Should we trust George W. Bush?

World Net Daily ^ | 8/29/02 | Harry Browne

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Yes, well one of your specialities is judging everyone else

The term "judging" is so overused. I'm not judging you or anyone else.

I am simply telling you very frankly what I think about you and how you affect me and some others.

When any of us join a public discussion, we are open to being ridiculed, opposed and exposed. Deal with it.

You saturate the thread with so much of YOURSELF that you are begging for a reaction. It's another of your juvenile traits. Good or bad.....attention is all you want.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

Ditto

[KentuckyWoman]

The following might be of some use in this argument:

BIG GOVERNMENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS UNDER GWB
Last Update 08-22-2002

SOCIALISM & PORK

• Airline bailouts.
• Post Office bailout.
• $205 million Amtrak bailout.
• Federal prescription drug subsidies, $350 billion over 10 years.
• "Homebuyer bill of rights" -- federal regulation of real estate.
• Continued anti-trust lawsuit against Microsoft.
• Federal subsidies for the poor to purchase homes.
• Additional funding for Medicare.
• Health care subsidies for laid-off workers and expanded job retraining benefits ($10 billion to $12 billion over 10 years).
• Wage insurance -- federal wage supplement.
• Took $67 million in taxpayers' money to finance presidential campaign via federal matching funds.
• Submitted largest budget ever to Congress, $2.13 trillion.
• Increased debt-limit from $5.95 trillion to $6.4 trillion.
• Scholarships for Cuban students and professionals.
• $9.5 million to hire new Customs Service agents.
• Increased farm subsidies by $180 billion over 10 years.
• Increased Pentagon budget by $48 billion to $379 billion.
• $560 million USA Freedom Corps.
• Over $3-million spent on SuperBowl anti-drug ads.
• Increased funding for IRS and BATF.
• Faith-based subsidies.
• Increased federal spending on education from $39.9-billion to $44.5-billion.
• Signed Congressional payraise of $4,900.
• Patients Bill of Rights.
• Federal Compassion Capital Fund, $700 million over 10 years.
• $100_million to beef up investigative manpower and technology at the SEC.
• $6 million to upgrade a U.S. Geological Survey data center near Sioux Falls, S.D.
• $10 million to help farmers near the Rio Grande River involved in a water dispute with Mexico.
• $7 million for enhancing water supplies in New Mexico.
• A provision pressuring the Agriculture Department to reimburse poultry producers in West Virginia and Virginia for losses from avian influenza.
• $1 billion for Pell grants for low-income students.
• $417 million for veterans' medical care.
• $400 million to help states improve voting systems.
• $100 million for countering western wildfires and floods.
• Taxpayer-funded national memorial, congressional gold medals, and gold coins for victims of 9/11.
• Scholarships and grants to nurses and help hospitals with retention.
• Increase the NEA budget by $10 million, to $126 million.
• $200,000 for a trucker congestion notification system in Tacoma, Washington.
• $500,000 to save the Prebles Meadow Jumping Mouse in Colorado.
• $62 million to promote the Sacajawea dollar coin.
• $100,000 a month to monitor news reports and offer advice on media strategy for the Pentagon.
• $1.5 million for taking care of the Vulcan Statue in Alabama built for the 1904 World's Fair
• $20 million annually for "Strategic Milk Reserve." Was phased out in 1999 by the 1996 Freedom to Farm Act. Congress extended it temporarily, and then made it permanent again in the farm bill that President Bush signed into law in May.
• Federal aid to Texas flood victims.
• Federal recovery assistance to typhoon victims in Guam.
• Steel and lumber tariffs.
• $300 million for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) via the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2001.
• Federal disaster relief for tonado victims in Maryland.
• Federal disaster relief for Minnesota because of storms, flooding, and tornadoes.
• Payoff to families of 9-11 victims.
• School vouchers.
• $450,000 in federal funds for the Chicago Project for Violence Prevention for fiscal year 2003 on top of $750,000 in 2002.

