George W. Bush's resume

I am not a liberal, nor a conservative. I don't feel the need to a choose a side, so you may kiss my butt with your collective lips. I am not trying defend any of those other claims but texas was number 1 polluter in the USA unless it recently changed, I live here and I know and I lived in odessa when the whole huntsman thing was going the supporters wanted it to stay for jobs, the otherside was getting ill and a lot of them had cancer because that plant had been there all their lives. And why do you call me the idiot, you seem to be the one lacking knowledge, perhaps self defense mode? Have a good evening sir.

So you can continue to insult me and avoid facts, because in all honestly it doesn't phase me. As a good friend of mine says "Wha'evah floats yer goat"

[Edited on 29-4-2003 by Lysergic]

Texas Under the Leadership of Governor G.W. Bush





By Bee Bea Sharper, Gazette Numerical Columnist





Texas' rank among states in spending for teachers' salaries: 50.

Texas' rank among states in spending for the environment: 49.

Texas' rank among states in per-capita funding for public health: 48.

Texas' rank among states in delivery of social services: 47.

Texas' rank among states in child-support collections: 42.

Texas' rank among states in per-capita spending on public education: 41.

Texas' rank among states in percentage of population living in poverty: 5.

Texas rank among states in water and air pollution: 1.

Texas rank among states in percentage of poor working parents without insurance: 1.

Texas rank among states in percentage of children without health insurance: 1.

Texas rank among states in executions: 1.

Proportion of adult Texans who are currently locked up in a state prison facility: 1 in 98.

Proportion of adult Texans who are currently under supervision of the penal system (in jail or on probation, for example): 1 in 26.

Seems Ohio took the prized number 1 spot in 2001, but hey 2nd place ain't too bad!!! 2 out of 50!

The Montreal-based agency, the environmental watchdog under the North American free-trade agreement, released its fifth annual assessment of the continent's industrial pollution yesterday. Called Taking Stock, it found that Ohio, Texas, Michigan, Indiana and Ontario, in that order, were the five worst-polluted jurisdictions on the continent.

www.cleanair.web.net...
www.texascenter.org...


[Edited on 29-4-2003 by Lysergic]

[Edited on 29-4-2003 by Lysergic]

Well, let us add some more facts to the list, shall we?

#1: Dubya's father benefited from the sale of coc aine to inner city youths during his tenure at the CIA, and used the money to fund the Vietnam war.

#2: Dubya's cabinet is made up of members of the infamous Wolfowitz cabal, an organization of neo-conservative Israel sympathizers who made it their goal in 1994 to find a way into the white house so they could purge Islam from the world.

#3: Dubya "earned" a D+ average in High School.

#4: Dubya deserted his air national guard post during Vietnam. He was absent for three months. Even though he claimed he was so proud of defending Texas from the mighty forces of the ever encroaching Vietcong.

I laugh at these people who blindly support him. Though, truth be told, I have never met a Republican who had any common sense in the first place.

How can you respect a party that chastises it's own people for not voting unilaterally? (I'm talking about what the GOP is doing to that fellow who voted to cut Bush's tax plan)

I dare someone to tell me how a 350 Billion dollar tax cut is going to create jobs. Smells like reaganomics.

Life was better under Clinton because of one simple fact the Republicans will never admit:

He fought for the working man.

Originally posted by HKoT
No I have trouble spelling though. Carcinogens are simply cancer causing agents you idiot. Anything altering DNA is a Mutagen.

*bows* now kiss my conservative butt. This Thread is a puss-hole of misinformation steming from Television intoxicated Liberals.

Considering all of the cable news networks are Republican slanted, your comment is flawed.

Though, answer me this:

Why is it all conservatives are foul mouthed and rude?

Because we're so sick of listening to Liberal Lies. I suggest you open a book for once, and learn who it was that enabled the president to have near Dictatoral powers, who it was that restricted federalism, who it was that bloated the government to the size it is today, and who it is who keeps over taxing the poor.

