Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, December 26, 2008
Pat Buchanan :: Townhall.com Columnist
George Bush, Protectionist
by Pat Buchanan
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


"I've abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system," President Bush told CNN, defending his offer of $17 billion in loans to the Big Three "to make sure the economy doesn't collapse."

Thus did Bush concede that protectionism, if a critical U.S. industry is in peril, must trump free-trade ideology. For in offering the bailout to GM, Ford and Chrysler, Bush, by omission, excluded BMW, Mercedes, Honda, Toyota, Nissan and Hyundai -- though all operate auto plants here in the United States and all are feeling the same sales slump.

Indeed, Toyota claims losses for the first time in 70 years -- though how Toyota's management was able to keep sales up in 1945, when Gen. Curtis LeMay's B-29s were conducting their nightly visits, escapes me.

Bush may believe he has sinned against free-market principles, but he is following the path of his great free-market predecessor. Ronald Reagan, too, was not prepared to see Japan take down the U.S. auto industry, or steel industry, or computer chip industry, or Harley-Davidson.

Believing Japan was dumping to destroy U.S. companies, Reagan put patriotism before ideology and imposed quotas on Japanese imports. He, too, was castigated by the same commentariat that is berating Bush.

Vice President Cheney, too, has endorsed the bailout of Detroit. Of the senators who voted to pull the plug on General Motors, Cheney is said to have remarked, "It's Herbert Hoover time" up there in the GOP caucus

Averting Chapter 11 for GM, which could lead to liquidation of the greatest manufacturing company in U.S. history -- cutting America out of the premier consumer market of the 21st century -- makes sense not only from the standpoint of politics, but economics, as well.

For other nations, as The Washington Post reports, are far ahead of Bush in sheltering their industries and protecting their markets:

"Moving to shield battered domestic manufacturers from foreign imports, Indonesia is slapping restrictions on at least 500 products this month, demanding special licenses and new fees on imports. Russia is hiking tariffs on imported cars, poultry and pork. France is launching a state fund to protect French companies from foreign takeovers. Officials in Argentina and Brazil are seeking to raise tariffs on products, from imported wine and textiles to leather goods and peaches, according to the World Trade Organization."

India has levied a 20 percent duty on soybeans to cut imports and protect her farmers. The United States has just filed charges with the World Trade Organization against China for "unfair support of its export industry -- including the award of cash grants, rebates and preferential loans to exporters."

Awfully late in the game, Bush seems to have awakened to an ancient reality. When the tough times come, nations protect their own interests first, free trade be damned.

"Country first," as the John McCain slogan ran.

Libertarians of the Milton Friedman school may be unforgiving of Bush. But what has their free-trade globalism given us, but $5 trillion in trade deficits since Bush 1 and a new dependency on foreigners for the necessities of our national life and the loans to pay for them?

Were all the Playstations and Priuses worth it?

By traditional free-trade theory, a nation should import what it does not produce from the nations that produce it most cheaply.

But in 1946, Japan produced almost no steel, no TVs and no cars. Instead of buying them from America, Tokyo subsidized its own steel, TV and auto industries for decades, and protected their market. Now, as Sony did to Philco and Dumont, Toyota, Honda and Nissan are taking down Ford, GM and Chrysler. Were the Japanese foolish to subsidize their industries and protect their market? Were we wise to let our TV industry be taken down, and watch our auto and steel industries driven to death's door?

To 1970, Boeing, Lockheed and McDonnell Douglas produced almost all of the world's jetliners. But rather than rely in perpetuity on Americans for passenger planes, Britain, France, Germany and Spain subsidized a socialist cartel, Airbus, that did not make a profit for 25 years and sold its planes for less than it cost to build them.

That trampled all over free-trade theory, but it did kill Lockheed and McDonnell Douglas and almost killed Boeing.

Were the Europeans foolish to create an aircraft industry and subsidize the destruction of Lockheed and McDonnell Douglas? Or were they wise to sacrifice today to capture the world's aircraft market of tomorrow?

Like Prohibition in Hoover's phrase, globalism is "an experiment, noble in purpose, that has failed."

As we have learned, at a cost of $10 trillion in wealth wiped out on Wall Street, the nations of the future are not the consumer nations that pile up debt as they live on imports, but the producer nations that save and sacrifice and make the things the world wants.

With the tax-and-trade policies of the Old Republican Party that made America first by putting Americans first, we can be that nation again.

As for President Bush, welcome to the Protectionists Club, sir.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Pat Buchanan is a founding editor of The American Conservative magazine, and the author of many books including State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Pat Buchanan's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Bush took a step in the right direction
but a true protectionist would collect tariffs from the foreign competition to save the big three from going belly up, and not collect money from the taxpayers to do so. Sure, Bush can't do this on such short notice, but only by doing that could he ensure a sustainable solution to the problems of the Big Three.
And I just could not see Bush doing that, and I see no other sensible way, apart from tariffs, to keep the Big three alive, and assure free trade exists.

It must have sure took some soul searching for Bush to do what he did. Imagine his fear that
the history books would name his free trade policies as what destroyed the American auto industry... So to protect his good name, he just took several billion dollars of taxpayer money to quick fix the problem long enough for
the Big Three to stay alive so the next president can deal with the continuing consequences of contined free trade.

Not much of a protectionist in my book, unless it is being a protectionist of his own memory.

And what about all the other smaller American manufacturing companies that already went belly up or moved outside of the US, thanks to free trade? If a company so run of the mill, like Swingline and a hundred other similarly small companies, has to close their factory doors and set up shop in, say, Mexico, will anyone notice?

Not as much as people will notice the Big Three going under. But, the same protections in the form of tariffs would need to be slapped on all foreign competition to keep trade fair, to protect all American manufactiring jobs, and not just to protect the Big Three's manufacturing jobs.

Fair trade, with protections and tariiffs alone will protect both consumers and the American manufacturing base. Free trade only destroys the American way of life.

Bush took a step in the right direction
but a true protectionist would collect tariffs from the foreign competition to save the big three from going belly up, and not collect money from the taxpayers to do so. Sure, Bush can't do this on such short notice, but only by doing that could he ensure a sustainable solution to the problems of the Big Three.
And I just could not see Bush doing that, and I see no other sensible way, apart from tariffs, to keep the Big three alive, and assure free trade exists.

