Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Looks like the Dems have Bush by the bush

And to further my point, which isn't exactly the same as one refuting your point (just to make that perfectly clear). What major thing has Bush done to immortalize him the way those above have been?


Nobody ever said he DID do anything. The major point was to show that even the best decisions ever made in history we're extremely unpopular....much like the war now....but it wasn't in the beginning and that has more to do with the current public opinion of people wanting everything fixed yesterday and simply can't stomach a long war. Nobody in their right mind would say he is comparable to the ones mentioned above in stature because the effect of a Presidency isn't measure during their terms.
 
That's what they said about the Democratic party in 2004.

If you think for a second the Republican party is in worse shape then the left, then you are sipping the Kool Aid a bit too often.

Your democratic majority just had to bribe 2 parties to get a bill past. Nothing like giving billions to the dairy, spinach and peanut industries to pass an ANTI-WAR bill. :rolleyes:

Isn't the this the new "ethical" Congress? Bwahaha...

Not sure I understand the '04 comment?

I never said my party was perfect. This is why I dont get into political debates online with republicans (or try not too). They always act so self righteous and swear their sh*t don't stink. :dump: Whether you want to admit it or not, your party is at a crossroad and the winner of the primary will indicate which one gets traveled.

Now as far as this spending bill goes....Its a joke. its nothing but politics. Anyone and everyone who follows this knows the dems dont have the heart to cut funding at this time. So why waste everyone's time with this stuff? Bush is doing a good enough job tanking the republican party on his own for the dems to get involved and screw it up.

Personally, i think ammendments to bills should be done away with or drastically scaled back. Most of the BS that gets passed is done so as an admendment.
 
Not sure I understand the '04 comment?

I never said my party was perfect. This is why I dont get into political debates online with republicans (or try not too). They always act so self righteous and swear their sh*t don't stink. :dump: Whether you want to admit it or not, your party is at a crossroad and the winner of the primary will indicate which one gets traveled.

Now as far as this spending bill goes....Its a joke. its nothing but politics. Anyone and everyone who follows this knows the dems dont have the heart to cut funding at this time. So why waste everyone's time with this stuff? Bush is doing a good enough job tanking the republican party on his own for the dems to get involved and screw it up.

Personally, i think ammendments to bills should be done away with or drastically scaled back. Most of the BS that gets passed is done so as an admendment.

In 2004 people claimed the Democrat Party was basically dead after Bush beat Kerry handley.

What crossroads? You mean we have to actually pick someone that doesn't agree with conservative values straight down the line? You actually think for a moment that road doesn't veer off in the general election? Gee, THATS never happen before :rolleyes:

The Republican party isn't going anywhere because as long as we have the Democrats in power its going to be easy pickings. As long as they have to satisfy the left they will be in trouble.

So I am a self rightous Republican? You think I haven't blamed the Republican party for anything? Do you even bother to read any of my fvckin posts before you start spouting your generalities?

"Or is that the democrats actually can have their own voice and not be silenced by the nuts in the party like the gop have?"


Yeah we are all just right wing nuts and such a corrupt party but when the Democrats load a nice WAR spending bill with billions of taxpayer dollars its just politics. I'd rather have a corrupt party that doesn't tax the living hell out of me.

You can take your "self rightous" comments and shove it. I'm out.
 
In 2004 people claimed the Democrat Party was basically dead after Bush beat Kerry handley.

What crossroads? You mean we have to actually pick someone that doesn't agree with conservative values straight down the line? You actually think for a moment that road doesn't veer off in the general election? Gee, THATS never happen before :rolleyes:

The Republican party isn't going anywhere because as long as we have the Democrats in power its going to be easy pickings. As long as they have to satisfy the left they will be in trouble.

So I am a self rightous Republican? You think I haven't blamed the Republican party for anything? Do you even bother to read any of my fvckin posts before you start spouting your generalities?

Yeah we are all just right wing nuts and such a corrupt party but when the Democrats load a nice WAR spending bill with billions of taxpayer dollars its just politics. I'd rather have a corrupt party that doesn't tax the living hell out of me.

You can take your "self rightous" comments and shove it. I'm out.


Geesh, you republicans are so touchy. ;)

In '04 the dems were dead when they elected Kerry IN the primary

The country is moving away from the religous conservatism that has been so strong these past few years. The question is how much has the party ran from it? Can they elect Gulliani? He's the only one who really has a chance to win the general.

My comments about being self-righteous was half in jest. I guess the little guy going all red and green on the pooper didnt convey that as well as I would have liked. I still stand by these comments though, as its just impossible to have a debate online without it either getting all crazy or just becoming a "liberlism" is bad debate.

I've already conceeded that the actions taken by dems and this bill are stupid. But I'm not about to start economics/taxation debate.

I never said YOU were a right wing nut job. Your right, I havent read any of your past posts on politics and your also right, I'm dealing with generalities here...much like you are. Either way, the Neo-cons have done serious damage to the state of this country, IMO. The far lefties would do the same if they have 6 years of unfettered power. (OK probably more). I guess you could call me a Reagan democrat, though I slide more to left on the social issues so the far left is not appealing to me.

And.....ah scew it, I'm out too! :D
 

For my reason above.

I know what you're saying, that history is best viewed in hindsight, not foresight. But again I say, I just can't come up with anything in this presidency that will be profound enough to put him in the same company as those in which you listed.

But this is personal opinion, which has a lot to do with friend overseas, having to get rid of my truck due to overwhelming prices at the pump, and a few other reasons. But we always dwell on the bad and look past the good, so maybe this is what I am doing, but I just don't like him. I'd rather have George Herbert Walker back...
 
rhino just likes to point out everything negative and flawed. He takes the works by people such as Lerone Bennett as fact. That's his pattern. Its either a conspiracy controlled by the corporate elite or we are being lied to. Pick your poison. :)

Why can't it be both?

I equate it to the odds makers in Las Vegas or your local bookie. They simply set up the sides US vs THEM, set the spread,( oil land, freedom), then no matter who wins they make their living on the creamy middles and the "vigg"( the price of doing business). I don't think of it as negative just one part of life in this universe...I am just jealous because I( or my ancestors) did not think of it first!

I continue to bring up alternative view points to establish that history is by definition a "story". it is up to the individual to do the research. Then you can draw your own conclusions.

When a specific issue is factually one sided; it is a tell tale sign that there is some manipulation of the facts!
 
When a specific issue is factually one sided; it is a tell tale sign that there is some manipulation of the facts!

To those who are paranoid. Curiosity is one thing, paranoia and conspiracy at every turn is another.

But continue to use colorful words....I can't find the X-Files on TV anymore.



:blink:
 
For my reason above.

I know what you're saying, that history is best viewed in hindsight, not foresight. But again I say, I just can't come up with anything in this presidency that will be profound enough to put him in the same company as those in which you listed.

.

Never said he would. Those men listed above are extreme example to prove a point.

There are actually several things Bush has done well...they just get overshadowed by the war.
 
To those who are paranoid. Curiosity is one thing, paranoia and conspiracy at every turn is another.

But continue to use colorful words....I can't find the X-Files on TV anymore.



:blink:

Just because your paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you!:think:

ps. [ame=http://www.amazon.com/The-X-Files-Seasons-1-9/dp/B000JJ6K1U/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/103-4665141-4988651?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1174997524&sr=8-2]Amazon.com: The X-Files - Seasons 1 - 9: DVD[/ame]
 
Rhino,




Many of your points are true and also confirm what I already said....its business as usual and public opinion based on ignorance of the facts isn't really worth anything.

Even considering the negatives of those listed above, historians still rank them extremely high based on all the factors, not just the select few you choose to make them appear as horrible men. BTW, its FDR, not Teddy as perceived to be one of the greatest even though his New Deal was an utter failure. But that is your general pattern so I wouldn't except otherwise.....

FDR was a socialist tool, who mortgaged this country's future by accepting loans from global bankers that can never be paid off.

He also changed the US money system from deposit certificates backed by gold and silver to the fiat based Federal Reserve Notes.(1933) He approved the confiscation of private gold(real wealth) held by US citizens, which were exchanged for FED NOTES(debt)

This changed our money system from a wealth system to a debt system. The interest on the debt system appears as inflation in our economy, so today's dollar is worth 4 cents in 1933 value.

FDR also conditioned the population to accepting money removed from our paychecks in the form of Social Security tax. as the norm, which paved the way for todays income tax structure and withholding practices.

FDR will be remembered as the man who bankrupted the United States, once the world community stops accepting US Dollars as a trading instrument. ( ie Iran, N. Korea, Venezuela)
 
There are actually several things Bush has done well...they just get overshadowed by the war.

And they are? I'm sorry, I just see Bush as one great failure. I really cant think of anything he has done to make this country better.

On another note...after reading a comment by Robert Novak, looks like the republicans all over the board are running away from their president. If thats true, its the best political move they've made in years (second to have gay marriage ammendments on the ballet in '04 to bring out their base....i hated it, but it was a slick move)

"With nearly two years remaining in his presidency, George W. Bush is alone," writes Novak in The Washington Post. "In half a century, I have not seen a president so isolated from his own party in Congress -- not Jimmy Carter, not even Richard Nixon as he faced impeachment."
 
FDR was a socialist tool, who mortgaged this country's future by accepting loans from global bankers that can never be paid off.

He also changed the US money system from deposit certificates backed by gold and silver to the fiat based Federal Reserve Notes.(1933) He approved the confiscation of private gold(real wealth) held by US citizens, which were exchanged for FED NOTES(debt)

This changed our money system from a wealth system to a debt system. The interest on the debt system appears as inflation in our economy, so today's dollar is worth 4 cents in 1933 value.

FDR also conditioned the population to accepting money removed from our paychecks in the form of Social Security tax. as the norm, which paved the way for todays income tax structure and withholding practices.

FDR will be remembered as the man who bankrupted the United States, once the world community stops accepting US Dollars as a trading instrument. ( ie Iran, N. Korea, Venezuela)

In your own, selective and strange way.

But please continue with your rants. They amuse me.
 
And they are? I'm sorry, I just see Bush as one great failure. I really cant think of anything he has done to make this country better.
Here is pretty much the summary. Many I agree with, some I don't, some are in left field. Now given the size of this list, and the fact that Presidents are basically judged after their terms, I'm not so presumptuous and confident saying a President is a failure. But I guess you've examined this large list and made your call already. I wish I could have been that wise in my mid 20's. But then again, you could end up like rhino.

Abortion & Traditional Values 1. Banned Partial Birth Abortion — by far the most significant roll-back of abortion on demand since Roe v. Wade.
2. Reversed Clinton's move to strike Reagan's anti-abortion Mexico Policy.
3. By Executive Order (EO), reversed Clinton's policy of not requiring parental consent for abortions under the Medical Privacy Act.
4. By EO, prohibited federal funds for international family planning groups that provide abortions and related services.
5. Upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals.
6. Made $33 million available for abstinence education programs in 2004.
7. Supports the Defense of Marriage Act — and a Constitutional amendment saying marriage is between one man and one woman.
8. Requires states to conduct criminal background checks on prospective foster and adoptive parents.
9. Requires districts to let students transfer out of dangerous schools.
10. Requires schools to have a zero-tolerance policy for classroom disruption (reintroducing discipline into classrooms).
11. Signed the Teacher Protection Act, which protects teachers from lawsuits related to student discipline.
12. Expanded the role of faith-based and community organizations in after-school programs.

Budget, Taxes & Economy

1. Signed two income tax cuts, one of which was the largest dollar-value tax cut in world history.
2. Supports permanent elimination of the death tax.
3. Turned around an inherited economy that was in recession, and deeply shocked as a result of the 9/11 attacks.
4. Is seeking legislation to amend the Constitution to give the president line-item veto authority.
5. In process of permanently eliminating IRS marriage penalty.
6. Increased small business incentives to expand and to hire new people.
7. Initiated discussion on privatizing Social Security and individual investment accounts.
8. Killed Clinton's "ergonomic" rules that OSHA was about to implement; rules would have shut down every home business in America.
9. Passed tough new laws to hold corporate criminals to account as a result of corporate scandals.
10. Reduced taxes on dividends and capital gains.
11. Signed trade promotion authority.
12. Reduced and is working to ultimately eliminate the estate tax for family farms and ranches.
13. Fight Europe's ban on importing biotech crops from the United States.
14. Exempt food from unilateral trade sanctions and embargoes.
15. Provided $20 million to states to help people with disabilities work from home.
16. Created a fund to encourage technologies that help the disabled.
17. Increased the annual contribution limit on Education IRA's from $500 to $2,000 per child.
18. Make permanent the $5,000 adoption tax credit and provide $1 billion over five years to increase the credit to $10,000.
19. Grant a complete tax exemption for prepaid or college tuition savings plans.
20. Reduced H1B visas from a high of 195,000 per year to 66,000 per year.



Education & Employment Training

1. Signed the No Child Left Behind Act, delivering the most dramatic education reforms in a generation (challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations). The very liberal California Teachers union is currently running radio ads against the accountability provisions of this Act.
2. Announced "Jobs for the 21st Century," a comprehensive plan to better prepare workers for jobs in the new millennium by strengthening post-secondary education and job training, and by improving high school education.
3. Is working to provide vouchers to low-income students in persistently failing schools to help with costs of attending private schools. (Blocked in the Senate.)
4. Requires annual reading and math tests in grades three through eight.
5. Requires states to participate in the National Assessment of Education Progress, or an equivalent program, to establish a national benchmark for academic performance.
6. Requires school-by-school accountability report cards.
7. Established a $2.4 billion fund to help states implement teacher accountability systems.
8. Increased funding for the Troops-to-Teachers program, which recruits former military personnel to become teachers.

Environment & Energy

1. Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty.
2. Submitted a comprehensive Energy Plan (awaits Congressional action). The plan works to develop cleaner technology, produce more natural gas here at home, make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy, improve national grid, etc.
3. Established a $10 million grant program to promote private conservation initiatives.
4. Significantly eased field-testing controls of genetically engineered crops.
5. Changed parts of the Forestry Management Act to allow necessary cleanup of the national forests in order to reduce fire danger.
6. Part of national forests cleanup: Restricted judicial challenges (based on the Endangered Species Act and other challenges), and removed the need for an Environmental Impact Statement before removing fuels/logging to reduce fire danger.
7. Killed Clinton's CO2 rules that were choking off all of the electricity surplus to California. (Enron anyone?)
8. Provided matching grants for state programs that help private landowners protect rare species.

Defense & Foreign Policy

1. Successfully executed two wars in the aftermath of 9/11/01: Afghanistan and Iraq. 50 million people who had lived under tyrannical regimes now live in freedom.
2. Saddam Hussein is now in prison. His two murderous sons are dead. All but a handful of the regime's senior members were killed or captured.
3. Leader by leader and member by member, al Maida is being hunted down in dozens of countries around the world. Of the senior al Qaeda leaders, operational managers, and key facilitators the U.S. Government has been tracking, nearly two-thirds have been taken into custody or killed. The detentions or deaths of senior al Qaeda leaders, including Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, the mastermind of 9/11, and Muhammad Atef, Osama bin Laden's second-in-command until his death in late 2001, have been important in the War on Terror.
4. Disarmed Libya of its chemical, nuclear and biological WMD's without bribes or bloodshed.
5. Continues to execute the War On Terror, getting worldwide cooperation to track funds/terrorists. Has cut off much of the terrorists' funding, and captured or killed many key leaders of the al Qaeda network.
6. Initiated a comprehensive review of our military, which was completed just prior to 9/11/01, and which accurately reported that ASYMMETRICAL WARFARE capabilities were critical in the 21st Century.
7. Killed the old US/Soviet Union ABM Treaty that was preventing the U.S. from deploying our ABM defenses.
8. Has been one of the strongest, if not THE strongest friend Israel has ever hand in the U.S. presidency.
9. Part of the coalition for an Israeli/Palestinian "Roadmap to Peace," along with Great Britain, Russia and the EU.
10. Pushed through THREE raises for our military. Increased military pay by more than $1 billion a year.
11. Signed the LARGEST nuclear arms reduction in world history with Russia.
12. Started withdrawing our troops from Bosnia, and has announced withdrawal of our troops from Germany and the Korean DMZ. 13. Prohibited putting U.S. troops under U.N. command.
14. Paid back UN dues only in return for reforms and reduction of U.S. share of the costs.
15. Earmarked at least 20 percent of the Defense procurement budget for next-generation weaponry.
16. Increased defense research and development spending by at least $20 billion from fiscal 2002 to 2006.
17. Ordered a comprehensive review of military weapons and strategy.
18. Ordered a review of overseas deployments.
19. Ordered renovation of military housing. The military has already upgraded about 10 percent of its inventory and expects to modernize 76,000 additional homes this year.
20. Is working to tighten restrictions on military-technology exports.
21. Brought back our EP-3 intel plane and crew from China without any bribes or bloodshed.

Globalization & Internationalism

1. Challenged the United Nations to live up to their responsibilities and not become another League of Nations (in other words, showed the UN to be completely irrelevant).
2. Killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court.
3. Told the United Nations we weren't interested in their plans for gun control (i.e., the International Ban on Small Arms Trafficking Treaty).
4. The only President since the founding of the UN to essentially tell that organization it is irrelevant. He said: "The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace. Iraq has answered a decade of UN demands with a decade of defiance. All the world now faces a test, and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced, or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding, or will it be irrelevant?" We all know the outcome and the answer.
5. Told the Congress and the world, "America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country."

Government Reform

1. Improved government efficiency by putting hundreds of thousands of jobs put up for bid. This weakens public-sector unions and cuts undeserved pay raises.
2. Initiated review of all federal agencies with the goal of eliminating federal jobs (completed September 2003) in an effort to reduce the size of the federal government while increasing private sector jobs.
3. Led the most extensive reorganization the Federal bureaucracy in over 50 years: After 9/11, condensed 20+ overlapping agencies and their intelligence sectors into one agency, the Department of Homeland Security.
4. Ordered each agency to draft a five-year plan to restructure itself, with fewer managers.
5. Converted federal service contracts to performance-based contracts wherever possible so that the contractor has measurable performance goals.

Health<

1. Strengthen the National Health Service Corps to put more physicians in the neediest areas, and make its scholarship funds tax-free.
2. Double the research budget of the National Institutes of Health.
3. Signed Medicare Reform, which includes:

A 10-year privatization option.

Prescription drug benefits: Prior to this reform, Medicare paid for extended hospital stays for ulcer surgery, for example, at a cost of about $28,000 per patient. Yet Medicare would not pay for the drugs that eliminate the cause of most ulcers, drugs that cost about $500 a year. Now, drug coverage under Medicare will allow seniors to replace more expensive surgeries and hospitalizations with less expensive prescription medicine.

More health care choices: As President Bush stated, "…when seniors have the ability to make choices, health care plans within Medicare will have to compete for their business by offering higher quality service [at lower cost]. For the seniors of America, more choices and more control will mean better health care. These are the kinds of health care options we give to the members of Congress and federal employees. What's good for members of Congress is also good for seniors.

