TORRANCE, California (AFP) — President George W. Bush pointed Wednesday to a startling slowdown in US growth as he urged passage of a stimulus package and free trade pacts with Colombia, Panama and South Korea.
Backed by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bush preached confidence in the face of downbeat new data showing that US Gross Domestic Product grew at an 0.6 percent annual crawl in the fourth quarter of 2007.
"I hope you're confident about our economy. I am. We've got some short-term issues to deal with. Fourth-quarter growth slowed to 0.6 percent. In other words, there's signs that our economy is slowing," he said.
"But in the long-run, you've got to be confident about your economy," Bush said as he toured the Robinson Helicopter Company, which boasts of being the world's top producer of civilian helicopters.
The stimulus package, agreed to by the House of Representatives and the White House, has stalled as the US Senate mulls expanding it. And the free trade pacts face opposition from Bush's Democratic foes, who run the Congress.
"If you're truly interested in dealing with the slowdown of the economy, the Senate ought to accept the House package, pass it, and get it to my desk as soon as possible," said the president.
On trade, the unpopular president faced an uphill battle: Democrats have expressed a wide range of objections to the trade deals on human rights, labor rights, and environmental grounds.
They have resisted the treaty with Colombia amid charges that Colombian President Alvaro Uribe's government tolerates crimes and human rights abuses by right-wing paramilitary groups.
On South Korea, leading Democrats have complained that the US ally still blocks US beef imports -- which, while not technically part of the agreement, are a major irritant.
"Free trade means good-paying jobs for Americans, and so Congress needs to pass these agreements, for the sake of economic vitality," said Bush, who acknowledged "a tough vote" ahead but mounted a defense of Uribe.
"He inherited a tough deal, a tough situation, where he's fighting off drug lords, drug traffickers, people who are manufacturing drugs that come and pollute our kids, and he's taking the fight to this enemy, and he's an ally, and he wants this free trade agreement passed," said Bush.
"If we turn down this free trade agreement, it'll hurt our relations in South America," he added, warning that rejection would embolden messengers of "false populism" -- a reference to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
"We need more trade," agreed Schwarzenegger, who declared that the three accords "will strengthen our economy, and create jobs and help the workers."
Ports in California, which has been hard-hit by the housing slump, handle roughly 43 percent of total US container activity, and there are more than two million trade-related jobs in the state, according to the governor's office.
With nine months before the November US elections, the president also used the first day of a four-state swing to raise millions of dollars for Republican candidates, hoping to help his party hold the White House and retake Congress.
Bush, vastly unpopular with the US public, nonetheless expected to scoop up roughly five million dollars through California, Nevada, Colorado and Missouri, before returning to Washington on Friday.
The trip included the president's first overnight stay in the glittering gambling paradise of Las Vegas since he took office in January 2001 -- he has raised money there before, but never bunked down in "Sin City."
Hosted by Google
Copyright © 2008 AFP. All rights reserved. More »
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Bush comes to the 'hood
www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/politics/bal-md.kane30jan30,0,6250322.column
baltimoresun.com
Bush comes to the 'hood
Gregory Kane
January 30, 2008
Jason Hines had his question all ready yesterday for President Bush, who came a-callin' to Baltimore and talked to nine members of Jericho, a re-entry program for nonviolent, adult male ex-offenders.
Hines said he had served a year and a half for a theft conviction. His parole and probation officer recommended Jericho, which helps ex-offenders find jobs and housing once they get out of prison. Since the Episcopal Community Services of Maryland runs Jericho, it comes under the category of what's called a "faith-based initiative."
That's what brought Dubya to town; that's why he wanted to talk to Jericho. But there was something else on Hines' mind besides a job, or housing, or faith-based initiatives.
"I asked him about voting rights for felons," Hines, 32, said. "He informed me that that was something that was not going to be done across a broad level. He told us that anyone who's really passionate about their voting rights should write their senator or congressman, explain the circumstances about why they committed the crime and express remorse."
This is the second year for the Jericho program. It was funded from a three-year grant from the U.S. Department of Labor's Prison Reentry Initiative. The second year will be officially completed at the end of February; the third will run from March of this year through February of 2009. Jean Cushman, the executive director of ECSM, said there is money to fund a fourth year.
So perhaps Hines' question should have been: "Mr. President, wouldn't programs like this be easier to fund if the federal government weren't spending billions on the war in Iraq?"
But this was not a day to embarrass Dubya. Hines and other enrollees in the Jericho program said they were impressed with the president. He spoke to them about his own addiction to alcohol. He told them that his favorite food was enchiladas and that he hadn't given much thought to his post-presidential plans.
Then Bush autographed their GED certificates, address books or anything else they had handy. He gave them all official presidential pins, which they sported proudly on their shirt pockets. At the end, according to Jericho staffers who witnessed the scene, the guys in the program wrapped their arms around Bush as if he'd been one of their buddies from around the way and posed with him for snapshots.
You read that right: George W. Bush became a "Homey for a Day."
"I had mixed views about him," Hines said of his feelings for Bush before his visit. "But now I see him as a man just trying to do a job. Heavy lies the head that wears the crown. I was also impressed by his faith."
Pierre Leftfel just did a six-month stretch in Baltimore's city jail for a drug conviction. Leftfel said the president's message about personal uplift struck him the most.
"He said 'Give yourself a chance. Things will work out. When things look like they're bad for you, never give up. They'll get better at the end. Always look to your higher power.'"
Bush's talk about his alcohol addiction hit home for Leftfel, who has been a drug addict for half of his life. Leftfel said he's also sold drugs. There's a theory that says addicts have to hit bottom before they find the fortitude to kick their habits. Leftfel's bottom was when he found himself, at the age of 43, doing yet another stint in jail.
He wanted "to stop coming back to prison, going in and out," Leftfel said. "I'm too old for this right now."
Whether they felt they were too old or just plain tired of making Maryland's jails or prisons a second home, some 365 people have enrolled in the Jericho program, according to ECSM. Of that number, 237 have been placed in jobs.
The recidivism rate for Jericho participants, according to ECSM, is 22 percent, compared with the Baltimore rate of 52 percent. Some 67 employers in the Baltimore area have hired program participants in fields as varied as installing cables, warehouse work, steel manufacturing, construction, trucking, maintenance and hotel and restaurant work.
Jericho's numbers are a drop in the bucket of ex-offenders who need help returning home from prison, if the data provided by ECSM are correct. About 9,000 people are released from Maryland prisons every year. There should be more programs like Jericho, not fewer. There should be much more money allotted to them, not less.
None of the participants in the Jericho program asked Bush how much more money could have been diverted into re-entry programs if we weren't spending money for a war in Iraq, but the president can be certain of one thing:
Someone, somewhere will very soon ask him precisely that question.
greg.kane@baltsun.com
Copyright © 2008, The Baltimore Sun
baltimoresun.com
Bush comes to the 'hood
Gregory Kane
January 30, 2008
Jason Hines had his question all ready yesterday for President Bush, who came a-callin' to Baltimore and talked to nine members of Jericho, a re-entry program for nonviolent, adult male ex-offenders.
Hines said he had served a year and a half for a theft conviction. His parole and probation officer recommended Jericho, which helps ex-offenders find jobs and housing once they get out of prison. Since the Episcopal Community Services of Maryland runs Jericho, it comes under the category of what's called a "faith-based initiative."
That's what brought Dubya to town; that's why he wanted to talk to Jericho. But there was something else on Hines' mind besides a job, or housing, or faith-based initiatives.
"I asked him about voting rights for felons," Hines, 32, said. "He informed me that that was something that was not going to be done across a broad level. He told us that anyone who's really passionate about their voting rights should write their senator or congressman, explain the circumstances about why they committed the crime and express remorse."
This is the second year for the Jericho program. It was funded from a three-year grant from the U.S. Department of Labor's Prison Reentry Initiative. The second year will be officially completed at the end of February; the third will run from March of this year through February of 2009. Jean Cushman, the executive director of ECSM, said there is money to fund a fourth year.
So perhaps Hines' question should have been: "Mr. President, wouldn't programs like this be easier to fund if the federal government weren't spending billions on the war in Iraq?"
But this was not a day to embarrass Dubya. Hines and other enrollees in the Jericho program said they were impressed with the president. He spoke to them about his own addiction to alcohol. He told them that his favorite food was enchiladas and that he hadn't given much thought to his post-presidential plans.
Then Bush autographed their GED certificates, address books or anything else they had handy. He gave them all official presidential pins, which they sported proudly on their shirt pockets. At the end, according to Jericho staffers who witnessed the scene, the guys in the program wrapped their arms around Bush as if he'd been one of their buddies from around the way and posed with him for snapshots.
You read that right: George W. Bush became a "Homey for a Day."
"I had mixed views about him," Hines said of his feelings for Bush before his visit. "But now I see him as a man just trying to do a job. Heavy lies the head that wears the crown. I was also impressed by his faith."
Pierre Leftfel just did a six-month stretch in Baltimore's city jail for a drug conviction. Leftfel said the president's message about personal uplift struck him the most.
"He said 'Give yourself a chance. Things will work out. When things look like they're bad for you, never give up. They'll get better at the end. Always look to your higher power.'"
Bush's talk about his alcohol addiction hit home for Leftfel, who has been a drug addict for half of his life. Leftfel said he's also sold drugs. There's a theory that says addicts have to hit bottom before they find the fortitude to kick their habits. Leftfel's bottom was when he found himself, at the age of 43, doing yet another stint in jail.
He wanted "to stop coming back to prison, going in and out," Leftfel said. "I'm too old for this right now."
Whether they felt they were too old or just plain tired of making Maryland's jails or prisons a second home, some 365 people have enrolled in the Jericho program, according to ECSM. Of that number, 237 have been placed in jobs.
The recidivism rate for Jericho participants, according to ECSM, is 22 percent, compared with the Baltimore rate of 52 percent. Some 67 employers in the Baltimore area have hired program participants in fields as varied as installing cables, warehouse work, steel manufacturing, construction, trucking, maintenance and hotel and restaurant work.
Jericho's numbers are a drop in the bucket of ex-offenders who need help returning home from prison, if the data provided by ECSM are correct. About 9,000 people are released from Maryland prisons every year. There should be more programs like Jericho, not fewer. There should be much more money allotted to them, not less.
None of the participants in the Jericho program asked Bush how much more money could have been diverted into re-entry programs if we weren't spending money for a war in Iraq, but the president can be certain of one thing:
Someone, somewhere will very soon ask him precisely that question.
greg.kane@baltsun.com
Copyright © 2008, The Baltimore Sun
Bush Tells Congress to Put Economy Ahead of Politics (Update1)
By Catherine Dodge and Holly Rosenkrantz
More Photos/Details
Jan. 28 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush, delivering his final State of the Union address, urged Congress to set aside election-year politics and act quickly on an economic stimulus plan and other measures he said the country needs.
The president said he recognized the anxiety many Americans feel because of the slump in housing, higher unemployment and rising prices for food and gasoline.
``At kitchen tables across our country, there is concern about our economic future,'' Bush said in a nationally televised address from the House chamber of the Capitol. ``In the long run, Americans can be confident about our economic growth.''
He called for passage of the $150 billion package of rebates for individuals and tax breaks for businesses and warned lawmakers against altering the compromise reached after extensive bipartisan negotiations. ``That would delay it or derail it, and neither option is acceptable,'' Bush said.
``In this election year, let us show our fellow Americans that we recognize our responsibilities and are determined to meet them,'' he said.
Entering his final year in office facing a slumping economy, still dealing with an unpopular war in Iraq and public approval ratings in the low 30s, Bush, 61, offered few new initiatives in a speech that was about equally divided between domestic and foreign policy.
`First Step'
In the Democratic response to the address, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, called the stimulus proposal a good ``first step'' toward meeting the countries economic challenges. The nation isn't as divided as the political debate in Washington suggests, she said.
Bush made another appeal to lawmakers to make permanent his 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, which he said would bolster the economy, and he vowed to veto any tax increases.
Bush said the federal budget he will submit to Congress next week will keep his administration on target for a surplus in 2012. It will terminate or reduce 151 ``wasteful or bloated programs,'' saving $18 billion, Bush said.
Extending the tax cuts -- and their impact on the budget -- likely will be a matter left to Bush's successor. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said last week that extending the cuts beyond their Dec. 31, 2010 expiration date would cost more than $150 billion in 2011 alone. Costs would quickly grow in subsequent years, the agency said. By 2013, annual costs would reach $300 billion; by 2016, they would grow to $400 billion, CBO said.
Veto Threat
Bush also vowed to veto any legislation for fiscal 2009 that doesn't reduce special spending programs, known as earmarks, by half.
``The people's trust in their government is undermined by congressional earmarks -- special interest projects that are often snuck in at the last minute, without discussion or debate,'' Bush said.
Among Bush's new proposals is a $300 million program to help children in poor neighborhoods get access to private schools. He also wants to create a $2 billion international fund to speed development of more efficient energy technology in rapidly developing nations, including China and India, to combat climate change. He said his administration is committed to forging an international agreement to limit greenhouse gasses.
He also prodded lawmakers to finish work on pending legislation, such as a renewal of an electronic surveillance law to fight terrorism, legislation to extend his signature education law, the No Child Left Behind Act, and approval of trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea.
