Its all the Presidents fault

[OliverTwistofLime]

Here is a partial list of what many SDMB accuse Bush for....many on this list I agree and am very angry about....Please add or subtract from this list and name some things that you do like about him, if anything..

1. He put us to war in Iraq without a good reason
2. He cares about corporations and screw the public
3. Responsible for the tremendous price of oil
4. Speaks only for the benefit of the Carlyle Group
5. Opens the gates wide open for the illegals to come in
6. Is against pro choice
7. Antienvironmental
8. Shoving religion down our throats whether we like it or not
9. He talks down to the citizenry of the US not as our equals
10. Spends hundreds of billions on foreign aid at the expense of aiding our own people
in the US
11. Taxes the poor and middle class far more than the rich
12. Instead of doing "good" and following the peoples wishes, he does what he, not us, thinks is important
13. Had he used government funds to enable the levees to handle a Type 4 or a 5 Hurricane this horrible situation along the Gulf Coast would have been significantly less severe.

[Otto]

14. He stole the apostrophe out of your subject header.

[Psycho Pirate]

Thanks for filling the gaping void of Bush-bashing threads on this board. And so eloquently put! Really, you are national treasure, and yet you grace us with your presence. I feel really nervous even responding to someone of your posting skills, but I'll risk responding anyway.

[Psycho Pirate]

And by the way, you are certifiably insane or tremendously ignorant if you believe point 11 is anywhere approaching reality.

[OliverTwistofLime]

14. He stole the apostrophe out of your subject header.


You are right....You just raised your IQ from 60 to 80. Thanks for your contribution. :wally

[FinnAgain]

You are right....You just raised your IQ from 60 to 80. Thanks for your contribution. :wally

Wow... that's a pretty harsh reaction to a rather funny joke. Poor form.

[Lord Ashtar]

Well, his lousy mood is all Bush's fault.

[duffer]

11. Taxes the poor and middle class far more than the rich

No, you're confusing tobacco and alcohol taxes with income tax. The poor don't pay income tax. They do, however pay sin taxes.

7. Antienvironmental

According to the environmentalists that pretty much call him Satan for proposing new refineries being built and oil drilling. Then they bitch about the price of gasoline and natural gas when a disaster hits.

12. Instead of doing "good" and following the peoples wishes, he does what he, not us, thinks is important

Every President has done this. It goes with the job. Remember SALT? Remember the attempt to nationalise health care? Remember a call for the end of slavery? Remember a certain Washington character that led a nation to war when many were happy to be subjects of the Crown? Show me a President that is loved by all and I'll ask how much you paid for the movie ticket.

5. Opens the gates wide open for the illegals to come in

That's a little more complicated. Keep in mind the ACLU and other powerful groups are involved with this. He's not a dictator. He does, hard as it might be to beleive, have to follow some semblence of law.


Just a few thoughts.

[FinnAgain]

7. Antienvironmental
According to the environmentalists that pretty much call him Satan for proposing new refineries being built and oil drilling. Then they bitch about the price of gasoline and natural gas when a disaster hits.

Come on Duffer, that's not fair and you know it. Don't you think there are valid reasons to call him anti-enviornment, including allowing bussinesses to write the laws governing them and mercury production? (http://www.ucsusa.org/documents/scienceabuseexamples.pdf)
This, of course, has an agenda, but can you really refute all of these points? (http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200409/bush_record_print.asp)

Like it or not, Bush's stance on the enviornment is not a fever dream cooked up by hippies.

[alphaboi867]

11. Taxes the poor and middle class far more than the rich

No, you're confusing tobacco and alcohol taxes with income tax. The poor don't pay income tax. They do, however pay sin taxes...

Which they can avoid by choosing not to by those items. Alcohol and tobacco are luxury items, not necessities.

[DMC]

Which they can avoid by choosing not to by those items. Alcohol and tobacco are luxury items, not necessities.
Stock trades are "luxury items", not necessities, so can we tax them at 50%? What about vacations? They're not necessities, so let's tax the shit out of them, too.

[TLDRIDKJKLOLFTW]

15. Entered office with record budget surplus; turned it into record deficit in first term.

[fushj00mang]

1. He put us to war in Iraq without a good reason

Actually, he put us into a war with Iraq for a lot of good reasons. He was wrong about all but one of them (wrong on WMD's and terrorists, right about Saddam being a bad guy.)

2. He cares about corporations and screw the public
Well said, comrade. After all, if not for those lousy corporations and their lobbiests, the USA would be a happy place full of milk and honey. Instead, Bushco and their corporate overlords waste it all. :rolleyes:

3. Responsible for the tremendous price of oil
No, market forces are responsable for the tremendous price of oil. Say, China and India. Or perhaps the fact that we've finally reached our true capacity for refining (nearly worldwide.) I'd still say it's China's fault though.

4. Speaks only for the benefit of the Carlyle Group

Who? *goes to Google* Oh. See 2.


5. Opens the gates wide open for the illegals to come in
Blame the ACLU and the Democratic party for that.

6. Is against pro choice
Don't you mean he's "pro life" or "anti abortion?" When come back, bring grammar.


Not anti-environment, more like "we've done it this way, so let's keep doing it this way." I remember the uproar that was over his stance of arsenic, when he 'upped' the allowable level to 50/ppb in water. Clinton had inacted an allowable level of 10/ppb. He signed that legislation three days before Bush took office. Bush put it back to the level it'd been at for forty years. Kyoto protocol? Kiss my ass. For every bit that we give up, China and India get to put up twice as much.

[quote]8. Shoving religion down our throats whether we like it or not
And so did Clinton and Gore (except that Gore didn't know what he was talking about. Favorite Bible passage is John 16:3?) I'd rather the president be upfront about it, and not a pandering asshole like Gore or Kerry.

9. He talks down to the citizenry of the US not as our equals
So did Clinton. Your point?

10. Spends hundreds of billions on foreign aid at the expense of aiding our own people in the US
Every president since Truman has done this. So?

11. Taxes the poor and middle class far more than the rich
You can't be serious. Tell me you aren't serious. Are you serious? Nevermind the fact that your little IRS book shows where and how much is taken from different percentiles every year? I think it was something like the top 1% payed 20% of the taxes in the US, and the top 20% payed like, 65% of the total income tax? And that highest tax bracket is for people with a taxable income of $115,000 a year?

12. Instead of doing "good" and following the peoples wishes, he does what he, not us, thinks is important
Well son, what do you think is important? And how are you going to fund it? And who is going to build it or perform that service? And who will benifit from this? Doing "good" is a great way to keep yourself from being re-elected. Doing your job (eg, what is important, and not necessarily good.) will get you re-elected.

13. Had he used government funds to enable the levees to handle a Type 4 or a 5 Hurricane this horrible situation along the Gulf Coast would have been significantly less severe. No, the situation in New Orleans would be less severe. And do you know how much it would cost to build said levies? And where is the money going to come from? And what about Buloxi, MS? Or Miami, FL? Or Charleston, SC? Or Galveston, TX? Going to outfit each seashore metropolis with these levies? If so, what about the pissant town next door with no sea wall?

[duffer]

15. Entered office with record budget surplus; turned it into record deficit in first term.

15. Remember how Reagan killed the country with the deficits? Passed by a Democratic Congress? Then we had a surplus? This country has more money than you can comprehend. We'll have a surplus again. Don't worry your little head with these issues.

[Harborwolf]

Seriously. We needed another thread blaming the president for the effects of a natural disaster? What the fuck is with people these days? Haven't blamed him for something in so long that it just got all backed up?

My nose is kinda stuffy. Fuckin' president.

[Casey1505]

14. He stole the apostrophe out of your subject header.To be fair, then, should we be blaming Cheney for stealing the second one? Or should we be blaming the President for both of the missing apostrophies?

[Otto]

Blame the ACLU and the Democratic party for that.
Can you point me toward anything that factually indicates that the ACLU is working to "open[] the gates wide open for the illegals to come in"? Or even supports the idea of "open[ing] the gates wide open for the illegals to come in"? Here, this is the ACLU's immigration (http://aclu.org/ImmigrantsRights/ImmigrantsRightsMain.cfm) site. Show me there where the ACLU indicates it stands for what you're claiming.

I'd be kind of interested in seeing something factual that the Democratic Party supports "open[ing] the gates wide open for the illegals to come in" as well. I'm not finding it in the 2004 Democratic Party Platform (http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:yuZQIPNpi3sJ:www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf+democratic+party+platform&hl=en) about it. Maybe you can enlighten me?

And please, spare me a response along the lines of "the OP said it about Bush." Whether Bush does or doesn't believe it has no bearing on your claims about the ACLU and the Democratic Party.

[betenoir]

No, you're confusing tobacco and alcohol taxes with income tax. The poor don't pay income tax. They do, however pay sin taxes.



:dubious:

Excuse me, but there are plenty of people who are poor - at least but the standards the First World should, I hope, hold to as far as what poor and not poor means (decent shelter, decent food, hope for their children, and of could, the ability to see a doctor when needed...oh, and I guess, the resources to leave town when a hurricain is coming) - who nonetheless work their asses off and pay tax on their income.

Oh, but I forgot. There are no working poor. The world is divided between the sucessful and the people who smoke and drink all day :rolleyes: .

(and yes I realizes income is not taxed below a certain level, my point being that level does not necessarily corrilate to to what we should reasonably consider poor in this society.)

[duffer]

Well, Otto, I won't attempt to defend the post. Not my job to do so. But I trust you are aware that the ACLU is generally the first organization to defend the rights of those that have no US rights because they aren't US citizens. There are many things I'm sure the ACLU does that I can agree with, but most of what I see from them just rubs me the wrong way. It seems more the perception of the group, no neccesarily what they're doing.

But again, I can't speak for flush.

[duffer]

:dubious:

Excuse me, but there are plenty of people who are poor - at least but the standards the First World should, I hope, hold to as far as what poor and not poor means (decent shelter, decent food, hope for their children, and of could, the ability to see a doctor when needed...oh, and I guess, the resources to leave town when a hurricain is coming) - who nonetheless work their asses off and pay tax on their income.

Oh, but I forgot. There are no working poor. The world is divided between the sucessful and the people who smoke and drink all day :rolleyes: .

(and yes I realizes income is not taxed below a certain level, my point being that level does not necessarily corrilate to to what we should reasonably consider poor in this society.)

After I decipher the mispellings, I'll ask you what arbitrary level of income you've deemed as "poor". Who can't see a doctor? Are you talking about the bill when they see one? If they're that poor, Medicaid pays it. I know because my checks list the Medicare tax every pay period. There is a difference between not going to a doctor because you're afraid of the bill, and not seeing a doctor because you're denied service.

I've never known of a person that literally couldn't see a doctor. There may be some asshats that went into medicine for the check, but every doctor I've ever known will see you. Then bill you later. And if you're that poor, a doctor's bill is that last thing you need to worry about. I challenge you to cite a doctor that turned away a person needing care because they're poor.

I also challenge you to show me that gas, tobacco, alcohol, and sales taxes are more fair than the income tax. Oh, never mind. I already did that.

[Otto]

Well, Otto, I won't attempt to defend the post. Not my job to do so. But I trust you are aware that the ACLU is generally the first organization to defend the rights of those that have no US rights because they aren't US citizens.
Um, from where do you get the idea that non-citizens have no rights under the Constitution? The Constitutional rights of non-citizens are not as extensive as those of citizens, but they exist.
There are many things I'm sure the ACLU does that I can agree with, but most of what I see from them just rubs me the wrong way. It seems more the perception of the group, no neccesarily what they're doing.
Maybe you should take a little time and learn about what the organization actually does before deciding that it rubs you the wrong way.

[FinnAgain]

I challenge you to cite a doctor that turned away a person needing care because they're poor.


Up until 1985, it was fairly common. Even then, the only conditions hospitals were mandated to look into were emergencies. Also, this only applies to hospitals which participate in medicare. (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3940/is_200201/ai_n9075644)

Obviously every time someone needs to see a doctor, it's not an emergency.

However, even with the law, violations still occur:

On average, since 1995, CMS regional offices have directed state survey agencies to investigate about 400 hospitals per year and have cited about half of them for EMTALA violations...From 1995 through 2000, the OIG imposed fines totaling over $5.6 million on 194 hospitals and 19 physicians. The majority of hospital fines were $25,000 or less. The total number of physicians ever fined by the OIG for EMTALA violations is 28.

[OliverTwistofLime]

The list I made in the OP summarize to some degree various comments I have read from the posts of Bush bashers....I said I agree with some of them.

I am pro life but pro a woman's choice to have an abortion.
I am pro euthanasia if performed under established rules and regs.

Bush is against both choice and euthanasia almost assuredly because of his religious convictions.....fine....but don't force it down our throats.

He does not believe in same sex marriage.....religious reasons? traditional reasons? Marriage is a word......some are lousy...some are good...some are tolerable.

The republican party led by our President has turned a deaf ear to halting illegal aliens from crossing into our country.

What I think, however, is not the topic here. I wanted to present the negatives attributed to the president and see if you dopers can add to the list...subtract from the list or point out some good attributes we can say about Bush.

[duffer]

Maybe you should take a little time and learn about what the organization actually does before deciding that it rubs you the wrong way.

Did you notice the part where I mentioned I agreed with a lot of thier points? Guess not. I was just pointing out what seems to be the majority opinion of the ACLU. Sorry for interfering.

FinnAgain, those are disgusting figures. Hippocratic Oath? I hear doctors don't even take it anymore. (Somebody please tell me I'm wrong.) But today, right now (20 years after the law was enacted) how often does this happen? With all the public-funded health centers, I refuse to believe that health care isn't available to everyone. I won't mention who was President at the time that law was written. After all, the President is responsible for everything that happens in the country. ;)

[JonScribe]

16. That fucking smirk.

Man, I wanna slap that from here to Crawford.

[FinnAgain]

FinnAgain, those are disgusting figures. Hippocratic Oath? I hear doctors don't even take it anymore. (Somebody please tell me I'm wrong.)

Well, this says that most, but not all, doctors take the oath when they get out of med school. (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath.html) I attended a graduation at Columbia University and was rather shocked to see that when the doctors graduated, they weren't asked to take the oath. Maybe they had taken it earlier, or would take it later.


But today, right now (20 years after the law was enacted) how often does this happen?

I'd wager not very often, but it still happens.
This can provide some good resources to start looking. (http://www.medlaw.com/healthlaw/EMTALA/index.shtml)


With all the public-funded health centers, I refuse to believe that health care isn't available to everyone.

Florida Hospital Heartland Medical Center, a 186-bed hospital located in Sebring, and owned by the Winter Park, Fla.-based Adventist Health System Sunbelt Health Care Corp., paid $20,000 for allegedly failing to provide appropriate medical screening and stabilization to a 21-year-old patient three times over a 12-day period. The patient later died of a rare and difficult-to-diagnose parasitic infection. (http://www.medlaw.com/healthlaw/EMTALA/other/new-emtala-fines-reported.shtml)

Disbelief becomes something of a stumbling block past a certain point.

[danceswithcats]

What the fuck-go for the gusto. Blame GW for your beer being skunky, the crabgrass in your lawn, birdshit on your windshield, and why you couldn't get stiff with your favorite sheep last night.

Christ on a unicycle already! It must be nice to live in an altered dimension where there's a bogeyman to hold accountable for everything ill that happens. Please tell your therapist that slapping sense into you isn't working at the current rate. I recommend quadrupling the amount of slapping.

[Otto]

Did you notice the part where I mentioned I agreed with a lot of thier points? Guess not.
I saw the bit where you said if you knew what they did about some things you might agree with them, but that you disagreed with the majority of the group's actions:
There are many things I'm sure the ACLU does that I can agree with, but most of what I see from them just rubs me the wrong way.

[dalej42]

You forgot:

No Child Left Behind.

Prescription Drug Bill which benefits large drug companies and makes it difficult to obtain drugs from Canada.

Mission Accomplished! That flight suit....

How about Karl Rove?

[Tenar]

[B]7. Antienvironmental

According to the environmentalists that pretty much call him Satan for proposing new refineries being built and oil drilling. Then they bitch about the price of gasoline and natural gas when a disaster hits.


Have to call "bullshit" on this one. You make it sounds as if environmentally concerned people are the primary group who are upset about gas prices. Are you suggesting that people who are NOT environmentalists DON'T bitch about the price of gasoline and natural gas? Those idiots who went out and bought Hummers and Expeditions and Escalades and all those other ridiculous gas sucking monsters sit there and smile at the pump?

Actually, I see one -- and only one -- advantage to soaring gas prices, which is that people only conserve energy and invest in energy efficient technology and alternative fuel technology when shortages or high prices require it.

The answer to oil shortages is to find a way to avoid using oil. Period. Otherwise, we just swing back and forth between times of crisis and times of complacency. More drilling and more refining doesn't solve oil shortages any more than building more houses relieves overpopulation. It just masks the problem temporarily.

[Monty]

That flight suit....

Perhaps you should be reading stuff for grownups instead of whatever you pulled that out of. "That flight suit" is what's commonly known as protective clothing for all personnel in that particular aircraft. It doesn't matter that he wasn't flying the thing, it just mattered that he was in it & thus the flight suit.

[dalej42]

The shot of Bush in the flight suit behind the Mission Accomplished sign was designed for a campaign commercial. Remember Bush's waffling (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/28/mission.accomplished/) on why the sign was placed there?

[Monty]

Then talk about the sign, the comment itself, but give the childish and asinine and absolutely ignorant griping about the flight suit a rest.

[Monty]

p.s. And once you do, then you'll get your tush handed to you. ISTR there being more than a couple of military folks--the folks he was visiting--quite pleased to see him there, bolstering their morale--something one would think a CinC would be expected to do from time to time.

[BobLibDem]

The whole flight onto the carrier was a farce. The ship and its men were kept at sea an extra day just so Bush could land on it. He could easily have landed by helicopter but chose the more dramatic entry. And the cameras were pointed to the open sea on one side of the ship, not the nearby shore on the other.

If I had to pick one boneheaded thing, and believe me it's tough, I'd go for preventing Medicare from negotiating a price with drug companies. A transparent giveaway to the pharmaceutical lobby.

[dalej42]

If I had to pick one boneheaded thing, and believe me it's tough, I'd go for preventing Medicare from negotiating a price with drug companies. A transparent giveaway to the pharmaceutical lobby.

You mean he didn't have a transparent giveaway to the oil companies as well?

[dalej42]

p.s. And once you do, then you'll get your tush handed to you. ISTR there being more than a couple of military folks--the folks he was visiting--quite pleased to see him there, bolstering their morale--something one would think a CinC would be expected to do from time to time.

I'm sure Cindy Shaheen would be happy to visit with him...

[LavenderBlue]

Come on Duffer, that's not fair and you know it. Don't you think there are valid reasons to call him anti-enviornment, including allowing bussinesses to write the laws governing them and mercury production? (http://www.ucsusa.org/documents/scienceabuseexamples.pdf)
This, of course, has an agenda, but can you really refute all of these points? (http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200409/bush_record_print.asp)

Like it or not, Bush's stance on the enviornment is not a fever dream cooked up by hippies.

Finn,

The next time you pull up a .pdf file, kindly put a little warning in first. Thanks.

17. The push to abolish inheritance taxes. Pure payback to his cronies and nothing else.

[FinnAgain]

I generally do, and to my knowledge there's no rule stating that I have to. Besides, this one loaded real quick. Ah well.

