Inside the Bush White House during the economic meltdown

[JasonF]

GQ has an excerpt from a forthcoming book by one of President Bush's speechwriters about what was going on this time last year. It's way too long to quote here, but this is GQ's summary:

Matt Latimer worked as one of Dubya’s speechwriters during the president’s final twenty-two months in office. He was there to help sell the surge to a skeptical public. He was there as we pretended that the fundamentals of the economy were strong. And he was there to see a president who failed to grasp his own $700 billion bailout package—even as he was pitching it to the American public on live TV. A disillusioned insider reveals for the first time just how messy things got.

http://men.style.com/gq/features/landing?id=content_10957

The focus is on the economy in September 2008, but there are also some interesting tidbits about President Bush's assessments of the various candidates for President and Vice President.

My favorite line of the piece, attributed to President Bush:

“Why did I sign on to this proposal if I don’t understand what it does?” he asked.

[Venusian]

“Why did I sign on to this proposal if I don’t understand what it does?” he asked.
if he'd only listened to himself...and if only congress would think the same thing...

[DeputyDave]

GQ has an excerpt from a forthcoming book by one of President Bush's speechwriters about what was going on this time last year. It's way too long to quote here, but this is GQ's summary:



http://men.style.com/gq/features/landing?id=content_10957

The focus is on the economy in September 2008, but there are also some interesting tidbits about President Bush's assessments of the various candidates for President and Vice President.

My favorite line of the piece, attributed to President Bush:

“Why did I sign on to this proposal if I don’t understand what it does?” he asked.At least you gotta give him credit for admiting he didn't understand something he signed (unlike EVERY Democrat who signed Cap and Trade and the Health Bill).

I take crap like this with a grain of salt. This guy would barely see a penny if he wrote good things about the worst man in the history of the world.

[cpgator]

If only Bush could have explained his plans as well as Obama does.

[General Zod]

I agree with DeputyDave... At least he was smart enough to ask the question. That makes him smarter than 60% of congress.

[Venusian]

In the weeks that followed, Paulson changed his spending priorities two or three times. Incredibly, he’d been given the power to do with that money virtually anything he pleased. All thanks to a president who didn’t understand his proposal and a Congress that didn’t stop to think.

[Venusian]

At least you gotta give him credit for admiting he didn't understand something he signed (unlike EVERY Democrat who signed Cap and Trade and the Health Bill).
who has "signed" "the Health Bill"?

[Venusian]

As Treasury started to use the bailout funds to invest directly in financial institutions, Ed wanted to come up with a name for the plan that made it sound better to the public, particularly conservatives who thought this was nothing more than warmed-over socialism. Yes, a catchphrase would solve everything. As we were working on this, Ed called a few of the writers on speakerphone with the idea he’d come up with: the Imperative Investment Intervention. “Oh, that sounds good,” one of us remarked, as the rest of us tried not to laugh. We decided that if a catchphrase must be deployed, surely we could come up with something better than a tongue twister with the acronym III. We started out with dark humor: the “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Capitalism” Plan; the MARX Plan. I suggested that we also apologize to the former Soviet Union and retroactively concede the Cold War. Then one of the writers got serious and came up with the Temporary Emergency Market Protection Program, or TEMP. Not bad as gimmicks go, and Ed liked it. But he decided that instead of dropping it into a speech, we’d leak it to the press that this was the phrase we were using internally. Ed’s logic was that anything Bush said would be ignored, but if the press thought they’d got it from a leak, they’d find it more interesting and newsworthy. TEMP never made it as a catchphrase regardless.

:lol:

[Venusian]

“If bullshit was currency, Joe Biden would be a billionaire.”

:lol:

It was clear, though, that the president, ever the skilled politician, had concerns about the choice of Palin...“This woman is being put into a position she is not even remotely prepared for,” he said. “She hasn’t spent one day on the national level. Neither has her family. Let’s wait and see how she looks five days out.”

Sounds like Bush was smarter than alot of people gave him credit for

“I’m trying to remember if I’ve met her before. I’m sure I must have.” His eyes twinkled, then he asked, “What is she, the governor of Guam?” :lol:

[panchor]

“Why did I sign on to this proposal if I don’t understand what it does?”

He was elected to lead, not to read.

[Thor Simpson]

Bush was actually one of the more brilliant minds that has graced the White House. He just didn't come across as one because of poor speaking skills.

[Thor Simpson]

Okay, I admit. I just wanted to see how many of our members go into seizures reading that post. ;)

[Red Dog]

“Why did I sign on to this proposal if I don’t understand what it does?” he asked.


A likely common problem with most Presidents and most bills they sign.

[DeputyDave]

who has "signed" "the Health Bill"?

Sorry, "voted for".

[Red Dog]

“If bullshit was currency, Joe Biden would be a billionaire.”


This may be single greatest line I've ever read, even if it did come from Bush.

[Tracer Bullet]

Sigh. I see that everyone here favored Great Depression II.

[Pharoh]

It's a good thing then that the 'Bush' plan didn't work.






