• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Official Anti-Bush Thread: Please keep all Bush Bashing in here

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Bush Administration wants to turn Weather Service Website over to Private Companies only forcing U.S. Taxpayers to have to pay twice to receive weather data.

Doing this for the Corporate Weather buddies like Accuweather and Weather Channel.

Of course, what else would you expect from the Bush Regime.


1-23-2005 Is President Bush good for tech?

The question at its core is whether the National Weather Service, which uses taxpayer funds to collect nearly all weather readings, will be allowed to make its information available through the Internet--or instead required to sluice it all to commercial weather services, as the SEC once did with Mead.

The famous Circular A-130 argued strongly for Internet distribution, as did a special study of the question by the National Research Council in 2003. The weather service went ahead with such sites--and they have proved enormously popular. During the three months last fall when four hurricanes struck the South, weather service sites received nine billion hits--breaking a government record of six billion hits on NASA sites in the three months after the Mars rover landing last spring.

But the Commercial Weather Services Association, the industry's trade group, has complained that such sites violate an agreement from the pre-Internet era. By its argument, the taxpayers should continue to pay for all the weather balloons and monitoring stations--but should not be allowed to get the results directly from government sites.

 
1-24-2005 Dustin Hoffman Denies Relocation Plans

The 67-year-old actor told reporters at Heathrow Airport that media speculation that he plans to move to Britain was wrong.

"I was doing some publicity for this movie in the states, and one of the things they asked was don't I have a place in London? I said, `Yes, for 25 years, but we haven't been able to use it as much as we want because we didn't like to separate from the kids. So with five kids over the past 35 years, I've lived my life scheduled around the school year. The last kid is in the house, she graduates in five months and I'm going to get to London as soon as I can and finally make use of the place.'

That turned into: `I'm moving to get away from (President) Bush,'" Hoffman said.

He added: "That's silly. You can't go anywhere in the world to get away from Bush."
 
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
OK, I'll start it off.

Official Anti-Bush Thread.

Please post all Bush Bashing in here.

I think "Hate" is not an appropriate word although will have to see how we do after the next 4 years.

Thank you

Good Luck with that... :disgust:
 
Originally posted by: ntdz
I say us "cons" use this thread to praise Bush. Bush has done a fine job as President, and he will suprise you all with his second term...it'll be a good one.


yep, if its a good one it would be a surprise. unfortunately, i see nothing to indicate it will be anything of the sort.
 
I doubt this thread or others like it will impact the outlook that history will have on G.W. Bush. He'll be seen as a decisive President and one of the more prominent ones. I dare say more than Clinton. I'm sure this response will elicit some anger. However, there is probably not much of anything any of us can do about it at this point. Perhaps we can go out into our communities and contribute to our favorite causes. Screaming into the wind is not going to change history. Especially when it is being written by the current administration in office. I, for one, remain hopeful.
 
Originally posted by: d3n
I doubt this thread or others like it will impact the outlook that history will have on G.W. Bush. He'll be seen as a decisive President and one of the more prominent ones. I dare say more than Clinton. I'm sure this response will elicit some anger. However, there is probably not much of anything any of us can do about it at this point. Perhaps we can go out into our communities and contribute to our favorite causes. Screaming into the wind is not going to change history. Especially when it is being written by the current administration in office. I, for one, remain hopeful.


Sorry, you're Off Topic in this thread. This is the BASH BUSH thread.

So Fvck Bush!
 
No link yet. Listening to Bush Press Conference #15 this morning:

Same Bull, Different Day.

My Way or the Highway.

He says all people are equal in the U.S. Bullsh1t. Women have no bodily rights, Gays are undesireables and discriminated against, anyone not a RRR is undesirable etc etc.

Update: It was said the LLL Looney Left Liberals are divorced from reality.

They said the Economy is booming but Social Security is on the verge of collaspe not the other way around.
 
2-1-2005 Bush to Call for Near-Freeze in Spending

WASHINGTON - President Bush will call for a near-freeze in the overall growth of government spending not connected to national defense to try to rein in record deficits, a senior administration official said on Tuesday.

Critics have accused the White House of using an inflated forecast to make it easier for Bush to meet his deficit-reduction targets, a charge the White House denies.

Analysts say achieving Bush's goal of cutting the deficit in half was made more difficult with the announcement last week the White House would seek $80 billion in new funding this year for military operations in Iraq

The White House acknowledged the funding request would push the fiscal 2005 deficit to a record $427 billion, but Bush will say his deficit-reduction plans remain on track, officials said.

Critics also warn of cutbacks for international aid programs.

When he first proposed the Millennium Challenge Account program in March 2002, Bush pledged $5 billion by 2006, and aid groups accused the president of backing away from his commitment. Eligible countries under the program have yet to receive any money.

 
Overall government spending has increased by 26 percent between 2001 and 2004, while discretionary spending during the same period has surged 38 percent, according to an analysis by Riedl.

38 percent in discretionary spending? Fiscially conservative?

WOW!

I won't hold my breath on this one.....
 
Back
Top