Where is our president in a time of crisis?

United States
November 25, 2008 8:09pm CST
The last few days we have seen more of the president elect, then the man that actually is president. Today we hear that Hank Paulson wants to spend all the money now, instead of letting the new president decide where the money will go. Does anyone know what President Bush is doing?
5 responses
@newtondak (3950)
• United States
26 Nov 08
I had heard somewhere that President Bush intended not to spend more than half of the $700B that was approved - leaving the other half to be used by Obama as he chooses after he took office. I am sure that anything that Bush would do in the next two months would be severely criticized anyway - so why not just ride the wave out and avoid any more scrutiny? I think it would be the ideal situation if they were to work together and implement an economic stimulus package before January 20, 2009 - but it doesn't appear that will happen.
• United States
26 Nov 08
Thanks for your response Newton. I heard the same thing about Bush, but Hank Paulson is now out as treasury, so there is now a run on the treasury, and they want to make sure what friend gets how much money. I understand that Bush has been everyone's punching bag (I will admit that I am one of the bigger ones), but good leaders don't run from crisis they take it head on, and solve problems. I wish that someone would explain to the president that his legacy will be how he acted in a time of crisis, and we all remember the last thing you do, not the best thing you have done.
@newtondak (3950)
• United States
26 Nov 08
I think all of Washington is so involved with all the bail-out stuff and how the money is going to be spent that they don't really have time for much else. Everyone will be gone over the holidays, so nothing will get done then. The new Congress will be circulating in and getting situated and nothing will get done then. I don't really ever recall any outgoing President doing anything monumental in the last few months of his term. I do recall that Clinton's staff messed up the office computers before they left and took all the W's off of the keyboards - left the offices in a mess and such.
1 person likes this
• United States
29 Nov 08
Newton, no president has ever left the country in worse shape than George W. Bush. We are in a major recession (possible depression), the credit markets are completely tied up, we have spent over $380 billion dollars on bailing out millionaires who just spent that money on lavish trips. Hank Paulson is spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars bailing out his friends, and people that donated to GWB. But, this is all Baracks fault, according the republicans.
@spoiled311 (5502)
• Philippines
26 Nov 08
hi thegreatdebater! well, i heard on the news that he met with another outgoing president, was it the israeli president? i wasn't really listening too well. i am not sure but i guess he is trying to wrap things up before he steps down from public office. well i really pray that everything will work out for the best for america. because whatever happens there affects the rest of us in the entire world. take care and God bless America!
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
26 Nov 08
I think the president is simply doing his job to the best of his ability in the waning days of his presidency. Obviously he's not doing a great job, but I think you're assuming he's doing nothing just because you are seeing more Obama on the TV than you are Bush. The media is out for ratings, not an accurate representation of what's going on right now. The sooner you learn that the better.
• United States
27 Nov 08
Taskr, if the president was doing his job he would be calming down wall street, and reassuring the Amreican people that his secritary of treasury knows what he is doing (when either he has no clue, or he lied to the world and is spending all of the bail out money on his old friends. Remember this money was suppose to go to paying off mortgages). If you went into a bank, asked for a loan, signed the papers for the loan, accepted the terms, and then violated the terms the bank would ask for the money back, and if you didn't have it, they could sue you, or even file criminal charges against you. Can you explain to me the difference between what Paulson is doing, and bank fraud? I agree that the media lives off of ratings (funny isn't it how FOX news is always talking about how big their ratings are? But, they only report the news, O'Reilly, and Hannity just report their own news), I was just pointing out that Obama is taking responsibility for Bush's mess, and Bush is doing what he has done all of this life: Run away from problems, and let someone else deal with the mess he has created. This isn't the frist time Bush has done this, he has a history of this.
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
27 Nov 08
I really don't see Obama doing anything aside from standing in front of the camera more. He hasn't taken any action, just talked. He's spent most of his time just rehiring old Clinton people. Frankly all these bailouts are retarded and Bush and Obama are both supporting them. The only difference is that Bush seems to actually look at what will happen before agreeing to a bailout, whereas Obama is just blindly agreeing with everything Pelosi wants. Of course that's no different than how he towed the party line as a senator.
• United States
28 Nov 08
Taskr, when Obama came out and showed some leadership (something missing for years now from the president), the market went up both days. The traders that were interviewed on wall street said that the stability was a main reason that the market is up. Will you provide me with one link where Bush said exactly what this bail out money was suppose to be used for, and then show me a link of what the bail out is actually used for. You will see they are two entirely different things, and Bush hasn't said a word to Paulson about it. I think that Obama hiring people that have actually made our economy grow, instead of Bush who hired people that destroyed the economy (and surprise, surprise look where we are toda). Obama's hires are just like Bush's, and I am sure you didn't complain about that Taskr, and before you say that Obama said he was going to change Washington, remember who said he was going to be "the great uniter", and would change Washington?
@jonesy123 (3950)
• United States
26 Nov 08
Working on pardons and such. Bush really can't stop Paulson, that's congress' job. Bush has said that he doesn't want all of it spend now but wants the majority to be spend under Obama. Something tells me that our elected officials in congress are pushing Paulson to spread the money quickly so all their 'friends' can benefit before Obama might close the faucet of the cash flow;)
• United States
26 Nov 08
Jonesy, here is a little lession on Civics: The congress doesn't appoint the secritary of treasury, that is the presidents job. I know what Bush has said, but Paulson now isn't going to be out of a job in January, and he has said that he needs another $800 billion for Citi, and credit card bail out. He has said that part of that money ($300 billion) coming from the current $700 billion bail out bank. Thus, Paulson will be the one deciding where there money is going. By the way, Hank Paulson is the ONE that is deciding where the money is going, not congress. If you look at the "friends" that are being helped right now you will notice one thing they all have in common: They all donated millions to Bush/Cheney 2000 and 2004. So, who's "friends" are being paid back? The banking industry hasn't been very friendly to democrats in the past, they are much closer to republicans.
@jonesy123 (3950)
• United States
26 Nov 08
It was congress who put Paulson in charge of the money without any supervision. Doesn't matter that he was appointed by Bush, he doesn't do his bidding. Sorry to burst your bubble there.
@ClassyCat (1214)
• United States
26 Nov 08
Well, this may be a silly post, but I wonder if giving the American people a large bunch of the bail out money, wouldn't have been a better route to go than to help so many corporations, with self serving CEOs. Washington could have given every American that is 21 and above $10,000 (except for anyone making over $200,000) and still had money left over - - and we would have then paid our bills, mortage payments, and maybe even had a little left for Christmas. At least WE would have put it to good use. I don't see the line for a hand out ending. They'll al be yelling "Discrimination" if Washington shuts the flow off. $10,000 may not sound like a lot, but I know of many, and I do mean many - - that would really benefit from it.
1 person likes this
@oyenkai (4398)
• Philippines
29 Dec 08
Strange, I don't follow the news to closely - heck I don't even follow news on my country, but I read the Time Magazine. Anyway, I don't find it strange that Obama is more visible that Bush - that has been happening since forever. Bush hasn't been the present type anyway. Thanks for the comment on my discussion!