Yep...all Democrats.

And I'm sorry your state sucks, but you can't blame anyone but your legislature.

The Taliban isn't a Nation,

Umm no, but Afghanistan is. Can�t you tell the difference between a Country and its Government? Oh wait, what am I saying? Of course you can't.

Which sovereign nation? Not Afghanistan that's for sure

Umm, no. That would be Iraq.


Enough with picking on executions, they are a good way to kill the bad guys

Ohh yes, and the mentally ill, along with juveniles. The U.S keeps illustrious company in that regard, the only other countries to execute Juveniles being the Democratic Republic of Congo, Pakistan and Iran. The U.S executes more Juveniles per year than all of these put together.

LINK

It is safe to say that the president only effects what happens in the next president's term.

So ehh.. your saying any good things that happened in Bush�s term were down to Clinton then?

� Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (The 'poorest' multi-millionaire, Condoleeza Rice, has an Exxon oil tanker named after her).

Uh lol...I'm named after the Duke of Essex in England and the beheader of King Charles the first, so what? My name actually means more than a ships name...you should fear me OOGA BOOGA!

The point was that they are all millionaires, numbnuts. The ship being named after her was just a sideline.

The rest of your �rebuffs� were either to moronic to reply to, or I don�t know or care enough about American domestic policies to comment on.










[Edited on 29-4-2003 by kegs]

Originally posted by HKoT
Because we're so sick of listening to Liberal Lies. I suggest you open a book for once, and learn who it was that enabled the president to have near Dictatoral powers, who it was that restricted federalism, who it was that bloated the government to the size it is today, and who it is who keeps over taxing the poor.

Yep...all Democrats.

Bush is still a little bit*h for dodging the draft.

www.awolbush.com...

So HKot & astrocreep are left overs from ATS 1.0!?!

The Junior Fascist Boys Club is recruiting new mwmbers again, huh?

Boy, insult all you want, just do it with some eloquence & wit, ok? Also, please research your rebuttals instead of just flying off at the lip.

Geez!

Originally posted by Lysergic
Seems Ohio took the prized number 1 spot in 2001, but hey 2nd place ain't too bad!!! 2 out of 50!

The Montreal-based agency, the environmental watchdog under the North American free-trade agreement, released its fifth annual assessment of the continent's industrial pollution yesterday. Called Taking Stock, it found that Ohio, Texas, Michigan, Indiana and Ontario, in that order, were the five worst-polluted jurisdictions on the continent.

www.cleanair.web.net...
www.texascenter.org...


[Edited on 29-4-2003 by Lysergic]

[Edited on 29-4-2003 by Lysergic]

hard to believe Ohio is the most polluted, most of their garbage ends up down here in KY's tourist locations. But it keeps us in jobs I guess picking up after them.

"And I'm sorry your state sucks, but you can't blame anyone but your legislature."

Good one, but you only proved my point. Pull that stick out of your butt and open your eyes sometime, it might help you not come off as such a jackass.

-Lysergic

Originally posted by Kai-Raega

I dare someone to tell me how a 350 Billion dollar tax cut is going to create jobs. Smells like reaganomics.

Life was better under Clinton because of one simple fact the Republicans will never admit:

He fought for the working man.

