A White House death

A White House death

By Ken Herman Monday, January 5, 2009, 09:23 AM

Austin-American Statesman: Window on Washington

Here’s the official announcement from first lady Laura Bush’s office, via Sally McDonough, her press secretary.

“The president, Mrs. Bush, Barbara, and Jenna are deeply saddened by the passing of their cat India (“Willie”). The 18 year-old female black American shorthair died Sunday, January 4, 2009 at home at the White House.”

“When Barbara was nine years old, she named India after the former Texas Ranger baseball player, Ruben Sierra, who was called “El Indio.” When Barbara and Jenna moved away to college, India, affectionately called “Kitty” by the family, stayed at the White House with the president and Mrs. Bush.”

“India was a beloved member of the Bush family for almost two decades. She will be greatly missed.”

Read the rest of the post here: A White House death
20090105 A White House death

Merry Christmas from the Left Red White and Impeach

Merry Christmas from the Left Red White and Impeach

December 2, 2008

Apparently the left dos not rest for the holidays.

For those of us who feel passionately about the right to free speech, we also understand that it comes with responsibilities.

Memo: I’d love to see the elite media’s reaction if something like this were to occur during the presidency of Barack Obama.

Hat Tip: Don Surber: “Maturity” “Ornament maker does something inappropriate. The White House refuses to retaliate.”

Read on, according to “Christmas Colors for the White House: Red, White and Impeach,” By The Reliable Source December 2, 2008:

[…]

Laura Bush asked members of Congress to pick local painters to decorate ornaments for this year's 20-foot Fraser fir in the Blue Room. The globes (to be unveiled by the first lady tomorrow) are supposed to showcase something special about each congressional district. Washington state's Rep. Jim McDermott contacted a local arts organization, which asked Lawrence, a collage artist, to create the local entry.

"I was at first nauseated, then realized it was an opportunity," said Lawrence, 55, who frequently combines politics and satire in her work and saw this as the perfect way "to highlight Jim McDermott because he's a hero of mine."

The nine-inch ball is covered with swirly red and white stripes -- and, in tiny glued-on text, salutes the Democratic congressman's support for a resolution to impeach President Bush.

See a picture of it here.

Sally McDonough, the first lady's press secretary, said yesterday that hundreds of ornaments were submitted for display and there were no plans to pull Lawrence's artwork or her invitation. But, she said, "it really is too bad. I haven't seen the ornament, but I would hope that no one would take this as an opportunity to be divisive and partisan. There is a time and place for everything, and I don't think this is either."

Read the entire account here: “Christmas Colors for the White House: Red, White and Impeach”

And be sure to read Don Surber’s post also: “Maturity”

And be sure to read all the comments...

Commenter “dhender999aolcom” said: “When Deborah Lawrence arrives in the White House she will be treated graciously by her hosts, because that is the nature of George W and Laura Bush…”

“olukemi": said: “I applaud Deborah Lawrence for her courage in celebrating her equally forthright Congressman. Freedom of speech does not take a rest on Christmas. Happy Holidays to all!”

Then in a flourish of the holiday spirit, “editwest” wrote: “To dehender999@aol.com: ‘Gracious’ people do not steal elections, subvert the Rule of Law and the judiciary and the Department of Justice, attack and occupy sovereign states for imperialist goals, profit from the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians, order the death/maiming of tens of thousands of our own troops in a war of naked aggression forged in lies, loot the treasury and destroy the futures of America's children, channel fortunes to cronies, attack the Constitution and its protections against tyranny, destroy America's position in world opinion, and so much more. Gracious people don't do these things. Thugs and ghouls do.”

Nice.

Oh Merry Christmas

20081202 Merry Christmas from the left Red White and Impeach

Presidents Radio Address for November 14 2008

Presidents Radio Address for November 14 2008

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
November 14, 2008
President's Radio Address
President's Radio Address Audio En Español

In Focus: Economy

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This weekend I am hosting a summit on the global financial crisis with leaders of developed and developing nations. By working together, I'm confident that with time we can overcome this crisis and return our economies to the path of growth and vitality.

I know many of you listening are worried about the challenges facing our economy. Stock market declines have eroded the value of retirement accounts and pension funds. The tightening of credit has made it harder for families to borrow money for cars, homes, and education. Businesses have found it harder to get loans to expand their operations and create jobs. Many nations have suffered job losses and have serious concerns about the worsening economy.

Nations around the world have responded to this situation with bold measures, and our actions are having an impact. Credit markets are beginning to thaw and businesses are gaining access to essential short-term financing. It will require more time for these improvements to fully take hold and there will be more difficult days ahead, but the United States and our partners are taking the right steps to get through the crisis.

As we address the current crisis, we also need to make broader reforms to adapt our financial systems to the 21st century. So during this summit, I will work with other leaders to establish principles for reform, such as making markets more transparent and ensuring that markets, firms, and financial products are properly regulated.

All these steps will require decisive actions from governments around the world. At the same time, we must recognize that government intervention is not a cure-all. While reforms in the financial sector are essential, the long-term solution to today's problems is sustained economic growth. And the surest path to that growth is free markets and free people.

This is a decisive moment for the global economy. In the wake of the financial crisis voices from the left and right are equating the free enterprise system with greed, exploitation, and failure. It is true that this crisis included failures by lenders and borrowers, by financial firms, by governments and independent regulators. But the crisis was not a failure of the free market system. And the answer is not to try to reinvent that system. It is to fix the problems we face, make the reforms we need, and move forward with the free market principles that have delivered prosperity and hope to people around the world.

The benefits of free market capitalism have been proven across time, geography, and culture. Around the world free market capitalism has allowed once impoverished nations to develop large and prosperous economies. And here at home, free market capitalism is what transformed America from a rugged frontier to the greatest economic power in history.

Just as important as maintaining free markets within countries is maintaining the free movement of goods and services between countries. There are many ways for nations to demonstrate their commitment to open markets. The United States Congress can take the lead by approving free trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea before adjourning for the year.

In the long run, Americans can be confident in the future of our economy. We will work with our partners around the world to address the problems in the global financial system. We will strengthen our economy. And we will continue to lead the world toward prosperity and peace.

Thank you for listening.

# # #

FAQ
I can't find a radio station that carries the radio address. Click here for answer....

Archives
Radio Address:
2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001
Radio Interviews: 2006 2005 2004

2008114 Presidents Radio Address for November 14 2008

First Bush-Obama Meeting: Hard Feelings and Hand Sanitizer

First Bush-Obama Meeting: Hard Feelings and Hand Sanitizer

As President Bush and President-elect Barack Obama prepare for their post-election meeting at the White House on Monday, memories of their first encounter linger.

Bill Sammon FOXNews.com Sunday, November 09, 2008

President Bush and President-elect Barack Obama are probably hoping their meeting Monday goes better than their first get-together, which left a bad taste in the mouths of both men.

Four years ago, Obama and other newly elected members of the Senate were invited to the White House for a breakfast meeting with Bush, who pulled the young Chicagoan aside.

"Obama!" Bush exclaimed, according to Obama's account of the meeting in his second memoir, "The Audacity of Hope." "Come here and meet Laura. Laura, you remember Obama. We saw him on TV during election night. Beautiful family. And that wife of yours -- that's one impressive lady."

The two men shook hands and then, according to Obama, Bush turned to an aide, "who squirted a big dollop of hand sanitizer in the president's hand."

