PDA

View Full Version : SMU Faculty dont want Bush's Library??



BaylorGuy08
12-15-06, 09:32 PM
Here is another push for Baylor to get it. Texas Monthly Magazine published the article that included excerpts of a letter written by SMU faculty members and administrators of the School of Theology asking the SMU Board of Trustees and SMU President to withdraw their bid for the library.

I have not heard anything positive about putting at SMU except that its Laura's alma mater. Woopie s***. Atleast Baylor faculty and administrators are supporting the library, or atleast keeping quiet about it if they don't want it.

Here is the link from KWTX...
http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/4932371.html

Link to the Texas Monthly Blog:
http://www.texasmonthly.com/community/blog/paulburka/2006/12/protest-at-smu-targets-bush-library.php

Pilot0287
12-15-06, 09:34 PM
I saw that. More library for us!

whitetrash
12-15-06, 09:49 PM
Hmmm....I heard a story in the early 90s from a prominent Republican in Houston that everyone thought GHWB's library was headed to Rice (which had strong ties to James Baker--his grandfather was the longtime lawyer for Rice) until it was reported that 90% of the Rice faculty had supported Clinton and that nearly as high a % of A&M faculty had supported GHWB.

ScottS
12-15-06, 09:58 PM
I would be willing to bet that almost no faculty wants a library from a president that has an R next to their name.

90sBear
12-15-06, 10:32 PM
I would be willing to bet that almost no faculty wants a library from a president that has an R next to their name.
Bob Jones?

piratestef
12-15-06, 11:07 PM
I would be willing to bet that almost no faculty wants a library from a president that has an R next to their name.

Are you kidding? Library = money. Money money money. Even liberals understand the good that is money. (Well, sometimes.)

JETHRO
12-16-06, 10:01 AM
If we don't get it, we can at least relish the fact that many ultra-liberal people will have to walk by a giant monument to conservatism every day.

LIB,MR BEARS
12-16-06, 10:07 AM
If we don't get it, we can at least relish the fact that many ultra-liberal people will have to walk by a giant monument to conservatism every day.
I voted for the man twice but I find it hard to believe that anything related to B43 would be a monument to coservatism.:rolleyes:

piratestef
12-16-06, 01:25 PM
I voted for the man twice but I find it hard to believe that anything related to B43 would be a monument to coservatism.:rolleyes:

Amen to that...the government just got bigger and bigger and bigger since he took office. :puke: Not cool on Dubya's part.

BrooksBearLives
12-17-06, 03:57 PM
I don't know if I want it either.

I think we already ***** ourselves out to the republican/conservative right.
We're an institution of Higher Education and should strive to remain outside the ideals of any one set of specific Ideologies and open to all. (open, not accepting/tolerating... but open.)

piratestef
12-17-06, 05:45 PM
Hey, now...there will inevitably be liberals studying W's f-ups, too. I still say library = money.

JETHRO
12-17-06, 09:47 PM
Can you imagine SMU students studying at Bush's "think tank?" :lol:

Southern Baptists, on the other hand, tend to be more conservative and represent a large portion of our military. Think about it....

Dia_del_DougO
12-17-06, 10:10 PM
I would be willing to bet that almost no faculty wants a library from a president that has an R next to their name.

Until it means a "$" next to a whole bunch of numbers for the school.

Dia_del_DougO
12-17-06, 10:14 PM
We're an institution of Higher Education and should strive to remain outside the ideals of any one set of specific Ideologies and open to all. (open, not accepting/tolerating... but open.)

I totally agree. There should be a law that requires one conservative college professor for every commie pinko liberal professor.

Solan=Christ!!!
12-17-06, 10:27 PM
I totally agree. There should be a law that requires one conservative college professor for every commie pinko liberal professor.

Intellectual Affirmative Action?

You go find all the conservative college professors and try to fill those holes. :)

Waco Lions
12-17-06, 11:55 PM
while the library might be an economic boost to BU, it would ultimately be a black eye for the school unless W can get this thing turned around. as of right now, even as a card carrying republican, i don't want the library here.

BrooksBearLives
12-17-06, 11:58 PM
Y'know... I don't really think it would be a "black eye." Yeah, he's unpopular. And yeah, he's making democrats look great.

But I think in the end, few people are going to give two ****s or a dollar about the name. Its the facility and that luciani that comes with it that's gonna make me turn my head. If one of the Presidents put his library in Waco... that makes us legit in the eyes of the world.

Pilot0287
12-18-06, 12:29 AM
plus, people are going to go to it just because it's a PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY. They'll pay to go look around for a while, go through the museum, etc. And students will use the actual museum part.

JETHRO
12-18-06, 10:39 AM
One more note on the "Think Tank" he wants to put in. We already have a "Church and State studies program that could tie in nicely...and save that program from extinction.

cowboycwr
12-18-06, 10:46 AM
In a few years time people will forgot like they have a tendancy to do and no one will really care about the name on the building. Then again in a few years Bush could be veiwed in a different light if things change. IF Iraq becomes a successful country W's image will be drastically different and history may be kinder to him.

And Those Twins
12-18-06, 10:55 AM
SMU is doing the right thing. Why would they want to put their name next to history's worst president?

Yogi
12-18-06, 10:57 AM
SMU is doing the right thing. Why would they want to put their name next to history's worst president?

Franklin Pierce?

And Those Twins
12-18-06, 11:00 AM
he's second worst.

It is only a fool who believes that W has had a presidency that can be categorized anything other than utter failure as he is murdering people at will

Yogi
12-18-06, 11:06 AM
he's second worst.

It is only a fool who believes that W has had a presidency that can be categorized anything other than utter failure as he is murdering people at will

Sorry, you had some credibility there for a second.

Now that you have completely rid yourself of it, you may go on. ;)

cowboycwr
12-18-06, 11:16 AM
he's second worst.

It is only a fool who believes that W has had a presidency that can be categorized anything other than utter failure as he is murdering people at will

without getting into the arguement over whether the war is just, what really has W failed at doing?

Capturing Saddam. Check

killing or capturing much of the leaders of Iraq, Afghanistan and al Qaeda. check

Improving the economy. Check

creating a democracy in Afghanistan. Check

limiting the power of Al Qaeda. Check

creating a democracy in Iraq. (granted there is still alot of infighting) check

tax cuts (even if they were controversial) check

partial birth abortion (again controversial) check

tougher background checks for foster and adoptive parents. check

marriage penalty on taxes decreased. Check

I could go on but I am sure you get the idea. People call him a failure but most cannot point out things other then the reasons we went to war, the lack of capturing Bin laden, controversial issues, what they feel is illegal activities, murder, etc.

I have a feeling that when history is written by people without so much feeling for bush either way he will be seen much less as a failure, less controversial etc. Example. Everyone loved FDR but now people look back and realise he was not as great of a president as once thought.

BearChick
12-18-06, 12:14 PM
The library will be a huge boon for Waco, economy-wise. For those of you who remember Waco before BU joined the Big XII, this will just take that progress even further. When I first came to Waco, there were few restaurants, few hotels, etc. It was a nice-sized small town. The economic development around this library will be much-needed for Waco as a whole. I get excited thinking about what could happen in the city of Waco, not just Baylor, if the library comes to town.

People thought Jimmy Carter was a buffoon, too, when he was in office. Just a peanut farmer from Georgia with a peanut-sized brain is the impression I had of him when I was a kid. My parents disliked him so much I was embarrassed to be born during the Carter administration as a kid. But in the intervening 30 years, Carter has completely changed his legacy. I'm not saying GWB is going to become some world humanitarian, etc., but it's possible that he is not always going to be as reviled as he is now.

I think that we should want the library, for a myriad of reasons. At the least, as a business transaction, it's good business for Waco.

eastdallasloco
12-18-06, 12:15 PM
I don't know if I want it either.

I think we already ***** ourselves out to the republican/conservative right.
We're an institution of Higher Education and should strive to remain outside the ideals of any one set of specific Ideologies and open to all. (open, not accepting/tolerating... but open.)


exactly right.

And Those Twins
12-18-06, 01:00 PM
without getting into the arguement over whether the war is just, what really has W failed at doing?

Capturing Saddam. Check SHOULDN"T HAVE BEEN THERE TO BEGIN WITH

killing or capturing much of the leaders of Iraq, Afghanistan and al Qaeda. check WHICH LED TO THE DEATH OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS. GOOD JOB

Improving the economy. Check HOW? ARE YOU CRAZY?

creating a democracy in Afghanistan. Check THE DUMBEST THING YOU'VE SAID YET

limiting the power of Al Qaeda. Check YOU CAN'T SPELL INSURGENCY WITH OUT AL QAEDA

creating a democracy in Iraq. (granted there is still alot of infighting) check OH MY GOODNESS, REMOVE THIS FROM YOUR LIST, EVEN THE OTHER RIGHT WING NUT JOBS ARE EMBARASSED YOU PUT THIS ON THERE

tax cuts (even if they were controversial) check SMOKESCREEN TO DIVERT ATTENTION FROM FOREIGN POLICY

partial birth abortion (again controversial) check AGREED, GOOD ACCOMPLISHMENT

tougher background checks for foster and adoptive parents. check REACHING HERE HOMEBOY

marriage penalty on taxes decreased. Check

I could go on but I am sure you get the idea. People call him a failure but most cannot point out things other then the reasons we went to war, the lack of capturing Bin laden, controversial issues, what they feel is illegal activities, murder, etc.

I have a feeling that when history is written by people without so much feeling for bush either way he will be seen much less as a failure, less controversial etc. Example. Everyone loved FDR but now people look back and realise he was not as great of a president as once thought.

WHAT ABOUT THE LEADERSHIP LOSING CONTROL OF THE SENATE AND HOUSE? PROUD OF THAT? SEE ABOVE FOR THE REST OF MY REBUTTAL

BrooksBearLives
12-18-06, 01:01 PM
without getting into the arguement over whether the war is just, what really has W failed at doing?

Capturing Saddam. Check

killing or capturing much of the leaders of Iraq, Afghanistan and al Qaeda. check

Improving the economy. Check

creating a democracy in Afghanistan. Check

limiting the power of Al Qaeda. Check

creating a democracy in Iraq. (granted there is still alot of infighting) check

tax cuts (even if they were controversial) check

partial birth abortion (again controversial) check

tougher background checks for foster and adoptive parents. check

marriage penalty on taxes decreased. Check

I could go on but I am sure you get the idea. People call him a failure but most cannot point out things other then the reasons we went to war, the lack of capturing Bin laden, controversial issues, what they feel is illegal activities, murder, etc.

I have a feeling that when history is written by people without so much feeling for bush either way he will be seen much less as a failure, less controversial etc. Example. Everyone loved FDR but now people look back and realise he was not as great of a president as once thought.
I'm sorry.

But I can counter every point you made (and many of them were INCREDIBLY suspect and can be disagreed with) simply by saying

The ends do not justify the means. Every administration has had its successes and its failures. And it is extremely unfair how short-memoried some people can be. Clinton had his screw-ups. But then again, his biggest one didn't get anyone killed. It just made the republicans/America look like uptight witch hunters... so I guess at least that much was true...

but even still. Most of the time Good leadership is nothing more than disappointing people at a rate they can handle. And at that, Bush has failed miserably.

in winning he has lost so much more. Pyrrhic victories all around?

I want the library like an aspiring artist wants a job waiting tables... but you know you got to "do by to get by."

In the long run, it'll help. I just hope we don't sell our souls to get it.

cowboycwr
12-18-06, 01:48 PM
WHAT ABOUT THE LEADERSHIP LOSING CONTROL OF THE SENATE AND HOUSE? PROUD OF THAT? SEE ABOVE FOR THE REST OF MY REBUTTAL


so because i don't think everything W has done is a total failure I suddenly support the guy? maybe you are the idiot for thinking that I do.

didn't clinton lose control while he was in office?

cowboycwr
12-18-06, 01:51 PM
I'm sorry.

But I can counter every point you made (and many of them were INCREDIBLY suspect and can be disagreed with) simply by saying

The ends do not justify the means. Every administration has had its successes and its failures. And it is extremely unfair how short-memoried some people can be. Clinton had his screw-ups. But then again, his biggest one didn't get anyone killed. It just made the republicans/America look like uptight witch hunters... so I guess at least that much was true...

but even still. Most of the time Good leadership is nothing more than disappointing people at a rate they can handle. And at that, Bush has failed miserably.

in winning he has lost so much more. Pyrrhic victories all around?

I want the library like an aspiring artist wants a job waiting tables... but you know you got to "do by to get by."

In the long run, it'll help. I just hope we don't sell our souls to get it.

so counter them.

I am simply pointing out that many people can only point at W's failure to find a quick solution to iraq but forget about some of the other positive things he has done. (while there are not many of them there are some).

I am not a W supporter I just do no think he is as bad as some people think and that in the future (depending on how things turn out with Iraq, Afghanistan, Al Qaeda, etc) he may not be seen as the huge failure he is often portrayed as now.

JETHRO
12-18-06, 01:55 PM
I think it is funny when "And those Twins" tries to use his brain. :lol:

BrooksBearLives
12-18-06, 02:22 PM
so counter them.

I am simply pointing out that many people can only point at W's failure to find a quick solution to iraq but forget about some of the other positive things he has done. (while there are not many of them there are some).

I am not a W supporter I just do no think he is as bad as some people think and that in the future (depending on how things turn out with Iraq, Afghanistan, Al Qaeda, etc) he may not be seen as the huge failure he is often portrayed as now.
I don't WANT people to forget how badly he ****ED UP in Iraq. People, conservatives, especially, countered his "lack of intelligence" by saying how he'd surround himself with the best. Well that didn't work out so well, did it?

We rushed into Iraq. We ran rough-shod, for whatever reasons, (did anyone else think we were moving too fast?) and what do you know, it turns out that we didn't have HALF as many men committed at the beginning that we needed to get the job done. As a result, a power vacuum allowed any ******* with a gun and a copy of the Qur'an to set up his own little neighborhood kingdom.

I don't know how you could think that Afghanistan is going to be better. I do'nt understand how you think violence in the middle east is goign to get any better. If anything, it'll get worse, because we've proven ourselves completely impotent over there. They've called our bluff and W was too much of a moron to realize that a King-ace-deuce-3-4 isn't a straight and he bet the house.

but... that being said. I don't think he's a murderer. I think he honestly thought he was doing the world a favor.

And you are right in that his reputation will recover a bit. But I honestly think its only because it really can't get any worse. Over time people will think "meh... what were so mad about again?"

Maybe.

Who knows. But the building will be nice.

And Those Twins
12-18-06, 03:52 PM
I think it is funny when "And those Twins" tries to use his brain. :lol:

as I find it funny when our President tries to use his

Republicans should try to use theirs as well, instead of blindly following this man. Stand up for what is right. I promise you no black people will move into your neighborhood.

JETHRO
12-18-06, 05:19 PM
I wasn't taking the Repulican's side. It's just after all the "tagging" stories and other crap you've posted on this site, it's funny to see you try to have a meaningful debate. Kinda like Paris Hilton being political. That is all. :)

boxster
12-18-06, 05:29 PM
And it is extremely unfair how short-memoried some people can be. Clinton had his screw-ups. But then again, his biggest one didn't get anyone killed.

Slow down on that one.

BrooksBearLives
12-19-06, 10:00 AM
Slow down on that one.
you think his tagging Monica Lewinsky's DRESS is going to get someone killed?

Please explain. I'm intrigued...

BrooksBearLives
12-19-06, 10:11 AM
Queue the Ghost of Vince Foster...or those killed when he launched cruise missle attacks to take the spotlight off Monica...or those killed on 9/11 b/c Clinton was too distracted (and weakened) from the Lewinsky deal to actually focus on the growing terror threat...
Really? You think so?

But Bush wasn't distracted when he "ignored" the same threats...

Yawn, Esq. You're reaching so very hard right there.

cowboycwr
12-19-06, 10:31 AM
Every administration has had its successes and its failures. And it is extremely unfair how short-memoried some people can be. Clinton had his screw-ups. But then again, his biggest one didn't get anyone killed.

