Announcement

Collapse

Welcome to Moorcock's Miscellany

Dear reader,

Many people have given their valuable time to create a website for the pleasure of posing questions to Michael Moorcock, meeting people from around the world, and mining the site for information. Please follow one of the links above to learn more about the site.

Thank you,
Reinart der Fuchs
See more
See less

Bush: Take from the Poor, Give to the Rich

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Miqque
    replied
    Take from poor, give to rich = Republican platform.

    Take from rich, give to poor so they have money to give back to rich = Democratic platform.

    Take from poor, give to rich, lie about it = Communist platform.

    Take from anybody, give to self = Libertarian platform.

    Take from anybody, be too confused to know what to do with it = Green Party platform.

    Key word = "take".

    Any questions, class?

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    Originally posted by Dark Lord's Passing
    Lemec no worries, it's a good post and deserves discussion. It raises some serious issues for us all. Having seen the postings of some of those whom Bush claims to represent - i.e. the Christian Right in the US - it makes me even more scared.

    Oh! Thanks! Very cool, Dark Lord's Passing,

    Then, you might appreciate this statement:


    Tom Laughlin wrote:


    Bush's Messianic Complex


    Underneath his mano-a-mano posturing (“Bring ‘em on!”) Bush is a deeply insecure, frightened little man possessed by a Messianic Complex with all its delusions and fantasies as a compensation to his lifelong fear he’d never be the man his father was. Bush, a “Mama’s Boy,” was called “The Chosen One,” through his childhood by his mother.

    Bush’s irrational refusal to ease the nuclear tension and negotiate one-on-one with North Korea until Jong Il caves into his demands is a result of Bush’s deep-seated need to prove his manhood – escalating, not lessening, the world’s danger.

    An absolute proof that Bush’s mental illness has put him out of touch with reality, including the real danger of North Korea having nuclear bombs, is Bush appointing Bolton as Ambassador to the UN one of the most mentally ill, fascist authors of The Bush Doctrine who has viciously vilified the UN and who is the author of the extreme hard line Bush has taken against North Korea which has caused Jong Il to race to develop nuclear weapons.

    Jong Il refers to Bolton as “blood sucking scum.” And this appointment is supposed to defuse the nuclear crisis with North Korea? It is insane to think so.

    Just when world pressure was causing Syria to withdraw its troops from Lebanon, Bush’s narcissistic need to take the spotlight and prove his manhood by demanding Syria get out immediately, “I will accept no half measures,” was equivalent to pouring gasoline on the Lebanese crisis. The next day well over a half a million anti-American/pro-Syrian Lebanese, furious that Bush was trying to dictate how they should run their country, flooded the streets demanding Syria stay and pushing an extremely dangerous and explosive situation to the brink of a civil war, all because of Bush’s sickness and inability to understand that with quiet diplomacy this crisis could have been peacefully solved. Bush’s delusion that people tremble when he speaks and will unilaterally obey him is what has brought the world to this brink of chaos and nuclear catastrophe.

    For the safety of the entire world, we cannot impeach Bush soon enough.

    “Bush thinks war is a videogame, and he’s John Wayne.”

    http://www.billyjack.com/index.php?menuID=Page&pid=88
    Last edited by lemec; 08-01-2006, 07:06 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    Here is another interesting bit:


    Tom Laughlin wrote:

    after spreading our military so thin, Bush and Cheney have given a free license to North Korea to develop their nuclear capability so that North Korea now has nuclear missiles capable of reaching Japan, and will soon have missiles capable of reaching America which Bush and Cheney are now incapable of stopping. What could America possibly do if North Korea’s one million man Army crossed the border into South Korea’s capital, just 30 miles away?

    After failing miserably in the war against terror with over 700 suicide bombers giving their lives already this year, with their invasion of Iraq, and using Israel as their “proxy” to invade and destroy Hezbollah, Bush has spread the hatred of America throughout the world to an all time crescendo, recruiting millions of terrorists all over the world at a time they will soon have nuclear weapons in suitcases to set off in our subways and nuclear plants …

    … after arbitrarily and unilaterally breaking the Nuclear Arms Proliferation Treaty with India, forcing President Putin to have Russian Parliament appropriate billions of dollars to escalate the nuclear arms race because as Putin told Parliament that it was urgent and necessary because “… a wolf (Bush) won’t listen to anyone …” (see quote below) …



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

    “America (Bush) is a wolf … doing as it pleases in the world – he swallows without listening to anyone. Nor does he intend to listen to anyone …”

    – President Putin restarting the nuclear arms race by asking Parliament for a bigger nuclear arsenal
    ---------------------------------------------------


    http://billyjack.com/index.php?menuID=Page&pid=153


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


    The Bush Doctrine:

    http://www.newamericancentury.org/Re...asDefenses.pdf


    http://www.billyjack.com/index.php?menuID=Page&pid=59


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Last edited by lemec; 08-01-2006, 06:46 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dark Lord's Passing
    replied
    Lemec no worries, it's a good post and deserves discussion. It raises some serious issues for us all. Having seen the postings of some of those whom Bush claims to represent - i.e. the Christian Right in the US - it makes me even more scared.

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    Originally posted by Dark Lord's Passing
    Lemec I think this is a great post and deserves its own thread


    Thanks, Dark Lord's Passing!


    Well, this is almost a new thread,haha. I guess we could always move it later, I just thought it might tie in with this thread's name.



    -Lemec

    Leave a comment:


  • Dark Lord's Passing
    replied
    Lemec I think this is a great post and deserves its own thread

    Leave a comment:


  • lemec
    replied
    Hello,

    I was reading the Tom Laughlin web site. (an actor/director from the 70's who became a political activist.)

    I found some of the stuff, he had to say interesting,haha, he sure does say alot.

    Anyway, here are some quotes:

    Tom Laughlin wrote:

    The real reason people seek to repress criticism and free speech, as the pro-war/pro-Bush fanatics are now doing so aggressively, is because, deep down inside they are afraid that if people are allowed to quietly and calmly hear the criticism, learn all the facts, and to discuss them thoughtfully pro and con, the pro-war/pro-Bush position will fail, and opposition to the war will grow stronger. “If you can’t convince them – shout them down.” (Why is it the anti-war activists have no desire to suppress or shout down the pro-war activists? As far as I know, I have never heard of any anti-war boycott of a pro-war celebrity to get them fired from their job, or any pro-war employee being fired by an anti-war employer.)



    “We are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” -- Thomas Jefferson



    “Such is the irresistible nature of truth that all it asks, and all it wants,

    is the liberty of appearing.” – Thomas Paine



    Without noticing it, we slid from being a democracy, a representative democracy, a government by the people with all power being in the hands of the people, to a plutocracy, a government that is ruled by the wealthy or a special class through a corrupt influence peddling election system.

    (plu-toc-ra-cy, n. pl. –cies. 1. the rule or power of wealth or of the wealthy. 2. a government or state in which the wealthy class rules. 3. a class or group exercising power by virtue of its wealth.)

    Then it became even worse – we went from being a plutocracy to an oligarchy.

    No one took President Eisenhower’s warning that the greatest danger facing America was that America would become an oligarchy, a country ruled and controlled by a small group, a clique, of powerful men, seriously. If you even used the word, you were labeled a fringe conspiracy nut.

    “…we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence …by the military-industrial-complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.”

    – Dwight D. Eisenhower, January 17, 1961.

    Today, just as Eisenhower predicted, America did become such an oligarchy, controlled by a military-multinational corporate complex – but then it became even worse than that. America has become a truly fascist Oligarchy.

    A Totalitarian Oligarchy
    Not only has the White House and the power corridors of Washington become an oligarchy of the military and the multinational corporations, again, without our noticing it, and far more frighteningly, America has become more than just an oligarchy. It has become a totalitarian oligarchy, a dictatorial White House and government that requires complete subservience in which no dissent or criticism is tolerated, and anyone who stands in the way of the will of this authoritarian power matrix will be vilified and destroyed.

    The first two clear, unmistakable signs of an Authoritarian, or Totalitarian, government are 1) a ruthless suppression of criticism and dissent, which has become a functioning principle of the Bush White House and its followers, and 2) a massive outpouring of lies and propaganda to deceive the American people the government is doing one thing when in fact it is doing something quite the opposite, and that something “other” is always for the profit or further concentration of the oligarchy’s power to at independently of the will of the people.


    The Second Reason we have Become the most Hated Nation on Earth
    We have also become two Americas in our relationships with the rest of the world, in our foreign policy. We have two faces in foreign policy – one face the oligarchy presents to the American people, and the other is the face seen by the rest of the world.

    99.9% of the American people firmly believe that America has not now, and never has had, any Imperialistic desires of world conquest, to conquer and control other nations, especially for economic purposes. They still believe America is not interested in turning other countries into American colonies, and would be appalled by the idea of interfering with another nation’s sovereignty and the right to govern themselves, either by invading them or through covert actions that topple their government, or assassinate their leaders in order to install the oligarchy’s puppet government.

    Unfortunately the rest of the world knows better. The rest of the world sees into the other face of America, into the dark shadow side of those Americans controlling our government, and sees clearly what almost no American has ever seen or been conscious of – the “secret group within the secret groups’” continuously interfering in the internal affairs of sovereign nations for profits.


    http://www.billyjack.com/index.php?menuID=Page&pid=80


    Tom Laughlin wrote :

    How, and why, Bush is using Israel as a ‘proxy’ to destroy Hezbollah and Lebanon, escalating a different form of World War, a World War by proxy

    How, and why, Bush is using Israel as a ‘proxy’ to destroy Iran and Syria’s proxy - Hezbollah and Hamas - according to an Israel step-by-step plan pre-approved by Bush - escalating a radically new and different form of World War –a World War III by proxy


    We must stop being deceived – it is not Israel invading Lebanon, but Bush using Israel as a ‘proxy’ nation and Iran using Hamas and Hezbollah as its proxy nation in this escalating new form of World War. In World War III, superpowers use ‘proxy’ nations to attack each other behind the scenes while pretending to have a friendly working relationship on the surface – China and Russia using Iran, Syria and North Korea, and Bush using Israel. Bush and Cheney’s delusional systems do not allow them to understand this, and so they keep being surprised that Russia and China constantly do not cooperate but protect North Korea and Iran against Bush’s attempts to control them.

    Bush’s/Israel’s overkill destruction of Lebanon, and Bush’s open refusal to even try for a ceasefire until his “five-step” fantasy plan to destroy Hezbollah is accomplished, per the Bush Doctrine of “destroying anyone who aspires to even regional influence,” threatens the very survival of Israel.

    It is not possible to understand what’s going on in the Middle East unless you read ‘The Bush Doctrine’ of Imperialistic ambition to use our “superpower status to dominate and control the entire world.” (click here)

    Only when you understand Bush and Cheney’s lust to control the whole world, as clearly spelled out in the Bush Doctrine, includes destroying anyone who even aspires to not only lead, but even just have an influence in their region, as Hezbollah and Hamas are daring to do – and behind them Iran and Syria.

    Here are the quotes from this terrifying anti-American doctrine, declaring Bush’s Imperial ambitions:

    “The US must establish and protect a new order that convinces potential competitors that they may not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect even their legitimate interests … “

    “We must discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role …

    “… we must prevent the domination of key regions by a hostile power …

    “… we must maintain our status as a military power of the first magnitude to prevent the development of a nation with regional influence.”

    The document openly spells out how we are to “use” certain allies, especially Britain (Tony Blair) and Israel, that can be used as “fronts to provide the most effective and efficient means of exercising American global leadership.”


    Bush’s ‘Dead-or-Alive’ Policy


    Eliminating Hezbollah, and punishing Lebanon is consistent with Bush’s avowed policy, repeated over and over publicly, of severely punishing any nation that even harbors terrorists – Bush’s ‘dead or alive’ policy of “we will hunt down and kill them, and anyone who harbors them.”

    Nothing is more important for Americans to see that it is Bush and Cheney using Israel as a ‘proxy’ to destroy Hezbollah, and to severely punish the Lebanese government and make an example of them by their massive overkill in Lebanon, per the Bush Doctrine. Five years ago Israel drew up a step-by-step plan to invade Lebanon and totally destroy Hezbollah. Per the Bush Doctrine, Bush approved it in detail three years ago, just as Bush had pre-approved before he was even sworn in as President the invasion and occupation of Iraq (click here).