Can you tell me how raising taxes creates jobs in a capitalistic economy? Can you really make the case that the government needs total control over every aspect of life? I guess you're of the opinion that the only reason socialism has never worked is that the right people haven't tried it huh? Little hint, thats the idea everyone who has ever tried it and saw if fail has had. We are not talking about taking money from a poor defensless government , we are talking about leaving some of the profits in the business economy to put some capital back into a tired economy. I once used the analogy of a mule pulling a plow. Sooner or later, if you want it to keep producing a way to raise crops, your going to have to invest some of the corn it made it possible to raise into feeding it otherwise you'll have a dead tired mule that is no good for anything. You have the image of business owners as fat cats in thousand dollar suits lighting cigars with 50s but just walk to the closest business and ask to see the owner. Ten to one, he's working harder than anyone. Those big fat cats do exist and they sit in Washinton DC wanting bigger spending for social programs and they don't care how much they damage the mules that produce it. Next to the 128 trillion dollar budget that the gov. has for the next ten years, how is a 750 billion dollar tax decrease over the same period going to amount to a drop in the bucket? It isn't...but its power leaving Washington going back to the people..and that what hurts the socialists...er um..I mean liberals. Plus after the 40 billion dollar tax cut Bush pushed through last year, the democrats added 60 billion to their already fat budget and then blame the tax cut for the entire defecit. Ten years of over-taxation is whats to blame for the defecit. the fact that we Americans are expected to balance our spending by what we earn and pay our bills..and the politicians in Washington aren't? How can you defend the kind of waste that think it deserves a third of what some poor schmuck has put every last breath into making? Look at all the tax increases and gov. programs to aid the poor and yet after all that the poor grow in numbers. That tells me our beloved saviors on capital hill aren't doing squat for the poor. In fact, numbers last year prove that more money from independant charities got to the poor than aid from our well-meaning government. Wake up buddy. Realize who's the fat cats and who's really been getting screwed. And, during the Clinton Era of Prosperity, I lost almost everything...why, I stayed working and lived modestly...so why, because the FAKE money that was supposedly driving the economy didn't make it to me. I made real money and he taxed the hell out of that. remember 1993, 14% tax increase? I sure the hell do. The last thing I got from the gov was a n educational grant in 1987 until last year when the 600.00 refund came. The only two times money has flowed the other way and niether was under Clinton.

Oh and the big recession came about not only due to 9-11 but also because when the laws began to be enforced again, all the cooked books that had accumulated since 1995 when the laws were laxed brought it down. Even as early as 1998 Greenspan was saying that it didn't all add up and a major adjustment had to come and the longer it was allowed to go the harder it would hit..well it hit. When Robert Rupriechs buds at City Corp and Enron got found out. Why hasn't leiberman released any new info on how Bush had a hand in that?..because the deal was made in 1998 and compounded every year making it that much worse.

And as for the working man comment..wher did the Clinton's hang out..the Hamptons..Martha's Vinyard..

How about Bush? A ranch that he owns in a one-horse town in texas. Don't give me the old working man ideology or do you think Algore's Mom sung the Union label song to him in his crib ( when he was 17)? I am the working man, buddy. I'll tell ya who is for the working man when I look at my pay stub every month...and in my next post, I'm going to give you some info on who the rich truly support with hard numbers.

Democrats Get More Money From "Rich"

December 18, 2002

Another myth about "the rich" has been shattered � namely the conventional wisdom that they are all Republicans � thanks to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. A December 18, 2002 Washington Times editorial reports that donors giving "small and medium amounts" in 2002 overwhelmingly supported the GOP, while "rich or deep-pocketed givers" hugely backed the Democrats!



Those giving $200 to $999: GOP $68 million; Democrats $44 million. Those giving $1,000 to $9,999: GOP $317 million; Democrats $307 million. The "fabulously wealthy" donors of $10,000+ gave $111 million to the GOP � a whopping $29 million less than the $140 million they lavished on the Democrats! Among those who gave $100,000+, the Democrats raised $72 million � more than double the $34 million the GOP took. . The fact is that in the 2002 election cycle, those who gave a million dollars or more poured $36 million into the Democrat coffers, and a paltry $3 million into the pockets of the GOP. Again: millionaire donations went Democrat by a 12:1 margin! The two parties took in about the same amount overall � GOP: $384 million; Democrats: $350 million. Just look at the Hollywood left, and you see where the big money goes. In addition, the GOP attracted 40% more individual donors! (George W. Bush set an all-time fund-raising record by collecting the most money from one-thousand-dollar donors in the history of presidential politics.) Far more people giving small amounts exist as contributors to the Republican Party - while Democrats skunked the GOP among the super-rich. That's no surprise, since nine of the twelve richest members of the United States Senate are Democrats. This myth that the Republicans are the party of the rich is breathing its last gasps This is not a political commercial you have to disprove. These are actual results of campaign contributions in just the 2002 cycle, which is why this class-envy garbage isn't getting the traction it used to.