Oh wait, it did, albeit with some flaws.

[Venusian]

Sorry, "voted for".

has anyone even voted for a health bill yet?

[classicman2]

has anyone even voted for a health bill yet?

only in committees

[Thor Simpson]

has anyone even voted for a health bill yet?

Only Rep. Joe Wilson has announced his vote on the floor.

[JasonF]

Okay, I admit. I just wanted to see how many of our members go into seizures reading that post. ;)

I don't think President Bush is dumb. Intellectually rigid and unciurious, but certainly not dumb.

[Groucho]

Only Rep. Joe Wilson has announced his vote on the floor.With all due respect, I don't believe this comment is 100% truthful.

[cpgator]

I don't think President Bush is dumb. Intellectually rigid and unciurious, but certainly not dumb.

Unciurious?

[JasonF]

Sigh. I see that everyone here favored Great Depression II.

Not me.

It's a good thing then that the 'Bush' plan didn't work.






Oh wait, it did, albeit with some flaws.

I think the plan worked reasonably well at curing the short- and medium-term problems, although I would have prefered something closer to what was done with GM. But I don't quibble with the general principle of throwing a lot of money at the problem to soak up the financial markets' fears -- I think that was more or less the only solution available by summer/fall 2008.

[DeputyDave]

has anyone even voted for a health bill yet?

I was talking about the various versions passed by the different House committees.

[JasonF]

Unciurious?

Typomographical error. I meant "uncurious." But you knew that. ;)

[X]

Makes one nostalgic for when people in the White House had even half a clue.

(It's ok to talk about the current administration, isn't it? I saw Obama's speech today and he's certainly obsessed with the past.)

[DeputyDave]

Typomographical error. I meant "uncurious." But you knew that. ;)I never liked that word. I prefer "incurious".

[orangecrush]

In the weeks that followed, Paulson changed his spending priorities two or three times. Incredibly, he’d been given the power to do with that money virtually anything he pleased. All thanks to a president who didn’t understand his proposal and a Congress that didn’t stop to think.
That was my biggest problem with the "plan." Basicly congress and the President said that they had no clue at all what to do, so let's put this one guy in charge and trust him blindly. To be fair, we probably were better off with Paulson pulling the strings than Congress.

[Thor Simpson]

So basically, the Bush administration is partly responsible for the economic crisis, but took the necessary steps to solve it and if the Obama administration hadn't added so much to the debt, we'd be out of this crisis by now.

[Tracer Bullet]

So basically, the Bush administration is partly responsible for the economic crisis, but took the necessary steps to solve it and if the Obama administration hadn't added so much to the debt, we'd be out of this crisis by now.

lol whut

[Thor Simpson]

lol whut

bhk is gone, someone has to say it. :(

[Jason]

So basically, the Bush administration is partly responsible for the economic crisis, but took the necessary steps to solve it and if the Obama administration hadn't added so much to the debt, we'd be out of this crisis by now.

The bush administration is responsible for nothing. In fact, the "bush administration" is actually nothing more than a poorly constructed fabrication of the liberal media to conceal the culpability of Jimmy Carter in this mess.

[kvrdave]

So basically, the Bush administration is partly responsible for the economic crisis, but took the necessary steps to solve it and if the Obama administration hadn't added so much to the debt, we'd be out of this crisis by now.

Certainly partly responsible. But would it have been any different with anyone else? McCain and Obama both took time of the campaign to meet with Bush and go over it all and give input, and vote for it.

[Tracer Bullet]

Certainly partly responsible. But would it have been any different with anyone else? McCain and Obama both took time of the campaign to meet with Bush and go over it all and give input, and vote for it.

What?

[kvrdave]

Don't you remember during the bailout when McCain and Obama both quit campaigning and went to DC to meet with Bush? Bush wanted them both there as one would be the guy dealing with it, etc? Then both said it was necessary and voted to pass it?

It would be weird if I were the only one that remembered that....on the entire earth. Maybe I am. :eek:

[Tracer Bullet]

Don't you remember during the bailout when McCain and Obama both quit campaigning and went to DC to meet with Bush? Bush wanted them both there as one would be the guy dealing with it, etc? Then both said it was necessary and voted to pass it?

It would be weird if I were the only one that remembered that....on the entire earth. Maybe I am. :eek:

That wasn't what I was confused about. I was confused about your point. What do McCain or Obama have to do with the Bush administration's culpability for the financial crisis? Or are you saying that TARP made things worse?

[Tommy Ceez]

That wasn't what I was confused about. I was confused about your point. What do McCain or Obama have to do with the Bush administration's culpability for the financial crisis? Or are you saying that TARP made things worse?

First

The article makes the Bush White House look like the Obama White House

Second

How do we make Bush culpable for the crisis?

The crisis is a result of a mindset Americans have been developing since the end of the 70's

[Hank Ringworm]

Or are you saying that TARP made things worse?

Because that would be just ridiculous.

[Tracer Bullet]

Because that would be just ridiculous.