New Health Savings Accounts: Effective January 1, 2004, Americans can set aside up to $4,500 every year, tax free, to save for medical expenses. Depending on your tax bracket, that means you'll save between 10 to 35 percent on any costs covered by money in your account. Every year, the money not spent would stay in the account and gain interest tax-free, just like an IRA. These accounts will be good for small business owners, and employees. More businesses can focus on covering workers for major medical problems, such as hospitalization for an injury or illness. At the same time, employees and their families will use these accounts to cover doctors visits, or lab tests, or other smaller costs. Some employers will contribute to employee health accounts. This will help more American families get the health care they need at the price they can afford.

Homeland Security, Border Enforcement & Immigration

1. *See Government Reform above. Under President Bush's leadership, America has made an unprecedented commitment to homeland security.
2. Has CONSTRUCTION in process on the first 10 ABM silos in Alaska so that America will have a defense against North Korean nukes. Has ordered national and theater ballistic missile defenses to be deployed by 2004.
3. Announced a 9.7% increase in government-wide homeland security funding in his FY 2005 budget, nearly tripling the FY 2001 levels (excluding the Department of Defense and Project BioShield).
4. Before DHS was created, there were inspectors from three different agencies of the Federal Government and Border Patrol officers protecting our borders. Through DHS, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) now consolidates all border activities into a single agency to create "one face at the border." This not only better secures the borders of the United States, but it also eliminates many of the inefficiencies that occurred under the old system. With over 18,000 CBP inspectors and 11,000 Border Patrol agents, CBP has 29,000 uniformed officers on our borders.
5. The Border Patrol is continuing installation of monitoring devices along the borders to detect illegal activity.
6. Launched Operation Tarmac to investigate businesses and workers in the secure areas of domestic airports and ensure immigration law compliance. Since 9/11, DHS has audited 3,640 businesses, examined 259,037 employee records, arrested 1,030 unauthorized workers, and participated in the criminal indictment of 774 individuals.
7. Since September 11, 2001, the Coast Guard has conducted more than 124,000 port security patrols, 13,000 air patrols, boarded more than 92,000 vessels, interdicted over 14,000 individuals attempting to enter the United States illegally, and created and maintained more than 90 Maritime Security Zones.
8. Announced the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), an internet-based system that is improving America's ability to track and monitor foreign students and exchange visitors. Over 870,000 students are registered in SEVIS. Of 285 completed field investigations, 71 aliens were arrested.
9. This week, the US-VISIT program began to digitally collect biometric identifiers to record the entry and exit of aliens who travel into the U.S on a visa. Together with the standard information, this new program will confirm compliance with visa and immigration policies.
10. Eliminated INS bureaucratic redundancies and lack of accountability.
11. Split the Immigration and Naturalization Service into two agencies: one to protect the border and interior, the other to deal with naturalization.
12. Signed the workplace verification bill to prevent hiring of illegal aliens.
13. Established a six-month deadline for processing immigration applications.
14. Information regarding nearly 100% of all containerized cargo is carefully screened by DHS before it arrives in the United States. Higher risk shipments are physically inspected for terrorist weapons and contraband prior to being released from the port of entry. Advanced technologies are being deployed to identify warning signs of chemical, biological, or radiological attacks. Since September 11, 2001, hundreds of thousands of first responders across America have been trained to recognize and respond to the effects of a WMD attack.

Judiciary & Tort Reform

1. Is urging federal liability reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits.
2. Killed the liberal ABA's unconstitutional role in vetting federal judges. The Senate is supposed to advise and consent, not the ABA.
3. Is nominating strong, conservative judges to the judiciary.
4. Supports class action reform bill which limits lawyer fees so that more settlement money goes to victims.

Politics

1. His leadership resulted in Republican gains in the House and Senate, solidifying Republican control of both houses of Congress and the presidency.
2. Signed an EO enforcing the Supreme Court's Beck decision regarding union dues being used for political campaigns against individual's wishes.

Second Amendment

1. Ordered Attorney General Ashcroft to formally notify the Supreme Court that the OFFICIAL U.S. government position on the 2nd Amendment is that it supports INDIVIDUAL rights to own firearms, and is NOT a Leftist-imagined "collective" right.
2. Signed TWO bills into law that arm our pilots with handguns in the cockpit.
3. Currently pushing for full immunity from lawsuits for our national gun manufacturers.
4. *See Globalization & Internationalism.

Traditional Values, Compassion & Volunteerism

1. Endorses and promotes "The Responsibility Era." President Bush often speaks of the necessity of personal responsibility and civic volunteerism. He said, "In a compassionate society, people respect one another and take responsibility for the decisions they make in life. My hope is to change the culture from one that has said, if it feels good, do it; if you've got a problem, blame somebody else — to one in which every single American understands that he or she is responsible for the decisions that you make; you're responsible for loving your children with all your heart and all your soul; you're responsible for being involved with the quality of the education of your children; you're responsible for making sure the community in which you live is safe; you're responsible for loving your neighbor, just like you would like to be loved yourself."
2. Started the USA Freedom Corps, the most comprehensive clearinghouse of volunteer opportunities ever offered. For the first time in history, Americans can enter geographic information about where they want to get involved, such as state or zip code, as well as areas of interest ranging from education to the environment, and they can access volunteer opportunities offered by more than 50,000 organizations across the country and around the world.
3. Established the The White House Office and the Centers for the Faith-Based and Community Initiative — located in seven Federal agencies. The faith-based initiative supports the essential work of these important organizations. The goal is to make sure that grassroots leaders can compete on an equal footing for federal dollars, receive greater private support, and face fewer bureaucratic barriers. Work focuses on at-risk youth, ex-offenders, the homeless and hungry, substance abusers, those with HIV/AIDS, and welfare-to-work families.
4. The White House released a guidebook fully describing the Administration's belief that faith-based groups have a Constitutionally-protected right to maintain their religious identity through hiring — even when Federal funds are involved.
5. Issued an EO implementing the Supreme Court's Olmstead ruling, which requires moving disabled people from institutions to community-based facilities when possible.
6.Increased funding for low-interest loan programs to help people with disabilities purchase devices to assist them.
7. Revised the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Section 8 rent subsidies to disabled people, permitting them to use up to a year's worth of vouchers to finance down payments on homes. HUD has started pilot programs in 11 states.
8. Committed US funds to purchase medicine for millions of men, women and children now suffering with AIDS in Africa.
 
On another note...after reading a comment by Robert Novak, looks like the republicans all over the board are running away from their president. If thats true, its the best political move they've made in years (second to have gay marriage ammendments on the ballet in '04 to bring out their base....i hated it, but it was a slick move)

"With nearly two years remaining in his presidency, George W. Bush is alone," writes Novak in The Washington Post. "In half a century, I have not seen a president so isolated from his own party in Congress -- not Jimmy Carter, not even Richard Nixon as he faced impeachment."