I would by no means call the Lewinsky scandal Clinton's biggest screw-up, mistake, failure, or whatever. I might point out the fact that 30 years from now when he is studied in a history class things that will be looked at will be the non reaction to events like Rwanda, late reaction to serbia, soft reaction to terrorism, failure to get health care, failure to create a lasting peace in the middle east that turned into active fighting, and several other smaller things.

While he did have a few successes: the economy got better (although it can be argued it wasn't him), he helped stop the fighting in serbia, but after that in the end he will not be remembered for much else.

BrooksBearLives
12-19-06, 10:32 AM
Bush had been in office less than 9 months when this happened. The plot originated during the Clinton admin.

As to "ingnoring" threats, my concern is that Bush is currently ignoring (or at least not acting on) various other threats to our security (Iran, N. Korea, etc) b/c he is too bogged down and too weakened from Iraq.

It's never a good situation, and will end up costing us again...next time probably bigger than 9/11.
Well we agree there. With what is going on in Iran and North Korea, it seems LUDACRIS (chikin' and beer, son) that we're so invested in Iraq. But personally, I think its our bed, we made it (when we elected him, and followed it all up with 60-80% approval ratings) and I don't think its right that Iraqi's have to sleep in it. However, I do think we should split the ***** up. Just split Iraq up. Segregate the hell out of it. Fine. That's what they want? That's what they can have. Build walls and everything. The whole 9, baby.

And let the Hoff play in a horrible shirt when they tear those walls down 20 years from now.

Personally, I think it is just as likely that President Bush invaded Iraq to keep Americans mobilized behind him (as the war on terror was stalling). Though I do not think His nor President Clinton's actions were as nefarious as that. They probably honestly thought they were doing good things, just doing them at a time that was "opportune" to their administrations.

FDR did the same thing on a scale neither of them could hope to appreciate.

BrooksBearLives
12-19-06, 10:38 AM
I would by no means call the Lewinsky scandal Clinton's biggest screw-up, mistake, failure, or whatever. I might point out the fact that 30 years from now when he is studied in a history class things that will be looked at will be the non reaction to events like Rwanda, late reaction to serbia, soft reaction to terrorism, failure to get health care, failure to create a lasting peace in the middle east that turned into active fighting, and several other smaller things.

While he did have a few successes: the economy got better (although it can be argued it wasn't him), he helped stop the fighting in serbia, but after that in the end he will not be remembered for much else.
He was the first black president.

He was a damn good president. He did a lot more than that. You're really not being fair.

Come on, who really could have seen 9/11 coming? I mean, we knew there was something happening. But 9/11 would have happened to absolutely any President, no matter how awesome or vigilant, conservative or liberal they were. Lets just be fair.

With the pure amount of crap that gets put on their desks everyday, its impressive they have any real grasp of what's going on at all. (And we put a C student in there... but whatever).

But what we CAN do is learn from our mistakes. And has Bush really done that? You talk about the middle east and Clinton... but did Bush really do any better? And he has the burden of knowledge, too.

And even MORE telling is Darfur...

And Rwanda is the same as Darfur... only we supposedly "learned a lesson" from Rwanda... so which is worse? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice... shame on... well that guy got fooled the first time... its still his fault...

cowboycwr
12-19-06, 11:44 AM
He was the first black president.

He was a damn good president. He did a lot more than that. You're really not being fair. like what?? name something. I'm telling you history will know Clinton as a do nothing, 2nd person to get impeached president.

Come on, who really could have seen 9/11 coming? I mean, we knew there was something happening. But 9/11 would have happened to absolutely any President, no matter how awesome or vigilant, conservative or liberal they were. Lets just be fair.

With the pure amount of crap that gets put on their desks everyday, its impressive they have any real grasp of what's going on at all. (And we put a C student in there... but whatever). I guess it depends on what school you are talking about with those grades. I mean a C at MIT is much more impressive then an A in the same class at Prairie view ATM.

But what we CAN do is learn from our mistakes. And has Bush really done that? You talk about the middle east and Clinton... but did Bush really do any better? And he has the burden of knowledge, too. Has Bush pushed for peace as hard as Clinton did? I don't remember any peace accords, peace talks, etc under Bush falling apart into open fighting in the streets.

And even MORE telling is Darfur...

And Rwanda is the same as Darfur... only we supposedly "learned a lesson" from Rwanda... so which is worse? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice... shame on... well that guy got fooled the first time... its still his fault...


Rwanda we (the world, UN, US) did nothing. In Darfur while the US has not done much by itself the UN has tried to send in peacekeepers but Sudan has said peacekeepers would be seen as foreign invaders and attacked. This has kept countries from sending troops in. This would probably be similar to Somalia if the UN, Nato, etc sent troops in when the Sudanese government does not want them there. Each side might attack the peace keepers and/or try to use them as sheilds, advantages, etc.

So saying Bush, the UN or anyone else is sitting by and doing nothing while Darfur is going on is incorrect. The world is trying to do something short of attacking the Sudanese government but in a nation that does not trade much with other countries, trade embargoes do not have much effect. I do not see how this can be blamed on Bush or Clinton or any American. Many Americans have tried to do something but it is hard to get 2 sides who do not want peace to sit down and talk peace when you don't really have any leverage over them (trade, guns, medical supplies, food, etc)

BrooksBearLives
12-19-06, 12:04 PM
Name something. I'm telling you history will know Clinton as a do nothing, 2nd person to get impeached president. I'm not getting into that... That's a rabbit that your willfull ignorance won't allow the conversation to chase. (you'd just argue minutia) If you tried HALF as hard to find good in President Clinton as you did in President Bush, this point would be moot.

Come on, who really could have seen 9/11 coming? I mean, we knew there was something happening. But 9/11 would have happened to absolutely any President, no matter how awesome or vigilant, conservative or liberal they were. Lets just be fair. What... no comment on that?

I guess it depends on what school you are talking about with those grades. I mean a C at MIT is much more impressive then an A in the same class at Prairie view ATM. First of all, MIT ISN'T Yale, okay? There's very little if ANY social promotion at MIT. We all know how Bush got into Yale. Let's just not jerk each other off on that. And C's? Meh. I've written papers on Grade inflation at Harvard and Yale. C's are given there. Earned? That's up to debate.

Getting a C there is tantamount to a failing grade everywhere else if you want to be absolutely honest. Do NOT try to tell me Bush is exceedingly intelligent. He's average. He wrote his ticket on being average.

Maybe we shouldn't settle for average.

Has Bush pushed for peace as hard as Clinton did? I don't remember any peace accords, peace talks, etc under Bush falling apart into open fighting in the streets. Yeah... because Iraq is giving him SOOOOO much room to talk right now. And besides, its hard to have "peace talks" fall apart on you IF YOU REFUSE TO HAVE THEM.

Honestly. Do you even THINK about these topics? And for the record, I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I've never voted straight-ticket in my life. Though I will admit I do have a slight, liberal slant, my natural contrariness almost always makes me a moderate.

cowboycwr
12-19-06, 01:06 PM
Honestly. Do you even THINK about these topics? And for the record, I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat. I've never voted straight-ticket in my life. Though I will admit I do have a slight, liberal slant, my natural contrariness almost always makes me a moderate.

Okay here are a few of Clinton's successes. he helped peace talks in N ireland. The whole Haiti thing was a success. Once he finally went into Bosnia/Serbia that was a success.

I am not saying Clinton had no success. I am just saying that no matter what you look at (success or failures) he did not really have any that were major. That is why history will more then likely remember him most for being impeached and not much else. However, I think his failures will far outweigh any small success he had b/c any success he had really was small. You say you don't want to argue with me on that because I am not trying to find good in Clinton but I have numerous times and only find failures.

I do not think 9/11 would have happened on any president, i do think it could have and still could happen on any president. So on that we agree in a way. I think more could have been done to stop it and more can be done to prevent another one.

Did I call Bush smart? I don't see those words anywhere in my post. I simply said that a C at some schools is alot better then other places. I think a C at Yale is probably better then an A at most schools. I don't care how/why you got in to the school (sure Bush probably got in b/c of family) but to me it is still impressive that he went to yale and has a masters.

Bush has not refused to have peace talks. He has called for peace numerous times. Even during the recent fighting between Israel and Hezbollah he tried to get both sides to come together but neither side really wanted to talk. No matter who was president during the last bit of fighting would not have been able to hold peace talks then.

Listen I am not a Clinton basher and Bush supporter. I just do not think Clinton is as good as everyone thinks he was. I also do no think Bush is as bad as everyone makes him out to be.

BrooksBearLives
12-19-06, 01:19 PM
Okay here are a few of Clinton's successes. he helped peace talks in N ireland. The whole Haiti thing was a success. Once he finally went into Bosnia/Serbia that was a success.

I am not saying Clinton had no success. I am just saying that no matter what you look at (success or failures) he did not really have any that were major. That is why history will more then likely remember him most for being impeached and not much else. However, I think his failures will far outweigh any small success he had b/c any success he had really was small. You say you don't want to argue with me on that because I am not trying to find good in Clinton but I have numerous times and only find failures.

I do not think 9/11 would have happened on any president, i do think it could have and still could happen on any president. So on that we agree in a way. I think more could have been done to stop it and more can be done to prevent another one.

Did I call Bush smart? I don't see those words anywhere in my post. I simply said that a C at some schools is alot better then other places. I think a C at Yale is probably better then an A at most schools. I don't care how/why you got in to the school (sure Bush probably got in b/c of family) but to me it is still impressive that he went to yale and has a masters.

Bush has not refused to have peace talks. He has called for peace numerous times. Even during the recent fighting between Israel and Hezbollah he tried to get both sides to come together but neither side really wanted to talk. No matter who was president during the last bit of fighting would not have been able to hold peace talks then.

Listen I am not a Clinton basher and Bush supporter. I just do not think Clinton is as good as everyone thinks he was. I also do no think Bush is as bad as everyone makes him out to be.

Well, I think we all can agree on your last couple of sentences... to a point. Bush wasn't a total failure in the idea that he got accomplished many of the things he wanted to accomplish. However, I do NOT agree with many of his tax-cuts. Especially when he's increased spending by so much. And he wants MORE tax cuts. We're robbing Peter to pay the top 1% of Paul.

But meh.

And while I'll agree that Clinton wasn't perfect, I still think that he did a MUCH better job than most conservatives want to give him credit for. Unprecedented economic prosperity. Peace. I think there's much to be said for a President that avoids trouble as opposed to the conqueror. I think, and many can agree, that our foreign policy has been incredibly sh!tty the last 6 years. Unprecedentedly crappy.

The world hates us. And the worst part: they have some pretty good reasons. We have our thumbs in every pie. Especially the pies that serve us.

So I guess I agree with the sentiments you've stated... sorta. I just disagree with your reasons and think your perception is a bit askew.

Yogi
12-19-06, 02:44 PM
Especially when he's increased spending by so much. And he wants MORE tax cuts. We're robbing Peter to pay the top 1% of Paul.


BBL, you know I like you, but if you are going to call people out for not "thinking", then you need to also remove yourself from reliance upon mere political rhetoric as well.

Besides, Marx is so 19th century; you know? ;)

Guys like you and me? Totally beyond that stuff; right? :)

BrooksBearLives
12-19-06, 02:51 PM
BBL, you know I like you, but if you are going to call people out for not "thinking", then you need to also remove yourself from reliance upon mere political rhetoric as well.

Besides, Marx is so 19th century; you know? ;)

Guys like you and me? Totally beyond that stuff; right? :)
hahaha, touche.

I actually thought about that sentence when I wrote it. But I still think its true. The tax cuts really only helped one group of people. One very small group of people.

Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society. (Oliver Wendell Holmes said that)

Besides, I sorta AM a Socialist. Until this week, the background on my Myspace was Che Guevara. True, it was mostly because I think its funny that all these rich kids like to wear the ultra-trendy shirts to assuage their trust-fund guilt... but meh. Whatever.

I think if Christ were King of America, we'd live in a Socialist society. Or something very close to it.

But that's me.

Yogi
12-19-06, 03:09 PM
hahaha, touche.

I actually thought about that sentence when I wrote it. But I still think its true. The tax cuts really only helped one group of people. One very small group of people.

Prove it up, then. The economy is booming due to these tax cuts. Tax cuts generally accomplish two things: (1) they cause reinvestment into the economy; (2) they actually bring in more revenue to the government. See, our tax system is based upon a percentage of income. So, the more money a business makes, the more it pays in taxes. You are assuming that the economy would function equally under tax raises. That's a false assumption. If business income goes down, then the government collects less revenue.


Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society. (Oliver Wendell Holmes said that)

But does that price have to be so high? If it is too expensive to live in a civilized society, then how will civilized society ever exist? Put another way, who is going to work for nothing in return?

"Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition."
-- Thomas Jefferson (Notes on Virginia, Query 19, 1781)


Besides, I sorta AM a Socialist. Until this week, the background on my Myspace was Che Guevara. True, it was mostly because I think its funny that all these rich kids like to wear the ultra-trendy shirts to assuage their trust-fund guilt... but meh. Whatever.

I think if Christ were King of America, we'd live in a Socialist society. Or something very close to it.

But that's me.

But, a closer examination of the Bible reveals that only to be true if the people decide to follow him THEMSELVES.

See, the flaw in your thinking is that Jesus tells his diciples to give individually out of their own hearts - not because he is going to come put a lien on their property or throw them into jail.

Jesus never spoke of the generosity of Government; he spoke of the generosity of man. For example, Jesus told the rich man to share of his own income. He did not tell the rest of the diciples to take the rich man's income and redistribute it.

One more point: your taxes are drawn directly from your paycheck or paid by your bank from escrow if you own property. When that transaction takes place, do you honestly think of the person whom you are helping? Are you feeling love in your heart when that happens? Are you thinking of Jesus when those taxes are paid?

Probably not.

Socialism is nothing more than egalitarianism for the sake of equality oblivious to the fact that human beings are inherently different and the rate of contribution and production is inherently different. Only a fool could ever be a socialist.

BrooksBearLives
12-19-06, 03:50 PM
Sigh... I'll bite...

Prove it up, then. The economy is booming due to these tax cuts. Tax cuts generally accomplish two things: (1) they cause reinvestment into the economy; WRONG. They don't CAUSE reinvestment. They allow for it. People do what they want with their money. Sometimes they take it and invest it into THE MARKET (which could go back into the government in the form of taxes, but then again, they might not which leads to your #2) (2) they actually bring in more revenue to the government. See, our tax system is based upon a percentage of income. So, the more money a business makes, the more it pays in taxes. You are assuming that the economy would function equally under tax raises. That's a false assumption. If business income goes down, then the government collects less revenue. This isn't false. I'll cede that. However, there's a big IF that goes into that which I've already addressed. And I feel the need to point out that this sounds a LOT like "Trickle-down" economics, and we know how well that worked for the 80's recession...

But does that price have to be so high? If it is too expensive to live in a civilized society, then how will civilized society ever exist? Put another way, who is going to work for nothing in return? Alright, Debbie drama. Lets just turn down the stage lights a little, mmkay? Relatively speaking, we don't pay that high of taxes.


Taxation as a percentage of GDP in 2003 was 56.1% in Denmark, 54.5% in France, 49.0% in the Euro area, 42.6% in the United Kingdom, 35.7% in the United States, 35.2% in The Republic of Ireland, and among all OECD members an average of 40.7%

And my point, is that these tax-cuts are for only a small part of the population. A very small portion. Less than 1 in 100 people. So, we act like this is a great thing, we all have more money to spend. When really, we're only geting a cent or two on the dollar while others are getting more. And to be honest, when they (the affected 1%) take into account the money saved by accountants that know the system and can take fair advantage of loopholes, etc. that the average Joe isn't able to, it really ends up being a little more equitable than SOME of us would want to admit.

But face it, you're not pissed about taxes based on idealogical bases... you're pissed because someday you MIGHT be rich.


"Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition."
-- Thomas Jefferson (Notes on Virginia, Query 19, 1781)
Don't get me started on the high-nosed, arrogance and blatant hypocrisy of Tommy Jefferson


But, a closer examination of the Bible reveals that only to be true if the people decide to follow him THEMSELVES. Hold on while I get my LECTURE LISTIN BOOTS!


See, the flaw in your thinking is that Jesus tells his diciples to give individually out of their own hearts - not because he is going to come put a lien on their property or throw them into jail.

Jesus never spoke of the generosity of Government; he spoke of the generosity of man. For example, Jesus told the rich man to share of his own income. He did not tell the rest of the diciples to take the rich man's income and redistribute it.

One more point: your taxes are drawn directly from your paycheck or paid by your bank from escrow if you own property. When that transaction takes place, do you honestly think of the person whom you are helping? Are you feeling love in your heart when that happens? Are you thinking of Jesus when those taxes are paid?

Probably not.
First of all: yes. I honestly do. I am proud to pay taxes because #1. many, MANY people where I grew up, couldn't pay taxes. Nearly half of my and surrounding counties live at or below the poverty line. Saying I pay my taxes is something I look forward to doing. And, I mean that. That line by Oliver Wendell Holmes is something my father said to me when he heard me complaining about losing a quarter of my first paycheck to "the man." It affected me.

Secondly: if you READ CLOSELY, I made a very specific usage of the words "society" and not "government." I'm surprised at you, Yogi. Lawyers usually LOVE fine print. (now its MY turn to be smug haha)

What I meant... shoot, what I actually SAID was that we'd be living in a Socialist Society. And you'll excuse me, but this switching of thinking is EXACTLY the root of what I believe is the largest problem with Modern Christianity. We can't see the difference between society and government. Personally, I think that I should feel as much in common with a Roman Catholic from France as I do with the jerk next door. The Church SHOULD be my society.

I'll continue below.

Socialism is nothing more than egalitarianism for the sake of equality oblivious to the fact that human beings are inherently different and the rate of contribution and production is inherently different. Only a fool could ever be a socialist.
Socialism: is it practical? No. Not really. It's idealistic at best. However, the only real problem the ideals of a socialist government is that it does not factor in human greed and frailty. (haha, that's IT?!?!) It assumes that all people will work hard, therefore everyone deserves the same. Well, some people are lazy, so others, being greedy and small will tend to look over at the next lawn and think its greener and the jerk who lives there doesnt' work as hard. (that's an small-scale practical problem)

IF Christ was King of America, the church and/or the government (I guess), would me more Socialistic than Democratic. And here's why it would really work. We wouldn't have the problems with Christ as we would with a Kaiser or a Tsar or a Dictator.

Christ wouldn't have to worry about re-election or suppressing revolts or coups. He wouldn't squander precious money's Presidential Yachts or Palaces. He truly would govern for the people. And I tell you, THAT was the practical problem with Socialist governments.

I simply wouldn't think those problems would exist on such a scale if Christ were King.

Is it Idealistic? Completely. Will it EVER WORK? Ish don't think so. It requires The Messiah as my leader to be the lynchpin of the plan, so my expectations are limited. However, I DO have hope.

The world is not changed by those who see the world and accept it for what it is, but by those who see it for what it could be and ask why it isn't.

Whew! My hands hurt. And now I have some more work to do to make up for what I wasn't doing while I was writing.

cowboycwr
12-20-06, 07:23 AM
Well, I think we all can agree on your last couple of sentences... to a point. Bush wasn't a total failure in the idea that he got accomplished many of the things he wanted to accomplish. However, I do NOT agree with many of his tax-cuts. Especially when he's increased spending by so much. And he wants MORE tax cuts. We're robbing Peter to pay the top 1% of Paul.

But meh.

And while I'll agree that Clinton wasn't perfect, I still think that he did a MUCH better job than most conservatives want to give him credit for. Unprecedented economic prosperity. Peace. I think there's much to be said for a President that avoids trouble as opposed to the conqueror. I think, and many can agree, that our foreign policy has been incredibly sh!tty the last 6 years. Unprecedentedly crappy.

The world hates us. And the worst part: they have some pretty good reasons. We have our thumbs in every pie. Especially the pies that serve us.

So I guess I agree with the sentiments you've stated... sorta. I just disagree with your reasons and think your perception is a bit askew.

Name a long lasting effect of Clinton that would be worth studying in 40 years in a history class.

there are NONE.

Any economist will tell you that the President actually has very little to do with the economy and whether it is doing well or doing bad. So giving Clinton all the credit for a good economy is going way beyond what he did and giving him credit for it.

Sure Clinton gave us peace, if you consider a terrorist attack about every 2 years peaceful. But then again he had virtually no responses to these terrorists attacks. WE had peace but many places in the world were not peaceful but Clinton did NOTHING about helping those places. Instead he got another shine job and smoked another cigar.

Again, years from now when Clinton is mentioned in history books he will be more like President Harrison, or Arthur. He will be mentioned briefly and in connection to things he didn't really do.

When people talk about clinton I think they have a case of "the good ole days". What I mean is that it seems like everyone seems to remember it being so much better back then when things were actually the same, or slightly better/worse.

Yogi
12-20-06, 09:43 AM
Sigh... I'll bite...




And my point, is that these tax-cuts are for only a small part of the population. A very small portion. Less than 1 in 100 people. So, we act like this is a great thing, we all have more money to spend. When really, we're only geting a cent or two on the dollar while others are getting more. And to be honest, when they (the affected 1%) take into account the money saved by accountants that know the system and can take fair advantage of loopholes, etc. that the average Joe isn't able to, it really ends up being a little more equitable than SOME of us would want to admit.

But face it, you're not pissed about taxes based on idealogical bases... you're pissed because someday you MIGHT be rich.

Don't get me started on the high-nosed, arrogance and blatant hypocrisy of Tommy Jefferson

Hold on while I get my LECTURE LISTIN BOOTS!


First of all: yes. I honestly do. I am proud to pay taxes because #1. many, MANY people where I grew up, couldn't pay taxes. Nearly half of my and surrounding counties live at or below the poverty line. Saying I pay my taxes is something I look forward to doing. And, I mean that. That line by Oliver Wendell Holmes is something my father said to me when he heard me complaining about losing a quarter of my first paycheck to "the man." It affected me.

Secondly: if you READ CLOSELY, I made a very specific usage of the words "society" and not "government." I'm surprised at you, Yogi. Lawyers usually LOVE fine print. (now its MY turn to be smug haha)

What I meant... shoot, what I actually SAID was that we'd be living in a Socialist Society. And you'll excuse me, but this switching of thinking is EXACTLY the root of what I believe is the largest problem with Modern Christianity. We can't see the difference between society and government. Personally, I think that I should feel as much in common with a Roman Catholic from France as I do with the jerk next door. The Church SHOULD be my society.

I'll continue below.

Socialism: is it practical? No. Not really. It's idealistic at best. However, the only real problem the ideals of a socialist government is that it does not factor in human greed and frailty. (haha, that's IT?!?!) It assumes that all people will work hard, therefore everyone deserves the same. Well, some people are lazy, so others, being greedy and small will tend to look over at the next lawn and think its greener and the jerk who lives there doesnt' work as hard. (that's an small-scale practical problem)

IF Christ was King of America, the church and/or the government (I guess), would me more Socialistic than Democratic. And here's why it would really work. We wouldn't have the problems with Christ as we would with a Kaiser or a Tsar or a Dictator.

Christ wouldn't have to worry about re-election or suppressing revolts or coups. He wouldn't squander precious money's Presidential Yachts or Palaces. He truly would govern for the people. And I tell you, THAT was the practical problem with Socialist governments.

I simply wouldn't think those problems would exist on such a scale if Christ were King.

Is it Idealistic? Completely. Will it EVER WORK? Ish don't think so. It requires The Messiah as my leader to be the lynchpin of the plan, so my expectations are limited. However, I DO have hope.

The world is not changed by those who see the world and accept it for what it is, but by those who see it for what it could be and ask why it isn't.