It must have sure took some soul searching for Bush to do what he did. Imagine his fear that
the history books would name his free trade policies as what destroyed the American auto industry... So to protect his good name, he just took several billion dollars of taxpayer money to quick fix the problem long enough for
the Big Three to stay alive so the next president can deal with the continuing consequences of contined free trade.

Not much of a protectionist in my book, unless it is being a protectionist of his own memory.

And what about all the other smaller American manufacturing companies that already went belly up or moved outside of the US, thanks to free trade? If a company so run of the mill, like Swingline and a hundred other similarly small companies, has to close their factory doors and set up shop in, say, Mexico, will anyone notice?

Not as much as people will notice the Big Three going under. But, the same protections in the form of tariffs would need to be slapped on all foreign competition to keep trade fair, to protect all American manufactiring jobs, and not just to protect the Big Three's manufacturing jobs.

Fair trade, with protections and tariiffs alone will protect both consumers and the American manufacturing base. Free trade only destroys the American way of life.

So what are you saying?
Buchanan's put forth another stream of his usual garbage and ends up saying nothing. Get over it, Pat, your nonsense isn't going to get you any further ahead now than it ever has.

Bailing out General Motors and Chrysler isn't going to change the UAW's chokehold on the industry or the Congress, it isn't going to put an end to Congress and California's unrealistic stsndards or the public's incessant love of muscle cars and trucks.

It wasn't Bush who created the graft, corruption and sleazy dealings between Boeing and highly placed government workers who worked out the deals that resulted in criminal charges and Bush abandoned every scintilla of conservative principles that Newt Gingrich brought back to the Congress even after getting a second chance in 2004.

He blew it, the Republican Congress joined hands with the socialists across the aisle and now we are just along for the ride until the Messiah gets his toes wet.




Pat misses the real problem
It's government regs and the unions that are hurting the auto industry, not free trade.

Pharmaceuticals?
Yeah, protectionism. Like when the government forces schoolgirls to take Gardasil against their will and against their parents' wills. Let's roll back, Pat, to the days of a 90% tax on the highest incomes, too, why doncha?

Ford doesn't need bailouts. They produce better cars than the others. Their Brazilian plants (you can see 'em on u-tube for yourself) are flexible, producing multiple platforms at the same time, while it takes weeks and months for the American plants to make changes (so it's said.) Guess you're against automation, too? Costs jobs? Go drive a Flintstonemobile!

Just waiting for you to make some intemperate remarks about Israel. I'm sure they're coming. How's Ahmadinejad these days, anyway?

Well China, Japan, Saudi Arabia etc
have a bunch of America IOU's for products we have used. Now tell me will those IOU's ever be paid back?

Protect our pork exports to Saudi Arabia
Generally agree that it was necessary to have our government do what governments of other nations, our foreign competitors, have always done...and that is to protect their industries.

If you don't take care of your own, who the hell will?

That should be commonsense.

That is not to excuse incompetence and stupidity among American automobile executives.

And nor is it to punish foreign competitors who may be more innovative.

UAW does not get off scot-free either, but recent rants in demonizing the union, and only the union, is just ideological shilling, and gets a bit tiresome.

At one time, American auto industry was creative. I may be wrong, but power steering, power brakes, automatic transmission were among the innovations created and made commercially viable by our auto industry.

But too often engineering and innovation gave way to marketing, and slight changes in automobile body styles took precedence over innovation in technology and engineering.

Yearly variations on tail fins of Cadillacs in the late 50s and early 60s come to mind.

And so the Japanese cannot be faulted for making more technologically advanced, and better engineered cars, than Americans...and that was the case for decades.

Now Americans have eliminated that gap, so we are told.

Could be.

But there should never have been a gap in the first place.

That was not Japan's fault. That was ours'.

But on a happy note, I don't think our pork exporters need to worry that Saudi Arabia or Israel will slap a tariff on American pork products to their nations to protect their respective domestic pork industries.

Barbeque baby-back ribs can't be beat.

Them Muslims and Jews don't know what they're missing.






Hmmm, Pat
Sorry Pat but you are a idiot now. Free trade is good for the country and let GM , Ford and Chrysler prove themselves. It is not my fault they have cars that cost to much for me to drive a new one. And i drive a used Ford Ranger. a 2002 model with 104,000 miles on it now and i am not going out to shop for a new one.

Not the same
What Reagan did was nothing compared to this. Balanced trade is like a balanced check book. Required even in free market.

This misnomer of free trade abroad is like American's importing/spending to their hearts pleasure. That alone tells one the problem American's have.

That is a great example of how Nations go bus. When they pay for technology that no one wants for 25 years.

This financial crisis stinks. Bush just wants to put it all on Obama's watch. To that I somewhat agree. Let one President handle the affair. Bush has made that clear from day one.

It should give Americans an idea that something big is about to happen economicly, r-u-ready.



Americans in America
are building automobiles which are successful in the market place. Some number of cars will be built somewhere and bought here. Which course will be ultimately more successful? To have the market supplied by those doing it well, serving the market in a self-sustaining profitable way for all involved? Or to have the cars built by companies where decisions made by management and labor have made it impossible to operate at a profit. The same number of jobs are available in either case. Let Detroit, the UAW, and GM sink to their market worth. Its called bankruptcy. Let the stockholders face the results of complacency. Let the workers go to Kentucky and Alabama, where the jobs will go, where the taxes/business climate make building autos viable for workers and management alike. It is crazy and immoral to tax these successful producers to support foolishness and failure in Detroit. I'm in favor of letting the buggy whip makers suffer too.
Investment goes where it gets the best return. That used to be here, and the whole world invested here. Now that investment money is going other places because of the anti-business climate here. Naturally, jobs follow. To re-vitalize American business, make it profitable to start a business here again.

Trade Deficits
We are in our 32nd year of trade deficits. Anything wrong with that?

Naivite
Free trade is an ideal, but no other government pursues free trade in the absence of it's own industrial policy. And that's the reality of how the world operates. It's fine to support capitalism abroad as a means of encouraging the development of third world countries - but those are political goals.

