posted on June 24, 2004 06:50:48 PM new
Yes, the Scorecard is now retired. With the election coming up quickly, I'm working full time at getting John Kerry elected. Even though I'm ending the entries with October 2003, it's still a good record of what this administration has done to this country, and I hope you'll send it around to your friends.
Thanks for all the encouraging emails, including those speculating that I had been kidnapped by blackbooted thugs in the Bush administration. I've created a printer-friendly version of the Scorecard in response to the many requests.
Questions? Comments? Don't hesitate to send me an email.
Planning on writing some hate mail? Read this first!
Evil index Evil act Evil details
10-20-2003
USA Today
Bush pleads with China and Japan to save him from his economic failures. Bush likes to say that his enormous tax cuts that give hundreds of billions of dollars to America's wealthiest people are job-creation programs. But America has bled millions of jobs since Bush's tax cuts became law, so it's time to try something new. Bush's new tactic? Beg China and Japan to increase the value of their currencies, which will make American manufacturers more competitive. But Bush has nothing to offer in return -- and has done little to make other countries inclined to offer him favors. Instead of making pointless pleas to other countries, maybe Bush should come up with an economic plan that would actually create jobs instead of just putting more money in the pockets of those who need it least.
10-15-2003
Washington Post
Bush uses EPA funds to make campaign ads. Well, the EPA probably has a lot of money sitting around, what with it not enforcing environmental regulations anymore. So why not spend some of that dough getting President Bush reelected? The EPA runs Spanish-language ads on radio touting the Bush environmental policies that destroy the environment.
10-15-2003
CBS
Bush misrepresents evidence on Iraq to the United Nations. Colin Powell's speech to the United Nations was a watershed moment in the run-up to the Iraq war. Powell's reputation as a moderate and credible voice made the evidence he presented about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction seem that much more impressive. But as State Department employee Greg Thielmann reveals, it was nothing but twisted and misleading evidence, trumped up to sell Bush's Iraq war.
10-11-2003
Washington Post
Bush proposes loosening protections of endangered species. Sure, species extinction is a bad thing, but is it as bad as, say, not having a wastebasket made out of real ivory? That's the position of the Bush administration, anyway, which lifts restrictions on killing and trading endangered species. But at least it's only foreign animals. Who cares about those animals in other countries?
10-10-2003
Associated Press
Bush overturns limits on mining waste sites. In another victory for the mining industry, which has been as generous to President Bush as a donor as he has been to it as a president, the Interior Department overturns a rule put in place by the Clinton administration that limited the land mining sites could use to dispose of waste.
10-8-2003
CNN
Bush starts new public relations campaign on Iraq. Faced with failure, effective leaders change policy. Ineffective leaders figure out new way to sell their current policies. President Bush chooses to do the latter in Iraq, creating a new public relations push to make people feel better about the soldier-per-day death rate since Bush declared "Mission Accomplished."
10-3-2003
White House Proclamation
Bush declares Marriage Protection Week. Is the institution of marriage in danger? Because as far as I can tell, people are still getting married. But President Bush apparently thinks marriage is in dire need of protection, and hops into action by declaring "Marriage Protection Week." Bush, of course, thinks that marriage needs protection from gay couples, who want to attack marriage by, uh, getting married. I'm not quite sure how that works, but Bush must know what he's doing, right?
10-1-2003
CNN
Bush does nothing to reveal who disclosed Valerie Plame's identity. The White House likes to tout President Bush as a "strong leader." If there's even a modicum of truth to that, Bush already knows who leaked Valerie Plame's identity as an undercover CIA agent. But when asked, he refuses to do anything to reveal the truth, instead just claiming, "I want to know the truth," and passing the buck (as usual) to the Justice Department.
9-28-2003
Washington Post
Bush discloses undercover CIA agent's identity as retribution against her husband. When Joseph Wilson revealed that the Bush administration had used false intelligence to justify the war in Iraq, a smear campaign against him was predictable. But it was impossible to predict that the White House would reveal that Wilson's wife was an undercover CIA agent who worked on weapons of mass destruction -- supposedly the reason we went to war in the first place -- just to get back at Wilson.
9-24-2003
New York Times
Bush tells Congress not to offer a Medicare prescription drug benefit to the poor. Traditionally, Medicare benefits go to all Medicare recipients. But President Bush wants millions of low-income seniors to lose out on any new prescription drug benefit. He would rather those seniors rely on the states' Medicaid benefits, which vary from state to state (and year to year) and worsen the states' already severe fiscal crises -- which Bush has made worse with his enormous tax cuts.
9-23-2003
Washington Post
Bush takes away the discretion of career prosecutors. Conservative politicians like to reduce law enforcement to simple "tough on crime" platitudes. But the actual enforcement of law and prosecution of crime can't be reduced to simple black-and-white thinking. That's why prosecutors ought to have discretion over charges they file. But Attorney General John Ashcroft issues new guidelines forcing federal prosecutors to file the most serious charges possible in every case, because that "tough on crime" stance still looks great in the papers.
9-22-2003
Associated Press
Bush gives federal funds to religious groups. President Bush continues his efforts to chip away at the wall between church and state by issuing new regulations that allow new federal funds to go religious groups. But this is about more than church-state separation. It's also about Bush's attempt to move the federal government out of the business of helping people.
9-21-2003
The Observer
Bush tries to cover up global warming. Seriously, can we just stop it with the global warming denial already? I know it's inconvenient for conservative ideologues, but facts are facts. Actually, facts aren't facts if you work for the Bush administration, because facts can always be covered up. And when it comes to global warming, that's just what this administration does.
9-17-2003
Washington Post
Bush continues to hide energy task force proceedings. Back in 2001, the administration released an energy policy that was filled with gifts to President Bush and Vice President Cheney's friends in the energy industry. So it would hardly be surprising to find out that the energy industry dominated the meetings at which the policy was written. But Cheney goes to the Supreme Court to try and keep records of his energy task force's meetings secret, simply because of the administration's distaste for open government.
9-16-2003
New York Times
Bush attacks librarians for opposing the Patriot Act. Librarians have criticized the Patriot Act because it allows the federal government to invade the privacy of library patrons. And how does the Bush administration respond? "Mr. Ashcroft mocked and condemned the American Library Association and other Justice Department critics for believing that the F.B.I. wants to know 'how far you have gotten on the latest Tom Clancy novel.'" Silly people who want to protect civil liberties! Don't you have something more important to do, like celebrating "Patriots' Day"?
9-11-2003
Washington Post
Bush uses the September 11 attacks to justify all his policies. Why should we pass tax cuts for the rich? The September 11 attacks. Why should we clear cut forests and let polluters write environmental policy? The September 11 attacks. Why has America lost millions of jobs since Bush took office? The September 11 attacks. Next thing you know, he'll be saying we went to war with Iraq because of the September 11 attacks! Nah, he wouldn't go that far...
9-11-2003
Washington Post
Bush tries to expand the Patriot Act. President Bush celebrates the second anniversary of the September 11 attacks by calling for an expansion of the Patriot Act, which restricts civil liberties in the name of security. But at least he renames the day "Patriots' Day," so we all know that we're bad Americans for valuing our freedom.
9-10-2003
Agence France-Presse
Bush tries to expand the death penalty. This really speaks for itself. In a time when the death penalty ought to be shrinking into nonexistence what with dozens of innocent people being discovered on death row, President Bush pushes for an expansion of the death penalty, saying the current law is one of the "unreasonable obstacles" to fighting terrorism.
9-1-2003
USA Today
Bush allows the sale of PCB-polluted lands. Remember when EPA stood for Environmental Protection Agency? President Bush's EPA -- who knows what the hell it stands for under that guy -- reverses a 25-year policy of not selling lands polluted by PCBs. The bans prevented people from spreading the pollution until the EPA could ensure the lands were clean. Not any more.
8-29-2003
Associated Press
Bush expands global abortion gag rules. One of Bush's first acts in office (see 1-21-2001 below) was to limit funding to international organizations that provide abortions. Now he expands that rule so that no federal funds can go to international organizations that provide any abortions, even with their own funds. The result, of course, is devastating for the health of the world's poorest women.
8-29-2003
Washington Post
Bush chooses not to regulate auto emissions. It isn't often that government agencies choose to limit their own power, but President Bush's EPA is a notable exception. The agency announces that it conveniently doesn't have the power to regulate auto emissions, providing another big win for the auto industry. The reason? The EPA claims carbon dioxide isn't a pollutant. Which is true, if you don't believe in global warming. (See 9-21-2003, above.)
8-29-2003
Associated Press
Bush cuts Energy Star program. President Bush likes to praise programs in front of the camera and then slash them when the camera is turned off. One good example is the Energy Star program, which Bush touts (correctly) as an effective environmental program, providing $70 in benefits for every one dollar spent. But the EPA shifts funds so that the Energy Star program doesn't get the funds Congress intended for it to get. When Bush praises a program, watch out -- it maybe destined for big cuts.
8-28-2003
Washington Post
Bush awards no-bid contracts to Halliburton. Look, Halliburton may be the best company to provide contracting services in Iraq. It may not be. But one thing is certain: it looks awfully suspicious for the Bush administration to award a no-bid contract to Halliburton when Vice President Cheney used to be the company's CEO. What's more, it completely contradicts the White House's professed distaste for government interference in a free market. A bidding process would drive down the costs for the taxpayer and guarantee improved services. But it would mean smaller profits for Cheney's old firm.
8-27-2003
Associated Press
Bush cites war on terror as reason for small federal pay raise. Justifying a miserly 2 percent raise for federal workers, Bush says that a higher raise would harm our ability to prosecute the war on terror. So he does realize that we need money to win the war on terror. But he hasn't realized that his multi-trillion-dollar tax cuts do much, much, much more to destroy the nation's financial health than a decent raise for those who work for the government.
8-23-2003
Washington Post
Bush relaxes clean air rules. We have to be honest with you: we thought this was a done deal back in November 2002. (See 11-22-2002 below.) But apparently the EPA is now getting around to implementing the rules that will gut the Clean Air Act. Under the new Bush rules, older power plants will be able to expand their operations without installing new anti-pollution technology. But why should Bush care? Prevailing wind patterns push all that pollution toward the northeast, and those states didn't vote for him anyway.
8-22-2003
Associated Press
Bush lies about air quality after September 11 attacks. There's nothing funny about this at all. After the September 11 attacks, the EPA told New Yorkers it was safe to live and work near Ground Zero. It turns out that under White House pressure, the EPA lied about the data it had and omitted important information about the quality of the air and what New Yorkers needed to do to stay healthy. It may take years to see the effects -- possibly birth defects or increased cancer rates -- of what may be Bush's worst lie yet.
8-18-2003
Time
Bush defunds Teach for America. If you run a nonprofit organization, beware the photo-op with George W. Bush. It's like the kiss of death: it may seem friendly at the time, but you'll learn to regret it later. While those who run Teach for America were optimistic after meeting Bush the presidential candidate, they found their funding taken away under Bush the president. Now the program, which gives top students money for college for teaching in underprivileged communities, has to eliminate scholarships.
8-17-2003
Washington Post
Bush blocks plan to upgrade nation's power grid. You would think that in the wake of an enormous power outage that paralyzed much of the northeast United States and southeast Canada, it wouldn't be difficult to unite behind a plan to upgrade the power grid. But President Bush opposes his own handpicked chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and sides with (surprise, surprise) the energy industry to oppose the plan. Instead, the administration thinks that more deregulation is the solution, even though deregulation is largely the problem in the first place. A deregulated power industry has no financial incentive to pay the costs of upgrading the grid. Apparently, Bush hasn't quite learned the lessons from Enron that he needs to learn yet.
8-14-2003
San Francisco Chronicle
Bush cuts pay for soldiers in Iraq. "And tonight, I have a special word ... for all the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States: America is grateful for a job well done," said President Bush as he declared an end to fighting "major" combat operations in Iraq. Bush has a funny way of showing he's grateful. Under Bush, the Pentagon cuts imminent danger pay as soldiers die every day in Iraq and family separation pay as soldiers are separated from their families for months.
8-12-2003
New York Daily News
Bush uses the IRS and federal funds to send out a campaign letter -- again. Just as with his enormous tax cut in 2001 (see 6-22-2001 below), President Bush is spending millions of taxpayer dollars to send a letter to folks letting them know about the rebate checks they'll receive in the mail. The purpose of the letter is nothing more than to associate Bush's name with the checks, providing a little campaign boost for the president's reelection.
8-11-2003
Associated Press
Bush pushes plan to make it easier for timber companies to plunder national forests. Just as President Bush fights the freedom-hating terrorists by taking away our freedoms, so he fights tree-burning forest fires by selling off the trees. (See 8-21-2002 below.) On a break from his annual month-long vacation, Bush takes the opportunity to promote his tree-destroying program and pretend to be an environmentalist.
8-9-2003
New York Times
Bush proposes eliminating protections for historical sites from highway projects. Another no-brainer that's no-brained by the Bush administration. Of course protecting historical sites should be of vital importance when you're deciding where to put a major interstate. And those protections are written into federal law. But if the Bush administration has its way, they'll be taken out, opening all kinds of historical sites to desecration and even destruction.
8-7-2003
LA Times
Bush gives oil companies in Iraq blanket immunity from lawsuits. Whether you think Iraq's oil was a small factor in the decision to go to war or the main reason, you cannot deny the potential that some of the companies given contracts to deal with the oil in post-Saddam Iraq may abuse their new privileges. After all, any company can abuse any contract. But Bush ensures that oil companies can engage in all the abuse they want with an executive order that gives them blanket immunity from lawsuits.
8-7-2003
Washington Post
Bush seeks retribution for judges who use their discretion in sentencing. Laws that restrict the ability of judges to use their discretion when sentencing criminals can be the source of grave miscarriages of justice. Attorney General John Ashcroft wants to make sure those miscarriages happens as often as possible, so he has asked federal prosecutors to report any instances of judges imposing more lenient sentences than the law allows. The law is a blunt instrument, and discretion in sentencing allows judges to take appropriate action based on mitigating circumstances. Is it any surprise that Ashcroft doesn't approve?
8-6-2003
New York Times
Bush proposes cuts to Medicare funding for cancer drugs. Cutting government healthcare costs is a good goal. When it involves cutting services for cancer patients, you'd hope the compassionate would rule out the conservative. But not for the Bush administration, as the Department of Health and Human Services proposes cutting the amount of money the government spends on cancer drugs. The administration says we overpay, but patient advocates say "instead of expanding access to lifesaving drugs, [the cuts] would limit access to cancer treatments for some of the most seriously ill Medicare beneficiaries."
7-31-2003
CBS News
Bush promotes a federal ban on gay marriage. Conservatives believe that gay people getting married somehow threatens heterosexual marriages. (They never seem particularly clear on how that works.) President Bush believes that an unsatisfied conservative base somehow threatens his reelection chances. (It's pretty clear how that works.) The solution is clear. Bush attacks gay marriage, suggesting that his administration is working on a way to make it illegal everywhere in the country. His attack comes at the expense of equality and dignity for homosexuals, values that Bush has never seemed to hold in high regard.
7-31-2003
Guardian
Bush shuts down nuclear weapons advisory panel. President Bush has been pushing for new kinds of nuclear weapons (see 7-6-2003 below), and there's nothing more inconvenient for that kind of goal than independent oversight. So the Bush administration eliminates the independent advisory board to the National Nuclear Security Administration. Members of the committee had criticized Bush's plans for new nukes, and the administration hadn't called the committee together in the year before it was disbanded.
7-29-2003
New York Times
Bush creates a system where people can invest in the possibility of terror attacks and international upheaval. This one didn't last long, and it showed just how important it is to have open government. From the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the same folks who brought us "Total Information Awareness" (and, years ago, the Internet), comes a project that would encourage investors to risk real money against the possibility of future events, like the overthrow of Jordan's king, or terrorist attacks. The idea would be to see whether such a system would have a predictive effect that would help us see world events before they happen. But the obvious ethical problems of essentially betting on chaos, death, and destruction forces the Pentagon to shut down the sickening project the day it becomes public.
7-22-2003
Reuters
Bush threatens veto if Congress overturns new FCC rules. When President Bush eased media ownership rules (see 6-3-2003 below), he never expected trouble from the Republican-controlled Congress. But an unprecedented public outcry against the new rules has put pressure on Congress to overturn the FCC's decision. But Bush isn't one to let something like "the will of the people" get in the way of his pro-corporate agenda. So he lets Congress know that if it overturns the new rules, he'll exercise his first veto. How appropriate that it will go to protect the profits of megacorporations!
7-16-2003
The Nation
Bush exposes an undercover CIA agent in an act of petty vengeance. Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson recently went public to say that he had investigated President Bush's State of the Union claim that Iraq tried to purchase uranium from Africa and had found the story not credible nearly a year before Bush's speech. Given the Bush administration's record, you'd expect some kind of retaliation or attempt to discredit Wilson from the White House or its surrogates. But Bush hits a new low when "senior administration officials" expose Wilson's wife as an undercover CIA agent to reporter Robert Novak, ruining her career and possibly endangering her life. Wilson calls it "a shot across the bow" to others who would speak out against the Bush administration. Seems like a pretty direct hit to me.
7-9-2003
New York Times
Bush obstructs September 11 investigation. Remember when President Bush's complaint with the weapons inspectors was that all their interviews were conducted in front of Iraqi government "minders"? Apparently he objected to the instance but likes the principle. When the independent commission (long opposed by Bush) investigating the attacks of September 11 interviews intelligence personnel, the Justice Department insists on having a "minder" in the room, chilling testimony before the commission. And that's just the tip of the Bush administration obstructionism iceberg. The commission complains of interference and noncooperation from all over the administration, noting that "problems that have arisen so far with the Department of Defense are becoming particularly serious."
7-8-2003
Washington Post
Bush proposes weakening Head Start. Head Start is that rarest of gems: an effective and universally lauded educational program. So why mess with success, right? But instead of expanding this preschool program that has been proven to give children a jump on learning, President Bush proposes changing the specific federal outlays to block grants that will give states more "flexibility" to spend the money. Given that states are in their worst fiscal crises since World War II, it's likely that they'll stretch the money and direct as much as possible away from Head Start.
7-6-2003
USA Today
Bush continues to push for new nuclear weapons. Radical conservative activists like the current President Bush a lot more than they did his father, and here's one reason why. Where Bush 41 put a moratorium on U.S. nuclear weapons tests in 1992, Bush 43 not only wants to resume tests, but wants to create entirely new kinds of nuclear weapons. Continuing with earlier efforts (see 2-20-2003 below), the Bush administration argues for smaller nukes that are much more likely to be used in combat.
Evil scale
Evil
Very evil
Very, very evil
Very, very, very evil
Very, very, very, very evil
The Wage Slave Journal is a collection of political commentary by Jesse Berney.
posted on June 24, 2004 07:13:33 PM new
Just comming out of a coma or having a flashback to you LSD days, are you? Looks more like irrelevant drivel.
"The natural family is a man and woman bound in a lifelong covenant of marriage for the purposes of:
*the continuation of the human species,
*the rearing of children,
*the regulation of sexuality,
*the provision of mutual support and protection,
*the creation of an altruistic domestic economy, and
*the maintenance of bonds between the generations."
posted on June 24, 2004 08:43:03 PM new
Bear - just out of curiosity - have you ever had an original thought? The few times I have asked you relevent questions regarding articles you have posted you have completely ignored them in favor of slinging sophmoric slanderous comments at others. I'm curious as to whether you actually reand anything in the original post other than the poster name before you deemed it irrelevent and tossed still another example of close minded pettiness.
I can't really figure ot why you post here - can't you just shout insults at passers by from your truck window to fulfill that need?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on June 24, 2004 10:05:33 PM new
I agree twelve....found it odd that all the articles were from a year ago.
Kind of reminded me of dave...when he only wanted to discuss with me the economy and job market up UNTIL 2003. Didn't want to go past that time frame....get up-to-date.
posted on June 24, 2004 10:16:52 PM new
Why the interest in email address twelve. Yeah I know you have one some fly by night hotmail number.
As to EBAG just a Bag of Hot Gas.
And Linda, a brainless ditto head spreading her venom through the universe. A bitter old lady with as heart of stone.
Just the way I see it and I call them as I them.
Feel free to counter attack my words, as I have no respect for you I could care less as to your opinion as I view those who espouse your views as pimples on the rectum of humanity.
posted on June 24, 2004 10:41:15 PM new
I don't know fenix - appears to me davebraun does a little slinging sophmoric slanderous comments at others of his own.... all the time....and I haven't seen you quesion HIM on his posts.
posted on June 24, 2004 10:52:45 PM new
I'd be VERY surprised IF she came to defend you dave.
You do exactly what she has accused bear of doing. Only I'm calling you on it because it's true of you. You only pop in to sling your insults...nothing more. Grow up.
I disagree that you really don't care what I say since it appears to upset you so much to hear a different opinion on the issues discussed.
posted on June 24, 2004 11:05:02 PM new
Don't mistake my pulling your reactionary chain to caring what you think. I will not let your fascist view go unchallenged. But don't confuse that for anything more.
posted on June 24, 2004 11:09:07 PM new
To be quite honest Linda - I put Dave on ignore awhile ago. I don't agree with his posting styleand since I don't think I have seen him start a topical thread in months I didn't really think I was missing out on anything.
I called Bear on his tactics because he posts articles with high frequency, never answers relevent questions regarding the topic and seems to use them as little more than bait to attract comments from people he can then fling completely irrelevent insults at.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Jun 24, 2004 11:11 PM ]
posted on June 24, 2004 11:15:40 PM new
Yes, dave, I understand that anyone who doesn't accept your progressive/socialist way of thinking is, in your mind, not entitled to use their constitutional right of free speech. You'd like me/us/them to shut up and not respond to the issues.
But you don't respond to the issues...you just come here and insult me on a continuing basis.
I wouldn't think anyone so foolish to think your actions are going to change anyone's minds on the political issues with this sad/sick approach. It only makes YOU look small as a person. Unable to communicate in a civil manner. Unable to control your own emotions enough to debate/discuss the issues being discussed.
I pity you dave....nothing more...nothing less.
Get used to it. I'm not alone in thinking the way I do. GASP!!!
posted on June 24, 2004 11:27:33 PM new
fenix - That's a GREAT idea....he's now on ignore for me too.
On this topic though....I find it laughable, with the way political issues change daily, that crowfarm would come in and start a thread titled: "relevant information"....and then post articles that are a year old. To me, that's what bear was responding to. Not your previous questions of him nor his lack of responses. That's between the two of you...I already have my hands full with my admirers.
Plus for me personally crowfarm continues to post untrue statements....and only slings insults when one presents another view on whatever point he/she's trying to make - rather than rationally continue to discuss the subject.
Not speaking for bear, please understand that, but for me, I get to a point where anytime I see the userids of some...it does bring up an immediate negative reaction on my part.
Not exactly the way to win over the 'undecided' voters either, imo.
posted on June 25, 2004 12:03:54 AM new
Since the right evidently feels that what went on in an administration over four years ago is still relevant today, why cavil at what went on 6 months to a year ago in this administration?!?
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on June 25, 2004 12:12:47 AM new
bunni - IF I'm understanding your question correctly, I wasn't limiting my conversation with dave95XX to a six month period. I was not willing to be limited ONLY to the time frame wished to discuss....since what is/was relevant was that we've come from point A to point B June 2004.
I'll never understand the objection to clinton being mentioned when discussing politics. It's very normal and natural, imo, to compare the previous one to the present one. Just like the left likes to do when it come to the economy under clinton. They want to discuss that comparison...but not any similar issue where there was agreement between the two parties.
posted on June 25, 2004 05:36:18 AM new And Linda, a brainless ditto head spreading her venom through the universe. A bitter old lady with as heart of stone.
SO, Linda responds to that by admonishing FENIX for her negative comment to Bear, pointing out that FENIX failed to say anything about DAVE.
Amazing!!! Linda is giving directions to Fenix? Hahaha....Linda says, "I don't know fenix - appears to me davebraun does a little slinging sophmoric slanderous comments at others of his own.... all the time....and I haven't seen you quesion HIM on his posts."
And so Fenix responds to Linda. Awwww.... Fenix says, "I put Dave on ignore awhile ago"
You now have Fenix in a position where you will never find me or quite a few other posters here.
posted on June 25, 2004 06:21:53 AM new
Well, to get back on topic, yes, oh linda of the shriveled heart, this IS relevant.
There is an election coming up...at least we hope it will be an election instead of an appointment like last time....and the nastiness of the present regime should be known.
As to up to the minute stuff there is just so much of it that it's hard to keep track of it all. And I do more than cut and paste like you...I have a life, it's busy and I use more than websites to get information.
But, once again, you couldn't address the issues. And I never expected you to. You probably didn't even read the post before you posted a reply. Besides you probably agree with all the rotten nasty treasonous things bushy has done anyway so I knew you'd just blow this off.
I did this just to be a smart ass and prove once again that if YOU post something it's the truth but if someone else posts something it's not. THIS proves what a teeny tiny small box you have to think in and sadly, you'll never escape it. I wish I could help you but I don't think there's a light at the end of the tunnel you're in.
posted on June 25, 2004 11:35:44 AM new
Linda--no, I was refering to your beef with what crowfarm posted. In terms of looking at a man who is running for re-election, what he has done throughout his term is relevant.
And you said that crowfarm posted "untrue statements." Please show which are untrue...
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on June 25, 2004 01:37:10 PM new
Personally, I like Dave's comment. But then, I don't suppose that should be a surprise. He's honest at least in his opinions even if they seem brash to some. He's also quite observant, IMO.
crowfarm
You really are wasting your time. The elite right don't want to hear the truth. They play "follow the leader" quite well. Remember the Pied Piper? Remember what happened to the rats that followed him? Bush sings a pretty tune to those who are tone deaf.
posted on June 25, 2004 02:29:26 PM new
Some people confuse objective with subjective. Others feel all their opinions must be valid and everybody else doesn't understand. We understand, what we understand is just not their fervently held opinion. Luckily, other than posting here, they mostly just rant to their own choir.
_______________
You know...the best way to defeat a liberal is to let them speak.
posted on June 25, 2004 04:15:03 PM new
bunni - I was referring to crowfarm continually spouting falsehoods and then can't/won't back up his statements.
The one I was referring to when I said that was not one of his above 35-40 copy and pastes [maybe].
Anyone who wishes to discuss OLD news is sure free to do so ....but rather to this statement I asked him to support and he couldn't. And there have been others.
Linda_K: posted on June 22, 2004 09:08:18 AM
quoting crowfarm: - Bush "outed" a CIA agent because her husband criticized the administration. He didn't care that this could very well end up with her death along with many of her contacts'.
Linda_K: I'm sure in the interest of not allowing your credibility to continue to decline around here ....you'd like to PROVE your above statements are true.
Show your 'proof' the President himself actually did what you're accusing him of.
posted on June 25, 2004 04:38:35 PM newYou now have Fenix in a position where you will never find me or quite a few other posters here.
Helen
Yes helen...fenix is very much unlike yourself [thank God for small favors] - although politically you two agree much more often than she and I do.
She does not have different standards for those who agree with her positions and those who don't. Your double standards are clearly noticable. lol
Fenix has many attributes I admire. It's nice to have dems who are capable of discussing the issues without insulting the person. A wonderful quality, imo.
posted on June 25, 2004 07:29:18 PM new
Fenix, did you say something to me? If you did, sorry I didn't reply more eloquently and simply for you. All I remember are snide comments, all of which had no point. If you didn't understand my replys, too bad. All the salent points I refered too have been self explanatary to anyone with a open mind, (read uncluttered with left wing, lib psyco babble mad Gore disease).
"The natural family is a man and woman bound in a lifelong covenant of marriage for the purposes of:
*the continuation of the human species,
*the rearing of children,
*the regulation of sexuality,
*the provision of mutual support and protection,
*the creation of an altruistic domestic economy, and
*the maintenance of bonds between the generations."
posted on June 25, 2004 09:09:23 PM new
Hello All, After reading all these posts. I am thinking back to when Geo. Bush said he was a "great uniter" not a divider.
posted on June 26, 2004 05:26:28 AM new
Wasn't it Bush that also said he would bring back honesty and dignity to the White House.....I like to know what that will start.
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
