Bush Outreach: Words But Not Deeds

"Ingredient one: strong revenue growth driven by an economy distinguished by surging profits and rising incomes at the top, which are taxed more heavily than incomes at the bottom. Ingredient two: tax cuts and spending increases, which arrived when the U.S. economy needed a boost. Ingredient three, and perhaps the most significant: the willingness of foreigners to lend to the U.S., which finances the budget deficit without pushing up interest rates at a time when Americans don't save very much. . . .

"For now, the budget the president will offer today essentially counts on continued good luck."

As for that third and possibly most significant ingredient? Friday's session with House Democrats provided some evidence that Bush doesn't even get that one.

As Jeff Zeleny blogs for the New York Times: "Representative John Tanner of Tennessee asked Mr. Bush who owned the United States debt, and whether there was a plan to lessen the dependence on foreign financing.

"Mr. Bush was reported to have said that he did not know who, specifically, owned the debt. He stressed his administration's plan to balance the budget in five years. "

Martin Crutsinger writes for the Associated Press this morning: "President Bush on Monday unveiled a $2.9 trillion spending plan that devotes billions more to fighting the war in Iraq but pinches pennies on programs promised to voters by Democrats now running Congress. Democrats widely attacked the plan and even a prominent Republican conceded it faced bleak prospects."

A Billion Here, A Billion There . . .

Michael Abramowitz and Lori Montgomery wrote in Saturday's Washington Post: "President Bush will ask Congress for close to three-quarters of a trillion dollars in defense spending on Monday, including $245 billion to cover the cost of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and other elements of the 'global war on terror,' senior administration officials said yesterday."

Dean Baker blogs for the American Prospect: "Is this a lot or a little? Most readers probably have some sense that this is big money, but how about telling them that the 2008 request is equal to approximately 5 percent of total spending, or maybe $2,000 for a family of four."

'Civil War Plus'?

Here's the unclassified summary of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq released by the White House on Friday.

Bottom line: The situation in Iraq is very grim and there may be nothing we can do about it. And that's very hard to reconcile with the official White House line.

Karen DeYoung and Walter Pincus write in Saturday's Washington Post: "The U.S. intelligence community yesterday released a starkly pessimistic assessment of the situation in Iraq, warning that even if security improves, deepening sectarian divisions threaten to destroy the government and ultimately could lead to anarchy, partition or the emergence of a new dictatorship.

"Citing 'the current winner-take-all attitude and sectarian animosities infecting the political scene,' declassified judgments of a new National Intelligence Estimate predicted that Iraqi leaders will be 'hard pressed' to reconcile over the next 18 months. . . .