Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: avacado
It could be that, in a weird and perverted way, Bush was actually being a fiscally-responsible steward. Not for the American taxpayerss, but for his backers, the bankers.

He wanted to make sure that his pet project, i.e.: home loans for Mexican illegal aliens, the one made possible by his Partnership for Prosperity Agreement (with Mexico) and New Alliance Task Force and the one that defined his entire domestic economic policy in his first term, lived a long and profitable life.

His backers were depending on it. They probably had trillions in the pipeline that would be lost if the pipeline blew up.

With the way the dems were mis-managing it, Bush knew, via his backers, that it would blow up before the end of his second term.

So, he tried as best he could to wrest control from Congress before it happened.

Again, not to protect the American taxpayer, but to protect the bankers.

138 posted on 10/01/2008 10:00:18 AM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (While the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies ]


To: Ol' Dan Tucker
Again, not to protect the American taxpayer, but to protect the bankers.

Things would be different for everyone right now
if Congress had listened to Bush 5 years ago

140 posted on 10/01/2008 10:10:52 AM PDT by syriacus (Under Bush, Dems controlled the Senate for MOST of the 107th Congress and for ALL of the 110th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson