Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California), is again trying to clarify statements he made about Barack Obama back in November on Rush Limbaugh where he called Obama “one of the most corrupt presidents in modern times.”
Issa appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” show over the weekend where he explained that he meant to say Obama’s administration was corrupt — not Obama himself.
But what’s the difference?
“When you hand out $1 trillion in TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) just before this president came in, most of it unspent, $1 trillion nearly in stimulus, that this president asked for, plus this huge expansion in health care and government, it has a corrupting effect,” Issa said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
What all of that means is Bush left office in 2008 without setting any ground rules directing where the $700 billion in TARP funds should be spent. The TARP bill was originally passed in 2008 (during Bush’s term) to buy back worthless assets from banks so the banks could clear their books.
Instead, Obama — who inherited the $700 billion from Bush — used the money to bail out his buddies’ banks and insurance companies on Wall Street.
Obama then asked for – and received another $800 billion for a stimulus plan that was mostly payouts for political favors (earmarks). History will note that Obama’s stimulus plan did little to stimulate the economy.
If you recall, Obama campaigned on a promise that there would “not be a single earmark” or “pork barrel spending” in any of his bills.
New year, same old hate……………….
#teamObama he is still the HNIC
I’m new here hello everyone.
But you know that’s wrong right. The Tarp Money was under Bush and went out under Bush, but with no rules or stipulations on how its spent i.e why the banks are loaning like they should. When the Obama admin got in charge they put rules in place for how it should be spent and when it should be paid back, he failed to mention the bail out money has been paid back, thanks to O who said it had to be becuase it orginally went out with no stipulation on getting it back.
Phillybruh says:
The Tarp Money was under Bush and went out under Bush, but with no rules or stipulations on how its spent…
______________________
I clearly mentioned that in my post. By the way,
Phillybruh says:
The Tarp Money was under Bush and went out under Bush, but with no rules or stipulations on how its spent…
______________________
I clearly mentioned that in my post. By the way,
Thank you, I’ve been a fan of your blog for long time
You did mention it, but OBAMA didnt spend it, which is what your post is leading readers to beleive, I’ll give you the Stimulas and Healthcare for now. But the TARP was all Bush, O just imposed rules to ensure we get that money back.
bs:dr
President Bush The First also rescinded on a campaign promise: “Read my lips…NO NEW TAXES!” Only to turn around and tax the American public into oblivion.
So President Obama went back on a few things. Oh well…
rolleyes: Isn’t he doing what politician’s do? Smear each other, call each other names and rip each other apart? Oh, how quickly you forget that the first bailout for Wall street, was Bush & Co’s idea. You don’t remember him crying on the news saying that if we did nothing it was going to be a disaster. I remember because it was during the election and conservative’s really let McCain have it because Republican’s were/are anti stimulus and he agreed that the stimulus was needed. Your article is really misleading. The earmarks in the bill were put in place for specific states to allocate money for projects that were supposed to stimulate the economy. It’s not like, these politicians bought new cars or something like that with stimulus money. Now, Whether it worked or not, you might actually be o, you might actually be onto to something. My point is there is plenty of blame to go around…..
Sorry for all the typos…Lol. Typing on a phone…
New here as well….What about Stimulus 2? Was that Bush too? Seems like folks are just breezing over the last sentence entirely.
Sandra glad you let me on. You being real in depth and insightful person that i think you are. I thought you would have a more in depth perspective on politics you seem like a a tentacle for FIX errrr FOX News. everyone knows you cant believe anything on FOX. Earmarks are a problem with both parties. Until you have more than a 2 party system nothing is gonna change. NO party is better than the other. They keep us arguing over the B.S. wedge issues like gay rights, abortion, while they take over the economy. I think you need to go at the real problem and it aint Obama he is only controlled by the corporations who financed his campaign.
I’m sorry, but believing ANY polictician, sans the race, creed, or ethnicity….is like believing a burglar with bills hanging out this pocket talking about he dont know who the thief was.
:::Sidenote though…..Doing the same things and thinking you are going to have “change” results in insanity, which explains the current state of mind of the American people.
Oh….and does it REALLY matter who had what under his belt when they left or started office???
They are all under the same Umbrella talking ’bout….”eh, eh, eh”
…while sitting at Camp David sipping on fine wine and scotch, smoking cigars and talking about how dumb WE are.
@Busybee, No I actually read the article. Lol. And I quote from SR article “Instead, Obama — who inherited the $700 billion from Bush — used the money to bail out his buddies’ banks and insurance companies on Wall Street.” First bailout was for Wallstreet and it was passed by the Bush Adminstration. I never said the 2nd bailout wasn’t Obama’s or wasn’t’ a complete disaster…… #thatisall