Bush: U.S. Not Headed Into Recession
President Bush said Thursday that the country is not headed into a recession and, despite expressing concern about slowing economic growth, rejected for now any additional stimulus efforts.
"We've acted robustly," he said.
"We'll see the effects of this pro-growth package," Mr. Bush told reporters at a White House news conference. "I know there's a lot of, here in Washington people are trying to - stimulus package two - and all that stuff. Why don't we let stimulus package one, which seemed like a good idea at the time, have a chance to kick in?"
"One of the things he wanted to do is focus attention on the White House," said CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer after the press conference.
Mr. Bush's view of the economy was decidedly rosier than that of many economists, who say the country is nearing recession territory or may already be there.
The centerpiece of government efforts to brace the wobbly economy is a package Congress passed and Mr. Bush signed last month. It will rush rebates ranging from $300 to $1,200 to millions of people and give tax incentives to businesses.
CBS News correspondent Bill Plante reports however, that the collapse of the housing market may have put the economy beyond the reach of the stimulus spending which won't reach taxpayers until May.
"We're talking about the collapse of an $8 trillion housing bubble," the Center for Eonomic and Policy Research's Dean Baker told Plante, "and that's a huge hit to the economy."
The president expressed his oppostion with Democrats in the Senate over proposed laws to help strapped homeowners.
"Unfortunately the Senate is considering legislation that would do more to bail out lenders and speculators than to help American families keep their homes," he said.
Another issue particularly worrisome to American consumers, there are indications that paying $4 for a gallon of gasoline is not out of the question once the summer driving season arrives. Asked about the possible increase by CBS News Radio correspondent Peter Maer, Mr. Bush said "That's interesting. I hadn't heard that. ... I know it's high now."
Mr. Bush also used his news conference to press Congress to give telecommunications companies legal immunity for helping the government eavesdrop after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
He continued a near-daily effort to prod lawmakers into passing his version of a law to make it easier for the government to conduct domestic eavesdropping on suspected terrorists' phone calls and e-mails. He says the country is in more danger now that a temporary surveillance law has expired.
The president and Congress are in a showdown over Mr. Bush's demand on the immunity issue.
Mr. Bush said the companies helped the government after being told "that their assistance was legal and vital to national security." "Allowing these lawsuits to proceed would be unfair," he said.
More important, Mr. Bush added, "the litigation process could lead to the disclosure of information about how we conduct surveillance and it would give al Qaeda and others a roadmap as to how to avoid the surveillance."
The Senate passed its version of the surveillance bill earlier this month, and it provides retroactive legal protection for telecommunications companies that wiretapped U.S. phone and computer lines at the government's request and without court permission. The House version, approved in October, does not include telecom immunity.
Telecom companies face around 40 lawsuits for their alleged role in wiretapping their American customers.
Senate Democrats appeared unwilling to budge.
As Mr. Bush began speaking, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., cast the president's position as a "tiresome campaign...to avoid accountability for the unlawful surveillance of Americans."
"The president once again is misusing his bully pulpit," Leahy said. "Once again they are showing they are not above fear-mongering if that's what it takes to get their way."
Mr. Bush criticized the Democratic presidential candidates over their attempts to disassociate themselves from the North American Free Trade Agreement, a free-trade pact between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. Mr. Bush said the deal is contributing to more and better-paying jobs for Americans.
"The idea of just unilaterally withdrawing from a trade treaty because of, you know, trying to score political points is not good policy," he said. "It's not good policy on the merits and it's not good policy as a message to send to people who have in good faith signed a treaty and worked with us on a treaty."
Democratic Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama are feuding over NAFTA as they compete for their party's presidential nomination, as the pact is deeply unpopular with blue-collar workers. Though neither has said they were ready to pull the United States out of the agreement, both say they would use the threat of doing so to pressure Mexico to renegotiate it.
Mr. Bush fended off a question about why he has yet to replace Fran Townsend, his White House-based terrorism adviser, who announced her resignation more than three months ago. He said the job is being ably filled by her former deputy, Joel Bagnal.