Of course they are, just like Democrats and Al Gore ran away from Clinton. Your point?

More of the same? People need to be elected...if Bush was popular do you think they would be for or against the war? And that goes for both parties. I would rather have someone that doens't bend with the public opinion instead of elected officials who consistently change their opinion because the need to be elected.
 
Agreed, what has bush done? And please don't say "No Child Left Behind"...because that is just a horrible plan.


I seem to remember James Carville coining the phrase: "it's the economy stupid", which Bill Clinton used frequently.

Now that our economy is doing fantastic, business is thriving and that AFTER GW cut taxes. The countries tax revenue has increased while the tax rate decreased.
I would say that is something.

He remains steadfast to his convictions and makes decisions based on what he believes is the right thing to do vs. what the polls will reflect. He say's what he will do and does what he say's he will. Like his policies or not, he is an honorable man. I would not want his job. Especially with the venomous hatred and attacks directed toward any decision he makes from the left even if they had previously supported the very proposition they are attacking. It is juvenile. We need more troops, oh wait, now that you propose sending more troops we are against it and so on and on and on.

Edit: dam Bobo, not only did you beat me to it, yours is better. :D
 
Last edited:
Agreed, what has bush done? And please don't say "No Child Left Behind"...because that is just a horrible plan.

Can you please tell me why? It actually had bipartisan support.
 
Damn Bobo, that list could be absolutely picked apart! Thankfully for the both of us, I'm too lazy to do so. :yawn:

:D
 
zbt, i think you may be my new best friend...

but I'll be back to deal with you other guys after I eat...I just felt like i need to say something...
 
Of course they are, just like Democrats and Al Gore ran away from Clinton. Your point?

It was Clinton who did not endorse Gore!

More of the same? People need to be elected...if Bush was popular do you think they would be for or against the war? And that goes for both parties. I would rather have someone that doens't bend with the public opinion instead of elected officials who consistently change their opinion because the need to be elected.

Bush supported an invasion in Afghanistan to remove Osama Bin Laden (remember? he was the 911 guy), then he supported invading Iraq before they could use their massive 20 minutes away WMD's, Then he wanted a regime change because Sadaam Hussien was "terrorist friendly", then he wanted to bring democracy to the Iraqii people,then he wanted to stay then course, now he wants to stabilize the insurgency and tomorrow???
 
Damn Bobo, that list could be absolutely picked apart! Thankfully for the both of us, I'm too lazy to do so. :yawn:

:D

Of course it could. Some of those points are in left field, but some I agree. Accomplishments and failures are mostly based on which side you lean and what you agree with.
 
Bush supported an invasion in Afghanistan to remove Osama Bin Laden (remember? he was the 911 guy), then he supported invading Iraq before they could use their massive 20 minutes away WMD's, Then he wanted a regime change because Sadaam Hussien was "terrorist friendly", then he wanted to bring democracy to the Iraqii people,then he wanted to stay then course, now he wants to stabilize the insurgency and tomorrow???

Have a piece of cake?
 
Then it was a bipartisan mistake.

That doesn't tell me why.

We could always support the liberal agenda who just banned kids from playing with lego's in school because the town they created started to encourage capitalistic thought. They just they wanted to encourage equal ownership for everyone, community distribution, etc....sounds familiar to anyone? :D

Rhino will love that one!
 
They just they wanted to encourage equal ownership for everyone, community distribution, etc....sounds familiar to anyone? :D

Rhino will love that one!

Hey, that does sound familiar, why it sounds remarkably like the same kind of social dictatorship that the Neo-cons want for the United States!

Actually, as far as labels go ;I prefer anarchist to liberal, although strictly speaking they are the same thing. The confusion started during the communist infiltration of the 1930's. a Liberal(anarchist) used to be the opposite of collectivist/communist/socialist/fascist, but once the US became a representative democracy instead of a constitutional republic, everything became a game of deception and spin words, So now the word liberal is interchanged for Non-Republican or social activist. The Irony is that it was the liberals who fought the hardest against social democracy. but ultimately they lost the fight.
 
Hey, that does sound familiar, why it sounds remarkably like the same kind of social dictatorship that the Neo-cons want for the United States!

.

I see the Kool Aid is strong this morning.


Conservatives stifling capitalist thought. Wow. Next thing I'll hear from you is liberals want small government. Your rods and cones are seriously crossed.
 
That doesn't tell me why.

We could always support the liberal agenda who just banned kids from playing with lego's in school because the town they created started to encourage capitalistic thought. They just they wanted to encourage equal ownership for everyone, community distribution, etc....sounds familiar to anyone? :D

Rhino will love that one!

Because its not working. The idea of standards are great imo, but tying it to funding has created a lot of problems. For example, the city schools in my area are constantly failing. So what do they do? They change the structure of their school by moving another grade up to the HS, or moving one down to the Middle School. Or they just rename the school. These moves start you back at square one with NCLB, so you dont get funds cut. But the kids are still failing.

Again, standards are the way to go in this day in age. But the unattended consequences of the program need to be addressed (cuts in sports, music, and arts for example) and so far they havent.
 
Because its not working. The idea of standards are great imo, but tying it to funding has created a lot of problems. For example, the city schools in my area are constantly failing. So what do they do? They change the structure of their school by moving another grade up to the HS, or moving one down to the Middle School. Or they just rename the school. These moves start you back at square one with NCLB, so you dont get funds cut. But the kids are still failing.

Again, standards are the way to go in this day in age. But the unattended consequences of the program need to be addressed (cuts in sports, music, and arts for example) and so far they havent.
Unlike you, I actually look at the data, and both sides of the coin before stating something is a failure and isn't working. Once again, your infinite wisdom at such an early age trumps mine. What seems to be the problem is not the plan, but the local officials implementing it. But thats Bush's fault as well I guess..... :rolleyes:


Note: Ted Kennedy was an original sponsor of this plan.


Claims made in favor of the act

Supporters of NCLB claim the legislation encourages accountability in public schools, offers parents greater educational options for their children, and helps close the achievement gap between minority and white students.[3] NCLB aims to show achievement toward these goals through federally mandated standardized testing.