I have no idia where to even begin with your long list of conspiracies!!! The fact that this is a conspiracy site, I picture you as a Mel Gibson-esque type figure from the movie "Conspiracy Theory".

I find it amusing that Clinton is gonna be blamed for everything bad from now til the end of time. I guess the Reich Wing needs a villian to highlight their hero. Clinton has brains & compassion, something Junior is seriously lacking.

Bout time, RIGHT ON!!!

pearlyabraham.tripod.com...

Originally posted by astrocreep

How about Bush? A ranch that he owns in a one-horse town in texas. Don't give me the old working man ideology or do you think Algore's Mom sung the Union label song to him in his crib ( when he was 17)? I am the working man, buddy. I'll tell ya who is for the working man when I look at my pay stub every month...and in my next post, I'm going to give you some info on who the rich truly support with hard numbers.

If you weren't making money during the Clinton years, blame yourself for lack of initiative, not Clinton. I am a business owner & have been since 1993. My revenue grew 1000% from 1993 to 2000. Am I anyone's definition of a 'Fat Cat'? Maybe. But, I pay mortgages, I never spent more than $500 on a suit, I pay taxes and I don't have my father's buddies setting me up in CEO slots at corporations. Not that UAW workers have that kinda of pull, but they're good men none the less. Yeah, I do work harder: I have 10 other 'work' windows open to this one 'fun' window & my 7:30 starts usually end on the other side of a 12 hour work day.
History, my friend, history. The Reagan/Bush era left the country in financial shambles. It was necessary to work our way out of the hole; to use your analogy, Clinton was the farmer who had to set up a side job selling corn at a roadside stand in order to buy seed and make bigger profit overall. The massive deficit accumulated under the previous 12 years eroded our solvency in world markets, it weakened the dollar and it curtailed foreign investment in US enterprises. Tax cuts without spending reductions simply remove working capital that is slated for vital program. You and I don't quit our jobs & then go on shopping sprees, do we? That's what Bush's plan does now. To pay for these cuts, it's reduced the amount of Federal Spending to the States, causing bankruptcies of municipalities & cites like has never been witnessed in the modern era.
It's a matter of public record, but look at what the Dems were adding in the way of extra 'fat' - increased education spending, increased aid to the states to fund first responders for domestic defense, increased aid to the long term unemployed suffering under the Bush recession. More of that 'fat' was the paying out of what Bush promised to begin with - that rhetoric now to gain approval/non-delivery of promises that is the standard of his presidency.
"One horse town Texas Ranch" - huh? You do know that he is New England-old-money-blue blood whose grandfathers made their fortunes off of being the henchmen for the Rockefellers & Duponts, don't you?
The working man - why is the White House backing legislation that would change the way overtime is calculated? You know, what the working man relies on to make ends meet? The legislation will calculate over a two week period instead of per day & reduce or eradicate what most people count on.
The poor, you want to really talk about this one? The Bush recession and fiscal mismanagement has driven more families under the poverty line than since the Depression. The largest segment of families not being able to afford medical insurance? Those with a household income over $60K.
The Clinton /Rubin team compared to Bush( insider trading/co. Pitt)/Pitt ( Ivan Boesky's personal lawyer & mouthpiece to the Andersen's & big 5) - I'll debate the comparison of their track records any day.
As for 'cooked books' - read the non-Rupert Murdoch papers, will you please? Under your Boy Bush, the number of corporations filing a restatement of earnings is up 22% over last year, breaking the all time record for a second year in the row!!!! For those who don't know what a company restating their earnings mean: If a company says they are going to make 'X', it give the impression of prosperity/profit/and a good business plan, all factors that give that company buying power/credit rating/added investors/increased working capital. Well now, the time to 'proof' it out comes around and that company goes back & says "well, we actually made 'Y' ". But, they of course don't give back any gain garnered when pretending to be an 'X' strength company. I wonder why that record number of companies all think they can get away with it!?!
And yes, the Clinton SEC honcho's piece of legislation to stop just such a thing was smacked down by a GOP lead Congress.

