Bush: so many deficiencies and blunders.

[Figleaf]

Does Bush lack respect for Afro-Americans?

President Bush ... has been criticized for failing to meet with the NAACP, a longstanding civil rights group, during his term in office; he is the first sitting President not to do so since Herbert Hoover, although he did meet with them during the 2000 campaign. During the 2004 campaign, Bush declined an invitation to speak, at first citing scheduling conflicts; later on, several of Bush's staff also cited critical political advertisements that the group ran as a reason not to attend.

Is Bush against science?

Scientists have repeatedly criticized the Bush administration for reducing funding for scientific research, setting restrictions on Federal funding of stem cell research, ignoring scientific consensus on critical issues such as global warming [not to mention the theory of evolution!], and hampering cooperation with foreign scientists by employing deterring immigration and visa practices. ... The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and other groups have routinely denounced Bush for distorting or suppressing scientific findings. In a February 2004 report endorsed by sixty Nobel laureates, the UCS alleged a pattern of manipulation of scientific findings for political goals.

Bush's record on the environment is mixed at best. While its true...

[bush] signed the Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002 authorizing the federal government to begin cleaning up pollution and contaminated sediment in the Great Lakes, as well as the Brownfields Legislation in 2002, accelerating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites, or brownfields, to better protect public health, create jobs, and revitalize communities.

however...

... his Healthy Forests Initiative; environmental groups have charged that the plan is simply a giveaway to timber companies. Another subject of controversy is Bush's Clear Skies Act; opponents say that the initiative will in fact allow utilities to pollute more than they do currently. ... The Bush administration's plan to allow oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was rejected twice by the U.S. Senate in 2002 due to concerns that it would potentially harm Arctic wildlife in the region. ... Bush supported the Clear Skies Act of 2003, which repeals or reduces air pollution controls. This act reduces caps on toxic chemicals in the air and cuts enforcement of the Clean Air Act, and is opposed by environmentalist groups such as the Sierra Club. Among other things, the Clear Skies Act:

-Weakens the current cap on mercury pollution levels from five tons per year to 26 tons.

-Weakens the current cap on nitrogen oxide pollution levels from 1.25 million tons to 2.1 million tons, allowing 68 percent more nitrogen oxide pollution.

-Weakens the current cap on sulfur dioxide pollution levels from two million tons to 4.5 million tons, allowing 225 percent more SO2 pollution.

-Delays enforcement of smog-and-soot pollution standards until 2015.

-Allows industrial buildings undergoing renovation, modernization, or expansion not to install machines that allow the building to come into current environmental standards compliance.

And how many children will he leave behind?

... the No Child Left Behind Act, which targets supporting early learning, measures student performance, gives options over failing schools, [however] Critics ... say schools were not given the resources to help meet new standards. The House Committee on Education and the Workforce said that the Department of Education's overall funding increased by $14 billion since the enactment of NCLB in fiscal year 2001, going from $42.6 billion to $56.6 billion in fiscal year 2005.[3]. Some state governments are refusing to implement provisions of the act as long as they are not adequately funded.[4]

[source: http://www.answers.com/topic/domestic-poli...-administration ]

So, the picture that emerges of Bush foolishness and incompetence is not confined to his criminal blunders on the world stage. He's quite capable of blowing things badly at home too.

Next time Americans are tempted to elect someone because of his low intelligence and simplistic views, I sure hope they remember this administration and spare themselves some real trouble.

[sharkman]

And yet another thread with no other point than to bash Bush. I see you're getting lots of business on this one after 5 days.

[Figleaf]

And yet another thread with no other point than to bash Bush. I see you're getting lots of business on this one after 5 days.

Thank you for your comment. You're allegation that I am bashing Bush reveals an inherent distaste for free discussion, and by extension for democracy. This is not surprising, since as a defender of Bush, you are defending the same disdain for the American way that he has revealed.

My post consisted of a excerpts and comments about specific policies of the Bush administration. I didn't make up the problems, I am merely discussing them. If you wished to dispute the troubling nature of these choices, why did you not do so? Instead, you merely complained about having them even mentioned.

[sharkman]

No Figgy, I commented on your level of disdain of Bush which is so high you repeatedly start threads with no other point than to bash bush. Try again with the 'disdain for free discussion' crap.

[Figleaf]

l

Edited July 19, 2007 by Figleaf

[PolyNewbie]

No one could be as incompetent as Bush. Its all by design so that people do not realize the true reason as to why this is all happening.

The central bankers want a world government and for that to happen the USA and its constitution and manufactering capability must be destroyed.

David Rockefeller explains it:

"This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost

forty years."

"It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

"We are not going to achieve a new world order without paying for it in blood as well as in words and money." Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., in Foreign Affairs (July/August 1995)

"No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation." David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

"Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the Field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it." Woodrow Wilson,The New Freedom (1913)

New World Order Quotes

[Canadian Blue]

You seem to equate criticism with 'bashing'. Why?

So far you have made all of these topics with regards to George W Bush:

-Bush: so many deficiencies and blunders.

-Poll: New Bush 'plan' 12

Is this stupid?

-Catering to theocracy -- Bush agenda...

-Monumental Stupidity

Is their any point to make four topics, all of which only show your dislike of George Bush instead of having an actual debate.

[Figleaf]

[

Edited July 24, 2007 by Figleaf

[Canadian Blue]

Well, each thread has the exact same approach which is basically talking about how much you hate Bush. I haven't debated you in other threads simply because you use emotion more than anything else.

[Figleaf]

[

Edited July 24, 2007 by Figleaf

[Canadian Blue]

Listen, I don't see the point in debating this because I also believe that Bush has been a failure. After 9/11 the whole world was behind America, then he went into Iraq with poor intelligence resulting in most of the world hating America, and American lives being lost in Iraq in a conflict with only a small chance of ending on a positive note.

As for G bay, once again I'm a 110% against it, as America should be a beacon for human rights and liberty. The United States should never become like the people they are fighting, fighting terror with terror is not a good example for the rest of the world.

I think Bush could have been a much better president, however the biggest problem I think was the fact that the Republican's held a majority in both houses until 2006. If the Dem's had a majority in 00, 02, and 04, I think Bush would have been forced to compromise much more. When Bush was governor he was known for compromising with the democrats.

However due to incompetence Bush will probably be known as the worst president in 100 years, unless he is able to turn things around in the next 2 years which I highly doubt.

I think in the end the intention's were good, but in the end they were dead wrong on Iraq, the Patriot Act, and GBay.