Posted on 07/20/2007 5:35:34 AM PDT by fabrizio
President Bush inherited a recession, a stock market slump, a corporate corruption scandal and then had that whole economic morass topped off with a terrorist attack which cost the American economy greatly. From these economic doldrums, President Bush has cleared the way for an economic boom the likes of which America has never seen. Oh, to be sure, a lot of people don't see it - because the MSM simply will not tell the people the truth about what is happening in the economy. But for anyone paying attention, it is clear that we've never had it so good - and all of this economic growth was fostered by President Bush in the teeth of what he inherited, and the desperate attempts by Democrats to get President Bush to kill the economy via tax hikes.
Iraq was the central act of courage of President Bush - he could have avoided it altogether. In other words, after toppling the Taliban he could have called it a day and basked in the glow of a low-cost and successful military campaign which exorcised a lot of the anger and fear Americans felt immediately after 9/11. But he knew that to leave things alone after Afghanistan - and even if we really stepped up our non-military anti-terror campaign - it would be to just kick the problem down the road...perhaps until after President Bush left office, but still a gathering threat which would be best met as early as possible.
And so, into Iraq - but first he, mistakenly, gave his critics their UN due and did the diplomatic dance which merely allowed Saddam and the terrorists time to prepare; but President Bush had promised a new tone in Washington, and he felt bound by that promise, even if the other side was spitting in the extended hand. When diplomacy inevitibly failed, the military which had been refurbished by President Bush since 2001 gave the world the most magnificent display of armed might ever seen. And, once again, President Bush could have cashed his chips in and come home - like his father, he could have declared victory, held a big parade and then basked in the glory of it all...and, unlike his father, this would likely have propelled President Bush to re-election with something on the order of 60% of the vote...but votes weren't important; heck, getting re-elected wasn't important...what was important was changing the dynamic of the Arab/Moslem world as the only means to actually solve the problem of terrorism - and that meant we'd have to stay in Iraq and make certain it got fully on its feet before we left. And thus the tight election of 2004, and the continued hammering of the President's popularity as the campaign has gone on far longer than anyone wanted, or hoped.
Many times since 2004 President Bush could have given up - to the applause of many, he could have pulled the troops out after declaring victory...but that, once again, would be to just delay the day of reckoning. One thing President Bush has certainly proved is that he has no lack of courage - and that courage will be rewarded.
It might take some time, but I don't think it will take much time - it could be as soon as 2010 or so that we're already getting people saying that "President Bush would have done such and such" in the face of some crisis, or that "President Bush wouldn't have backed down the way so and so did". President Bush's courage and sublime disregard for his own position will become a standard of reference - it will be asked if "so and so" has the courage to risk his political career the way President Bush did. A man like President Bush comes along rarely in a nation's history, and I am grateful we have had him through these difficult times - the next President will have less trouble to deal with and a smoother ride...and will likely reap the political benefits he didn't earn, but that is ok - all President Bush ever needs to know is that he did his duty, and that is enough for any man.
As a person who has some investments in stocks and mutual funds, I wouldn't mind seeing another surge in the stock market like what happened during the Clinton years. The first and last 8 months of it didn't do anything, but the years between that were an economic boom the likes of which America has never seen I would have much rather had a Republican in the White House during those years, but fact are facts.
President Bush has b..uh... the intestinal fortitude of a true leader. I am proud that he is an American.
And what was it specifically that Clinton did to spur the growth in the stock market? You're giving Clinton credit for being the president that "happened to be president" during the stock market surge of the 90s. But, wouldn't the stock market have surged anyway driven by the internet boom of the 90s? Clinton was the recipient of the good news rather than the spark for the good news.
This point is argued all the time by Clinton supporters. There was a huge tax increase yet we had an economic surge and low unemployment figures therefore they say that tax cuts don't create jobs or economic surges. What really did cause the surge in the 90's?
The same thing that is causing the stock market to rise today — the expanding WORLD economy.
So the argument that tax cuts or increases is irrelevant holds some water?
bump
Amen.
And Bush hasn't been as lucky as Clinton, who was president in 1993 when the terrorists did not succeed in their attempt to bring down the WTC.
The terrorists apparently selected the World Trade Center as a target not because it was a symbol of Western values or the financial power of the United States, but simply because toppling the twin towers would enable them to inflict a large number of casualties...[snip]Yes, Bush has done very well.As Yousef was being flown from Pakistan to the United States to stand trial, he told Secret Service agent Brian Parr that he would have put sodium cyanide into the WTC bomb if he had had enough money...
Yousef told Agent Parr that he intended for the explosion to cause one tower to fall into the other, inflicting 250,000 civilian casualties.[10]
Even Bill ("I like booty") Clinton could not have done any better.
This was the line of the article I was taking exception to. As much of a fan of Bush's that I am, (and I am), this statement was a bit overboard. The stock market vs presidents, Kennedy,Johnson & Nixon - FLAT. Carter - SCARY. Reagan - GREAT. GHW BUSH - FLAT/POOR. Clinton - BEST EVER. GW BUSH - VERY GOOD.
Of course not. :-)
Didn’t really think so... just wanted a better explanation for the 90’s.
It’s a combination of the two. Today’s economy, as compared to the ‘90s, is real and better.
Amen! Amen! Amen! :-) Thanks, W!!!
That said, I sorely wish that W was a better public speaker and would have spoken more often. We needed to have things explained to us along the route. Doing the right thing for the right reasons is the only way to live life and lead. We needed to be verbally escorted down the path so we could ALL be behind this war and our President. America can do ANYTHING if we're all behind the cause.
I think one of that factors that drove the market in the 90’s was that it was suddenly “democratized”. People could buy and sell stocks online and we had many day-traders. Unfortunately, people started playing the market via their computers like a slot machine. Of course with so much buying, companies started hiding their numbers and silly made-up dot-coms that didn’t really make any profit eventually tumbled leaving us with the bad economic environment inherited by Bush. How’s that for an explanation?
Sounds good to me. That’s what I meant by “real.” We think alike, I see. :-)
Sounds good to me. That’s what I meant by “real.” We think alike, I see. :-)
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.