Attention all Bush haters

[avatar4321]

I asked this a while ago, none of you could answer it.

Exactly what Bush policies are destroying our nation?

What rights have we lost under President Bush?

(Note: Illegal immigration is one conservatives are upset with the President about. But I'm talking Bush haters here. The ones always saying Bush is evil but can't seem to cite any valid reason. Id really like to know what rights we've lost)

[diuretic]

Can I get a rain check? If Bush and the big sahib hunter, the killer of small, tame birds, that bloodless Cheney, step down when the constitution requires it and don't do a re-run of their very good buddy Pervez Mushareff and elections go ahead as normal (well, as normal as a corrupted electoral system allows), then I will be happy to say I was totally wrong about the pair of them.

[PostmodernProphet]

Exactly what Bush policies are destroying our nation?

his policy of abandoning the Republican standard of fiscal responsibility......

[Gaffer]

Can I get a rain check? If Bush and the big sahib hunter, the killer of small, tame birds, that bloodless Cheney, step down when the constitution requires it and don't do a re-run of their very good buddy Pervez Mushareff and elections go ahead as normal (well, as normal as a corrupted electoral system allows), then I will be happy to say I was totally wrong about the pair of them.

Bush's term ends Jan 20 2009. The new president will be sworn in then. There is absolutely no way they can continue in power beyond that for any reason under the Constitution.

As for mushareff. They have no say over what he does. They may try to influence him through aid or money, but what he does is his own doing. They must not have had too much control over him as al qaeda has continued to grow in pakistan.

[Joe Steel]

I asked this a while ago, none of you could answer it.

Exactly what Bush policies are destroying our nation?

What rights have we lost under President Bush?

(Note: Illegal immigration is one conservatives are upset with the President about. But I'm talking Bush haters here. The ones always saying Bush is evil but can't seem to cite any valid reason. Id really like to know what rights we've lost)

Fiscal irresponsibility.
Lawlessness.
Deceit.

These are Bush's guiding principles. Americans will be suffering the consequences for decades.

[Nukeman]

Can I get a rain check? If Bush and the big sahib hunter, the killer of small, tame birds, that bloodless Cheney, step down when the constitution requires it and don't do a re-run of their very good buddy Pervez Mushareff and elections go ahead as normal (well, as normal as a corrupted electoral system allows), then I will be happy to say I was totally wrong about the pair of them.
Why exactly do yo foriengers believe this line of BS. The American people may be complacent in some things but they would not stand for that type action EVER period......

Do you people subscribe to the same conspiracy theory magazine or what. The yahoos in Finland and Sweden say the same stupid thing.

We are not a 10 million person nation with a small area to oversee, we are 300 million people with one of the largest geographical area's for one country. How exactly would Bush/Cheney accomplish this trashing of the constitution??:poke:

When this DOES NOT HAPPEN I expect a huge appology for even thinking that we as Americans would let this happen.....:slap:

[April15]

The policy of using executive privilege to redact CDC reports and others because the information in them goes counter to what Bush wants believed.
The Faith based government initiatives. On the same track withholding monies from any organization that discusses birth control in any manner other than abstinence.
Providing corporations welfare, or the equal in tax breaks.
Nation building.
NCLB that is dumbing down ALL the students.

[Hobbit]

The policy of using executive privilege to redact CDC reports and others because the information in them goes counter to what Bush wants believed.

The CDC? That's news to me. What reports did he allegedly doctor? Anthrax? Bird flu?


The Faith based government initiatives. On the same track withholding monies from any organization that discusses birth control in any manner other than abstinence.

Ok, 2-part answer here:

1. Federal funding for faith-based initiatives is nothing new. Prison Fellowship has been getting federal funds for years because of the low recidivism rate of inmates who go through their program.

2. I don't recall federal funds being denied any program that preached things other than abstinence. I do remember a few stand-offs regarding programs that made no mention, whatsoever, of abstinence, but I don't remember any of these stand-offs involving federal funds.


Providing corporations welfare, or the equal in tax breaks.

This whole point reeks of a big, fat diarrhea load of bullcrap. First off, a tax break is not welfare. When you give somebody a tax break, you are allowing that person or entity to keep a portion of what they have rightfully earned or what has been legally given to them. When you give somebody welfare, you are using force to confiscate another's legal, earned resources in order to grant them to a person who did not earn them nor was willfully given them.

Second, corporations don't pay taxes because corporations are incapable of accumulating wealth. All corporate taxes are passed on to YOU in the form of increased prices and pay cuts.


Nation building.

You mean like what we did to Germany, Europe's industrial powerhouse, or Japan, one of the foremost producers of electronics worldwide? Yeah, that's a horrible idea. We should never do that. We should just pillage and ruin countries that pose a threat, like we did in WWI, or better yet, just let them gather their strength until they're ready to strike at us, because that worked so well in the past.


NCLB that is dumbing down ALL the students.

I can't argue with you there. I'm sure our solutions to the problem would be as different as night and day, but I can't disagree that NCLB was a terrible idea.

[darin]

The CDC? That's news to me. What reports did he allegedly doctor? Anthrax? Bird flu?



Ok, 2-part answer here:

1. Federal funding for faith-based initiatives is nothing new. Prison Fellowship has been getting federal funds for years because of the low recidivism rate of inmates who go through their program.

2. I don't recall federal funds being denied any program that preached things other than abstinence. I do remember a few stand-offs regarding programs that made no mention, whatsoever, of abstinence, but I don't remember any of these stand-offs involving federal funds.



This whole point reeks of a big, fat diarrhea load of bullcrap. First off, a tax break is not welfare. When you give somebody a tax break, you are allowing that person or entity to keep a portion of what they have rightfully earned or what has been legally given to them. When you give somebody welfare, you are using force to confiscate another's legal, earned resources in order to grant them to a person who did not earn them nor was willfully given them.

Second, corporations don't pay taxes because corporations are incapable of accumulating wealth. All corporate taxes are passed on to YOU in the form of increased prices and pay cuts.



You mean like what we did to Germany, Europe's industrial powerhouse, or Japan, one of the foremost producers of electronics worldwide? Yeah, that's a horrible idea. We should never do that. We should just pillage and ruin countries that pose a threat, like we did in WWI, or better yet, just let them gather their strength until they're ready to strike at us, because that worked so well in the past.




April15 got:

http://dmc4.orcon.net.nz/alcapowned.jpg



I can't argue with you there. I'm sure our solutions to the problem would be as different as night and day, but I can't disagree that NCLB was a terrible idea.


What all this means is: NO president will always make the right call in the minds of even his supporters. Still - is disagreeing with Bush on the illegal foreigners and NCLB a reason to HATE the man?

No...not for a reasonable person.

[April15]

ttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-scientists10feb10,0,4954654.story?coll=la-home-nation/
THE NATION
U.S. Scientists Say They Are Told to Alter Findings
More than 200 Fish and Wildlife researchers cite cases where conclusions were reversed to weaken protections and favor business, a survey finds.
By Julie Cart
Times Staff Writer

February 10, 2005

More than 200 scientists employed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service say they have been directed to alter official findings to lessen protections for plants and animals, a survey released Wednesday says.

The survey of the agency's scientific staff of 1,400 had a 30% response rate and was conducted jointly by the Union of Concerned Scientists and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.

A division of the Department of the Interior, the Fish and Wildlife Service is charged with determining which animals and plants should be placed on the endangered species list and designating areas where such species need to be protected.

More than half of the biologists and other researchers who responded to the survey said they knew of cases in which commercial interests, including timber, grazing, development and energy companies, had applied political pressure to reverse scientific conclusions deemed harmful to their business.

Bush administration officials, including Craig Manson, an assistant secretary of the Interior who oversees the Fish and Wildlife Service, have been critical of the 1973 Endangered Species Act, contending that its implementation has imposed hardships on developers and others while failing to restore healthy populations of wildlife.

rest at link.


http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/13518.html

November 8, 2007
CDC claims ‘executive privilege’ over global warming testimony
Posted November 8th, 2007 at 9:20 am

Share This | Spotlight | Permalink

A couple of weeks ago, Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, testified before a Senate panel yesterday on the impact of climate change on public health, but the White House altered her testimony before it was delivered. References to potential health risks were removed; one CDC official said Gerberding’s draft “was eviscerated”; and details on how many people might be adversely affected because of increased warming were deleted.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calf.) wants to know what happened. The Bush gang doesn’t care.

Last week, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) wrote to President Bush “requesting a full accounting of what occurred during that review process.” Appearing on MSNBC [yesterday], Boxer said the administration has stonewalled her efforts, claiming executive privilege:

“Many pages of it were redacted… And by the way, we wrote the President. He gave our letter to Fred Fielding, the chief counsel over there, his counsel, who said ‘executive privilege, I don’t have to tell you what she wrote.’ … So yes, I think they are hiding this. I think they are hiding a lot of things. It’s their way, it’s their habit, it’s wrong.”

As of last week, the White House counsel’s office claimed that “the request by its very nature seeks communications involving pre-decisional deliberative materials relating to an inter-agency review process … it is clear that the request implicates core Executive Branch interests and raises separation of powers concerns.”

In other words, the White House wanted to cover up Gerberding’s testimony last month, and cover up the editing of Gerberding’s testimony this month.

Here’s a crazy idea: why not invite Gerberding back to the same committee, giving her another chance to specifically talk about the public health dangers associated with global warming? Would the White House “eviscerate” the testimony twice?

According to the Bush gang, of course, they simply wanted Gerberding to look at the silver lining of climate change. Remember this gem?

PERINO: I haven’t seen the specific edits…. As I understand it, in the draft there was broad characterizations about climate-change science that didn’t align with the IPCC. And we have experts and scientists across this administration that can take a look at that testimony and say, “This is an error,” or, “This doesn’t make sense.” And so the decision was made on behalf of CDC to focus that testimony on public health benefits.

more at link