Whew! My hands hurt. And now I have some more work to do to make up for what I wasn't doing while I was writing.

I agree with everything, including the fact that I want to be rich some day.

It's hard to be a philanthropist and a good Christian when you have little to give. :)

Yogi
12-20-06, 09:45 AM
BBL,

One more question: in terms of excesses, why are greed and gluttony worse "sins" than lust?

I hate to generalize, but it seems that the people who chastise those who try to make their lives more pleasant through the accumulation of wealth encourage others to make their lives more pleasant through excessive sex.

Isn't moderation in general a good thing?

Furthermore, is Government forced moderation a good thing?

BrooksBearLives
12-20-06, 11:13 AM
BBL,

One more question: in terms of excesses, why are greed and gluttony worse "sins" than lust?

I hate to generalize, but it seems that the people who chastise those who try to make their lives more pleasant through the accumulation of wealth encourage others to make their lives more pleasant through excessive sex.

Isn't moderation in general a good thing?

Furthermore, is Government forced moderation a good thing?
Incredibly good question, Yogs. And to be honest, I don't know what to say. Personally, I don't see either sin to be "better" than the other. Or even "less bad." A sin, doing one thing when you know it to be wrong, is a sin (is a sin is a sin is a sin).

I'm assuming you're speaking in reference to your current situation. Personally, I see all three of the afore mentioned "sins" to be linked in that they all are driven by base and animal "need" or "nature". There's no superego in it at all.

And listening to Andrew... well I love the guy, I really enjoy his point of view, but he's all Id. He spends his time doing what he wants or finding ways to help him do what he wants (or justifying doing what he wants).

And calling a graduated tax "forced moderation" ISN'T really fair. Taxes aren't driving anyone into the poorhouse. Especially the top 1%. Let's not be dramatic. And if you look at the dispertion of wealth, the distance between the richest and the poorest is growing steadily. A graduated tax wouldn't put a DENT in the income of even the richest of the rich. Bill Gates doesn't complain about taxes.

BrooksBearLives
12-20-06, 11:23 AM
Name a long lasting effect of Clinton that would be worth studying in 40 years in a history class.

there are NONE.

Any economist will tell you that the President actually has very little to do with the economy and whether it is doing well or doing bad. So giving Clinton all the credit for a good economy is going way beyond what he did and giving him credit for it.

Sure Clinton gave us peace, if you consider a terrorist attack about every 2 years peaceful. But then again he had virtually no responses to these terrorists attacks. WE had peace but many places in the world were not peaceful but Clinton did NOTHING about helping those places. Instead he got another shine job and smoked another cigar.

Again, years from now when Clinton is mentioned in history books he will be more like President Harrison, or Arthur. He will be mentioned briefly and in connection to things he didn't really do.

When people talk about clinton I think they have a case of "the good ole days". What I mean is that it seems like everyone seems to remember it being so much better back then when things were actually the same, or slightly better/worse.
Wrong:

Economic Leadership and a Stronger Economy
Under President Clinton's leadership, almost 6 million new jobs were created in the first two years of his Administration -- an average of 250,000 new jobs every month.

In 1994, the economy had the lowest combination of unemployment and inflation in 25 years.

As part of the 1993 Economic Plan, President Clinton cut taxes on 15 million low-income families and made tax cuts available to 90 percent of small businesses, while raising taxes on just 1.2 percent of the wealthiest taxpayers.

President Clinton signed into law the largest deficit reduction plan in history, resulting in over $600 billion in deficit reduction. The deficit is going down for 3 years in a row for the first time since Harry Truman was president.

Fighting Crime and Restoring Our Communities
The President signed into law the Brady Bill, which imposes a five-day waiting period on handgun purchases so that background checks can be done to help keep handguns away from criminals.

The President's Crime Bill will put 100,000 new police officers on the street. More than 1,200 communities have already received grants to hire 27,000 additional officers.

The Crime Bill also punishes criminals by expanding the number of offenses eligible for the death penalty and implementing the "three-strikes-and-you're-out" provision.

And, the Bill banned the manufacture of 19 specific types of deadly assault weapons, while simultaneously protecting hunters' rights by exempting over 650 hunting rifles.

Strengthening Our Families: Security and Opportunity
President Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act. The law, which covers over 42 million Americans, offers workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-guaranteed leave for child birth, adoption, or personal or family illness.

President Clinton expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit to cut the taxes of 15 million working families with incomes of $27,000 or less.

President Clinton granted waivers to 25 states -- half the nation -- providing for comprehensive welfare reform demonstrations.

President Clinton ordered the U.S. Justice Department to conduct the first-ever crackdown on deadbeat parents who refuse to accept financial responsibility for their own children.

Signed an Executive Order cracking down on federal employees who owe child support.

Cutting Bureaucracy
President Clinton has already cut the federal bureaucracy by more than 100,000 positions. Under the recommendations of the National Performance Review, the federal bureaucracy will be reduced by 272,000 -- its lowest level since the Kennedy Administration.

And, he reduced the White House staff by 25 percent.

Making Education A Priority
Under the President's Direct Student Loan program, students can borrow money directly from the government at a lower interest rate and with many flexible repayment options, including the option to repay with a percentage of their after-graduation salary. Taxpayers will save at least $4.3 billion over five years.

In 1994, over 20,000 AmeriCorps members tutored students, immunized children, reclaimed urban parks, and patrolled neighborhoods. In return, they earned $4,725 per year of service towards college tuition or job training.

Expanding Markets for American Products
The Clinton Administration forged a bipartisan coalition to pass NAFTA, after concluding tough negotiations on side agreements covering workers' rights, the environment, and import surges. Exports to Mexico rose 23 percent in the first 11 months of 1994.

President Clinton led the fight to pass GATT, which lowers tariffs worldwide by $744 billion over ten years -- the largest international tax cut in history. GATT cuts tariffs on manufactured goods by more than one-third overall and eliminates tariffs in major markets in a number of sectors in which the U.S. is particularly competitive.

Promoting Security and Freedom Abroad
President Clinton hosted the signing of the Israeli-Palestinian Declaration of Principles in September, 1993, and the signing of the Israeli-Jordan Washington Principles in July, 1994 -- historic agreements between the leaders of Israel and her Arab neighbors to settle differences by peaceful means.

To enhance European security and stability, the Clinton Administration proposed the Partnership for Peace program, offering former Soviet republics and Central/East European states closer ties with NATO. Already, 22 nations have signed on, since NATO's adoption of the program in January, 1994.

As of May, 1994, nuclear missiles in Russia and the United States are no longer targeted against any country. And, as a result of other Clinton Administration efforts, the Ukraine is ahead of schedule in reaching the goal of transferring 1,500 nuclear warheads to Russia for dismantlement.

President Clinton peacefully restored democracy to Haiti, curbing the violence that threatened tens of thousands of Haitians, securing our borders, and upholding our commitments and the commitments made to us in the process.

CREATING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND SECURITY FOR ALL AMERICANS
Signed the Economic Package, August 10, 1993.
The economy created 7.7 million new jobs in the first 34 months of this Administration.
Passed the largest deficit-cutting plan in history -- saving more than $1 trillion over seven years.
On track for three consecutive years of deficit reduction -- for the first time since Harry Truman.
Cut federal spending by $255 billion over 5 years.
Made new tax cuts available to over 90% of small businesses.
Unemployment has fallen from 7% when President Clinton took office to its current rate of 5.6%
Lowest combined rate of unemployment and inflation since 1968.
1994 real GDP growth was the highest in a decade.
Proposed a plan to balance the budget while protecting critical investments in education.