`Unfinished Business'
``We have unfinished business before us, and the American people expect us to get it done,'' Bush said.
Among the items still awaiting final action is legislation to update the Federal Housing Administration and creation of a tougher regulator for government-chartered mortgage-finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Bush said those measures will help the country ``weather turbulent times in the housing market.''
He also reminded lawmakers that they have ``two other pressing challenges'' that have not been dealt with: revamping the entitlement programs of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and resolving the impasse over illegal immigration. Neither is likely to be finished before his term ends.
On foreign policy, Bush made no mention of the National Intelligence Estimate last month that concluded that Iran suspended its nuclear weapons program in 2003.
Instead, he said Tehran is developing ballistic missiles of increasing range and continues to develop its capability to enrich uranium, which could be used to create a nuclear weapon. He also said Iran is funding and training militia groups in Iraq, supporting Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon and backing Hamas's efforts to undermine Israeli-Palestinian peace.
Confronting Iran
``America will confront those who threaten our troops, we will stand by our allies, and we will defend our vital interests in the Persian Gulf,'' he said.
On Iraq, Bush said his goal for the final year of his presidency is to shift American troops away from leading operations in the country, and toward partnering with Iraqi forces. At the same time, he said he was reluctant to push fast to bring more troops home. ``We must do the difficult work today, so that years from now people will look back and say that this generation rose to the moment,'' he said.
Beyond stabilizing Iraq and containing Iran, Bush said he will work to help Israelis and Palestinians reach a peace agreement before the end of the year.
To contact the reporter on this story: Catherine Dodge in Washington, at cdodge1@bloomberg.net ; Holly Rosenkrantz in Washington, at hrosenkrantz@bloomberg.net
More Photos/Details
Jan. 28 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush, delivering his final State of the Union address, urged Congress to set aside election-year politics and act quickly on an economic stimulus plan and other measures he said the country needs.
The president said he recognized the anxiety many Americans feel because of the slump in housing, higher unemployment and rising prices for food and gasoline.
``At kitchen tables across our country, there is concern about our economic future,'' Bush said in a nationally televised address from the House chamber of the Capitol. ``In the long run, Americans can be confident about our economic growth.''
He called for passage of the $150 billion package of rebates for individuals and tax breaks for businesses and warned lawmakers against altering the compromise reached after extensive bipartisan negotiations. ``That would delay it or derail it, and neither option is acceptable,'' Bush said.
``In this election year, let us show our fellow Americans that we recognize our responsibilities and are determined to meet them,'' he said.
Entering his final year in office facing a slumping economy, still dealing with an unpopular war in Iraq and public approval ratings in the low 30s, Bush, 61, offered few new initiatives in a speech that was about equally divided between domestic and foreign policy.
`First Step'
In the Democratic response to the address, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, called the stimulus proposal a good ``first step'' toward meeting the countries economic challenges. The nation isn't as divided as the political debate in Washington suggests, she said.
Bush made another appeal to lawmakers to make permanent his 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, which he said would bolster the economy, and he vowed to veto any tax increases.
Bush said the federal budget he will submit to Congress next week will keep his administration on target for a surplus in 2012. It will terminate or reduce 151 ``wasteful or bloated programs,'' saving $18 billion, Bush said.
Extending the tax cuts -- and their impact on the budget -- likely will be a matter left to Bush's successor. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said last week that extending the cuts beyond their Dec. 31, 2010 expiration date would cost more than $150 billion in 2011 alone. Costs would quickly grow in subsequent years, the agency said. By 2013, annual costs would reach $300 billion; by 2016, they would grow to $400 billion, CBO said.
Veto Threat
Bush also vowed to veto any legislation for fiscal 2009 that doesn't reduce special spending programs, known as earmarks, by half.
``The people's trust in their government is undermined by congressional earmarks -- special interest projects that are often snuck in at the last minute, without discussion or debate,'' Bush said.
Among Bush's new proposals is a $300 million program to help children in poor neighborhoods get access to private schools. He also wants to create a $2 billion international fund to speed development of more efficient energy technology in rapidly developing nations, including China and India, to combat climate change. He said his administration is committed to forging an international agreement to limit greenhouse gasses.
He also prodded lawmakers to finish work on pending legislation, such as a renewal of an electronic surveillance law to fight terrorism, legislation to extend his signature education law, the No Child Left Behind Act, and approval of trade agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea.
`Unfinished Business'
``We have unfinished business before us, and the American people expect us to get it done,'' Bush said.
Among the items still awaiting final action is legislation to update the Federal Housing Administration and creation of a tougher regulator for government-chartered mortgage-finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Bush said those measures will help the country ``weather turbulent times in the housing market.''
He also reminded lawmakers that they have ``two other pressing challenges'' that have not been dealt with: revamping the entitlement programs of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and resolving the impasse over illegal immigration. Neither is likely to be finished before his term ends.
On foreign policy, Bush made no mention of the National Intelligence Estimate last month that concluded that Iran suspended its nuclear weapons program in 2003.
Instead, he said Tehran is developing ballistic missiles of increasing range and continues to develop its capability to enrich uranium, which could be used to create a nuclear weapon. He also said Iran is funding and training militia groups in Iraq, supporting Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon and backing Hamas's efforts to undermine Israeli-Palestinian peace.
Confronting Iran
``America will confront those who threaten our troops, we will stand by our allies, and we will defend our vital interests in the Persian Gulf,'' he said.
On Iraq, Bush said his goal for the final year of his presidency is to shift American troops away from leading operations in the country, and toward partnering with Iraqi forces. At the same time, he said he was reluctant to push fast to bring more troops home. ``We must do the difficult work today, so that years from now people will look back and say that this generation rose to the moment,'' he said.
Beyond stabilizing Iraq and containing Iran, Bush said he will work to help Israelis and Palestinians reach a peace agreement before the end of the year.
To contact the reporter on this story: Catherine Dodge in Washington, at cdodge1@bloomberg.net ; Holly Rosenkrantz in Washington, at hrosenkrantz@bloomberg.net
Monday, January 28, 2008
FOCUS Economic legacy claim problem for Bush State of the Union speech
WASHINGTON, Jan. 28, 2008 (Thomson Financial delivered by Newstex) -- A US president's last State of the Union speech is traditionally where he lays out what he hopes history will see as his legacy. There is little doubt George W Bush would like to claim tonight that the economy is stronger and more prosperous because of his policies, but that would be a tough sell.
Such a claim would simply lack credibility when the country is on the verge of a recession or--according to some economists and most of the public--already in one. But Bush can hardly ignore the economy either.
'He will confidently boast that he will sign into law a bipartisan agreement to legislate an economic stimulus package to counteract the effects from an economy rapidly headed downhill. The fiscal package will be the highlight of his message since it is the most prominent piece of legislation that (can be) enacted quickly and without partisan bickering,' said Brian Fabbri of BNP Paribas. (OOTC:BPRBF)
The stimulus package has to be Bush's focus because the economy has risen to the top of the pubic's worry list and because he's got to promote it heavily if it's to have any prospect of getting through Congress quickly. That's what makes his position so paradoxical.
'He's likely to focus a lot on the near-term challenges and not much on his legacy. He'll be saying his economic legacy is a strong one but on the other hand the economy is so weak we need to adopt a stimulus package,' said Kevin Hassett of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI)(and an economic adviser to Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain of Arizona).
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino got a direct question on the Bush economic legacy this morning: 'Is the country better off now than it was seven years ago?'
She claimed that Bush wasn't even thinking about his legacy tonight. 'The president doesn't spend a lot of time thinking about that,' she said. 'Look, the president thinks his legacy will shake itself out when people look at the record and history will tell.'
At around 150 bln usd, the stimulus package is big, just over 1 pct of GDP. The intention is for it to be implemented quickly with the first checks going out to taxpayers by May.
'The personal tax rebates alone will be worth almost 100 bln usd, and it is hard to imagine throwing that kind of money at the economy and seeing no result,' according to Ian Shepherdson of High Frequency Economics.
The academic research on tax rebates in 2001 and 2003 showed that between one third and two thirds of the rebates were spent quickly. Now, 'the increased financial pressures on households mean that a greater proportion of the rebates this year will be saved or used to pay down debt,' said Shepherdson.
Mr. Bush has always portrayed himself as anti-deficit and there are some anti-spending initiatives to be included in the State of the Union speech. The cost of the stimulus package is likely to be left out. The Congressional Budget Office has said it's likely to add 75 bln usd to the Fiscal Year 2008 deficit and the same amount in FY 2009.
Merrill Lynch's (NYSE:MER) (OOTC:MERIZ) David Rosenberg, who believes the US is already in recession doesn't see much impact from the stimulus, even combined with Fed rate cuts. 'At the margin, the fact that we are seeing a more aggressive policy response is a positive, but in the overall scheme of things, it doesn't change the recession outlook, though it all may serve to dull the pain,' he said.
Leaving the impression that at least he's trying to dull economic the pain may be the best President Bush can hope for tonight.
wash/ajb
Copyright Thomson Financial News Limited 2007. All rights reserved.
The copying, republication or redistribution of Thomson Financial News Content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Financial News.
Newstex ID: AFX-0013-22580856
from
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/newstex/AFX-0013-22580856.htm
Such a claim would simply lack credibility when the country is on the verge of a recession or--according to some economists and most of the public--already in one. But Bush can hardly ignore the economy either.
'He will confidently boast that he will sign into law a bipartisan agreement to legislate an economic stimulus package to counteract the effects from an economy rapidly headed downhill. The fiscal package will be the highlight of his message since it is the most prominent piece of legislation that (can be) enacted quickly and without partisan bickering,' said Brian Fabbri of BNP Paribas. (OOTC:BPRBF)
The stimulus package has to be Bush's focus because the economy has risen to the top of the pubic's worry list and because he's got to promote it heavily if it's to have any prospect of getting through Congress quickly. That's what makes his position so paradoxical.
'He's likely to focus a lot on the near-term challenges and not much on his legacy. He'll be saying his economic legacy is a strong one but on the other hand the economy is so weak we need to adopt a stimulus package,' said Kevin Hassett of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI)(and an economic adviser to Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain of Arizona).
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino got a direct question on the Bush economic legacy this morning: 'Is the country better off now than it was seven years ago?'
She claimed that Bush wasn't even thinking about his legacy tonight. 'The president doesn't spend a lot of time thinking about that,' she said. 'Look, the president thinks his legacy will shake itself out when people look at the record and history will tell.'
At around 150 bln usd, the stimulus package is big, just over 1 pct of GDP. The intention is for it to be implemented quickly with the first checks going out to taxpayers by May.
'The personal tax rebates alone will be worth almost 100 bln usd, and it is hard to imagine throwing that kind of money at the economy and seeing no result,' according to Ian Shepherdson of High Frequency Economics.
The academic research on tax rebates in 2001 and 2003 showed that between one third and two thirds of the rebates were spent quickly. Now, 'the increased financial pressures on households mean that a greater proportion of the rebates this year will be saved or used to pay down debt,' said Shepherdson.
Mr. Bush has always portrayed himself as anti-deficit and there are some anti-spending initiatives to be included in the State of the Union speech. The cost of the stimulus package is likely to be left out. The Congressional Budget Office has said it's likely to add 75 bln usd to the Fiscal Year 2008 deficit and the same amount in FY 2009.
Merrill Lynch's (NYSE:MER) (OOTC:MERIZ) David Rosenberg, who believes the US is already in recession doesn't see much impact from the stimulus, even combined with Fed rate cuts. 'At the margin, the fact that we are seeing a more aggressive policy response is a positive, but in the overall scheme of things, it doesn't change the recession outlook, though it all may serve to dull the pain,' he said.
Leaving the impression that at least he's trying to dull economic the pain may be the best President Bush can hope for tonight.
wash/ajb
Copyright Thomson Financial News Limited 2007. All rights reserved.
The copying, republication or redistribution of Thomson Financial News Content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Financial News.
Newstex ID: AFX-0013-22580856
from
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/newstex/AFX-0013-22580856.htm
Democrats standing up to Bush on warrantless wiretap bill
Filed by Nick Juliano
In the shadow of the president's final State of the Union address, Senate Democrats are preparing for an 11th-hour showdown with George W. Bush and his Republican allies in Congress over controversial surveillance legislation.
Advertisement
The Senate will vote Monday at 4:30 p.m. on a GOP proposal that would cement an expansion of the president's authority to spy on Americans and free from legal jeopardy any telephone or Internet service provider who helped the country's intelligence agencies to collect vast amount of data on US citizens without a warrant. Anti-immunity activists say they expect the GOP gambit to fail.
Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) successfully led an effort to block immunity in December, just before Congress' holiday recess, and the Senate returned to the issue last week, considering dual proposals from the Intelligence and Judiciary committees. Last Thursday, Republicans and a dozen Democrats blocked Judiciary's proposal to update FISA without immunity, but the GOP then refused an agreement that would have required a mere 51-vote majority to pass further amendments.
Republicans filed for an immediate cloture vote on the Intelligence bill, which would preclude any amendments from being made. This angered Democrats, and Reid, who encouraged his caucus to support a filibuster of the bill. Reid also filed a 30-day extension of the Protect America Act, which expires Feb. 1.
Although the Judiciary proposal failed on a 60-34 vote, the Republicans' attempt to preclude any further amendments is expected to cost them support from some of the Democrats who joined them in that effort. Democratic presidential candidates Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Barack Obama (D-IL) also have said they will vote against cloture.
Assuming cloture fails, Reid is expected to move forward with a vote on a one-month extension to give the Senate more time to work out its differences. President Bush has promised to veto such a bill.
After they were cowed last August into passing a temporary expansion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that critics said did too much to concentrate power in the hands of the executive, Congressional Democrats have decided to hit back against the president. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) turned the tables on Bush over the weekend, saying that blame for any gaps in the ability to collect intelligence resides at the White House.
The Senate's debate over a long-term FISA expansion has come in fits and starts over the last few months, since passage of the Protect America Act. Several times the issue was scuttled after left-leaning Senators moved to block a proposal that would grant legal immunity to telecommunications companies that facilitated Bush's warrantless wiretapping program. Those companies, such as AT&T and Verizon, are plaintiffs in 40 or so lawsuits nationwide alleging they violated customers' privacy; administration critics say the lawsuits are the only means for oversight of the wiretapping scheme in the face of an ultra-secretive administration.
Bush has promised to veto any temporary expansion of the PAA, and the administration hopes to use the pending deadline to force Congress into giving into telecom immunity. The House passed an immunity-free update months ago, and Reid has indicated he also will not budge, accusing Bush of "simply posturing" before his final State of the Union, according to the Politico.
"There will be no terrorism intelligence collection gap," Reid said. "But if there is any problem, the blame will clearly and unequivocally fall where it belongs: on President Bush and his allies in Congress."
DEVELOPING...
from
http://rawstory.com//printstory.php?story=9031
In the shadow of the president's final State of the Union address, Senate Democrats are preparing for an 11th-hour showdown with George W. Bush and his Republican allies in Congress over controversial surveillance legislation.
Advertisement
The Senate will vote Monday at 4:30 p.m. on a GOP proposal that would cement an expansion of the president's authority to spy on Americans and free from legal jeopardy any telephone or Internet service provider who helped the country's intelligence agencies to collect vast amount of data on US citizens without a warrant. Anti-immunity activists say they expect the GOP gambit to fail.
Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) successfully led an effort to block immunity in December, just before Congress' holiday recess, and the Senate returned to the issue last week, considering dual proposals from the Intelligence and Judiciary committees. Last Thursday, Republicans and a dozen Democrats blocked Judiciary's proposal to update FISA without immunity, but the GOP then refused an agreement that would have required a mere 51-vote majority to pass further amendments.
Republicans filed for an immediate cloture vote on the Intelligence bill, which would preclude any amendments from being made. This angered Democrats, and Reid, who encouraged his caucus to support a filibuster of the bill. Reid also filed a 30-day extension of the Protect America Act, which expires Feb. 1.
Although the Judiciary proposal failed on a 60-34 vote, the Republicans' attempt to preclude any further amendments is expected to cost them support from some of the Democrats who joined them in that effort. Democratic presidential candidates Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Barack Obama (D-IL) also have said they will vote against cloture.
Assuming cloture fails, Reid is expected to move forward with a vote on a one-month extension to give the Senate more time to work out its differences. President Bush has promised to veto such a bill.
After they were cowed last August into passing a temporary expansion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that critics said did too much to concentrate power in the hands of the executive, Congressional Democrats have decided to hit back against the president. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) turned the tables on Bush over the weekend, saying that blame for any gaps in the ability to collect intelligence resides at the White House.
The Senate's debate over a long-term FISA expansion has come in fits and starts over the last few months, since passage of the Protect America Act. Several times the issue was scuttled after left-leaning Senators moved to block a proposal that would grant legal immunity to telecommunications companies that facilitated Bush's warrantless wiretapping program. Those companies, such as AT&T and Verizon, are plaintiffs in 40 or so lawsuits nationwide alleging they violated customers' privacy; administration critics say the lawsuits are the only means for oversight of the wiretapping scheme in the face of an ultra-secretive administration.
Bush has promised to veto any temporary expansion of the PAA, and the administration hopes to use the pending deadline to force Congress into giving into telecom immunity. The House passed an immunity-free update months ago, and Reid has indicated he also will not budge, accusing Bush of "simply posturing" before his final State of the Union, according to the Politico.
"There will be no terrorism intelligence collection gap," Reid said. "But if there is any problem, the blame will clearly and unequivocally fall where it belongs: on President Bush and his allies in Congress."
DEVELOPING...
from
http://rawstory.com//printstory.php?story=9031
Bush trying to foment discord in Mideast: IRGC commander
Tehran Times Political Desk
TEHRAN - Islamic Revolution Guards Corps Commander Mohammad-Ali Jafari said here on Sunday that U.S. President George W. Bush traveled to the Middle East to invite Arab countries to join the West’s efforts to isolate Iran and to foment discord between the Islamic Republic and its Arab neighbors.
On his recent visit to Persian Gulf countries, Bush branded Iran the leading state sponsor of terror, and said “all options” against Tehran remain on the table.
Bush became concerned about the warming relations between Iran and its southern neighbors, which was a result of President Mahmud Ahmadinejad’s “successful visits to the Persian Gulf states”, and thus he headed to the region to continue the U.S. policy of “spreading lies, which we have witnessed over the past three decades,” Jafari told Al-Jazeera television on Saturday.
He rejected the idea that the U.S. president was seeking to prepare the ground for a military strike against the Islamic Republic.
The reports of the UN nuclear watchdog and U.S. intelligence agencies, confirming the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear activities, have removed all pretexts for the West to attack Iran, he said.
Bush launched his Middle East tour to divert attention from the United States’ failure in its efforts to gain the international community’s support for its baseless accusations about Iran’s civilian nuclear program, he opined.
Jafari said Iran does not regard Bush’s “meaningless remarks” about Iran’s role in the region as a threat to its security and reiterated that the U.S. president is seeking to sow discord between Iran and Muslim Arab countries.
However, the Iranian military will retaliate against U.S. military bases in the Persian Gulf if they are used for an attack on Iran, AP quoted the IRGC commander as saying.
“Of course, if the U.S. attacks Iran, Iran’s first response will be defense with all its might and this might is far greater than (Iran’s) strength at the time of the war against Saddam Hussein’s regime (the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war).”
However, he assured Persian Gulf littoral countries, some of which host U.S. military bases, that only the U.S. forces would come under counterattack and that Iran “would never endanger regional countries.”
“We realize that there is concern among Muslim countries that host U.S. military bases,” Jafari said.
“However, if the U.S. launches a war against us, and if it uses these bases to attack Iran with missiles, then, through the strength and precision of our own missiles, we are capable of targeting only the U.S. military forces that attack us,” he told Al-Jazeera.
The U.S. military has several bases in Arab countries including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Yemen.
Despite the U.S. military’s supremacy in air power and advanced electronic equipment, Iran can counter any attack just like the Hezbollah forces that achieved victory in the 33-day war against the Zionist regime, Jafari said.
Hezbollah soldiers did not have high-tech weapons but managed to defeat the region’s most advanced and best-equipped military, he added.
He said the U.S. military bases in neighboring countries are not a “source of power” but a “source of vulnerability” for the U.S. troops.
“They believe they have encircled Iran, but they are definitely aware that they are within range of our long-range guns and medium-range missiles.”
Jafari ruled out the possibility of a ground attack against Iran, saying, “I do not think U.S. troops or even its politicians are crazy enough to try that.”
He said the world’s secular powers feel threatened by Iran’s growing “spiritual, political, and revolutionary power” which has created unity and Islamic vigilance in the country and enjoys the support of many Muslims around the world.
Asked how Iran would respond to an attack by the Zionist regime, Jafari said, “Our information about the regime occupying Qods tells us that they would not make such a great and historic mistake.”
However, he said the U.S. and Israel are both pursuing the same objectives and if they are foolish enough to attack Iran, “we will be free to make a decision and we will do what we decide to do, and that is what Israel is worried about.
TEHRAN - Islamic Revolution Guards Corps Commander Mohammad-Ali Jafari said here on Sunday that U.S. President George W. Bush traveled to the Middle East to invite Arab countries to join the West’s efforts to isolate Iran and to foment discord between the Islamic Republic and its Arab neighbors.
On his recent visit to Persian Gulf countries, Bush branded Iran the leading state sponsor of terror, and said “all options” against Tehran remain on the table.
Bush became concerned about the warming relations between Iran and its southern neighbors, which was a result of President Mahmud Ahmadinejad’s “successful visits to the Persian Gulf states”, and thus he headed to the region to continue the U.S. policy of “spreading lies, which we have witnessed over the past three decades,” Jafari told Al-Jazeera television on Saturday.
He rejected the idea that the U.S. president was seeking to prepare the ground for a military strike against the Islamic Republic.
The reports of the UN nuclear watchdog and U.S. intelligence agencies, confirming the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear activities, have removed all pretexts for the West to attack Iran, he said.
Bush launched his Middle East tour to divert attention from the United States’ failure in its efforts to gain the international community’s support for its baseless accusations about Iran’s civilian nuclear program, he opined.
Jafari said Iran does not regard Bush’s “meaningless remarks” about Iran’s role in the region as a threat to its security and reiterated that the U.S. president is seeking to sow discord between Iran and Muslim Arab countries.
However, the Iranian military will retaliate against U.S. military bases in the Persian Gulf if they are used for an attack on Iran, AP quoted the IRGC commander as saying.
“Of course, if the U.S. attacks Iran, Iran’s first response will be defense with all its might and this might is far greater than (Iran’s) strength at the time of the war against Saddam Hussein’s regime (the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war).”
However, he assured Persian Gulf littoral countries, some of which host U.S. military bases, that only the U.S. forces would come under counterattack and that Iran “would never endanger regional countries.”
“We realize that there is concern among Muslim countries that host U.S. military bases,” Jafari said.
“However, if the U.S. launches a war against us, and if it uses these bases to attack Iran with missiles, then, through the strength and precision of our own missiles, we are capable of targeting only the U.S. military forces that attack us,” he told Al-Jazeera.
The U.S. military has several bases in Arab countries including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Yemen.
Despite the U.S. military’s supremacy in air power and advanced electronic equipment, Iran can counter any attack just like the Hezbollah forces that achieved victory in the 33-day war against the Zionist regime, Jafari said.
Hezbollah soldiers did not have high-tech weapons but managed to defeat the region’s most advanced and best-equipped military, he added.
He said the U.S. military bases in neighboring countries are not a “source of power” but a “source of vulnerability” for the U.S. troops.
“They believe they have encircled Iran, but they are definitely aware that they are within range of our long-range guns and medium-range missiles.”
Jafari ruled out the possibility of a ground attack against Iran, saying, “I do not think U.S. troops or even its politicians are crazy enough to try that.”
He said the world’s secular powers feel threatened by Iran’s growing “spiritual, political, and revolutionary power” which has created unity and Islamic vigilance in the country and enjoys the support of many Muslims around the world.
Asked how Iran would respond to an attack by the Zionist regime, Jafari said, “Our information about the regime occupying Qods tells us that they would not make such a great and historic mistake.”
However, he said the U.S. and Israel are both pursuing the same objectives and if they are foolish enough to attack Iran, “we will be free to make a decision and we will do what we decide to do, and that is what Israel is worried about.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Bush faces final State of the Union
WASHINGTON (AFP) — US President George W. Bush delivers his final State of the Union speech Monday, its agenda-setting powers diluted by pressing, unfinished business abroad and the fight to succeed him at home.
With not quite 12 months left in his term, the deeply unpopular president is slated to revive a few bold ideas -- like his May 2007 call to double US funding to battle AIDS -- and argue that US-led forces are winning in Iraq.
But he faces a US economy in crisis; the uncertain fate of his suddenly personal, late-game Middle East peace drive; a struggle over ending North Korea's nuclear programs; and tensions with Iran over its atomic ambitions.
"I will report that over the last seven years, we've made great progress on important issues at home and abroad. I will also report that we have unfinished business before us, and we must work together," he said Saturday.
He will urge lawmakers to approve a proposed US economic stimulus package hoped-for by mid-February; make permanent his giant tax cuts, which expire in 2010; and approve free trade pacts with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea.
Bush is also expected to call on the US Congress to renew his signature education reform law, approve a controversial law allowing warrantless spying on US citizens, and curb its appetite for costly pet projects.
Bush told the USA Today newspaper in an interview Thursday that he would would not wax sentimental over his time in office, partly because "we've got so much going on" that there is little time to dwell on the past.
"Look at the world -- you've got Iraq, Iran, Middle Eastern peace opportunities, North Korea, Sudan, Burma. This is a world that is full of opportunities to spread freedom and hope and opportunity," he said.
But spokeswoman Dana Perino acknowledged a day later that "it is unrealistic" to expect lawmakers to bring Bush's calls for overhauling immigration policy and pension programs back from the dead.
The speech comes not quite three months after the president helped revive Middle East peace talks, and about three weeks after he visited the region in hopes of promoting an agreement to create a Palestinian state by late 2008.
For years, Bush has battled charges of keeping the peace process at arm's length by saying he was the first sitting US president to call for such a state -- but aides say he wants to be able to point to more than words before his term runs out.