In addition, it is argued that local government had failed students, necessitating federal intervention to remedy issues like teachers teaching outside their areas of expertise, and complacency in the face of continually failing schools.[4] Some local governments, notably New York State, have voiced support for NCLB provisions, arguing that local standards had failed to provide adequate oversight over special education, and that NCLB would allow longitudinal data to be more effectively used to monitor adequate yearly progress.[5]

The Department of Education points to National Assessment of Educational Progress results, released in July 2005, showing improved student achievement in reading and math: [5]

* More progress was made by nine-year-olds in reading in the last five years than in the previous 28 years combined.
* America's nine-year-olds posted the best scores in reading (since 1971) and math (since 1973) in the history of the report. America's 13-year-olds earned the highest math scores the test ever recorded.
* Reading and math scores for African American and Hispanic nine-year-olds reached an all-time high.
* Math scores for African American and Hispanic 13-year-olds reached an all-time high.
* Achievement gaps in reading and math between white and African American nine-year-olds and between white and Hispanic nine-year-olds are at an all-time low.
* Forty-three states and the District of Columbia either improved academically or held steady in all categories (fourth- and eighth-grade reading and fourth- and eighth-grade math).

In addition to and in support of the above points, proponents argue that No Child Left Behind:

* Introduces an element of accountability into public school education and the expenditure of public funds for education.
* Links State academic content standards with student outcomes.
* Requires schools and districts to focus their attention on the academic achievement of traditionally under-served groups of children, such as low-income students, students with disabilities, and Blacks and Latinos. Many previous state-created systems of accountability only measured average school performance, allowing schools to be highly rated even if they had large achievement gaps between affluent and disadvantaged students.
* Supports early literacy through the Early Reading First initiative.
* Increases the quality of education. Schools are required to improve their performance under NCLB by implementing "scientifically based research" practices in the classroom, parent involvement programs, and professional development activities.
* Establishes the foundation for schools and school districts to significantly enhance parental involvement and improved administration through the use of the assessment data to drive decisions on instruction, curriculum and business practices.
* Measures student performance: a student's progress in reading and math must be measured annually in grades 3 through 8 and at least once during high school via standardized tests.
* Emphasizes reading, writing, math and science achievement through a number of "core academic subjects" that include subjects as diverse as algebra and art.
* Provides information for parents by requiring states and school districts to give parents detailed report cards on schools and districts explaining the school's AYP performance. Schools must also inform parents when their child is being taught by a teacher or para-professional who does not meet "highly qualified" requirements.
* Gives options to students enrolled in schools failing to meet AYP. If a school fails to meet AYP targets two or more years running, the school must offer eligible children the chance to transfer to higher-performing local schools, receive free tutoring, or attend after-school programs.
* Gives school districts the opportunity to demonstrate proficiency, even for subgroups that do not meet State minimum achievement (AYP) standards, through a process called "safe harbor," a precursor to growth-based or value-added assessments.
* Increases flexibility to state and local agencies in the use of federal education money.
* Provides more resources to schools. Federal funding for education increased 59.8% from 2000 to 2003.
* Seeks to narrow class and racial gaps in school performance by creating common expectations for all.
* Addresses widespread perceptions that public education results fall short of expectations.












Negatives:



Criticism of the Act

The neutrality of this article is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.

Critiques of NCLB can be organized into the following categories:

[edit] Constitutionality of Federal Government Policy on Education

One fundamental criticism of the No Child Left Behind Act is its dubious constitutionality as per the Tenth Amendment.

[edit] Failure to fully fund the act

Many initial supporters of NCLB have since broken with the Bush Administration over what they claim is the White House's failure to adequately fund its own programs. Ted Kennedy, the legislation's initial sponsor, has claimed: "The tragedy is that these long overdue reforms are finally in place, but the funds are not."[6] Organizations such as ACORN (a community organization of low and moderate-income families and itself the subject of controversy [6]) have criticized the unwillingness of the federal government to "fully fund" the act. Neither the Senate nor the White House has requested funding up to the authorized levels for several of the act’s main provisions (for example President Bush requested only $13.3 of $22.75 billion in 2006) [7]. State education budgets are in very bad shape these days as declining tax revenues have forced many governors and legislatures to make deep cuts. While some new money may flow to districts as a result of NCLB, the amount falls far short of the cuts being made at the state level. Inadequate funding places a strain on local school districts, many of which are not funded by the law. As just one example, under the Choice provisions of NCLB, LEAs must allow transfers of students from poorly performing Title I schools to good schools, but Title I funding will not follow that student to the new school. Many other provisions of NCLB such as a push for quality teachers and more professional development, while laudable, bring huge responsibilities to local districts that are not fully funded by NCLB (Jamie McKenzie 2003). Republicans in Congress have viewed these authorized levels as spending caps, not spending promises and have pointed out that President Clinton never requested the full amount of funding authorized under the previous ESEA law. [8] Some opponents argue that these funding shortfalls mean that schools faced with the system of escalating penalties for failing to meet testing targets are denied the resources necessary to remedy problems detected by testing.

[edit] Allegations of Corruption

The system of incentives and penalties sets up a strong motivation for schools, districts, and states to manipulate test results. For example, schools have been shown to exclude minorities or other groups (to enhance apparent school performance; as many as 2 million students) [9] and have employed creative reclassification of drop-outs (to reduce unfavorable statistics) [10]. Evidence has accumulated that these and other strategies have created an inflated perception of NCLB's successes, especially in states with high minority populations [11].

[edit] Problems with Standardized Tests

Critics have argued that the overwhelming focus on standardized testing as the means of assessment encourages "teaching to the test". That is, teachers are encouraged to teach a narrow subset of skills that will increase test performance rather than focus on deeper understanding which can more readily be transferred to similar problems. [12]

In addition, because each state can produce its own standardized tests, states could compensate for inadequate education programs by making the standardized tests easy enough that their results are on par with those from other states with average or above average education programs.[13] For example, the difficulty of Arizona's Instrument to Measure Standards test has been questioned and criticized.

Standardized tests have also been accused of cultural bias, and the practice of determining educational quality by testing students has been called into question. [14]

[edit] Inequitable divisions of resources

Because the law's response if the school fails to make adequate progress is not only to provide additional help for students, but also to impose punitive measures on the school, the incentives are to set expectations lower rather than higher [15] and to increase segregation by class and race and push low-performing students out of school altogether [16].

Students who are learning English have a 3 year window to take assessments in their native language, after which they must demonstrate proficiency on an English language assessment. In practice, however, only 10 states test any students in their native language (almost entirely Spanish speakers).[17] The vast majority of English language learners are given English language assessments, which are neither valid nor reliable in measuring what they know.[18]

Surveys of public school principals indicate that since the implementation of NCLB, instructional time has increased for reading, writing, and math (subjects tested under the law), and decreased for the arts, elementary social studies, and foreign languages.[19] Some critics of the law suggest it is also responsible for the elimination of certain extracurricular activities.

