are going to get quite nasty, no doubt about it.

Talking of Socialism, it is interesting don't you think that the outcome of decades of 'free market' ideology dominance has culminated with what we now witness happening in the apex of word Capitalism, the USA. In the past few weeks we have witnessed the socialization of corporate debt, no less.

Yes, everyone is now paying for the losses made by private enterprise, through their taxes. The government nationalizes Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac, and now AIG has been bailed out. That is the failure of the 'free market'. And it has been totally predictable all along.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well Taniwha, I'll agree it's a failure of the free market. Un-checked lending is the height of irresponsibilty, though I don't share your thinking that the end is nigh for capitalism...heh, too much money to be made from it all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ModerateGuy2008- great posts,very informative.

The world is going through hard times granted, but the US is strong and as the worlds richest nation, we must and will survive bto drive the world economy to growth.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

moderateguy2008 - "SushiSake3; My claims and predictions have all come true, as my posting history would show you. There is aglobal economic crisis, and the US is in the best position to avoid recession. These are facts, acknowledged by experts on the economy, not people posting here with their own political agendas."

Would be great if you could provide some links - any links - to back up your claims?

Can't you even do that?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake3- Man you are too lazy dude. Just sit in front of your tv for a few hours and watch an unbiased news service. The economic crisis is the main news, you can't miss it.

Bush is the man, voted by the people twice, and i guess you have better judgement than millions of Americans.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm sympathetic to the statement that Bush did not cause this problem. But I'm totally gobsmacked at suggestions that the fault lies all with Clinton. If Clinton erred while finishing out the last 6 years of his administration with a Republican Congress, Bush failed to correct while enjoying a Republican Congress for his first 6 years.

Failure to correct an error is itself a likely error.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

moderateguy2008,

Those reports about weathering the crisis may be correct and I hope they are. We certainly don't need anyone to tell us, however, that "prosperity is right around the corner".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SwiftBoatVet - "but the US is strong and as the worlds richest nation."

Wrong again. The US is the world's greatest debtor nation.

I'm afraid you've got your facts 180 degrees out of whack.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

moderateguy2008 - you still haven't provided ANY LINKS or news sources whatsoever to back up your as yet completely unsubstantiated claims...

How long are you going to keep us waiting? :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake3- Watch any tv news show noe, except fom the far left ones. The information is being reported now.

If you choose not to watch and learn, then don't blame informed guys like me. Educate youself sir, learning is fun.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

moderateguy2008,

I have just been watching an unbiased news source and they guy there said basically the opposite of everything you are saying. FACT! you are wrong.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The origin of 'the problem' lies much further back than Clinton. You need to go back many decades, at least as far as the 'New Deal'. However, the solution does not lie in tweaking the Capitalist system which long ago had run its course, and is now a colossal and grindingly slow train wreck.

The ultimate peaceful solution lies in dismantling nation states and yes, in International Socialism.

The alternative is world war. That too followed the Great Depression. The cogs are already in motion, you only need to listen to the war mongering from the McCain and Obama campaigns to have an insight into what the Plutocracy ruling the USA have in mind as a solution to fall of US dominance. The same talk to various degrees can be heard from most of the other world powers at this point also.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

moderateguy: Sorry, bud... been watching the news and according to it, you are completely off on just about everything you've said. Sorry amigo, that's a fact (you want links for proof to my statement? Just watch 'any TV or news show now -- other than far right ones! har har).

Anyway, you saying, "every single one of my claims and predictions have come true", when you are completely wrong... well, I guess that would make every single comment and prediction wrong. Nice try, though.

Bush is not 'the man'; he walked away from his speech in shame, and could not utter a word about the tanked economy. When even george can't lie, it's REAL bad.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smithinjapan; millions of voters can't be wrong twice buddy! Bush knows how to deal with this crisis, which was secretly done behind his back by traders and speculators.

Ask any other moderate guy on here, if i am lying or not?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hey, just keep voting REPUBLICAN, if you want the US and the rest of the world economy to be in this mess, just keep on voting REPULICAN, yes, for old McCain and his young beautiful future vice-president, PALIN!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The ultimate peaceful solution lies in dismantling nation states and yes, in International Socialism.

