And Denys the flip-flopper started another OT-Line.
And he just tried to tell us, that he doesn't remember and never starts an
OT. Here's the other real flip-flopper.


http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/opinion/9925970.htm

Falling short of his own standards   By Jack Z. Smith

In several very important ways, George W. Bush hasn't been the president
that he assured Americans he would be.

The man who in 2000 touted himself as a "compassionate conservative" has
proven incredibly charitable when it comes to providing tax cuts for the
rich. But he won't push Congress to raise the pathetically low minimum wage
of $5.15 an hour to help low-income working people.

The man who said his tax cuts would stimulate the economy and create droves
of new jobs has witnessed an embarrassing net loss of more than 800,000
jobs during his administration.

At a time when America needs to add at least 1.5 million jobs a year just
to accommodate population growth, Bush has the worst job-creation record of
any president since Herbert Hoover (1929-33). In contrast, America gained
nearly 23 million jobs when Bill Clinton was president.

Bush, who decries "tax-and-spend liberals," declared in 2000 that "big
government is not the answer." But he hasn't been the responsible fiscal
conservative he pledged to be. As president, he has not vetoed a single
spending bill and has supported increased spending in numerous budget
categories.

His failure to rein in spending, coupled with excessive tax cuts, has
resulted in the largest federal budget deficits in history and projections
of continued red ink far into the future.

Yet he stubbornly refuses to embrace a responsible "pay-as-you-go" policy
requiring that any future tax cuts be offset by similar-sized cutbacks in
spending or tax increases in other areas, or a combination of the two.

In 2000, Bush promised to be "a uniter, not a divider." He said he
wanted "to change the tone of Washington to one of civility and respect."

But his administration and the Republican Party that he leads have often
been needlessly polarizing and divisive. He has made little effort to rein
in the relentlessly partisan GOP congressional leadership that includes
bellicose House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

Although he portrayed himself in 2000 as a principled straight shooter,
Bush heads an administration that sometimes is willing to do whatever it
takes to win.

When the administration was desperately trying to squeeze a costly Medicare
prescription drug bill through a hesitant Congress, it publicly projected
the bill's 10-year cost at $395 billion -- while keeping secret an estimate
by the program's chief cost analyst that the real price tag would exceed
$500 billion. That's the antithesis of shooting straight.

Long before today's world of $50-a-barrel oil and nearly $2-a-gallon
gasoline, Bush promised to champion a comprehensive, balanced energy policy.

But he obstinately refuses to support one of the most obviously needed and
beneficial measures: a substantial increase in federal fuel economy
standards to diminish our heavy reliance on foreign oil from politically
volatile nations.

At the 2000 Republican National Convention, Bush promised to "confront the
hard issues," including "threats to our health and retirement security."

Yet today, approximately 45 million Americans lack health insurance, and
those who have it are seeing their monthly premiums skyrocket.

As far as retirement security goes, Bush has done virtually nothing to
address the huge long-term deficits facing Social Security and Medicare. In
fact, he has weakened the nation's ability to deal with the problem by
running up big budget deficits and spending surplus Social Security payroll
tax revenues on other programs.

In 2000, Bush said, "We will give our military the means to keep the
peace." As commander in chief, however, he and his advisers seriously
underestimated the troop strength and containment measures needed to
maintain calm and order in Iraq after the successful U.S.-led military
invasion there -- hence the very messy situation there now.

Being president is an incredibly difficult job. In some ways, Bush has
performed admirably, such as in the inspiring leadership he provided
immediately after 9-11.

He certainly appears to be sincere, at least for the most part, in
believing that his policies are best for America. And some of his policies
have been sound.

In a variety of ways, however, his positions on economic, social and
foreign policy issues have belied the unifying, compassionate, egalitarian,
let's-all-come-together tone of his acceptance speech at the Republican
convention in 2000.

Much of that speech was quite inspiring. But he hasn't lived up to it.

It's time for a new tenant at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Although John Kerry
has his own warts, he's a breath of fresh air after four years of Bush.

If elected, Kerry will prove a wiser, fairer and better president than
Bush. That's the bottom line, isn't it?



On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 16:51:06 -0500, Denys Beauchemin
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200410150823.asp
>
>
>Denys
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *