• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Bush's Resume

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Get a clue - did you even read the link YOU posted? Do you understand how Houston got it's "crown" yet?
And again you fail to see that I questioned BOTH of their direct responsibilities in the matter. Yes, it is a serious issue and the Govenor should do what is within his power to curtail pollution - but I'd rather have the pollution and jobs than less pollution and no jobs;) You see - Pollution(waste) goes hand in hand with Economic centers. It's just a fact of life. People and manufacturing/industry produce waste.

CkG
Of course I read the link. Houston got the "crown" for worst air-pollution because CA was actually doing something about it. Unlike Bush during his tenure in TX. I think it's YOU who needs to get a clue. Who gives a rat's ass about what CA is doing or not doing. The problem, as it was being discussed, was a TX problem. Nobody except you, demanded that we compare/contrast the entire country to TX.

Additionally, I don't see this as a black or white issue. I'd rather have both a clean environment and a healthy job-base and economy. It can be done, you just don't want to make the investment. You (and Bush) would rather spend our nation's cash bombing the sh!t out of some hapless middle eastern country. Sad and pathetic is what it is. You and Bush both seem complacent enough about our environment to let it turn to sh!t while framing it as a "choice" between jobs or the environment. What a crock.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Get a clue - did you even read the link YOU posted? Do you understand how Houston got it's "crown" yet?
And again you fail to see that I questioned BOTH of their direct responsibilities in the matter. Yes, it is a serious issue and the Govenor should do what is within his power to curtail pollution - but I'd rather have the pollution and jobs than less pollution and no jobs;) You see - Pollution(waste) goes hand in hand with Economic centers. It's just a fact of life. People and manufacturing/industry produce waste.

CkG
Of course I read the link. Houston got the "crown" for worst air-pollution because CA was actually doing something about it. Unlike Bush during his tenure in TX. I think it's YOU who needs to get a clue. Who gives a rat's ass about what CA is doing or not doing. The problem, as it was being discussed, was a TX problem. Nobody except you, demanded that we compare/contrast the entire country to TX.

Additionally, I don't see this as a black or white issue. I'd rather have both a clean environment and a healthy job-base and economy. It can be done, you just don't want to make the investment. You (and Bush) would rather spend our nation's cash bombing the sh!t out of some hapless middle eastern country. Sad and pathetic is what it is. You and Bush both seem complacent enough about our environment to let it turn to sh!t while framing it as a "choice" between jobs or the environment. What a crock.
No, I do believe it was framed as a worst in "the entire country" type question. I didn't demand anything. You fail to realize why it is relevant. Yes Texas should have done something about it - but yes it does come at an economic price. "cleaning" up or reducing pollution isn't just a flip of the switch - it takes time and money.

Again you think you know what I want and don't want to do.
And bringing up Iraq isn't part of the question AT ALL. There is an economic cost to reducing pollution - YOU just fail to recognize it and acknowlegde it.

Typical liberalism on display here - if you don't rail against pollution and industry then you "don't care". What a crock.

CkG
 

Orsorum

Lifer
Dec 26, 2001
27,626
3
81
I am surprised that you would resort to such brainless blanket statements, CkG, even in the face of blatant ignorance by others.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUYNo, I do believe it was framed as a worst in "the entire country" type question. I didn't demand anything. You fail to realize why it is relevant. Yes Texas should have done something about it - but yes it does come at an economic price. "cleaning" up or reducing pollution isn't just a flip of the switch - it takes time and money.

Again you think you know what I want and don't want to do.
And bringing up Iraq isn't part of the question AT ALL. There is an economic cost to reducing pollution - YOU just fail to recognize it and acknowlegde it.

Typical liberalism on display here - if you don't rail against pollution and industry then you "don't care". What a crock.

CkG
Economic cost that could be paid for if we valued our environment more than war. I can think of a lot of beneficial ways to spend $87 billion right here in this country. That's how it's relevant, Cad. It's a simple matter of priorities.

What's typical though of the blustering republican conservo-bots, is to pick ONE thing from the linked material, attempt to "defeat it" and then pretend they've disproved the entire thing. Why don't you tackle some of the other issues brought up by the linked material? Can I assume you agree with the rest of it?
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUYNo, I do believe it was framed as a worst in "the entire country" type question. I didn't demand anything. You fail to realize why it is relevant. Yes Texas should have done something about it - but yes it does come at an economic price. "cleaning" up or reducing pollution isn't just a flip of the switch - it takes time and money.

Again you think you know what I want and don't want to do.
And bringing up Iraq isn't part of the question AT ALL. There is an economic cost to reducing pollution - YOU just fail to recognize it and acknowlegde it.

Typical liberalism on display here - if you don't rail against pollution and industry then you "don't care". What a crock.

CkG
Economic cost that could be paid for if we valued our environment more than war. I can think of a lot of beneficial ways to spend $87 billion right here in this country. That's how it's relevant, Cad. It's a simple matter of priorities.

What's typical though of the blustering republican conservo-bots, is to pick ONE thing from the linked material, attempt to "defeat it" and then pretend they've disproved the entire thing. Why don't you tackle some of the other issues brought up by the linked material? Can I assume you agree with the rest of it?
87Billion from the Gov't to help corporations pollute less? Then you'd bitch about "corporate welfare".
You can assume all you want but your assumption about me average in this thread isn't in your favor.;)

Orsorum- I understand not ALL liberals will do what I pointed out, but it seems that the ones who post here the most do fit that description. There are always exceptions and I do recognize and acknowledge such.

CkG
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
87Billion from the Gov't to help corporations pollute less? Then you'd bitch about "corporate welfare".
You can assume all you want but your assumption about me average in this thread isn't in your favor.;)

Orsorum- I understand not ALL liberals will do what I pointed out, but it seems that the ones who post here the most do fit that description. There are always exceptions and I do recognize and acknowledge such.

CkG
I don't know Cad, you got all over my case about the TX environment, even though I showed it was indeed a problem. I even showed it was the worst air-pollution in the nation in 99-00 during Bush's tenure. Other than being a YABA, why did you even feel it was necessary to attack me over it? Sorry it makes your guy look bad, but facts are facts. Why don't you try again, 'cause your dart missed again ;)
 

OS

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
15,581
1
76
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY


My Oh My, what has Greyout Davis done....
2003 list 1-20 in order:
Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, Calif.
Fresno, Calif.
Bakersfield, Calif.
Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, Calif.
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, Texas
Sacramento-Yolo, Calif.
Merced, Calif.
Atlanta, Ga.
Knoxville, Tenn.
Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, N.C.-S.C.
Washington-Baltimore, D.C.-Md.-Va.-W.V.
Dallas-Ft. Worth, Texas
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, Pa.-N.J.-Del.-Md.
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, Conn.-N.J.-N.Y.
Phoenix-Mesa, Ariz.
Baton Rouge, La.
Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, N.C.
Memphis, Tenn.-Ark.-Miss.
Birmingham, Ala.
San Diego, Calif.

Wha...Wha...What!? LA is first(and reclaimed the title in 2001;))? Houston is 5th? Nah... Guess LA and Davis just wanted it more- heck Davis has the top 4 positions now. Maybe he should run on HIS environmental record :p

Davis is a DISASTER!!!! ;)

Blah...Blah....Blah... I don't want to hear any whining about changing the subject - it is relevant. Houston had it for maybe two years(99 & 00) Now how exactly is Bush AND/OR Davis entirely responsible for such things? You people bitch about wanting jobs and companies to stay yet you bitch and moan about the pollution that they inherently bring with them. If you Bash Bush on this issue - you must also bash Davis....that is - IF you are to be consistant;)

...Oh...and just a tidbit of info... "Much of Los Angeles' ozone is formed when exhaust from cars and smokestacks released during the day mixes with other chemicals and sunshine. In Houston, much of the pollution comes from oil refineries, petrochemical plants and cargo ships." - last part

CkG
Well, looking at that another way, one could say the air in houston got alot cleaner when bush left TX. :Q

 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
87Billion from the Gov't to help corporations pollute less? Then you'd bitch about "corporate welfare".
You can assume all you want but your assumption about me average in this thread isn't in your favor.;)

Orsorum- I understand not ALL liberals will do what I pointed out, but it seems that the ones who post here the most do fit that description. There are always exceptions and I do recognize and acknowledge such.

CkG
I don't know Cad, you got all over my case about the TX environment, even though I showed it was indeed a problem. I even showed it was the worst air-pollution in the nation in 99-00 during Bush's tenure. Other than being a YABA, why did you even feel it was necessary to attack me over it? Sorry it makes your guy look bad, but facts are facts. Why don't you try again, 'cause your dart missed again ;)
I got all over your case? heh - that wasn't close to being all over your case. The Davis stuff was a Bonus since the trend here is to get all worked up and post about how much someone sucks or how big of a disaster they are. HOUSTON defaulted to the worst in 99-00 when Bush was Govenor. I fail to see how any Govenor can directly influence such things. Sure maybe he didn't do "enough" or whatever but to accuse him of causing it(which was implied) is rediculous. Now I'm not sure why you think I am attacking YOU - well I do....- but more like setting you straight on your assumptions of what I said. The assinine insinuation that this "resume" makes is that Bush caused Houston to top LA - which isn't entirely true - which your source points out.
Learn how to identify a dart - you seem to be confusing it with something else.;)
If I pointed out the other inaccuracies and skewing of truth in this "resume" you'd just dismiss it as YABA
. I don't care - you can believe what you want. If you can find a candidate that will come close to beating Bush in '04 - you let me know, because so far - the ones that are running don't stand a chance.:)

CkG
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY


My Oh My, what has Greyout Davis done....
2003 list 1-20 in order:
Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, Calif.
Fresno, Calif.
Bakersfield, Calif.
Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, Calif.
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, Texas
Sacramento-Yolo, Calif.
Merced, Calif.
Atlanta, Ga.
Knoxville, Tenn.
Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, N.C.-S.C.
Washington-Baltimore, D.C.-Md.-Va.-W.V.
Dallas-Ft. Worth, Texas
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, Pa.-N.J.-Del.-Md.
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, Conn.-N.J.-N.Y.
Phoenix-Mesa, Ariz.
Baton Rouge, La.
Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, N.C.
Memphis, Tenn.-Ark.-Miss.
Birmingham, Ala.
San Diego, Calif.

Wha...Wha...What!? LA is first(and reclaimed the title in 2001;))? Houston is 5th? Nah... Guess LA and Davis just wanted it more- heck Davis has the top 4 positions now. Maybe he should run on HIS environmental record :p

Davis is a DISASTER!!!! ;)

Blah...Blah....Blah... I don't want to hear any whining about changing the subject - it is relevant. Houston had it for maybe two years(99 & 00) Now how exactly is Bush AND/OR Davis entirely responsible for such things? You people bitch about wanting jobs and companies to stay yet you bitch and moan about the pollution that they inherently bring with them. If you Bash Bush on this issue - you must also bash Davis....that is - IF you are to be consistant;)

...Oh...and just a tidbit of info... "Much of Los Angeles' ozone is formed when exhaust from cars and smokestacks released during the day mixes with other chemicals and sunshine. In Houston, much of the pollution comes from oil refineries, petrochemical plants and cargo ships." - last part

CkG
Well, looking at that another way, one could say the air in houston got alot cleaner when bush left TX. :Q
Or California got a lot worse under Davis;) That's why taking the absolute ranking doesn't tell the whole story.

CkG
 

Pers

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,603
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY


My Oh My, what has Greyout Davis done....
2003 list 1-20 in order:
Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, Calif.
Fresno, Calif.
Bakersfield, Calif.
Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, Calif.
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, Texas
Sacramento-Yolo, Calif.
Merced, Calif.
Atlanta, Ga.
Knoxville, Tenn.
Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, N.C.-S.C.
Washington-Baltimore, D.C.-Md.-Va.-W.V.
Dallas-Ft. Worth, Texas
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, Pa.-N.J.-Del.-Md.
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, Conn.-N.J.-N.Y.
Phoenix-Mesa, Ariz.
Baton Rouge, La.
Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, N.C.
Memphis, Tenn.-Ark.-Miss.
Birmingham, Ala.
San Diego, Calif.

Wha...Wha...What!? LA is first(and reclaimed the title in 2001;))? Houston is 5th? Nah... Guess LA and Davis just wanted it more- heck Davis has the top 4 positions now. Maybe he should run on HIS environmental record :p

Davis is a DISASTER!!!! ;)

Blah...Blah....Blah... I don't want to hear any whining about changing the subject - it is relevant. Houston had it for maybe two years(99 & 00) Now how exactly is Bush AND/OR Davis entirely responsible for such things? You people bitch about wanting jobs and companies to stay yet you bitch and moan about the pollution that they inherently bring with them. If you Bash Bush on this issue - you must also bash Davis....that is - IF you are to be consistant;)

...Oh...and just a tidbit of info... "Much of Los Angeles' ozone is formed when exhaust from cars and smokestacks released during the day mixes with other chemicals and sunshine. In Houston, much of the pollution comes from oil refineries, petrochemical plants and cargo ships." - last part

CkG
Well, looking at that another way, one could say the air in houston got alot cleaner when bush left TX. :Q
Or California got a lot worse under Davis;) That's why taking the absolute ranking doesn't tell the whole story.

CkG
after carefully reading all of your posts

i have concluded that you are located somewhere deep within bush's ass.

please crawl out and see the light.

thanks
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Buahahaha - Now what was I saying before about tripping....;)

Sorry Bowfinger - you should have been quicker- you know how much BOBDN hates Bush(and me). Keep trying though, remember...it's whatever makes you "FEEL" better;)

CkG
While Cad acknowledges BOBDN and I raise the same point, he conveniently neglected to address that point. Why is that?

Bush is bashed by his own record. Blaming the messenger doesn't change the facts.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Pers
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY


My Oh My, what has Greyout Davis done....
2003 list 1-20 in order:
Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, Calif.
Fresno, Calif.
Bakersfield, Calif.
Visalia-Tulare-Porterville, Calif.
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, Texas
Sacramento-Yolo, Calif.
Merced, Calif.
Atlanta, Ga.
Knoxville, Tenn.
Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, N.C.-S.C.
Washington-Baltimore, D.C.-Md.-Va.-W.V.
Dallas-Ft. Worth, Texas
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, Pa.-N.J.-Del.-Md.
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, Conn.-N.J.-N.Y.
Phoenix-Mesa, Ariz.
Baton Rouge, La.
Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, N.C.
Memphis, Tenn.-Ark.-Miss.
Birmingham, Ala.
San Diego, Calif.

Wha...Wha...What!? LA is first(and reclaimed the title in 2001;))? Houston is 5th? Nah... Guess LA and Davis just wanted it more- heck Davis has the top 4 positions now. Maybe he should run on HIS environmental record :p

Davis is a DISASTER!!!! ;)

Blah...Blah....Blah... I don't want to hear any whining about changing the subject - it is relevant. Houston had it for maybe two years(99 & 00) Now how exactly is Bush AND/OR Davis entirely responsible for such things? You people bitch about wanting jobs and companies to stay yet you bitch and moan about the pollution that they inherently bring with them. If you Bash Bush on this issue - you must also bash Davis....that is - IF you are to be consistant;)

...Oh...and just a tidbit of info... "Much of Los Angeles' ozone is formed when exhaust from cars and smokestacks released during the day mixes with other chemicals and sunshine. In Houston, much of the pollution comes from oil refineries, petrochemical plants and cargo ships." - last part

CkG
Well, looking at that another way, one could say the air in houston got alot cleaner when bush left TX. :Q
Or California got a lot worse under Davis;) That's why taking the absolute ranking doesn't tell the whole story.

