That's big bro 43's mentality. Remember back when W was maneuvering one of his first tax cuts for his "Ranger" and "Pioneer" cronies. He was following one of his many mentor's requests. At one point Cheney was asked by Paul O'Neill, Dubya's Treasury Secretary at the time, why he supported redistribution of wealth to the wealthiest and feckless, reckless, impotent, dickless Cheney chortled that "You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. We won the mid-term elections, this is our due!" as noted in the Transcript of Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's Interview on CBS,
6O Minutes, 11 January 2004.
Not to belabor the point but this isn't ancient, forgotten history but it might as well be if we don't learn from our mistakes.
This was on CBS just 3 and a half years ago. W was against another tax cut and said "Why are we doing it again?"
His advisors say "Well, Mr. President, the upper class, they're the entrepreneurs."
It looked like W was going to make a stand against trickle down, but he decided that he should listen to the grown-ups in the room and said "Well, shouldn't we be giving money to the middle? Won't people be able to say, 'You did it once, and then you did it twice and what was it good for?"
The Democrats have realized that W's chums have been shafting the 99% for the benefit of the few.
The March 24, 2007
CNN.com Transcript "Subprime Hearings on Capitol Hill; Predatory Lending; Lower Your Taxes" states "Finally, one Senate committee is getting down and dirty, putting industry executives and regulators in the hot seat. The big question-why the subprime lending sector, the one that serves people with poor credit scores, is melting down and what can be done about it?"
SEN. CHRISTOPHER DODD (D), CONNECTICUT stated "A study done by the Center for Responsible Lending estimates that up to 2.2 million families with subprime loans could lose their homes at a cost of some $164 billion in lost home equity....The fact that any reputable banker or lender would make these kinds of loans so widely available to wage-earners, to elderly families on fixed incomes, or to lower-income, unsophisticated borrowers, strikes me as unconscionable and deceptive."
Everything for this administration has been geared to make the top 1% all the possible profits at the expense of the 99%. They'd steal the pennies off dead people's eyes.
It can be summed as "According to the National Association of Mortgage Brokers, there were 53,000 brokerage companies in the U.S. in 2004, and they represented 68 percent of new home loans. The critics of their industry say that brokers and lenders grew too aggressive, offering loan terms and
interest rates that weren't affordable for clients, and brokers started selling some of the most complicated and riskiest loans to folks least prepared to understand them."
The article "George Bush Doesn't Like America" at
http://www.oliverwillis.com/2007/08/george-bush-doe.html
puts it succinctly as "Who does he want to cut taxes for? The middle class? The lower class? No sir, he wants to cut taxes for corporations. Right before the little bugger skips out of office, he wants to screw us over financially one more time. Any Democrat who votes for this, and the Republicans who I'm sure will, is a turd.
President Bush said yesterday that he is considering a fresh plan to cut tax rates for U.S. corporations to make them more competitive around the world, an initiative that could further inflame a battle with the Democratic Congress over spending and taxes and help define the remainder of his tenure. A turd.
Bush will try to sell this as a boost to small business, but make no mistake - this is targeted at the GEs, Exxon-Mobils and other fattest of fat cats that in turn fill up Republican party coffers with their filthy lucre. We're in the middle of a war, a war whose costs are sinking us day in and
out in debt, and the response of the Republican party is to give the robber barons another truckload of free money. What a disgraceful man George W. Bush is. No wonder his father is so embarrassed by his failed presidency."
41 is being as supportive of 43! Well then 41 is just as huge a cold-blooded killer that his son is, with the souls of US soldiers and innocent Iraqis on his blood-stained hands!
W's US military is attacking Sadr's forces in Baghdad while Maliki is Iran. When Maliki is in Baghdad he runs interference for Sadr precluding the US from attacking the man who gave Maliki his job. W is stating Maliki is doing well, but these attacks of Sadr weakens Maliki's standing in Iraq and in Iran with the Shiites who he's currying favor with.
The article "Just Another Vacation From Reality" talks about Iraq and how W is trying to sabotage Maliki in Iraq because Maliki is making nice with Iran. It states "You probably reasoned that with 162,000 U.S. troops sweltering in the war zone, with the Iraqi government fracturing along sectarian lines and with what is billed as a make-or-break report from the U.S. commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus, due next month, maybe tradition ought to be ignored and the summer heat withstood just this once. You doubtless pointed out that no matter how uncomfortable triple-digit temperatures might be for the grandees of Washington and Baghdad, soldiers burdened with body armor and combat boots-and the constant threat of getting shot or blown up-have it a bit worse.
You were right, of course-it's unbelievable that the Iraqi parliament is taking a month-long vacation, that Congress has left for its traditional August recess
and that George W. Bush is heading off to Kennebunkport and then to Texas. What you failed to take into account is that none of this really matters, because the war in Iraq is on autopilot.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
