endorsing new taxes. So all his formulations were as diffuse as possible. Were tax revenue increases
the same as taxes?
Bush: And I say budget reforms are required, and I say spending cuts are required, and so let's see
where we come out on that.
Q: But is it taxes?
Bush: Is what taxes?
Q:What you're saying. Are you saying taxes are --higher taxes are--
Bush: I've told you what I've said, and I can't help you any more. Nice try.
Q:You said we needed--
Bush:You got it. You got it, and you've got a--you've seen the arrows coming my way. And that'sfine, but-- let people interpret it any way--
Q: Well, I have--
Bush: Well, I want to leave it the way I said I would, so the negotiators are free to discuss a widearray of options, including tax increases. Does that help?
A questioner cited a tabloid headline: "Read My Lips: I Lied." Bush had been prepped by an
historical review of how other presidents had allegedly changed their minds or lied, which had
convinced Bush that he, although amore relaxed about it than I thought I'd be," quipped Bush. "I feel comfortable about that because liar, was actually in the same class with Lincoln. "I've been (^)
I've gone back and done a little research and seen these firestorms come and go, people who feel
just as strongly on one side or another of an issue as I do and haven't gotten their way exactly."
Why had he said no new taxes during the campaign? "Well, I don't think anybody did such a
penetrating job of quethat Reagan had gotten away with the 1982 restioning...." Bush's basic idea was that he could get away with it, in the waycession. But for many voters, and even for many
Republican loyalists, this had been yet another epiphany of a scoundrel. Many were convinced that
Bush believed in absolutely nothing except hanging on to power.
It was also in the early summer of 1990 tto the terms of the Savings & Loan bailout championed by Bushat it gradually dawned on many taxpayers that, accordingh during the first weeks of his
regime, they would be left holding the bag to the tune of at least $500 billion. Their future was now
weighted with the crushing burden of a defacto second mortgage, in addition to the astronomical
national debt that Reagan and Bush had rolled up. This unhappy consciousness was compounded by
the personal carnage of the continuing economic contraction, which had been accelerated by theshocks of September-October, 1989. An ugly mood was abroad, with angry people seeking a point (^)
of cathexis.
They found it in Neil Bush, the president's marplot cadet son, the one we saw explaining his March
31, 1981 dia member of the board of directors of Silverado Savings and Loan of Denver, Colorado, which wentnner engagement with Scott Hinckley. As even little children now know, Neil Bush was (^)
bankrupt and had to be seized by federal regulators during 1988. Preliminary estimates of the costs
to the taxpayers were on the order of $1.6 billion, but this was sure to go higher. The picture was
complicated by the fact that Neil Bush had received a $100,000 personal loan (never repayed, and
formally forgiven) and a $1.25 million line of credit from two local land speculators, Kenneth Good