    Just as 9/11 gave Bush the excuse to execute his already approved invasion and occupation plans for Iraq, so too, Hezbollah’s illegal invasion, killing and capturing of Israeli soldiers gave Bush and Israel the opportunity to execute their preexisting plan to destroy Hezbollah, and bring down the weak Lebanese government, even though Lebanon was a democracy and Hezbollah had been freely elected to their Parliament.


    Israel has more than a right to defend itself – It has a sacred obligation to do so


    It is the brutal overkill in Lebanon that betrays Bush and Israel’s real intention. Make no mistake about it – Israel has more than a right to defend itself. It has a serious moral obligation to do so. However, in Lebanon it is no longer a question of Israel defending itself effectively and with whatever brutality is necessary, as they did in Palestine when Hamas illegally capturing an Israeli soldier – in Lebanon it goes way beyond the defeating an enemy. It has become the total destruction of a country and its infrastructure, killing and maiming thousands of innocent civilians, and displacing 500,000 refugees out of their Homeland that has turned the entire world, not just the Arab world, against Israel and Bush’s United States, who the whole world sees clearly is not just behind Israel’s right to defend itself, but Israel’s massive overkill, an overkill that may, in the long run, threaten the very survival of America’s lifelong friend, Israel.

    Bush/Israel’s response is like a 12-year-old schoolboy who was beaten up on the bus by a bigger 15-year-old, who takes a gun to school and shoots not only the boy who beat him, but a dozen other innocent bystanders as well.


    Israel, a democracy who wants only to be left alone in peace, is put in severe jeopardy by Bush’s blunder


    Israel, which from the beginning has been our good and faithful ally, has by Bush’s latest blunder to use Israel to crush anyone ‘aspiring to even regional influence,’ has intensified the already existing hatred against Israel by every Arab on the peninsula to such an enormous level it cannot be measured. And though Israel will crush Hezbollah and obliterate Lebanon, no Jew will be able to eat safely in a café without being blown up by a thousand new suicide bombers, a hatred that will continue for the next 100 years.
    All because Bush and Cheney’s incredible incompetence has fundamentally miscalculated the response of the 300 million Arabs on the peninsula against only 5 million Jews – not to mention the response of the entire world, even our allies, against Bush’s madness and Israel’s over the top destruction of an entire nation.

    Bush and Cheney are mentally incapable of understanding the complexity of the new sophisticated form of World War III they’ve started in Iraq and are now spreading to the Middle East. Though they can see – as does the whole world – that Syria and Iran are clearly using Hezbollah and Hamas to attack Israel and the United States, their delusions keep them from seeing that behind the scenes, and China and Russia while pretending with lip service to denounce Hezbollah and Hamas, are secretly and fully supporting Iran and Syria, just as they secretly are supporting North Korea against the United States. It is for this reason that Russia and China, while pretending to cooperate, constantly block Japan and the United States’ attempts to punish North Korea and Iran, who are their ‘proxies’ in this new, very different kind of World War.


    Bush, blind to the new World War III he and his Doctrine have created and are now escalating by spreading the Iraq war to Lebanon, intensifies the nuclear crisis Bush has created, and plunges us further towards a nuclear catastrophe


    Tragically for the United States and the entire world, Bush and Cheney’s delusional systems and profound ignorance of their enemies, starting with Hezbollah and Hamas to Syria, Iran and North Korea, to Russia and China make them blind to the incredible holocaust and escalating nuclear and terrorist crisis their blunder by using Israel as their attack dog in executing their ‘dead or alive’ policy, has created a cultural and religious new World War III that, unless it is stopped, will result in the greatest nuclear catastrophe mankind has ever known.

    Only by clearly seeing it is Bush using Israel to destroy Hezbollah and prove his manhood through his cowboy “dead or alive” fantasy and stopping him in the November election by enacting a superb exit plan from Iraq immediately available, or by an Impeachment Inquiry, can we stop this insane escalation of the war before it’s too late.


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

    “I’m the Commander see, I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being the President … (I) don’t feel that I owe anybody an explanation.”

    -- President Bush, to the National Security Council

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

    Leave a comment:


  • Morgan Kane
    replied
    1) Free market is a myth. economists explain that to exist a free market must
    fullfill some conditions, among them :

    - no producer, no consummer can have an effect on market conditions ( monopoly ... ). Every body must be equal on the market.