Bush, whose time in office was shaped by the September 11, 2001 attacks by Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda network, is unlikely to address the fact that the terrorist mastermind he vowed to capture "dead or alive" is still at large.
And six years after Bush used the same forum to declare Iran, North Korea, and Saddam Hussein's Iraq an "axis of evil," all three countries are still source of major headaches.
In Iraq, Bush's decision to "surge" roughly 30,000 more US troops to the front lines has helped tamp violence down to roughly 2005 levels, but has failed to achieve the policy's two major goals: Political reconciliation and Iraqi security forces taking responsibility for their country by November 2007.
Democrats opposed to the war have watched with alarm as the White House has declared plans to seal a long-term strategic relationship with Iraq by July -- well before the November elections that will decide Bush's successor.
North Korea missed a December 31 deadline to fully disclose its nuclear activities, forcing the White House to quell an unprecedented public insurrection against Bush's diplomatic approach.
US officials worry that Pyongyang may be looking to run out the clock before Bush's successor takes over in January 2009, gambling that the new president will offer the Stalinist state a better deal.
And Iran has continued to resist UN sanctions and global pressure to end uranium enrichment, while Washington has struggled to keep diplomatic partners, especially China and Russia, on board with its confrontational approach.
Bush is expected to travel extensively overseas in 2008, notably next month when he spotlights his anti-AIDS strategy with a trip to Benin, Tanzania, Rwanda, Ghana, and Liberia.
Hosted by Google
Copyright © 2008 AFP. All rights reserved. More »
With not quite 12 months left in his term, the deeply unpopular president is slated to revive a few bold ideas -- like his May 2007 call to double US funding to battle AIDS -- and argue that US-led forces are winning in Iraq.
But he faces a US economy in crisis; the uncertain fate of his suddenly personal, late-game Middle East peace drive; a struggle over ending North Korea's nuclear programs; and tensions with Iran over its atomic ambitions.
"I will report that over the last seven years, we've made great progress on important issues at home and abroad. I will also report that we have unfinished business before us, and we must work together," he said Saturday.
He will urge lawmakers to approve a proposed US economic stimulus package hoped-for by mid-February; make permanent his giant tax cuts, which expire in 2010; and approve free trade pacts with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea.
Bush is also expected to call on the US Congress to renew his signature education reform law, approve a controversial law allowing warrantless spying on US citizens, and curb its appetite for costly pet projects.
Bush told the USA Today newspaper in an interview Thursday that he would would not wax sentimental over his time in office, partly because "we've got so much going on" that there is little time to dwell on the past.
"Look at the world -- you've got Iraq, Iran, Middle Eastern peace opportunities, North Korea, Sudan, Burma. This is a world that is full of opportunities to spread freedom and hope and opportunity," he said.
But spokeswoman Dana Perino acknowledged a day later that "it is unrealistic" to expect lawmakers to bring Bush's calls for overhauling immigration policy and pension programs back from the dead.
The speech comes not quite three months after the president helped revive Middle East peace talks, and about three weeks after he visited the region in hopes of promoting an agreement to create a Palestinian state by late 2008.
For years, Bush has battled charges of keeping the peace process at arm's length by saying he was the first sitting US president to call for such a state -- but aides say he wants to be able to point to more than words before his term runs out.
Bush, whose time in office was shaped by the September 11, 2001 attacks by Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda network, is unlikely to address the fact that the terrorist mastermind he vowed to capture "dead or alive" is still at large.
And six years after Bush used the same forum to declare Iran, North Korea, and Saddam Hussein's Iraq an "axis of evil," all three countries are still source of major headaches.
In Iraq, Bush's decision to "surge" roughly 30,000 more US troops to the front lines has helped tamp violence down to roughly 2005 levels, but has failed to achieve the policy's two major goals: Political reconciliation and Iraqi security forces taking responsibility for their country by November 2007.
Democrats opposed to the war have watched with alarm as the White House has declared plans to seal a long-term strategic relationship with Iraq by July -- well before the November elections that will decide Bush's successor.
North Korea missed a December 31 deadline to fully disclose its nuclear activities, forcing the White House to quell an unprecedented public insurrection against Bush's diplomatic approach.
US officials worry that Pyongyang may be looking to run out the clock before Bush's successor takes over in January 2009, gambling that the new president will offer the Stalinist state a better deal.
And Iran has continued to resist UN sanctions and global pressure to end uranium enrichment, while Washington has struggled to keep diplomatic partners, especially China and Russia, on board with its confrontational approach.
Bush is expected to travel extensively overseas in 2008, notably next month when he spotlights his anti-AIDS strategy with a trip to Benin, Tanzania, Rwanda, Ghana, and Liberia.
Hosted by Google
Copyright © 2008 AFP. All rights reserved. More »
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Pundits in early rush to judge Bush's legacy
Paul Harris
Sunday January 27, 2008
The Observer
Being ignored is bad enough for anyone. But when you are President of the United States it must be doubling humiliating. Yet Democrats are too busy fighting each other to mention him and Republicans fear to be associated with his record.
Now George W Bush - whose successor won't take office until January 2009 - is also suffering the indignity of having his historical legacy unfavourably examined while still having almost a year left of his second term. A slew of books and a planned major film are all starting to judge Bush's place in history even as he keeps the seat warm in the Oval Office.
And so far, the verdict does not look good.
The title of Jacob Weisberg's recent book says it all. The editor of online magazine Slate called his tome The Bush Tragedy. It is an exhaustive look at the Bush years that paints a portrait of disaster. A publicity blurb for the book, ignoring the fact that Bush has 11 months left in power, talks of the president's 'historic downfall'.
Weisberg is not alone in his brutal assessment of Bush's significance as America, and the rest of the world, waits for the Bush era to be over. A book coming out in March is entitled Reagan's Disciple: Bush's Troubled Quest for a Legacy. It has been penned by distinguished Washington reporters Lou Cannon and Carl Cannon and paints a picture of Bush as a man who failed to live up to the expectations of his own party, which had thought he would be a 'second Ronald Reagan'.
To cap it all, film director Oliver Stone has announced plans to rush out a biopic on Bush in time for the November election. Though Bush may take some solace in being played by acclaimed actor Josh Brolin, Stone's record of liberal sympathies mean he is unlikely to get a positive treatment on the big screen. He will join Richard Nixon and JFK as having been the subject of Stone's movies. But both those presidents were dead when Stone made his films. Not still in office.
Experts say the rush to judge Bush's legacy in print and celluloid is a sign of the modern media times and also of Bush's powerlessness. Having lost control of Congress, he is effectively unable to drive any policy forward. Thus his legacy is already in place. 'Bush fatigue has set in. Part of that is him. Part of that is the nature of the modern presidency,' said Carl Cannon.
Cannon points out that Bush's legacy means different things to different people. Liberals will see the war in Iraq, high oil prices, Hurricane Katrina and a lax attitude to the environment and conclude that history will judge Bush as an unmitigated disaster.
However, conservatives will point to deeply conservative judges appointed to the Supreme Court as being of huge and positive historic significance. 'If you are a conservative, Bush's moves on taxes and judges were what you wanted. He walked the walk,' said Cannon. But he added: 'In the long term, Bush's legacy is unknowable. In the short term, he's been great for Democrats.'
Political experts agree that any initial historical judgment on Bush may be premature. The reputations of major figures go through a phase of historical revisionism long after they have left office, with even Nixon having been rescued from the disgrace of his exit from office.
'In 10 years' time, someone will write a book about how brilliant and foresighted Bush was, even though that might be hard to imagine now,' said Professor Shawn Bowler, a political scientist at the University of California at Riverside.
this article is from
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2247533,00.html
Sunday January 27, 2008
The Observer
Being ignored is bad enough for anyone. But when you are President of the United States it must be doubling humiliating. Yet Democrats are too busy fighting each other to mention him and Republicans fear to be associated with his record.
Now George W Bush - whose successor won't take office until January 2009 - is also suffering the indignity of having his historical legacy unfavourably examined while still having almost a year left of his second term. A slew of books and a planned major film are all starting to judge Bush's place in history even as he keeps the seat warm in the Oval Office.
And so far, the verdict does not look good.
The title of Jacob Weisberg's recent book says it all. The editor of online magazine Slate called his tome The Bush Tragedy. It is an exhaustive look at the Bush years that paints a portrait of disaster. A publicity blurb for the book, ignoring the fact that Bush has 11 months left in power, talks of the president's 'historic downfall'.
Weisberg is not alone in his brutal assessment of Bush's significance as America, and the rest of the world, waits for the Bush era to be over. A book coming out in March is entitled Reagan's Disciple: Bush's Troubled Quest for a Legacy. It has been penned by distinguished Washington reporters Lou Cannon and Carl Cannon and paints a picture of Bush as a man who failed to live up to the expectations of his own party, which had thought he would be a 'second Ronald Reagan'.
To cap it all, film director Oliver Stone has announced plans to rush out a biopic on Bush in time for the November election. Though Bush may take some solace in being played by acclaimed actor Josh Brolin, Stone's record of liberal sympathies mean he is unlikely to get a positive treatment on the big screen. He will join Richard Nixon and JFK as having been the subject of Stone's movies. But both those presidents were dead when Stone made his films. Not still in office.
Experts say the rush to judge Bush's legacy in print and celluloid is a sign of the modern media times and also of Bush's powerlessness. Having lost control of Congress, he is effectively unable to drive any policy forward. Thus his legacy is already in place. 'Bush fatigue has set in. Part of that is him. Part of that is the nature of the modern presidency,' said Carl Cannon.
Cannon points out that Bush's legacy means different things to different people. Liberals will see the war in Iraq, high oil prices, Hurricane Katrina and a lax attitude to the environment and conclude that history will judge Bush as an unmitigated disaster.
However, conservatives will point to deeply conservative judges appointed to the Supreme Court as being of huge and positive historic significance. 'If you are a conservative, Bush's moves on taxes and judges were what you wanted. He walked the walk,' said Cannon. But he added: 'In the long term, Bush's legacy is unknowable. In the short term, he's been great for Democrats.'
Political experts agree that any initial historical judgment on Bush may be premature. The reputations of major figures go through a phase of historical revisionism long after they have left office, with even Nixon having been rescued from the disgrace of his exit from office.
'In 10 years' time, someone will write a book about how brilliant and foresighted Bush was, even though that might be hard to imagine now,' said Professor Shawn Bowler, a political scientist at the University of California at Riverside.
this article is from
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2247533,00.html
Bush skips Kenya in Africa tour as US backs peace talks
Sat, January 26, 2008
By KEVIN J KELLEY
Last updated: 58 minutes ago
President George W Bush will once again skip Kenya in his planned visit to Africa next month.
But this time around, the likely reason for the side-step is the raging violence triggered by results of last month’s presidential election.
The White House announced on Friday that the American leader will travel to Tanzania, Rwanda, Ghana, Liberia and Benin between February 15 and 21.
Prior to Kenya’s December 27 election, there had been hope that Mr Bush might become the first sitting US president to visit Kenya.
A successful round of voting and a peaceful aftermath might well have led the Bush administration to showcase Kenya as a beacon of African democracy.
Democratic reform
But the chaos convulsing the county instead destroyed any chance of Mr Bush stopping in Kenya on a tour intended, in part, to demonstrate US support for what the White House terms “continued democratic reform” in Africa.
Mr Bush also sidestepped Kenya during a five-nation tour of Africa in 2003 that included a stop in Uganda.
President Bill Clinton likewise paid a visit to Uganda but not to Kenya during a six-country visit in 1998. Three former US presidents have visited Kenya, beginning with Theodore Roosevelt nearly a century ago.
The United States meanwhile called for renewed peace efforts by President Kibaki and opposition leader Mr Raila Odinga.
By KEVIN J KELLEY
Last updated: 58 minutes ago
President George W Bush will once again skip Kenya in his planned visit to Africa next month.
But this time around, the likely reason for the side-step is the raging violence triggered by results of last month’s presidential election.
The White House announced on Friday that the American leader will travel to Tanzania, Rwanda, Ghana, Liberia and Benin between February 15 and 21.
Prior to Kenya’s December 27 election, there had been hope that Mr Bush might become the first sitting US president to visit Kenya.
A successful round of voting and a peaceful aftermath might well have led the Bush administration to showcase Kenya as a beacon of African democracy.
Democratic reform
But the chaos convulsing the county instead destroyed any chance of Mr Bush stopping in Kenya on a tour intended, in part, to demonstrate US support for what the White House terms “continued democratic reform” in Africa.
Mr Bush also sidestepped Kenya during a five-nation tour of Africa in 2003 that included a stop in Uganda.
President Bill Clinton likewise paid a visit to Uganda but not to Kenya during a six-country visit in 1998. Three former US presidents have visited Kenya, beginning with Theodore Roosevelt nearly a century ago.
The United States meanwhile called for renewed peace efforts by President Kibaki and opposition leader Mr Raila Odinga.
Romney praises Bush, bashes Washington
Print | Close this window
Romney praises Bush, bashes Washington
Sat Jan 26, 2008 3:20pm EST
By Jason Szep
ST. PETERSBURG, Florida (Reuters) - Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney often casts himself as an agent of change who would fix a "broken Washington" but he spares an obvious target -- President George W. Bush.