P.S. Why is it that the word 'kindly' almost always sounds condescending? Go figure.

[LavenderBlue]

I generally do, and to my knowledge there's no rule stating that I have to. Besides, this one loaded real quick. Ah well.

P.S. Why is it that the word 'kindly' almost always sounds condescending? Go figure.

There's no rule. But it is polite. Pdf's tend to mess with my mozilla so I don't like them.

And I thought kindly sounded better than "hey asshole," which was not my intent. :p

[TVeblen]

Christ on a unicycle already! It must be nice to live in an altered dimension where there's a bogeyman to hold accountable for everything ill that happens. Please tell your therapist that slapping sense into you isn't working at the current rate. I recommend quadrupling the amount of slapping.

In what altered dimension is a Chief Executive not responsible for the performance of basic systems he touted for protecting the populace in case of a catastrophic event?

Remember the expense and hoopla of Homeland Security? Mega tax bucks were diverted from nearly every other sector of public funding, including civil engineering projects like levy repair, in order to craft a strong, responsive system of response. Saying it's Bush's fault that the hurricane hit is a blatant strawman. Of course he wasn't responsible for the storm. He was and is responsible for the supposedly improved (and very expensive) govermental systems trumpted to handle catastrophic losses.

New Orleans is a major city, with significant oil and shipping capabilities, not to mention a large civilian population. Please tell me how and why Homeland Security measures wouldn't have included worst-case scenarios in case of deliberate attack. The cause of devastation shouldn't have mattered a whit; what difference if a hurricane breached the levies or they were bombed? The basic network of intergovermental coordination and response was supposedly in place--and wasn't, at a great cost of lives, misery and property.

Sorry, but a vital city that lay below sea level got hit by a major hurricane and few of the expensive, loudly-touted responsive measures worked.. There 'tis.

The bucks flowed to Bush's administration on the premise that it would, in part, improve govermental readiness in catastrophes. The buck stops with him and his administration. Govermental reactiveness was a dismal fiasco, and as Chief Exec, he's responsible.

[FinnAgain]

There's no rule. But it is polite. Pdf's tend to mess with my mozilla so I don't like them.

Oh, I know, I use firefox and pdf's can seriously fuck my laptop up. And I do generally try to post warnings with PDF's, but this one slipped through, probably because my laptop had no problem loading it. Came up real quick.


And I thought kindly sounded better than "hey asshole," which was not my intent. :p

No problem, sorry if I reacted a bit snarkily then. I'll be happy to try to do my best to post warnings on PDF's.

[Squink]

Remember the expense and hoopla of Homeland Security? Mega tax bucks were diverted from nearly every other sector of public funding, including civil engineering projects like levy repair, in order to craft a strong, responsive system of response. Once the hoopla dies down a bit it may be time to talk seriously about removing FEMA from the control of that department. Over and over and over the news stories this week have told us how responders were ready to go, but hadn't gotten a request from FEMA, or the paperwork hadn't arrived from Washington. The current megabureaucracy may simple be too damned big to respond to crises in real time.

[Psycho Pirate]

In what altered dimension is a Chief Executive not responsible for the performance of basic systems he touted for protecting the populace in case of a catastrophic event? Goodness, you're dense.

You act as if Bush single-handedly hired the employees, came up with the relief plans, and was a key participant in every single step of the efforts. Of course he wasn't, nor should he be.

