Not really.

Poor Billy...you really should watch the news (nothing but love).
And furthermore racial stereotyping has been around for ages...through a lot of different presidents!

Ok, so you dont watch the news much, how would you like him to condem those attacks? By writing you a personal letter??
If your not putting yourself in a position to hear him condem the attacks, how would you know if he did or didnt??

I didn't say he did or he didn't. I said i hadn't heard it. And yes, a personal letter would be nice.

I wasn't talking about that. He seemed to have much more insight into the situation with Arafat and Israel than Bush has.

I suppose that YOU are perfect in every situation, of course. ;)

I simply respect Bush because he is President and he's been a great figurehead during this whole bit, I do not agree with his politics and I do feel he gained the presidency through shady means. :rolleyes:

I do not credit him with any post-September 11th successes as President, however. He is surrounded by two of the most brilliant people regarding the Middle East and our role there, Ms. Rice and Gen. Powell. This reminds me of a talk I heard given by a Planned Parenthood doctor regarding the fact that reproductive rights were in such jeopardy, "Bush may be personally stupid, but he has surrounded himelf by some of the smartest people in American politics." It's not HIM I'm impressed by (or scared of), it's the people with whom he does business.

So you are going to make a comparison of that nature without even knowing how he responded to the attacks on Arab Americans?? You said he was racist, how?? What are you basing that statement off of?? Hopefully something you heard rather than didnt hear and therefore assumed....





I think its funny how when people give him credit for something good, its because of his cabinet(which he chose). But when there is something someone may disagree with its HIS fault.

often times, people surround themselves with the best to make up for their own shortcomings - i think he made a damn smart move having both of them on his cabinet - lol, he can't be less of a presidnet becuase well unfortunately he is the only president we have - you don't have to agree with me, just understand that there are people out there who see politics and the way they work differently from you.

Bush's administration want's to drill for oil in the Alaska wildlife refuge. There was a study put out a couple of years ago that said if we did drill, there would only be a 2-3 month supply for drilling, so it's not worth it. Not only would we be drilling, but roads would have to be built into the refuge, of which there aren't many at present. He also backed America out of the Environmental emissions reduction world talks (I can't remember what it was called, it might have been the kyoto agreement, but I'm not sure.) If I did more research, I'm sure I could find more, but these are things that I've heard on the news, for everyone to hear.

yes it was Kyoto - Clinton actually signed the Kyoto agreement, but it means nothing unless Congress passes it - which isn't going to happen, unfortunately.

Anyways getting back on subject here......

I thought that there was another set of talks recently, and that we walked out and basically said that the plan was l\flawed and we weren't going to agree to it. At wi\hich point I say, why not stay and explain the fatal flaw and fix it? I'll do some more research.

Doesn't that oil that is being consumed by YOU and every person in America, have to come from somewhere? Is the global environment going to be hurt any less if that oil comes from the North Atlantic or the Gulf of Mexico or the Middle East. Basically you have a not in my backyard mentality. You are still going to use just as much oil as you always did and you dont really care if the environment is damaged as long as it isn't the environment in your back yard.

Okay, there's a serious difference between drilling in uninhabited desert areas (which was were most of the domestic and foreign petrol is harvested) and offshore drilling, which threatens human, non-human animal, and plant life, now isn't there? :rolleyes:

The Bush administration, in less than 11 months at the helm, has already approved serious amounts of OFFSHORE drilling, the destruction of wetlands and forests for development, and has increased the maximum level of arsenic that can be allowed in the drinking supply.

That is what GWBush has done to the environment, thank you very much. Yes, everyone has hurt the environment, but now with a president who not only endorses the all-out destruction of the environment for various commercial uses, it'll just be that more tragic.

Don't blame me, I voted for Nader...:D

Skip, why are you assuming that we all use as much oil as we always did? I take public transportation to work and rarely drive, but when I do, it is in my little, fuel efficient car. I would never in a million years drive an SUV because aside from guzzling gas and having a terrible impact on our environment, they are dangerous to smaller vehicles on the road. IMHO, they are the epitome of selfishness. So please do not make a blanket accusation.