The hard reality that those that blindly follow free trade without balancing that trade with an industrial policy seem to always ignore is that no 1st World Country can compete with labor costs in third world countries, when people are being paid $1 to $2 per hour. Blaming it on unions, or government regulations, or the rest, is a convenient way to ignore this hard fact. At the same time, no 1st World Country can compete with countries who wish to take over industries when those countries decide to use their national tax base to subsidize business. Unlimited capital given with no expectation of repayment, let alone interest, as well as protecting their markets by ensuring that the duties on imports would make it impossible for those imports to compete, are the favorite tools of such governments. And continuing to provide such capital for decades to off-set losses, is a continuation of such policies.

Reagan was a realist about such things. Clinton and Bush, however, chose to pursue the ideal of free trade, without insisting on an industrial policy to balance that ideal. There's a reason that manufacturing now employs fewer than 10% of American workers. The great irony is that we have reached this point with very little public debate - and almost by accident. And that's naive.


Free Trade
You can only have free trade when both parties allow the free flow of merchandise across their borders. We are the only country in the world that does not protect its own industries with tariffs and quotas. When Reagan began talking about protecting the U.S.auto industry's the Japanese opened plants on our soil. Unlike our trading partners we are the only fools who put our own citizens out of work to hire foreigners. Don't believe it, check out the tech jobs sent overseas and the tech workers being given visas to come here to work. Make some excuse about the lack of tech workers, of how about all the plants closed down and the jobs sent to Mexico or some other country. Pat is right we need to get our heads out of the sand stop believing all the B.S. fed to us and start worrying about our fellow citizens, our economy and our country. Mccain was right America first, but Pat B. said it first and has tried to rally us against the great giveaway for the last 30 years. PAY ATTENTION!!

Not quite Pat
Was Europe stupid to subsidize Airbus ?

duh.

Europe has been in economic and cultural free fall for 2 decades.

Was Japan stupid for subsidizing its auto industry?

Gee, they've had zero economic growth for a decade.

Let's make sure we follow their lead.

Subsidize everything?
Is that Pat's answer to competition. He talks about free trade and otyher countries subsidizingbtheir industries but says nothing about our subsidies to farmers, inckuding thosen subsidies that hide the true cost of Ethanol and Soy Diesel. He also doesn't mention the money will be used to subsidize labor unions and their legacy costs. Isn't the Japanese auto industry in the U.S. deserving of subsidies? Why not? They were the ones that provided us with cars that we wanted and were not only fuel efficient, but durable.

Redlac
nice comment.

Scott re. IOU's
They'll get paid back after we collect The Marshall Plan back from Europe...with interest.

Bush took a step in the right direction?
Patrick is out in left field as usual. Under Bush, the U.S. economy is built on a "house of cards." CREDIT CARDS THAT IS!

All Bush has set us up for is a re-run of the "Great Depression." Rather than cleaning out the trash like GM, Bush has given GM and the trash Unions more taxpayer dollars to squander.

Why is old left-wing Patrick even allowed to post on this site?

Good article,
Makes sense.

Redlac, Crescen7
The ultimate protected economy was soviet Russia. It produced a miserable life for Joe Sixpack and eventually collapsed after 70 years. There are doubtless areas where the govt must step in for strategic, country-wide b enefits that the market can not be expected to handle. A military capability is an obvious example, and i think developing shale oil and liquid fuel from coal fall into this category. But subsidizing failure, is not a govt function. It always results in more failure and more expense and eventual stagnation. Do you want to follow Europe Redlac, and turn over progress and technology innovation to the emerging countries?

Pistol
Those Japanese and Korean plants in the South were built as a result of Reagan's industrial policy, which in turn led to the recognition by foreign auto manufacturers that the politics of employment had to be addressed.

However, we shouldn't be naive about this. The hard reality is that the Southern plants may have a lower labor cost that unionized northern plants, but they are not remotely competitive with the world's labor market. At the same time, many of the parts and components that are being assembled in those plants, are made elsewhere as we will import $130 billion in parts. Those plants that make those engines, drive trains, etc. were never imported into the ÜS. In addition, keep in mind that as the WSJ reported, in November the total sales of light vehicles were 747,000. However, almost 200,000 of those were imported. Indeed, almost 1/2 of Toyota's sales were imported and almost 45% of all "foreign cars"sold here were imported. So, they assemble here, but continue to produce most parts o/s, and they still produce almost 1/2 of what they sell here o/s as well.

It is more profitable to build cars in India, China etc and ship them to the US and sell them here, than it is to build and sell them here.

And have no illusions - if their were no US auto industry and no government involvement in preserving jobs in the industry - those Southern Plants would evaporate right along with those of the big 3.

What to do about it
Protectionism never works. It historically bites the hand that feeds it.
George Bush took yet anothe step downward by doing the liberals work for them. Bush is no more a "Consertive" than McCain.

Consertivatives are not represented these days, yet we're the majority of the taxpayers.

One solution: Get all the conservatives to stop work for even "ONE DAY" (A Week). It would work. The evil done by our "Elected Communist Officials" depends on our "Wonderfully Delicious Taxpayer MONEY".

A choke hold always gets the chokee's attention.

Pat never talks about
quality. The reason Japanese cars became so popular was that the quality was immenently higher than the American junk being produced in Detroit. The Big Three finally got dragged kicking & screaming into producing a quality product by about 1995, but when the $2000 per unit legacy costs are added, it was too little too late. The same goes for TV's. If it were not for the Japanese driving quality, we'd still be watching a snowy pictured set with 15 knobs to tweak every time the channel is changed. The name of the game is best quality at the lowest price. Henry Ford knew that 100 years ago. American manufactureers thought they could keep shoving junk out the door forever.

Pistol
You, like many, miss a simple fact. As a businessman I don't. You can no longer manufacture much of anything in the US and be competitive with other countries - unless government levels the playing field.

It's a very simple reality. Do you want manufacturing or not? Yes or No. Those Southern plants are not competitive - not even close. The workers make far too much, and have far too high of an hourly cost. Your corporate taxes and health costs are also far too high. And, you cannot have military capability without protecting a wide range of industries that contribute. You seem to ignore how foreign governments manipulate the system, and then complain and call it protectionism or being uncompetitive if we return the favor. You simply don't seem to get it.

I manufacture power systems in China. Why - because my costs are 40% less than in the US. And why is that - because I pay $2 per hour for labor, and China doesn't float her currency, which keeps the cost of raw materials down to half of ours. And like Japan, she dumps $100's of billions directly into industry.

