Democrats & Liberals: Archives

Andre,

Is your article about the energy bill, or is this just a Bush-bash in general?

Its hard to define.

I agree with Beagle. The problems you state have been the part of several administrations, including democratic ones. Did the last democratic president do anything to address these issues?

As for ‘no child left behind’, this program has been credited with recent nine-year old grades improving faster than any time over the past 30 years. How does this equate with your assertion that children are being ‘left behind’? Do you provide any details about how your statement and the recent scores differ? (source)

To me your post just seems like another in the long line of anti-bush, anti-republican rhetoric that is doing nothing about address real problems with this administration in specific (and there are a number) and the governmental processes in general. In the end this type of rant seems to do more harm than good, IMO.

Rhinehold, Beagle,

My take away from Andre’s post is that once again a tax cut for a select few will further encumber the gov’t and subtracts from any pretense of consideration for the general populace and other promises. These complaints are specific to this administration and, IMO, are completely valid.

Beagle had a valid comment to some extent. The article certainly went beyond a simple statement re: big oil. So, let’s talk some more Bush here. What has Bush done? Has Bush left us a budget surplus? Has Bush left us with a safer world? Has Bush left us with a more equitable tax system? Or, has Bush left us with the largest deficit ever, an interminable war and growing threat of international terrorism, and the greastest disparity in wealth seen for at least 80 years? Once again, Bush has chosen to reward his faithful. That is the definition of corruption.

BTW; I didn’t see Andre use the word “Republican”.

Beagle and Rhinehold,

The point is, why is this administration allowed to shape their ENTIRE government strategy around the oil industry.

Environmental policy: Make sure oil industry profits,screw plants and animals.

War in Iraq: Secure oil for oil industry.

Health Care: Nonexistent,unless oil industry thinks it would be a good idea.

Education: Cut funding to cover war in Iraq costs.

Energy policy: Make sure the starving oil execs get potentially 32 billion dollars in tax relief.

Homeland Security: Nonexistent

Foreign relations:Buddy up to those that have oil,piss on the rest.

I know that it’s inevitable that a Texas oil-man would cater to the oil industry but not at the expense of EVERYTHING else.

OK - maybe this is complete hyper-conspiracy-theory, but someone pointed out that the major military bases within Afgan. as are located along the main oil pipeline.

True or not?

The administration has caused a huge shift from the ideals of taking care of the people of this country, to taking care of big business in this country. It’s going back to the way it was around the beginning of the 20th century and prior. Perhaps it won’t be as bad because we won’t ever let it get that bad again, but this new energy bill will take us back in several ways.
One of the major rollbacks in protection for US consumers is the new ability for utility companies to merge and control other markets. This will result in something close to the monopolies of old. Prices will rise and the rich will get richer. Federal control over these companies is being eroded day by day, with every passing bill.
Now the push is on (if you’ve seen Fox News lately) to turn the public against unions, altogether. Soon, unions will be the only protection that the common people will have against the growing, soon-to-be-giant corporations, and the republicans know it. So they will set out to eradicate them. Even make them illegal, or at least water down their effectiveness so as to make them worthless.
You know, I’m usually not much for conspiracy theories, but what I’m seeing now has me very worried.

Cole,

My vision has 1984 meets Rollerball.

To Beagle - Bush bash in general I’m all for. Rhinehold, if you think the problems of this administration are the same as past administrations - ignorance is bliss… you stated however, “real problems” in this administration in specific (and admitting there are a number) …there’s hope for your reality check. I agree with Dave & Andre. Tony - the answer is TRUE. Cole, you’re on the right track. Although Moore’s film better documented Bush & what this administration is all about the best. At this point and the “state of our country” , well, it just doesn’t even matter anymore if I can forgive Bush anymore, or even anyone else; MAY GOD FORGIVE HIM…let’s just leave it at that. He’ll go down in history for a WAR BASED ON LIES and the worst president ever…he has yet to live up to one promise he made for his administration. Energy plan? I listen to the news every night and young boys are dying every day while Bush pats his wallet and meets with the Saudi’s. When I hear certain names on the news anymore I just want to vomit…Annie

Troy:

OK - maybe this is complete hyper-conspiracy-theory, but someone pointed out that the major military bases within Afgan. as are located along the main oil pipeline.