"I salute the fact the president has kept us safe these past six years," he told a rally on Saturday in Florida, whose primary on Tuesday is the next test in the most wide open race for the Republican presidential nomination in 50 years.
A day earlier, speaking to reporters, he was even kinder to the unpopular president, saying that while he differed with Bush at times he still deeply respects him.
"Has the president done everything perfectly? Absolutely not," he said. "But is he a person I deeply respect for his conviction and his appreciation for the country and his desire to do what's right for it? I sure do."
While Bush's job approval rating languishes near record lows of around 30 percent, it is more than double that among core Republican primary voters who could make the difference in Florida's primary.
Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, is aggressively courting that Republican Party base in his race with John McCain, a four-term Arizona senator who Florida polls show is neck-and-neck with Romney.
Florida is the next battle in the state-by-state contests to pick nominees for the November 4 presidential election to succeed Bush.
At campaign rallies, Romney presents himself as an outsider who would fix a "fundamentally broken" Washington. Both Democrats and Republicans, he often says, are to blame.
In Florida's conservative bastion of Pensacola on Friday, he derided "an arrogance that sets into Washington".
"These last few decades have not been kind to Washington and people are tired of it," he said.
MENTIONS THE ELDER BUSH
Like many speeches, he ended the rally with praise for Bush's father, George H.W. Bush, president from 1989 to 1993.
After winning Michigan's primary this month, Romney said he drew inspiration from the elder Bush and former president Ronald Reagan, staying clear of any mention of the current president in a state that continues to lose thousands of auto manufacturing jobs.
But as he campaigns in Florida, a more conservative state, references to the first president Bush are now accompanied with fulsome praise of the current president's handling of national security.
"It is easy and fashionable to point out the failures and conflict of management, particularly in Iraq, and that's going to be the case in any war. But let us not forget this president has kept us safe these last six years," Romney said on Wednesday in Boca Raton.
It's unclear how the multimillionaire former venture capitalist, who is often accused of shifting positions for political convenience on heated issues such as abortion, would handle the branding of being a Bush loyalist in the general election against Democrats, given the president's low popularity.
But he draws heavily on the political network of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, the president's brother.
His senior policy adviser, Sally Bradshaw, was a chief of staff for Jeb Bush, for example, while his state director, Mandy Fletcher, was Florida political director of President Bush's 2004 campaign and executive director of a Jeb Bush advocacy group.
(Editing by Philip Barbara)
© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world.
Reuters journalists are subject to the Reuters Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.
Romney praises Bush, bashes Washington
Sat Jan 26, 2008 3:20pm EST
By Jason Szep
ST. PETERSBURG, Florida (Reuters) - Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney often casts himself as an agent of change who would fix a "broken Washington" but he spares an obvious target -- President George W. Bush.
"I salute the fact the president has kept us safe these past six years," he told a rally on Saturday in Florida, whose primary on Tuesday is the next test in the most wide open race for the Republican presidential nomination in 50 years.
A day earlier, speaking to reporters, he was even kinder to the unpopular president, saying that while he differed with Bush at times he still deeply respects him.
"Has the president done everything perfectly? Absolutely not," he said. "But is he a person I deeply respect for his conviction and his appreciation for the country and his desire to do what's right for it? I sure do."
While Bush's job approval rating languishes near record lows of around 30 percent, it is more than double that among core Republican primary voters who could make the difference in Florida's primary.
Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, is aggressively courting that Republican Party base in his race with John McCain, a four-term Arizona senator who Florida polls show is neck-and-neck with Romney.
Florida is the next battle in the state-by-state contests to pick nominees for the November 4 presidential election to succeed Bush.
At campaign rallies, Romney presents himself as an outsider who would fix a "fundamentally broken" Washington. Both Democrats and Republicans, he often says, are to blame.
In Florida's conservative bastion of Pensacola on Friday, he derided "an arrogance that sets into Washington".
"These last few decades have not been kind to Washington and people are tired of it," he said.
MENTIONS THE ELDER BUSH
Like many speeches, he ended the rally with praise for Bush's father, George H.W. Bush, president from 1989 to 1993.
After winning Michigan's primary this month, Romney said he drew inspiration from the elder Bush and former president Ronald Reagan, staying clear of any mention of the current president in a state that continues to lose thousands of auto manufacturing jobs.
But as he campaigns in Florida, a more conservative state, references to the first president Bush are now accompanied with fulsome praise of the current president's handling of national security.
"It is easy and fashionable to point out the failures and conflict of management, particularly in Iraq, and that's going to be the case in any war. But let us not forget this president has kept us safe these last six years," Romney said on Wednesday in Boca Raton.
It's unclear how the multimillionaire former venture capitalist, who is often accused of shifting positions for political convenience on heated issues such as abortion, would handle the branding of being a Bush loyalist in the general election against Democrats, given the president's low popularity.
But he draws heavily on the political network of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, the president's brother.
His senior policy adviser, Sally Bradshaw, was a chief of staff for Jeb Bush, for example, while his state director, Mandy Fletcher, was Florida political director of President Bush's 2004 campaign and executive director of a Jeb Bush advocacy group.
(Editing by Philip Barbara)
© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world.
Reuters journalists are subject to the Reuters Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.
Iraq war at the heart of Bush's legacy
Iraq war at the heart of Bush's legacy
By Tim Shipman in West Palm Beach, Florida
Last Updated: 1:46pm GMT 26/01/2008
George W.Bush will put Iraq back at the heart of the presidential election campaign when he makes the final State of the Union speech of his presidency.
# Home truths will set limit on Bush's final year
# Vicki Woods: What we need is an actor to vote for
# CIA: Hackers shut down power to entire cities
In a move that may help the candidacy of the Republican front-runner, John McCain, the sitting president will use his annual address to Congress to insist that America is now winning in Iraq - an argument that aides to Sen McCain believe will help him win conservative support in primary elections over the next 10 days.
George W Bush
Bush's legacy a statesman has been burnished by a recent trip to the Middle East
Mr Bush’s speech, designed in part to lay down a blueprint for his political legacy, will push his own record to the forefront of the race for the White House, a contest which has increasingly thrust him towards the margins of US politics.
Campaigning in West Palm Beach, Florida, ground zero in Mr Bush’s election victory in 2000, Mr McCain told The Sunday Telegraph that he had discussed the content of the speech with the president.
The former Vietnam war hero, who lost the Republican nomination to Mr Bush that year, has built himself into a frontrunner this time, partly through his espousal of the apparently successful surge strategy in Iraq, even before the Bush administration embraced troop increases.
If he wins his party’s nomination he seems likely to face Hillary Clinton as his Democrat opponent.
Mr McCain told The Sunday Telegraph: "I know what the president is going to say on Iraq. I have had many talks with him about it. We are succeeding. Al Qaeda is on the run. They are not defeated. We have a lot of work to do.
"For us to do what Senator Clinton wants to do, which is to declare surrender - if we do that, I can’t guarantee our security in the world.
"Listen to David Petraeus (the US commander in Iraq). He argues that Iraq is the central front in the battle with radical Islam. We have enormous challenges all around the world."
Mr McCain joked: "I’d like to see President Bush use the State of the Union address to embrace his unabashed support for my candidacy. I’d like him to lean towards that."
However, he added: "I don’t think the president is interested in a message that helps or hurts me."
A McCain adviser John Lehman, who was Ronald Reagan’s navy secretary and was a member of the 9/11 Commission, said a focus on Iraq would help Mr McCain draw distinctions between himself and Mrs Clinton, a central element in his case that he is the most electable Republican.
He told The Sunday Telegraph: "John wants to focus strictly ahead: what do we do now with the economy and Iraq? He wants to draw that stark contrast between his view of our role in Iraq and Hillary Clinton’s view."
advertisement
The most wide open primary election campaign in eight decades has almost entirely eclipsed Mr Bush’s position at the centre of American political life.
US media coverage of his economic stimulus package last week focused not on the plan, but on the reaction of the presidential candidates to it. Every Republican said it could have been better.
Mr Bush’s name is heard more regularly - but not complimentarily - at Democrat campaign rallies than at Republican ones.
The rival Republican candidates contest a primary election in Florida on Tuesday and a series of elections across the US a week later on Super Tuesday.
Mr McCain’s stump speech in West Palm Beach contained praise for President Bush’s work combatting terrorism.
"Don’t you think the President of the United States deserves a little credit for the fact that there has not been an attack on the US since 9/11?" he asked.
And the Arizona senator said he was "proud of the president’s efforts" on an Isreali-Palestinian peace deal.
But Mr McCain went on to dismiss the prospects of such a deal - and made a promise to "get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice" which highlighted one of the most embarrassing failures of the Bush years.
His complaint that "we’ve presided over the greatest increase in spending since" the 1960s, is an open repudiation of Mr Bush’s spending policies.
For his part, Mitt Romney - the other frontrunner in Florida - is campaigning as a Washington outsider.
When asked about the Bush administration’s economic record in a Republican debate on Thursday night, Mr Romney said: "I’m not going to run on that record, I’ll tell you that. I’ll run on my record; I’ll run away from the record of Washington."
Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas who is still in the Republican race, famously condemned the current president’s foreign policy as the result of an "arrogant bunker mentality".
Mr Bush has spent recent weeks attempting to burnish his legacy as a statesman, with a long trip to the Middle East.
But accompanying reporters ridiculed his willingness to spend more than an hour talking to them while he was in Saudi Arabia.
Newsweek magazine’s Michael Hirsch, reported: "It occurred to me: George W.Bush literally had nothing else to do this afternoon."
In his speech, Mr Bush will attempt to reassure voters that the US economy is fundamentally sound.
And in a bid to stress the positive role of America in the world, he will draw attention to what the president believes is an underappreciated aspect of his tenure: his investment in Africa, including a £30billion programme to combat Aids.
He will reinforce the case with a visit to that continent next month.
But Mr Bush’s bid to leave a positive legacy is being contested by a campaign group called Americans United for Change, who announced last week that they will spend $8.5 million on adverts condemning his record to try to make sure the president’s approval ratings don’t rise during his final days in the White House.
Information appearing on telegraph.co.uk is the copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without licence. For the full copyright statement see Copyright
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/26/wbush226.xml
By Tim Shipman in West Palm Beach, Florida
Last Updated: 1:46pm GMT 26/01/2008
George W.Bush will put Iraq back at the heart of the presidential election campaign when he makes the final State of the Union speech of his presidency.
# Home truths will set limit on Bush's final year
# Vicki Woods: What we need is an actor to vote for
# CIA: Hackers shut down power to entire cities
In a move that may help the candidacy of the Republican front-runner, John McCain, the sitting president will use his annual address to Congress to insist that America is now winning in Iraq - an argument that aides to Sen McCain believe will help him win conservative support in primary elections over the next 10 days.
George W Bush
Bush's legacy a statesman has been burnished by a recent trip to the Middle East
Mr Bush’s speech, designed in part to lay down a blueprint for his political legacy, will push his own record to the forefront of the race for the White House, a contest which has increasingly thrust him towards the margins of US politics.
Campaigning in West Palm Beach, Florida, ground zero in Mr Bush’s election victory in 2000, Mr McCain told The Sunday Telegraph that he had discussed the content of the speech with the president.
The former Vietnam war hero, who lost the Republican nomination to Mr Bush that year, has built himself into a frontrunner this time, partly through his espousal of the apparently successful surge strategy in Iraq, even before the Bush administration embraced troop increases.
If he wins his party’s nomination he seems likely to face Hillary Clinton as his Democrat opponent.
Mr McCain told The Sunday Telegraph: "I know what the president is going to say on Iraq. I have had many talks with him about it. We are succeeding. Al Qaeda is on the run. They are not defeated. We have a lot of work to do.
"For us to do what Senator Clinton wants to do, which is to declare surrender - if we do that, I can’t guarantee our security in the world.
"Listen to David Petraeus (the US commander in Iraq). He argues that Iraq is the central front in the battle with radical Islam. We have enormous challenges all around the world."
Mr McCain joked: "I’d like to see President Bush use the State of the Union address to embrace his unabashed support for my candidacy. I’d like him to lean towards that."
However, he added: "I don’t think the president is interested in a message that helps or hurts me."
A McCain adviser John Lehman, who was Ronald Reagan’s navy secretary and was a member of the 9/11 Commission, said a focus on Iraq would help Mr McCain draw distinctions between himself and Mrs Clinton, a central element in his case that he is the most electable Republican.
He told The Sunday Telegraph: "John wants to focus strictly ahead: what do we do now with the economy and Iraq? He wants to draw that stark contrast between his view of our role in Iraq and Hillary Clinton’s view."
advertisement
The most wide open primary election campaign in eight decades has almost entirely eclipsed Mr Bush’s position at the centre of American political life.
US media coverage of his economic stimulus package last week focused not on the plan, but on the reaction of the presidential candidates to it. Every Republican said it could have been better.
Mr Bush’s name is heard more regularly - but not complimentarily - at Democrat campaign rallies than at Republican ones.
The rival Republican candidates contest a primary election in Florida on Tuesday and a series of elections across the US a week later on Super Tuesday.
Mr McCain’s stump speech in West Palm Beach contained praise for President Bush’s work combatting terrorism.
"Don’t you think the President of the United States deserves a little credit for the fact that there has not been an attack on the US since 9/11?" he asked.
And the Arizona senator said he was "proud of the president’s efforts" on an Isreali-Palestinian peace deal.
But Mr McCain went on to dismiss the prospects of such a deal - and made a promise to "get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice" which highlighted one of the most embarrassing failures of the Bush years.
His complaint that "we’ve presided over the greatest increase in spending since" the 1960s, is an open repudiation of Mr Bush’s spending policies.
For his part, Mitt Romney - the other frontrunner in Florida - is campaigning as a Washington outsider.
When asked about the Bush administration’s economic record in a Republican debate on Thursday night, Mr Romney said: "I’m not going to run on that record, I’ll tell you that. I’ll run on my record; I’ll run away from the record of Washington."
Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas who is still in the Republican race, famously condemned the current president’s foreign policy as the result of an "arrogant bunker mentality".
Mr Bush has spent recent weeks attempting to burnish his legacy as a statesman, with a long trip to the Middle East.
But accompanying reporters ridiculed his willingness to spend more than an hour talking to them while he was in Saudi Arabia.
Newsweek magazine’s Michael Hirsch, reported: "It occurred to me: George W.Bush literally had nothing else to do this afternoon."
In his speech, Mr Bush will attempt to reassure voters that the US economy is fundamentally sound.
And in a bid to stress the positive role of America in the world, he will draw attention to what the president believes is an underappreciated aspect of his tenure: his investment in Africa, including a £30billion programme to combat Aids.
He will reinforce the case with a visit to that continent next month.
But Mr Bush’s bid to leave a positive legacy is being contested by a campaign group called Americans United for Change, who announced last week that they will spend $8.5 million on adverts condemning his record to try to make sure the president’s approval ratings don’t rise during his final days in the White House.
Information appearing on telegraph.co.uk is the copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without licence. For the full copyright statement see Copyright
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/26/wbush226.xml
George Bush and False Statements? Na it Couldn't Be!
By Chris anon Some people in politics like to stretch the truth a little to gain propaganda but, how much is too much?
According to the False Pretenses article by By Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith, found at http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/, George W. Bush lied a grand total of 935 times.Four of these moments include when he claimed:1. That "Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them." It is very clear that they do not2. "Iraq had links to Al Qaeda" If they did who knows who they are or what we could do about it.3. President Bush declared: "We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories." But it had been reported that the factory was used to produce gas for weather balloons. not quite the biological warfare factory used to scare the public.4. Bush also said: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." But he had been sent an email by his research team that had claimed it a hoax.The fact is...well? Who could say what the facts are now? Sources all twist things the way they want them to appear to the public. I have no doubt in my mind that Bush has twisted a few truths, I would hope for the sake of his integrity that not all 935 comments were lies. For now though as Americans we must just wait out the war, even if who we are fighting is unclear. The most important thing is to support the troops while they make history and defend our country.
According to the False Pretenses article by By Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith, found at http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/, George W. Bush lied a grand total of 935 times.Four of these moments include when he claimed:1. That "Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them." It is very clear that they do not2. "Iraq had links to Al Qaeda" If they did who knows who they are or what we could do about it.3. President Bush declared: "We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories." But it had been reported that the factory was used to produce gas for weather balloons. not quite the biological warfare factory used to scare the public.4. Bush also said: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." But he had been sent an email by his research team that had claimed it a hoax.The fact is...well? Who could say what the facts are now? Sources all twist things the way they want them to appear to the public. I have no doubt in my mind that Bush has twisted a few truths, I would hope for the sake of his integrity that not all 935 comments were lies. For now though as Americans we must just wait out the war, even if who we are fighting is unclear. The most important thing is to support the troops while they make history and defend our country.
President Bush, First Lady to Visit Africa Next Month
 |
| President Bush, First Lady to Visit Africa Next Month | |
| 25 January 2008 |
 |
| George W. Bush and wife Laura (File) |
The trip - from February 15-21 - will take them to Benin, Tanzania, Rwanda, Ghana and Liberia.
The White House says the president will meet with the leaders of those countries to discuss how the United States can support continued democratic reform, respect for human rights and economic opportunity across the continent.
Mr. Bush last visited Africa in 2003. The White House says that on this visit, he will review progress made in U.S.-assisted efforts to increase economic development and fight HIV/AIDS, malaria and other treatable diseases.
Bush confident about economy, urges stimulus
By Jeremy Pelofsky
WHITE SULPHUR SPRINGS, W., Virginia (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush said on Friday he was confident in the long-term strength of the U.S. economy, but urged lawmakers to act swiftly on a stimulus plan he and others hope will help stave off a possible recession.
"I strongly believe it would be a mistake to delay or derail this bill," Bush told his fellow Republicans from the House of Representatives who are attending an annual retreat.
He said the economy's underpinnings were solid but added it needed a temporary boost that would be provided by the election-year package of tax breaks for businesses and government rebates to individuals and families.
Bush and leaders in the Democratic-led House on Thursday unveiled a package of about $150 billion in tax rebates and business investment tax breaks aimed at stimulating consumer and business spending and giving a boost to the economy that has been suffering from high oil prices, a housing market slump and a subprime mortgage crisis.
"It's a sound package. It makes a lot of sense. It's needed and you need to pass it as quickly as possible to get money in the hands of the people who are going to help this economy stay strong," Bush said.
The package must first pass the House before it heads to the Senate, where it will be subject to changes. The House is expected to act quickly on the deal negotiated by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat; House Minority Leader John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.
SENATE MAY DO SOME TINKERING
Boehner told reporters that the House would act quickly on the plan, but expressed concern that momentum could slow in the Senate.
"The Senate is another body. They've got their own issues that they have to deal with. They're going to speak on this, I just hope they do it quickly so that we can get it to the president's desk," Boehner told reporters.
Senate Democrats have said they hope to add a temporary extension of unemployment insurance benefits beyond the 26 weeks normally offered by states and other spending that could help low-income people.
In Washington, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, discussed the stimulus plan at a meeting with Paulson. He told reporters afterward that the Treasury secretary would resist efforts to add on to the package.
"I don't think he's enthusiastic about that," Dodd said.
The package includes government tax rebates of up to $600 for individuals and $1,200 for married couples, plus $300 per child. The rebates phase out for individuals with taxable incomes above $75,000 and for couples with taxable incomes above $150,000. Checks could be sent out as early as May.
The package includes tax provisions allowing businesses to more quickly write off new investments in plant and equipment.
Although Democrats gave up on efforts to get unemployment insurance benefits and money for food stamps into the package, Pelosi told a National Press Club audience in Washington on Friday, that the stimulus package was aimed at helping middle- and low-income Americans.
"This package that we put forth yesterday was a drastic shift from tax cuts for the wealthiest people in our country to tax cuts for the middle class and tax cuts for the working Americans," she said.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, has said he does not see the package getting bogged down in the Senate and would push to land the legislation on Bush's desk by mid-February.
Home truths will set limit on Bush's final year
By Alex Spillius
Last Updated: 2:03am GMT 26/01/2008
George W Bush's State of the Union speech on Monday will abandon sweeping ambition and instead reflect the political realities of his final 12 months in office, say White House aides. With the nation's attention increasingly shifting to those who will compete to succeed him in November's election, the 43rd president's annual address will not include any bold proposals. "It's just not realistic," acknowledged Dana Perino, his press secretary. advertisement On foreign policy, the president will tout progress in Iraq and restate that more US troops will come home only as conditions allow. He will also promote the US-backed Middle East peace bid, but the rhetoric will lack the grandeur of his call to spread freedom to the "darkest corners of the world" made at his second inauguration in 2005. Mr Bush's approval ratings remain in the low 30s and few commentators are forecasting that his legacy will be remembered kindly. A new book, The Bush Tragedy, identifies three acts within his life. "Act One is the son's struggle to be like his dad until the age of 40. Act Two is his growing success over the next 15 years as he learned to be different. The botched search for a doctrine to clarify world affairs and the president's progressive descent into messianism constitute the conclusive third act," writes Jacob Weisberg, a leading journalist and author of Bushisms, a collection of the president's malapropisms. Mr Weisberg concludes that the younger Bush has been driven by a desire to better his father and to frame the kind of imposing foreign policy dogma lacking in the earlier regime. Americans will probably be listening most closely to Mr Bush for reassurance on the economy, which supersedes Iraq as an election issue. Energy costs are rising, the housing market is troubled and there is a visceral fear of foreign competition for jobs and trade. Having recently announced a £75?billion ($150?billion) tax-rebate package to stimulate the economy, Mr Bush is expected to ask Congress to make permanent other tax cuts that are set to expire in 2010. The day after his speech the media focus will switch to the Republican primary in Florida. Within weeks a new face who will compete in November for the party could have been chosen. |
Information appearing on telegraph.co.uk is the copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without licence. For the full copyright statement see Copyright
Behind the Scenes with Brett Baier: George W. Bush: Fighting to the Finish
Friday , January 25, 2008
By Brett Baier
A President Bush enters the final year of his presidency, he granted me and FOX News Channel’s Documentary Unit unprecedented access to his day-to-day world. The documentary will air this Sunday night at 8 p.m. ET.
• Click over for more information on George W. Bush: Fighting to the Finish
I’ve really enjoyed working on this program. For starters, the footage you will see in this hour is historic and fascinating. We were given access to the president at his ranch in Texas, in the Oval Office during meetings, aboard Air Force One during his historic trip to the Mideast and in the White House residence that is rarely seen.
We visited the president’s ranch multiple times. With our cameras rolling, he drove me around for more than an hour, giving me a guided tour of landscape while he shared his thoughts on the war, the presidential race, immigration, family and faith. We started with a long interview outside of his office on the ranch and thought that might be all we would get. But, the president asked us to hop in his pickup truck and proceeded to drive me and one cameraman all over his 1,600 acre ranch.
He also took me on the same rugged hike that he walks with world leaders when he’s looking for a diplomatic breakthrough. It winds through the woods — over a few streams — until it reveals a huge dramatic canyon carved out of the limestone. The amazing thing is how quiet it is there. The president told me he’s had some of his most poignant moments — alone and with various world leaders in that very spot.
Our series of in-depth interviews with the president and his inner circle is generating a lot of news, too:
• Former Homeland Security Advisor Fran Townsend told me that the president has made abundantly clear that he wants Usama Bin Laden killed or captured before he leaves office … and describes, in detail, the president’s daily brief in the Oval Office.
“Once a week he's — he's getting an update on the hunt for Bin Laden and the Al Qaeda leadership,” Townsend, who left her position at the beginning of January, told me. “The president has made perfectly clear that he wants Bin Laden brought to justice before he leaves office.”
• Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice linked the Operation Iraqi Freedom to Iran’s decision to end part of its nuclear program involving the weaponization of nuclear material. She is the first Administration official to make that connection
“It's hard for me to believe that the Iranians were unaware of the fact that we'd overthrown Saddam Hussein because of an issue of weapons of mass destruction,” Rice told me. “I were teaching this in a political science course, I would have to say I think the Iranians — had to take those things into account in their decision making.”
Rice’s statement runs contrary to the National Intelligence Estimate which, President Bush told me, specifically credited only diplomatic pressure for Iran’s action. If Rice is right, it would arguably be a significant win of the President’s strategy for Iraq, and the Global War on Terror.
• White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten revealed to me that the NIE’s conclusions on Iran cause great concern among the leaders the President met with on his Mideast trip.
“I think pretty much almost every one of the foreign leaders with whom the president met in the Middle East raised concerns about Iran and about the NIE intelligence report that many had misinterpreted to mean that the United States thinks Iran is not dangerous.”
• President Bush conceded to me that he failed in his goal to be a “uniter and not a divider.” The president told me, “I'd say that I worked to be a uniter and it didn't work.”
• In a series of revealing and personal interviews, President Bush told me that as he enters his final year in office, the past President he thinks about most is Abraham Lincoln. And while the president says he doesn’t want people to think that he believes he’s “another Lincoln” he does likens his liberation of Afghanistan and Iraq to Lincoln's emancipation of America’s slaves during the Civil War.
• In a television first, we also sat in on a series speechwriting sessions for the State of the Union Address, which the president will deliver Monday night. In the documentary the president’s chief speechwriter, Bill McGurn, explains why the address is “the most edited 15 pages in America.”
• McGurn, a veteran of the Wall Street Journal and National Review, also told us that President Bush is the most exacting editor he’s every had.
“I've been edited by Bob Bartley [of the Wall Street Journal] and Bill Buckley [of National Review] and the president is by far the most thorough and sharp editor.”
It’s an hour that really captures the behind the scenes of the president’s day to day life — and looks ahead at his final year in office. I think, as someone who covers the White House everyday, it’s extremely interesting — and is definitely worth watching.
• Click over for more information on George W. Bush: Fighting to the Finish
Click here for FOX News RSS Feeds
Advertise on FOX News Channel, FOXNews.com and FOX News Radio
Jobs at FOX News Channel.
Internships At Fox News (Summer Application Deadline is March 15, 2007)
Terms of use. Privacy Statement. For FOXNews.com comments write to
foxnewsonline@foxnews.com; For FOX News Channel comments write to
comments@foxnews.com
© Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Copyright 2008 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
All market data delayed 20 minutes.
