PDA

View Full Version : Bush misses seeing G.I.'s, White House food


WoodysGirl
05-29-2009, 08:47 AM
By James Prichard, Associated Press Writer – 2 hrs 47 mins ago

BENTON TOWNSHIP, Mich. – Flying on Air Force One, eating meals prepared by the White House kitchen staff and drawing inspiration from his encounters with U.S. military personnel were among things former President George W. Bush missed since leaving office, he said Thursday.

The often-tearful meetings he had with relatives of fallen soldiers were "in some ways... very hard and in some ways, it was very uplifting," the Texas Republican said in a speech to The Economic Club of Southwestern Michigan at Lake Michigan College.

About eight people protested Bush's appearance outside the venue, carrying signs that called him a murderer and a traitor. The speech Thursday was one of the first made by the former president since leaving office in January.

Bush, the nation's 43rd president, spoke to 2,500 people about "the fog of war" that followed the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the economic downturn and his return to life as a regular citizen.

"It was a roller coaster of emotions, it really was," Bush said of the terror attacks. "I think about it now at times but I definitely thought about it every day as president."

He talked about the economy, blaming "a lack of responsible regulation" in the lending industry for the recession and said that the Federal National Mortgage Association, known as Fannie Mae, and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., or Freddie Mac, shouldn't have engaged in certain financial practices.

"I don't want to sound like a self-serving guy, but we did try to rein them in," Bush said.

He also said he believes he was right to depose Iraq president Saddam Hussein and that it may lead to the spread of democracy throughout the Middle East.

The audience, which gave Bush a warm welcome at his arrival, cheered when he said he wanted to be remembered as a president who "showed up in office with a set of principles and he was unwilling to sacrifice his soul for the sake of popularity."

Mark Brewer, chairman of the state Democratic Party, disagreed.

"I think it takes a lot of gall for him to come into Michigan without acknowledging the damage that his policies have done to the state," Brewer said. He did not offer any specifics.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090529/ap_on_re_us/us_bush_speech

DIAF
05-29-2009, 08:52 AM
Mark Brewer, chairman of the state Democratic Party, disagreed.

"I think it takes a lot of gall for him to come into Michigan without acknowledging the damage that his policies have done to the state," Brewer said. He did not offer any specifics.



That's too bad. He was the President of the United States of America, not the President of Michigan.

zrinkill
05-29-2009, 09:00 AM
"was unwilling to sacrifice his soul for the sake of popularity."

:D

Thats gonna leave a mark.

fredp22
05-29-2009, 10:21 AM
By James Prichard, Associated Press Writer – 2 hrs 47 mins ago


"I don't want to sound like a self-serving guy, but we did try to rein them in," Bush said.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090529/ap_on_re_us/us_bush_speech

he did? how?

his failure to act in the financial collapse and monetary rape of companies by CEO's that he allowed will brand him as one of the worst presidents to serve.

DIAF
05-29-2009, 10:32 AM
he did? how?

his failure to act in the financial collapse and monetary rape of companies by CEO's that he allowed will brand him as one of the worst presidents to serve.

Government has no business dictating that. Unless, of course, the government bails you out and becomes a stakeholder, but not until that point.

Doomsday101
05-29-2009, 10:36 AM
he did? how?

his failure to act in the financial collapse and monetary rape of companies by CEO's that he allowed will brand him as one of the worst presidents to serve.

That is the responsibility of the board of directors and share holders to determine what CEO's get paid not the US Government.

numnuts23
05-29-2009, 10:46 AM
That is the responsibility of the board of directors and share holders to determine what CEO's get paid not the US Government.

Shhhhh....please don't tell people that. We all know that everything is Bush's fault.

fredp22
05-29-2009, 03:07 PM
That is the responsibility of the board of directors and share holders to determine what CEO's get paid not the US Government.

When they're coming to the govt for money then the govt has to be involved. Giving AIG, Citigroup, BOA, Wells money without restrictions is a joke. They all tried to pay top management high payouts while doing layoffs.

Doomsday101
05-29-2009, 03:17 PM
When they're coming to the govt for money then the govt has to be involved. Giving AIG, Citigroup, BOA, Wells money without restrictions is a joke. They all tried to pay top management high payouts while doing layoffs.

Yes when you get money from the Government you then are at the will of the Government. I have not said other wise however I was not in favor of the bailout to begin with under Bush and his 700 billion and even less with Obama. If a board of directors want to pay the CEO big money that is their choice but we should not have to bailout companies who have bad business practice.

fredp22
05-29-2009, 03:59 PM
Yes when you get money from the Government you then are at the will of the Government. I have not said other wise however I was not in favor of the bailout to begin with under Bush and his 700 billion and even less with Obama. If a board of directors want to pay the CEO big money that is their choice but we should not have to bailout companies who have bad business practice.


I agree I was also not in favor of any bailouts. Why do we keep giving money to GM?


I also starting to think we should have a maximum a ceo could get vs what the lowest paid or even average salaried employees get. I dont believe a select few execs should get say a 75 million dollar bonus while the average employee in the company is told theres a salary freeze and layoffs. Especially when the company is losing money or the person is leaving. Thats just plain raping the company.

Doomsday101
05-29-2009, 04:14 PM
I agree I was also not in favor of any bailouts. Why do we keep giving money to GM?


I also starting to think we should have a maximum a ceo could get vs what the lowest paid or even average salaried employees get. I dont believe a select few execs should get say a 75 million dollar bonus while the average employee in the company is told theres a salary freeze and layoffs. Especially when the company is losing money or the person is leaving. Thats just plain raping the company.

What CEO get paid in a private company is up to those board of directors and the stock holders it is not the responsibility of the Government to dictate pay at any company. The only reason they have a say in some of these business is because of this bailout which in my view was wrong the business should have been allowed to fail. Then again I'm a capitalist

Rogah
05-29-2009, 04:15 PM
he did? how?

his failure to act in the financial collapse and monetary rape of companies by CEO's that he allowed will brand him as one of the worst presidents to serve.Did you blame Bill Clinton for Enron and other market scandals of that time?

iceberg
05-29-2009, 04:23 PM
I agree I was also not in favor of any bailouts. Why do we keep giving money to GM?

I also starting to think we should have a maximum a ceo could get vs what the lowest paid or even average salaried employees get. I dont believe a select few execs should get say a 75 million dollar bonus while the average employee in the company is told theres a salary freeze and layoffs. Especially when the company is losing money or the person is leaving. Thats just plain raping the company.

crap on a wicker stick. if you're able to make that kind of money, go for it. this country isn't about being a "commune" dude, it's about getting off your arse and working for a living to go as far as you want to go.

Doomsday101
05-29-2009, 04:26 PM
crap on a wicker stick. if you're able to make that kind of money, go for it. this country isn't about being a "commune" dude, it's about getting off your arse and working for a living to go as far as you want to go.

True the funny thing is I saw a documentary on the 60's commune movement and why it failed. After a while the people in the communes who were working hard growing the food and working the fields started getting upset that those who did little still expected their equal share.