True or not?

Not. Thanks to Farenheit 9/11 for drudging up this old debunked argument.

Andre:

The point is, why is this administration allowed to shape their ENTIRE government strategy around the oil industry.

They aren’t.

Environmental policy: Make sure oil industry profits,screw plants and animals.

Actually, it’s ‘ensure that our economy continues to function while trying to spur private research into alternative fuels that will pay for themselves. While I think we should be doing more, I don’t see any legitimate argument that their policy has any real difference than the Clinton/Gore environment policy, the same group that ALSO recommended against signing Kyoto…

War in Iraq: Secure oil for oil industry.

Except that makes no sense. Wouldn’t it have been cheaper and easier to just have gone along with the rest of the sniveling/corrupt UN politicians that were using the Iraq sanctions to line their own pockets and pay for the oil instead? If that was their plan it was a bog stupid one.

Health Care: Nonexistent,unless oil industry thinks it would be a good idea.

Huh?

Education: Cut funding to cover war in Iraq costs.

And spur the largest increase in reading scores for nine-year olds for the past 30 years. Horrible plans!

The rest is just the same, you make wildly inane emotional rhetoric filled statements that have no resemblance to reality and then use them as proof points to build your case on. Maybe if you could back any of them up with facts…?

Rhinehold, I agree that some of this stuff is over the top, but I couldn’t let this go:

War in Iraq: Secure oil for oil industry.

Except that makes no sense. Wouldn’t it have been cheaper and easier to just have…

It’s a fact that the Bush administration and the Pentagon thought we’d have a secure, democratic, friendly Iraq by the end of 2003, with Iraq paying for its reconstruction soon after. Iraq was supposed to be cheap and easy.

Obviously, oil wasn’t the only reason to invade Iraq, but having a major base in the area (after pulling out of Saudi Arabia) was a big bonus. We’d be able to respond quickly to threats against the oil pipelines (and to Israel).

Anyhow, the energy bill (aside from new regulations on the power grid) is a waste of taxpayer money. It will increase our reliance on foreign oil by 85%.

President Bush once said, “our dependence on foreign energy is like a foreign tax on the American Dream.” He just raised taxes 85%.

Rhinehold,

You honestly believe that Bush is not attempting to put a government in place, in Iraq, that feels indebted to him and would open Iraq’s oil industry wells to feed our growing dependency?

You really believe the “Iraqi Freedon”, “Take the fight to them”, bullshit that the Bush administration is handing us?

We are in Iraq for oil.

You really believe the “Iraqi Freedon”, “Take the fight to them”, bullshit that the Bush administration is handing us?

This statement just belittles a very large portion (over half I believe) of the opinions regarding the war in Iraq. I was for military action against them in 1998, even before, especially once Saddam started putting bounties on American and UK soldier’s heads. As I’ve detailed before, Iraq was a serious threat against the US and any kind of peace or stability in the region, despite what the history rewriters attempt to push.

Of course, these same people say we were in Iraq the first time because of oil, etc…

And no AP, there was NO need to go to war to secure the oil, Saddam would have had no trouble selling it to whoever wanted to buy it, he liked money and power more than anything else.

Ok, I’ll play along.

The DNC says Is Bush’s fault childern are fat.

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=51219

This fits right in with big oil controling the Whitehouse.

Everyone knows that fat kids don’t walk or ride bikes. They will ride a bus or in a car, that uses more oil.
You guys may be right, its all starting to fit together now.

AP:
“the energy bill (aside from new regulations on the power grid) is a waste of taxpayer money. It will increase our reliance on foreign oil by 85%.”