[edit] State Education Budgets

State education budgets are poorly functioning these days as declining tax revenues have forced the government to make deep cutbacks. Some of the new funds for districts funding NCLB never make it because of the cuts being made at the state level. Inadequate funding makes it hard for local school districts not funded by the law. Provisions of NCLB that push for quality teachers and more professional development are good, however they bring huge responsibilities to local districts that are not fully funded by NCLB. [20]

[edit] Narrow Curriculum

NCLB's focus on just math and reading scores is more likely to backfire and have the reverse effect on a generation of students in poorly performing schools, as schools may strip away much of the broad education in order to elevate scores on just two indicators. [21]

[edit] Narrow definition of research

Some school districts object to the limitation created by the "scientifically based research standard." Research based on case studies or other forms of qualitative research are generally excluded from this category. Furthermore, the inability to employ random assignment for important educational predictors such as race and socio-economic status excludes a large amount of quasi-experimental work that could contribute to educational knowledge. [22]

[edit] Limitations on local control

Conservative critics have pointed out that NCLB violates conservative principles by federalizing education and setting a precedent for further erosion of state and local control. Libertarians and some conservatives further argue that the federal government has no constitutional authority in education. [23]

[edit] Facilitates military recruitment

NCLB (In section 9528) requires public secondary schools to provide military recruiters the same access to facilities as a school provides to higher education institution recruiters. Schools are also required to provide contact information for every student to the military if requested, and schools are not required to tell the students or parents. Students or parents can opt out of having their information shared. [24][25]

[edit] Miscellaneous critiques

A study conducted by the American Heart Association and the National Association for Sport and Physical Education contend that diminishing physical education in school has contributed to childhood obesity.[26]

The Center on Public Education found that after implementation of NCLB, 71 percent of the districts surveyed had elementary schools that cut back on instructional time for a subject to make room for more reading and math — the primary focus of the law.[27]

NCLB includes the controversial Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act, an act some consider to be a violation of the separation of church and state.

Under the NCLB act, schools that do not meet certain established standards are given additional funds in an attempt to boost scores. Critics argue that schools have less of an incentive to do better if they are already receiving more funds. However, schools are also given bonuses for meeting yearly requirements. Since these requirements are given each year schools are less likely to rapidly increase their scores as a slow and gradual improvement would be financially better. Another part of the NCLB act gives schools that perform well awards and special recognition that opponents argue would encourage schools already doing well to push out disadvantaged students even more so.

[edit] Proposals for reform

The Joint Organizational Statement on No Child Left Behind
More than 100 national civil rights, education, disability advocacy, and religious groups have signed on to the "Joint Organizational Statement on NCLB," calling for major changes to the federal education law. FairTestinitiated and chaired the meetings that produced the statement, originally released in October 2004. The statement's central message is that "the law's emphasis needs to shift from applying sanctions for failing to raise test scores to holding states and localities accountable for making the systemic changes that improve student achievement." The number of organizations signing the statement has nearly quadrupled since it was launched in late 2004 and continues to grow. The goal is to influence Congress, and the broader public, as the law's scheduled reauthorization approaches. [28]
 
And for the funding:

"Meanwhile, in a testimony to the Heritage Foundation, Krista Kafer quoted other statistics, arguing that "Since the law’s enactment, Congress has sent $771.5 million to states to design and implement their annual testing programs, and President Bush has asked an additional $390 million for next year. Two recent studies suggest this will be more than adequate. A 2002 study conducted by Accountability Works found that the annual cost increase for the 50 states to implement new tests will be between $312 million and $388 million. A GAO study completed this May estimates that the new tests will cost $1.9 billion between 2002 and 2008. That is less than the funding ceiling set in the NCLB."


I suggest you look at who is using those funds. I already know what party makes up the majority of local school systems and it sure isn't Republicans.
 
When did I ever say it was Bush's fault? I know who sponsored the Bill and who voted for it and against it. I'm not one of these people who is against something just because Bush is for it. Like I said before, I'm a very conservative democrat so I do have a lot more in common with the right than you may think. So please stop assuming that Im some left wing nut job (Like Kennedy or Kucinich :D )

And Dude, your 33! Stop playing that up like its some big deal. Age has nothing to do with any of this. I work with a bunch of 40 year olds who cant even name their congressman and some probably couldnt even name one of our Senators!..and if I told them they couldnt name Clinton as one they'd be stumped. Worst of all I work with a bunch Network Engineers who have all those fancy degrees that gives them some higher authority to think they're smarter than everyone else.

The only data you actually provided was from '05. I've seen data after that showing that the program hasnt work quite as well over the years...can i prove it..no..cause I dont have the time to search for it. I already spend too much time on your damn message board to begin with! ;)

Ive spoken with a LOT of teachers over the last couple years and I have yet to find anyone who thinks the program is actually making things better or even working. Each have their reasons, and quite frankley, I'll believe them before I believe some data being released by this group or that.

Lastly...I'm having a political debate with you...not a who's better than who. And yes I realize I probably started the name calling with the whole right wing nut job comment but it really was in jest so stop thinking I'm trying to just fight with you because we disagree, or that I'm better than you because I think one way or another. I love debating politcs when its civil and good natured. When I'm wrong I admit that I'm wrong.

Now...I gotta get back to work. :D
 
Here's an article I actually remembered reading and where i read it...

Invalid Link Removed
 
When did I ever say it was Bush's fault? I know who sponsored the Bill and who voted for it and against it. I'm not one of these people who is against something just because Bush is for it. Like I said before, I'm a very conservative democrat so I do have a lot more in common with the right than you may think. So please stop assuming that Im some left wing nut job (Like Kennedy or Kucinich :D )

The original premise was that Bush actually has accomplished some things in which you deny with very little data and more partisan opinion. Other than a USA Today article I've seen.."he's failed" and "because it doesn't work" isn't exactly conclusive.

And Dude, your 33! Stop playing that up like its some big deal. Age has nothing to do with any of this.
Say that when you study and cover politics for another 10 years..."dude". Considering I have a History degree in which politics is basically intertwined, not to mention I've been following politics since I was 17, its more about experience than age. When someone that is 40, or 50, or 60 that has covered, studied or basically been around politics, I listen first no matter what side they are on. Then I analyze and give my opinion but rarely do I make the mistake the layman does making statements about policies that are generally in their infancy.

I work with a bunch of 40 year olds who cant even name their congressman and some probably couldnt even name one of our Senators!..and if I told them they couldnt name Clinton as one they'd be stumped. Worst of all I work with a bunch Network Engineers who have all those fancy degrees that gives them some higher authority to think they're smarter than everyone else.