No American business can compete with that.


Don't blame Bush!
Don't blame Bush! The free market doesn't work. In fact, it doesn't exist. If it did, there wouldn't be failures.

While what Bush and the Fed are doing won't work either, it is important to recognize that free market ideology is a red herring.

The economy follows the simple rules of cause and effect. Buy low-sell high has consequences. Neither businesses nor government can work when maximum profit is the dominate philosophy; it creates too volatile an economy.

Free trade requires self-restraint, and a philosophy of buy low-sell low. What goes around comes around, and inflation destroys everything in its path.

Inflation is a man-mad phenomenon; it is not created by the markets. It is a mathematical echo of the WRONG choices we make.

http://www.behappyandfree.com

Band aid appoach
will not work any longer. Our economy and governement have gotten to the point that an intensive over haul is needed. We have to have a change in many policies and ideals to make our country function for the 21st Century. To begin with lets:

1. Let us reduce the regulation of our industries by big government.

2. Let us reduce the spending of government to a point that taxation can be drastically reduced.

3. Our tax system needs to be changed to remove the complexity. Something like a sales tax, but not the Fair Tax in its present design, would be much better.

4. I also think a reasonable tariff across the board on all products would be wise. It won't prop up businesses that are failing in our country if the tariff is not made too large.

5. Balance of trade must be brought into a reality that speaks to the money coming back to America to buy goods and services not Federal Bonds.

6. There are many things that need improvement but the most important is the reduction of governmental reach. Americans need to insist on more freedom not more "rights" found by a Federal government.

Bushes Cut and Run
Finally G Bush has learned something about dealing with life (reality) on life's terms. After 9-11 he and the braintrust -Rove, Cheney, Wolfwitz, Rumsfeld, hid under the sheets disallowing any 'infection' of the ideaology of neocon. The commentariat Buchannon mentions do not have the ability to let go of the past. The Free Market is only as good as the bottom feeders in it. Right now the bottom is pretty nasty. All bets and trade agreements are null until all countries revisit their particular identity and purpose. When the politics settles down, here and every where, trade can return but it will not be 'free' so much as fair. Currency revaluation, industrial reestablishment, reduction in waste in all activity especially government are what is headed our way. None of the TH RETRO big talker-slow thinkers thread posters has proposed anything of value so far.
Antiprogressarianism - stay the course. Delusional myth proclaimations - free market for ever.
One thing about a crisis - The real leaders will emerge and lead, the wannabes fall to the side.

THE ULTIMATE WIMP OUT

.....BUSH is subsidizing the UAW pure and simple ...he knows that Obama's administration is going to protect union workers so he is kicking the can down the road to protect his legacy, which in my opinion, has been the selling out of conservative principles ....

.....The Democrat Party, since FDR, has cast itself as the Labor Party ...the opposite side of that coin is that they have become the anti-business Party ...the Waggoner Act gave the unions great power but they have abused that power to drive American industry into the ground ...they have turned our industrial heartland into the "Rust Belt" ...ask the Rubber Worker in Akron what happened to Uniroyal and B F Goodrich ...ask the steelworkers in Gary, IND why their mills shut down ...

.....With Obama in the White House and the Democrats in charge of government we are entering the most hostile to business era since FDR ...we have oil, gas and coal in the ground that can't be developed ...we have some of the highest corporate taxes in the World and with the Global Warming and Cap & Trade Hoaxes about to be foisted upon us they are only going to get worse ....

.....We no longer have a free market economy ...our Government has sold us out and is taking over ...the spirit of FDR is alive and kicking our butts .....COLOSSUS

Democracy is an inferior system.
Okay Pat, I work twice as hard and make half as much as a Detroit auto worker. I don't complain about that - until you want to take money from me and give it to those unionized thugs. You make no demands that they bring their wage and benefit package within the range of their competition. You just want to hand over tax money you've taken from me so that they can work their cushy jobs and continue to build their overpriced, inferior product.

You're lucky the USA isn't a monarchy with me as it's king. I'd fix the Big 3's problems. Ever wonder why there are no Studebakers on the road today? Do we miss them? No. They were replaced by companies that COULD compete.

Admit it, Pat. You're a union man, through and through.

protectionism
"As we have learned, at a cost of $10 trillion in wealth wiped out on Wall Street, the nations of the future are not the consumer nations that pile up debt as they live on imports, but the producer nations that save and sacrifice and make the things the world wants."

Pat, it appears you have tunnel vision... unionized American auto companies not only don't produce what the world wants, they are also the most costly machines in the world!

Just as the American auto industries have saturated the American market and grown too large for a domestic market only, all large American companies will do the same... especially if their labor is owned by unions.

Yes, when another country protects their business interests we very well should impose a like penalty on them to protect ours. The flip side, don't protect, with tax dollars, monsters that have priced themselves out of a job!

Oh yea, for everyone who has lost money in the market, that same money ended up in another person's bank account as they took the profit and ran.

Politicians smarter than Consumers
In the case of the auto industry, which is somewhat different than the banking industry collapse, the consumer, yes the American consumer, decided that the American auto industry should be the one to fail.

Isn't a bit odd, the American consumer(also voter) is suppose to be smart enough to elect the President of the United States, but many politicians have decided they are not smart enough to decided which automobile companies should survive.

Making the loans to the Big 3 clearly does not make their product more competitive quality wise, and unless additional pressure is applied to the UAW, it will not substantially make the product more competitive cost wise.

Is the day coming where the some politicians will suddenly decide that the consumer (voter) is no longer smart enough to elect the President or Governors.

Buchanan - A Blathering Idiot
Buchanan offers, "Libertarians of the Milton Friedman school may be unforgiving of Bush. But what has their free-trade globalism given us, but $5 trillion in trade deficits since Bush 1 and a new dependency on foreigners for the necessities of our national life and the loans to pay for them?"

What a blathering idiot! Since when was the "Friedman school" practiced in trade? Buchanan points to protected industries failing and screams that they fail because they are not protected enough. Stupid argument, of course.

Buchanan is a looney.


COST OF LIVING

.....REDLAC ...You wrote ...