PROMOTING A FUTURE OF OPPORTUNITY
Increased Head Start funding by almost $760 million.
Passed the Student Loan Reform Act, August 10, 1993.
Implemented the National Service Act, September 21, 1993.
Signed the Goals 2000: Educate America Act, March 31, 1994.
Enacted the School-to-Work Opportunities Act on May 4, 1994.
Signed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Reauthorization

MAKING COMMUNITIES AND SCHOOLS SAFE FOR OUR FAMILIES
Passed the toughest most comprehensive Crime Bill ever, September 13, 1994
Signed the Brady Bill, November 30, 1993.
Enacted the Assault Weapons Ban as part of the Crime Bill.
Put 100,000 new police on the street -- nearly 31,000 more officers have been funded.
Signed the Violence Against Women Act as part of the Crime Bill.
Signed the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Act, October 20, 1994.
Issued Presidential Directive enforcing a "Zero Tolerance" gun policy in schools, October 22, 1994
Submitted and fought for the most comprehensive Drug Control budget ever.

MAKING GOVERNMENT WORK BETTER AND COST LESS
cut the Federal Workforce by over 200,000 -- on the way to lowest level in 30 years.
Abolishing 16,000 pages of obsolete regulations and rewriting 31,000 more pages.
$58 billion in savings are already in the bank. $46 billion in savings are still to come.
Over 180 new recommendations will save $70 billion. Eliminated 284 federal advisory committees.
Developed government-wide Customer Service Standards for the first time.
Appointed the most diverse Cabinet and Administration in history.
Reformed Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation to protect 8.5 million pensions.
Signed the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, March 22, 1995.

PROMOTING HEALTH CARE FOR ALL AMERICANS
Passed the Family and Medical Leave Act, February 5, 1993.
Signed a comprehensive Child Immunization Plan.
Revoked the Reagan/Bush restrictions on abortion counseling ("the gag rule"), abortions in military hospitals, "Mexico City" policy and RU-486 imports.
Increased Ryan White CARE Act funding for outpatient AIDS care over 100% in first 3 budgets.
Put the Women, Infants and Children Program (WIC) on a full-funding path.
Increased funding 65% for breast cancer research.
As part of the balanced budget plan, introduced health care reform initiative which strengthens Medicare and expands coverage.
Proposed a $1.3 billion increase in veterans' benefits -- of which $1 billion will be directed to the VA health system to provide treatment for 43,000 more veterans.

PRESERVING AND STRENGTHENING OUR FAMILIES
Expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit providing tax relief for 15 million working families.
Introduced the Work and Responsibility Act - comprehensive welfare reform.
Passed the Family Support and Preservation Program.
Passed major funding increases for homeless programs in both Houses.
Approved 35 waivers to states permitting comprehensive welfare reform demonstrations.
Collected a record $10 billion in child support through enforcement in 1994.
Signed the Social Security Independent Agency Act.
Increased adoption and foster care funds by almost $600 million from 1994-1995.

NAFTA

Helped Israel and Jordan achieve an historic peace treaty and Israel and the Palestinians fulfill their historic accord.
Contributed to an historic cease-fire in Northern Ireland.
Bosnia.
Persuaded Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan to give up the nuclear weapons left on their land when the Soviet Union collapsed.
Led the international effort to secure the indefinite and unconditional extension of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) further reducing the danger of nuclear proliferation around the world.
http://www.perkel.com/politics/clinton/accomp.htm

Yogi
12-20-06, 12:54 PM
Incredibly good question, Yogs. And to be honest, I don't know what to say. Personally, I don't see either sin to be "better" than the other. Or even "less bad." A sin, doing one thing when you know it to be wrong, is a sin (is a sin is a sin is a sin).

I'm assuming you're speaking in reference to your current situation. Personally, I see all three of the afore mentioned "sins" to be linked in that they all are driven by base and animal "need" or "nature". There's no superego in it at all.

And listening to Andrew... well I love the guy, I really enjoy his point of view, but he's all Id. He spends his time doing what he wants or finding ways to help him do what he wants (or justifying doing what he wants).

And calling a graduated tax "forced moderation" ISN'T really fair. Taxes aren't driving anyone into the poorhouse. Especially the top 1%. Let's not be dramatic. And if you look at the dispertion of wealth, the distance between the richest and the poorest is growing steadily. A graduated tax wouldn't put a DENT in the income of even the richest of the rich. Bill Gates doesn't complain about taxes.

Understood, which leads me to my next point: what about beeeewwwbs?

piratestef
12-20-06, 01:14 PM
I say GWB43's library should be all about beeeeeeeewwwwwwbs.

Baylor would land it in no time.

BrooksBearLives
12-20-06, 01:31 PM
Beeeeeewwwwbs is a commodity everyone can appreciate. No?

Yogi
12-20-06, 01:45 PM
At least they should be shared...

cowboycwr
12-20-06, 04:56 PM
Wrong:

Economic Leadership and a Stronger Economy
Under President Clinton's leadership, almost 6 million new jobs were created in the first two years of his Administration -- an average of 250,000 new jobs every month. How many of those jobs were a direct result of him? The president can have an impact on the economy but not as large as everyone thinks.

In 1994, the economy had the lowest combination of unemployment and inflation in 25 years. Again not all tied directly to him.

As part of the 1993 Economic Plan, President Clinton cut taxes on 15 million low-income families and made tax cuts available to 90 percent of small businesses, while raising taxes on just 1.2 percent of the wealthiest taxpayers. Don't you mean Congress? The president cannot cut taxes by himself.

President Clinton signed into law the largest deficit reduction plan in history, resulting in over $600 billion in deficit reduction. The deficit is going down for 3 years in a row for the first time since Harry Truman was president. The deficit would really go down if we made countries pay back loans we give them. But yes he did cut it down, however it was not long lasting and had very few benefits to the american people

Fighting Crime and Restoring Our Communities
The President signed into law the Brady Bill, which imposes a five-day waiting period on handgun purchases so that background checks can be done to help keep handguns away from criminals. Research shows that most handgun crimes happen with illegal handguns so this law is still questionable as to whether it had any effect.

The President's Crime Bill will put 100,000 new police officers on the street. More than 1,200 communities have already received grants to hire 27,000 additional officers. Look at cities that cut police force size during this same time to see the result. The grants were short term and when that money ran out many departments had to either institute a hiring freeze or let officers go.

The Crime Bill also punishes criminals by expanding the number of offenses eligible for the death penalty and implementing the "three-strikes-and-you're-out" provision. Which doesn't work. This was also mainly for federal crimes so it had little impact on states.

And, the Bill banned the manufacture of 19 specific types of deadly assault weapons, while simultaneously protecting hunters' rights by exempting over 650 hunting rifles. Has it stopped these guns from hitting the streets?

Strengthening Our Families: Security and Opportunity
President Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act. The law, which covers over 42 million Americans, offers workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-guaranteed leave for child birth, adoption, or personal or family illness. Which most companies in the US don't have to follow.

President Clinton expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit to cut the taxes of 15 million working families with incomes of $27,000 or less.

President Clinton granted waivers to 25 states -- half the nation -- providing for comprehensive welfare reform demonstrations.

President Clinton ordered the U.S. Justice Department to conduct the first-ever crackdown on deadbeat parents who refuse to accept financial responsibility for their own children. Good plan but I know first hand it doesn't work like its supposed to. To many deadbeats still skip out on child payments and get away with it.

Signed an Executive Order cracking down on federal employees who owe child support. Which hasn't happened much.

Cutting Bureaucracy
President Clinton has already cut the federal bureaucracy by more than 100,000 positions. Under the recommendations of the National Performance Review, the federal bureaucracy will be reduced by 272,000 -- its lowest level since the Kennedy Administration. CUT JOBS.

And, he reduced the White House staff by 25 percent. And stole 25 percent of the furniture

Making Education A Priority
Under the President's Direct Student Loan program, students can borrow money directly from the government at a lower interest rate and with many flexible repayment options, including the option to repay with a percentage of their after-graduation salary. Taxpayers will save at least $4.3 billion over five years. This was good.

In 1994, over 20,000 AmeriCorps members tutored students, immunized children, reclaimed urban parks, and patrolled neighborhoods. In return, they earned $4,725 per year of service towards college tuition or job training. You can get more from the military or various other ways.

