Bush's Midnight Regulations

posted by Peter Rothberg on 12/17/2008 @ 12:41pm

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (73)

Subscribe Now

President Bush may have hospitably welcomed his successor and his wife into the White House while promising a "transition of the highest order," but despite voters' overwhelming rejection of Republican ideology, his administration has been using its waning days in power to codify a host of harmful new pro-industry, anti-environmental rules and regulations.

As R. Jeffrey Smith and Juliet Eilperin wrote recently in the Washington Post, "In a burst of activity meant to leave a lasting stamp on the federal government, the Bush White House in the past month has approved 61 new regulations on environmental, security, social and commercial matters that by its own estimate will have an economic impact exceeding $1.9 billion annually."

These so-called "midnight regulations" are free of Congressional oversight and will be completely legal once Bush signs off on them. They'll allow factories to pollute more, let food manufacturers hide their toxins more easily, gives states the chance to restrict women's access to abortion services and force municipalities to cut off aid to needy families in the middle of a recession.

On the environmental front, the latest rules show that the Bush administration is trying to lend a final assist to its crony industries that could be affected by looming pollution controls or wilderness-protection laws. A rule approved by the White House three days after the presidential election, for example, eased constraints on environmentally damaging oil shale development throughout the West, despite objections from Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter and a majority of the state's congressional delegation.

The Bush White House's perfidy is amusingly called out in the latest video from the good folks at Brave New Films. Their devastating spin on the holiday favorite 'Twas the Night Before Christmas, highlights the administration's final, desperate power grab with piercing humor and unassailable facts. Playing the critical role of New Media Town Crier, BNF is refusing to allow the Bush Administration to stealthily sneak out the backdoor with what's left of the family jewels.

Watch the video.

While President-elect Obama has vowed to roll back his predecessor's abuses, many regulatory and legal observers say that it won't be so easy given the veritable tidal wave of new rules on multiple fronts (close to 90, according to the Post), and the long, arduous regulatory requirements for repealing each rule.

There's also not much of a procedural process to block "midnight regulations" but there are levers of power that can be pulled if the lame duck White House gets too carried away. So the best thing to do is send this video around and continue to shine a light on what the outgoing Administration is trying to do under the radar. It hopes to avoid scrutiny and achieve a few final victories in quiet. Let's make some noise!

Comments (73)

Peter, as opposed to what "proposals" have been placed on President Bush's desk, how many of them have actually been signed?

Posted by ACook at 12/17/2008 @ 2:02pm
Good question, ACook. I would also like to know more about the "proposals" pertaining to workplace safety.

Posted by k330k at 12/17/2008 @ 2:22pm
Just 61 more things for Obama to undue on January 20th!

Posted by Metteyya at 12/17/2008 @ 2:50pm
Bill and Jimmy did it, so even though they are worse than Chimpy, it is OK to do this.

so sayeth the cons.

Posted by crabwalk at 12/17/2008 @ 3:30pm
Just 61 more things for Obama to undue on January 20th!---Posted by Metteyya at 12/17/2008 @ 2:50pm

Exactly. The only LONG TERM problem would be either Obama not un-doing them or some minor stink from the Repubs/cons of "Obama initiating dozens of NEW regulations!!!!" (which would simply be him un-doing Bush's DE-regulations).

Dubya just trying to throw some bones to his corporate wing...probably for speech money post-2009.

Posted by Mask at 12/17/2008 @ 3:45pm
The big problem is that some of the changes will have to go through the beer-ra-crocy again in order for Obama to change them back. This could take months and cost millions. As with Clinton, I expect that Bush hopes that many of the changes will not be worth the time and effort, and political cost, to change them back.

Posted by crabwalk at 12/17/2008 @ 4:11pm
Luvvy is correct, many have been sitting around for months and have gone trhough review. The questions are, was the review finished and what were the findings?

An ethical President would leave these as suggestions for the next admin to focus on in the first 30-60 days.

Posted by crabwalk at 12/17/2008 @ 4:18pm
Finally we are making progress:

crabwalk says:

"Bill and Jimmy did it, so even though they are worse than Chimpy..........."

By "Chimpy" crabwalk is referring to George W. Bush.

So crabwalk admits Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter are worse than George W. Bush.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with George W. Bush.

But Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter are among the worst U.S. presidents in history. And Jimmy Carter, a virulent anti-Semite, is THE worst ex-President in our country's history, hands down.

So at least crabwalk sees this now, and is willing to admit it.

Posted by sjchermak at 12/17/2008 @ 4:50pm
...despite voters' overwhelming rejection of Republican ideology...?

haha, good one! Wait... you're serious?

Even funnier!

Posted by freiheit1 at 12/17/2008 @ 5:38pm
Finally WE are making progress? So sayeth the beast CHERMAK.

Why, it makes me want to throw a shoe.

And there's this ... "Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter are among the worst U.S. presidents in history. And Jimmy Carter, a virulent anti-Semite, is THE worst ex-President in our country's history, hands down."

A virulent anti-semite? Is Anne Coulter coming over for lunch? I thought she was allergic to balogna.

Sigh. Another conservative trying to make us all forget the past 8 years by pointing a finger in the other direction, hoping no one noticed just what Bush and Dick have done. There has been so much talk about Carter and Clinton.. you'd think that they were the ONLY presidents we've ever had. Really sad.

Bush existed, he exists. A real and screwed up recovering alcoholic with a 'pretzel logic.'

Posted by ficheye at 12/17/2008 @ 7:32pm
Posted by ficheye at 12/17/2008 @ 7:32pm

As compared to an impeached lying womanizer who's using his wife to get back into the WH by any means necessary or a naive peanut farmer who didn't have the guts to stand up to a trash-talking old guy in a turban?

Posted by ACook at 12/17/2008 @ 8:11pm
The strutting Stalinist, history rewritting semi moron chimp face Mussolini. That is our legacy of eight years of totally inane right wingnut government?

Is anyone going to arrest that bitch? I doubt it. I would seriously consider sending anyone who voted for that misanthrope to re-education school. Now the idiot (not even in the league with a "Fool") is going to try to tie the hands of a new administration.

When is enough, enough in this twisted nation? This guy doesn't even have any idea that he needs to be hung from the neck on the White House lawn. He is actually convinced that he is leaving the highest office on Earth with some sort of respect.

UNREAL.

Posted by chaoszen at 12/17/2008 @ 8:38pm
What is even sicker is that there are lots of people among us who still think this scum did a good job.

That is what I can't for the life of me understand. Never made one good decision. Totally brought this country to it's knees. Left it in ruins. And some of the idealog's, rednecks and religious right crazies still stand by him?

I guess as long as you don't get caught with a dead and naked young boy in your bed, you are good to go!

Posted by chaoszen at 12/17/2008 @ 8:52pm
chaoszen,

You say George W. Bush never made one good decision.

I know. He made many, not just one.

You of course want me to go to re-education school. You need to identify your re-education school for what it really would be - lib programming and indoctrination school.

Of course, that is what some high schools and colleges are now!

He is leaving office with some respect, from me. So if President Bush thinks he is leaving office with some respect, then he is correct.

Posted by sjchermak at 12/17/2008 @ 9:16pm
Posted by comanchenation at 12/17/2008 @ 10:44pm

Ooops! Yeah I guess I forgot for a minute that the constitution has been trashed and that the 1st Amendment along with a host of others have been flushed down the toilet. And that treason and the highest betrayal of the peoples trust and confidence is O.K. if you hold high office. And that now respect for the rule of law and being held accountable for high crimes and misdemeanors means nothing.. and my right to critisize my government should I chose, is now considered terrorism instead of patriotism.

And that it is O.K. to torture and hold people without due process and trial for as long as the King may wish.

Yeah I guess I forgot that I don't live in The United States of America anymore.

Posted by chaoszen at 12/18/2008 @ 12:13am
No matter how much revisionist history is conjured up by Rush, Hannity, Coulter et al...Bush will be considered the worst President ever. Hands down.

On his first innauguration, he was pelted with eggs. Oh, sure, the right wing Kool-aid crowd loves him. But, really, how popular has he ever been?

Also, I have to say this... As bad a reputation that Carter has, and as bad as Clinton's Lewinsky scandal was, I cannot remembering a President appearing to be an idiot like Bush.

Posted by koroviev at 12/18/2008 @ 12:18am
He is leaving office with some respect, from me. So if President Bush thinks he is leaving office with some respect, then he is correct. Posted by sjchermak at 12/17/2008 @ 9:16pm

That's too bad. I think the 'house elf' position is available

It's funny how, when anyone criticizes Bush, the responses seem to assume that you are a fan of the Clintons and/or Jimmy Carter. Clinton had some serious problems, but nothing like George 'AWOL, and by the way, I'm a coke fiend' Bushes. And then the response about Carter and the 'guy with the turban....' It's pretty well documented that the Reagan admin. did everything they could to capsize the hostage trade that Carter had going on, then 'amazingly' got them freed after he was elected. Reagans hair was perfect, but the only thing that 'trickled down' went down his leg.

Everyone who voted for Bush.. twice... are now busy trying to make his mistakes someone else's fault. It's fun!

Oh, and in response to the tally of attacks under the 'honorable' George - I just choked on a pretzel and shit my pants, Laura, come quick - Bush... I am not of the mind that his administration orchestrated 911, but they sure as hell fell down on the job. And now both of those aliens in charge admit that the WMD intelligence was flawed, both of them, after pissing and moaning about everyones patriotism on the way to breaking open our piggy bank. Did you read that? The information is available for those who seek the truth. But what fun is that?

Posted by ficheye at 12/18/2008 @ 12:49am
It's a shame that anyone who critizes Bush on here are lambasted for speaking the truth. The man has failed miserably as a President for the past 8 years, he is leaving office with the lowest approval rating, no credibility, our loss of respect around the world and yet we are not allowed to condemn him....WHY!!!!! Clinton is brought up time and again in comparison, there is no comparison as regards to having a flourishing economy and great standing around the world during his administration. Did he have faults of course he did, no one has said he was perfect, but by golly this country was in FAR better shape than it is now. So you can play up Bush as a great guy all you want but in reality that is far from the truth....he's left this country in ruin!!!