Advertise on FOX News Channel, FOXNews.com and FOX News Radio
Jobs at FOX News Channel.
Internships At Fox News (Summer Application Deadline is March 15, 2007)
Terms of use. Privacy Statement. For FOXNews.com comments write to
foxnewsonline@foxnews.com; For FOX News Channel comments write to
comments@foxnews.com
© Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Copyright 2008 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.
All market data delayed 20 minutes.
Friday, January 25, 2008
The Leadership of George W. Bush: Con & Pro.
by Joseph Bottum , Michael Novak Joseph Bottum writes: After six years of President Bush--thought by nearly every observer to be the most socially conservative president of recent decades--where does social conservatism stand? No one can deny there have been some bright spots: the defeat of the Democrats' Senate leader Tom Daschle in 2004, the nominations of Justices Roberts and Alito to the Supreme Court in 2005, a few successful state referenda in 2006. What isn't so clear is what it all amounts to. The noise has been overwhelming since George W. Bush took office. Abortion, euthanasia, stem cells, public Christmas displays, same-sex marriage, pornography in the movies, faith-based initiatives, immigration, visible patriotism: We've been warned by the media, over and over again, that Republicans are reshaping America into a Puritan's paradise. But, at the end of the day, the media mostly won and the Republicans mostly lost. Social conservatism is in little better shape now than it was when Bush was first elected. In many ways, it is in worse shape. In truth, no branch of conservatism has prospered much under Bush, particularly since the beginning of the Iraq War. Economic conservatives have had several victories, particularly with tax cuts, but on their fundamental worries about bloated government spending, they've been routed. From 2000 to 2006, the Republican Congress proved as financially undisciplined as its Democratic predecessors--and occasionally even less disciplined, as the prescription-drug entitlement and Katrina relief showed. And that's to say nothing about the scandals involving Tom Delay, Jack Abramoff, Mark Foley, and all the rest. The Gingrich Republicans used the long parade of congressional corruption to help defeat the Democrats in 1994, but they seemed all too ready to join it themselves once they had held power for a few years. Even the neoconservatives have suffered. The original agitators for the toppling of Saddam Hussein--and the first to see clearly the threat of global Jihadism--they seemed to the media to have gotten what they wanted with the invasion of Iraq. But the Bush administration did not give them the kind of war, much less the kind of peace, for which they had called. Why, these days, should the Sudanese government fear the United States will intervene to halt the slaughter in Darfur? Why should the Iranians worry about an American strike against their development of nuclear bombs? Shortly after the success of the initial invasion of Iraq, Libya announced it would dismantle its weapons of mass destruction. It's hard to imagine any Middle Eastern country doing the same now. Since 2003, the neoconservatives have been the whipping boys of a left invigorated by the floundering Bush administration--all while that same administration has systematically rejected their policy suggestions, culminating in the disheartening appointment of the self-proclaimed realist Robert Gates as the nation's new secretary of defense. So why were conservatives supposed to cheer the president's State of the Union address this January? If we haven't yet demonstrated to the world that we can successfully oppose the Jihadists, if we haven't yet brought government spending under control, if we haven't yet established any permanent advances on the life issues--if all that Republican government has successfully managed over the past six years is to inspire a rabid opposition at home and abroad--then many opportunities have been squandered. Every conservative I know is depressed these days, and they are fight to be. Under President Bush, conservatism has won only in the sense of not losing as quickly as it would have under a President Gore or a President Kerry. The common turn among commentators, once they've recognized Bush's weakness, has been to declare the betrayal of some form of authentic conservatism. In book after book--from Bruce Bartlett's Imposter and Patrick Buchanan's State of Emergency to Jeffrey Hart's The Making of the American Conservative Mind and Richard Viguerie's Conservatives Betrayed--a number of self-declared conservatives have announced the apostasy and treachery of George W. Bush. Thus Bush is an ideologue where sincere conservatives are pragmatists. Or Bush is a spendthrift where true conservatives are budget-balancers. Or Bush is an expansionist where genuine conservatives are isolationists. Or Bush is a religious believer where real conservatives are religious skeptics. Some of these commentators, particularly the economic conservatives, have valid complaints, though like the rest of us they must face the fact that things would have been even worse under a Democratic administration. But their conclusion that the White House has flown under false colors is ludicrous. In all that he has tried to do--reform education, fix social security, restore religion to the public square, assert American greatness, appoint good judges--Bush has proved himself a conservative. Of course, along the way, he has also proved himself hapless. The problem isn't his lack of conservatism. The problem is his lack of competence. Apart from the still not certain pro-life views of the two new Supreme Court justices, where is there a major success to which one can point? In the opening days of his presidency, Bush declared that the return of government support for faith-based institutions would be the great legacy of his administration--as well it might have been, if the whole thing had not quickly collapsed into a clown show of political missteps, fumbled chances, and administrative infighting so vicious that the director of the faith-based office eventually took to the pages of Vanity Fair to denounce his co-workers as a bunch of "Mayberry Machiavellians." Stem cells are perhaps the exception, for there President Bush did indeed hold the conservative line. It is worth remembering, however, the way in which he did so: letting federal funding for embryonic stem cell research become a public crisis when quicker action would have kept it off center stage. By allowing it to boil over, the administration allowed its opponents to shift the focus off abortion, where the pro-life movement seemed to be gradually winning, and onto embryonic stem cells, where the nation has yet to be convinced. There's a reason the word abortion was never spoken from the podium of the 2004 Democratic convention, while the phrase stem cells was trumpeted dozens of times. Correct action, even when strongly undertaken, is not the same thing as persuasive leadership. Regardless, little else comes to mind. President Bush was absolutely fight that social security is a looming disaster, and as a result of his efforts, social-security reform is now dead for a generation. The White House saw clearly that education in this country needs a complete overhaul, and we got as a consequence only the bureaucratic annoyance of the No Child Left Behind Act. The Republicans' lack of political savvy abandoned an astonishing number of unconfirmed judicial nominees--and now we have a Democratic Senate unlikely to confirm any conservative judges at all. Many things contributed to the Democrats' victory in the 2006 election, but, by any reckoning, a considerable part came from the electorate's unhappiness with the situation in Iraq. So what, then, are conservatives to make of the war? This much seems certain: If the United States loses in Iraq, the consequences will be incalculably bad. Indeed, those consequences will come even if the war is won, as long as the perception remains that it has been lost. For all the absurdity of the media's endless comparisons of Iraq to Vietnam, the parallel here seems exact: We will not be helped by recognizing, years later, that the struggle was going better than it seemed at the time. Nearly every historian now realizes that the Tet Offensive was a military disaster for the North Vietnamese. The American belief that our opponents had won, however, proved a sufficient political triumph to swell the anti-war movement. From that moment on, Vietnam was over. Eventually, we admitted defeat and abandoned our allies--with the Cambodian killing fields, the Cuban adventure in Angola, and the Soviets' invasion of Afghanistan all following like dominoes through the 1970s. Things at home were little better. For conservatives, the 1970s stand as the nadir of American social history--the "decade of nightmares," in Philip Jenkins' phrase. This was the era that installed the media culture of suspicion, surrendered the nation's cities to crime zones, suffered double-digit inflation, nationalized the sexual revolution, and gave us Roe v. Wade. Direct cause and effect for such things are always difficult to decide, but, in one way after another, we were demoralized for a decade after America's defeat in Vietnam. The consequences of American defeat in Iraq are likely to be similar. Around the globe, the Jihadists will be inspired to greater and greater violence--as the "lesson of Iraq" keeps any U.S. government, Democrat or Republican, from committing troops to a foreign struggle. The weaker opponents of radical Islam will quickly become even more vulnerable. Can southern Sudan hold without at least the distant intimidation of American military intervention? Can Nigeria? Can Indonesia? Terrorism, too, will surely expand as a chastened United States finds it cannot realistically threaten such nations as Syria, Iran, and North Korea with military consequences for supporting terrorist organizations. Domestically, a large range of conservatives will seem discredited by an American defeat in Iraq, which is why their liberal and radical opponents so quickly, and fecklessly, embraced the claim that Iraq is lost. On crime, abortion, education, government spending--the whole litany of domestic concerns--the American conservative movement may well find itself starting over, back once again where it was in 1974. The result will be perhaps most disheartening for social conservatives, as decades of intellectual and political gains against abortion are frustrated. And the fact we must face is this: We have already been defeated in Iraq. Perhaps not in literal truth; a better policy, better implemented, might yet bring about a stable, democratic country. And certainly not in historical terms; Iraq is only an early chapter in what must be a long struggle against global Jihadism. But, at the very least, the battle for perception of the Iraq War has gone entirely against the United States. In the eyes of both the American public and the Islamic world, we have lost--and lost badly. The reason is President Bush. His administration has mishandled the logistics of the war and the politics of its perception in nearly equal measure, from Abu Ghraib to the execution of Saddam Hussein. Conservatives voted for George W. Bush in 2000 because they expected him to be the opposite of Bill Clinton--and so, unfortunately, he has proved. Where Clinton seemed a man of enormous political competence and no principle, Bush has been a man of principle and very little political competence. The security concerns after the attacks of September 11 and the general tide of American conservatism carried Republicans through the elections of 2002 and 2004. But by 2006 Bush had squandered his party's advantages, until even the specter of Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House was not enough to keep the Republicans in power. To abandon Iraq now would be the height of irresponsibility. It would lock in place the perception of defeat, with all the predictable consequences, and it would abandon the Iraqis to whom we promised freedom and democracy. President Bush has clearly done the right thing in refusing retreat and pledging to stay the course in Iraq. But hasn't that always been the problem? Again and again, he has done the right thing in the wrong way, until, at last, his wrongness has overwhelmed his rightness. How can conservatives continue to support this man in much of anything he tries to do? Iraq is not America's failure, and it is not conservatism's failure. We are where we are because of George W. Bush's failure. All the 2008 Republican presidential candidates should understand the task they face over the next two years. George Bush's ideals have gotten him elected president twice, and his incompetence has finally delivered the Congress to his domestic opponents and empowered his nation's enemies abroad. Iraq needs an American president who embraces Bush's principles--and rejects his policies. The United States needs much the same thing. Michael Novak writes: Shortly after President Bush's State of the Union Address this January, I attended a conservative summit in Washington, D.C., where I heard a raft of criticism about the president's falling away from conservative principles. There was hope and energy, of course, but also more demoralization than I expected--a demoralization Joseph Bottum clearly shares. I am considerably more supportive of President Bush's stewardship. Bottum's judgments--many of which have force, I admit--require two general remarks. The first involves his claim that the war in Iraq is "already lost" (which he qualifies by adding "in perception"). The second is the criterion of "competence," lack of which in several major areas is Bottum's single most serious charge against President Bush. As far as perception of the war in Iraq goes, it's worth remembering that perceptions are changeable. As the war began in 2003, the New York Times required less than three weeks before it ran a front-page report by a star correspondent of the last generation, R.W. Apple, which hauled out the heavy word of the Vietnam generation, quagmire--as in the quagmire in which, Apple wrote, U.S. troops were already bogged down. Three weeks later, those same quagmired troops had sped into Baghdad, watching as jubilant crowds pulled down the great statue of Saddam Hussein in the center of the city and organizing a systematic search for the suddenly deposed butcher of Mesopotamia. Of course, changeable or not, what counts as perception in this country is still defined by the disproportionately liberal media, particularly the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the major television networks. But Ronald Reagan taught us that the perceptions promoted by the liberal media do not, in fact, control the way Americans think. As Clare Boothe Luce once explained, from his experience as a B-movie actor Reagan learned the difference between the box office and the critics. If you win over the first, you can be awfully sweet-tempered to the second. He showed that the hostility of all the liberal media could not, finally, drown out common-sense reality. I agree with Bottum that in the view of the media the war has been lost. But we may also expect this perception to reverse itself if events in the coming six months unmistakably change direction. Consider three positive possibilities. None of these may turn out to be true, of course, but for one moment assume that they do, just to imagine how perceptions would shift. Suppose, first, Al-Sadr orders his Mahdi followers to keep their arms out of sight, to tear down their checkpoints in the streets, and to cooperate with the Iraqi Army and the new American battalions. Al-Sadr may, of course, opt to fight a bloody winner-take-all contest. Yet the record of American soldiers directly engaging Iraqi forces is not likely to tempt him overmuch in that direction. He may wish to save his army to defend Shi'ites in future years. Suppose, second, that al-Qaeda, which is steadily sweeping all other dissident groups under its wing, abandons Baghdad to take up bases in more remote locations north of Anbar Province. It might do so for the same reason that persuaded Al-Sadr: to avoid confrontation with the modern arms, extraordinary skill, and well-demonstrated fearlessness of the American battalions. Al-Qaeda's way is no longer face-to-face encounters with superior force; its preferred style is sneaky terror by a few. And if they do mass in open battle, all the better for an Iraqi national victory, supported by U.S. firepower. Suppose, third, that the Sunni tribal leaders and other local authorities in Anbar Province come to recognize two realities: that the goal of reclaiming rule in Iraq is so futile that the goal of the Sunnis must be survival (for which American protection is vitally necessary); and that the empty bravado and overweening