You mean similar to liberal professors? :)


The only data you actually provided was from '05. I've seen data after that showing that the program hasnt work quite as well over the years...can i prove it..no..cause I dont have the time to search for it. I already spend too much time on your damn message board to begin with! ;)

If you don't have time to research it, then I would suggest taking some time before stating something is a failure. Chaos is a failure, but I don't have time to research it and its because I just don't like Crowler. Would you like that? ;)

If you have data after the fact then show me. I'm not the one saying its failed or worked completely. I like the premise. I like what he is trying to do. I like the fact that he is the first one to really try and tackle the gaps that make the current system horrible. Other than Clinton who just through money at the issue with Pell Grants which effected higher education, its an actually attempt at reforming the whole system in which both parties agreed is horrible. Data supports that it works...but not perfect or infallible.

If I was so partisan I would say its failed for simple fact Ted Kennedy was involved but there isn't a Ted Kennedy derangement syndrome like their is with Bush.


Ive spoken with a LOT of teachers over the last couple years and I have yet to find anyone who thinks the program is actually making things better or even working.

As I've said before, its tough to pass and implement a plan in which local politicians and the local school boards (which for the most part oppose the plan because its actually puts pressure on them to perform) fail to implement or utilize funds in the wrong way. The government can't hold your hand all day.


Each have their reasons, and quite frankley, I'll believe them before I believe some data being released by this group or that.

But of course. Within the educational system, statistics mean less than opinion. :)

Lastly...I'm having a political debate with you...not a who's better than who. And yes I realize I probably started the name calling with the whole right wing nut job comment but it really was in jest so stop thinking I'm trying to just fight with you because we disagree, or that I'm better than you because I think one way or another. I love debating politcs when its civil and good natured. When I'm wrong I admit that I'm wrong.

When have I not been civil? Other than telling you to shove it, I've provided data and my opinion.

Who's better than who? That's ridiculous. I simply like debating issues in which I feel the other side puts more emotional and personal thought into it rather than fact. :D
 
Copy and pasting college students papers is happening a lot in this thread...

Wikepedia is college student papers now?


Its much better than hearing college student opinion though. As least the papers might have some facts.
 
I love wikipedia, but you should know better then taking all of it for fact...I can go update any page with some false info any day...

But i'm not in the mood to get into any of that right now...
 
Wikepedia is college student papers now?


Its much better than hearing college student opinion though. As least the papers might have some facts.

I saw something a few weeks ago where Colleges were banning kids from using it as a source for their papers cause there were so many factual mistakes. Others are using it as a way for kids to get things "published" in a sense so that they could understand the importance of writing something for the masses (and having it factually correct).
 
As I've said before, its tough to pass and implement a plan in which local politicians and the local school boards (which for the most part oppose the plan because its actually puts pressure on them to perform) fail to implement or utilize funds in the wrong way. The government can't hold your hand all day.

Going down a slightly different road.. Should the federal government have stepped in or should it be handled at the State level? Or even the local level? I'm really interested in how you feel about this since most conservatives believe in less federal influence and more state/local. Of couse Bush, to me, doesnt seem like a real conservative in that sense with all his spending and such.
 
most conservatives believe in less federal influence and more state/local. Of couse Bush, to me, doesnt seem like a real conservative in that sense with all his spending and such.

There is nothing conservative about the Bush Administration or the Neo-cons!

* Actively circumventing the US Constitution to further a party agenda is not conservative!

* Spending money on a foreign occupation is not conservative!

* Supporting Israel through AIPAC is not conservative!

* Hiding pedophilia rings is not conservative!

* Promoting Christian religious beliefs is not conservative!

*Firing US attorney generals and replacing them with Neo-con cronies is not conservative!

It is an illusion that Republicans = Conservatives.

They are two different things.

The BUSH administration proves that fact!!!
 
I love wikipedia, but you should know better then taking all of it for fact...I can go update any page with some false info any day...

But i'm not in the mood to get into any of that right now...


Who said it was taking it all as fact? There is actually a talk discussion about those points if you look it up and for the most part, it LEANS LEFT :)
 
I saw something a few weeks ago where Colleges were banning kids from using it as a source for their papers cause there were so many factual mistakes. Others are using it as a way for kids to get things "published" in a sense so that they could understand the importance of writing something for the masses (and having it factually correct).

You can read the discussion section part of NCLB. Wiki for the most part, leans left so it would actually hurt me to quote from there.
 
Who said it was taking it all as fact? There is actually a talk discussion about those points if you look it up and for the most part, it LEANS LEFT :)

LOL...so are you implying that anything leaning left is not factual? :hammer: ;)
 
Going down a slightly different road.. Should the federal government have stepped in or should it be handled at the State level? Or even the local level? I'm really interested in how you feel about this since most conservatives believe in less federal influence and more state/local. Of couse Bush, to me, doesnt seem like a real conservative in that sense with all his spending and such.


And that's the reason many conservatives simply didn't vote in the last election. Too much spending. Too much pork. Too many ethical violations. But I also know its not going to stop with the Dems in power...in fact, the spending will probably get worse, the ethical violations are already there, and the pork is just bad as before as you can see with the war spending bill. So no matter WHO is in there, those problems will always be there. Considering those facts, I would rather pay less taxes than more if the status quo remains.

Conservatives definitely do not want more government but that doesnt mean you eliminate federal aid either. For the most part programs such as education and health, conservatives tend to bend on federal involvement. Where they don't want it is with economic issues. Welfare, retirement, etc....

The problem is their has been failure at the local level for years. They can't fund it, and they don't know where to spend it. Federal involvement is good if local officials are held accountable which is the main objection here. They don't want the federal government holding local officials accountable but if you have failed for year and years, tough sh!t.



Bush has definitely veered away from a "traditional" conservative on many issues but they get overshadowed by the war. NCLB has more similarities to a plan that would come from the Dems. I think most of the criticism are more partisan than anything because the plan from the start resembles something the Dems would introduce, not Republicans. So for me to think its working isn't exactly a partisan opinion.
 
LOL...so are you implying that anything leaning left is not factual? :hammer: ;)


No, it means that if I am quoting a left leaning website that states positives about a program (a BUSH program), its not exactly quoting facts from a selectively conservative viewpoint.
 
I can go update any page with some false info any day...

.


And it will eventually either get edited or discredited within a discussion page....

Similar to the NCLB page on wikipedia.


And if you rep me once more so help me god!!! :lol:
 
Back
Top