Bush then offered some to Obama, who recalled: "Not wanting to seem unhygienic, I took a squirt."

The president then led Obama off to one side of the room, where Bush said: "I hope you don't mind me giving you a piece of advice."

"Not at all, Mr. President," Obama told the commander-in-chief.

"You've got a bright future," Bush said presciently. "Very bright. But I've been in this town awhile and, let me tell you, it can be tough. When you get a lot of attention like you've been getting, people start gunnin' for ya. And it won't necessarily just be coming from my side, you understand. From yours, too. Everybody'll be waiting for you to slip, know what I mean? So watch yourself."

[…]

I thought I was actually showing some kindness," Bush said indignantly. "And out of that he came with this belief?"

The president added with a bit of a scowl: "He doesn't know me very well." (Ed: My emphasis)

[…]

Remove all heavy and sharp objects from the room and read the entire article… First Bush-Obama Meeting: Hard Feelings and Hand Sanitizer. It should remind you of the Ann Coulter admonishment – sometimes, you can never be nice to a liberal. Wow, did I ever learn that lesson the hard way…

Bill Sammon is Washington Deputy Managing Editor for FOX News.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/09/bush-obama-meeting-hard-feelings-hand-sanitier/#

20081109 First Bush Obama Meeting Hard Feelings and Hand Sanitizer

President's Radio Address

For Immediate ReleaseOffice of the Press SecretarySeptember 27, 2008

President's Radio Address

In Focus: Economy
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This is an extraordinary period for America's economy. Many Americans are anxious about their finances and their future. On Wednesday, I spoke to the Nation, and thanked Congress for working with my Administration to address the instability in our financial system. On Thursday, I hosted Senator McCain, Senator Obama, and congressional leaders from both parties at the White House to discuss the urgency of passing a bipartisan rescue package for our economy.

The problems in our economy are extremely complex, but at their core is uncertainty over "mortgage-backed securities." Many of these financial assets relate to home mortgages that have lost value during the housing decline. In turn, the banks holding these assets have restricted credit, and businesses and consumers have found it more difficult to obtain affordable loans. As a result, our entire economy is in danger. So I proposed that the Federal government reduce the risk posed by these troubled assets, and supply urgently needed money to help banks and other financial institutions avoid collapse and resume lending.

I know many of you listening this morning are frustrated with the situation. You make sacrifices every day to meet your mortgage payments and keep up with your bills. When the government asks you to pay for mistakes on Wall Street, it does not seem fair. And I understand that. And if it were possible to let every irresponsible firm on Wall Street fail without affecting you and your family, I would do it. But that is not possible. The failure of the financial system would mean financial hardship for many of you.

The failure of the financial system would cause banks to stop lending money to one another and to businesses and consumers. That would make it harder for you to take out a loan or borrow money to expand a business. The result would be less economic growth and more American jobs lost. And that would put our economy on the path toward a deep and painful recession.

The rescue effort we're negotiating is not aimed at Wall Street -- it is aimed at your street. And there is now widespread agreement on the major principles. We must free up the flow of credit to consumers and businesses by reducing the risk posed by troubled assets. We must ensure that taxpayers are protected, that failed executives do not receive a windfall from your tax dollars, and that there is a bipartisan board to oversee these efforts.

Under the proposal my Administration sent to Congress, the government would spend up to $700 billion to buy troubled assets from banks and other financial institutions. I know many Americans understand the urgency of this action, but are concerned about such a high price tag. Well, let me address this directly:

The final cost of this plan will be far less than $700 billion. And here's why: As fear and uncertainty have gripped the market for mortgage-related assets, their price has dropped sharply. Yet many of these assets still have significant underlying value, because the vast majority of people will eventually pay off their mortgages. In other words, many of the assets the government would buy are likely to go up in price over time. This means that the government will be able to recoup much, if not all, of the original expenditure.

Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have contributed constructive proposals that have improved this plan. I appreciate the efforts of House and Senate Democratic and Republican leaders to bring a spirit of bipartisan cooperation to these discussions. Our Nation's economic well-being is an issue that transcends partisanship. Republicans and Democrats must continue to address it together. And I am confident that we will pass a bill to protect the financial security of every American very soon.

Thank you for listening.

# # #

20080927 President’s Radio Address

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/09/20080927.html

President Bush’s address to the nation on the economic crisis

President Bush’s address to the nation on the economic crisis

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
September 24, 2008
President's Address to the Nation
State Floor

Video (Windows) /news/releases/2008/09/20080924-10.wm.v.html

Presidential Remarks
Audio
In Focus: Economy

9:01 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. This is an extraordinary period for America's economy. Over the past few weeks, many Americans have felt anxiety about their finances and their future. I understand their worry and their frustration. We've seen triple-digit swings in the stock market. Major financial institutions have teetered on the edge of collapse, and some have failed. As uncertainty has grown, many banks have restricted lending. Credit markets have frozen. And families and businesses have found it harder to borrow money.

We're in the midst of a serious financial crisis, and the federal government is responding with decisive action. We've boosted confidence in money market mutual funds, and acted to prevent major investors from intentionally driving down stocks for their own personal gain.

Most importantly, my administration is working with Congress to address the root cause behind much of the instability in our markets. Financial assets related to home mortgages have lost value during the housing decline. And the banks holding these assets have restricted credit. As a result, our entire economy is in danger. So I've proposed that the federal government reduce the risk posed by these troubled assets, and supply urgently-needed money so banks and other financial institutions can avoid collapse and resume lending.

This rescue effort is not aimed at preserving any individual company or industry -- it is aimed at preserving America's overall economy. It will help American consumers and businesses get credit to meet their daily needs and create jobs. And it will help send a signal to markets around the world that America's financial system is back on track.

I know many Americans have questions tonight: How did we reach this point in our economy? How will the solution I've proposed work? And what does this mean for your financial future? These are good questions, and they deserve clear answers.

First, how did our economy reach this point?

Well, most economists agree that the problems we are witnessing today developed over a long period of time. For more than a decade, a massive amount of money flowed into the United States from investors abroad, because our country is an attractive and secure place to do business. This large influx of money to U.S. banks and financial institutions -- along with low interest rates -- made it easier for Americans to get credit. These developments allowed more families to borrow money for cars and homes and college tuition -- some for the first time. They allowed more entrepreneurs to get loans to start new businesses and create jobs.

Unfortunately, there were also some serious negative consequences, particularly in the housing market. Easy credit -- combined with the faulty assumption that home values would continue to rise -- led to excesses and bad decisions. Many mortgage lenders approved loans for borrowers without carefully examining their ability to pay. Many borrowers took out loans larger than they could afford, assuming that they could sell or refinance their homes at a higher price later on.

Optimism about housing values also led to a boom in home construction. Eventually the number of new houses exceeded the number of people willing to buy them. And with supply exceeding demand, housing prices fell. And this created a problem: Borrowers with adjustable rate mortgages who had been planning to sell or refinance their homes at a higher price were stuck with homes worth less than expected -- along with mortgage payments they could not afford. As a result, many mortgage holders began to default.

These widespread defaults had effects far beyond the housing market. See, in today's mortgage industry, home loans are often packaged together, and converted into financial products called "mortgage-backed securities." These securities were sold to investors around the world. Many investors assumed these securities were trustworthy, and asked few questions about their actual value. Two of the leading purchasers of mortgage-backed securities were Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Because these companies were chartered by Congress, many believed they were guaranteed by the federal government. This allowed them to borrow enormous sums of money, fuel the market for questionable investments, and put our financial system at risk.