Links : Bush on Workers & Taxes
www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.wage-slave.org...

Originally posted by romantico
I have no idia where to even begin with your long list of conspiracies!!! The fact that this is a conspiracy site, I picture you as a Mel Gibson-esque type figure from the movie "Conspiracy Theory".

I find it amusing that Clinton is gonna be blamed for everything bad from now til the end of time. I guess the Reich Wing needs a villian to highlight their hero. Clinton has brains & compassion, something Junior is seriously lacking.

Bout time, RIGHT ON!!!

pearlyabraham.tripod.com...

No conspiracy talk just elementary economics. YOu seriously want to pay more taxes? Thats what it comes down to. We all have to manage our budget but when the gov overspends, it can just take more. Its not conspiracy..its a simple choice. You want more gov involvement or less. You want a socialist gov. or a minimum one laid out by the Constitution? These aren't near conspiracies at all just bottom line ideas behind two different views. I never anywhere claimed any sort of conspiracy. My post was simply economics. Deal with the ideas will you romantico. One question, Do you want to pay more to a government eaten up with waste and try to manage with whats left.


Bout Time, if you had read my post you would have seen that I stated I did make money...I just made hard money and not imaginary money like the dot com industry which even you can't deny burst just like it was predicted by Bill Clinton's own guy, Alan Greenspan. My money was just subject to taxes at the tune of 27%. The fact that I didn't find any loop-holes like the elite do is what held me back. Like I said, I'm doing okay now but attribute more of that to my own motivation but I still think the guys in Washinton are funded to the hilt!!! Thats my aregument and my only one!!! Do you think the government needs to grow any bigger and take control of more avenues that were once private industry...and the kicker is, I work for my state government and these might mean the end of my job but I can always land on my feet. The point is, drive businesses out of business and where do the jobs come from then? Where does anything come from? You can't force someone into business if its not profitable just to drive a lush gov slush fund!!! Am I the only one who sees this. The government are the rich!! They have taxed and taxed and no one is asking them to shrink just to not grow as fast as they want. In times like this a responsible government tightens it's belt first!!! We've fed it like crazy for years..better it have to cut ice for Ted's drinks than my family have to run into dept for things easily affordable if we weren't taxed so much. You will never convince me we need gov. running every aspect of life. This is NO CONSPIRACY THEORY!!! Look up conspiracy will you!!

However, Bout Time, I have to admit you do make good arguments and I know you wouldn't think so but I voted for Clinton twice (not in the same election) and I was torn on this last one. My decision came from the core belief of bringing people out of business and state gov..(like Gov Clinton) and not putting in career politicains..ie 20 years in DC. That was a belief by our founding fathers as evident that most of our first presidents went back into private business after holding office.

Plus, my area of expertise is geotechnology and thus I have uncovered a number of facts that really turn me off to the environmental movement..(not the environment itself because I love the outdoors) but to the political "hijackers" who've really lost all direction in this going backward beleif. I think poverty is the environments worst enemy because we always have to be able to clean the water we dirty but thats another discussion. But, I'm not a fascists whatsoever..but I have come to realize that tax cuts cost nothing..tax increases cost. I'm all for education and helping everyone afford health care but I don't believe a gov committee overseeing it will do anything except leach most of the funds. My ideas are to cut out the middlemen and then we don't need to tax more because the money will go where its needed. I think 128 trillion should do these guys for 10 years or so.

lol Bush dodged the Draft? How about CLINTON and his running away to england.

Liberals are such idiots...hypocrits, all rolled into one.