Third Party & Independents: Archives

Is Perchlorate a chemical in Diesel fuel? I was just wondering because you mention disel fuel and the article mentions perchlorate. I checked the EPA because the Washington Post link did not work for me and found out information that confirms your statements. I think the reason Bush is stingy with “donated” money is because the CEO’s/coporations are intelligent and will hold him accountable as opposed to tax payers who won’t.

I thought it was conservative philosophy to spend the taxpayers’ money wisely?

That used to be conservative policy. Lately, it’s hard to tell exactly what they’re conserving, but it sure isn’t my bank account.

Perchlorate is in Rocket Fuel.

David, nice piece.

I’ve been waiting to see if the Dubya apologists would reply, but it seems that none of them have anything to say…

From your link on tax reform:
But the president may have tipped his hand during that two-day conference when he devoted his time to Social Security changes”

Yes, lets make retirement pensions hang entirely upon the whims of the stock market. Let’s get people put their money in, but not necessarily get anything it out of it when they’re sick and old.
This will only benefit the wealthiest American’s who will take that money, but feel no responsibility to the people.

“and limits on civil lawsuits.”

Yes, let’s ignore the constitution and obstruct an individuals right to due process. Let’s take the power out of the hands of a jury when they want to award people large pay outs of money after corporations have harmed them - even those who will never be able to work again.
This will only benefit the wealthiest American’s who own corporations or are stockholders in those corporations. They will not be forced to take much, if any financial responsibility for their mistakes - be they intentional or unintentional.

“His one mention of tax simplification came when he reiterated his support for the permanent repeal of the estate tax, a move Bush said would eliminate 300 pages of the Internal Revenue Code.”

Of course, any sort of estate tax must go - its such a nuisance to the wealthiest Americans.

“I think the president signaled that he is going ‘incremental’ on tax reform, not radical,” a policy aide who recently left the White House said after Bush’s speech.”

But we know one day he’ll be creeping up on the flat tax idea - just as soon as he’s finished destroying the New Deal. And when that day comes, again it will be to benefit the wealthiest American’s.

You wrote:
“He has reformed environmental laws”

Yes, to the point where calling them that is actually an oxymoron. But environmental regulations are such a nuisance to the wealthiest American’s who own corporations - they just had to go.

“He has reformed our foreign policy positions and we all know where that has taken us.”

But Halliburton and Bechtel made a nice chunk of change in Iraq didn’t they? And being able to control all the oil that country floats on was just too good a deal to pass up.
And anyway, who cares about a bunch of poor kids who go into the army because they haven’t any other way to get ahead in life?

“He called for federal reform to our educational system”

In order to squeeze it and create enough problems so that the whole idea of secular public schools will one day be utterly discredited. They’re going to wait until they to reach the point where they’ll be able to unequivocally declare that kids would do much better if we replaced public school with a privatized system. Again, to put money into the hands of wealthy people, with the side benefit of getting many of the kids into learning institutions where Christianity can be stressed.

“Can America and her future survive any more of President Bush’s reforms?”

Well, it seems to me that the wealthiest American’s are going to make out just fine, while the rest of us will increasingly suffer.
Future? Since the Republican’s are completely in charge now, I guess we’d all better start living like there is no tomorrow.

As you indirectly point out, Adrienne, the underlying philosophy of national management for GW Bush is predicated on the trickle down economics model. Every domestic policy issue Bush has touched has been shaped by this concept that if the wealthier get a break, everyone else will benefit.

Real Conservatives are finding it increasingly difficult to follow Bush’s lead. Conservative comes from the word conserve which means preserve and protect. Preserving and protecting as implemented by Bush however, is directed toward his supporters, rather than the nation as a whole. The only conservative national doctrines of the Bush administration are found in defense, right to life, and the trickle down fiscal policies. On every other issue I can think of, there is no conservation for the American people at large, just payback for his loyal supporters.

It is not all Bush’s fault, these political pressures are experienced and catered to by all presidents. But, many previous presidents, if given an exclusive choice between American interests and political supporters, would choose to favor America. Bush inevitably puts political buddies first and tells his speech writers to justify in national rhetoric as in America’s interest. That is the awesome threat of the trickle down economic theory. The barons can continue to rob from the public trough all the while, justifying their ever increasing amassing of wealth as in the nation’s best interests.

This is why Bush could not be unseated easily. This appraisal of the Bush administration is complex, sophisticated, and subtle, due to his advisors being so adept at couching their behavior in nationally palatable rhetoric which only skeptics, critics, and opponents are willing to discern. It says something that Bush employs the very same tactics as a con man who uses innocent victim’s trust, gullibility and desire to believe against them. Overall, I am now convinced the Bush administration is one huge con job, and history by both conservatives and liberals will come to that same conclusion evenutally, after the price of his presidency is fully realized and paid by the American people, culture and nation.

There is one other thing the neocons conserve - homophobic, hypocritical “family values.” Not that those values themselves actually conserve or protect anything in particular, but the values are being concerved admirably, not only against destruction, but against rational debate in any public forum.

David,
The term “trickle down” assumes that there is at least a small pond of money to “trickle down” from. If those that have it, allow it to “trickle down” of course.
This, I think is government arogance in it’s highest form.

David:
“the underlying philosophy of national management for GW Bush is predicated on the trickle down economics model. Every domestic policy issue Bush has touched has been shaped by this concept that if the wealthier get a break, everyone else will benefit.”

Right. And as we all know, that trickle-down shit has never flushed and never, ever will, except for the wealthy.
This is why it makes me SICK when I hear the rightwingers lionizing Reagan. Only the rich can love him, because supply side economics was only ever intended to work for THEM. For the rest of us, it was the beginning of the end.
And it isn’t just bad for the majority of the American people, it has been bad for the economy in general. Its what created our large trade deficit, and also why such a large number of tax loopholes were written into the tax code to cater to special corporate interests. Thats how we ended up with things like Enron - only possible because of laws that were passed during the Reagan years - to give corporations more legal legroom, and far less oversight.

It is THE BIGGEST LIE ever told to the American people. 

“Overall, I am now convinced the Bush administration is one huge con job, and history by both conservatives and liberals will come to that same conclusion evenutally, after the price of his presidency is fully realized and paid by the American people, culture and nation.”

I couldn’t agree with you more.

Houston has suddenly, it seems, awakened to the fact that our air quality sucks in particular near the refineries. They’ve now linked cancer rates to it.

I doubt much will come of it though since the economic base is largely refinery driven. Locals refer to the City of Pasadena on the east side of Houston (home to many refineries)as ” Stinkadena” due to the noxius fumes there.

The Chronicle had this story today:

Toxic air report spurs concern

Greg, and in typical fashion, the refineries will pool their money and buy advertising reassuring the good people that they have and are cleaning the air in Houston.

The Commercial will hide the fact that they polluted it in the first place and will forever continue to do so as long as it is affordable and profitable to do so. And the good residents will see the commercial, line up on right and left sides, confuse the issue and the facts, and in the wake of lack of concenusus, little if anything of significance will get done.

It is American history forever rewritten again and again due to the government siding with commerce over citizens, and rich citizens over poor, for the most part.

Occasionally, it makes political sense to side on commerce and the people’s side equally, but, those kinds of answers and solutions are rare and hard to come by due to all of the obfuscation leading up to a decision.