The decline in the housing market set off a domino effect across our economy. When home values declined, borrowers defaulted on their mortgages, and investors holding mortgage-backed securities began to incur serious losses. Before long, these securities became so unreliable that they were not being bought or sold. Investment banks such as Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers found themselves saddled with large amounts of assets they could not sell. They ran out of the money needed to meet their immediate obligations. And they faced imminent collapse. Other banks found themselves in severe financial trouble. These banks began holding on to their money, and lending dried up, and the gears of the American financial system began grinding to a halt.

With the situation becoming more precarious by the day, I faced a choice: To step in with dramatic government action, or to stand back and allow the irresponsible actions of some to undermine the financial security of all.

I'm a strong believer in free enterprise. So my natural instinct is to oppose government intervention. I believe companies that make bad decisions should be allowed to go out of business. Under normal circumstances, I would have followed this course. But these are not normal circumstances. The market is not functioning properly. There's been a widespread loss of confidence. And major sectors of America's financial system are at risk of shutting down.

The government's top economic experts warn that without immediate action by Congress, America could slip into a financial panic, and a distressing scenario would unfold:

More banks could fail, including some in your community. The stock market would drop even more, which would reduce the value of your retirement account. The value of your home could plummet. Foreclosures would rise dramatically. And if you own a business or a farm, you would find it harder and more expensive to get credit. More businesses would close their doors, and millions of Americans could lose their jobs. Even if you have good credit history, it would be more difficult for you to get the loans you need to buy a car or send your children to college. And ultimately, our country could experience a long and painful recession.

Fellow citizens: We must not let this happen. I appreciate the work of leaders from both parties in both houses of Congress to address this problem -- and to make improvements to the proposal my administration sent to them. There is a spirit of cooperation between Democrats and Republicans, and between Congress and this administration. In that spirit, I've invited Senators McCain and Obama to join congressional leaders of both parties at the White House tomorrow to help speed our discussions toward a bipartisan bill.

I know that an economic rescue package will present a tough vote for many members of Congress. It is difficult to pass a bill that commits so much of the taxpayers' hard-earned money. I also understand the frustration of responsible Americans who pay their mortgages on time, file their tax returns every April 15th, and are reluctant to pay the cost of excesses on Wall Street. But given the situation we are facing, not passing a bill now would cost these Americans much more later.

Many Americans are asking: How would a rescue plan work?

After much discussion, there is now widespread agreement on the principles such a plan would include. It would remove the risk posed by the troubled assets -- including mortgage-backed securities -- now clogging the financial system. This would free banks to resume the flow of credit to American families and businesses. Any rescue plan should also be designed to ensure that taxpayers are protected. It should welcome the participation of financial institutions large and small. It should make certain that failed executives do not receive a windfall from your tax dollars. It should establish a bipartisan board to oversee the plan's implementation. And it should be enacted as soon as possible.

In close consultation with Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, and SEC Chairman Chris Cox, I announced a plan on Friday. First, the plan is big enough to solve a serious problem. Under our proposal, the federal government would put up to $700 billion taxpayer dollars on the line to purchase troubled assets that are clogging the financial system. In the short term, this will free up banks to resume the flow of credit to American families and businesses. And this will help our economy grow.

Second, as markets have lost confidence in mortgage-backed securities, their prices have dropped sharply. Yet the value of many of these assets will likely be higher than their current price, because the vast majority of Americans will ultimately pay off their mortgages. The government is the one institution with the patience and resources to buy these assets at their current low prices and hold them until markets return to normal. And when that happens, money will flow back to the Treasury as these assets are sold. And we expect that much, if not all, of the tax dollars we invest will be paid back.

A final question is: What does this mean for your economic future?

The primary steps -- purpose of the steps I have outlined tonight is to safeguard the financial security of American workers and families and small businesses. The federal government also continues to enforce laws and regulations protecting your money. The Treasury Department recently offered government insurance for money market mutual funds. And through the FDIC, every savings account, checking account, and certificate of deposit is insured by the federal government for up to $100,000. The FDIC has been in existence for 75 years, and no one has ever lost a penny on an insured deposit -- and this will not change.

Once this crisis is resolved, there will be time to update our financial regulatory structures. Our 21st century global economy remains regulated largely by outdated 20th century laws. Recently, we've seen how one company can grow so large that its failure jeopardizes the entire financial system.

Earlier this year, Secretary Paulson proposed a blueprint that would modernize our financial regulations. For example, the Federal Reserve would be authorized to take a closer look at the operations of companies across the financial spectrum and ensure that their practices do not threaten overall financial stability. There are other good ideas, and members of Congress should consider them. As they do, they must ensure that efforts to regulate Wall Street do not end up hampering our economy's ability to grow.

In the long run, Americans have good reason to be confident in our economic strength. Despite corrections in the marketplace and instances of abuse, democratic capitalism is the best system ever devised. It has unleashed the talents and the productivity, and entrepreneurial spirit of our citizens. It has made this country the best place in the world to invest and do business. And it gives our economy the flexibility and resilience to absorb shocks, adjust, and bounce back.

Our economy is facing a moment of great challenge. But we've overcome tough challenges before -- and we will overcome this one. I know that Americans sometimes get discouraged by the tone in Washington, and the seemingly endless partisan struggles. Yet history has shown that in times of real trial, elected officials rise to the occasion. And together, we will show the world once again what kind of country America is -- a nation that tackles problems head on, where leaders come together to meet great tests, and where people of every background can work hard, develop their talents, and realize their dreams.

Thank you for listening. May God bless you.

END 9:14 P.M. EDT

Return to this article at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/09/20080924-10.html

20080924 President Bush’s address to the nation on the economic crisis

Declaraciones del Presidente Sobre la Economía

Declaraciones del Presidente Sobre la Economía
19 de septiembre de 2008

Para su publicación inmediata
Oficina del Secretario de Prensa

Rose Garden

10:45 A.M. EDT

EL PRESIDENTE: Buenos días. Les agradezco al secretario del Tesoro, Hank Paulson, al presidente de la Reserva Federal, Ben Bernanke, y al presidente de la Comisión de Valores y Cambio Bursátil (Security and Exchange Commission), Chris Cox, por acompañarme hoy.

Éste es un momento importante para la economía de Estados Unidos. Problemas que se originaron en el mercado de crédito -y se presentaron inicialmente en el sector de préstamos hipotecarios no preferenciales- se han propagado por todo nuestro sistema financiero. Esto ha llevado a una pérdida de confianza que ha congelado muchas transacciones financieras, entre ellas préstamos a consumidores y a empresas con planes de expandirse y generar empleo. Como resultado, debemos tomar medidas ahora para proteger de serios peligros el bienestar económico de nuestra nación.

Habrá abundantes oportunidades de debatir el origen de este problema. Éste es el momento de resolverlo. En la historia de nuestra nación, ha habido ocasiones que han requerido que nos unamos, independientemente de partido, para hacerles frente a desafíos importantes. Ésta es una ocasión tal. Anoche, el secretario Paulson y el presidente Bernanke y el presidente Cox se reunieron con líderes del Congreso de ambos partidos... y tuvieron una muy buena reunión. Agradezco que los líderes del Congreso estén dispuestos a hacerle frente directamente a esta situación.