  FOREIGN-AID & INTERVENTIONISM

• Thousands of civilians killed, hundreds of thousands displaced by areal bombing in Afghanistan.
• Invaded Afghanistan without Congressional declaration of war.
• Boost in American foreign-aid by 50% to more than $15 billion annually.
• Continued funding of World Bank.
• Engaging in nation-building.
• Meddling in Zimbabwe by threatening to withhold foreign-aid (Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001).
• Foreign debt relief.
• $474 million to combat HIV/AIDS overseas, including $100 million for a global trust fund, and $200 million for international disaster assistance.
• $676 million for South American anti-drug plan.
• $768 million in assistance to independent states of the former Soviet Union. (2001)
• $2.04 billion in military financing and $720 million in economic assistance for Israel. (2001)
• $1.3 billion in military assistance and $655 million in economic assistance for Egypt. (2001)
• $75 million in military financing and $150 in economic assistance for Jordan. (2001)
• $582 million to United Nations. (2001)
• $2-billion in foreign-aid to Egypt. (2002)
• $1.3-billion in foreign-aid to Columbia to fight Drug War. (2001)
• $120 million in foreign-aid to Uzbekistan. (2002)
• $40 million in foreign-aid to the Taliban government of Afghanistan (May, 2001).
• $500 million in funding to combat AIDS in Africa.
• $30 million in research grants over the next five years to develop new ways of making industrial products from plants and natural waste materials.
• $255 million over two years to expand US media influence in predominantly Muslim countries.
• $1.5 billion bailout of Uruguay.
• $64 million for "Education and Equipment" program to train Georgian military.
• $1.1 billion loan from the U.S. International Monetary Fund to Turkey.
• $4.5 billion spending plan to help african nations reduce disease and famine and cultivate energy, clean water and forests.

  LIBERTIES, CONSTITUTION, POWER GRABS

• Campaign Finance Reform.
• Made his intention clear to exclude non-believers from serving on the juduciary in violation of Article 6, USC.
• Creation of new federal bureaucracy, Dept. of Homeland Defense.
• Wall St. ordered to report "suspicious" transactions, or series of transactions exceeding $5000.
• Freezing private assets without due process under the guise of anti-terrorism.
• Detention of suspects for months without due process.
• Domestic surveillance by FBI without evidence of criminal activity.
• Project Safe Neighborhood -- unconstitutional gun-control and federal intrusion.
• U.S. Drug Czar calls for War on Marijuana during visit to Canada.
• Ashcroft's plan to fingerprint Arab and Muslim visitors to the US.
• Refused to allow airline pilots to arm themselves.
• Federalized airport security.
• Continued federal asset forfeiture.
• Enron scandal. Questionable campaign contributions.
• Secret trials. Military tribunals.
• "Magic Latern" FBI spyware.
• DOJ monitoring of cable modems without a warrant.
• Continued crackdown on medical marijuana. Cannabis Clubs raided.
• Transportation Security Administration to place armed law enforcement officers at ticket counters and other public areas at airports.
• Proposed 'federal standards' for state drivers licenses.

  Hmm - while GWB sure has Clintoon beat in the morals and personality departments, there seems to be little government philosophy difference of any consequence. Well, except for the fact that 'certain' conservatives and groups would have been screaming for Clintoon's head on a platter LONG before all this got passed.

  Have fun dear!

[Alan Chapman]

Bush, whether you like it or not, mostly not, has to be trusted right now.

GWB actions need to be scrutinized and criticized because they make us less safe, not more so. Further foreign interventionism (militarily, financial, or otherwise) will not make us safer. It will incite further hatred of the US and likely incite additional acts of terrorism.

Bush is trying to preserve the security of this country, and several other smaller nations, from the barbarians.

He's doing no such thing. He just authorized the sale of aircraft parts and radar technology to Pakistan plus $80 million in foreign-aid, and $120 million in foreign-aid to Uzbekistan. Both countries are known to harbor terrorists.

I wish some of the libertarians would accept this fact of why Bush has our support.War time requires it.

It's obvious that he has your support. He's your guy, afterall. And that's the only reason. If Clinton were in office you'd be ripping him a new one every day and we both know it.

What concerns me more is why a libertarian, in these times, would seek to question the motives of the POTUS? Why is a libertarian alinged against his CIC in a time of War?

It would seem you neglected to read the article because the answer to your question is there.

Your persistent reference to "time of war" is a weak attempt to stifle any rational discourse. Don't like what's being said? Just keep saying we're at war. Can't refute the facts? Question the sincerity of your opponent. Pathetic.

[GingisK]

BIG GOVERNMENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS UNDER GWB

Like "Read my lips" father, like son.

[DeadManRunning]

no

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

There is more than one reason why men in their forties often marry women twenty years younger than them--middle aged women often have an unbearable chip on their shoulder. Who would want to spend the rest of their life with someone like that?

[Raised eyebrows.]

You know, Beckie, I am not one to bother you too much. I generally refrain from posting to you (compared to others), but I must say that this simply shows your breathtaking lack of maturity (spiritual and otherwise).