CkG
after carefully reading all of your posts

i have concluded that you are located somewhere deep within bush's ass.

please crawl out and see the light.

thanks
Ah yes - if it isn't Pers back on the prowl.:p Sure - believe what you want, if you can't see my point by now you aren't going to with further explaination.

Bow - there is no need to elaborate - you supported my point:) Thanks.

CkG
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Buahahaha - Now what was I saying before about tripping....;)

Sorry Bowfinger - you should have been quicker- you know how much BOBDN hates Bush(and me). Keep trying though, remember...it's whatever makes you "FEEL" better;)

CkG
While Cad acknowledges BOBDN and I raise the same point, he conveniently neglected to address that point. Why is that?

Bush is bashed by his own record. Blaming the messenger doesn't change the facts.
CkG is delusional Bowfinger.

Not only does he hold the mistaken notion that somehow your post supports his point but in his tortured mind he sees anyone telling the truth about Bush as hatred.

I understand completely. Telling the truth about Bush would seem hateful except for the fact that it's just the truth.

What a YABA!

 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Buahahaha - Now what was I saying before about tripping....;)

Sorry Bowfinger - you should have been quicker- you know how much BOBDN hates Bush(and me). Keep trying though, remember...it's whatever makes you "FEEL" better;)

CkG
While Cad acknowledges BOBDN and I raise the same point, he conveniently neglected to address that point. Why is that?

Bush is bashed by his own record. Blaming the messenger doesn't change the facts.
CkG is delusional Bowfinger.

Not only does he hold the mistaken notion that somehow your post supports his point but in his tortured mind he sees anyone telling the truth about Bush as hatred.

I understand completely. Telling the truth about Bush would seem hateful except for the fact that it's just the truth.

What a YABA!

Yep - I'm delusional
You people are the ones who go off on insane little rants - but I'm the one who is delusional...got it


If either of you would grow up/wake up you'd realize your posts are nothing but hatefull and spitefull. YOU don't know any more than anyone else - you only THINK you do. Classic Liberal "I'm superior to you" attitude. Well I got news for you - You aren't;)

Now if you two wish to continue with the personal type posts then so be it - I'm done.

CkG
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Buahahaha - Now what was I saying before about tripping....;)

Sorry Bowfinger - you should have been quicker- you know how much BOBDN hates Bush(and me). Keep trying though, remember...it's whatever makes you "FEEL" better;)

CkG
While Cad acknowledges BOBDN and I raise the same point, he conveniently neglected to address that point. Why is that?

Bush is bashed by his own record. Blaming the messenger doesn't change the facts.
CkG is delusional Bowfinger.

Not only does he hold the mistaken notion that somehow your post supports his point but in his tortured mind he sees anyone telling the truth about Bush as hatred.

I understand completely. Telling the truth about Bush would seem hateful except for the fact that it's just the truth.

What a YABA!

Yep - I'm delusional
You people are the ones who go off on insane little rants - but I'm the one who is delusional...got it


If either of you would grow up/wake up you'd realize your posts are nothing but hatefull and spitefull. YOU don't know any more than anyone else - you only THINK you do. Classic Liberal "I'm superior to you" attitude. Well I got news for you - You aren't;)

Now if you two wish to continue with the personal type posts then so be it - I'm done.

CkG
Pers said it best.

It must be really dark up there.

Our posts aren't hateful or spiteful. Bush screwed up big time. We're pointing out that truth.

If he is allowed to skate on his mistakes he'll think it's OK to repeat them. How will we ever give him the training he lacked at home if we just keep doing the same things wrong his parents did? :)
 

XZeroII

Lifer
Jun 30, 2001
12,572
0
0
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: XZeroII
What a load of crap. I had to stop when I read this one because it shows a complete lack of intelligence...
Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period.
That is 100% Clinton's fault, yet he tries to pin it on Bush. Same with
In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their job.
Once again, 100% Clinton's fault. It just shows the intelligence of the average Bush basher.
Riiiiight. It's all Clinton's fault. Whatever. That song and dance is so old. What happened to the "era of responsibility" ushered in by Bush & Co? Or was that more campaign blather and lies? Oh, and what? You only found two things out of the entire list to quibble with? Pathetic.
So if I give you a nuclear bomb that is armed and set to explode in 10 minutes, it would be your fault when it exploded despite the fact that I built it, and armed it? You just happened to be holding it when it exploded?
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Pers said it best.

It must be really dark up there.

Our posts aren't hateful or spiteful. Bush screwed up big time. We're pointing out that truth.

If he is allowed to skate on his mistakes he'll think it's OK to repeat them. How will we ever give him the training he lacked at home if we just keep doing the same things wrong his parents did? :)
Right, Cad's is the worst kind of hypocrisy. Everyone on the planet must adhere to his "personal responsibility" rule, except for his almighty Dubya. Cad can't even stick to the topic at hand "Bush's Resume" without his usual bag of tricks: Changing the subject, compare/contrast, choose 1 element out of many and try to defeat it.

Stick in some more nickels and let Mr RoboRebuttle go to town.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: XZeroII
What a load of crap. I had to stop when I read this one because it shows a complete lack of intelligence...
Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period.
That is 100% Clinton's fault, yet he tries to pin it on Bush. Same with
In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their job.
Once again, 100% Clinton's fault. It just shows the intelligence of the average Bush basher.
Riiiiight. It's all Clinton's fault. Whatever. That song and dance is so old. What happened to the "era of responsibility" ushered in by Bush & Co? Or was that more campaign blather and lies? Oh, and what? You only found two things out of the entire list to quibble with? Pathetic.
So if I give you a nuclear bomb that is armed and set to explode in 10 minutes, it would be your fault when it exploded despite the fact that I built it, and armed it? You just happened to be holding it when it exploded?
I don't know XZrero, do you blame the suicide bomber or do you blame the bomb-maker?

Seriously though, job losses have occurred steadily over Bush's tenure as prez. It's not something that happened suddenly or immediately after Bush taking office. No matter how much you want to frame it that way. How long can Bush and his apologists continue blaming Clinton? He's been out of office for nearly 3 years now! Will Bush EVER be able to stand on his own two feet? Or will he be perpetually living in the long shadow of Clinton?

And by the way, you're the one bringing up Clinton in a Bush thread. Not me. Just want to make that perfectly clear. ;)

Personally, I'd like to know how many "lefties" have said, "Bush is so horrible because Clinton was so great." It's funny 'cause I don't ever hear that. But I DO hear the exact opposite all the freakin' time. Must be hard to be a YABA...
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Pers said it best.

It must be really dark up there.

Our posts aren't hateful or spiteful. Bush screwed up big time. We're pointing out that truth.

If he is allowed to skate on his mistakes he'll think it's OK to repeat them. How will we ever give him the training he lacked at home if we just keep doing the same things wrong his parents did? :)
Right, Cad's is the worst kind of hypocrisy. Everyone on the planet must adhere to his "personal responsibility" rule, except for his almighty Dubya. Cad can't even stick to the topic at hand "Bush's Resume" without his usual bag of tricks: Changing the subject, compare/contrast, choose 1 element out of many and try to defeat it.