Nuestro sistema de libre empresa se basa en la convicción de que el gobierno federal debe interferir en el mercado sólo cuando es necesario. Dada la situación precaria de los mercados financieros de hoy -y su vital importancia en la vida cotidiana del pueblo estadounidense- la intervención del gobierno no sólo se justifica; es esencial.

En semanas recientes, el gobierno federal ha tomado una serie de medidas para ayudar a promover la estabilidad en la economía en general. A fin de evitar alteraciones severas en el mercado financiero y apoyar la financiación de viviendas, tomamos medidas para hacerle frente a la situación en Fannie Mae y Freddie Mac. La Reserva Federal también dio pasos para evitar la liquidación desordenada de la compañía de seguros AIG. Y en coordinación con bancos centrales en todo el mundo, la Reserva ha inyectado liquidez muy necesaria en nuestro sistema financiero.

Esas fueron medidas específicas y concebidas principalmente para evitar que los problemas de firmas individuales se propagaran más extensamente. Pero es necesario hacer más. Debemos abordar la causa de gran parte de la inestabilidad de nuestro mercado: los activos hipotecarios que se devaluaron durante la desaceleración del sector de vivienda y que ahora restringen el flujo de crédito. La economía de Estados Unidos enfrenta desafíos sin precedente, y estamos respondiendo con medidas sin precedente.

El secretario Paulson, el presidente Bernanke y el presidente Cox les han informado a los líderes en el Capitolio de la urgente necesidad de que el Congreso apruebe legislación que dé el visto bueno a que el gobierno federal les compre a bancos y otras instituciones financieras activos ilíquidos como malos préstamos hipotecarios. Éste es un paso decisivo que abordará los problemas subyacentes de nuestro sistema financiero. Ayudará a disminuir la presión en los balances de los bancos y otras instituciones financieras. Permitirá que reanuden sus préstamos y que nuestro sistema financiero se vuelva a poner en marcha.

Además, el gobierno federal está dando pasos adicionales para abordar los problemas de nuestro mercado financiero.

El Departamento del Tesoro está tomando medidas para reestablecer la confianza en un elemento clave del sistema financiero de Estados Unidos: los fondos mutuos de inversión (en activos) del mercado del dinero. En el pasado, no había seguro gubernamental para estos fondos, y las recientes presiones en el mercado han causado que algunos se pregunten si estas inversiones son seguras y asequibles. Las medidas del Departamento del Tesoro abordan esa inquietud ofreciendo seguro gubernamental para los fondos mutuos de inversión en el mercado de dinero. Por cada dólar invertido en un fondo asegurado, podrán sacar un dólar.

La Reserva Federal también está tomando medidas para proporcionar liquidez adicional a los fondos mutuos de inversión en el mercado de dinero, lo que ayudará a disminuir la presión en nuestro mercado financiero. Estas medidas servirán como la grasa de los engranajes de nuestro sistema financiero, que corrían el peligro de detenerse completamente. Contribuirán al flujo de crédito a hogares de familia y empresas.

La Securities and Exchange Commission ha emitido normas nuevas de forma temporal que suspenden la práctica de venta al descubierto de acciones de instituciones financieras. Esto tiene como propósito evitar que los inversionistas reduzcan el valor de ciertas acciones para lucro personal. La SEC también está requiriendo que ciertos inversionistas divulguen sus ventas al descubierto y ha puesto en práctica estrictas medidas de control para detectar el fraude y la manipulación en el mercado. Cualquier persona que participe en transacciones financieras ilegales será detectada y perseguida [sic].

Finalmente, mi gobierno está deseoso de, una vez superados los desafíos inmediatos, cooperar con el Congreso en medidas para darle mayor transparencia y fiabilidad a largo plazo al sistema financiero, entre ellas las incluidas en el plan normativo presentado por el secretario Paulson anteriormente este año. Muchas de las reglamentaciones que rigen el funcionamiento del mercado estadounidense fueron redactadas en otra era. Es de vital importancia que las actualicemos para que conformen con la realidad actual del sistema financiero mundial.

Las medidas que acabo de describir reflejan el buen criterio del secretario Paulson, el presidente Bernanke y el presidente Cox. Creemos que es necesario que el gobierno tome medidas decisivas para resguardar el sistema financiero de Estados Unidos y sustentar la economía en general de Estados Unidos. Estas medidas requerirán que arriesguemos una cantidad significativa de dinero de los contribuyentes. Estas medidas, de hecho, implican riesgo. Pero tenemos previsto que este dinero se devuelva, a fin de cuentas. Los activos que el gobierno está planeando comprar, en su gran mayoría, retienen su valor con el tiempo, porque los propietarios de vivienda, en su gran mayoría, continúan pagando sus préstamos hipotecarios. Y el peligro de la inacción sería mucho mayor. Presión adicional en nuestros mercados financieros causaría la pérdida masiva de empleos, devastaría las cuentas para la jubilación y devaluaría más el sector de vivienda, además de hacer que se agoten los préstamos para casas y autos nuevos, y matrículas universitarias. Estos son peligros que Estados Unidos no puede darse el lujo de correr.

En este difícil momento, sé que muchos estadounidenses se preguntan sobre la seguridad de sus finanzas. Todos los estadounidenses deben saber que el gobierno federal continúa velando por el cumplimiento de las leyes y las normas que protegen su dinero. Por medio de la Corporación de Seguro Federal para Depósitos (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation o FDIC), todas las cuentas de ahorro, cuentas corrientes y certificados de depósito están asegurados hasta $100,000 por el gobierno federal. El FDIC existe desde hace 75 años, y nadie jamás ha perdido un centavo de un depósito asegurado, y eso no cambiará.

El sistema financiero de Estados Unidos es intrincado y complejo. Pero detrás de toda la terminología técnica y los datos estadísticos está un factor humano muy importante: la confianza. La confianza en nuestro sistema financiero y sus instituciones es esencial para que nuestra economía opere sin trabas, y recientemente esta confianza ha flaqueado. Los inversionistas deben saber que el gobierno de Estados Unidos está tomando medidas para reestablecer la confianza en el mercado financiero de Estados Unidos de modo que podamos volver a prosperar.

A largo plazo, los estadounidenses tienen buen motivo para tener seguridad en nuestra solidez económica. Estados Unidos cuenta con los trabajadores más hábiles, productivos y emprendedores del mundo. Este país es el mejor lugar del mundo para invertir y hacer negocios. Consumidores alrededor del mundo continúan escogiendo productos estadounidenses, como lo prueba el nivel récord de exportaciones. Tenemos un sistema flexible y resistente que absorbe desafíos y hace correcciones y rebota.

Hemos visto esa resistencia durante los últimos ocho años. Desde el 2001, nuestra economía ha enfrentado una recesión, el reventón de la burbuja de los puntocom, grandes escándalos empresariales, un ataque sin precedente contra nuestro territorio nacional, una guerra mundial contra el terrorismo, una serie de desastres naturales devastadores. Nuestra economía ha resistido cada uno de estos desafíos y aun así, ha logrado crecer.

También resistiremos este desafío y debemos hacerlo juntos. No es momento de partidismo. Debemos unirnos para lograr cuanto antes la aprobación de legislación urgentemente necesaria, sin agregar estipulaciones polémicas que podrían postergar una decisión. Trabajaré con tanto demócratas como republicanos para dirigir nuestra economía durante este momento difícil y retomar el camino hacia el crecimiento a largo plazo. Muchísimas gracias.

