Well, you’ve managed to prove that little thesis wrong haven’t you Danae. 
Says Danae who suffers from logorrhea.
Daniel
OK, I’ll take an honest stab at the OP, as a good thought exercise.
…hmmm
…er, …well…
Oh! I know!
Dubya is behind legislation allowing tradeable pollution credits for companies that are trying to comply with the Clean Air Act. In theory, at least, this should minimize the costs associated with compliance, without reducing the benefits of pollution reduction. It makes everything more efficient. I like it.
Now, considering I am not a fan of the man politically or personally, I think all you folks who support him owe me a pat on the back for my graciousness. (Well, not really, but it’s a nice fantasy…)
Here’s something he did I like: Bush signs national ‘do-not-call’ list bill
Rev, truly a bold legislative foray. Our Leader has taken another controversial stance, coming out firmly against telemarketers. There are rumors of legislation banning setting fire to cute, fuzzy kittens.
I have absolutely nothing to say about GWB, but I have this irrational thing about folks misquoting fine literature.
The above sentence should read, “Death is lighter than a feather, duty is heavier than a mountain”.
This would be Lan’s favorite Malkieri saying g I, in case you couldn’t guess, am a Jordan Junkie.
To say duty is lighter than a feather and heavier than a mountain, that just doesn’t make sense. Plus, I guess it would depend on whether you were in DC or at the ranch 
(This Robert Jordan moment brought to you by a pathetic WoT fan. Pray for me, oh ye completionists!)
FaerieBeth
His White House staff is well-organized and run professionally, unlike Clinton’s. Cite: http://bias.blogfodder.net/archives/2003_03.html#006799. And I’ve verified the transcript is accurate.
Hey, this will hurt telemarketing businesses. I never expected W to actually make any kind of decision that helps the average Joe and harms any kind of business.
And not only the telemarketing business, but telecommunication business as well, indirectly. When I was in the telecom biz our biggest customers for equipment were telemarketers.
Not as much of a slam-dunk as you might think.
A third nice thing about Gee Dubya:
He hasn’t peed on my leg yet.
WRING WROTE: “the whole Enron thing threatened to blow up in his face, Cheaney’s refusal to list the names of people w/whom he met to hammer out the national energy policy etc. those, IMHO would most certainly qualify as ‘whiffs of scandal’.”
And so? The President, V.P., their staffs and aides can meet with whomever they want provided it does not violate federal law or divulge the exchange of illicit information. So Cheney met with oil executives and not Sierra Club. What is the scandal with that?
When Clinton and Al Gore ran things, they met with people of their choosing to solicit policy advice. Clinton listening to Barbara Streisand and Susan Sarandon on foreign and military policy may be moronic, but it is not a scandal.
Simply put, meeting with people with who you disagree is not a scandal.
The reason the whole thing came to naught was that people realized there was nothing there. Congress wanted the list of people to prove that the Administration favored energy producers in developing its energy policy.
ElvisL1Lives Wrote: "Seymour Hersh on Perle’s “whiff of a scandal”, for just one example. Bond, you may think that business “coincidences of interest” are not scandalous, but over here we aren’t as inclined to think so.
I’m surprised that anyone would equate the degree of reporting of corruption with the degree of its actual occurrence and severity."
I am not sure what you mean by “coincidences of interest.” Does that mean that all oil producers have a common interest in promoting a particular policy? Does it mean that an elected official will promote policies endorsed by / favorable to his or her supporters?
Just like there were scores of journalists out to tarnish Bill, Hilliary and Al, there are scores of journalists out to tarnish George and Dick. They are looking for information that will embarass the current Administration. Media outlets like the New York Times, Mother Jones, the Washington Post, Drudge Report, etc. could love to break some sort of scandal on Bush. The difference between the two is: 1) that the current administration are friggin’ boyscouts (hence my original post); or 2) the current administration is better at controlling the inadvertant disclosure of potentially embarassing information.
Unless of course you’re the Pope. Come to think of it, that’s a nice thing about GW. He’s NOT the pope.
Bondy hun, the statement was made ‘not even a whiff of a scandal’, and the items I listed certainly qualify as ‘whiffs’, even without a multi year, multi million dollar investigation. to deny there’s a ‘whiff’ of a scandal there is really quite cutely naive.
Well personally I liked her last Album, I know it wasn’t exactly up to ‘the Dreaming’ but the quality was still above anything by Amos.
Dubya doesn’t visit California much. He didn’t even visit for the All California World Series[SUP]TM[/SUP] this past year.
Photos of Dubya on the phone shows him using a regular phone.
He says “my fellow Americans” so he assumes we all teach at college.
:rolleyes: 
4:
He has never PKed my amazon.
I have to say an AMEN to “He’s not Gore.”
~Salinye
Yeah, cuz then Gore would be Bush. Poor Gore. That’s a fate that no-one deserves.
After four DAYS of thought, the best I could come up with was:
He has added another answer to the trivia question: Name two US Presidents that were related.