For over a week I have been listening to the Repubs doing everything trying to save the reputation of Bush. I mean everyone of them is doing all they can to make him seem more like a success than he really is. But this latest anal statement is just beyond belief.
Fox News anchor Wendell Goler, doing his best revisionist history impersonation, has decided to declare the events of Sept. 11, 2001 really can not be blamed on President George W. Bush (even though it happened early on his watch). Instead, Goler is trying to insist that this was an inherited attack from the previous administration (the administration of President Bill Clinton). Goler also tried to say he inherited a recession and some tough times on Wall Street … along with the budget surplus. So, apparently Goler has gotten the Fox News memo that George W. Bush must be protected at all costs.
Please tell me these guys will go away soon.
To a point, Bush did inherit 9/11 because part of it was planned under Clinton’s watch however, that does not excuse his refusal to act upon intelligence saying that an attack was imminent. Part of me is wondering if he wanted the attack to happen so that he could use it as a means to pass some of his hidden agenda (Iraq).
The recession, that was Clinton. The way I see it, if Clinton had been in office for one more year, it would have been a totally different story. The events (Enron and Dot-Bomb) leading up to that recession happened under Clinton. I do not see Bush being able to stop it even if he tried.
It is coffeee time…..I will agree to a bit of blame for Clinton, but I think that his policies on trade did the most harm to the country and it just snowballed.
Back in 2006, the Bush Admin was warned by his head of GAO, David Walker
What they don’t talk about is a dirty little secret everyone in Washington knows, or at least should. The vast majority of economists and budget analysts agree: The ship of state is on a disastrous course, and will founder on the reefs of economic disaster if nothing is done to correct it.
There’s a good reason politicians don’t like to talk about the nation’s long-term fiscal prospects. The subject is short on political theatrics and long on complicated economics, scary graphs and very big numbers. It reveals serious problems and offers no easy solutions. Anybody who wanted to deal with it seriously would have to talk about raising taxes and cutting benefits, nasty nostrums that might doom any candidate who prescribed them.
So that sorta explains why this has become a prob all at once. All in all it can almost always be traced back to politics. So it may have begun in the past, but Bush was knowledgeable of the coming crisis and did little.
I am not sure now… is he saying that Bush inherited the current recession and problems on Wall Street? If so, that is bull. I was assuming that he was talking about the 2001 recession because I will argue that one he did inherit.
After that recession, well, that’s the republican congress’ and Bush’s baby.