The disastrous reign of the Bush administration
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
George Harris
Published: June 20, 2008
Have you ever had one of those AAARRGH! moments? I had one a couple of days ago when I opened the Potomac News and read about how President George W. Bush had finally decided that perhaps
we needed to strengthen the American dollar.
For seven and a half years, the president’s economic policies have been, at best, laissez-faire. He actually believed that by doing nothing (not letting the government interfere) there would be
unprecedented economic growth. Instead, just the opposite has happened.
The dollar is at an all-time low, the budget deficit and the national debt are higher than they have ever been (including World War II), the jobless rate stands at 5.5 percent. As a result of the weak dollar,
the price of a barrel of oil is soaring, the average price of a gallon of gasoline is now over $4.05 a gallon, and people have lost untold millions in investments. According to the Department of Agriculture,
grocery prices are rising at rates not seen since 1990. On the wholesale market, the country’s biggest commodity crops — corn, wheat, and soybeans — are selling at record highs; wheat prices are up
nearly 50 percent since the first of the year. Housing foreclosures are astronomical — Prince William County has the highest foreclosure rate in Virginia and is swimming in empty houses.
But in the eleventh hour of his administration, President Bush is mulling over the idea of doing something to strengthen the dollar. For decades the American dollar was the strongest currency in the
world. Despite its weakness, much of the world’s trading is still done in American dollars. That’s the problem — it takes more weak dollars to buy what the pre-Bush dollars could buy. It’s good for
American exports but it is devastating for the things we import. While I am no economics expert, I believe that we may be one of the few nations in the world that does not use some form of currency
control. But that is what George Bush has done — he has allowed the dollar to flap in the breeze and we have paid the price for his economic ignorance.
Bush continues to search for a way to leave his mark in history. He needn’t worry — he has. Except that it is a negative mark, almost the worst in the history of this nation.
GEORGE HARRIS
Manassas
Page 1 of 1
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( raywilliams ) on June 20, 2008 at 4:39 pm
cobra, why do the Big Oil companies not drill for oil on the land they currently hold leases on? Why do we need to open more territories when they’re not using what’s available? They have explored, bought and paid for land that is just sitting there, letting the Chinese suck the oil out from the other side. I do agree Oil should focus on oil, not alternate energy. But I do point out the fact Mr. Bush was ineffective for the 6 years he held both Houses. Good to see he got the telephone companies off for their acts in the illegal wiretapping of US citizens. I guess Republicans pick and choose the Laws they wish to obey. Hope you’re enjoying your vacation. Was this a trip for your non-profit paid for by Big Oil?
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( jVA ) on June 20, 2008 at 2:57 pm
“They have had control of both the house and senate for two years and their leadership has been miserable.”
I could not be happier with the Democrats’ leadership since taking control of congress. They’ve kept Bush from doing anything stupid for two years. Mission accomplished.
“Had the Clinton Administration taken custody of Bin Laden in the late ‘90s when he was incarcerated, 9/11 would not have happened. They refused and he was released. “
I’m curious, Stryker. What do you suppose Clinton was supposed to arrest Bin Laden for? The offer you’re talking about happened in 1996. For what crime exactly was Clinton supposed to arrest him? The embassy bombings of 1998? The Cole bombing of 2000?
If only somebody had handed Clinton an intelligence document titled, “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US"…
Clinton tried to get the Saudis to take bin Laden and deal with him. Big surprise that our “allies” didn’t help out.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( RonCharest ) on June 20, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Col Stryker,
Where is Bin Laden now?
Reality bites, but thanks for the wishes on a nice weekend.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Col Stryker ) on June 20, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Oh Ron, you force me to reply. Your statement of “the man responsible for 9/11/2001 is still running free in the country of our ally”. Who? Bill Clinton oh wait, you mean Osama Bin Laden, sorry. Had the Clinton Administration taken custody of Bin Laden in the late ‘90s when he was incarcerated, 9/11 would not have happened. They refused and he was released. As for the rest of your meandering thoughts come this quote, “Reality is the name we give to our disappointments.” Mason Cooley
Have a nice weekend!
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( RonCharest ) on June 20, 2008 at 12:43 pm
The real difference between Liberals and Conservatives is that Liberals have chosen to live in the reality-based world. That would be the world where:
- the man responsible for 9/11/2001 is still running free in the country of our ally
- where over 4,000 American troops have died in Iraq with an estimated 1 millon civilians have died with another estimated 2 million refugees
- Where we’re borrowing millions of dollars per day from nations including Saudi Arabia and China, with the highest deficit in our history
- Where the Afghanistan Taliban are now expanding their range of control and launching increasingly bold attacks on NATO troops (us)
- Where the world is hitting Peak Oil, and there just isn’t enough new oil available to drill for that will make a difference in availability
Yes indeed, reality is only for liberals; they’re the people strong enough to face the facts and deal with them.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( cobra ) on June 20, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Typical liberal puke to blame absolutely everything on this administration and to ignore past economic policies that have gotten us to where we are today. George Harris ignores the facts that high gas prices are due to the liberal’s absolute demonization of oil companies and not allowing them to drill here in the US. Oil companies are in the business of extracting oil from the ground. Why are we asking them to develop alternative sources of energy? That’s like asking Keebler to invest in Chickens when they are in the cookie business. Liberals have undermined this Administration from day one. They have had control of both the house and senate for two years and their leadership has been miserable. And now you put up a Presidential Candidate that has absolutely no credentials? What a joke!!!!
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( T Dawg ) on June 20, 2008 at 8:19 am
Tha’s right o’ wise lib ... never mind that we have not had one successful terrorist attack in this country since 9-11-2001. Never mind that around the world during this same period there have been 11293 verified terrorist attacks. Never mind that the economy was on track and doing good until the democrats took the majority in congress. Never mind that Al Qaeda and the Taliban have been dealt crushing blows and the citizens of Iraq exercised their voting powers for the first time in many years. Never mind that the infrastructure of Iraq had been restored and is functional and their government is getting stronger and closer to standing on their own. Never mind that the democrats, rinos, and libs have voted against every oil drilling project proposed in the last 20 years. Never mind that the dems, rinos, and libs have voted against every new refinery proposed in the last 20 years. Yessiree george you’re not blinded by Bush hate at all. hahahahahahahaha
hahahahahaha libs are funny ... sad but funny!!!
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( willow703 ) on June 20, 2008 at 8:16 am
The problem this country has is failure to reward saving & investment.
I am not a college grad, much less an economist, but I do know this: The more government taxes something, the less citizens will seek it.
If you tax the interest on savings accounts, people see no advantage in saving. Buy another latte.
If you tax the capital gains from investment, people see no advantage in
investing. Buy another yacht.
Sen. Obama wants to almost double the tax rate on capital gains. Why should anyone with half a brain seek a capital gain? How is that “helping” middle-income families with capital gains? Perhaps he is under the false impression that no middle-income families have or seek to have capital gains. While saying he wants to “help” middle-income families, Sen. Obama says nothing about reducing or eliminating the tax on income from savings accounts.
Just one more reason to go against my social & political philosophy & vote for Sen. McCain.
Report Inappropriate Comment