....."I manufacture power systems in China. Why - because my costs are 40% less than in the US. And why is that - because I pay $2 per hour for labor, and China doesn't float her currency, which keeps the cost of raw materials down to half of ours. And like Japan, she dumps $100's of billions directly into industry....

No American business can compete with that" ...

.....I can remember when American Labor could compete ...I remember when a man could earn $40 a week and support a stay at home wife and a couple of kids ... a loaf of bread cost .15 cents and I could go to a double matinee movie for a quarter ...what happened? ...FDR's New Deal happened! ...

.....The Waggoner Act gave great power to labor unions and the CIO and AFL used this power to shut down industries with costly strikes for ever increasing wages ...then FDR pushed for a minimum wage ...I remember when it was .75 cents an hour ...

.....Let's take the Steel Mills ...the union calls for a strike every three years and wins higher wages and benefits ...the steel companies raises the cost of steel to cover the added expenses ....every industry that uses steel, (auto, appliances, construction), has to raise their prices to keep up ...this raises the cost of living for every one so the minimum wage has to be raised ...

.....And on it goes ...the endless spiral of inflation that makes a loaf of bread go from .15 cents to $2.75 ...(CONT) .....COLOSSUS


COST OF LIVING - PART TWO

.....REDLAC ...

.....What you are doing is sub-contracting labor to keep your prices down ...if you paid USA wages you would have to raise the price of your product ...if the government put a high tariff on imports ...this would be the same thing ...the consumer would have to pay more for the same product ...so it is six of one and a half dozen of the other ...the bottom line is that labor costs are the biggest expense in the manufacture of any product ...and if tariffs level the playing field the consumer still has to pick up the tab .....COLOSSUS

Tim Makes a Good Point
I wish to add that in order to bomb Toyota plants today we would need to bomb places like San Antonio, not Tokyo. Why should non-union auto workers subsidize the UAW?

reply to michigander
By the way, I too am originally a michigander and grew up near Detroit. You're absolutely right. The Big Three kept producing cars that, in the long run, were just not competitive with the Japanese products. Sure, when the imports first hit the US market, they generally weren't much, but the Japanese and later, the Koreans, got their acts together pretty fast.

I've been buying cars for 40 years. During that time I've owned one American car--an AMC wagon that my wife got on the cheap because it had been her car for a sales job. As soon as we could, we got rid of it. VW, Honda, and Toyota have gotten our car business, and our kids continue with Toyota. Why? Just plain quality.

The American auto makers have made improvements, as various data sources attest. However, they lost credibility, and no bail out is going to recover that.

As for protectionism, free traders should just wake up and see that this is how the world works. Who really practices free trade in the global economy? Free trade is a piece of theory; in the real world businesses expect the kind of security that only government can provide.

Where is the logic Pat?
Why should I bail out the pension plans of guys who build cars that I don't want to buy?

These unions squeezed companies until they break, then they come after the tax payer

on being a prisoner to dogma
Some free-marketeers are so smitten with doctrine that they cannot, or will not, contemplate the consequences of such doctrine.

In the real world, rational nations protect their interests, be they capital(intellectual or otherwise), labor, or technology.

Patents, copyrights, franchises are established to protect intellectual property and industrial and commercial processes derived therefrom.

If nations don't protect their intellectual, labor and capital assets, they eventually cease to exist.

Something about the irrefutable laws of nature.

But when what has come to be "half-baked free-market doctrine" subverts the interests of the United States, we have the incredible situation where the nations of the world instinctively act to preserve and promote their own interests, while our's stupidly refuses to do so out of some perverse school-boy fascination with purist economic theory.

Communism was great in theory, horrible in practice.

I am not sure laissez-faire is not far behind, in that connection.

In addition, some are so viscerally loathe unions, as exemplified by their demonization of the UAW, that they would knowingly sacrifice the industrial sector of the United States if the result was destruction of unions.

Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Yes, unions sometimes hinder productivity and skewer wages to unrealistic heights, but blind allegiance to flawed doctrine has harmed our Beloved Republic far more than union excesses.




It all
comes down to this:

A politician looks a man in the eye who, for example, is busting his hump for twenty bucks an hour, and says to him with a straight face, "I'm going to take some of the taxes you pay and use it to prop-up a business so it can continue to pay its workers more than double what you earn."

Steel Tariffs
Only 10% of the cost of a car is labor, that means that 90% of the cost is something else. One of those "something elses" is the cost of steel.

The Genius in Chief, GWB, increased the cost of steel with tariffs to "protect" the steel industry. Despite being warned of the deleterious effects of tariffs on industries dependent upon steel, the Buchananites cheered. They then had their protectionist theory put to the test. GM, Ford and Chrysler can now testify to the results.

This, along with the huge increase in commercial real estate prices, drove the costs far more than labor did. (costs weren't the only problem, government regulation played a signficant part as well as incompetent management)

Now Buchanan, in one of his typical fits of stupidity, thinks we can save the car industry just like the steel industry was "saved", by raising the costs of every industry dependent upon autos and trucks.

If you apply these protectionist principles consistently you get the Smoot-Hawley tariffs which destroyed international trade and greatly exascerbated the Great Depression. Buchanan thinks that every industry can be saved by higher prices for its goods. And just whom does Buchanan think will pay these higher prices?

How did this happen?
I'm an old guy and I have seen much in this world. I have, you might say, removed myself from the main street thread. I, as a young man was blessed as I had the chance to gain a view of the world. I set foot in much of the free world during my years from 17-21. In essence, I saw how the rest of the world lived. In that time [1959-63] span, I grew up and became a man. Sometimes I rued the knowledge I gained as no-one wanted to hear the truth. People in this country were so focused in making more money to buy things, as my wife says] of frivilous nature, they failed to see the unbalance of fortune between the US and other nations.
I watched as the unions over stepped their bounds demanding more and more for less and less. I tried to tell those around me however no one believed it. I have been called Crabgrass, Doomsayer, nuts. My mother said to me, "I can't believe that is coming out of your mouth".
What is upon us now has been coming since the nation was born. The downslope has been steepening over the years. Now we are on the precipice of sheer drop. Everyone wants to know How did this happen.
When a people demand the highest wage in the world and the cheapest products made in the world. They are inviting disaster.
First the manufacturers cannot make a decent profit.
Second the people will not purchase the product they, themselves, make.
Third all the currency moves out of country.
Fourth people lose the good jobs in manufacturing and become workers in the service industries which cannot carry the economy.
Fifth when a nation attempts to allow a service or service industries to carry the economy, the bubble bursts.
This leads to Chaos as we now have.
So many so-called experts, brain trusts, we are told must be gathered to figure out the problem and how to mend,fix and/or sooth the raging masses. {Occurring now}}

