Paulson is a Gore guy:

Goldman Sachs acknowledges the scientific consensus, led by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, that climate change is a reality and that human activities are
largely responsible for increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the earth’s
atmosphere. We believe that climate change is one of the most significant environmental
challenges of the 21st century and is linked to other important issues such as economic
growth and development, poverty alleviation, access to clean water, and adequate energy
supplies.

Let’s see how fast he changes his tune, or how fast Rush “swift boat's” him.

Bush's first sec/treas, Paul O' Neill was also interested in combatting global warming, but soon found those ideas fell on deaf ears in the Bush White House.

Goldman Sachs was a huge corporate contributer to Bush's presidential campaigns. To me, Bush really represents corporate America and Wall Street more than the rest of America anyway. His policies are hugely pro-business, anti-consumer.

Pro business IS pro consumer

"Bush's first sec/treas, Paul O' Neill was also interested in combatting global warming"

That made me laugh out loud. I could just see the conversation between O'Neill and Bush. Bush asks about the yeild curve, interest rates, the strength of the dollar and O'Neill starts babbling like a left wing lunatic about fossil fuels. Oh man, what I wouldn't give to see that!

“That made me laugh out loud. I could just see the conversation between O'Neill and Bush. Bush asks about the yeild curve, interest rates, the strength of the dollar and O'Neill starts babbling like a left wing lunatic about fossil fuels. Oh man, what I wouldn't give to see that! “
Posted by: Capitalist Infidel

Hey Cap, boy that sure would be a stupid move by Bush. Bush appoints a guy that knows nothing about economics, but than again, Bush can’t recall making any mistakes in his tenure.

If pro-business is pro-consumer, i guess that means that war is pro-consumer...there we go...lets bomb someone else

That was incoherent, could you try to explain in English instead of moonbatese?

Man, it's folks like you CJ that make me happy to be alive, where would the world be without contrarians?

I'll answer your question, and apologize for any ambiguity. The quote was basically Pro-business=>Pro-Consumer ... therefore since the war is good for business (halliburton, bechtel, northrupp-grumman, NBC, ABC, FOX, boeing, microsoft etc) then war is apparently good for consumers...

*forget about the fallacy of GDP or the fact that ceteris paribus is the biggest lie economics can come up with, but I won't argue anymore than i really need to...does that make it any more clear?*

Capitalist Infidel---If you really believe that you should move to Maryland where our Pro-Business Governor who received $30,000 from Constellation Energy for his re-election campaign. Why were they so generous? He took consumer advocates off the Public Service Commission which regulates the utilities, and replaced them with ex-utility executives. They approved a plan last week that will raise electric rates for consumers , who now have no representation, a whopping 72% starting July 1. So pls don't tell me pro-business= pro-consumer- its just capitalist propaganda.

Of course war is good for consumers. Does that come as some kind of surprise to you? Look at what happened during and after WWII. I'm assuming you've actually learned a bit about that war. You know, the one when we were in a depression before it started and by the end we were in the beginning of the great economic expansion.

Now, you may hate the thousands of single mothers who work for Halliburton, Boeing, etc...but I do not.

Aww maself am pert disappointed that Bush's muchacho Kenny Boy Lay was predisposed with another engagegment.

Hey-Capitalist Infidel

You should read "The Price of Loyalty", which details O'Neill's tenure as Sec of Treas. Its an eye opener. O'Neill did try to bring up environmentally friendly policies, and was interested in combatting global warming. He was shocked to find out that Bush was in denial about the entire subject. O'Neill was also shocked to find out how disengaged Bush was during their meetings about economic policy.

O'Neill travelled to Africa with Bono, and came back enthused about an idea to dig wells so that the Africans would have clean drinking water. He thought if they had that, it would cut down on foreign aid for food and medical treatment as well. Shortly afterward, he was fired. And BTW, O'Neill was not a liberal-he was a staunch Conservative.

TEO, it's interesting that you should reference "ceteris paribus". I nearly flunked Labor Econ over 40 years ago because, on a written exam, I ridiculed the professor's propensity for prefacing nearly every statement with "all things being equal".... It was a cop-out then, and it's a cop-out now.

Barney, only you could tie the appointment of a new Treasury Secretary to global warming. You do realize that the IPCC is not a particularly credible source. Just today Jason Lee Steorts, in an article at NRO referencing a 2002 EPA report on global warming, had this to say:

Everything I've read today about Paulson seems to indicate that he's a good choice. I can just hear W saying "Hank, y'all gotta forget this global warming BS nonsense if you're gonna work for me. Besides, the treasury building is air-conditioned." Heh, heh.

Well, the quote from the linked article seems to have disappeared into cyber space. Let's try again:

Moreover, the report’s comments about the role of human activity in global warming are based on the International Panel on Climate Change’s models, which have long made unrealistic assumptions about the degree to which human activity is increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Accordingly, they have tended to overpredict warming. (Patrick Michaels of the University of Virginia notes that the IPCC’s input is 41 percent higher than the observed rate of CO2 increase, and that even NASA scientist James Hansen—who in many ways embodies the alarmist view on warming—has said that the IPCC’s assumptions may be “unduly pessimistic.”)

Kritter

Perhaps that is because global warming is caused by the SUN. Because it's cyclical and because it will change again as it has for billions of years.

He's also likely a Corzine guy.

CJ:

[Bush asks about the yeild curve, interest rates, the strength of the dollar] and O'Neill starts babbling like a left wing lunatic about fossil fuels.

Yeah right!

Talk about laughing out loud! Yeah, I can just picture W asking about the yield curve and interest rates. Hehehehehe

And you dare call us "moonbats"

Bush does have a MBA from Harvard business school. I'm fairly certain he understands yield curves, etc fairly well.

Judging by the economy, he most certainly does.

Which begs the question why Clinton's economy tanked so badly the last year in office after his "gifted" .com bubble (which landed in his lap) finally burst.

Sorry about that CJ, I meant C.I.

I would love to see him manage 'your' portfolio Warrior. Hehehehe Good luck.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3378

Bush and his Harvard MBA. A good read

After reading Mr. Lifsons article, I am enlightened.

I now realize W's business record was more than likely a stroke of bad luck.

Yeesh.

A 26-year-old college dropout who carries President Bush’s breath mints and makes him peanut butter-and-jelly sandwiches will follow in his boss’s footsteps this fall when he enrolls at Harvard Business School (HBS).

Though it is rare for HBS—or any other professional or graduate school—to admit a student who does not have an undergraduate degree, admissions officers made an exception for Blake Gottesman, who for four years has served as special assistant and personal aide to Bush.

--You guys never ever cease to amaze me...

Maroons.

Raker, try to put your hatred aside for two seconds.

Read about the number of people that went belly up in the oil market in the 1970's and early 1980's. It happened all over this country and Bush was no exception.

Secondly, Bush isn't a portfolio analyst or financial banker, but I'd take his returns on his investments any day of the week. So if you're saying I could lump my money into his investments and ride along for the % gain. By all means, I'd take it in a second.

Now, go on and return to your hatred.

should have done this sooner

U.S. Warns Germany to Do More to Stop Human Trafficking