It is a waste of our money, and it was designed to keep us dependent on dirty energy. Here are a few facts about the bill:
Over the next ten years they’ve given $8.5 billion in tax breaks to oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear power, and electric utilities. Nuclear alone is going to get $1.5 billion in direct subsidies, $2 billion in something called “risk insurance”, and loan guarantees for new reactor construction.
At the last minute DeLay managed to slip a $1 billion dollar provision into the bill to enrich an oil and gas consortium in his district. And the scariest last minute addition to the bill has got to be the one that relaxes the rules on the exportation of bomb-grade uranium, simply to benefit a single medical isotope manufacturer based in Canada!
These Republican’s sure know how to keep us “safe” don’t they?

And no AP, there was NO need to go to war to secure the oil, Saddam would have…

Rhinehold, look at the big picture. I’m not talking about Iraqi oil, I’m talking about “the Middle East and the surrounding energy-producing region.” After Saudi Arabia kicked us out, we had no rapid response capability in the region. Having military bases in the Middle East is a huge goal for the Bush administration.

Here’s the 2000 white paper by Bush administration policy makers that lays it all out,

Though the immediate mission of those forces is to enforce the no-fly zones over northern and southern Iraq, they represent the long-term commitment of the United States and its major allies to a region of vital importance. Indeed, the United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security.

While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need of a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Beagle,

The United States invaded Iraq for the purpose of establishing a government that will supply oil to the United States freely and cheaply.
Bush has no intentions of assisting the U.S. in its move to rely less on the very fossil fuels that has made the Bush’s rich.
One of the fastest growing investment opportunities in the near future is alternative fuels. He has a limited time frame with which to work(Line their own pockets).
The oil industry is his only real constituant. Not the people of this country.

Beagle your “The DNC says Is Bush’s fault childern are fat.” well, just the way it’s written is just another example - of what an illiterate ass that you are. For one, you can’t even spell “children”. But you and Bush share this intelligence, even in his speeches he makes up words that don’t even exist in the dictionary, for example - “renewables”. You both have a lot to learn. “We the people are not as stupid as you both think. And for the ignorant “who just didn’t know” and even voted for Bush - well they are listening and learning.

Bush’s energy speech (May 17, 2001) quote, “If we fail to act, our country will become more reliant on foreign crude oil, putting our national energy security into the hands of foreign nations, some of whom who do not share our interests
One…Two…Three…(what are we fighting for?) First, it reduces demand by promoting innovation and technology to make us the world leader in efficiency and conservation.
Second, it expands and diversifies America’s supply of all sources of energy — oil and gas, clean coal, solar, wind, bio-mass, hydropower and other renewables, as well as safe and clean nuclear power.
Third and finally, the report outlines the ways to bring producers and consumers together by modernizing the networks of pipes and wires that link the power plant to the outlet on the wall.
Our goal is to use less additional energy to fuel more economic growth, and I know we can do so. (written in 2001)
Over-dependence on any one source of energy, especially a foreign source, leaves us vulnerable to price shocks, supply interruptions and, in the worst case, blackmail.
What difference does 600,000 barrels a day make? Well, that happens to be exactly the amount we import from Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

(Bush’s real goal) One…Two…Three…(what are we fighting for?) modernizing the network that delivers the supply to the point of demand.(USA)

