The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Matters of Faith

12.10.07 @ 12:01AM

(Page 2 of 4)

At this time next year, George W. Bush might be a great president and pigs might fly. I think the last is the much more likely outcome, going on the first seven years of his presidency.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. Anything else is wishful thinking.
-- Christopher Holland
Canberra, Australia

Nothing wrong with anything Mr. Hillyer said. But more than half of the items noted depend on big, fat "ifs."

And let's not forget that for the first six years of his administration Mr. Bush ignored our porous borders, turned a blind eye to illegal immigration, and even in the face of screaming public opposition tried mightily to jam down our throats a collection of immigration-related proposals which, if enacted, would have had profound economic and cultural implications for the country, most of them by general agreement negative.

Nor should we forget that he tried to place an unqualified crony on the Supreme Court, or that he did install another unqualified crony as Attorney General.

He came into office claiming to be "a uniter, not a divider," and the fact is that our politics is now more poisonous than ever, albeit with plenty of blame to go around.

Let's give credit where credit is due, but if there is one word which does now and will in the future summarize the Bush Administration, I sadly suggest that word will be "disappointment."
-- C. Vail

THE SUGAR DADDY STATE
Re: John Berlau's Bailout Blues:

So much for signing contracts. So much for bond covenants. So much for the meaning of "bond."
Another well-meaning government bailout will (and should) undermine any covenant of the future. No wonder the credit markets are spooky. The cure will be worse than the disease.

The mortgage-back securities participants did a wonderful thing by liquefying mortgages that used to end up in bank vaults. But they went too far this time. And should hang for it. By themselves.
-- Mark Candon
Rutland, Vermont

I get sick and tired every time our imperial Federal Government comes running from the darkest recesses of bureaucracy to foist its ideals of nanny statism onto the free market. Where is the government's authority to do such? The market already has many built-in mechanisms to deal with the current mortgage situation and its inherent imbalances. And yes, I call it a "situation;" it is not yet a crisis -- as long as the Government keeps its hands out of the rice bowl.

To begin with, the $200M spent by the Treasury Department to set up a system to "find" these potential foreclosurees is unconstitutional. And more importantly, the Bush/Paulson bailout plan, no matter whether it is voluntary or not, in is direct violation of the Contracts Clause contained in the US Constitution. Specifically, the plan violates Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1.

This would be, as Mr. Berlau relates, a perfect time for some presidential candidates to separate themselves from the crowd and show that when they take the Oath of Office, they do so seriously. To "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" is the highest calling any American can commit to, bar none.

Lastly, as a holder of high-risk, mortgage-backed securities, I am incensed at the possibility of receiving "altered" returns because of Federal Government involvement. My preference is to totally keep the bureaucrats and policymakers out of the process. I would rather lose more potential returns due to the machinations of the free market, than to have "not-as-great" loses due to governmental interference.

To me, long-term trust in the capitalist system is far more important than any short-term gains provided by a government-sponsored bailout plan. In the end, the bubble will only be prolonged.
-- Owen H. Carneal
Yorktown, Virginia

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Harry Reid, Business, Religion, Abortion, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court, Military, NATO, Immigration