    - information must be avalaible and full on supply and demand

    - everybody must be free to enter on or exit from the market.

    Modern economists, even liberal ones, agrre that these conditions cannot be fullfiled and that if at a moment T they are fullfiled, these state of the thing cannot stay ....

    2 ) Oil price is a domain where market plays its role. In fact, prices of oil are growing up and it will not stop because demands grows sharply as China and other countries are developping when production and ressources are limited.

    Very expensive oil or quasi-termination of oil supply will finish our mode of living ( no more plastic for daily life objects, no more chemical products for agriculture, no more gas for cars etc ... )

    3 ) Free market is an ideology : belief that everything must become a product in market, education, health and so one... nothing can evade being on the market.

    4 ) Market is short time thinking as short term profit is his main ( only ) objective. Only public authorities can enforce long terme objectives and common interest. Theses result that individual interest is most of the time contradictory with public interest.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doc
    replied
    Originally posted by EverKing

    Where I feel that the actions of the large oil companies this past year are deplorable and I think it sad that the American people have been so dupped by them; I understand, and even agree with, Bush's decision not to step in. I may not agree with his motivations for it--like you I have the suspicion that his lack of action in this area was motivated more by greed and to support his oil-rich friends than any long term ideals of government. Still, though, I think the government should let the market sort itself out, for the most part.
    Part of the problem with this argument as it relates to oil is that Cheney's energy policy was crafted, in part, by oil company executives. My generation will never know how much they have manipulated the market, as the records of the meeting are sealed under executive privilege. The market cannot sort itself with such selective tinkering. In other words, I don't think oil prices are spiking in response to the market working on its own.

    You, of course, recognize that this happens as you continue your post...

    Originally posted by EverKing
    That is the basis upon which the United States' economy was built and I would like to see an eventual return to a more "free market" style of economy. The government subsidies in certain areas and alterations to the way the economy operates has created an artificially sustained economy where the price of a thing is not neccesarily determined by its availablity or demand. I say, let the m arket decide how much its willing to pay for something.
    This is unlikely to happen, particularly because the government directly manipulates part of the economy with the Department of the Treasury, even if it wouldn't touch economic or trade policies with its political decisions. The free market is an incredibly pervasive American myth.

    Originally posted by EverKing
    Of course, the argument is more complex than that. When it comes to items/materiel/etc. that are essential for modern life, such as fuel, there comes a point when we have to draw the line for the pofit mongers and let them know that they cannot control who gets to drive to work or heat their home in the cold months of winter. The question is: where do we draw that line?
    You point out some of the inconveniences of pure market economies. Governments are supposed to protect their constituents. Can a government in good conscience let people freeze because of high oil prices, or let down industries close because high fuel prices have rendered them uncompetitive? Well, of course, they do. Should they? That is part of the question you ask, I think.

    Originally posted by EverKing
    That's the question I've been struggling with. I am a proponent of personal liberties and personal responsibility. As such, I have an inate discomfort with government interference in pretty much any aspect of personal life, including business. But, as the Trusts at the turn of last century show, sometimes a truly free market can be a detriment to its self and the majority of the people.
    A timely personal struggle, if I can be so presumptuous to have an opinion. People should ask big questions in tough times. You are keeping yourself from the ignorance of knee-jerk political philosophy and the hypocricy of having no conviction. At the risk of condescention (which I certainly do not intend), I commend you for brave introspection. We don't have enough of it.

    One of the reasons I say this... I was always surprised that the some of the same people who called John Kerry a "flip-flopper" in 2004 are the same people who used to be staunchly libertarian and small government, but abandoned long-term political beliefs, voting for every invasive part of the Patriot Act, and rolling over when Bush tapped phone lines and now bank records. Their only explanation is "9/11," which is an explanation (and a cop-out) for everything.

    Leave a comment:


  • EverKing
    replied
    Sorry to raise this thread from the dead; but, I thought it worth talking about.

    I've made it no secret that although I'm not a staunch Bush supporter, I'm not completely anti-Bush either. That being said, my reponse here has little to do Bush but with the American government as a whole. So, please, do not misunderstand the motivations of this argument.

