Attention Bush-Haters

vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Not trying to get in a war or anything but I'm curious about something. Tom Daschle was on TV this morning talking about the corporate greed, illegalities, etc, that have recently come to light. He was fairly clear that he's placing blame for this "trend" squarely on Bush's shoulders and expects him to do something about it.

My question is this: Why is this Bush's fault and what can he possibly do to eliminate/prevent it?

Another question: With the recent bailout of Amtrak and various airlines, which do you think is better - to use our tax dollars to bail out a private corporation OR let them sink or swim on their own?

I obviously have my own ideas on both of these issues but I'd like to hear what the Bush-haters and libs have to say before I commit to an opinion.
 
J

jimmy

Drunkard
Well ok, I'm guessing you've got ME in mind here since I've been called both but am really neither... :)

I'm not agreeing with the "Bush Haters" on this one. Most of this stuff happened before his watch and, either way, I don't see blaming the president for this as anything more than a political move.

That being said, do I think Bushie probably benefited more throughout his life from shady business practices and, thus, would not have taken this stance had it not come up? Yes. But corporate greed is to blame here, not one man and his presidency...

Which is why I'm similarly displeased with the republican retort of "oh yeah? Well look at Clinton's presidency that spawned all this!!" Here we go again....I'm rubber, you're glue, and we're all stupid shits playing the blame game.

Corportate america needs to wrangled in, something the Righties are NOTORIOUSLY against, but with all this crap going on, I just hope Bush lives up to the somewhat tough talk he's having now and stays away from the BS politicing we're seeing here.
 
H

Heretic

Guest
What they fail to realize is this stuff didn't start happening in January 2001, but happened throughout the so called booming 90's. Its just catching up to them right now.
 
C

chuckster

IMFUBARED
Don't blame Bush

Gallup Stunner: Americans Blame Clinton for Business Scandals

Despite a coordinated Democratic Party-media push to pin blame for the recent wave of corporate scandals on President Bush, a majority of Americans currently blame ex-President Bill Clinton for the business corruption that has sent the stock market reeling and caused a crisis in confidence in corporate America, according to a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Monday.

Fifty-one percent of Americans surveyed agreed that President Clinton's "moral failings in office" contributed to the permissive climate that encouraged corporate leaders to behave unethically.

Of that number, more than half, 26 percent, "strongly agreed" that Clinton was partially responsible for the business scandals. The rest, 25 percent, "moderately agreed" the ex-president deserved blame.

When asked the same question about President Bush, only 15 percent "strongly agreed" that he set a climate that encouraged corporate corruption and 31 percent "moderately agreed" with the same proposition, for a cumulative total of 46 percent - 5 percent less than those who blame Clinton.

Another stunning development: President Bush's approval ratings have actually improved in the weeks since the Democrat-media complex began shifting blame to the president.

The CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll put Bush's overall job approval at 76 percent - up 6 points since early June.

"This result alone suggests that the president has been untouched by these scandals," Gallup said.
 
C

chuckster

IMFUBARED
Cariblue I agree with you. Monkey see monkey do.

I hope that Bush does have some of these corp a@#holes do time time in jail.

What I find funny about this whole thing is that people are looking for someone to blame for somebdy elses actions. These corp guys knew exactly what they were doing. It's always about money. If the "Bottom Line" isn't there....take it off the top.

Maybe we should have the saying on our money changed from In God We Trust to In Greed We Trust.
 
J

James D

Member
Ken or Larry can correct me, but I have always been told
that the govt has supported the rail system for the past 50 years
was in case of a national disater, the milatary could move large amounts of troops and supplies around quickly.

If this is still true, then the rail system is a national security cause and not a typical 'private company'.
 
vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Question 2-Let private corporation pull themselves up by the boot straps, or fold. Be it small business or large corporation, if the customer base isn't there, it's time to close shop.
Click to expand...
Cari, I used to feel the same way (and maybe still do). But the flip side of that is the number of jobs that are lost when a major company folds. In a smaller town, that company may employ the majority of the people who live there. When it looks like that company is gonna have to call it a day, the Congressman for that area tries to get the Prez to bail it out to keep the employees off the bread line. So the Prez is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. If he tells the company "sink or swim" he gets heat for all the lost jobs. If he gives them a bailout, he gets slammed for corporate welfare.

About the Bush thing, I think they need to get the SEC up to snuff so they'll actually punish the crimes that are committed (what a concept). I always thought it was against the law to fudge your books, even if you're a private company. The people who did this should go to jail, along with the accounting people that helped them. The attitude seems to be "Oh well, I'll earn $10 million and might have to do a year or two in jail or pay a $1 million fine. That's a decent trade..." then off they go. The penalty needs to be high enough to make people think twice about committing the crime.
 
