[quote]ron33 wrote:
I think gojira has it pegged.I don’t think its a coincidence that two outfits that seem to be profiting off all this ,halli burton & the oil boys have strong ties to the admin.Gas started steadily rising after he took over.This seems like a rehash of the reagan bush1 years, right down to the speeches they used when running for office.[/quote]
Pardon me for my bluntness.
Your obviously grotesque lack of political knowlege is showing. From the spelling to the assertion.
This is nothing but quasi-political bs spewed from people who actually know little, but try and regurgitate what liberal left bloggers are trying to insinuate.
[quote]vroom wrote:
It’s easy to stand back and criticize? And no,you can’t tell me how any other person may have reacted under the given circumstances. That’s not an excuse. That’s a fact.
What’s with all the annoying little jabs?
Anyway, by the look of your comments I’m guessing that at best nobody is going to post positive statements about progress because they are so arguable?
I didn’t actually see you say anything good, but you did give a good list of excuses why anything bad wasn’t really the fault of the president.
Do you think people elect someone hoping that he won’t be able to be blamed for anything? With the negative spin on politics and preponderance of attack ads, maybe so.
It still does look bad for Bush when the casual reader drops by this thread, at least for now, since nobody has anything good to say yet. That’s a fact too, Jack![/quote]
I never gave excuses, I simply stated that the major political issues that those opposing Bush have opined on have not been soley the President’s responsibilty. They blame him for the war, yet all agreed to go. They blame dhim for poor intel, the same that was available to all and what all based their decisions on.
He didn’t attack America
And I stand by my assertion that he had very little to do with the decided course or magnitude of Katrina.
Now come on, at least agree with me that Bush did,t cause or alter Katrina to artificially inflate gas/oil prices?
Why does it seem like we always argue over the same old thing? How about something new like which chemical element is most important to our survival, and how it’s abundance is linked to our political affiliation?
Sasquatch, I’d never suggest that Bush was driving around Katrina with some remote or any half-baked tin foil theory like that. No problems there.
However, you may not think of what you’ve stated as excuses, but they certainly are not examples of progress. They are easy to mistake as “excuses” because they seem to be reasons for or explanations for problems that you would expect democrats to mention.
I’m still waiting for examples of progress. Funny though, since Bush never takes the blame for anything, is he allowed to take credit on the other hand?
I guess it’s fitting maybe that the buck no longer stops anywhere!
[quote]slimjim wrote:
Why does it seem like we always argue over the same old thing? How about something new like which chemical element is most important to our survival, and how it’s abundance is linked to our political affiliation?[/quote]
Oxygen (O)
Get to much of it to high
Not enough and you’re gonna die
[quote]vroom wrote:
Sasquatch, I’d never suggest that Bush was driving around Katrina with some remote or any half-baked tin foil theory like that. No problems there.
However, you may not think of what you’ve stated as excuses, but they certainly are not examples of progress. They are easy to mistake as “excuses” because they seem to be reasons for or explanations for problems that you would expect democrats to mention.
I’m still waiting for examples of progress. Funny though, since Bush never takes the blame for anything, is he allowed to take credit on the other hand?
I guess it’s fitting maybe that the buck no longer stops anywhere! :p[/quote]
I just wanted to go long enough with you to bring out, the now infamous, tin-foil hat ref.
I will agree here that progress is tough to show. But I stand by that it is all not attributable to the leadership of Bush. Circumstances have been extrordinary. He has not been great. I’ve never suggested otherwise.
Hopefully our next leader will be reagan/clintonesque in his results.
Vroom:
That much may be true about members of this forum wanting to end abortion but democracy still works. I would think that more americans than not would be against it and if the republican controlled presidency and legislature really wanted to end it instead of moralizing like they enjoy doing; they could have ended abortion any time during bush’s term.
Why not? all they have to do is vote it in and send it up to bush, which he should sign if he follows the party line. But thats all it is, is a party line even monkey boy bush has a more reality based view-point that its just not a good idea considering the political damage that would result. I think you may be over-reacting in trying to say that this is a pressing issue over say hurricane katrina’s damage, the economy , foreign relations including - Iraq, Iran’s nukes, korea’s nukes, the canadians nukes ,ect.
As far as the economy. End of Bush one, it was on an upswing. Clinton came in, took credit for the upswing within 1 or 2 weeks of getting in office. I kid you not.