ambitions of al-Qaeda foreigners, Sunni anti-American insurgents, and former Baathists are a curse, having brought down on the Sunnis little but bloodshed, pain, and lost hope. With that recognition, the Sunnis could begin to fight back, slowly but with building momentum, turning against the rump insurgency in their midst and also against al-Qaeda terror. The people of Anbar Province might drive out their own tormentors and begin to feel secure. With these conditions met, Iraq would come to seem reasonably tranquil. Many countries have experienced steady bombings by dissidents, without losing civil control. In retrospect, it seems clear that President Bush made a serious mistake in not taking up the Democrats on their insistence in 2006 that he must both enlarge the forces in Baghdad and change leadership at the Pentagon and among the generals in the field. The Democrats were in favor of the surge, before they were against it. Bush ought to have abandoned "sweep and clear and leave." He ought to have changed the mission from "turning it over to the Iraqis as soon as we can." He should have seen, in warfare, the crucial importance of one key goal: victory. That goal can be achieved, in an insurgency war, only by bringing security to the people, beginning in Baghdad. (Most of the rest of Iraq, from the Kurdish north to the Shi'ite south, is already reasonably secure, if more sparsely settled.) In any case, the president has now changed strategy, as well as the generals charged with pursuing it. He now has commanders who believe in victory and who, in fact, designed the way to get to it. In war there is no substitute for victory. The ethic of the just war--by requiring "a reasonable hope of success"--also demands it. Bottum's charge of incompetence is more troubling, although he may expect from government more than government can deliver. A long-established lesson is that, even in the best of times, government is mightily incompetent--and the bigger government gets, the more incompetent it becomes. Think of how much time it takes to obtain a building permit, to go through vehicle registration, to correct a government mistake on tax forms or on public utility bills, etc. Recall how few government offices in the same building communicate with the others, and how often you are shuttled back and forth. This is why President Kennedy used to joke that he would send out executive orders, and they would sit in offices, and be pondered and discussed, until no action could be taken. He learned quickly how powerless a president is every time he must go through a bureaucracy. And I seem to recall how incompetent Lincoln's first series of generals were--together with the Department of War, the Department of Justice, and practically everything else. Lincoln himself was frequently charged with incompetence, bumbling, and simplemindedness. By no means should President Bush get a pass for his errors and misperceptions, or his slowness in correcting them. Still, one ought to use standards that are cut to the cloth of human nature. In politics, Aristotle wrote, we must expect "a tincture of virtue." Expectations too high for anyone in the presidential office are no proper criterion for evaluation. Besides, despite enormous blows to our banking, investment, and transportation systems, the decisive steps President Bush took allowed our economy not only to recoup the dreadful financial losses of September 11 but also to climb unparalleled heights. You can see much of this come together in the State of the Union address this January. All day before his address, the press was picturing a president disrespected, unloved, a helpless failure, one of the worst presidents ever. So it was startling when Bush, from his gracious compliment to the new Speaker of the House, faced a suddenly attentive--and frequently applauding--audience. Some, it is true, hated to be applauding him. But the way the president put his points made it very costly for them not to rise. Two-thirds of the viewing audience, the networks reported, were either Democrats or Independents (probably because of the new Speaker). Startling, then, were the polls showing that an astonishing majority--78 percent--had a positive reaction to the speech. In another surprising turn, those approving the president's decision to increase troop levels in Iraq jumped from 43 percent to 52 percent. The president hit on a rhetorical style, which he has not quite used before, that suits him very well--a much more plain-spoken, direct, unvarnished way of speaking, considerably less poetic than his most famous speeches. More, he used half his speech to occupy what some think of as Democrat territory: the environment, energy policy, a comprehensive immigration policy, and health insurance. True enough, given the new majority in both houses, he seemed to go too far in the statist direction on the first three (although, reading between the lines, one could see his reliance on private enterprise). On the fourth, he did take a large step toward individualizing a more competitive health-insurance system. The single most dominant issue we face remains the threat from Jihadism. The ugly words broadcast by the Jihadists may seem mad, but they are matched by steady actions upon a worldwide front. Their stated aim is forcibly to convert us to Islam or to exterminate us until the caliphate stretches around the world: one religion, one polity. President Bush addressed this threat with the greatest simplicity and power he has ever brought to the subject. A great many do not see the danger as President Bush does. They certainly do not recognize what bin Laden and his lieutenants have often declared--that Iraq is today the front line in that jihad. Some in America seem ready to withdraw U.S. troops. They seem willing to prove bin Laden's maxim that in any protracted fight, the United States is the weak horse, and the Jihadists are the strong horse, which is the only one that people respect. I admit that I nearly always love the nuances of political rhetoric, even when delivered by politicians whose policies I oppose. For instance, I was grabbed by this year's response to Bush's speech by Jim Webb, even though I despise many of his arguments. So I am probably the least exigent of critics of political discourse. Still, I don't remember many addresses in which a president faced such a high mountain of opposition. And I will never forget the scenes afterward, in which even the most intense public opponents of the president lined the exit aisle, holding out their programs for him to sign. For nearly ten minutes the banter flowed, backs were warmly slapped, and geniality appeared to reign. Of course, Washington is a city in which (as the old joke goes) no one takes friendship personally. Yet it is also a city in which widely scorned bravery, such as Harry Truman's, has appeared in the most modest of persons and years later come to be cherished. Often enough, the nation's public leaders have been burned in effigy on the spots where their gleaming statues are later paid respect. If the reputation of President Bush meets such a fate, his 2007 State of the Union address just might be seen as one of the modest pivots on which that turn began slowly to revolve. Joseph Bottum's criticisms are to be taken seriously, even if they set criteria for angels, not flawed humans, and seem to overlook some stirring initiatives by this much-attacked president--such as his work on AIDS, for the poor in Africa, and against human trafficking. However deficient you think his judgment may have been about what was possible, no president has ever been more openly pro-life. At the very least, in the face of passionate hostility at home and abroad, George Bush has proved himself a brave and determined man who has staked his presidency on getting democratic momentum underway in the Middle East. Even if in the short run he fails--which many of us are not yet ready to concede--some Muslims in the future will be able to remember that in a difficult time an American president, at heavy cost, cared about their sufferings, their natural rights, and the better angels beckoning in their dreams. He held before them a democratic standard by which they will forever measure other political movements and other leaders. These are not inconsiderable accomplishments. JOSEPH BOTTUM is editor of FIRST THINGS. MICHAEL NOVAK, who holds the George Frederick Jewett Chair in Religion and Public Policy at the American Enterprise Institute, is a member of the editorial board of FIRST THINGS. |
Questia Media America, Inc. www.questia.com
Publication Information: Article Title: The Leadership of George W. Bush: Con & Pro. Contributors: Joseph Bottum - author, Michael Novak - author. Magazine Title: First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life. Issue: 171. Publication Date: March 2007. Page Number: 31+. COPYRIGHT 2007 Institute on Religion and Public Life; COPYRIGHT 2007 Gale Group
Publication Information: Article Title: The Leadership of George W. Bush: Con & Pro. Contributors: Joseph Bottum - author, Michael Novak - author. Magazine Title: First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life. Issue: 171. Publication Date: March 2007. Page Number: 31+. COPYRIGHT 2007 Institute on Religion and Public Life; COPYRIGHT 2007 Gale Group
A president takes charge; How George W. Bush reconfigured himself after September 11
A president takes charge; How George W. Bush reconfigured himself after September 11 Byline: Roger Fontaine, SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES Bill Sammon, a senior White House correspondent for The Washington Times, has it all: a good beat, a bestseller already under his belt, and oh, yes, access. In this case Access. "Fighting Back: The War on Terrorism from Inside the Bush White House" is the story of September 11 and the aftermath, but unlike most books pouring off the nation's presses about our generation's Pearl Harbor, Mr. Sammon concentrates on the view from the Oval Office or wherever President George W. Bush happened to be during this national nightmare. When the attention is on the president and his national security team the story is well told. When it wanders, less so. The two Sperling breakfasts featuring Democrat strategists James Carville. Bob Shrum, and Stanley Greenberg are entertaining enough, but go on for too long - although the irony of the three amigos crowing to the Fourth Estate over the vulnerabilities of W. on the morning of September 11 is too rich in irony not for Mr. Sammon to dwell on. So is former President Bill Clinton's shameless scene stealing during the memorial service at the National Cathedral. So fair enough. Furthermore, to Mr. Sammon's credit, he notes that Mr. Carville (to his credit) having learned about the fate of the Twin Towers hit the delete button on everything he had been saying. At least for a while. As for Bubba . . . what else can we expect? The chapters on Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda also are perfunctory, leaving the reader hoping the author will return to the scene he knows best. And these chapters are very good indeed. In them, Mr. Sammon draws a portrait of a president who performs under fire with no little grace - the vignette of him sitting through the Sarasota elementary school classroom gives all of us another reason why we never wanted to be a president faced suddenly with some earthshaking news. How the president transformed himself from pol to commander-in-chief while listening to school kids doing their lessons is fascinating, leaving anyone wondering what he would have done in his place. Mr. Sammon also traces the president's journey that first day in detail, an account that pretty well demolishes the carping critics who accused Mr. Bush of cowardice for not returning immediately to the stricken capital - surely one of the most idiotic critiques of a president since the press description of Abraham Lincoln as a baboon. In doing so the author also captures the jumpiness of a White House in crisis, something that if experienced is not easily forgotten; it simply rewrites everything one once believed about how men and women in high places act when fear is in charge. There is a moment recorded by Mr. Sammon that is especially revealing. On the evening of September 11 with the president "safely" in the White House, the Secret Service informed Mr. Bush that he would be sleeping in the underground bunker. The president refused, believing rightly the danger was minimal and he needed a good night's rest in his own bed and not on the lumpy foldout provided in the shelter. He almost didn't get it - just before dozing off in the residence, the Service hustled him and the entire staff into the bunker once more after reports of an unidentified aircraft nearby. The jitters turned a patrolling F-16 into a life threatening menace. Mr. Sammon makes no secret of his admiration of the president - which is fine - there is plenty of the opposite from other journalists and pundits who don't fare too well in this account. In fact, anyone who loathes the media will have a joyous time reliving the moronic questions from the Pentagon and White House press corps. By this account, the boys in the big gray building on the other side of the river come off worst and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld best. As for the president when confronted with the decision to shoot down any civilian airliner that might be in the wrong place at the wrong time, Mr. Bush simply said: "You bet." No "West Wing" angst about that decision. He knew it was an appalling choice, but Truman-like it was the right one. The commander-in-chief also looks pretty good at Ground Zero giving an impromptu talk to the rescue workers, turning their raucous over familiarity into a tribal fury aimed at America's enemies. As for the media, much of the press still thinks of President Bush as a lightweight who remains aloft in the polls on the strength of a national tragedy. But as with Ronald Reagan, it pays to be underestimated by your opponents who in truth aren't all that bright either. Listen to any of the armchair experts discussing military strategy, for example, people who know even less about the art than Saddam Hussein. But the pull of the conventional wisdom of the well-groomed herd is not to be discounted either. Along the way Mr. Sammon provides some insights on what it is like working in the press. Even better, his description of the White House press briefing room as a "cramped and cluttered dump" with "ambience of a bus station" is accurate with the caveat that it is somehow unfair to bus stations. I am sorry to learn, however, this national disgrace is now named after James Brady, a fine man, who deserves far better. Somehow the briefing room should be called "Nixon's Revenge" for never was a relationship between press and president based on more mutual loathing. Filling in the White House swimming pool where JFK once frolicked with various pool maidens and leaving the press corps with that briefing room and its tiny adjacent quarters would make any newsman grumpy. And so a generation later, they continue to toil in general misery. Perhaps some day, a truly Machiavellian chief executive will put them up in something more like the Waldorf. Perhaps, but until then I prefer the current arrangement with an occasional newsman like Bill Sammon writing from a slightly different perspective. Roger Fontaine served on the National Security Council staff during the first Reagan administration. +++++ FIGHTING BACK: THE WAR ON TERRORISM FROM INSIDE THE BUSH WHITE HOUSE By Bill Sammon Regnery Publishing, $27.95, 400 pages [Photo from the book cover] U.S. Secret Service and Military Police go on high alert and double up security checks for all passengers boarding Air Force One on September 11 as President Bush departs Sarasota, Fla., following a series of terrorist attacks U.S. facilities. [Photo by Agence France-Presse] President George W. Bush speaks to Vice President Dick Cheney aboard Air Force One hours after the terrorist attacks on September 11. Top: An F-16 fighter flies off the wing of Air Force One on a flight back to Washington, where Mr. Bush returned to address the nation. [Photo by AP]; [Photo by Agence France-Presse] -1- |
Questia Media America, Inc. www.questia.com
Publication Information: Article Title: A President Takes Charge; How George W. Bush Reconfigured Himself after September 11. Newspaper Title: The Washington Times. Publication Date: October 27, 2002. Page Number: B08. COPYRIGHT 2002 News World Communications, Inc.; COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group
Publication Information: Article Title: A President Takes Charge; How George W. Bush Reconfigured Himself after September 11. Newspaper Title: The Washington Times. Publication Date: October 27, 2002. Page Number: B08. COPYRIGHT 2002 News World Communications, Inc.; COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)