Bush's very good year

[b_justb]

Against all odds, and despite the usual drumbeat of criticism, President Bush had a very good year.The troop surge in Iraq is succeeding. America remains safe from terrorist attacks. And the Goldilocks economy is outperforming all expectations.At his year-end news conference, Mr. Bush said with optimism that the economy is fundamentally sound, despite the housing downturn and the subprime credit crunch. The very next day, that optimism was reinforced with news of the best consumer spending in two years. The prophets of recessionary doom, such as former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, Republican adviser Martin Feldstein, ex-Democratic Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, and bond-maven Bill Gross have been proven wrong once again.

Article

DISCLAIMER: The posting of this, or any other, news article or op/ed piece, does not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, standards, values, shoe size, ethnicity, pet ownership, or marital status of this CAF Poster. Failure to use this posting in accordance with its labeling is a violation of Federal law.

 

[goofyjim]

Goldilocks economy? Retail sales are not what they expected and the mortgage crisis is causing the housing market to crumble. So much for that idea.

 

[stanmaxkolbe]

Well,
I work in the printing field [advertising] and we have done very well this year. I did the numbers in Excel and we have spent more money on ink and media than we have in that last five years. Lot of more orders!

Why? More customers are advertising their products. So that tells me that the economy is doing very well I don’t care what the news people are saying.

They said what a great economy we had during the Clinton/Gore recession but I still have my numbers in Excel we [my company] wasn’t’ doing that great.

I say look at advertising; if you want to check out the economy not the MSM news.

 

[MelanieAnne]

In my life I have found persons that, even if you were to set them down in the middle of the Garden of Eden (of course that assumes you could actually do that) would find fault.

There are fault finders and then there are love finders.

Love finders are more positive. And yeah, I’m sure anyone who is, by nature, a “fault finder” will also find fault with this post. I submit that doing so says more about them when they do, so please keep that in mind.

Blessed Teresa has even spoken of this sort of effect, but since I don’t have the precise quote, I will not attempt it.

Bottom line, some people just hate good news if it, in their opinion, helps “the other side”. As such, you cannot take their opinions too seriously. After all, to do so is to concede their lack of objectivity.

Perhaps, as one of the quotes in my signature suggests, their “opinion” is the result of their using their mind the “wrong way”.

 

[estesbob]

Goldilocks economy? Retail sales are not what they expected and the mortgage crisis is causing the housing market to crumble. So much for that idea.

If a Democrat were in office the MM woulds be talking about the economic miracle.For instance I beleive retail sales are up over last year so the MM downplays it by saying they were less than expected. Less than expectd by who? I beleve the revised 3rd QTR growth was near 4% and both unemployment and inflation are low. 94% of mortgages in the country are current and I beleive that the value of homes has dropped on average less than 1/2 of 1% in the last year. of course one would not know any of this if they depended on the MM for news.

 

[MelanieAnne]

Retail sales are such silly thing, only because they are open to all sorts of silly manipulation. It seems that’s what’s going on here.

Every YEAR we get treated to “expectations” about the holiday season and then we are treated to expectations that shoppers are hunting for the best value (don’t they do that all year anyway? so why is it such a marvel at holiday time? Is this just an annual hunt for something to write about?)

I’ve always thought that some of this tripe trotted out by the media is just filler because they don’t have anything else to write about (ask me privately about the “filler” surrounding diabetes!!)

Speaking only for myself, as a retailer, we have had a BANNER year. Our only problem was that we ran out of popular products and could not provide more.

 

[rlg94086]

If a Democrat were in office the MM woulds be talking about the economic miracle.For instance I beleive retail sales are up over last year so the MM downplays it by saying they were less than expected. Less than expectd by who? I beleve the revised 3rd QTR growth was near 4% and both unemployment and inflation are low. 94% of mortgages in the country are current and I beleive that the value of homes has dropped on average less than 1/2 of 1% in the last year. of course one would not know any of this if they depended on the MM for news.

Nope, Bob, the economy is in a freefall.

I did a quick check on retail sales: money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200712261257DOWJONESDJONLINE000449_FORTUNE5.htm

From the day after Thanksgiving to midnight Monday, total retail sales, excluding automobiles, rose 3.6% over the previous year, according to MasterCard SpendingPulse, a unit of MasterCard Advisors. But factoring out spending on gasoline - which soared thanks to a 27% average price increase since this time last year - retail sales increased a lackluster 2.4%. Industry forecasts had predicted gains of 3.5% to as high as 4.5%.

Yep. Only a 2.4% increase…it’s the end of the world.

 

[Pong]

Let’s see- just for a start:

1. We are still needlessly in the middle east fighting someone else’s civil war. (Which we started but can’t finish)
2. The housing market is in a shambles.
3. Gas is over $3 a gallon in most places.

Oh yeah, great year.

 

[john1863]

If, if, etc., etc., does anyone notice the trend? Bush is this, Clinton was that…if anyone is expecting a single politician to back their beliefs…good luck.

John

 

[a_priori]

Retail sales? So what? We only borrow more and go deeper into debt in order to produce those sales.

 

[LRThunder]

Didn’t finish the year with the Saints, being investigated for violations at USC…

wait, that’s Reggie Bush. Sorry.