How did this happen? [con't]

Now, as is occurring, you can blame the big corporate managers/CEO's for their great misdirected Greed, and/or the Idiotic Politicians, [that by the way, we voted for]or you can blame the Mexicans, the illegal aliens for the fall. Yep, it's their fault. You can blame the Chinese, the Japanese, the Indians, the Indonesians, Anyone but yourself.
Jesus said, "You Hypocrites, remove the beam out of your own eye before attempting to remove the mote out of someone else's eye."
To sum it up. The blame lies on us the people, those who work hard, those who allow the people in power to lead and never look at what they are doing until it gets into our own back yards. Folks, we the people' have allowed the Wolves into the sheepfold and now are going to pay that price.

How about some common sense?
Wow - so many economists! Why would you pay $25,000 for a new Pontiac? It's like these diamond ads that convince women that they need a second rock. They're just taking your money for crap you don't need because they know you'll do anything for sex.

They could build something simple and inexpensive but they'd rather screw you out of your money for crap like a 25k firebird. You are an idiot if you want to bail out these guys and that's because they will screw you in return.




Protectionism...
...is just Smoot-Hawley all over again and will have the same (bad) results.

 

Pat you need to read
David Friedman.

Protecting one set of jobs only takes jobs away from someone else.

You are simply wrong about this issue, you are giving support to protecting one class of American's supposedly to protect them from foreigners, but all your really protecting them from is other American's that would be able to produce efficient products or services to ship overseas.

There are two ways to get a car into the American market, one way is to build it here, another way is to grow something, build something, invent something, or service something for a foreigner who will in turn send you a car.

By protecting Detroit you are screwing all the other American's who have to both pay higher prices (i.e. be less efficient) and also lose the market overseas for the things they produce.

Pat, your economics is bad for America (except for a few in a special interest group).

George Bush the protectionist and ... SO
The Big Three Automakers have to start building cars that Americans WANT at a price Americans think is REASONABLE or they will keep "sucking air".

So, Pat Buchanan, and protectionists like him, including the NEW protectionist and Socialist George Bush, will have to pass laws MANDATING AND REQUIRING that Americans "buy American products ONLY" to get their protectionist plans to materialize, like those of SORCERY! OsiSpeaks.com

pese don tro me n de brar pech
Those who have the advantage of watching others make the hard decision are so stuck on themselves, believe that the world is about them, and every body is out to get their money. You rose with the tide(conservative Presidents and/or congress)for 28 years that sent manufacturing overseas, bought new cars, houses, sent your kids to college, got you season tickets to pro football and stock car racing. The going MIGHT get tough for awhile and what a bunch of whiners and blamers.
You tell storys of how hard you work and how life was so good until this fall. Now that the sand has been removed from the sandhill in which you buried it, how does the breeze feel?

Inconvenient truth
US business taxation rates, government regulation of manufacturing and union benefit excesses have created a situation which if not corrected dooms the US as the worlds preeminent industrial power. If corrections are made free trade is fine, otherwise protection is an essential retardant to ultimate decline.

I've been saying it........
all along with you Pat......don't blame me, I voted for YOU.....

"globalism is "an experiment, noble in purpose, that has failed."

The only thing I would correct is "noble in purpose"......lol...otherwise the rest is correct.

Baseball doc.
Regulation, management, unions, and the current economic situation in which car sales have dropped by 40% - also due to government actions - or lack of it, are at the heart of this condition.

We can, as some suggest, let the industry survive or fail. But let's not convince ourselves of facts not in evidence. Some wish to believe that many of those jobs will still stay here, and other's like to believe that if we don't find a way to keep the industry afloat, that there'll be no cost. Both are very wrong. Foreign manufacturers assemble (primarily from parts made o/s and shipped here) about 30% of the cars sold in the US, and import another 25%. US manufacturers were making 45%. Does anyone seriously think that companies with 30% of US assembly capacity can add another 45% - for a total of 75%? And what about the parts and components? Can they rise magically from making perhaps 10% here to 75%? Combine this with the fact that the cars and parts they make off shore are more profitable than the ones they make here, and you can only answer: No. It fails the common sense test.

As far as the cost to the taxpayer, consider the cost of losing the taxes on the parts made and sold to the big 3, employee income taxes, profits on the sale of those cars, the cost to carry 1.5 million to 2.0 million people while we try to find other jobs, and then add in the cost to the government of ending up having to fund a portion of the pension funds - which we are on hook for. And, if you allow the Big 3 to fail - then economics will rule - and in the end, you will see the Foreign manufacturers begin to close their American plants and move to the low cost producing countries. Eventually - they'll all be gone. And, since we must buy cars - we will be helpless to stop them.

jerabaub
what he said. Unions are not the worst thing that has happened. What is worse is the pay of non union people who actually MAKE something besides paper cuts has been too low for too low. When Reagan made it a "happy day' to break a union he may have set the stage for ALL working people to work harder for less, pushing the profits up hill to the elite management and investment class. You remember them as the recent guests of Barny Frank and friends.

Obama has been reading Lincoln...
and Lincoln was a PROTECTIONIST ... HE loved the TARIFF.

If Obama uses the TARIFF and can regenerate our non-existent manufacturing industry ...

instead of going with his stupid Government workfare program ...

This country could turn around.

Bush had his chance to use TARIFFS to save this nation AND his place in history... but he stuck with Free-trade (Which is NOT really free-trade. It is more like STUPID trade)

But for some reason Bush chose to go down with the ship.

If Obama does turn around the economy you can say goodbye to the Republicans for another 50 years.

Free Market does not equal Free Trade.
Never has, never will.

Free markets only function where there is equal freedom of entry into the market and there is a level playing field for the participants.

Don Juan said something similar, but since he has no brain, disregard his words and use your common sense.

