[Rhodes22-list] Andrew C. said, "...

[Brad Haslett]

Ed,

Here's a timely article on the subject (attached).

Brad

-------------

December 11, 2008
Bailout Generation
By Debra Saunders

For eight years, Democrats have hurled all manner of criticism at
President Bush. Some of the heat was well deserved, some was not.

Either way, it is about to be their turn to be held to the standards
they held for Bush -- and they are not prepared. I saw a taste of the
future at the Democratic convention in Denver, when Sen. Debbie
Stabenow, D-Mich., sat down with journalists to discuss the now
President-elect Barack Obama's economic plan. In light of an
anticipated $482 billion deficit -- how quaint that humble number
seems today -- I asked Stabenow, how can Obama propose a tax cut and
more spending?

Her answer: "The first question is: How do you do a tax cut and fight
a war, which is what George Bush did." Funny thing. Stabenow seemed
genuinely and completely oblivious to the fact that her nominee was
campaigning daily on a platform that promised a tax cut for 95 percent
of American families, while he pledged to beef up the U.S. presence in
the war in Afghanistan. Sounds like a tax cut during a war to me.

And now, after Obama spent the silly season saying he would rescind
the Bush tax cuts on families earning more than $250,000, Obama is
rethinking the issue. Sunday he said on "Meet the Press," "My economic
team right now is examining, do we repeal that through legislation? Do
we let it lapse so that, when the Bush tax cuts expire, they're not
renewed when it comes to wealthiest Americans? We don't yet know what
the best approach is going to be."

That is, there could be a new tax cut and old tax cuts while America
is fighting two wars -- without Bush in the Oval Office.

It makes you wonder: Did Democrats not believe what they said on the
campaign trail in 2008? Or did they believe what they said then, but
they've moved away from their core beliefs because they'll do anything
and spend any amount of other people's money to retain power?

They complained that Bush gave tax cuts to corporations. Now that they
are in charge of Congress, Democrats are raiding the cookie jar so
that they can toss cookies to favored industries. Note the proposed
emergency credit line of $15 billion for Detroit's Big Three. (Credit
Bush, by the way, for insisting that the money come from an existing
program.)

Blame Bush for the $700 billion bailout bill -- which Sen. Majority
Leader Harry Reid inflated by another $110 billion. Obama promised
"change you can believe in." Here it is: Earlier this year, Obama
proposed a $50 billion stimulus package, which grew to $175 bil before
Election Day. Now the proposed price tag is reported to be $700
billion -- with well-wishers suggesting a $1 trillion package.

The bailout mentality is growing -- as is the list of people who
believe they should be recipients. It's not just the auto companies
who want to follow greedy investment houses. State governments want
in. Experts are calling for billion-dollar infrastructure projects --
I guess because state governments weren't spending on infrastructure.

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, proposed redistributing the unspent $350
billion in Bush bailout money by suspending federal payroll taxes for
two months. It's a bad idea, in that the last stimulus package failed
to stimulate the economy as hoped. It makes the entire country look
like the Wal-Mart shoppers who crushed to death a Long Island
temporary worker in their rush for a bargain.

So where is Barack Obama? Sure, I know many readers will jerk their
knees and blame Bush. It's a freebie. But after a while, the public
may start to wonder: Where's the responsibility now?
dsaunders at sfchronicle.com

On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 7:45 AM, Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net> wrote:
>
> Andrew C said, "Oh, and since my clients can't get loans, they are not
> building, and don't need to hire engineers. This is going to be quite a
> holiday season, thanks to the absence of leadership in the in the halls of
> Washington."
>
> Andrew, looking to others or to Washington is an abdication of leadership.
> At times you seem to be a man who can reason.  Consider the approaching
> quiet time as opportunity.
>
> What you say?  Have you ever heard of the Adirondack Mountains?  Find a
> cheap and quaint motel, hotel, or such near or in the mountains.  Take your
> people for a couple of days cross country skiing.  Tell them to bring their
> lap tops and a couple of blank flip charts.
>
> Maybe bring a real prospect that has a genuine need for your services.
> Bring in a banker or someone skilled at getting financing to do projects.
>
> The second day after a day of exercise and skiing and beverages, sit around
> a big round table in the morning and discuss a hypothetical built around
> your client and his need.
>
> Just go around the table as a case study with brain storming, no solutions
> just discussions of need.  Then go skiing again.
>
> Designate two different people to prepare old fashioned paper flip charts of
> the mornings discussions.  Over dinner and wine, review what was said, and
> then on a blank flip chart write down potential ways to achieve a good
> result.
>
> Leaders do not look to others to lead.  There is always a need for leaders.
> Now is the time for you to be that 2nd Lieutenant and say "Charge".
>
> Ed K
> Addendum:  ""I am looking for a lot of men who have an infinite capacity to
> not know what can't be done." Henry Ford
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Andrew-C.-said%2C-%22...-tp20955698p20955698.html
> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>