Posted on 05/02/2012 8:13:03 AM PDT by Sen Jack S. Fogbound
This may have been around before but it is worth reading it again!
This tells the story, why Bush was so bad at the end of his term.
Some people aren't aware of all of this. Don't just skim over this, please read it slowly and let it sink in. If in doubt, check it out.
The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3, 2007... the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.
The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this: January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77 The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5% The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy? BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!
Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!
Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie? OBAMA and the Democrat Congress So when someone tries to blame Bush.. REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!" Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party.
Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 & 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.
For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.
And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.
If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is "I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th." There is no way this will be widely publicized unless each of us sends it on!
Exactly.
This GWB revisionism never dies. Yep, in this fantasy world Bush was fighting to keep his economy booming but Dems passed all these laws over his veto for 15 months until the economy collapsed.
Back to Planet Earth:
The Bear stock market started September 2007 NOT September 2008 a year later. That's why GWB worked with Pelosi to pass a stimulus #1 in early 2008. The final collapse and market run happened a year later in Sept 2008.
Bush bragged about CRA type housing risky loan policies to minorities that he promoted. He gave speeches bragging about it easy to find on the internet.
Yes, Dems took over the House in 2007 but with a 51 seat dem Senate caucus (includes 2 independents) when it takes 60 to pass mostly anything Dems accomplished nothing without GWBs blessing, major accomplishments :
1) Bush/Pelosi stimulus #1,
2) The 2007 Energy Act and
3) the Bush/Paulson TARP are the most significant.
The crash was a result of bubble that was started back in 2002 and 2003. By 2007 it was little late to reform home loans as prices were at their peak of the bubble. How about 2006 when Rs had a clear majority?
Trying to revise GWB history just makes Republicans look silly.
.
Bush didn’t have subversives backing and protecting his every breath either.
It makes a big difference in what he was able to do.
True, I disliked his borders stance but look what we have now.
I’ll take Bush any day.
C’mon now. Buford is his biggest fan.
Not for nothing but, GWB never vetoed anything from the RAT Congress, in his 2nd term the disregarded advice from Dick Cheney and relied on RINOS. One thing that will never be forgotten, is that he never fought back against diatribes from bums like Reid, Schumer, Kerry and the rest of their ilk. And what was the end result......Obama!!
” Then, he bought that plantation in Central or South America.”
Do you have details ? I never heard of this, Tom.
Quite a number of exasperating missteps and bad appointments really sunk Bush’s second-term. For me, the very day that Bush came out and disparagingly called the border Minutemen “vigilantes” while pushing for amnesty, well, from that day forward, I never uttered a single word in his defense ever again, on any issue, at any time. I had supported him and voted for him, but at that moment, he was pretty much dead to me.
The only good lesson this taught me (along with the GOP backstabbing of Palin) is to maintain a intense wariness, and no longer just have that instinctual ‘default’ position that a “Republican” will generically share my beliefs and values. In fact, after three decades of voting GOP, I’ve really a gained a deep, deep, overriding pool of mistrust in the Republican Party because of all of this.
Pro-abortion.
” The crash was a result of bubble that was started back in 2002 and 2003. By 2007 it was little late to reform home loans as prices were at their peak of the bubble. How about 2006 when Rs had a clear majority?”
Correct. I warned FReepers repeatedly in 2006(plenty of time to bail if they had just listened)that RE was in a massive bubble, and it would be a TRILLION dollar bloodbath.
Maybe you can find them. I don’t know how to do it.
” Quite a number of exasperating missteps and bad appointments really sunk Bush’s second-term. For me, the very day that Bush came out and disparagingly called the border Minutemen “vigilantes” while pushing for amnesty, well, from that day forward, I never uttered a single word in his defense ever again, on any issue, at any time”
Same here. That was just too much.
He still held a vote pen that he did not use.
Yea ... Gore and Kerry would have been SO much better. /s
Yea ... Gore and Kerry would have been SO much better. /s
Bookmark
Bookmark
A President, during a time of war, has a huge responsibility to keep the Country united. That would automatically limit the use of a veto pen. That, and after consulting with the GOP Senate (Snowe, Collins, Graham, Specter, McCain, Murkowski, Lugar, Bond, Hutchinson, Voinovich, Lott, etc. - with 'friends' like this, who needs enemies?), he realized he did not have a snowball's chance in Hades of ever having a veto upheld.
Obviously ineffective is preferable to actively hostile to the country’s interests.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.