    Where I feel that the actions of the large oil companies this past year are deplorable and I think it sad that the American people have been so dupped by them; I understand, and even agree with, Bush's decision not to step in. I may not agree with his motivations for it--like you I have the suspicion that his lack of action in this area was motivated more by greed and to support his oil-rich friends than any long term ideals of government. Still, though, I think the government should let the market sort itself out, for the most part. That is the basis upon which the United States' economy was built and I would like to see an eventual return to a more "free market" style of economy. The government subsidies in certain areas and alterations to the way the economy operates has created an artificially sustained economy where the price of a thing is not neccesarily determined by its availablity or demand. I say, let the market decide how much its willing to pay for something.

    Of course, the argument is more complex than that. When it comes to items/materiel/etc. that are essential for modern life, such as fuel, there comes a point when we have to draw the line for the pofit mongers and let them know that they cannot control who gets to drive to work or heat their home in the cold months of winter. The question is: where do we draw that line?

    That's the question I've been struggling with. I am a proponent of personal liberties and personal responsibility. As such, I have an inate discomfort with government interference in pretty much any aspect of personal life, including business. But, as the Trusts at the turn of last century show, sometimes a truly free market can be a detriment to its self and the majority of the people.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doc
    replied
    I thought of this when I caught my own elation at seeing gas at $2.29 a gallon. i was so excited-- for about 20 seconds. Then I realized that I was very upset about paying $1.75 near the beginning of the summer, and over the moon the first time I filled my 19 gallon tank with gas over $2.

    Thanks for the link, by the way. I'll pass it on to several people who suspect the same thing.

    Leave a comment:


  • PsychicWarVeteran
    replied
    Originally posted by Doc
    I read somewhere (sorry for a lack of link) that Exxon made more last quarter than Microsoft, Wal Mart, and Boeing combined.
    What I read was slightly different, but still abominable:

    Originally posted by Post-Gazette
    Exxon made more money in the third quarter than all but eight companies in the S&P 500 made all of last year. One of those eight was Exxon itself. The others: Bank of America Corp., Chevron, Citigroup Inc., General Electric Co., Microsoft Corp., Pfizer Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
    SOURCE: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05301/596812.stm

    Still, they made a ridiculous profit by taking advantage of national tragedy.

    Originally posted by Doc
    I hate to be a conspiricy theorist, but I really believe oil companies produced the enduring spike in gas prices so we would be happy about gas that simply isn't $3 a gallon.
    Exactly! And you know what? I keep hearing people claim they're relieved by the recent drop (of mere cents) in the gas prices. So many people are so easily manipulated!

    Leave a comment:


  • Doc
    replied
    I read somewhere (sorry for a lack of link) that Exxon made more last quarter than Microsoft, Wal Mart, and Boeing combined. Of course, we were led to believe that it was the price of crude, or lack of refineries, or scares from hurricanes. Instead, we see what we get when oil executives write our nation's energy policies. Giving to the rich? Bush (via Dick's secret meetings) are letting them dictate their own profits.

    Before writing the next section, I apologize in advance to our European friends who would love to have gas as cheap as we in the US have-

    I really fear that people will get too excited about gas that is $2.30 a gallon, and forget that gas was well under $2 a gallon a few short months ago. We have short memories. I hate to be a conspiricy theorist, but I really believe oil companies produced the enduring spike in gas prices so we would be happy about gas that simply isn't $3 a gallon.

    Leave a comment:


  • PsychicWarVeteran
    started a topic Bush: Take from the Poor, Give to the Rich

    Bush: Take from the Poor, Give to the Rich

    Just in case anyone out there still isn't convinced the Bush administration has no love for the country's poor:

    Originally posted by United Press International
    WASHINGTON, Nov. 3 (UPI) -- The Bush administration is opposing U.S. Senate Republicans who want oil companies to divert some profits to low-income households for winter heat.

    Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has called for oil and gas companies to devote a portion of their nearly $100 billion profits in the latest quarter to families who could see a 50-percent hike in heating bills this winter.

    But Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said there was no way the administration would back the proposal, The Washington Times reported Thursday.
    SOURCE: http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.ph...3-110946-6486r

    While Americans paid record prices for gas last quarter, the oil companies made record profits. Bush has no problem with that.

    This winter, heating prices will increase by 50% for most of the country's poorest families. Bush has no problem with that.

    Make no mistake. Bush takes from the poor and gives to the rich. It's so painfully obvious at this point.
Working...
X