The Bush Legacy

“LOL@ Stovie”

“It's unkind to laugh at someone like Stoviet who is physically and mentally challenged, Al.”

“People who defend this crap ---- We know what you are.”

“People who defend Pelosi ---- We know what you are.
Hypocrites”

“How sub-human of you.

That's part of your heritage as well, is it not.”

“only fair to keep this clowns name at the top next to obama...”

“I wish it was that simple that the prez was the most of our problems.”

“I think all presidents spent 3 years cleaning up the prior pres mess, then 1 year trying to change things.

cirlce jerk of life :(”

“
Grand Jury Inquiry on Destruction of C.I.A. Tapes
by MARK MAZZETTI
Published: July 2, 2009

WASHINGTON — Current and former top Central Intelligence Agency officers have appeared before a federal grand jury in Virginia as part of an 18-month investigation into the agency’s destruction of 92 videotapes depicting the brutal interrogations of two Qaeda detainees.

The witnesses recently called by the special prosecutor, former government officials said, include the agency’s top officer in London and Porter J. Goss, who was C.I.A. director when the tapes were destroyed in November 2005.

The grand jury testimony of C.I.A. officers is further evidence that, despite President Obama’s pledge not to punish agency operatives for their role in the detention and interrogation of terrorism suspects, the shadow of the controversial program still looms over the agency’s daily operations.

The court appearances are tied to a criminal investigation led by John L. Durham, whom the Justice Department appointed in January 2008 to investigate the destruction of the tapes. The tapes had shown C.I.A. officers using harsh interrogation methods, including waterboarding, on two detainees, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.

”

“I don't care.”

“A co-conspiritor after the fact.”

“Poor little t*lt. Bush isn't the President anymore.

It's The One's fault now. LOL”

“Now that Sarah is no longer governor of Alaska, she's coming down to straighten Stewball's act out.
last edited: 7/03/09 2:41:49 PM”

“Perhaps she'll take the time to dust off her old Poli Sci 101 text and do some reading.”

“Poor t*lty's not quite sane, is he?”

“Tilt is looking for a crime that never occurred. Didn't he ever watch Mission Impossible?

"This tape will self destruct in five seconds."”

“'This tape will self destruct in five seconds'

where tape = Republican Party”

“What an absolute effing idiot. I'm glad President Barry lifted this.

Bush's Goodbye Gift to the French: Hiking Tariffs on Roquefort Cheese

With less than a week left in his administration, George W. Bush had a few loose ends to tie up. One of those loose ends? Retaliation against the European Union for refusing to accept hormone-fed beef from the United States, in the form of tariffs on luxury European food items.

Among those hardest hit is Roquefort cheese, a highly renowned French blue cheese that saw tariffs raised by 300 percent. Also facing stiff tariffs are Irish oatmeal, French truffles, Italian sparkling water, and foie gras.

But Roquefort is gaining the most attention, partly because the impact of the increase in tax will be the most harshly felt in the small village that produces it. The distinctively stinky cheese, marbled with veins of blue mold, is carefully cultured in the Combalou caves of the French village Roquefort-sur-Soulzon, using milk from sheep that only graze in a specific section of the hillside.

http://www.zimbio.com/Roquefort+Cheese/articles/2/Bush+Goodbye+Gift+French+Hiking+Tariffs+Roquefort”

“Don't mess with my French triple cream brie.”

“Freedom Ticklers.”

“
Political Animal
by Steve Benen
Washington Monthly

September 12, 2009
FLUNKING EVERY TEST.... Ron Brownstein took a closer look at the Census Bureau's latest report on income, poverty, and health insurance, and what the data tells us about "the economic record of George W. Bush."


On every major measurement, the Census Bureau report shows that the country lost ground during Bush's two terms. While Bush was in office, the median household income declined, poverty increased, childhood poverty increased even more, and the number of Americans without health insurance spiked. By contrast, the country's condition improved on each of those measures during Bill Clinton's two terms, often substantially.

The Census' final report card on Bush's record presents an intriguing backdrop to today's economic debate. Bush built his economic strategy around tax cuts, passing large reductions both in 2001 and 2003. Congressional Republicans are insisting that a similar agenda focused on tax cuts offers better prospects of reviving the economy than President Obama's combination of some tax cuts with heavy government spending. But the bleak economic results from Bush's two terms, tarnish, to put it mildly, the idea that tax cuts represent an economic silver bullet.


When it comes to judging presidents by their economic performance, Brownstein noted, Bush "flunked on every relevant dimension." After eight years of Clinton's presidency, the nation saw improvements on median household income, poverty rates, and the uninsured. After years of Bush's presidency, the nation saw striking declines in every category. (Indeed, Bush is the only recent president to "preside over an income decline through two presidential terms.")

This seems relevant for a couple of reasons. First, I continue to believe Bush simply hasn't been blamed to the extent he should be. Indeed, his name has all but disappeared from the national discourse, despite the fact that his spectacular failures are at the root of almost every relevant challenge the nation is current facing (economy, budget, health care, environment, national security, etc.).

Second, the Republican Party still believes Bush's policies -- the ones that failed on a historic level and created messes we're still struggling to clean up -- were right. If given the opportunity, they'd like to implement them again. GOP lawmakers endorsed these failures as they occurred, and don't regret their positions in the slightest. They're proud to have supported misguided policies that didn't work, and insist that voters should reward them for failing -- and help them bring back the very policies that produced disastrous results.


[A]t the least, the wretched two-term record compiled by the younger Bush on income, poverty and access to health care should compel Republicans to answer a straightforward question: if tax cuts are truly the best means to stimulate broadly shared prosperity, why did the Bush years yield such disastrous results for American families on these core measures of economic well being?


That's not a rhetorical question. Bush had a vision, and with Republican lawmakers' help, it was implemented. It failed miserably. Why does the GOP suppose that is? And why does the party want to bring those same policies back?

”

“Is it any surprise that liberal progressivism failed miserably under Bush---just like it fails everywhere else? I think not.”

“Lower taxes work to create growth, but at some point they must be again raised, if only to allow support underage which allows them to be lowered in the next recession. The IRS should have meetings on the same day as the fed and make all changes effective the morning of the enouncement.”