Would you be happier if there was no Department of Homeland Security? It's a fairly new department, you know. It's childish and unrealistic to think that they will get it 100% right.
Remember the expense and hoopla of Homeland Security? Mega tax bucks were diverted from nearly every other sector of public funding, including civil engineering projects like levy repair, in order to craft a strong, responsive system of response.Nobody has forgotten Homeland Security. I'd say it has been a resounding success, since we haven't been attacked since 9/11. Well, that, and the war in Iraq keeping the terrorists on the defensive. And those levee's would have broken anyway, so can the loaded words about how engineering projects were cut. Boo hoo. They were probably overpriced union conracts anyway.
He was and is responsible for the supposedly improved (and very expensive) govermental systems trumpted to handle catastrophic losses. Uh...no.
New Orleans is a major city, with significant oil and shipping capabilities, not to mention a large civilian population. Please tell me how and why Homeland Security measures wouldn't have included worst-case scenarios in case of deliberate attack. The cause of devastation shouldn't have mattered a whit; what difference if a hurricane breached the levies or they were bombed? The basic network of intergovermental coordination and response was supposedly in place--and wasn't, at a great cost of lives, misery and property. I'd say those measures did include such scenarios. Can you prove they didn't? There were breakdowns, to be sure. But to lay these ultimately at the feet of Bush? Laughable to all but the most biased moonbats.
Sorry, but a vital city that lay below sea level got hit by a major hurricane and few of the expensive, loudly-touted responsive measures worked.. There 'tis. Yep, there 'tis. Who's fault is that? Plenty of blame to go around for that. Bush gets some, sure. All? That's ridiculous.
The bucks flowed to Bush's administration on the premise that it would, in part, improve govermental readiness in catastrophes. The buck stops with him and his administration. Govermental reactiveness was a dismal fiasco, and as Chief Exec, he's responsible.Keep telling yourself that.

[Shodan]

It must be nice to live in an altered dimension where there's a bogeyman to hold accountable for everything ill that happens.You and I are both Charter Members of such a dimension.

It's not so bad, usually.

Regards,
Shodan

[TVeblen]

You act as if Bush single-handedly hired the employees, came up with the relief plans, and was a key participant in every single step of the efforts. Of course he wasn't, nor should he be.
Pitifully transparent strawman. Bush is a CEO. With the title comes ultimate accountablity.

Would you be happier if there was no Department of Homeland Security? It's a fairly new department, you know. It's childish and unrealistic to think that they will get it 100% right.
I'd be happier if the heavily funded federal department had responded to a disaster within it's sphere of responsibility with at least basic competence. The continuing clusterfuck is sort of expensive in terms of human lives, y'know? And those levee's would have broken anyway, so can the loaded words about how engineering projects were cut. Boo hoo. They were probably overpriced union conracts anyway.
I've read some pretty asinine things on this board but that ranks with the worst. Maintaining levies that protect a major population and industrial center is basic common sense, a quality unfamiliar to you. Keeping water out of a delta city sited below sea level isn't a liberal union scam. It should have been a no-brainer aspect of disaster preparation.
I'd say those measures did include such scenarios. Can you prove they didn't? There were breakdowns, to be sure. But to lay these ultimately at the feet of Bush? Laughable to all but the most biased moonbats.
It's already been established the New Orleans was the site of disaster scenario drills. That's fine and laudable--except for the fact that obvious, crucial systems failed, at great cost to human life, suffering and catastrophic property loss, when a disaster actually happened.

I'm beyond disgusted that the horrendous blow to New Orleans is being reduced to nothing more than political ping pong. It's obscene to play a political ostrich game with this: coulda been worse, it's not that bad, etc. Contrary to your aspersions, I'm a Independent and a moderate one at that. My sole bias is that I expect goverment to cough up the protections to citizens that it taxed those citizens to provide. I don't give two whoops which party or person is in office at the time. I get pissed when the government fails at something it's responsible for.

But by all means just regard this as points in a temporary, shifting political game, if that's the limit of your scope.

[DiosaBellissima]

18: Don't mess with Texas.
19: Don't ever mess with Texas.


What? This thread needed to lighten up :)

[Frank]

There's no rule. But it is polite. Pdf's tend to mess with my mozilla so I don't like them.
Perhaps if you hovered your mouse over the link, you would notice the .pdf at the end of it.

[Monty]

I'm sure Cindy Shaheen would be happy to visit with him...
You left out the word again. The President has visited with the woman once.

[SnakesCatLady]

Bush appointed men to head FEMA and DHS. Neither man had experience in disaster management (but were probably very good at writing campaign checks.

How is Bush not responsible?