Ms Clinton started working on universal health care, and scared the hell out of everyone, the economy slowed, because people were afraid of making investments worried what would happen when Universal healthcare was started. (Part of the reason.)
The Republicans came in with their contract, cut taxes, and interestingly increased revenue to the government.
A few boom years followed, but people got stupid, and invested up the internet companies without any solid reasons, and when a recession hit, (guess what, recessions happen all the time,) it took all those weak companies out of the running.
The recession started in the end of 2000
Bush cut taxes, and the recession was over, and the recovery was just starting kick in gear at the beginning of September 11. (Anyone remember what happened then?)
With the attacks in New York, our economy took a real hit. We lost 1 million jobs from September to the end of the year. (Liberals keep forgetting this part of our history for some reason.) Again taxes were cut to help stimulate the economy from this artificially created recession.
With the wars, the budget exploded.
I only go through this quick history because there is so misunderstanding, and lack of knowledge. This is nowhere complete, and people are going to try to twist this information.
Now I agree with much of what Bush has done, but obviously not all of it. He spends like a liberal, (actually his is a liberal,) cannot close the southern border. (I also wonder aboot the northern border.)
He was not as aggressive in Iraq as he could have been or should have been, attempting to run a PC war. He can?t seem to talk, won?t explain things to people as he should, and lets the media, and liberals walk all over him.
I do have problems with Bush. I have said this repeatedly. But that does not give people the right to destroy him. The slightest thing happens, and Bush is suddenly the most evil person on Earth. Most of the time we are not discussing politics as much as gossip.
If you disagree with something Bush does, speak about the action, not the person.
Also everyone needs to quit attacking anyone who disagrees with them only because they disagree with them. This goes for everyone here, right, left, and even the fringe nuts. We can have discussions without acting like children.
Lets try discussing issues instead of people.
Now for the future. We will still be here. We will be richer, have more stuff, more free time, and will still be bitching about the same old shit. And this will be regardless of who is president.
Now for the future. We will still be here. We will be richer, have more stuff, more free time, and will still be bitching about the same old shit. And this will be regardless of who is president. [/quote]
The President serves as the representative for the administration in office. Personally, I don’t think GW is very bright and merely does what he is told. I don’t think he’s smart enough to be evil. But I think Karl Rove and Dick Cheney are. I don’t think he is any kind of a leader and couldn’t make a decision on his own.
I remember seeing a skit on SNL about Ronald Reagan. When the press or the public was in the room he was this kind of harmless fuddy-duddy. But when they left his demeaner changed to that of say, Dick Cheney, and he took control. But in front of the public he appeared to be this bumbling fool when in fact he was a ruthless calculating leader. It was pretty damn funny.
We don’t have leaders in charge any more, we have politicians that are driven by the agenda of their party. A previous poster stated that they didn’t think that they would try to turn over Row V Wade. Baby, that is number one on their hit list. The republicans and the religous right are very entwined. Many of the stands the republicans take are based on religous beliefs; gay marriage is a good example. And as far as abortion goes, it has always amazed me that these folks will go so far to protect a fetus until it passes through the birth canal. Then they don’t care about it any more. They do not care about the life already in progress (the mother) or the future of the child. It makes no sense, but then zealots rarely do. My belief has always been that it is not about “murder”, it is about restricting womens reproductive lives. Birth control and the right to choose are fundamental to womens independence. If you control a womans reproductive rights, you control the woman.
For republicans to throw all their bets on the religous right would be a tactical mistake. Church attendance decreases 1.5% every year( what my ex-pastor told me).Republicans have a much better chance LT for putting their efforts behind the wealthy ; who will need a nice comfortable secure country. Im sure that some republicans would want to do away w/ abortion but any thinking republican would know that they would never get elected again. I remember reading about abortions in back alleys and paying doctors by hand to give an abortion… America won’t stand to go through that experience again but the republicans sure will B1tch about it.
SAsquatch,If it is as simple as these things run in cycles,with all the expertise ,knowledge not to mention millions of dollars that go into running for pres.Why would any intelligent person or political party put so much money and effort into becoming pres. when they know a downward cycle is coming.And if they cant change this, or have any control over it ,what good are they.And as another post said about tax cuts,I am middle class working man and i have not seen any tax cut helping me ,mine are going up.And my father in law is worth a few million and hes always saying his taxes keep going up investments are in the tank and hes not making any money,not to mention the price of health care and medicine keep rising.
There is this little thing called the constitution and another little thing called a prior supreme court ruling.
Why go through all the effort of fighting a political war when you can just put the proper people on the bench and have the problem solved without the muss and the fuss?
Sometimes the path to a destination is not a straight line…
Vroom: That might be a good plan if you wanted to reverse something. Bush might even want to do that if he was evil like the other poster suggested but i like to think that reality is a lot more boring than fiction and much more predictable. the only problem w/ yalls statements are that the republicans would waste all their political capital on abortion. Do you think that they wouldnt be discredited after people started dying? Do you think that they would perhaps realize this in advance and decide not to overturn it?
Seriously its people like you that assume that any one issue is more important that than the U.S’s overall and LT well being. Abortion will never trump that vroom keep squaking.
Regarding the environmental issue, Bush has a mixed record.
He increased MPG requirements for SUV’s, something Clinton did not do.
He should have done cars too.
He actually implemented the reduced arsenic limits in drinking water. Clinton let this issue sit on his desk for years before he signed it on his last day in the office.
He eliminated Clinton’s all or nothing plan on powerplant emissions. Basically under Clinton power plants had to upgrade to meet the EPA standards or they were not allowed to upgrade at all. Most chose the not at all option.
Bush has allowed the power plants to incrementally upgrade their pollution control equipment. Under Bush, spending on pollution control equipment is much higher.
Most issues are like this. They are much more complicated that the press reports. We never read about the positives in Bush’s environmental record, but he has quite a few.
[quote]That might be a good plan if you wanted to reverse something. Bush might even want to do that if he was evil like the other poster suggested but i like to think that reality is a lot more boring than fiction and much more predictable. the only problem w/ yalls statements are that the republicans would waste all their political capital on abortion. Do you think that they wouldnt be discredited after people started dying? Do you think that they would perhaps realize this in advance and decide not to overturn it?
Seriously its people like you that assume that any one issue is more important that than the U.S’s overall and LT well being. Abortion will never trump that vroom keep squaking.[/quote]
Bigdon, what the hell are you talking about? I’m not the one doing any squawking. I’m describing a pending situation while you are describing a fantasy land.
Once you appoint people to the supreme court the decisions they make are completely independent of the politicians in office later on down the road. I don’t see the direct linkage you are trying to make, or assuming that the general public will make.
As for the overall and long term well being, what the hell are you talking about? I’m simply pointing out how and why some issues that others have raised could play out a certain way. What are you trying to pin this on me for?
Aren’t the religious right the ones that get all bent out of shape on the abortion issue – casting votes on that issue above all else, including the overall and long term well being of the country?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Another thing, the government pulled more money in on taxes than ever before this summer.
The economy has grown and the government is pulling in more money than ever.
Next time someone tries to tie tax cuts with our deficit please remember this.[/quote]
This is true. It was a great move. However, even if the government is pulling in more now than in Clinton’s day, Clinton actually saw black. Bush is 8 trillion in debt.
[quote]ron33 wrote:
SAsquatch,If it is as simple as these things run in cycles,with all the expertise ,knowledge not to mention millions of dollars that go into running for pres.Why would any intelligent person or political party put so much money and effort into becoming pres. when they know a downward cycle is coming.And if they cant change this, or have any control over it ,what good are they.And as another post said about tax cuts,I am middle class working man and i have not seen any tax cut helping me ,mine are going up.And my father in law is worth a few million and hes always saying his taxes keep going up investments are in the tank and hes not making any money,not to mention the price of health care and medicine keep rising.[/quote]
It is, indeed, quite cyclical in nature. Not simply as you suggested but cyclical nonetheless.
Why would someone want to be President if they knew a down cycle is coming? HMMMM…let me think about that. There is much more to the office than the economy. I’ll leave it at that and wonder how someone would be so naive as to ask that question and suggest that they can’t understand a political party wanting that office.
If your father in law is in fact worth millions, then he should be reaping the rewards of the Bush admin. if you believe all the nonsense about who is prospering from this administration.
The tax cut helped you, maybe you just didn’t realize the extra few hundres bucks that you dropped back into the economy. Maybe you didn’t notice, but it was there.
As i suggested earlier and has been backed up by saeveral, the economy was downturned before Bush took office. It would not have been this severe or prolonged had 9/11 not ocurred.