Stick in some more nickels and let Mr RoboRebuttle go to town.
Excuse me but it was you and digitalsm who took issue with the pollution - I added more FACTS to that argument. Did you again miss the question I posted in there? How exactly is the Governor directly responsible for a city's pollution? Yes he needs to be aware of the problem and try to do things which will curb pollution but to portray this subject as "created by Bush" is asinine - read your link;).
The "resume" is a blatant anti-Bush piece and it consistently distorts the facts or leaves out very important contextual info. The piece is a funny IMO - it shows how desperate the left is. They need to bash and demonize Bush to make their own dwarves look better. We'll just see once they go head to head who wins the "idea debate";)

CkG
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Excuse me but it was you and digitalsm who took issue with the pollution - I added more FACTS to that argument. Did you again miss the question I posted in there? How exactly is the Governor directly responsible for a city's pollution? Yes he needs to be aware of the problem and try to do things which will curb pollution but to portray this subject as "created by Bush" is asinine - read your link;).
The "resume" is a blatant anti-Bush piece and it consistently distorts the facts or leaves out very important contextual info. The piece is a funny IMO - it shows how desperate the left is. They need to bash and demonize Bush to make their own dwarves look better. We'll just see once they go head to head who wins the "idea debate";)

CkG
The governor is responsible because the buck stops with him. He's the highest authority in his particular state. Just like in a corporation, the CEO is at the helm. What happens in the state is the responsibility of the governor. Are you content to just let state officials get away with whatever they want because "they weren't aware of the problem?" Ridiculous. The Kenny-Boy Lay style of non-responsibility won't work anymore. Plausible deniability should be your new mantra now Cad.

Moreover, it was Bush's own legislative efforts in TX that weakened environmental protections in favor of industry and the worst polluters. Just like he's doing now for the entire country. That's how he's responsible.
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
0
0
How is he responsible?


Main Entry: re·spon·si·ble
Pronunciation: ri-'spän(t)-s&-b&l
Function: adjective
Date: 1643
1 a : liable to be called on to answer b (1) : liable to be called to account as the primary cause, motive, or agent <a committee responsible for the job> (2) : being the cause or explanation <mechanical defects were responsible for the accident> c : liable to legal review or in case of fault to penalties
2 a : able to answer for one's conduct and obligations : TRUSTWORTHY b : able to choose for oneself between right and wrong
3 : marked by or involving responsibility or accountability <responsible financial policies> <a responsible job>
4 : politically answerable; especially : required to submit to the electorate if defeated by the legislature -- used especially of the British cabinet
- re·spon·si·ble·ness noun
- re·spon·si·bly /-blE/ adverb
synonyms RESPONSIBLE, ANSWERABLE, ACCOUNTABLE, AMENABLE, LIABLE mean subject to being held to account. RESPONSIBLE implies holding a specific office, duty, or trust <the bureau responsible for revenue collection>. ANSWERABLE suggests a relation between one having a moral or legal obligation and a court or other authority charged with oversight of its observance <an intelligence agency answerable to Congress>. ACCOUNTABLE suggests imminence of retribution for unfulfilled trust or violated obligation <elected officials are accountable to the voters>. AMENABLE and LIABLE stress the fact of subjection to review, censure, or control by a designated authority under certain conditions <laws are amenable to judicial review> <not liable for the debts of the former spouse>.



That's how?

;)
 

Regs

Lifer
Aug 9, 2002
16,664
21
81
Sad that this is the best in what the country has to offer, right? Maybe if people stopped voting these dumb ass's in we wouldn't be here! Hell, not even my grand mother votes anymore. It is like choosing between monkey balls and cat crap for dinner.

I mean hell, the terminator is running for California governor and the republicans are routing for him!
 

JellyBaby

Diamond Member
Apr 21, 2000
9,159
1
81
Originally posted by: Regs
Sad that this is the best in what the country has to offer, right? Maybe if people stopped voting these dumb ass's in we wouldn't be here! Hell, not even my grand mother votes anymore. It is like choosing between monkey balls and cat crap for dinner.

I mean hell, the terminator is running for California governor and the republicans are routing for him!
There are other choices but their voices are locked out of debates and they're no longer able to raise the money necessary to gain even the slightest recognition. Perot went as far as he did only because he could spend millions of his own money to get access.

We need to better educate the public so they may make informed decisions, address the reasons people seek public office for the wrong reasons, and take a hard look at money equating to "free speech".

Fail to do that and it will always be a "choice" between lesser evils.

 

ASK THE COMMUNITY