Yes, it would be, unless you enjoy not eating.

[orangecrush]

Yes, it would be, unless you enjoy not eating.That is impossible to know for sure. Intelligent professors still argue about all of the causes, solutions, exacerbations, etc. of the great depression. The economy is a very complex system that tends to adapt to things. It is possible, though probably not very likely, that things would have gotten better without TARP. It is also uncertain that TARP and the subsequent bailouts will be a net gain in the long run. By the way, how many "toxic" assets did we buy again? We were told that was the primary purpose of the TARP program.

[Tracer Bullet]

That is impossible to know for sure. Intelligent professors still argue about all of the causes, solutions, exacerbations, etc. of the great depression. The economy is a very complex system that tends to adapt to things. It is possible, though probably not very likely, that things would have gotten better without TARP. It is also uncertain that TARP and the subsequent bailouts will be a net gain in the long run. By the way, how many "toxic" assets did we buy again? We were told that was the primary purpose of the TARP program.

The long-term consequences of this are uncertain, I grant you- but the fact of the matter is, the government was able to stop Great Depression II before it really got started.

I would not have liked going to an ATM and having no money come out. Or going to the grocery store and seeing empty shelves. We came extremely close to a complete collapse of the financial system. Whatever you think about the actions taken last fall, I would hope that we could agree that the long-term consequences of another Depression would have been worse.

And don't fool yourself- that is exactly what we on the brink of last fall.

[Birrman54]

Do you believe everything Wall Street bankers tell you?

[Tracer Bullet]

Do you believe everything Wall Street bankers tell you?

I believe nothing Wall Street bankers tell me. They were responsible for this mess, more than the government was.

I've never heard the conspiracy theory that this was all a ploy to steal tax money, but it's a good one. Bravo to you. :thumbsup:

[Tommy Ceez]

The long-term consequences of this are uncertain, I grant you- but the fact of the matter is, the government was able to stop Great Depression II before it really got started.

I would not have liked going to an ATM and having no money come out. Or going to the grocery store and seeing empty shelves. We came extremely close to a complete collapse of the financial system. Whatever you think about the actions taken last fall, I would hope that we could agree that the long-term consequences of another Depression would have been worse.

And don't fool yourself- that is exactly what we on the brink of last fall.

That, my friend, is ONE THEORY.

There is no gurantee that ANY of that would have happened and you are WAY WAY WAY oversimplifying things

[orangecrush]

I believe nothing Wall Street bankers tell me. They were responsible for this mess, more than the government was.

I've never heard the conspiracy theory that this was all a ploy to steal tax money, but it's a good one. Bravo to you. :thumbsup:The best conspiracy theory I have heard about the situation is that letting Leman Bros fail was just a way to clear out completion for Goldman Sachs. It has just the right mix of plausibility and ridiculousness.

[orangecrush]

The long-term consequences of this are uncertain, I grant you- but the fact of the matter is, the government was able to stop Great Depression II before it really got started.

I would not have liked going to an ATM and having no money come out. Or going to the grocery store and seeing empty shelves. We came extremely close to a complete collapse of the financial system. Whatever you think about the actions taken last fall, I would hope that we could agree that the long-term consequences of another Depression would have been worse.

And don't fool yourself- that is exactly what we on the brink of last fall.One could argue that simply removing the Mark to Market rule would have gone a long way toward preventing the mass failures that would have caused what you are talking about. It was those valuations that caused the banks to need to raise capital. Indecently, the government ended up removing the rule after months of saying the rule was needed.

[Tommy Ceez]

One could argue that simply removing the Mark to Market rule would have gone a long way toward preventing the mass failures that would have caused what you are talking about. It was those valuations that caused the banks to need to raise capital. Indecently, the government ended up removing the rule after months of saying the rule was needed.

Ahhh, Mark to Market

Allowed when it helped Enron scam its stockholders

Banished when it dragged down bank balance sheets

And Accounting is a precise science, right
:lol:

[orangecrush]

Ahhh, Mark to Market

Allowed when it helped Enron scam its stockholders

Banished when it dragged down bank balance sheets

And Accounting is a precise science, right
:lol:I personally have mixed feelings about it. When you are talking about a company with long term assets for which a market is virtually nonexistent at the time you are valuing them, it probably isn't the most useful thing. On the other hand, I think it prudent to have a realistic view of financial companies abilities to meet their liabilities if the crap hits the fan.

[Pharoh]

I personally have mixed feelings about it. When you are talking about a company with long term assets for which a market is virtually nonexistent at the time you are valuing them, it probably isn't the most useful thing. On the other hand, I think it prudent to have a realistic view of financial companies abilities to meet their liabilities if the crap hits the fan.

Which would have done nothing to address what was going on globally, such as with LOCs.

[orangecrush]

Which would have done nothing to address what was going on globally, such as with LOCs.I wish Eazy-E had never started that stupid trend.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=locs

[MoviePage]

“I know it sounds arrogant to say,” [Bush] told me, “but I redefined the Republican Party”

:lol: You certainly did!