Barack hears you. He has had to make some compromises to get the nomination but it was for show. This meltdown is the big one you and I have been waiting for, this time really is the last meltdown. Barack will usher in the changes you and the other international socialists who clamor to this site seek so ardently. Of course, it will take Barack and his people more than 2 terms. Any opposition from Congress is out of the question. Talk radio is finished. Fox News will be history. In fact, so called free speech will need to be curtailed, in the interest of The People of course.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nippon5 writes:

Those who dont understand finance blame it on the president and try to tie it to this and that, bu tthe truth is this was started in the clinton years and was pushed to become by the greedy banks, and the idiot people who bought homes with money they didnt have.

You mean Bush just stood aside for nearly 8 years and watched this all happen? Kindly stop embarrassing yourself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Barack will usher in the changes you and the other international socialists who clamor to this site seek so ardently.

Easy to tell when Republicans get desperate, isn't it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alinsky, Hey, sorry to be the one to break the news to you, but Barack Obama is a stooge.

Do you actually pay attention to what that hand puppet is saying?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Who knew there would still be so many Bush supporters. I guess it's true, tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth:

http://www.theendisalwaysnear.blogspot.com/2008/06/what-tangled-web-we-weave-part-i.html http://www.theendisalwaysnear.blogspot.com/2008/06/when-first-we-practice-to-deceive-lies.html http://www.theendisalwaysnear.blogspot.com/2008/06/lies-part-3.html

Tax cuts for the rich, printing presses running 24/7 to pay for war, deregulation, hmmm, i wonder if it's this administrations fault?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Anyone who believes the Obama and McCain campaigns can deliver peace and prosperity back to the American people, and as a result a good part of the world are living an illusion. Both candidates represent a plutocracy. The US is being run by the financial elite for their own ends. If that is too much to swallow, reflect then on what little substantial difference there is in the content of what both men have been saying in their speeches and in their interviews with the media. The difference is slight.

Obama apparently stands for "change", but fundamentally that change does include away from military muscle back to diplomacy as a tool of foreign policy. Quite the opposite. Obama has implied very clearly that he intends to bring back the military draft. Obama has put forward no economic policies that could possibly solve the financial crises.

McCain has promised more troops in Iraq and in all of America's on going wars. He has offered nothing that possibly shift the present course of America's financial meltdown. And his running mate in a most recent interview has suggested the possibility of a thermonuclear war with Russia is an option.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The US is being run by the financial elite for their own ends.

Who are they? Together we can destroy them! Right?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yabits

You mean Bush just stood aside for nearly 8 years and watched this all happen? Kindly stop embarrassing yourself.

I havent embarreassed myself (but your statement is embarrassing and makes you look so much the extremist)I also havent had my nose up any political rumps either, Im just tired of hearing people blame one person all the time when in reality he isnt the main problem this time.

Your making up what you want to hear. Which is usual for those who talk but dont listen...or in this case read..

Bush isnt the reason something happened to the Financial markets, it was caused by the Law being changed originally during the great depression and then rewrote during the Clinton administration.

The companies took the loophole and pushed it to the limit. Why would the goverment interfere in the business of private companies??

The people buying the houses paid too much and didnt plan for a budget..

Yes Bush could of changed the law, but so could of the 535 members of congress, and no one did.

So you cant blame one man for the problem which was what I said in the first place, but you want to try to make me a Bush supporter which would be wrong since I never voted for him. People like you seem to feed off of trying to make everyone a REP or a DEM and I wouldnt waste my time with either.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alinsky - Good one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Barack will usher in the changes you and the other international socialists who clamor to this site seek so ardently.

Except the Bush Administration beat him to the punch:

President Truman once tried to nationalize the steel industry, arguing that a strike that halted production in wartime created a national emergency. The Supreme Court ruled that was illegal. This time, however, the company agreed to the nationalization. It was the only way to get the cash it desperately needs.