Re; Presid. Bush!!!
Look, for all of you bleeding heart liberals I think you owe this man a great deal of thanks and gratitude because we have been attacked and no one has been diagnosed with some type of biohazard crap so you people need to thank this man from the bottom of your pointed little heads!!! Oh, and if it wasn't for Soros and Buffet and the like manipulating the market we would not have this econ. problem and he told Frank and Reid to shut up and let him regulate the Freddie and Fannie deal the world as we see it would be a damned go place to live!!!!

Bankruptcy for the Big Three or Bailouts
What you seem to be ignoring is that the big three's problem is caused not by unfair competiton by foreign auto makers but by their own (CEO's and workers alike) greed/avarice, ignorance and blatant disregard for market principles. You can say it as many times as you want but saying that just because they might end up in bankruptcy would mean the end of the Big Three doesn't make it so. Saying no now to handouts might get the fire lit and a meaningful restructuring started. It doesn't take Million plus CEOs to accomplish the things that need to be done. Quality cars that people want to buy, made by decently paid employees (not $76/hr), and good marketing are the key ingredients to a turn around not massive giveaways that only maintain the status quo. And does anyone really think that the flaming liberals and democrats plus RINO Bush are going to hold anyone's feet to the fire?

It's not either, or
Both sides are right!

The problem with Government Meddling
Is that it is the government meddling. A small number of people that have little or no experience even running a failing company let alone a successful one is not going to make the economy work. They don't know how.

Here is a cute but very accurate video protraying what happens when governments meddle (Someone else already pointed out the failures of other countries and their "protectionist" strategies. The LEAST protectionist is the MOST successful )

Now on to the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0r3y0ikLPLc The specific point is about 4 min into the video.

-Vicki-

P.S. Who caused the housing mess
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e11-_cE63Us

I don't know about all this stuff...!
I haven't bought a car since Aug.16,1977.
Therefore, Iam still driving my pink cadillac
around wearing disguises so the Grandmothers
will not scream and tear at my clothes if they see me!
But all this heavy idealistic fancy talk about what will work and what will not..is making me dizzy and as long as Iam dizzy..Iam equal to congress and the Prez. quick grab me while Iam dizzy and let me vote! Because once my head clears Iam going to vote for a bailout!
A bailout of congress! Bail those buzzards
out of office!
Elvis

The governments job is
first to protect the people's interests. Free trade is great as long as it is fair. Regulators in this country impose tough labor and safety standards on manufacturers which add to the cost of doing business. When we allow trade with countries that do not have these standards, we cannot compete.

The economic crisis we are in is global which is why the price of oil has fallen. It is not just we who are not driving as much. Manufacturing around the world has slowed. Before the crisis, oil was skyrocketing. Why? Because of world wide demand which brings me to my next point. We love to pay the lower prices we get on imported goods. The unintended consequence of that is that we Americans through our demand of less expensive imported goods caused a global industrial revolution that drove up the demand for and thus the price of energy so what ever dollars we saved at Walmart, we paid at the pump.

US Congress
Tariffs, free trade, free market, etc. do not register in the collective brains of elected representatives.

535 of the dumbest, most ignorant people in America are sitting in opulence inside the beltway. For one example, look at Joe Biden. His mouth and brain are completely unconnected.

Look at Rangel, another idiot who is "powerful" in congress. Doesn't even know the tax code he helped write.

What to do about it? Beats me. I'm sick of these morons who pontificate about subjects they know nothing about, yet will rule our lives with the laws they pass.

If anyone wants a grunt for a revolution, count me in.

We have NEVER had "free trade" . . .
but MANAGED trade. True "free trade" would entail a tit-for-tat response for trade restrictions imposed on our products.
In Japan, each imported car must be individually checked for compliance to safety and emission regulations. Contrast that with our open, blanket certification system. If we insisted that EVERY Japanese car be tested individually, there would be such a backlog at the docks; their trade restriction would disappear in a hurry. The only way to true free trade is an identical response to trade restrictions imposed on our products.

Pat Buchanan = National Socialist
I posted it before, I'll do it again. Buchanan and Bush deserve one another.

Krugman or Buchanan?
To make this New Directions thinking rock solid, a trinity, we need to add Krugman's equally excellent or superior recent article (it appears partially to agree w/Pat) AND the recent "Apology for Democratic Capitalism" by Michael Novak in "First Things."

We believe strongly in this trinity.

Dear Barack: No more "bubbles" please!

Baby with the bath water..
So Bush killed capitalism in order to save it?

Everything they are doing is a contradiction. Bush bails out the auto industry and congress passes new unrealistic CAFE standards at the same time.

Over two million Americans lost their jobs, with more losses to come, and congress is importing 140,000 foreign workers a month, plus illegals.

The congress wants to give us a tax holiday to leave more money in our pay checks. What part of "lost my job" suggests that there is a pay check to benefit from this?

So let's review: My house has lost 30% of it's value, my 401k is reduced to a 101k, my income is down by 50% but I managed to save Wall St, Banks, Insurance, and the Big Three.

I'm glad I'll at least be able to sit in the Hooverville and watch the new Chevy's go by.

Brother, can spare a billion?

Bail-out $$$
Lets see....
bail-out money going to many directions, auto, mortgage, union, banks in general, and who knows where else.

I wonder if this money is making up the differance of what these companies would have made without the "incentive package" to buy their goods and services. So either way the citizen/taxpayer pays and the greedy get their "profits."

And the "government" ends up owning everything, this is a bloodless coup! Fantastic, America or should I say the Amerimexican Union is now in place.

And people said there was no conspiricy by the Illuminati/Zionist/Freemason/Rothschild element. THEY GOTCHA, AND YOU NEVER SAW IT COMUING!

Koolmuse
You are right that oil production is being controlled. It is the congress that is doing the controlling. The free market would supply energy a lot more efficiently that what we have now. You are also right about the profits of Exxon. Were the politicians not in bed with them they wouldn't be making so much money.

As to your comment on auto manufacturer execs ruining the auto business by pushing for profits they have certainly done a bang up job in that they lose money on everything they sell. Without profit there is no reason for a company to exist which is why the Detroit guys should be in bankruptcy.

Taxpayers save the UAW!

Once again the ordinary person who works hard, pays taxes and tries to be a good citizen has been raped by the government.

How About it is Reed Smoot Time
at the White House.

hmmmm
Pat= moron.

You seem to forget that also automation is also helping with other car companies here that are from other countries which the big 3 and UAW fought to keep out of there factories for years. Do you want to do away with automation Pat?

How about going over to cafehayek.com and reading there from a real economists Pat. you might learn something.

Buchannan Writes the articles
while the mutts nip at his heels.

Hayek
A long time ago (well, to you kids, anyway) Dr. Freidrich Hayek pointed out that when fascism/socialism was consuming Europe, there was no real goal of nationalizing the entire private sector.

It started small, with a few big key industries. Hayek held that while SOME government interference is good, government tended to react to the vagaries of the market simply with even more interference.

Once the government had interfered too much over the market mechanisms, it had no choice but to rigidly control the entire economy.

Roy E. Cordato pointed out that government is force; like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master (attributed to G. Washington); if government is the hammer, then all problems become nails.

When demand increases, good businessmen attempt to increase supply. On the other hand, government attempts to decrease demand. You see this in the ideas that Obama has floated: make driving fossil-fueled cars so expensive that people will switch to "green" vehicles.

You don't have to read "The Road to Serfdom" by Hayek, folks, you're living it.

Not a Conservative
Once again, Buchanan proves he is able to misunderstand even the most obvious lessons of history. I don't know why he keeps trying to teach us economics when he himself appears to have learned it from a single chapter in a community college history text.

This guy gets a genuine kick out of swimming against the conservative stream on every issue save abortion. Why is he called conservative again?

Pat Buchanan True Conservative
Death to economic Treason!
Pack off these "Free Traitors" and send them to Dubai!
Most Americans have been Severely Hurt by this Very Costly 'free trade'. Globalism is a Failure and Economic Treason is just that,Treason! I vote my economic interest from now on until the Neo-Con's become Conservative again - Social issues be damned!

Economic Nationalism
Death to economic Treason!
Pack off these "Free Traitors" and send them to Dubai!
Most Americans have been Severely Hurt by this Very Costly 'free trade'. Globalism is a Failure and Economic Treason is just that,Treason! I vote my economic interest from now on until the Neo-Con's become Conservative again - Social issues be damned!

George, George, George
You can't abandon principles you never had. The more we spend, the closer we get to a one-world socialist order, and the farther we get from the United States I knew as a child, free, principled, honest, Christian, disciplined, devoted to hard work, where it was possible to win or lose without driving college professors into insane diatribes, and where the individual mattered. So sad. It is gone. Journalism isn't the only thing that is dead Hannity.

Failure
Speaking of jounalists, I understand that newspapers are the next failing industry to appeal to the government with hat in hand...

Tough Guys
Tough guys with all your B.S. about the lack of growth in Europe and Japan.Your B.S. about free trade and the importing of cheap manufactured goods. Your arrogance toward our billions of dollars in trade deficits. The only way we can keep our heads above water is to beg and borrow or sell off American assets. I for one can't wait to dive over the Mao Bridge or on the Saudi Interstate Highway. Stop your stupidity and get your heads out of the sand. We need to take control of our economy. Close our wallets and stop trying to be everything to everyone and we need to get our economy in order. Stop blaming unions or stop blaming corrupt greedy business people. We need to reestablish ourselves as the dominant industrial power we once were.

So once again...
... Mr. Buchanan has decided that since GM and Chrysler can't get me to give them my money voluntarily, the government should take it from me by force and give it to them. How is that just?

Interesting that he brings up Herbert Hoover, as he actually followed the prescription Buchanan and other protectionists support: Hoover supported the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which raised tariffs on imported goods, ostensibly to "protect American businesses". We see the result of that act over the next several years.

One tactic of fighting a war is to blockade a country, thus disallowing imports and forcing a country to produce all of its own goods and services. Interestingly, the protectionists wish us to do the same thing to ourselves.

Don't know if this will post,
but the American auto industry has priced itself out of the market.Till it gets rid of its 76 dollar wage average it always will.

To me this is stupid....
If you don't have the money... don't spend

If you can't meet your bills...cut back.

If you don't make something that people want to buy either close or develop something they do want.

The big 3 did none of these things...that's why they're in this mess..

If this was Joe Blow on the street he'd be homeless and hungry and looking for work.

No bail outs, no handouts, this is AMERICA you have as much right to fail as succeed.

If you fail pick your sorry a$$ up, dust yourself off, and try again and maybe learn something in the process.

Why is it so hard for 535 congressmen and a president to figure this out?

Government has gotten in over their heads and gotten too big for it's breeches..that's why.



A great man once said:
These wise words.

"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.

You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence. You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves."

Abraham Lincoln

Indeed
This reminds me of the story of a doctor saying that he had to kill the patient in order to save him. Let's face it, GW was and is a liberal lite. But I still give him an "A" for preventing another 9/11 attack in the US, and his choices of the Supreme Court. But, we've allowed the fox to guard the chicken coop. This is ok, but you have to replace the chickens that the fox has eaten.

Exactly ....
I still give him an "A" for preventing another 9/11 attack in the US, and his choices of the Supreme Court

Me too!

Credit for preventing another 9/11?
George Bush received a memo on August 6, 2001, while on vacation in Crawford, Texas that al qaeda was reported to be planning an attack by flying airplanes into buildings. Did he even read it? No one knows. Condi Rice testified it was not specific enough and no one could have anticipated what happened. If George Bush deserves credit for avoiding another 9/11 he should also get credit for preventing the sky from falling. In addition, I'll give him credit for not preventing 9/11 in the first place. How you people rationalize this stuff is beyond me.

George gets the credit or is it blame?
Some say George Bush should get credit for preventing another 9/11 although I wonder if those same people give him credit for not preventing the first one. Many posters here are republicans who have nothing good to say about the financial picture George Bush has painted for us during these last 8 years. However, they do not see the connection between the way they voted and the way govenment has performed. Lets forget conservative vs. liberal and think smart versus dumb. GWB is dumb and voting for him was even dumber. Thank yourselves for the mess were in. George Bush is still POTUS, has been since January, 2001. He rightfully gets credit or blame for everything that happens until 1/20/09, the same as Obama will when his term begins. Don't forget it.

re: bonnie
I agree to an extent: GWB was a weak choice for President. Unfortunately, both other choices we had in the general election were even weaker. Gore and Kerrey weren't exactly the sharpest tools in the shed either.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.