END 10:54 A.M. EDT

20080919 Declaraciones del Presidente Sobre la Economía

“Bush tours Gettysburg battleground site” by Christine Simmons

“Bush tours Gettysburg battleground site” by Christine Simmons

Politics By CHRISTINE SIMMONS, The Associated Press 2008-09-06

GETTYSBURG, Pa. –

President Bush brushed up on his Civil War history Friday, touring the battleground of Gettysburg, the site of one of the deadliest battles of the Civil War.

Normally for a $55 fee, visitors to the Gettysburg National Military Park can tour the area along with a licensed guide. But Friday, Bush had with him Gabor Boritt, an Abraham Lincoln scholar and director of the Civil War Institute at Gettysburg College, who could explain chronological events of the war to match each site of the battleground.

The president began his mid-afternoon tour at the Virginia Memorial, one of 1,300 monuments on the park's grounds.

He also was treated to a sneak peek of the park's Museum and Visitor Center, which has its grand opening Sept. 26.

[…]

Robert Kinsley, chair of the Gettysburg Foundation, was in the museum for the president's visit…

The town in the Pennsylvania countryside is near the site of a 3-day battle where Union troops successfully defeated Confederate troops' advances. More than 51,000 Confederate and Union soldiers were killed, wounded or captured.

[…]

Read the entire article here: Bush tours Gettysburg battleground site

20080906 Bush tours Gettysburg battleground site by Christine Simmons

20080528 Ex Press Aide Writes Bush Misled US on Iraq by Michael D. Shear Washington Post

Ex-Press Aide Writes That Bush Misled U.S. on Iraq

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052703679_pf.html

By Michael D. Shear Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, May 28, 2008; A01

Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan writes in a new memoir that the Iraq war was sold to the American people with a sophisticated "political propaganda campaign" led by President Bush and aimed at "manipulating sources of public opinion" and "downplaying the major reason for going to war."

McClellan includes the charges in a 341-page book, "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception," that delivers a harsh look at the White House and the man he served for close to a decade. He describes Bush as demonstrating a "lack of inquisitiveness," says the White House operated in "permanent campaign" mode, and admits to having been deceived by some in the president's inner circle about the leak of a CIA operative's name.

The book, coming from a man who was a tight-lipped defender of administration aides and policy, is certain to give fuel to critics of the administration, and McClellan has harsh words for many of his past colleagues. He accuses former White House adviser Karl Rove of misleading him about his role in the CIA case. He describes Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as being deft at deflecting blame, and he calls Vice President Cheney "the magic man" who steered policy behind the scenes while leaving no fingerprints.

McClellan stops short of saying that Bush purposely lied about his reasons for invading Iraq, writing that he and his subordinates were not "employing out-and-out deception" to make their case for war in 2002.

But in a chapter titled "Selling the War," he alleges that the administration repeatedly shaded the truth and that Bush "managed the crisis in a way that almost guaranteed that the use of force would become the only feasible option."

Read the entire article here: Ex-Press Aide Writes That Bush Misled U.S. on Iraq

20080314 President Bush Visits the Economic Club of New York

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
March 14, 2008

President Bush Visits the Economic Club of New York

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/03/20080314-5.html

New York Hilton
New York, New York

Fact Sheet: Taking Responsible Action to Help Homeowners and the Economy

11:20 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Glenn, thanks for the kind introduction. Thanks for giving me a chance to speak to the Economic Club of New York. It seems like I showed up in a interesting moment -- (laughter) -- during an interesting time. I appreciate the fact that you've assembled to give me a chance to share some ideas with you. I also appreciate the fact that as leaders of the business and financial community, you've helped make this city a great place, and you've helped make our country really, in many ways, the economic envy of the world.

First of all, in a free market, there's going to be good times and bad times. That's how markets work. There will be ups and downs. And after 52 consecutive months of job growth, which is a record, our economy obviously is going through a tough time. It's going through a tough time in the housing market, and it's going through a tough time in the financial markets.

And I want to spend a little time talking about that, but I want to remind you, this is not the first time since I've been the President that we have faced economic challenges. We inherited a recession. And then there was the attacks of September the 11th, 2001, which many of you saw firsthand, and you know full well how that affected our economy. And then we had corporate scandals. And I made the difficult decisions to confront the terrorists and extremists in two major fronts, Afghanistan and Iraq. And then we had devastating natural disasters. And the interesting thing, every time, this economy has bounced back better and stronger than before.

So I'm coming to you as an optimistic fellow. I've seen what happens when America deals with difficulty. I believe that we're a resilient economy, and I believe that the ingenuity and resolve of the American people is what helps us deal with these issues. And it's going to happen again.

Our job in Washington is to foster enterprise and ingenuity, so we can ensure our economy is flexible enough to adjust to adversity, and strong enough to attract capital. And the challenge is not to do anything foolish in the meantime. In the long run, I'm confident that our economy will continue to grow, because the foundation is solid.

Unemployment is low at 4.8 percent. Wages have risen, productivity has been strong. Exports are at an all-time high, and the federal deficit as a percentage of our total economy is well below the historic average. But as Glenn mentioned, these are tough times. Growth fell to 0.6 percent in the fourth quarter of last year. It's clearly slow. The economy shed more than 80,000 jobs in two months. Prices are up at the gas pump and in the supermarket. Housing values are down. Hardworking Americans are concerned -- they're concerned about their families, and they're concerned about making their bills.

Fortunately, we recognized the slowdown early and took action. And it was decisive action, in the form of policies that will spur growth. We worked with the Congress. I know that may sound incongruous to you, but I do congratulate the Speaker and Leader Reid, as well as Boehner and Mitch McConnell and Secretary Paulson, for anticipating a problem and passing a robust package quickly.

This package is temporary, and it has two key elements. First, the growth package provides incentives for businesses to make investments in new equipment this year. As more businesses take advantage, investment will pick up, and then job creation will follow. The purpose was to stimulate investment. And the signal is clear -- once I signed the bill, the signal to folks in businesses large and small know that there's some certainty in the tax code for the remainder of this year.

Secondly, the package will provide tax rebates to more than 130 million households. And the purpose is to boost consumer spending. The purpose is to try to offset the loss of wealth if the value of your home has gone down. The purpose is to buoy the consumer.

The rebates haven't been put in the mail yet. In other words, this aspect of the plan hasn't taken to effect. There's a lot of Americans who've heard about the plan; a lot of them are a little skeptical about this "check's in the mail" stuff that the federal government talks about. (Laughter.) But it's coming, and those checks, the Secretary assures me, will be mailed by the second week of May.

And so what are the folks, the experts, guys like Hubbard, anticipate to happen? I'm not so sure he is one now, but the people that have told me that they expect this consumer spending to have an effect in the second quarter, a greater effect in the third quarter. That's what the experts say.

The Federal Reserve has taken action to bolster the economy. I respect Ben Bernanke. I think he's doing a good job under tough circumstances. The Fed has cut interest rates several times. And this week the Fed -- and by the way, we also hold dear this notion of the Fed being independent from White House policy. They act independently from the politicians, and they should. It's good for our country to have that kind of independence.

This week the Fed also announced a major move to ease stress in the credit markets by adding liquidity. It was strong action by the Fed, and they did so because some financial institutions that borrowed money to buy securities in the housing industry must now repair their balance sheets before they can make further loans. The housing issue has dried up some of the sources of credit that businesses need in our economy to help it grow. That's why the Fed is reacting the way they are. We believe the actions by the Fed will help financial institutions continue to make more credit available.

This morning the Federal Reserve, with support of the Treasury Department, took additional actions to mitigate disruptions to our financial markets. Today's events are fast-moving, but the Chairman of the Federal Reserve and the Secretary of the Treasury are on top of them, and will take the appropriate steps to promote stability in our markets.

Now, a root cause of the economic slowdown has been the downtown in the housing market, and I want to talk a little bit about that today. After years of steady increases, home values in some parts of the country have declined. At the same time, many homeowners with adjustable rate mortgages have seen their monthly payments increase faster than their ability to pay. As a result, a growing number of people are facing the prospect of foreclosure.

Foreclosure places a terrible burden on our families. Foreclosure disrupts communities. And so the question is, what do you do about it in a way that allows the market to work, and at the same times helps people? Before I get to that, though, I do want to tell you that we fully understand that the mounting concern over housing has shaken the broader market, that it's spread uncertainty to global financial markets, and that it has tightened the credit, which makes it harder for people to get mortgages in the first place.

The temptation is for people, in their attempt to limit the number of foreclosures, is to put bad law in place. And so I want to talk about some of that. First of all, the temptation of Washington is to say that anything short of a massive government intervention in the housing market amounts to inaction. I strongly disagree with that sentiment. I believe there ought to be action, but I'm deeply concerned about law and regulation that will make it harder for the markets to recover -- and when they recover, make it harder for this economy to be robust. And so we got to be careful and mindful that any time the government intervenes in the market, it must do so with clear purpose and great care. Government actions are -- have far-reaching and unintended consequences.

I want to talk to you about a couple of ideas that I strongly reject. First, one bill in Congress would provide $4 billion for state and local governments to buy up abandoned and foreclosed homes. You know, I guess this sounds like a good idea to some, but if your goal is to help Americans keep their homes, it doesn't make any sense to spend billions of dollars buying up homes that are already empty. As a matter of fact, when you buy up empty homes you're only helping the lenders, or the speculators. The purpose of government ought to be to help the individuals, not those who, like -- who speculated in homes. This bill sends the wrong signal to the market.

Secondly, some have suggested we change the bankruptcy courts, the bankruptcy code, to give bankruptcy judges the authority to reduce mortgage debts by judicial decree. I think that sends the wrong message. It would be unfair to millions of homeowners who have made the hard spending choices necessary to pay their mortgages on time. It would further rattle credit markets. It would actually cause interest rates to go up. If banks think that judges might step in and write down the value of home loans, they're going to charge higher interest rates to cover that risk. This idea would make it harder for responsible first-time home buyers to be able to afford a home.

There are some in Washington who say we ought to artificially prop up home prices. You know, it sounds reasonable in a speech -- I guess -- but it's not going to help first-time home buyers, for example. A lot of people have been priced out of the market right now because of decisions made by others. The market is in the process of correcting itself; markets must have time to correct. Delaying that correction would only prolong the problem.

And so that's why we oppose those proposals, and I want to talk about what we're for. We're obviously for sending out over $150 billion into the marketplace in the form of checks that will be reaching the mailboxes by the second week of May. We're for that. We're also for helping a targeted group of homeowners, namely those who have made responsible buying decisions, avoid foreclosure with some help.

We've taken three key steps. First, we launched a new program at the Federal Housing Administration called FHA Secure. It's a program that's given FHA greater flexibility to offer refinancing for struggling homeowners with otherwise good credit. In other words, we're saying to people, we want to help you refinance your notes. Over the past six months this program has helped about 120,000 families stay in their homes by refinancing about $17 billion of mortgages, and by the end of the year we expect this program to have reached 300,000 families.

You know the issue like I do, though. I'm old enough to remember savings and loans, and remember who my savings and loan officer was, who loaned me my first money to buy a house. And had I got in a bind, I could have walked across the street in Midland, Texas, and say, I need a little help; can you help me readjust my note so I can stay in my house? There are no such things as that type of deal anymore. As a matter of fact, the paper -- you know, had this been a modern era, the paper that had -- you know, my paper, my mortgage, could be owned by somebody in a foreign country, which makes it hard to renegotiate the note.

So we're dealing in a difficult environment, to get the word to people, there's help for you to refinance your homes. And so Hank Paulson put together what's called the HOPE NOW Alliance to try to bring some reality to the situation, to focus our help on helping creditworthy people refinance -- rather than pass law that will make it harder for the market to adjust. This HOPE NOW Alliance is made up of industry -- is made up of investors and service managers and mortgage counselors and lenders. And they set industry-wide standards to streamline the process for refinancing and modifying certain mortgages.

Last month Hope Now created a new program. They take a look -- they took a look at the risks, and they created a program called Project Lifeline, which offers some homeowners facing imminent foreclosure a 30-day extension. The whole purpose is to help people stay in their houses. During this time they can work with their lender. And this grace period has made a difference to a lot of folks.

An interesting statistic that has just been released: Members of the Alliance report that the number of homeowners working out their mortgages is now rising faster than the number entering foreclosure. The program is beginning to work, it's beginning to help. The problem we have is a lot of folks aren't responding to over a million letters sent out to offer them assistance and mortgage counseling. And so one of the tasks we have is to continue to urge our citizens to respond to the help; to pay attention to the notices they get describing how they can find help in refinancing their homes. We got toll-free numbers and websites and mailings, and it's just really important for our citizens to understand that this help is available for them.

We've also taken some other steps that will bring some credibility and confidence to the market. Alphonso Jackson, Secretary of HUD, is proposing a rule that require lenders to provide a standard, easy-to-read summary statements explaining the key elements of mortgage agreements. These mortgage agreements can be pretty frightening to people; I mean, there's a lot of tiny print. And I don't know how many people understood they were buying resets, or not. But one thing is for certain: There needs to be complete transparency. And to the extent that these contracts are too complex, and people made decisions that they just weren't sure they were making, we need to do something about it. We need better confidence amongst those who are purchasing loans.

And secondly, yesterday Hank Paulson announced new recommendations to strengthen oversight of the mortgage industry, and improve the way the credit ratings are determined for securities, and ensure proper risk management at financial institutions. In other words, we've got an active plan to help us get through this rough period. We're always open for new ideas, but there are certain principles that we won't violate. And one of the principles is overreacting by federal law and federal regulation that will have long-term negative effects on our economy.

There are some further things we can do, by the way, on the housing market that I call upon Congress to do. By the way, Congress did pass a good bill that creates a three-year window for American families to refinance their homes without paying taxes on any debt forgiveness they receive. The tax code create disincentives for people to refinance their homes, and we took care of that for a three-year period. And they need to move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages.

Congress can also take other steps to help us during a period of uncertainty -- and these are uncertain times. A major source of uncertainty is that the tax relief we passed in 2001 and 2003 is set to expire. If Congress doesn't act, 116 million American households will see their taxes rise by an average of $1,800. If Congress doesn't act, capital gains and dividends are going to be taxed at a higher rate. If Congress doesn't make the tax relief permanent they will create additional uncertainty during uncertain times.

A lot of folks are waiting to see what Congress intends to do. One thing that's certain that Congress will do is waste some of your money. So I've challenged members of Congress to cut the number of, cost of earmarks in half. I issued an executive order that directs federal agencies to ignore any future earmark that is not voted on by the Congress. In other words, Congress has got this habit of just sticking these deals into bills without a vote -- no transparency, no light of day, they just put them in. And by the way, this executive order extends beyond my presidency, so the next President gets to make a decision as to whether or not that executive order stays in effect.

