Bush and the Economy

Dear editor:

During his trip to Africa President Bush held a full fledged press conference for the first time in quite a while. Some of the inquiries faced by the president dealt with the state of the American economy, especially in the face of the latest Department of Labor reports. His answer to these questions left many reporters scratching their heads unable to understand his interpretation of our economy and the view of many economists.

While he finally admitted that he was “concerned about the economy” he also believes “that our economy has got the fundamentals in place for us to grow and continue growing, more robustly hopefully than we’re growing now. So we’re still for a strong dollar.” That answer leaves one to wonder what planet the president is on. Look at the true facts that deny the president’s viewpoint.

1) In March 2003 the U.S. dollar was worth 98 cents as compared to the Euro. As of the end of February 2008 that same American dollar is worth only 68 cents in exchange for the Euro. That’s a drop of almost 31% in just five years of Mr. Bush’s leadership. The falling dollar value has given a huge boost to crude oil prices.

2) Thanks to Mr. Bush’s war in Iraq and his tax breaks to the rich, the U.S. debt has climbed to $9 trillion with no end in site for the war, the cost of it and the resulting increase in debt. A great record for seven and a half years.

3) Unemployment is increasing.

4) Inflation has raised its ugly head and is heading upwards. Mr. Bernanke, the head of the Federal Reserve has told Congress “I don’t anticipate stagflation.” Wonderful words to support his president, but almost impossible to defend in the face of our problems.

5) Oil has surpassed $102 per barrel and the possibility of $4 a gallon gasoline is a very real possibility in the near future.

6) The sub-prime mortgage mess is a disaster with people losing their homes and their savings. The building industry is having its biggest slowdown in decades and home inventories are still growing. Mr. Bernanke has said that some smaller banks may go belly up.

All of this is in the face of President Bush’s statement that “our economy has its fundamentals in place and we’re still for a strong dollar.” For a man that has been in office for seven and a half years he obviously still doesn’t understand what fundamentals are and is responsible for this mess. Remember, you can delegate authority but you cannot delegate responsibility, and leadership starts at the top.

McCain and the Evangelicals

Dear editor:

Those bigoted, “family value,” extremist, right wing pundits of the conservative airwaves; Rush Limbaugh, Neal Bortz, Hugh Hewitt, and Ann Coulter, (backed up by evangelical Christian leader James Dobson,) who claim to represent the “base electorate” of the Republican Party, are at it again, debasing and trashing Sen. John McCain, the presumptive presidential candidate of the Grand Old Party (GOP.) Coulter, who a few months ago declared on TV that Jews need “to be perfected,” stated that the only way McCain could have her vote is if he “put a gun to my head.” Limbaugh stated on air that McCain is “going to destroy the Republican Party.” The others have made similar disparaging statements about Sen. McCain, a true American war hero who speaks his mind and sticks to his opinions and guns.

Let’s face it, Sen. McCain ran in primaries against Rev. Huckabee, the darling of the evangelicals, and beat him soundly. Could it be that the religious extremists in the GOP are not the true “base” that controls the party, but rather the “base” is composed of all those who would rather see someone who wants to change the outlook of the United States and is not a tool of the so-called conservative talk radio hosts and their minions? In America the majority nominates, and evidently the majority of the Republican Party voted for McCain. Aren’t they really the “base?”

The one thing Mr. McCain has to do is not fall prey to the rantings of the extremists. Recently he has started to change some of his opinions and statements on many pressing subjects just to attract and pacify the evangelicals. If he continues this it is a major mistake, for he would be walking away from the “base” of the party that nominated him with their votes. Changes like this would be an insult to those who backed him in the primaries and probably would cost him many, many votes in the November general election.

I have always had a lot of respect for Sen. McCain as a straight shooter, even though I do not agree with him all the time (i.e. the continuing war in Iraq.) He stood up to the North Vietnamese in a prison camp for so long, and I think he should stand up to those in his party who want to remake America in their warped image.

Finding a Replacement for Cheney

Letter to the Washington Post

February 9, 2008

Dear editor:

Colbert King's column in the Saturday, February 9th paper (Page A15) brings up some interesting points for the second in command on the party ticket for McCain, Clinton or Obama, depending upon who will win the election in November.

Some of the choices are good and some are frightening, ie: Pastor Huckabee and his bible, breast beating minions. But let's face it, anyone or anything would be an improvement over “Darth Vader Cheney.” It's time we came out of the "Dark Side" and brought the office of Vice-President into the daylight. In fact, that could be said about the whole Bush presidency.

Misplaced Republican Priorities

Dear editor:

I daily read newspapers, both local and national, watch the news on TV, and find myself in a complete quandary as to what some Americans are thinking about. With all the obvious problems our country faces today, I do not understand what some people are considering what is of primary concern in the days ahead. Let’s look at what the ‘real problems’ are.

Start with the dragging on, old story of the Iraq War. The cost is running at over a half a trillion dollars, an American death toll less than 50 short of 4,000 troops, over 25,000 wounded and no end in sight. At least we can’t plan for an end because the definition of victory, as explained by the White House, keeps changing and the original reasons for the war has been lost in rhetoric and spin.

We now are sending 3,500 additional marines to the unfinished conflict in Afghanistan. NATO allies it appears will not send any more soldiers to share additional burdens caused by the renewal of major Taliban hostilities, and some allies are talking of pulling out altogether.

These two conflicts have stretched our military beyond belief. And no matter what anyone claims, being against the war is in no way against the troops. I should know. My son is a U.S. Navy Lt. Commander, having just spent three years with Naval Special Warfare, with numerous trips on the ground with the Seal Teams in Iraq. He now is leaving for six months in Bahrain.

Next are the economy and our financial position in the world.

There was a time in the not too distant past that the world looked to the United States for growth, financial investment, loans and ever increasing billions in aid. Oil was $20 a barrel; the Soviet Union was financially collapsing internally; Asian countries were courting the International Monetary Fund for cheap loans; and China, India and other East Asian countries were “emerging” economically.

Today, our “wars against terrorism,” a true misnomer, are draining our treasury, along with our tax breaks for the rich, and our national debt has ballooned to nine trillion dollars ($9,000,000,000.) The value of the American Dollar has plummeted world wide. The sub-prime mortgage debacle has had an unbelievable negative effect on our banking system, on our building industry, on the stock market, and most importantly on the savings and retirement plans of million of Americans. So what does our president do? To ‘solve’ the problem he has submitted a budget of three trillion dollars that cuts back on Medicare and Medicaid but increases the Department of Defense allocation by a huge amount. And oh yes, this doesn’t even begin to touch money for the war in Iraq or Afghanistan.

As a result of all of this, we are the country that must go hat in hand to Middle and Far Eastern countries, who enjoy huge monetary surpluses, to buy our out of control debt and to save our banks from bankruptcy. Don’t think it was hat in hand? It was President Bush who had to go “ask” the Saudi Arabian king to do something about oil prices to help us out. But it wasn’t even the king who turned him down, but rather an underling (oil minister) who did so to the man who occupies the so-called most powerful seat of government in the world.

And what are the minions of the so-called conservative, family oriented, evangelical, faith based, far-right wing of the President’s party, led by Rush Limbaugh, overly concerned about in finding a standard bearer for the November election? Let’s see….a Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, a ban on government sponsored stem-cell research, putting prayer in schools, no gays in the military, faith based initiatives paid for by the federal government, more tax breaks for the rich, and on and on.

Where in the world are their priorities for the survival of this country?