On another issue, Mr. Bush said that Turkey's offensive against Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq should be limited - and should end as soon as possible. The ongoing fighting has put the United States in a touchy position, as it is close allies with both Iraq and Turkey, and a long offensive along the border could jeopardize security in Iraq just as the U.S. is trying to stabilize the war-wracked country.
"It should not be long-lasting," Mr. Bush said. "The Turks need to move, move quickly, achieve their objective and get out."
He also said, though, that it is in no one's interest for the PKK to have safe havens.
On Russia, Mr. Bush said he does not know much about Dmitry Medvedev, the handpicked successor to President Vladimir Putin who is coasting to the job. Mr. Bush said it will be interesting to see who represents Russia - presumably either Medvedev or Putin - at the Group of Eight meeting later this year in Japan.
The president advised his own successor to develop a personal relationship with whomever is in charge in Moscow.
"As you know, Putin's a straightforward, pretty tough character when it comes to his interests - well so am I," Mr. Bush said. He said that he and Putin have "had some diplomatic head butts."
Mr. Bush also said, however, that the pair have "a cordial enough relationship to be able to deal with common threats and opportunities, and that's going to be important for the next president to maintain."
Mr. Bush also defended his stance of not talking directly with leaders of adversaries such as Iran and Cuba without setting preconditions. In doing so, he offered some of his strongest criticism yet of Raul Castro, who assumed Cuba's presidency on Sunday after his ailing brother Fidel, who ruled for decades, stepped aside.
"Sitting down at the table, having your picture taken with a tyrant such as Raul Castro, for example, lends the status of the office and the status of our country to him," Mr. Bush said.
He said that Raul Castro is "nothing more than an extension of what his brother did, which is ruin an island."
CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller reports that this is the president's 41st formal, White House news conference of his presidency, and first of 2008.
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. "We've acted robustly," he said.
"We'll see the effects of this pro-growth package," Mr. Bush told reporters at a White House news conference. "I know there's a lot of, here in Washington people are trying to - stimulus package two - and all that stuff. Why don't we let stimulus package one, which seemed like a good idea at the time, have a chance to kick in?"
"One of the things he wanted to do is focus attention on the White House," said CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer after the press conference.
Mr. Bush's view of the economy was decidedly rosier than that of many economists, who say the country is nearing recession territory or may already be there.
The centerpiece of government efforts to brace the wobbly economy is a package Congress passed and Mr. Bush signed last month. It will rush rebates ranging from $300 to $1,200 to millions of people and give tax incentives to businesses.
CBS News correspondent Bill Plante reports however, that the collapse of the housing market may have put the economy beyond the reach of the stimulus spending which won't reach taxpayers until May.
"We're talking about the collapse of an $8 trillion housing bubble," the Center for Eonomic and Policy Research's Dean Baker told Plante, "and that's a huge hit to the economy."
The president expressed his oppostion with Democrats in the Senate over proposed laws to help strapped homeowners.
"Unfortunately the Senate is considering legislation that would do more to bail out lenders and speculators than to help American families keep their homes," he said.
Another issue particularly worrisome to American consumers, there are indications that paying $4 for a gallon of gasoline is not out of the question once the summer driving season arrives. Asked about the possible increase by CBS News Radio correspondent Peter Maer, Mr. Bush said "That's interesting. I hadn't heard that. ... I know it's high now."
Mr. Bush also used his news conference to press Congress to give telecommunications companies legal immunity for helping the government eavesdrop after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
He continued a near-daily effort to prod lawmakers into passing his version of a law to make it easier for the government to conduct domestic eavesdropping on suspected terrorists' phone calls and e-mails. He says the country is in more danger now that a temporary surveillance law has expired.
The president and Congress are in a showdown over Mr. Bush's demand on the immunity issue.
Mr. Bush said the companies helped the government after being told "that their assistance was legal and vital to national security." "Allowing these lawsuits to proceed would be unfair," he said.
More important, Mr. Bush added, "the litigation process could lead to the disclosure of information about how we conduct surveillance and it would give al Qaeda and others a roadmap as to how to avoid the surveillance."
