Archive   |   Live Q&As   |   RSS Feeds RSS   |   E-mail Dan  |  
Page 3 of 4   <       >

Rove Questions Liberals' Sympathies

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

Here's the text of Bush's 45-minute ramble through his domestic agenda.

"See, even though the numbers are still good, there are still worries out there in the country," Bush acknowledged. "And we've got the responsibility in government to take the side of our working families. So we're moving aggressively -- we're not taking the good numbers for granted; we're moving aggressively with a pro-growth, pro-worker set of economic policies that'll enhance economic security in the country."

Going Nuclear

Matthew L. Wald writes in the New York Times: "George W. Bush on Wednesday made the first presidential visit to a nuclear plant in 26 years, and declared, 'It is time for this country to start building nuclear power plants again.'

"Mr. Bush laid out steps that he said the government should take to help. None of those proposals were new, but his venue was: an office building next to the twin-unit Calvert Cliffs nuclear plant here, about 50 miles southeast of the White House."

Warren Vieth writes in the Los Angeles Times: "Nearly 50 years after Dwight D. Eisenhower waved a 'neutron wand' to fire up America's first atomic power plant, President Bush sought today to launch a new round of plant construction financed in part with federal dollars."

CAFTA Watch

Bush also had some harsh words about opponents of his Central American free trade agreement: "See, I have a different approach than some of the economic isolationists who oppose this agreement. I believe they're pessimistic about America. I believe American workers can compete with anybody, anywhere, any time if the rules are fair. And so they need to pass CAFTA to be fair to our farmers and ranchers and workers and small business owners."

Jonathan Weisman wrote in The Washington Post yesterday about the White House's efforts to chip away at the opposition to the agreement on both sides of the aisle.

Social Security Watch

Mike Allen and Jonathan Weisman write in The Washington Post about a new approach to restructuring Social Security embraced by House Republican leaders yesterday.

"Republicans hope the new proposal will shift the debate away from future benefit cuts, as Bush envisions, to ending what they call the 'raid' on the current Social Security surplus. But the plan, unlike Bush's, would do nothing to remedy the New Deal-era program's long-term fiscal problems. . . .

"Although the new plan is considerably less broad than Bush's approach, it would still fundamentally change the way the Social Security system operates."

Richard Wolf explains in USA Today: "For months, congressional Republicans seeking to overhaul Social Security have been locked in a fight between the 'Pain Caucus' and the 'Free Lunch Caucus.' On Wednesday, the lunch bunch won the first round."

And Suzanne Malveaux reports on CNN: "Well, here's the White House strategy. Publicly, of course, they're saying that [Bush] is sticking with his plan, that he is behind those private investment accounts and that he is not moving away from that. Of course, privately, what they're trying to do is embarrass the Democrats, put them on the spot, and basically call their bluff, say: 'If you say that you're not willing to move forward, [that] you want the private investment accounts taken off the table and then you'll talk about Social Security reform, well, then, let's see it. Bring your ideas to the table.' "


<          3        >


© 2005 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive