Posted on 06/30/2007 2:24:57 PM PDT by hardback
The buzz around Washington today is that the proactive phase of the Bush presidency is over.
This analysis was prompted by the 46-to-53 Senate vote Thursday that ended the debate over immigration, most likely for the remainder of George W. Bush's term in office.
"You could make the case that the Bush presidency ended this week," a former White House adviser to Ronald Reagan told U.S. News. He points out that not only did Bush lose his main domestic priority for his second term, but he also faces a revolt within his party over his Iraq policy.
That was driven home when Sens. Richard Lugar of Indiana and George Voinovich of Ohio broke with the administration and said it's time for the United States to start disengaging from Iraq.
Bush aides are trying to persuade the GOP dissidents not to stray too far and to give the president's Iraq policy longer to work. But it's unclear whether those arguments will work.
On immigration, Bush argued Thursday that the American people realize that the status quo is "unacceptable," and he expressed disappointment that his compromise measure failed.
But its loss was caused at least as much by opposition from conservatives as from liberals, and it caused a rift between Bush and his base that may be irreparable. White House officials are trying to shift blame to the Democratic majority in Congress.
Bush advisers say Democratic leaders will now be unable to show any progress on immigration, raising questions about whether they can govern effectively.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
To suggest because the wealth stealing scheme of Soc Security had been raised 20, 30 or 100 times prior is meaningless to the reality that RR raised them again...Thus only further burdening another generation to this wealth stealing scheme (mandated by Gov't).
Additionally pointing out that he increased the retirement age to 67....Is just further increasing the amount wealth that is being stolen from each and every American. Why should a person have to wait longer to get a ROI. That is just the Gov't further stealing wealth from individuals and families (it is not any kind of plus as you seem to be suggesting).
R.R held the Senate by a large majority and gave amnesty to all illegals (sans those from 83-84)....This when the situation was at a much more manageable level. Yet, they (he) took the easy route....(but we'll just say it was a mistake...and he's still a great conservative). Got it.
Again, one standard for RR and another much higher one for GWB. Both issues of Soc Sec and immigration were at much more manageable levels in the 80s.....They weren't dealt with, they were simply pushed down the line to become bigger problems (and done some from a LIB stand point to boot....But gotcha, RR was a true conservative...GWB is not).
Can you explain this discrepancy? Someone's numbers appear to have been Rathered.
You must be a member of DENSA. What choice did Reagan have? If he allowed SS to continue paying out more than it was taking in, he would have to come up with the money to cover the shortfall. How? He would have to start redeeming the worthless IOUs [non-market T-bills] in the SS Trust Fund by borrowing real money, which would not only increase the national debt and debt servicing costs, but also cut into general revenue funds. In 1983, Reagan was in the middle of trying to rebuild the US military after years of neglect. There was no way that Reagan could have changed the SS system and he still had to pay people their benefits. Reagan was a pragmatist who used to say that he would negotiate to get half a loaf now and come back later for the rest. He would have also been commiting political suicide by refusing to fund SS. And he knew that he had to work with Tip to get his agenda through.
You need to do your homework on SS.
Again, one standard for RR and another much higher one for GWB.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Bush with his buddy Ted Kennedy who was also behind the 1986 and 1965 bills was about to destroy this country by legalizing the status of 12 to 20 million illegals who would then be eligible to bring in thru chain migration another 30 to 60 million other LEGAL immigrants in the form of spouses, children, and parents.
When Reagan provided amnesty in 1986, it was estimated that 1 million people would apply. In fact, 3 million applied. Today, we really don't know how many are even here. How anyone can make good public policy without reliable data is beyond my comprehension. Even without this bill, the Bureau of the Census projects the population of the US to grow by 62 million in the next 23 years, i.e., by 2030, to 364 million. This is the equivalent of adding the current population of the UK. And by 2050, the projection is 420 million. If the Senate bill had passed, these projections would be grossly understated.
Not even Jorge would pay illegal alien wages for the intellectual horsepower that Johnny and the other koolaid drinkers have combined. They just have a case of terminal stupidity and don't you dare try to disabuse them of it.