Expanding Markets for American Products
The Clinton Administration forged a bipartisan coalition to pass NAFTA, after concluding tough negotiations on side agreements covering workers' rights, the environment, and import surges. Exports to Mexico rose 23 percent in the first 11 months of 1994. And the jobs went south of the border

President Clinton led the fight to pass GATT, which lowers tariffs worldwide by $744 billion over ten years -- the largest international tax cut in history. GATT cuts tariffs on manufactured goods by more than one-third overall and eliminates tariffs in major markets in a number of sectors in which the U.S. is particularly competitive.

Promoting Security and Freedom Abroad
President Clinton hosted the signing of the Israeli-Palestinian Declaration of Principles in September, 1993, and the signing of the Israeli-Jordan Washington Principles in July, 1994 -- historic agreements between the leaders of Israel and her Arab neighbors to settle differences by peaceful means. How is the peace Israel and its neighbors? or between ISrael and the Palestinians? oh that's right they invaded lebanon and fought the Palestinians on numerous times expecially 2000

To enhance European security and stability, the Clinton Administration proposed the Partnership for Peace program, offering former Soviet republics and Central/East European states closer ties with NATO. Already, 22 nations have signed on, since NATO's adoption of the program in January, 1994. Wow big deal. What does this prove? Nato has outlived its purpose. Except for helping in Bosnia/Serbia NATOhas not done much

As of May, 1994, nuclear missiles in Russia and the United States are no longer targeted against any country. And, as a result of other Clinton Administration efforts, the Ukraine is ahead of schedule in reaching the goal of transferring 1,500 nuclear warheads to Russia for dismantlement. Right our missisles dont target anyone. I can tell you they do. we just say they don't

President Clinton peacefully restored democracy to Haiti, curbing the violence that threatened tens of thousands of Haitians, securing our borders, and upholding our commitments and the commitments made to us in the process. How is Haiti doing? oh thats right more violence.

CREATING ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND SECURITY FOR ALL AMERICANS
Signed the Economic Package, August 10, 1993.
The economy created 7.7 million new jobs in the first 34 months of this Administration.
Passed the largest deficit-cutting plan in history -- saving more than $1 trillion over seven years.
On track for three consecutive years of deficit reduction -- for the first time since Harry Truman.
Cut federal spending by $255 billion over 5 years.
Made new tax cuts available to over 90% of small businesses.
Unemployment has fallen from 7% when President Clinton took office to its current rate of 5.6%
Lowest combined rate of unemployment and inflation since 1968.
1994 real GDP growth was the highest in a decade.
Proposed a plan to balance the budget while protecting critical investments in education.

PROMOTING A FUTURE OF OPPORTUNITY
Increased Head Start funding by almost $760 million.
Passed the Student Loan Reform Act, August 10, 1993.
Implemented the National Service Act, September 21, 1993.
Signed the Goals 2000: Educate America Act, March 31, 1994.
Enacted the School-to-Work Opportunities Act on May 4, 1994.
Signed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Reauthorization

MAKING COMMUNITIES AND SCHOOLS SAFE FOR OUR FAMILIES
Passed the toughest most comprehensive Crime Bill ever, September 13, 1994
Signed the Brady Bill, November 30, 1993.
Enacted the Assault Weapons Ban as part of the Crime Bill.
Put 100,000 new police on the street -- nearly 31,000 more officers have been funded.
Signed the Violence Against Women Act as part of the Crime Bill.
Signed the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Act, October 20, 1994.
Issued Presidential Directive enforcing a "Zero Tolerance" gun policy in schools, October 22, 1994
Submitted and fought for the most comprehensive Drug Control budget ever.

MAKING GOVERNMENT WORK BETTER AND COST LESS
cut the Federal Workforce by over 200,000 -- on the way to lowest level in 30 years.
Abolishing 16,000 pages of obsolete regulations and rewriting 31,000 more pages. this rewriting actually added pages.
$58 billion in savings are already in the bank. $46 billion in savings are still to come.
Over 180 new recommendations will save $70 billion. Eliminated 284 federal advisory committees. which cut thousands of jobs.
Developed government-wide Customer Service Standards for the first time.
Appointed the most diverse Cabinet and Administration in history. check again. Bush has now the most diverse cabinet. Bush has appointed more females and minorities. Clinton had the most diverse.
Reformed Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation to protect 8.5 million pensions.
Signed the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, March 22, 1995.

PROMOTING HEALTH CARE FOR ALL AMERICANS
Passed the Family and Medical Leave Act, February 5, 1993.
Signed a comprehensive Child Immunization Plan.
Revoked the Reagan/Bush restrictions on abortion counseling ("the gag rule"), abortions in military hospitals, "Mexico City" policy and RU-486 imports.
Increased Ryan White CARE Act funding for outpatient AIDS care over 100% in first 3 budgets.
Put the Women, Infants and Children Program (WIC) on a full-funding path.
Increased funding 65% for breast cancer research.
As part of the balanced budget plan, introduced health care reform initiative which strengthens Medicare and expands coverage.
Proposed a $1.3 billion increase in veterans' benefits -- of which $1 billion will be directed to the VA health system to provide treatment for 43,000 more veterans.

PRESERVING AND STRENGTHENING OUR FAMILIES
Expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit providing tax relief for 15 million working families.
Introduced the Work and Responsibility Act - comprehensive welfare reform.
Passed the Family Support and Preservation Program.
Passed major funding increases for homeless programs in both Houses.
Approved 35 waivers to states permitting comprehensive welfare reform demonstrations.
Collected a record $10 billion in child support through enforcement in 1994.
Signed the Social Security Independent Agency Act.
Increased adoption and foster care funds by almost $600 million from 1994-1995.

NAFTA

Helped Israel and Jordan achieve an historic peace treaty and Israel and the Palestinians fulfill their historic accord.
Contributed to an historic cease-fire in Northern Ireland.
Bosnia. only because he didn't want the French to show him up. Also, Bosnia is still not a peaceful place, not violent like it was but is still struggling to find balance.
Persuaded Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan to give up the nuclear weapons left on their land when the Soviet Union collapsed.
Led the international effort to secure the indefinite and unconditional extension of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) further reducing the danger of nuclear proliferation around the world. Which seems to be going great!!!! oh wait.
http://www.perkel.com/politics/clinton/accomp.htm

Most of what you list as examples were laws passed by congress that did not originate with clinton. All he did was sign them.

You show alot of things that he did but fail to mention any of the long term affects or how these programs are doing today. You also fail to mention how successful some of these laws have been in acheiving their goals.

BrooksBearLives
12-20-06, 05:03 PM
You fail to see how pathetic you look when trying to poke holes in an argument just CLINGING to the thought that you were "more right" than someone else.

I actually feel a little bad for you.

I don't know if I want to respond to anything you say on this thread. If you want to be like this, take it to the R&P boards.

cowboycwr
12-21-06, 02:18 AM
You fail to see how pathetic you look when trying to poke holes in an argument just CLINGING to the thought that you were "more right" than someone else.

I actually feel a little bad for you.

I don't know if I want to respond to anything you say on this thread. If you want to be like this, take it to the R&P boards.


I am not trying to be more "right" than anyone. I feel Clinton was not as good of a president as everyone makes him out to be. I in no way think he was a failure but do think he may not be remembered for much else other than Lewinsky and being the 2nd president to be impeached. I know that alot of people do not feel the way I do and frankly I don't care. Time will tell how Clinton is remembered. I may be wrong or I may be right. I really don't care either way.

Feel bad for me all you want but know this, I have an opinion and I am going to voice it. I really don't care how many people agree with me or how many people I "convince" because that is not my purpose. My sole point when we started this whole debate was to express my opinions, and others, about Clinton. If you disagree then fine and I am gald you take a stance and back it up and thank you for the discussion. If you still feel bad for me and don't want to respond then fine I really don't care. I thought we were having a decent civilized discussion. If i offended you that was not my intention.

Sam Lowry
12-21-06, 09:09 PM
Name a long lasting effect of Clinton that would be worth studying in 40 years in a history class.

there are NONE.

We'll be lucky if the same holds true for Bush.

piratestef
12-21-06, 09:12 PM
*sigh*

If it goes to SMU, they better not make it about da boobies.

We better elect a president from Waco in '08 who does nothing but da boobies. Then we get our library and our beeeeeeeewwwwwwwwbs.