Posted by Caj at 12/18/2008 @ 08:21am
Caj,

As you know, the flourishing economy during the Clinton years was due to the dot com boom. And, as you know, the economy was going into a downturn at the end of the Clinton presidency.

As you know, the U.S. had a "great standing" around the world during the Clinton years because we were treating terror as a criminal matter and not as the war we now know that we were in.

This earns you good standing around the world because most of the rest of the world thinks this is the way to go, also.

But, of course, if that is the wrong approach and does not stop the terror, then why is it a good thing to have high standing around the world? Better to have low standing and do the right thing, which in this case was to more agressively fight future sources of terror rather than let it get worse, then have to fight anyway. (For an example, see World War II and Churchill, Winston)

You say the country was in "FAR" better shape with Slick Willie. Was that before, or after, Slick Willie allowed Loral Space, run by his buddy and campaign contributor Bernie Schwartz, to sell missile technology to the Communist Chinese, that enables the Chinese nuclear missiles to reach the U.S. West Coast? Missile technology sales like that are normally prohibited without a presidential waiver.

Was the country in better shape with Bill Clinton as president after the fire sale on pardons he held in his last days in office? (Actually, shortly thereafter the country was in better shape because Bill Clinton was no longer president).

Was the country in good shape when the Clinton White House was continually trying to "manage" and do damage control due to the Whitewater investigation?

You say "Clinton had faults, of course".... NO KIDDING!!

Posted by sjchermak at 12/18/2008 @ 09:42am
Everyone loves to blame Bush for the current economy, but conveniently forgets that the table for this disaster was set during the Clinton administration...just like they forgot that the recession of 2000-2001 began during the Clinton administration...but that doesn't stop them from blaming Bush for it...and then forget to CREDIT Bush for making it one of the shortest recessions on record.

Posted by usc1 at 12/18/2008 @ 10:30am
Posted by sjchermak at 12/18/2008 @ 09:42am

SJCHER, given you listen to the King Of Revisitionist History...gotta question-

When Rush goes off on Hank Paulson, our Secretary of the Treasury, do you EVER ask yourself...

"Who does Paulson WORK for? Is he totally unaccountable and unanswerable and is there NO ONE who can fire his ass?"

Or has Limbuagh convinced you that Paulson is now a dictator?

Posted by Mask at 12/18/2008 @ 10:43am
And Jimmy Carter, a virulent anti-Semite,

you are a virulent asshole, Sj

In the Middle East, through the Camp David agreement of 1978, he helped bring amity between Egypt and Israel.

usc1

you are another twit. Bush gets credit but no blame, yeah right. that's why his party ran away from him in the last election.

Posted by emile duBois at 12/18/2008 @ 11:31am
W. Bush is a Klingon, I read this article on a website call blackcoptermedia.com. It is brand new cause its not high on the web searches yet. They have a gallery of poster, which are unique. I supported them, just to see where they go. It is crazy and new!!!! Mojones look into them!!!!!

Posted by sidthekidney at 12/18/2008 @ 11:56am
Posted by sidthekidney at 12/18/2008 @ 11:56am

Dubya is not a Klingon.

Klingons, for the most part, are honorable warriors who do not shirk from battle (No Klingon would fly "combat missions over West Texas" when there was a REAL war going on)....and would never treat their fellow warriors with distain (a la Building 18 at Walter Reed)....nor send them off to a war and then say later that they were "unprepared for war".

/geek mode off

(heheh)

Posted by Mask at 12/18/2008 @ 12:05pm
emile duBois,

Excuse my demeanor, but right now I have to admit I am physically exhausted. The reason is total frustration.

I can not understand, and never will, what it is about you, and those like you, who take no responsibility whatever for understanding facts in the public domain.

I said above, and you referred to my quote "And Jimmy Carter, a virulent anti-Semite"

I repeat - JIMMY CARTER IS A VIRULENT ANTI-SEMITE.

What in God's name about this do you not comprehend?

Do you enjoy going through life with your head stuck up your rear end?

I am ticked off now, as you can probably tell.

Why do you think you can sail through life with no clue in the world about what is going on around you, yet you come on The Nation website and offer up your views anyway, knowing they have no basis or validation?

Sorry, but this gets ridiculous after awhile.

Jimmy Carter's Jewish Problem By Deborah Lipstadt Saturday, January 20, 2007; Page A23 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/article/ 2007/01/19/ AR2007011901541.html

December 15, 2006 12:00 AM Brave Jimmy Carter? It takes courage to criticize Israel? By Mona Charen http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjY4MTllMjY4OTA4OW ViYTE5NGM3MGI3 Nzg4ZGFkNmQ=

The Real Jimmy Carter By Alan M. Dershowitz FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, April 30, 2007 http://frontpagemagazine.com /Articles/Read.aspx?GUID= 14F14A6C-2BBE-439E- 929A-425288DA09E4

Carter's book: Anti-Semitism, not peace Jimmy Carter's latest offering reeks of anti-Semitism, not because of what he has written but because of how he has written it, what he has left out 12.29.2006 | YnetNews.com By Rabbi Levi Brackman http://www.normanfinkelstein.com /article.php?pg=11&ar=794

Posted by sjchermak at 12/18/2008 @ 12:12pm
Posted by sjchermak at 12/18/2008 @ 12:12pm

Sad.

