This blog,originally founded by Blogger, who is listed in Marquis Who's Who and is a recipient of the Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award. He holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Saturday, November 14, 2009

Former President Bush Speaks at SMU

"I went against my free market instincts and approved a temporary government intervention to unfreeze the credit markets so that we could avoid a major global depression. As the world recovers we're going to face a temptation to replace the risk and reward model of the private sector with the blunt instruments of government spending and control." - George W. Bush, Nov.13, 2009

I believe him. I don't put much stock in the view that the bailout was Bush's preferred policy. Many say it was a mistake but I don't know how they could know that. If you think that "abandoning free market instincts" is always too high a price to pay then I suppose that's valid but I can't say that without understanding that particular pinpointed crisis better than I do.

Bush's unwillingness to veto enabled too much spending. Passing the (what we thought at the time) huge omnibus bills also enabled the war to be funded by a Democrat controlled Congress. It was the price to pay. Too high? Maybe, but we had tons of money rolling in from his tax policy compared to now. Although, we didn't have much in the bank. That is a completely different issue than the bailout of banks. Still, it was bad and Bush deserves much of the heat he gets...but not all of it.

The "bailout" was administered horribly. Bush released the second half to Congress before Obama took the oath. Paulson was wishy-washy and had too much power. Strong arm tactics were used. Transparency was lacking. All that's true but, again, a separate issue from the decision to abandon "free market instincts".

I described the banking crisis as "pinpointed" because it is. The decision to spend that kind of money was a direct result of a crisis (or perceived crisis if you must) that the people we elected felt was dire enough to put "free market instincts" on hold. They might have been wrong but no one knows for sure. I don't doubt their intention which, as we know, means little.

Bush is right about the "temptation to replace the risk and reward model of the private sector with the blunt instruments of government spending and control." That's why it's so important to keep the bailout tucked away in it's separate corner of the debate. That's why the argument that Bush was the one that started all this and therefore Obama has to follow Keynesian claptrap is bogus.


Sarkazein said...

One thing you can count on, when President Bush tells you what his motive was for signing the Omnibus Bill, it will be the truth. He is honest to a fault.
Love him or hate him, agree with him or disagree, he is honest. These billion dollar bail-out things will not work no matter who administers them. The more government involvement, the more corruption and the less money for defense.
The more government involvement, the more need for bail-outs.
The lack of Vetoes bothered me also. President Ford was the best Vetoer I've seen. And that was before the Democrat controlled Congress soured.

Nonny said...

I do. Highlight the first three lines and copy them. Paste those lines to the search window of Google with quotation marks placed at the beginning and end.

When you press "search," you'll likely find over 200 appearances of the exact quote on the internet. Look for one of the entries that offers, "Would you like to translate this page?," and click on the question.

You'll be taken to a translated copy of the full original quote to find that it attempts to expose some kind of Ukranian political graft or tax fraud.

Bushrod Gentry said...

After the passage of the House health care bill, I saw the Speaker of the House on TV announce that it was done in time to be a Christmas present for the American people. That made me think of Hillary's campaign ad where she was by the Christmas tree wondering where she had put the pre-k. I now realize how my conservative inhibitions have held me back, so I'm going to follow suit of two of the world's smartest and most powerful women. Since it's now okay to give Christmas presents that the recipient has to pay for, you can expect 20 pizzas delivered to your door on Christmas morning. Have your credit card ready. Please be generous with the tip for the delivery boy. He's pinching pennies to save enough to pay for compulsory health care insurance.

RV said...

Thanks Nonny. I'ave learned something new. Now my next question is why are they posting on this blog? They are posting currently on a thread from January, 2008.

Nonny said...

It's totally random. It's a muddled message that's being forwarded to unprotected blogs. This has nothing to to with decisions made by anyone locally.

Honest Debate said...

Thanks RV, I think I got them all.

Johnny Rico said...


That was most excellant sir. You have touched upon a theme consistent with liberal socialists the world over. They want you to like them for giving you a pile of sh*^. And to make it even worse, they don't want anything to do with that pile of dung either!!!!!!

Excellant post sir!!!!!!!!