I sent Congress a budget that meets our priorities. There is no greater priority than to make sure our troops in harm way have all they need to do their job. That has been a priority ever since I made the difficult commitment to put those troops in harm's way, and it should be a priority of any President and any Congress. And beyond that, we've held spending at below rates of inflation -- on non-security spending, discretionary spending, we've held the line. And that's why I can tell you that we've submitted a budget that's in balance by 2012 -- without raising your taxes.

If the Congress truly wants to send a message that will calm people's nerves they'll adopt the budget I submitted to them and make it clear they're not going to run up the taxes on the working people, and on small businesses, and on capital gains, and on dividends, and on the estate tax.

Now, one powerful force for economic growth that is under -- is being questioned right now in Washington is whether or not this country is confident enough to open up markets overseas, whether or not we believe in trade. I believe strongly it's in our nation's interest to open up markets for U.S. goods and services. I believe strongly that NAFTA has been positive for the United States of America, like it's been positive for our trading partners in Mexico and Canada. I believe it is dangerous for this country to become isolationist and protectionist. I believe it shows a lack of confidence in our capacity to compete. And I know it would harm our economic future if we allow the -- those who believe that walling off America from trade to have their way in Congress.

And so I made it clear that we expect for Congress to move forward on the Colombia free trade agreement. And this is an important agreement. It's important for our national security interests, and it's important for our economic interests. Most Americans don't understand that most goods and services from Colombia come into the United States duty free; most of our goods and services are taxed at about a 35-percent rate heading into Colombia. Doesn't it make sense to have our goods and services treated like those from Colombia? I think it does. I think our farmers and ranchers and small business owners must understand that with the government finding new markets for them, it will help them prosper.

But if Congress were to reject the Colombia free trade agreement, it would also send a terrible signal in our own neighborhood; it would bolster the voices of false populism. It would say to young democracies, America's word can't be trusted. It would be devastating for our national security interests if this United States Congress turns its back on Colombia and a free trade agreement with Colombia.

I intend to work the issue hard. I'm going to speak my mind on the issue because I feel strongly about it. And then once they pass the Colombia, they can pass Panama and South Korea, as well.

Let me talk about another aspect of keeping markets open. A confident nation accepts capital from overseas. We can protect our people against investments that jeopardize our national security, but it makes no sense to deny capital, including sovereign wealth funds, from access to the U.S. markets. It's our money to begin with. (Laughter.) It seems like we ought to let it back. (Applause.)

So there's some of the things that are on my mind, and I appreciate you letting me get a chance to come by to speak to you. I'm -- you know, I guess the best to describe government policy is like a person trying to drive a car on a rough patch. If you ever get stuck in a situation like that, you know full well it's important not to overcorrect -- because when you overcorrect you end up in the ditch. And so it's important to be steady and to keep your eyes on the horizon.

We're going to deal with the issues as we see them. We're not afraid to make decisions. This administration is not afraid to act. We saw a problem coming and we acted quickly, with the help of Democrats and Republicans in the Congress. We're not afraid to take on issues. But we will do so in a way that respects the ingenuity of the American people, that bolsters the entrepreneurial spirit, and that ensures when we make it through this rough patch, our driving is going to be more smooth.

Thank you, Glenn, for giving me a chance to come, and I'll answer some questions. (Applause.)

MR. HUBBARD: Thank you very much, Mr. President.

As is the Club's tradition, we do have two questioners. On my left, Gail Fosler, the President and Chief Economist of the Conference Board. On my right, literally and metaphorically, Paul Gigot -- (laughter) -- the editorial page editor of The Wall Street Journal.

Gail, the first question for the President is yours.

Q Thank you, very much.

THE PRESIDENT: Who picked Gigot? I mean, why does he -- (laughter.) All right. Excuse me. (Laughter.)

MS. FOSLER: I'm glad you don't know me, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, well -- (laughter.) I'd be more polite, trust me. (Laughter.) My mother might be watching. (Laughter.)

MS. FOSLER: I would like to probe your thoughts on trade. You raised trade in your speech very passionately. And the Conference Board is made up of 2,000 businesses around the world; about a third of them are outside of the United States. And they look at the move toward protectionism in the United States with great alarm, even the shift in the Republican Party toward protectionism. And you mention that a confident nation opens its borders, and there does seem to be a lack of confidence in this country. And I wonder if you would give us a diagnosis of why we find ourselves in the situation we do today?

THE PRESIDENT: First of all, a lot of folks are worried about their neighbors losing work. In other words, they fear jobs moving overseas. And the best way to address that is to recognize that sometimes people lose work because of trade, and when that happens, the best way to deal with it is to provide educational opportunities so somebody can get the skills necessary to fill the higher-paying jobs here in the United States.

And I think, for example, of what happened to the textile industry in North Carolina. And stories like these really do affect how people think about trade. You know, some companies because of mismanagement, some companies because of trade couldn't survive. And it created a wholesale displacement of workers throughout North Carolina. And what the state of North Carolina did was they wisely used their community college system to be able to fit needs and skills.

In other words, a community college system -- the interesting thing about it, it's probably the most market-driven education system in the United States. Unlike some higher education institutions that are either unwilling or sometimes incapable of adjusting curriculum, the community college system is capable of doing that.

And North Carolina recognized they had a great opportunity to become a magnet for the health care industry. And a lot of their textile workers -- with government help, called trade adjustment assistance -- went to community colleges to gain new skills. And it turns out that when you analyze what happened, just the added value -- just kind of the increase in productivity and the relevancy of the job training made the wages higher for those than they were in the textile industry. There's a classic example of how to respond, rather than throwing up trade barriers.

Secondly, a lot of people don't understand this fact, that by having our markets open it's good for consumers. The more consumers get to choose, the more choice there is on the shelves, the less likely it is there will be inflation. And one of the great things about open markets is that markets respond to the collective wisdom of consumers. And so, therefore, it makes sense to have more choice, more opportunities. And yet when you read, "made from" another country on the shelves of our stores, people automatically assume that jobs are fragile. And so we've got to do a better job of educating people about the benefits of trade.

Third, it's -- sometimes, when times are tough, it's easy to -- it's much easier to find a -- somebody else to blame. And sometimes that somebody else that's easier to blame is somebody in a distant land.

And so those are the some of the fact -- and plus it's easy politics. It's easy to go around and hammer away on trade. It's -- and I guess if you're the kind of person that followed polls and focus groups, that's what your tendency to be. I'm the kind of person who doesn't give a darn about polls and focus groups, and I do what I think is right. And what is right is making sure that -- (applause.) And sometimes if you're going to lead this country, you have to stand in the face of what appears to be a political headwind.

And so those are some of the dynamics that makes it hard. And I'm troubled by isolationism and protectionism. As a matter of fact, I dedicated part of my State of the Union address a couple of years ago to this very theme. And what concerns me is, is that the United States of America will become fatigued when it comes to fighting off tyrants, or say it's too hard to spread liberty, or use the excuse that just because freedom hadn't flourished in parts of the world, therefore it's not worth trying, and that, as a result, we kind of retrench and lose confidence in our -- the values that have made us a great nation in the first place.

But these aren't American values; they're universal values. And the danger of getting tired during this world [sic] is any retreat by the America -- by America was going to be to the benefit of those who want to do us harm. Now, I understand that since September the 11th, the great tendency is to say, we're no longer in danger. Well, that's false. That's false hope. It's either disingenuous or naive, and either one of those attitudes is unrealistic.