This is what we have come to. If the guy that negotiated the ONLY peace agreement to hold in the ME (no SJ, not Maine) for decades is hated by those that treat ALL Palestinians as terrorists because he speaks honestly about Israel, he must be a anti-semite. That means he hates ALL jews.

The reality is Carter despises the government of Israel as it relates to their treatment of an ethnic group other than Jews. Here is the breaking news for your SJ, Israel does not = Jew.

I agree with President Carter on this issue. Does that make me an anti-semite?

---

BTW, remember last week the cons were boasting how they would NEVER speak bad about a president that was overseas. An outright lie, but funny. Now we can see how they view the office of the President. "Peanut" and the disdain they feel for the president that actually brought terrorists to justice and kept them off US soil for the remainder of his presidency. The recession of 2000-1 was CLintons fault because he came before Bush. The recession of 2008-? is Obamas fault, or Clintons, but NOT Bush's. ????????

The ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are not Bush's fault either. That is the fault of the leftwing media.

Even though John McCain said that Rumsfeld and his followers helped AQ, it is the fault of the media.

Con logic. Up is loose, east is mauve.

Posted by crabwalk at 12/18/2008 @ 12:54pm
So, other question are:

If Clinton was so bad, why do guys immediatly revert to "but Bill Clinton did the same/similar thing..."?

If Carter was so bad, why is Chimpy following his lead?

BTW Sj, could you list the wmd's found in Iraq that "everyone knew" existed? I am curious.

Posted by crabwalk at 12/18/2008 @ 12:56pm
Gee, how did I miss this "respect for the office of the President"?

Magic Negro.

mmmmm, respect.

From KORESHNATION, where killing federal agents and helping AQ is OK.

Posted by crabwalk at 12/18/2008 @ 12:59pm
crabwalk,

Can you list the WMD that Saddam was going to remanufacture once he was let off of the hook?

It would have been a lenghty list, but not needed anymore - George W. Bush and Tony Blair took care of that.

You asked if you are anti-Semite if you agree with Mr. Peanut "on this issue".... the information shows that on a variety of situations Mr. Peanut has shown himself to be an anti-Semite.

Criticism of Israel does not in itself by itself indicate anti-Semitism, after all the Israelis themselves do not agree on all of the issues. The appeasement type of guy, Ehud Olmert, and the acting Prime Minister, Tzipi Livni, do not agree with the person who will be the next Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who believes in being tough against terrorists.

If you agree with Mr. Peanut on one narrow issue out of all the issues that comprise the Middle East situation, then that does not automatically mean you are anti-Semite.

But if you agree with all or with most of what Mr. Peanut advocates, then you are an anti-Semite.

You pose the question whether the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are George W. Bush's fault, or the fault of the left wing media.

The answer is that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are the fault of terrorists and future would-be terrorists.

The left-wing media is not guilty of any fault. This is a free country with free speech. The left-wing media is wrong in their opinions, but are not guilty of any fault.

There is no "fault" or "wrong" or crime associated with advocating policy or ideas that are wrong and have been proven wrong. This is a free country and everbody is free to believe and advocate what they feel and what they think, even if their ideas are wrong.

Posted by sjchermak at 12/18/2008 @ 1:09pm
The report is the most direct refutation to date of the administration's rationale for using aggressive interrogation tactics -- that inflicting humiliation and pain on detainees was legal and effective, and helped protect the country. The 25-member panel, without one dissent among the 12 Republican members, declared the opposite to be true.

The administration's policies and the resulting controversies, the panel concluded, "damaged our ability to collect accurate intelligence that could save lives, strengthened the hand of our enemies, and compromised our moral authority."

---

The opposite of what SJ and RIOKORESH claim is true. The opposite.

That means you were 180 degrees off of correct.

which means you helped AQ grow.

according to John McCain and 11 republicans in the US senate.

zero wmd's, helping AQ grow. That is your legacy. intent means squat. Results matter.

Posted by crabwalk at 12/18/2008 @ 1:10pm
"But if you agree with all or with most of what Mr. Peanut advocates, then you are an anti-Semite. "

I am sure my Jewish wife will be alarmed to find this out.

don't let the facts get in your way, SJ, that might make you a "leftist".

Darin and Ponti, and Rush and Bubba Oh Really? say the leftist mnedia is to blame for the long war and the deaths of Americans. I guess you missed the kool-aid stand on that one.

Posted by crabwalk at 12/18/2008 @ 1:33pm
Other than bringing up Bill Clinton, Bill Ayers and Rev Wright, I have yet to read much defense of the cons prior claims that "a few bad apples" were to blame for raising AQ's membership, and the American deaths that can be blamed on Bush/Rumsfeld policies, via the loss of intelligence that could have saved those lives.

Why is that?

why don't the cons accept the blame that is theirs? It is right there in black and white, signed by the GOP's presidential candidate and backed up by "the troops". Did Sandy Berger write it? Did Bill Ayers? Did Rev Wright preach about it?

No, John McCain did, along with 11 of his closest "good friends from the Senate". Does John McCain hate America?