Kenneth Walsh
Fred Thompson's Potential Pitfalls
By Kenneth T. Walsh
"If Fred Thompson sounds like the conservative candidate from central casting-a latter-day Ronald Reagan-that's exactly the image he wants to project as he prepares to enter the race for the White House, probably in the next few weeks."
As I recall Bush began his second term with fixing Social Security at the top of his domestic agendy. He comes to the end of it by trying to dump 12 to 20 million illegal and unfunded aliens into that same system.
By the way, if an illegal alien is really an “undocumented worker,” then a drug dealer is an “undocumented pharmacist.” Not original with me, but it makes sense.
But when GWB does this...it shows he's not a true conservative, correct? No-Child Left Behind Act (for example)...Or trying to fix the terribly flawed Medicare program.....He was simply being a "pragmatist" regarding these issues and understood it would be political suicide not to reach out on the education front (that soccer mom America was demanding in 2000....and the elderly in 04).
I've done all my homework on SS. What I see is that R.R. made choices that only pushed the problem further down the road (for the sake of helping "then"). This is allowed and fine by you....Yet, when GWB has done the same now on several issues....He is completely wrong and must be held to a higher standard (yet R.R. had a REP Senate the majority of his years / at larger numbers...and while he didn't hold Congress, Congress most certainly did have a segment of "Southern DEMS" who are more conservative then most RHINOs of today...
his presidency should not be based on this. there were a lot of other things happening during this presidency that were successful.
I’ll take one of your large Johnnie Koolaids and an order of fries.
So what’s stopping Bush from enforcing the immigration laws we already have?
He’s had 7 years to figure out what they are. Is he a slow reader?
The bill drove down the Dems numbers and made it possible to defeat some rino’s in the primaries. Viva La Bush.
Being disgusted with Bush for 6 years ain’t knee jerk.
Headlines for July 1, 2007:
#1 Savage Nation Works, Borders Flooded with Mexicans Returning to Mexico.
#2 Anglo-Saxon Workers pouring into cities and towns now willing to do work!
#3 Employers Firing anyone that looks like a Mexican
#4 New Song Tops the Charts: We Are The Savage Nation and We are in your Face!
#5 Whatisthetruth Checking Spelling of New Workers and sings the new song.
So by this post you’re trying to take your stupidity to a whole new level? You should’ve quit while you were ahead.
Quit yelling. It shows weakness.
You are pitiful! Can’t you take a joke?
C'mon, DG, you know the White House was involved, since Bush held either the signing pen or the veto pen and Bush wanted this bill. After all, the provision for illegals to pay some back taxes was removed at Chertoff's insistance.
I wonder if he wanted to legalize the illegals to get more folks paying into the SS system. Plus their kids paying in. SS might be more stable if people were still having large families (ie higher ratio of workers to recipients).
So many problems would be solved if Westerners bred more.
The prescription drug program made it worse. Medicare’s Financial Condition: Beyond Actuarial Balance
What I see is that R.R. made choices that only pushed the problem further down the road (for the sake of helping "then"). This is allowed and fine by you....
Reagan had no other choice. SS will be in the same position as 1983 in 2017. That is the year that SS, a pay as you go system, goes into the red.
and while he didn't hold Congress, Congress most certainly did have a segment of "Southern DEMS" who are more conservative then most RHINOs of today...
The term is RINO [Republican in name only] not RHINO. And in terms of their stance on SS, the Southern Dems were just as committed to this New Deal legislation as the rest of the Dem party. Bush tried to raise the SS issue, but he lacked the same kind of force, urgency, and commitment that he had for amnesty. Perhaps his corporate masters didn't push him hard enough.
Bush's pandering to the soccer moms and seniors produced no real results for the GOP. Whatever his real motives were on pushing for amnesty, he wound up splitting the GOP needlessly and undermined further support for the WOT. You still haven't answered my question, "Why hasn't Bush secured the border since 9/11?"
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.