The Federal Reserve and the Bush administration believe the threat of defaults by A.I.G. on a lot of unregulated derivative contracts creates a national emergency. It’s too bad they didn’t think of that when they were opposing any efforts to regulate those markets. That would have been interfering with free enterprise. This move, somehow, is not....

http://norris.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/socialism-21st-century-style/index.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bush and his corrupt cronies use the same formula over and over again. Corner the market and rape the consumers and then when the whole effort fails have the taxpayers foot the bill.

Keep the profits and make the sucker republicans voters pay the bills when they come due.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nippon5 writes:

So you cant blame one man for the problem which was what I said in the first place, but you want to try to make me a Bush supporter which would be wrong since I never voted for him. People like you seem to feed off of trying to make everyone a REP or a DEM and I wouldnt waste my time with either.

Reading your complete post and trying to visualize the mental process that composed it made me think of a dog that is trying very hard to chase its own tail. I suppose I should congratulate you for catching it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nippon5: but you want to try to make me a Bush supporter which would be wrong since I never voted for him.

Anyone who disagrees with Sushi is a Bush supporter. Hell, I've campaigned for Obama, donated to his campaign twice, voted Democrat my entire life.....and I'm STILL a Bush supporter to him. ;)

Your comments are spot on, tho. The world is just too polarized for people to actually look at the situation and make comments based off of it. It's all about defending your party and attacking the other party. The problem I see is that no matter who wins (Obama or McCain) the stage is being set for more thick-skulled partisan politics from both Washington and the people around the world.

This article was about a comment Bush didn't make. We've had references to the Iraq war, Clinton, Afghanistan, Republicans, Democrats, tax cuts, pretty much everything one could think of. It's like a married couple who has the same fight every day regardless of what small incident triggered it. Tomorrow there will be a new article and the same comments will be said....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bush and his corrupt cronies use the same formula over and over again. Corner the market and rape the consumers and then when the whole effort fails have the taxpayers foot the bill.

What a dumb way to analyze the current situation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SuperLib writes in defense of Nippon5:

Your comments are spot on, tho. The world is just too polarized for people to actually look at the situation and make comments based off of it. It's all about defending your party and attacking the other party.

LOL!!! Remarks defending a person who reached back a decade to attack Bill Clinton for the current Wall Street debacle.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Remarks defending a person who reached back a decade to attack Bill Clinton for the current Wall Street debacle.

The Wall Street debable didn't just occur overnight, it was essentially a snowball of greed(started in 1913) that rolled down a mountian, gaining in size and speed and then plowed into the people at the bottom of the hill. Everyone since 1913 inculding Clinton could have stopped it or slowed it down but instead pushed the snowball to make it go that much faster. The part that Bush is responsible for is that because of the war in Iraq, the US had to transfer a portion of it's wealth to other Countries to pay for the war. Now there is not enough money to stop the people hit by the snowball from hemoraging.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bringing back the draft will end this war, in fact bringing back the draft may end all future U.S. Wars. I am all for a fair and equal draft with everyone from 18-65 with their name in the hat. (men, women and politicians) (President + VP excluded)

This financial downturn is the product of years of political work. Thank you Congress/Senate/President and Financial CEOs for making it happen. Hopefully with the raise in taxes you can find other ways to destroy the American economy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Thank you Congress/Senate/President and Financial CEOs for making it happen.

Don't forget every house buyer who knowingly over leveraged themselves to buy houses, in hopes of a quick sale.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bringing back the draft will end this war

I think the it will be far more likely to FEED "this war".

Reinstating the draft is one way the US government has of dealing with the outcome of the financial crises. It soaks up the large pool of young unemployed. It focuses the population on the growing foreign nemesis the country is supposedly at war with, and away from the reality of what is happening internally.

Obama's comments recently are a clear indication his intention is to see the military draft reinstated while in his first term in office. Obama is quite simply a handpuppet for a faction of the ruling elite, the 'Liberals'. McCain on the other hand represents the extreme right who now form the core of the Republicans, and he most certainly will have to reinstate the draft to fight this call to war ringing through his speeches.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If all people are forced into the draft nobody would want this war. As of now you have 1% fighting a war that nobody really wants to fight. =the 1% are forgotten and everybody else goes on with their lives = that's not fair.