Posted by crabwalk at 12/18/2008 @ 1:39pm
-Can you list the WMD that Saddam was going to remanufacture once he was let off of the hook? -

No. Can you? What would you base that on? Conjecture? What would the climate be like? Would inspections have continued? Probably. Would dual use products still have been forbidden under UN mandates? probably.

I don't live in a world where I am willing throw away a trillion dollars and the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans and millions of Iraqis because I am afraid of a 1% chance that something MIGHT happen. But, then you live in a world where helping AQ is seen as progress.

Can you answer the question? How many wmd's were found in Iraq?

Posted by crabwalk at 12/18/2008 @ 1:51pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/18/2008 @ 12:55pm

LVLIB, it's not me...it's SJCHER's mentor, Limbaugh. And HE's attacking Paulson, not me.

Heard him this morning on his "Morning Update"...he's trying to convince the ditto-heads (and has been) that Paulson is some "rogue agent" answerable to nobody, who's out there pushing his "bail-out agenda" and that Dubya is not only unable to stop but unaware that he's doing it.

It's Limbaugh's attempt to keep you 28% Club guys from thinking "Hey! Wait a minute! THE PRESIDENT controls the Executive Branch and can tell the Secretary of the Treasury what to do...and DOES....or can FIRE HIS BUTT if he does something the PRESIDENT doesn't like!"

So again, don't go after me for attacking Paulson....ask Rush....or faithful Limbaugh Legionnaire SJCHERMAK

Posted by Mask at 12/18/2008 @ 2:17pm
Well, MASK, this IS "Obamas recession"...

Bush had nothing to do with it. Well, to be honest, it is Obamas and Clintons recession. Bush and the republicans were simply to weak to overpower the liberals in congress in order to put in regulation that would have helped the economy. Even though it is a center-right country.

Posted by crabwalk at 12/18/2008 @ 2:23pm
Try reading the responses I posted today on the Bush WMD thread

Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/18/2008 @ 2:58p

Is reading quotes from people that were wrong going to make some wmd's exist?

Read what I posted from Hans Blix, IAEA and David Albright. If you chose to listen to Bill or Hillary for your information...well... nuff said.

How many wmd's were found? It seems like a simple question. Why all the obfuscations?

Posted by crabwalk at 12/18/2008 @ 3:24pm
You say "Clinton had faults, of course".... NO KIDDING!!

Posted by sjchermak at 12/18/2008 @ 09:42am

No point in arguing with you, whatever is said on here about your precious Bush you will defend him and the administration to the hilt!!! Democrats are by no means perfect but by God they have a lot more sense!!!!

Posted by Caj at 12/18/2008 @ 3:28pm
I said above, and you referred to my quote "SJ is a complete asshole" I repeat - Sj is a complete asshole.

you see, this is an opinion, not a fact.

that Carter brought about peace between former enemies is a fact. like all repugs you have trouble distinguishing between fact and opinion.

Posted by emile duBois at 12/18/2008 @ 3:28pm
Crabwalk,

These guys are not going to engage in logical debate... if we say blue, they'll say red. If we say 'Bush', they'll start talking about Lewinski. It's bloviating and obfuscation that only blind right wingers have the balls to use.

There is, as we 'speak' a growing trend, even among conservatives, to prosecute George Bush. Maybe they aren't afraid of being sent to gitmo any more. Who knows. Between Bush and Dick (!) a lot of freedoms have been compromised. I'd even go so far as to say that they screwed up the war on terror. They just went to the wrong country. But,if truth be told, someone made a lot of money in the country that we did go to.

Bush signed an order on election day (!) that allowed oil exploration around various national monuments in Utah. Slick! Who knows what's next. Of course a lot of the bills that he is contemplating signing have been on the books for a while, but they seem to be focusing on things that will be the hardest to undo.

comanchenation: Have a beer. I should have referred to the Reagan 'machine' in a different way, but you took the bait. The result was the same. He was, at the very least, the classic 'I was for it before it was against it' candidate. The only thing that trickled down went down his leg.

Posted by ficheye at 12/18/2008 @ 3:40pm
Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/18/2008 @ 3:04pm

I find him insightful...into the mind of the Hard Right (less yourself of course) and the 28% Club who still support Dubya.

HE knows the truth. But he can't go out and attack Bush for the bail-outs, or else he has to explain his Chauvin-like devotion for the past 8 years...and guys like SJCHER's head would ache from the neck wrench of El Rushbo "turning against Dubya".

So he employs this "Paulson is running the show" dodge (and the even lamer, as crab noted, "Obama recesssion" hoax) to keep up a defense of the last "real" conservative that Limbaugh is likely to get for 20 years (Michael Steele's assessment, not mine).

And guys like SJCHER buy it...or pretend to.

Posted by Mask at 12/18/2008 @ 4:26pm
Have a beer.

ah but which one? Jever

Posted by emile duBois at 12/18/2008 @ 4:42pm
Jever. Mmmm. Goes well with pretzels. I think I'll stick to the soft ones, however.

Posted by ficheye at 12/18/2008 @ 4:57pm
I think I'll stick to the soft ones, however. Posted by ficheye at 12/18/2008 @ 4:57pm | ignore this person | warn this person

a Weissbier from Bavaria perhaps?