I have to disagree with it being a good year for President Bush, but it’s probably going to be better than next year.

 

[estesbob]

If, if, etc., etc., does anyone notice the trend? Bush is this, Clinton was that…if anyone is expecting a single politician to back their beliefs…good luck.

John

The dirty litlte secret is that much of our economy is beyond the control of our President-other than setting broad policy. But if we are going to judge Presodents on it lets be consistent. Similar numbers in growth cant be good when achieved under one administration and called so so when achieved by another.

 

[mary_bobo]

Well,
I work in the printing field [advertising] and we have done very well this year. I did the numbers in Excel and we have spent more money on ink and media than we have in that last five years. Lot of more orders!

Why? More customers are advertising their products. So that tells me that the economy is doing very well I don’t care what the news people are saying.

They said what a great economy we had during the Clinton/Gore recession but I still have my numbers in Excel we [my company] wasn’t’ doing that great.

I say look at advertising; if you want to check out the economy not the MSM news.

Good points. I think it might be useful to look at the makeup of the Congress during the Clinton administration. Look at the Gingrich revolution and then look at the economy. We can never get those who do not like the president to agree that he has done anything right.

 

[mary_bobo]

The dirty litlte secret is that much of our economy is beyond the control of our President-other than setting broad policy. But if we are going to judge Presodents on it lets be consistent. Similar numbers in growth cant be good when achieved under one administration and called so so when achieved by another.

 

[pete_29]

Did you ever notice that when presidents are in office, they are usually considered the worst president ever, but when their presidency is over, people find out they weren’t the devil after all.

I’m with Dennis Miller. No attacks since 9/11 =good presidency.

 

[bones_IV]

President Bush a good year? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…how about the fact that he showed no anger, in regards to the Mexico City policy that allows abortions in cases of for rape, incest and life of the mother … standard fare for the pro-life politicos (or should I dare say, neo-cons) these days.

Fact: the Mexico City Policy does not and cannot prohibit our tax dollars from paying for abortion

Fact: it can only prevent our tax dollars from paying for some abortions.

Where was Bush’s anger towards fetal tissue being used in mice. The reporter from CNS News says that, “It is not clear how much fetal tissue is used or how it is supplied.” Don’t exactly see a law that prohibits this type of research.

Need I say more? Facts are facts.

 

[rlg94086]

I love ya Bones, but you are stretching on this one.

President Bush a good year? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…how about the fact that he showed no anger, in regards to the Mexico City policy that allows abortions in cases of for rape, incest and life of the mother … standard fare for the pro-life politicos (or should I dare say, neo-cons) these days.

Fact: the Mexico City Policy does not and cannot prohibit our tax dollars from paying for abortion

Yes, it is absolutely terrible that Bush didn’t do something about Mexico City policy.

Fact: it can only prevent our tax dollars from paying for some abortions.

Where was Bush’s anger towards fetal tissue being used in mice. The reporter from CNS News says that, “It is not clear how much fetal tissue is used or how it is supplied.” Don’t exactly see a law that prohibits this type of research.

Need I say more? Facts are facts.

I don’t know where his anger is, but did you read the article you linked?

Transplanting fetal tissue with the goal of helping to cure humans has been legal since 1993. On Jan. 22 of that year, President Clinton ordered Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala to remove the ban President Reagan had ordered in 1988 on federal funding of any “therapeutic transplantation research” that used human fetal tissue derived from induced abortions.

Congress later passed a law, Public Law 103-43, which states, “no official of the executive branch may impose a policy that the Department of Health and Human Services is prohibited from conducting or supporting any research on the transplantation of human fetal tissue for therapeutic purposes . . .”

…
It’s a concern that only Congress can address.

Yes, it is an outrage, but it is out of President Bush’s hands. “Facts are facts.”

 

[bones_IV]

I love ya Bones, but you are stretching on this one.

Yes, it is absolutely terrible that Bush didn’t do something about Mexico City policy.

I don’t know where his anger is, but did you read the article you linked?

Yes, it is an outrage, but it is out of President Bush’s hands. “Facts are facts.”

Neo-conservative propaganda.

 

[rlg94086]

Neo-conservative propaganda.

Excuse me? What did I say that is propaganda?

Are you trying to accuse me of spreading falsehoods? Is pointing out that Mexico City is not part of the United States and therefore not under Bush’s influence a “neo-conservative” lie?

Is highlighting part of the article **you **linked somehow disingenuous?

Please enlighten me, rather than resorting to calling me a propagandist.

 

[bones_IV]

I love ya Bones, but you are stretching on this one.

Yes, it is absolutely terrible that Bush didn’t do something about Mexico City policy.

I don’t know where his anger is, but did you read the article you linked?

Yes, it is an outrage, but it is out of President Bush’s hands. “Facts are facts.”

The Mexico City Policy is frought with problems that result in death. All told the Mexico City Policy is simply not pro-life. I have to laugh when people say “America is no longer an ‘exporter of death’”, they thus bear witness against themselves! I’m a little confused here, an organization agrees to refrain from paying for abortion with U.S. tax dollars, but then chooses to use those dollars to pay for other “services,” thus freeing up other money to subsidize the killing. Which is it? It’s either one or the other one. You can’t have it both ways.