The Senate passed its version of the surveillance bill earlier this month, and it provides retroactive legal protection for telecommunications companies that wiretapped U.S. phone and computer lines at the government's request and without court permission. The House version, approved in October, does not include telecom immunity.
Telecom companies face around 40 lawsuits for their alleged role in wiretapping their American customers.
Senate Democrats appeared unwilling to budge.
As Mr. Bush began speaking, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., cast the president's position as a "tiresome campaign...to avoid accountability for the unlawful surveillance of Americans."
"The president once again is misusing his bully pulpit," Leahy said. "Once again they are showing they are not above fear-mongering if that's what it takes to get their way."
Mr. Bush criticized the Democratic presidential candidates over their attempts to disassociate themselves from the North American Free Trade Agreement, a free-trade pact between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. Mr. Bush said the deal is contributing to more and better-paying jobs for Americans.
"The idea of just unilaterally withdrawing from a trade treaty because of, you know, trying to score political points is not good policy," he said. "It's not good policy on the merits and it's not good policy as a message to send to people who have in good faith signed a treaty and worked with us on a treaty."
Democratic Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama are feuding over NAFTA as they compete for their party's presidential nomination, as the pact is deeply unpopular with blue-collar workers. Though neither has said they were ready to pull the United States out of the agreement, both say they would use the threat of doing so to pressure Mexico to renegotiate it.
Mr. Bush fended off a question about why he has yet to replace Fran Townsend, his White House-based terrorism adviser, who announced her resignation more than three months ago. He said the job is being ably filled by her former deputy, Joel Bagnal.
On another issue, Mr. Bush said that Turkey's offensive against Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq should be limited - and should end as soon as possible. The ongoing fighting has put the United States in a touchy position, as it is close allies with both Iraq and Turkey, and a long offensive along the border could jeopardize security in Iraq just as the U.S. is trying to stabilize the war-wracked country.
"It should not be long-lasting," Mr. Bush said. "The Turks need to move, move quickly, achieve their objective and get out."
He also said, though, that it is in no one's interest for the PKK to have safe havens.
On Russia, Mr. Bush said he does not know much about Dmitry Medvedev, the handpicked successor to President Vladimir Putin who is coasting to the job. Mr. Bush said it will be interesting to see who represents Russia - presumably either Medvedev or Putin - at the Group of Eight meeting later this year in Japan.
The president advised his own successor to develop a personal relationship with whomever is in charge in Moscow.
"As you know, Putin's a straightforward, pretty tough character when it comes to his interests - well so am I," Mr. Bush said. He said that he and Putin have "had some diplomatic head butts."
Mr. Bush also said, however, that the pair have "a cordial enough relationship to be able to deal with common threats and opportunities, and that's going to be important for the next president to maintain."
Mr. Bush also defended his stance of not talking directly with leaders of adversaries such as Iran and Cuba without setting preconditions. In doing so, he offered some of his strongest criticism yet of Raul Castro, who assumed Cuba's presidency on Sunday after his ailing brother Fidel, who ruled for decades, stepped aside.
"Sitting down at the table, having your picture taken with a tyrant such as Raul Castro, for example, lends the status of the office and the status of our country to him," Mr. Bush said.
He said that Raul Castro is "nothing more than an extension of what his brother did, which is ruin an island."
CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller reports that this is the president's 41st formal, White House news conference of his presidency, and first of 2008.
Popular in Politics
- Obama prom pictures surface
- Obama: America at a "crossroads" in fighting terrorism 103 Comments
- IRS official Lois Lerner placed on leave
- Protester heckles Obama during counterterrorism speech Play Video
- Rep. Jo Bonner to resign from House for university job
- Obama announces steps toward Guantanamo closure
- Boehner calls out Obama administration's "arrogance of power" 104 Comments
- Lawmakers push to punish sexual offenders in the military
I had a discussion today with Hillary, Barack and God? I asked Barack what He will do for America. His response was %u201Cto focus on what Hillary%u2019s failures are to him and connect them with America.%u201D I asked Hillary what she would do for America. Her response was %u201Cto answer Barack issues leaving me sidestep without talking about America.%u201D I then asked God %u201Cwhat will He do for America?%u201D His response was %u201C%u2026 My people, on whom My name is called, shall be humbled, and shall pray, and shall seek My face, and shall turn back from their evil ways, then I will hear from Heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.%u201D I am God I can do this.