Posted by emile duBois at 12/18/2008 @ 5:32pm
Bush signed an order on election day (!) that allowed oil exploration around various national monuments in Utah. Slick!

Posted by ficheye at 12/18/2008 @ 3:40pm

That's is incorrect. This event had taken place between 2002 and 2003, well after the election.

According to the Washington Post: "The Bureau of Land Management had sought to open some public lands (in Utah) to energy exploration since 2003, but the agency had been repeatedly blocked by federal court and administrative rulings."

"Also from the NY Times: The perennial struggle over the use of public lands in the West, which traditionally pits ranchers, miners and oil and gas interests against environmentalists and groups interested in historic preservation, has been particularly acute in Utah."

"Many in the state, where resentment of the federal government runs deep, remain angry about the Clinton administration's decision in 1999 to set aside for protection three million acres deemed to have "wilderness qualities." The state sued; in 2003, the Bush administration settled and removed protections from those acres."

In other words, Bush had to pay up (so to speak).

Posted by ACook at 12/18/2008 @ 5:39pm
a Weissbier from Bavaria perhaps?

Posted by emile duBois at 12/18/2008 @ 5:32pm

MMMMMmmmmmmm.

Posted by Benchrest at 12/18/2008 @ 8:10pm
usc1

you are another twit. Bush gets credit but no blame, yeah right. that's why his party ran away from him in the last election.

Posted by emile duBois at 12/18/2008 @ 11:31am

typical...snide potshots and no facts...feel free to look up what I said if you want but you're not going to like what you see.

Posted by usc1 at 12/18/2008 @ 8:30pm
Wow.

I may stand corrected. I will have to check out the links. I'm wondering why Sean Hannity would say that. I figured he must have verified his sources, but since he's such a knucklehead I guess that serves me right.

Posted by ficheye at 12/18/2008 @ 8:34pm
..and then forget to CREDIT Bush for making it one of the shortest recessions on record. Posted by usc1 at 12/18/2008 @ 10:30am

Wait, wait.. is the recession over? Is that trade deficit gone? Am I getting another stimulus check? Have all the jobs and the auto industry been saved?

I would love to get some information on how the recession ended under Bush. It's entirely possible that profits from war, enjoyed mostly by very large corporations, got the benefit from whatever you are talking about. I'm open. Educate me about that.

Posted by ficheye at 12/18/2008 @ 8:41pm
As I said at the start, that would be the recession that began in 2000-2001...try to keep up...

Posted by usc1 at 12/18/2008 @ 9:04pm
emile duBois,

You are giving Mr. Peanut too much credit for the accords between Egypt and Israel.

The real credit goes to Anwar Sadat. He had a desire for peace. He is the reason it happened.

You may notice Anwar Sadat is dead now, and you might want to notice why and how he got that way. He paid for what he did with his life. The people in that region now hate him for what he did, they do not agree with it.

And you may notice there are no Anwar Sadats in the Middle East now. He was obviously an anomoly.

You also forget that Mr. Peanut did not like Menachem Begin. I saw this one time in a book that in itself had nothing to do with world politics.

It was a book written by Mr. Peanut and his wife Rosalyn about how to life a meaningful and healthy life. Most of the book contained tips on healthy eating and how to avoid or stop things like smoking and how to be productive and do things like community service, etc.

I will say that the book, while containing some good advice on these matters, could have been condensed to about 10 pages of tips. To say that this book was boring would be an understatement, it would have been more exciting watching paint dry.

But a few times in the book, some things slipped out, such as when Rosalyn made a snide comment about how difficult Menachem Begin was (In her and Jimmy's view).

Just because Mr. Peanut brokered a peace deal does not make him a friend or help or ally to Israel, or does not change the fact that he was an anti-Semite.

Posted by sjchermak at 12/18/2008 @ 10:26pm
as recessions go, this is the big one. and it happened on Bush's watch, as the saying goes. just like 9/11, IT HAPPENED ON HIS WATCH. this stain on that criminal Bush will never be wiped clean.

Posted by emile duBois at 12/18/2008 @ 10:28pm
Posted by crabwalk at 12/18/2008 @ 3:24pm

crab, you never answered my question. Are you endorsing the Matthew Alexander brand of psychological torture over the physical techniques?

Posted by twillie at 12/18/2008 @ 10:48pm
Just because Mr. Peanut brokered a peace deal does not make him a friend or help or ally to Israel, or does not change the fact that he was an anti-Semite. Posted by sjchermak at 12/18/2008 @ 10:26pm | ignore this person | warn this person

this is just plain INSANE.

Posted by emile duBois at 12/18/2008 @ 10:52pm
Posted by emile duBois at 12/18/2008 @ 10:28pm

yep...it happened during Bush's administration...but whose administration laid the groundwork for the crisis? Which party tried to stop it?

Posted by usc1 at 12/18/2008 @ 11:03pm
yep...it happened during Bush's administration...but whose administration laid the groundwork for the crisis? Which party tried to stop it? Posted by usc1 at 12/18/2008 @ 11:03pm

Right. Back to opinion. The Republicans tried to stop a recession? Your parsing of the data seems a trifle skewed. It just seems that way, mind you. Let's try this...