Sharon

Sharon

* * * * * * * * *
Staff member
PREMO Member
Make 'em pay!

bennett.jpg
 
Otter

Otter

Nothing to see here
Originally posted by vraiblonde
The attitude seems to be "Oh well, I'll earn $10 million and might have to do a year or two in jail or pay a $1 million fine. That's a decent trade..." then off they go.
Click to expand...

Exactly, but for white collar crime, its typically to some 'country club' jail...This galls me to no end....
 
Lilly

Lilly

The Original Lilly
I don't think any president can necessarily be blamed for corporate America's greed and dishonesty - although I would have to say that the fact that so many have gotten away with it for so long would have to fall more on Clinton's shoulders than Bush's.

I think corporate bailouts are justified if the corporation is failing due to no fault of its own. If the customer base is lagging then we can't just force them to "sink or swim" - the government should provide bailout assistance in addition to providing training on how the company can remarket itself. Amtrak is a good example, and the USPS will need it too in a few years.

However, companies that are going bankrupt due to thier own accounting fraud and schemes should not be able to apply for any government assistance. The CEO's should have all thier assets liquidated and sold to be split beween the employees that lost out. Of course, often these guys are in so much debt and the employees are too numerous for this too help much. Unfortunately its always the little guy that loses out.
 
Tonio

Tonio

Asperger's Poster Child
vrai, Daschle is doing what most politicians do: pointing the blame at the other party. Just more proof that the Reps and Dems have overstayed their welcome.
 
Last edited:
B

Bruzilla

Guest
I don't like the idea of any President deciding which companies should survive and which should fold. The same goes for politicians in general. They are not an honest broker in these cases as they are influenced bu voters, the companies, lobyists, unions, etc.

I think these decisions should stay where they are, with the Bankruptcy courts. If the company can present a sound plan for getting themselves back on their feet, then they should go into Chapter 11, fix their problems, and be on their way. If the company cannot present a sound plan for getting back on their feet then the company should be left to die on the vine. You can't have fair and honest competition in business, but also keep some businesses on government life support.
 
D

demsformd

New Member
I want to begin by saying that I do not hate President Bush. I merely disagree with the vast majority of his policies. There is credible evidence to suggest that the administration turned its head when corporate scandals were originally reported, i.e. Enron and meetings between top executives and administration officials. One of the administrations's first actions in office was to decrease regulation of business practices thus tempting companies to commit the sort of crimes that are now being divulged. The president's history with big business (especially his actions while owning an oil company in the late 1980's) cast a giant shadow over his credibility on the subject. To summarize, why does Mr. Daschle pin the blame on Bush? Because his party has always been too cozy with business and he did nothing to prevent the white collar crime from occurring.
Government bailouts of corporations are needed to ensure the economic stability of our nation. Before government regualted business in the 1940s, the Great Depression occurred as well as many other serious recessions. The economy was vastly inconsistent during the 19th and early 20th Century. While our market must remain free, government aid sometimes is needed.
 
Ken King

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
Where is that flag, there it is. :bs:

None of the incidents started in January 2001 when Bush took office, blaming him for this is absurd. 2001 is when these rip off artists started being discovered and since then it has all come to a head. The problem has been ongoing for some time now while everyone was fat, dumb, and happy about the killing they were making in the market. I think the previous administrations lack of respect for the law and non-existent ethics was a major contributor to the mentality many of these CEOs and corporate gurus picked up on.
 
D

demsformd

New Member
I think the previous administrations lack of respect for the law and non-existent ethics was a major contributor to the mentality many of these CEOs and corporate gurus picked up on. [/B][/QUOTE]

So once again, its all Bill Clinton's fault. Whatever is wrong with America was the doing of Bill Clinton and him alone. (Maybe his wife was in on it too.) Are you discussing Whitewater or the Monica Lewinsky debacle? Yes both showed lack of judgment but President Clinton but why did those instances come out: the vast right wing conspiracy that you are buying into. You know President Bush and Vice-President Cheney have some explaining to do about their own corporate practices. Lies have been made but the Democratic Party is too kind to drag the mud out as their Republican predecessors did.
In regards to Monica Lewinsky, guess what Bill Clinton liked sex. I don't know too many men (especially men in Washington) who don't. If every man in America had as many opportunities to cheat as Bill Clinton, the world would without a single faithful male. The man that was crucifying Clinton, Henry Hyde (chairman of the House judiciary committee), admitted himself that he too had an affair. Newt Gingrich divorced his second wife in favor of a younger third wife who had served as his intern in Washington. Doesn't that raise eyebrows? Every politician would lie if they were put in President Clinton's shoes and he should not have been put there in the first place. No man should have to answer questions about what he does in his bedroom.
 
Kyle

Kyle

ULTRA-F###ING-MAGA!
PREMO Member
Originally posted by demsformd

So once again, its all Bill Clinton's fault. Whatever is wrong with America was the doing of Bill Clinton and him alone. (Maybe his wife was in on it too.) Are you discussing Whitewater or the Monica Lewinsky debacle? Yes both showed lack of judgment but President Clinton but why did those instances come out: the vast right wing conspiracy that you are buying into.
Vast right wing conspiracy? :lmao: :roflmao: The Clintons are their own worst enemies. Monica was BS... Whitewater was an Arkansas thing. It could have been taken care of at that level but

... How about delivering technology to the communist Chinese that every other administration has denied them then taking campaign contributions from those same enemies?

How about his paring down of security in DOE and other agencies and gutting of the military in the 93-94 (demorats) congress?

The security breaches that provided critical technical data to China?

How about the FBI files for Clinton's "Enemies list" that couldn't be found for months then suddenly appeared from thin air when push came to shove?

How about the Travel Office firings...

Or the mysterious Office of Personnel Security Director Craig Livingstone that no one seemed to hire...

The legal briefs that Vince Foster had that disappeared before investigators could get into his office (after Hillary's people had been in there for hours)...

And this can go on... and on.... But I'm getting tired of typing it all.
Click to expand...
The Clintons were scum. And they were typical Democraps! Socialist through and through and as unprincipled as they come! :yay:
 
Last edited:
D

demsformd

New Member
Originally posted by Kyle
The Clintons were scum. And they were typical Democraps! Socialist through and through and as unprincipled as they come! :yay:
Click to expand...

For the time being let me say this, what a bunch of bullshit. Every administration has their scandals. The right-wing hated President Clinton because they were jealous. How could some dumb southerner get more votes than the elitest George Bush? They hated Clinton because he could appeal to people and people loved him. So they immediately set out on destroying him, something that the Democrats would never do. All the things that you mentioned came out because of the right-wing's hatred. There is plenty of documentation of this and one such insider of the conspiracy wrote a book detailing what the party did to destroy Clinton. This insider was the lawyer for Paula Jones and due to his experience has become a liberal with compassion. What the right wing did and what you are saying now are wrong, morally wrong. How can you attack on the side of morals while you are destroying another man? Jesus said whoever has not sinned throw the first stone. Have you never sinned before? Stop being self-rightous and take a look at yourself before you attack Mr. Clinton.
 
Kyle

Kyle

ULTRA-F###ING-MAGA!
PREMO Member
Originally posted by demsformd
... Jesus said whoever has not sinned throw the first stone. Have you never sinned before? Stop being self-rightous and take a look at yourself before you attack Mr. Clinton.
Click to expand...
Actually I can look at myself without any worry.

I haven't sold out my country like Mr. Clinton.
I haven't commited perjury like Mr. Clinton.
I haven't obstructed an investigation like Mr. Clinton.
This can go on forever. :lmao:

And it's nothing to do with whether "some dumb southerner get more votes than the elitest George Bush"... It has to do with principle, ethical behavior and loyalty to the counrty he was sworn in to serve!

Again... This was the Democraps Prime! God save us from another pair of traitors such as them!

P.S. One more thing... I never liked Jimmy Carter. I felt he was the most inept man we've ever had in that office... However he at least stood for something, had honor and true loyalty to his country.
 
Last edited:
B

bknarw

Attire Monitor
Originally posted by demsformd


For the time being let me say this, what a bunch of bullshit. Every administration has their scandals. The right-wing hated President Clinton because they were jealous. How could some dumb southerner get more votes than the elitest George Bush? They hated Clinton because he could appeal to people and people loved him. So they immediately set out on destroying him, something that the Democrats would never do. All the things that you mentioned came out because of the right-wing's hatred. There is plenty of documentation of this and one such insider of the conspiracy wrote a book detailing what the party did to destroy Clinton. This insider was the lawyer for Paula Jones and due to his experience has become a liberal with compassion. What the right wing did and what you are saying now are wrong, morally wrong. How can you attack on the side of morals while you are destroying another man? Jesus said whoever has not sinned throw the first stone. Have you never sinned before? Stop being self-rightous and take a look at yourself before you attack Mr. Clinton.
Click to expand...


Are you seriously asking these questions?
Ironic that you ask how a dumb southerner get more votes than George Bush, because all I hear the Dems calling George Bush is a dumb southerner.
We are now suffering the results of 8 years of Clinton. A nation that said that personal accountability and moral standards meant nothing, then found itself in a morass of laxity and corruption that includes the likes of sexual predators, priests who perv on young boys, and crooks who run major corporations.
And before you jump on this, I'm not saying Clinton is personally responsible for these things, but it's the mindset of the Clinton legacy that has us in the much in which we find ourselves today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top