And the biggest job we've got is to protect the American people from harm. I don't want to get in another issue, but that's why we better figure out what the enemy is saying on their telephones, if you want to protect you. (Applause.) Notice I am deftly taking a trade issue and working in all my other issues. (Laughter.)

But I'm serious about this business about America retreating. And I've got great faith in the transformative power of liberty, and that's what I believe is going to happen in the Middle East. And I understand it undermines the argument of the stability-ites -- people who say, you just got to worry about stability. And I'm saying, we better worry about the conditions that caused 19 kids to kill us in the first place.

And the best way to deal with hopelessness is to fight disease like we're doing in Africa, and fight forms of government that suppress people's rights, like we're doing around the world. And a retreat from that attitude is going to make America less secure and the world more dangerous, just like a loss of confidence in trade.

And yet the two run side by side: isolationism and protectionism. I might throw another "ism," and that's nativism. And that's what happened throughout our history. And probably the most grim reminder of what can happen to America during periods of isolationism and protectionism is what happened in the late -- in the '30s, when we had this "America first" policy, and Smoot-Hawley. And look where it got us.

And so I guess to answer your question, there needs to be political courage, in the face of what may appear to be a difficult headwind, in order to speak clearly about the effects of retreat and the benefits of trade. And so I appreciate you giving me a chance to opine. (Laughter and applause.)

MR. HUBBARD: Thank you, Mr. President. The second and final --

THE PRESIDENT: Never bashful, never short of opinions. (Laughter.) Just like my mother. (Laughter.)

MR. HUBBARD: The second and final question for the President is from Paul Gigot.

Q Welcome to New York, Mr. President. And I want to ask you about something you didn't -- an issue you didn't address, which is prices.

THE PRESIDENT: Which is what?

Q Prices. Gasoline is selling for $4 a gallon in some parts of the country, but food prices are also rising very fast -- grain prices, meat prices, health care prices. And the dollar is weak around the world, hitting a record low this week against the Euro. The price of gold is now about $1,000 an ounce. Many observers say, oh, this means that we have an inflation problem. Do you agree with them, and what can be done about it?

THE PRESIDENT: I agree that the Fed needs to be independent and make considered judgments, and balance growth versus inflation. And let me address some of those issues one by one.

We believe in a strong dollar. I recognize economies go up and down, but it's important for us to put policy in place that sends a signal that our economy is going to be strong and open for business, which will -- you know, which supports the strong dollar policy, such as not doing something foolish during this economic period that will cause -- make it harder to grow; such as rejecting -- shutting down capital from coming into this country; such as announcing that, or articulating the belief that making the tax cuts permanent takes uncertainty out of the system.

Energy: Our energy policy has not been very wise. You can't build a refinery in the United States. You can't expand a refinery in the United States. The Congress believes we shouldn't be drilling for oil and gas in a productive part of our country like ANWR because it will destroy the environment, which, in fact, it won't. Technology is such that will enable us to find more oil and gas. And so as a result of us not having, you know, been robust in exploring for oil and gas at home, we're dependent on other countries. That creates an economic issue, obviously, and it creates a national security issue.

And, look, I'm very -- I'm an alternatives fuel guy, I believe that's important. As a matter of fact, we've expanded -- mightily expanded the use of ethanol; a slight consequence if you rely upon corn to grow your hogs, but nevertheless it's a -- it is a policy that basically says that we got to diversify. But diversification does not happen overnight. You know, I firmly believe people in New York City are going to be driving automobiles on battery relatively quickly. And it's not going to be like a golf cart, it will be a regular-sized vehicle that you'll be driving in. (Laughter.) And I think it's coming. I think this technology is on its way.

But there's a transition period, and we, frankly, have got policies that make it harder for us to become less dependent on oil. You talk about the price of oil -- yeah, it's high. It's high because demand is greater than supply, is why it's high. It's high because there's new factors in demand on the international market, namely China and India. It's also high because some nations have not done a very good job of maintaining their oil reserves -- some of it because of bureaucracy, some of it because of state-owned enterprise. And it's a difficult period for our folks at the pump, and there's no quick fix.

You know, when I was overseas in the Middle East, people said, did you talk to the King of Saudi about oil prices? Of course I did. I reminded him two things: One, you better be careful about affecting markets -- reminding him that oil is fungible; even though we get most of our oil, by the way, from Canada and Mexico, oil is fungible. And secondly, the higher the price of oil, the more capital is going to come into alternative sources of energy. And so we've got a plan that calls for diversification, but it's -- our energy policy hadn't been very wise up to now.

Anyway, I'm going to dodge the rest of your question. (Laughter.) Thank you for your time. (Applause.)

END 11:59 A.M. EDT

20070913 The president in HD

The president in HD

Thursday, Sept. 13, 2007

Thanks to David Wissing over at the Hedgehog Report – “President Bush Speech Notes/Open Thread” we learn that “tonight's Presidential address from the White House (was) broadcast for the first time in high definition television.”

Mr. Wissing credits TVNewser, “The President In HD” for the information, which notes, “Previous events, including this year's State of the Union address, were in HD but now that the White House is wired, the networks can carry the speech in HiDef.”

But quick, when was the first presidential speech on TV?

The History News Network, “How the White House Discovered Television” cites Christine Gibson in American Heritage : “…the first televised Presidential speech ever…” was “President Harry Truman's speech on October 5, 1947, urging Americans to save wheat…”

The speech and the circumstances are to be the subject of a future column that I am writing to coincide with the anniversary. I had come across the information before and then when I was at the Truman Key West “Little White House” this past February, I gained some more insight into the event. See: 20070214 President Harry Truman and Gauging a presidential legacy.

####

Florida Key West, President George W. Bush, President Harry S Truman, The Tentacle, History American Presidents

Kevin Dayhoff writes from Westminster Maryland USA.

www.kevindayhoff.net

E-mail him at: kdayhoff AT carr.org or kevindayhoff AT gmail.com

His columns and articles appear in The Tentacle - www.thetentacle.com; Westminster Eagle Opinion; www.thewestminstereagle.com and Winchester Report.

####

20070813 Wall Street Journal: Karl Rove to Resign at the End of August

Wall Street Journal: Karl Rove to Resign at the End of August

Karl Rove to Resign at the End of August

By a WALL STREET JOURNAL Staff Reporter

August 13, 2007 4:00 a.m.

Karl Rove, President Bush's longtime political adviser, is resigning as White House deputy chief of staff effective Aug. 31, and returning to Texas, he said in an interview with Paul Gigot, editor of The Wall Street Journal's editorial page.

(See related editorial.) 'THE MARK OF ROVE'

Read the editorial by The Wall Street Journal's editorial page editor, Paul Gigot, on his interview with Karl Rove.

Mr. Rove, who has held a senior post in the White House since President Bush took office in January 2001, told Mr. Gigot …

Read the rest of the article here: Karl Rove to Resign at the End of August

The Wall Street Journal published the interview Monday.

RELATED ARTICLES AND BLOGS

Related Content may require a subscription Subscribe Now -- Get 2 Weeks FREE

Related Articles from the Online Journal

'The Mark of Rove'

Bush Invokes Executive Privilege

White House Won't Rule Out Eventual Pardon for Libby

House Democrats Issue New Subpoena

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118698747711695773.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news