Post me some links so that I may read for myself this analysis that some kind of recession ended under Bush. I must be looking at the wrong publications, so help us all out. I promise that I'll try to keep up, especially if I can be directed to a source of information that I can respect.

And no fair blaming Clinton. I'm not a fan of his. That's just obfuscation. Whatever Bill did was just add-on idiocy after Reagan started the economic landslide.

Posted by ficheye at 12/19/2008 @ 01:06am
Just because Mr. Peanut brokered a peace deal does not make him a friend or help or ally to Israel----Posted by sjchermak at 12/18/2008 @ 10:26pm

Ah-ha

Posted by Mask at 12/19/2008 @ 07:28am
Posted by ficheye at 12/19/2008 @ 01:06am

You're not following very well...probably because you're coming in on other people's discussions...The current economic situation most certainly can be traced to Clinton and his "work" with Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, Franklin Raines, etc. To deny that is simply ignorance...and yes, Republicans tried to bring GSEs back under control but Frank and Dodd were instrumental in denying the problem...it's on video...feel free to check the C-span archives.

As for the recession that began and ENDED in 2001...

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2003-07-17-recession_x.htm

Posted by usc1 at 12/19/2008 @ 09:33am
"but Frank and Dodd were instrumental in denying the problem."----Posted by usc1 at 12/19/2008 @ 09:33am

Curious, usc, did Frank and Dodd oppose the Bush tax cuts?

Posted by Mask at 12/19/2008 @ 09:41am
rab, you never answered my question. Are you endorsing the Matthew Alexander brand of psychological torture over the physical techniques? Posted by twillie at 12/18/2008 @ 10:48pm

Missed the question.

The Army Field Guide on Interrogation recommends befriending the subject. This is what Alexander said worked. What torture are you talking about?

"I taught the members of my unit a new methodology -- one based on building rapport with suspects, showing cultural understanding and using good old-fashioned brainpower to tease out information. I personally conducted more than 300 interrogations, and I supervised more than 1,000. The methods my team used are not classified (they're listed in the unclassified Field Manual), but the way we used them was, I like to think, unique. We got to know our enemies, we learned to negotiate with them, and we adapted criminal investigative techniques to our work (something that the Field Manual permits, under the concept of "ruses and trickery"). It worked. Our efforts started a chain of successes that ultimately led to Zarqawi."

Over the course of this renaissance in interrogation tactics, our attitudes changed. We no longer saw our prisoners as the stereotypical al-Qaeda evildoers we had been repeatedly briefed to expect; we saw them as Sunni Iraqis, often family men protecting themselves from Shiite militias and trying to ensure that their fellow Sunnis would still have some access to wealth and power in the new Iraq. Most surprisingly, they turned out to despise al-Qaeda in Iraq as much as they despised us, but Zarqawi and his thugs were willing to provide them with arms and money. I pointed this out to Gen. George Casey, the former top U.S. commander in Iraq, when he visited my prison in the summer of 2006. He did not respond.

Posted by crabwalk at 12/19/2008 @ 10:32am
Posted by lvliberty1 at 12/19/2008 @ 11:10am

Ah....Well, how is it that Frank and Dodd were unable to prevent the Bush tax cuts....

but prevented "all those reforms" of Freddie and Fannie that the Republicans "wanted to save us from a housing crises"?!?!!?!??!!??!?!??????

Posted by Mask at 12/19/2008 @ 11:14am
Posted by sj"Blacks Don't Want or Need to Vote"chermak at 12/18/2008

Still waiting for SJ"Blacks Don't Want or Need to Vote"CHERMAK, to explain what the 14th ammendment had to do with the SCOTUS decision in Bush v. Gore. To whom was equal protection apportioned? Against what? With which precedents?

Or, let me guess: SJ was merely aping some free-floating and wretch-inducing rightwing flatus that had circulated around his head that s-o-u-n-d-e-d sophisticated to someone as drenched in orthodox righwing ignorance as he is. But when called upon to e-x-p-l-a-i-n what appeared above his name, SJ fled and re-treated more quickly than George W Loser making a pansy-assed metrosexual leap into the Champaign Unit of the Texas ANG, to defend Texas against the non-existent North Vientnamese airforce (or, equivalently, a retreat as reckless as Mary "I look like a man, so I can love like one" Cheney avoiding amorous encounters with the opposite sex).

Thus, when asked to give a coherant acount of his own claims, the non-sequiters gushed from SJ"Blacks Don't Want or Need to Vote"CHERMAK as once again monkeyed the party line on...Al Gore.

Next shitbum mythical nonsense up from "Blacks Don't Want or Need to Vote"CHERMAK: George W Loser was born a poor child to an inner city single-parent Mexican...paid his way through parochial school with a paper route...then to the Ivy League on scholarship on the strength of near-perfect SAT scores...volunteered for Nam as a young man and brought home a clutch of Purple Hearts and a leg injured by shrpnel...The eptiome of a self-made man...

Yup, SJ"Blacks Don't Want or Need to Vote"CHERMAK is stoopid enough to believe this and every other rightwing howler that he will loudly proclaim in long-winded, pompous and boring posts...

Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 12/19/2008 @ 11:31am
Posted by PhilMcCrevice at 12/19/2008 @ 11:31am | ignore this person | warn this person

I'm with you.

Posted by emile duBois at 12/19/2008 @ 3:08pm
Posted by crabwalk at 12/19/2008 @ 10:32am

crab, Matthew Alexander from Time.com:

"1. On the new interrogation tactics he was trained to utilize: "The quickest way to get most (but not all) captives talking is to be nice to them. But what does it mean to be "nice" to a subject under interrogation? ... It means, ideally, getting to know the subject better than he knows himself and then manipulating him by role-playing, flattering, misleading, and nudging his or her perception of the truth slightly off center. The goal is to turn the subject around so that he begins to see strong logic and even wisdom in acting against his own comrades and cause."

This sounds like psychological torture to me. Are you in favor of psychological torture?

Posted by twillie at 12/19/2008 @ 11:56pm
This sounds like psychological torture to me. Are you in favor of psychological torture? Posted by twillie at 12/19/2008 @ 11:56pm | ignore this person | warn this person

sounds like bullshit to me. it is in short an apology for real torture, like waterboarding.

Posted by emile duBois at 12/20/2008 @ 12:21am
Waterboarding? People in the military having been getting waterboarded during survival training for 20 or thirty years. Are you just getting concerned about it now?

Posted by twillie at 12/20/2008 @ 12:47am
As for the recession that began and ENDED in 2001... Posted by usc1 at 12/19/2008 @ 09:33am

You're not following very well, usc. I said I wasn't a Clinton fan, but it's back to the Clinton vilifying again for lack of any coherent response to the fact that Reagan kicked the football that started most of the current mess. To think anything else is just ignorance. You've got Clinton on the mind, methinks. Monica too, possibly. You're not actually reading these posts, you're just skimming and responding. I never denied that Clinton did or didn't do anything. But you'd actually have to read the post first before 'responding'. Clearly, there's no chance of that.

And the recession that began and ended in 2001? No, it only seemed to end because of a massive uplift due to military spending and further credit deregulation. Time to lay off the fruit loops. To believe that the administration of the last 8 years has had no affect on the current crisis is, well, delusional. What? You didn't say that? Well, you infer it by omission.

You have a very typical 'conservative denier' stance. No matter what is said, it's always the other guys fault. No matter if I posted fact after fact with links to back everything up, you'll just rely on your massive intellect to dismiss it all.

Try to stay up with the discussion. It's about George Bush and what he's doing on the way out the door. Refer to the top of the page. In my only defense of Clinton, it's odd that conservatives never mention the budget surplus that he left Bush with... who got busy spending it. That money is long gone. My money and your money. Probably don't wanna talk about that. It's gotta hurt. You wanna talk about Slick Willie. Well, right now Dubya is signing some weird shit on his way out. Heads up.

Posted by ficheye at 12/20/2008 @ 03:05am
All the right wing lunatics who haunt this web sight are growing tiresome! I think every other post is a troll! If I wanted to hear their drivel I would tune in to Rush Limbaugh!!!! No one can ruin a sight any quicker than brainwashed right winger can!

Posted by ganddw42 at 12/20/2008 @ 09:42am
Posted by ganddw42 at 12/20/2008 @ 09:42am | ignore this person | warn this person

good point. a remedy is at hand. the ignore button.

Posted by emile duBois at 12/20/2008 @ 10:29am
Waterboarding? People in the military having been getting waterboarded during survival training for 20 or thirty years. Are you just getting concerned about it now? Posted by twillie at 12/20/2008 @ 12:47am | ignore this person | warn this person

a lie to be sure. in training you know damn well that they will not let you drown. the prisoner has no such assurance.

waterboarding has been considered torture for ages. the US prosecuted perps of this in times past.

Posted by emile duBois at 12/20/2008 @ 10:31am
OK Let's have some fun! Mail George W. Bush an old shoe or flip flop. Email your friends! Get some chainmail going!

Here is the address:

George W. Bush The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington DC 20500

Now, isn't this fun!

Posted by BushCamWildlife at 12/20/2008 @ 12:56pm
OK Let's have some fun! Mail George W. Bush an old shoe or flip flop. Email your friends! Get some chainmail going!

Here is the address:

George W. Bush The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington DC 20500

Now, isn't this fun!

Posted by BushCamWildlife at 12/20/2008 @ 12:57pm
OK Let's have some fun! Mail George W. Bush an old shoe or flip flop. Email your friends! Get some chainmail going! Here is the address: George W. Bush The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Washington DC 20500 Now, isn't this fun! Posted by BushCamWildlife at 12/20/2008 @ 12:57pm

What a hoot! You kids! That's the way to stick it to "the man"!

Posted by twillie at 12/20/2008 @ 11:31pm
ganddw42:

So no one is allowed here, but people who agree with you? The great thing about this nation was it was founded on ideas, differing ideas and the freedom of those ideas.

Does it hurt to read things other than flaming liberals typing "We hate GW" every other second? Are original ideas and thoughts somehow threatening to you and your sheltered life in the liberal echo chamber?

That is one of the great things about the freedom of ideas, you have the freedom to be as confused as possible and put it out there for others to see and agree with, or in my case, be extremly entertained.

Posted by Weyld1 at 12/22/2008 @ 12:39pm