I would think, given your background, that you would have learned a little something about a Christ-centered marriage by now.

So, when you're forty (and you WILL be...one of the little ironies of all this) and your husband dumps you for a sophomore snow bunny, get back to me. I'm sure you'll blame it all on the "chip on your shoulder".

The fact is, most - if not all - of the women you seem to be alluding to have very happy marriages with very satisfied and happy husbands.

If you're going to make statements like this and do Monica Lewinsky-style flirting with men in their forties and fifties, I know I'm not the only one here who would very much appreciate you requesting a new screen name. Please. That's all I ask of you.

This could get me banned, I suppose, but that's all right. If I got something through your head, it's worth it.

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

This could get me banned

I can't imagine why, but stranger things have happened.

Your post is very accurate and again points out the impresson given by the immature antics of a very young person attempting to keep pace with people old enough to be her parents.

Nine out of ten times, if it's overboard (and this is), it can be misleading. A little innuendo and coyness mixed together are often mistaken to mean something other than what was intended; sometimes it is intentional. Either way......this is not the place for it.

[Freemeorkillme]

"911". Now a fairly insignificant event????

You sincerely believe this?? I know of a whole country who'd disagree with you here, particularly the 3,000 families directly effected.

Your statement is absolutely appauling. Disgusting behaviour on your part which is quite unacceptable. Many a person who do physical harm to you had you said this to them in person. FMOKM

[Isle of sanity in CA]

The point that you seem to obviously have missed is that France stuck it's neck in the noose with ours with only a hope of future trade as any possible reward.

Actually France supporting us was more analogous to us supporting the Mujahadeen. Their enemy was our enemy.

[KentuckyWoman]

Their enemy was our enemy.

Point is, they weren't involved in that particular war until they came to our aid. Had we gone down, they would have soon joined us at the hands of the British. Everyone else, it seems, wants us to send in our troops whenever they get in a jam or wish to garner more of our taxpayer's money for acting friendly (ala' UN).

[Aurelius]

Why We Fight

[Southflanknorthpawsis]

There is more than one reason why men in their forties often marry women twenty years younger than them--middle aged women often have an unbearable chip on their shoulder. Who would want to spend the rest of their life with someone like that?

Quite an alarming thought process coming from a pastor's daughter.........quite alarming.

A good many men that marry younger women leave a wife and children in ruin. It has more to do with selfishness than anything else.

I wouldn't know, I've been married to the same man since I was 21 years old, but my experience tells me that women with your pestering nature are often the first ones left on the chopping block. At the rate you're going, you may never get far enough to find out

[lonestar]

"Sick Puppy"...Me ?? ...remote possibility, at least to a degree...you've heard about the differences between puppies and Republicans, haven't you? After 6 six weeks the Puppies open their eyes.

Yes, I've heard it but you re-wrote it to suit yourself.

[GingisK]

You sincerely believe this??

WWII is what I consider a significant event. People elsewhere in the world die in far greater numbers; and, nothing appears in US media. This Nation has indeed endured a lot worse with far less gnashing of teeth. Wake up! We were attacked by a handful of people. The attack was devistating in terms of loss of life, but insignificant in terms of National security. If the Bush administration considered it to be a significant event, there would have been meaninful changes to airport and border security. The most significant changes are tighter restrictions on American citizens, not the actual enimies. There should be no event that could cause a real American to trade his rights for security. Compared to the continuous destruction of our Constitutional governance, the 911 event is insignificant ... but only since Americans will cash in their freedoms for FAKE security measures.

When you do trade your freedoms for illusion of security, that is a significant event. When Americans surrender freedoms for the illusion of security, they mock those who died in real wars to preserve our freedoms. That is more significant.

Your statement is absolutely appauling. Disgusting behaviour on your part which is quite unacceptable.

I find Americans who trade away freedoms for security appauling.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

[lonestar]

Would you rather live here with Bush or in Iraq with Saddam?

The depth and profundity of the questions raised by the Bushbots certainly give me pause in my questioning of our President's policies!

What did you think of her answer?

[Iwo Jima]

I once heard someone say "But enough about me. Let's talk abut you. What do YOU think about me?"

Sound like anyone you know?

[Iwo Jima]

"Abut" should be "about." Really. No slight intended.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Sound like anyone you know?

[Whistling, looking innocently around the room.]

[Iwo Jima]

Isn't there a limit on how many times you can proclaim that you are leaving FR and come back? I thought that there was a three strikes and you're out policy. Maybe we need one.