Q & A to Bush - But they’re wasting their time if they think that they’ll get from you an international binding agreement about mandatory curbs on greenhouse gases?
THE PRESIDENT: I have — I have no idea — look, you’re asking me to design a treaty here with you on the set of the — right here on the set of this — on this beautiful set. I mean, that’s kind of — but I’m telling you, if you’re trying to get me to say, we support Kyoto, the answer is no, we don’t. And it’s a bad deal for America. (how intelligent)
Asian and European nations have strongly criticized Bush’s decision in 2001 to abandon the Kyoto treaty, which commits 37 industrialized nations to cut gas emissions. Bush has criticized the treaty, saying it set unrealistic goals and could damage the U.S. economy. But other nations worry about scientific concerns that climate change could lead to severe floods and droughts, rising sea levels and an increase in malaria and respiratory disease.
Bush calls Iraq “the central front” in the war on terror. The suicidal hijackers who crashed the World Trade Center and Pentagon where all from Egypt and Saudi Arabia, not Afghanistan (Iran or Iraq). Rich Saudis fund and encourage the violent, fundamentalist breed of Islam from which the hijackers came. The religious schools that breed the radical mujahdeen, including many who have joined the Taliban Army, are mostly in Pakistan. Iraq and Iran do fund and support terrorists. In other words, the terrorists are spread across many nations and not all harbored in Afghanistan. Furthermore, numerous experts link the 911 hijackers to an Egyptian group, Gama’at al-Islamiyya. (Best known for the 1993 WTC bombing).
The President and Congress have breached a sacred trust with our soldiers and abused their oath to defend the Constitution by leading young Americans to kill and die in a war based on lies.
The war in Iraq has claimed more than 1,821 (as of today) Americans, wounded 13,190 and cost more than $200 billion. The war has helped to make Bin Laden larger than life. He will become a celebrated martyr of the Muslim world. We also took a country by force that had no political power, (this defies America’s sense of fairness) and the terrorists were not even from Iran or Iraq. The bombing campaigns may well usher into power the northern alliance, a group more brutal than the Taliban. Our efforts “of democracy” that are underway at forming a broad pan-Afghan political coalition of anti-Taliban parties, some veteran diplomats and intelligence officers are skeptical that such a confederation would survive after a victory over the Taliban. The result of this Northern Alliance taking power, predict a new flood of heroin across the globe. Afghanistan produces 75 percent of the world’s opium, used to make heroin.

July 11, 2005 Bush says nation must ‘stay on offense’ against terror. Again saying that Iraq is the central front in the war on terror. The terrorists were from Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

The simple fact is that the Bush administration has refused to make the needed investments to secure American cities and towns. We spend more in Iraq in a single month than we spend on first responders all year.
The “blowback” effect of the war has created more harm than good. London is just another example of what is being accomplished.

I’ll just quote Bush now when he said this, “I have opinions of my own - strong opinions - but I don’t always agree with them.” (his own admission of stupidity)
On Wednesday, the Web site of the Ansar al-Sunnah Army posted photographs from Monday’s attack on the Marine sniper team. One picture shows a bloody, battered body wearing Marine camouflage trousers. Another shows two hooded gunmen standing in front of several rifles, apparently taken from dead Marines.
“The heroes slaughtered those who were still alive … except for one, who begged the mujahedeen for his life. They captured him and he is in our hands.”
At the Pentagon, Ham said no Marines were missing and believed captured.
At least 1,821 members of the U.S. military have died since the Iraq war began in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.
Marines often criticize the protection provided by their armored amphibious vehicles, or AAVs, which are designed to be dropped from ships for coastal assaults. The vehicles have armor plating that is lighter than those used by the Army.
As I said before, “I just want to vomit!” Annie

Annie, you posted;

“Beagle your ?The DNC says Is Bush’s fault childern are fat.? well, just the way it?s written is just another example - of what an illiterate ass that you are. For one, you can?t even spell ?children?. But you and Bush share this intelligence,”

You are correct that I misspelled a word, and I do have poor writing style and format.
I do that quite often, even if I cut+paste from a program with spellcheck.

If you were dislexic you might understand that even correct spelling often looks wrong.

Perhaps you could put you next post in russian or chineese ?

I’ve been posting here for several yrs., and thats the first time someone has called me an
illiterate ass, lacking intelligence.

Thank you for pointing that out, I’ll try harder.

Sorry Beagle just didn’t see any intelligence in that post. And you’re welcome. Annie