These financial CEOs, Hedge-Funders,, Liberals, Clintoncrats, and brokers should be the first to get drafted as part of their Gov buyout.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Remarks defending a person who reached back a decade to attack Bill Clinton for the current Wall Street debacle.

Yabits -- Nippon5 didn't attack Bill Clinton. He merely said that the law was changed during the Clinton administration. That's correct. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which essentially repealed the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act that had limited the types of businesses in which banks could be involved, was passed in 1999 by the 106th Congress. At the time, the Republicans had a 54-46 majority in the Senate, and a 223-211 majority in the House (with one independent).

The real problem is that the Depression-era generation pretty much died out, and those who came after them thought the Depression-era limits on speculative activity were too restricting. There's a lesson to be learned from this that can be applied to a wide variety of things, including not only the regulation of financial markets (in the US and in Japan), but also whether Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution should be repealed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Badsey

If all people are forced into the draft nobody would want this war.

"All" people would not be drafted, and neither would just anyone. Historically those that get drafted are the ones that lack the means to avoid it. The other point is most Americans are against the war now. Polls clearly showed this to be the case just prior to the last presidential election.

Obama began by playing to the anti-war sentiments expressed by the majority of Democrat supporters. But it was evident even then he had no intention of pulling out of the 'War on Terror'. His calls for change are meaningless in any anti-war context. So far as the economy goes Obama equally has nothing to offer the average American.

The whole deal about Bush not being able to comment on this financial crises is because no comment a president can make is able to undo what is already done. This crises is symptomatic decades of political decision making that has always served the interests of a financial elite. The results have got us all into deep doggy do-dos and it is the average citizen who is going to be forced to pay.

Bush, McCain, or Obama, no president can fix this mess so long as they are upholding the interests of a financial elite above the interests of everyone.

These financial CEOs, Hedge-Funders,, Liberals, Clintoncrats, and brokers should be the first to get drafted as part of their Gov buyout.

I sympathize with your sentiments.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This financial fall-out has probably done what a draft could not -> it has ended the Iraq war.

The almighty dollar has spoken and has done what the Dems could not.

This War will be over <1 yr.

Badsey<

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Badsey

You have GOT to be kidding. The Iraq war over? I don't think so not by any stretch of the imagination. Iraq is extremely unstable.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama is quite simply a handpuppet for a faction of the ruling elite, t

We need names, taniwha.Barack has spent the last few days in LA. I sincerely hope you are not implying that Barbara Streisand, one of the most astute political minds in America, is in actuality some kind of stooge sent by these higher powers you refer to and she too has been actively misleading Barack.It would be too much to bear.

Name names or else stop tormenting us.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush commenting on the economy is like a child molester commenting on Montessori. It just aint pretty.

68% in US now dissaprove of the boy blunderer, highest ever recorded. It will be higher before he leaves. Only the bible tnumpers will still love their miserable failure.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taniwa, If 8 years of bush has not taught you that who is president matters then you will never learn anything. You think Gore would have invaded Iraq?

Nader and his trite ideas are over and done with, he is so 2000. And so responsible for the last 8 years as well which destroyed his legacy of consumer protection advocacy. I wonder how he sleeps at night knowing he let bush win in Florida due to his egomaniacal behavior.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush's legacy will be like Hoover for the new millenium.

I don't think Nader really cares about Bush winning. I think he just wants to be in the spotlight. I think he will be rising from the ashes again for this election. I also believe his appearance will hurt McCain more than Obama.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

jwills,

nader is getting zero coverage in the US as far as I can tell. He is like an ugly rash that comes back every four years. I think his impact on this election well be zero as well.

In 2000, when he did matter, he gave the election to bush. For that liberals will never, never forgive him.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush isnt the reason something happened to the Financial markets,

Watch this video and see if you agree: http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/291.html

It's a seven-minute video about why Eliot Spitzer was taken out of the picture for exposing Bush's part in the predatory lending industry.

Look at his father's involvement in the Savings and Loan crisis. Do you think it's just happenstance that a Bush is involved every time the U.S. banking industry falls into a black hole?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites