LIVE THREAD: President Bush's Press Conference

www.freerepublic.com | April 28, 2005

[Howlin]

FROM WASHINGTON
Pres. Bush Press Conf. Tonight 
At the White House, Pres. Bush holds an evening press confer-ence. The President intends to talk about his Social Security reform plan and his energy plan. He is also likely to get questions on other topics such as the John Bolton nomination, Senate filibuster rules on judicial nomina-tions, House ethics rules, etc.

Live at 8:00 P.M. EDT

Watch live from the White House web site:

The White House

(Link on right)

or

C-SPAN

(link at top)

and all the usual suspected news outlets.

[roses of sharon]

Ignore the contrarian, if Bush said the sky was Blue, the contrarian would say it's either, light blue, navy blue or even purple.

[Evolution]

It was very disturbing to hear Bush say that rich people dont deserve their benefits and it is okay to cut their benefits and redistribute their money to other people.

Also the argument for Privatization using the excuse that if it is good enough for Congress it is good enough for the American people, can be a slippery slope. Liberals always say we need the same healthcare plan congress offers.

(I support privatization but the argument that it is better for people to make their own decisions is good enough) The fact is that SS is a mistake made by that Socialist RAT Roosevelt and the whole point of Privatization is to get rid of it by making people responsible, not just enlarging another entitlement program.

[Miss Marple]

I think I can come up with a solution. Why not identify people who are willing to do Q & A from the thread at the beginning of the thread? Then you could simply search on those names and read their posts.

Live threads have always been hard to contain, because they are sort of a stream-of-consciousness effort. I try to post facts, but I also get sidetracked because of disruptors. Plus I get infuriated with the press and go off on tangents ranting about them.

I think we could make this work, and I would like to help the office-bound. Then we could have the best of both worlds.

[Cboldt]

A pay as you go welfare social safety net program, which is what SS really is, does not pose a moral hazard. A private account, which if it fails, and leaves the investor too poor, will cause the government to just give the investor his old benefits under the old system, is a tails the investor wins, heads the government (taxpayer) loses, proposition. That becomes the moral hazard.

How about mandatory purchase of government bonds? The payment in can be used to pay for present beneficiarries, and the private holder of bonds has something to pass on to his heirs if he outlives the purchase. It's not a private account in the sense that its success depends on any company's business success, but it is a private account in that the value of the government bonds accrues to an identifiable individual buyer.

[dwills]

ugh . . . i hate when people throw out jargon as shorthand for superior enlightenment, retreat behind it and then refuse to examine their position

again, how is this tired 'moral hazard' canard any worse than what we've got?

"pay as you go" is not "pay what you can"--there is a level of expectation, among those who need benefits to make ends meet, that can't be ignored when we hit negative cash flow

since a lockbox is not an option where politicians are involved, the only difference is that under the current system the coin's already been tossed--whereas what's proposed gives us another toss in the private sector

[Wild Irish Rogue]

" I have to say that President Bush is doing SO great tonight.."

Didn't have a chance to watch the press conference, but, turned on tv to see Joe Scarborough announce that although President Bush looked more confident tonight than in his first term, he basically laid a huge egg tonight ( my words, his inference. )
Glad to read so many positive remarks by Freepers who must have seen a different press conf than Joe.

[TheForceOfOne]

Don't feel bad all alone, I have a guy named Arlen Specter to deal with not to mention "Fast Eddie Rendell" who did his best to deny the military a vote this past November.

The Democrats need to be called on their pure
obstructionism and forced into making votes up or down. I
don't believe their polls no more than I believed the early
exit polling on election day.

Posted by TheForceOfOne to 1Old Pro
On News/Activism 11/02/2004 2:57:59 PM EST · 49 of 87

How many of these so called media outlets have shown a
complete bias against Bush? DON'T PUT ANY WEIGHT IN THIS POOL! Its crap!

ABC, AP, CBS, CNN, Fox, and NBC, have created the National
Election Pool to provide tabulated vote counts and exit
poll surveys for the 2004 major presidential
primaries and the November general election.


These six major news organization, in a joint decision,
have appointed Edison Media Research and Mitofsky
International as the sole provider of exit polls for
the most important political races of 2004. The AP will
tally the vote
----------------------

Why can't we have someone like Rush asking a question in the so called Press Core?

[Evolution]

Hard to believe their are people on this forum opposed to privatizing SS and actually enjoy being on government welfare, and some how manage to call themselves CONSERVATIVE!

This is what Compassionate Conservatism leads to, and hearing the President say Rich people dont deserve their money was disturbing!

[dwills]

right now everyone's benefits are indexed to wages instead of prices--leaving it that way for poor folks minimizes their dependence on other welfare in their old age, which is unneeded by rich folks

in a utopian dreamland, successes and failures would get to eat what they kill and starve if they fail . . . simply melting away, instead of committing crimes and littering the sidewalk with their corpses

of course, i'd like to believe that, if they got the government off our backs, we'd use our extra wealth to care for others voluntarily . . . i'd really like to, but i wised up and quit the libertarian party in my 20s

[Txsleuth]

I noticed a long time ago that whenever Joe is with Chrissy Mathews, Andrea Mitchell, Howard Fineman and Pat Buchanan, he turns distinctly LEFT and is very critical of Bush...

almost like he doesn't want to have to defend his position if he says anything positive...

[patriciaruth]

He still trusts Vlad Putin. This is NOT a good thing

Did you notice this?

In answer to a question about Iran, the President mentioned "my good friends in" such and such countries are doing this about that, and "Vladmir Putin has offered to "...do this about that.

Get it?

[paulat]

I did not say that. Direct your query to the person who did.

I'll accept your apology when you muster up the integrity to offer one.

WATSONFELLOW SAID THIS:

It's more than a little annoying to scroll through hundreds of posts that TELL ME NOTHING ABOUT WHAT WAS SAID. can't you guys make a sep. comment thread?

I responded by saying we weren't his private news service.

My bad, cyncooper...you were the :cc and I forgot to include watsonfellow, who made the original remark.

ATTENTION ALL FREEPERS!!! CYNCOOPER IS MAD AT ME BECAUSE I MADE A MISTAKE!!!

PLEASE DO NOT ATTRIBUTE ANY COMMENT I EVER COMMENTED ON TO CYNCOOPER.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING!!

...uh...is that okay?

[Evolution]

of course, i'd like to believe that, if they got the government off our backs, we'd use our extra wealth to care for others voluntarily

in a utopian dreamland,

In a utopian dreamland people would take what they need and become independent. The fact is any government welfare is abused and only creates more waste. People need to be independent. Before government welfare people made it in this country just FINE and were better off!

You support the Welfare State?

[Huber]

Was the NYTimes the only available link?

[Evolution]

Not to mention the US has the most private Charity than any other country!

[Torie]

The balance of SS benefits are cut back at an interest rate of 3% over inflation, compounded annually, for the money diverted into the private accounts. So there is compounding on both sides of the ledger. There has to be, or the actuarial deficit would increase.

[dwills]

err, no, in simpler english for you, i'm for privatization and arguing against the guy (gal?), Torie, who claims it presents a moral hazard larger than leaving it in the hands of the politicians

nevertheless, to get private accounts, i don't mind if they start indexing wealthier folks' inflation adjustment to prices instead of wages

[Torie]

I am not sure what your point is. Private accounts do nothing to reduce the actuarial deficit in the system.

[Evolution]

nevertheless, to get private accounts, i don't mind if they start indexing wealthier folks' inflation adjustment to prices instead of wages

Problem is this leaves the door open to more punishments against people for earning money after all as Bush put it they are already well off.

And if Rich people are not getting anything out of the system why would they keep their money in the US and invest in a system that is redistributing their money even more!