Posted by AnvilofSteel
I also wanted to comment on the "excellent virtues." I also think conservatism has some excellent virtues, which is why I can be conservative thinking on some issues (but w/o calling myself a conservative).
An example of forms of connectedness on one site lists: "our sense of connectedness to nature and our attachment to a particular locality." This is plenty virtuous. Problem is there is another form of connectedness that overrides this: the functioning of an economic community/system based on consumption. The "connectedness to nature" does not extend to being good stewards of the planet if the former impedes the established economic system (read: institution).
Posted by AnvilofSteel
Absolutely right. I only dipped into the political to parody poop''s synopsis of Liberalism.
In fact, the first paragraph of my synopsis was not meant to be parody at all. The fundamentals of Conservatism, even according to their own websites, include the things I mentioned. One example of the hierarchy phenomenon, besides the patriarchal structure of a "traditional family", is where observers get the idea that conservatives are pro-corporation instead of pro-worker: the employers are the ones w/ the jobs to mete out, & w/ them in control, the pecking order is established & the top-down engine is running.
By Mark Richardson 2002: "What conservatives wanted especially to defend were particular forms of human identity and connectedness. For conservatives, the need for these forms of identity and ''relatedness'' is an unchanging part of our human nature."
I did not ''reach'' when giving examples of tradition + hierarchy. These are things that are referred to in many conservative examples "connectedness" & conservation of institutions that preserve the structure of the "connectedness".
Run up 4 trillion dollars of new debt, drive economy to the limit, then add another 150 Billion of debt and say-
"We acted robustly"
Yep, robustly further in to the deep, deep hole!
Hey poop, I''m neither a liberal nor a conservative according to the "full-spectrum" applications of the terms -- I try to understand what the foundations are of each & derive my perspectives based on the virtues of both.
In response to your synopsis of Liberalism, for fun, I went to both liberal & conservative sites to compile what each faction considers its basic principles. I''ve come up with the following little ditty to counter your Liberalism synopsis, purposefully adding in some bias in a attempt to mirror what I read in your synopsis of Liberalism.
What I believe you''ve done is given us a synopsis of the extremes or the worst of Liberalism from the perspective of a Conservative (not saying that the ideology itself is bad or in anyway evil). The overgeneralizations (false witness) in your synopsis are as unfair as you will find in the following parody on Conservatism.
An ideological base governed by a strong belief in a hierarchy & a moral platform that comes ''top down'', as well as a fervent belief that "tradition" (as an institution) defines the character of a people & creates a type of ''stability'' that need not trouble the majority''s minds. Combine hierarchy w/ tradition, & you get something of a cast system, a gentry, a priesthood, a ruling class, or patriarchy.
True to a closed system & quoting from their moral authority, you are either with them or against them: you cannot be conservative on this issue & progressive on another issue; nor can you disagree w/ them w/o fear of hell or retribution, like outing a CIA agent to punish a dissenter, excommunication, etc. If you disagree w/ them, you must, therefore, "hate" them. All or nothing.
Subverting the standards of their own higher authority does not matter so long as their actions destroy dissenters, leaving only the glory of God. You are free to practice all forms of deceit, slander & worse to achieve the agenda. They rely on Grace to excuse their deliberate sins, which is their version of "doing what they want w/o consequence"; or they can pass laws to retroactively forgive them of the rules they broke.
They find the Constitution to be an obstacle to be destroyed & replaced by the Bible because the freedoms endowed by the Creator can only be fulfilled if you believe as they do. Civil liberties means "freedom" only if they do not challenge tradition or the structure.
I am convinced that Dubya just doesnt have a competent grasp on anything in our government that is of a mildly complex nature, from world policy, foreign relations, corporate america, economic policy, pollution, domestic needs, etc. The man is remarkably unremarkable in his intelligence, wisdom and experience. But he is quite funny but mainly because he unintentially makes a fool out of himself which is pretty humorous.