Can someone help me rip this a part?

Has Bush done any of this? I am arguing with a Bush lover at the moment.

"(1) He inherited the Clinton recession and ended it before the end of the first year of his term (March 2000 - November 2001).

(2) He proposed the Clear Skies Initiative, which will accelerate the reduction of harmful emissions. As part of his Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, the Department of Energy "will shift its clean fuels research program from ultra-clean forms of petroleum-based fuels to a new research effort focused on lower cost ways to produce hydrogen from coal and natural gas." Furthermore, the Office of Energy and Renewable Energy is increasing federal funding into research of renewable energy sources.

(3) He increased federal funding to schools in a bipartisan education bill that "mandates annual math and reading tests in Grades 3 through 8, gives local school districts more "flexibility" in spending federal aid, and gives parents the right to transfer children from one government-run school to another." He also supports the use of school vouchers so that parents in poor communities will have the same opportunity as the rich to send their children to private schools. "




I know this is all total BS, but I need something to back it up with.

On #1 you might want to try the Federal Reserve Board's website. I think they have GDP data going back almost 100 years listed there. A recession is defined as 2 quarters of consecutive negative economic growth. While GDP slowed in 2000, I believe to about 1.0% in the 4th quarter, the statistical definition of a recession was not met, and unemployment remained low, nonetheless.

1) There was a "Clinton Recession" ... in 1993. When Clinton left office, every major economic indicator was at historic highs. Since Bush was installed, every major economic indicator has fallen at one time or another, and most of them have stayed low.

2) Clear Skies was never funded. The Office of Energy is clearly under-funded. "Hydrogen energy" isn't a renewable form of energy, simply a way to store energy generated from other sources. Every dollar of energy technology development has gone to oil companies and major Bush donors, such as Haliburton.

3) No Child Left Behind is so poorly funded that it basically doesn't exist. Mandatory testing has become a major unfunded mandate falling on the states. School voucher programs are strategically designed to keep private school tuitions high enough to exclude nearly every family below the top tax bracket.

It's all been lip-service. Tell your friend that a lot of Republicans are ripping on Bush, too, and to start there. All of these points have been addressed by many conservatives as well as liberals.

BUT ... instead of answering questions, your basic tactic should be to attack, attack, and attack. That's the only way to win arguments.

--bkl

And thank you very much!

It's not plagiarism if it's public domain, and everything I've written has been reported in papers supposedly friendly to Bush.

Since hiding things is impossible today, Bush's tactic has been to flood the public with examples of his misfeasance. People go numb to it after a while.

Ten minutes with your local big-city newspaper will yield a dozen or more good examples you can use. Each day. The problem isn't finding ammo -- it's in battle tactics and accuracy of aim.

As the Japanese samurai used to say, zan totsu -- close and strike.

Best of luck!

--bkl

The first one is just pathetic. First off, they claimed that Bush inherited a Clinton recession, which is a lie. And then to say that he fixed it, but 9/11 sent us into recession, unemployment and deficits is a terrible lie.

For the second one, thats the beauty of the Bush administration. They propose and talk about all kinds of shit that would be good for the US and the environment. But they just talk. They never fund anything (except for corporations and tax cuts for the wealthy) and if by some miracle a program gets any funding it is only a quarter of what they were promised.

Third, No Child Left Behind is a joke and a failure. Even if it was a good idea, it would not be recieving the necessary funding.


Bush is all talk, no substance.

1. The recession started just after Bush took office in March 2001 if I remember correctly. When Bush took office, the economy had been slowing all year, and was pretty clearly headed into recession. The stock market went down dramatically in 2000. The S+P 500 finished the year minus 9.1 % which was its worst performance in 20 years. You can say that Clinton left Bush with a prosperous booming economy, but you're lying if you do. Luckily the recession was a very short one, and barely qualified technically as a recession. We have not been in a recession for two years now. The economy is not adding jobs though. I believe this is because corporations (like my company) have discovered that they can move thousands of information jobs overseas. My company moved thousands of phone bank jobs to the Philippines. Most other brokerage firms have done the same.

To me this is the most serious economic challenge America has today. With the invention of the internet it is now possible for information to be processed in India just as quickly as it could be processed a block away. If a solution to this outsourcing cannot be found, it will effect our whole nation's standard of living, and already is. I am not committed to any candidate yet. I'd like to see one come up with a realistic plan to stem this ebbing tide. So far all I've heard is nonsense like "Elect ____ and he will solve the problem."

2. Sorry, don't know anything about it.

3. I think Bush's educational reforms are generally positive, and I think they have been in Texas too. The biggest citicism is that they're too test-driven. The biggest change is that each school gets rated by test score. What I've seen around me is that if one school in town gets rated worst with 21 % of its kids passing the reading test, then the newspapers and the parents want to know why, and there have been changes made, and resources allocated. There's no way to know whether the school is working or not without some type of scoring system. In my town, grades mean nothing. The local paper reported that over 75 % of all letter grades given out in 6th grade were A's last year. Therefore, if your kid got A's on his report card, that grade told you very little. But, if 79 % of the kids in your kid's school failed the reading test, and only 16 % of the kids in the other school failed, well, you've been told a lot. Bush is for vouchers, but they were not in his educational reform plan. He is trying to get a voucher program started in DC, where the mayor is trying to help him. The senate is going to filibuster it though, even though it comes with entirely new money and won't cost the district a dime.

has not been funded. All those mandated tests have had to be paid out of other funds-states or local.

And now for my rant. I taught in public schools as a regular and substitute for over twenty years. What I have seen is a steady erosion in the ability of teachers to be allowed to teach. When I moved to Texas, I was told that there was only one method to use to teach children reading. When I tried using other methods (because some students weren't learning to read using the 'approved' method) I was repremanded. About half the year was spent learning how to take tests, which has nothing to do with learning how to learn or how to solve problems, etc. I was teaching fourth grade, and some of the kids had no clue what 1 +1 was, or how to read or spell words like "the". But boy, could they fill in those circles on the practice test! And they knew how to 'read' the test and 'guess' the best answer-in other words, how to fake it. I'm tired of people blaming teachers and schools for kids not learning, because they aren't the only reason, and often aren't the primary reason. If you have a school where crack houses are next door, where people have been assaulted or murdered, you've got a big problem. If you have a school where the parents never spend any time with their kids, who think learning is sissy or worse, you've got a bigger problem. If you have a school in a neighborhood where they value gangs and the one with the longest prison record is looked up to, you've got a huge problem. A person's basic personality and value system is learned by the time they start school at five. If education is not valued by the family, if there is no family or family support, that person will simply not learn and thrive.

Instead of more tests for schools, I'd like to see more mentors, especially for minority students. I'd like to see Head Start's funding increased, and more early intervention programs (starting at birth) to be initiated. That, imho, will help make sure no child is left behind far better than making all children learn the same way and spend three quarters of their school year studying for a test.

I like your response (I liked all of them), but the reason Bush does not push hard for vouchers is that his white, surburban, well-off constituents like their schools the way they are, and don’t want to upset the apple cart. Bush went silent on the issue when his base (esp. the Christian right) turned on the issue.

As to “No Child left Behind, if that damn program is so good, why is the State of Maine, that has really good schools (ranks in the top six in the nation in math, reading, science and writing), so against it?

From PBS: <http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/education/july-dec03/maine_9-2.html>
"JOHN MERROW (PBS): The Department has created a rural education task force to address concerns coming from Maine and other rural states. One of the major issues is funding. Maine is eligible for about $90 million in federal funds under the "No Child Left Behind Act." But (Maine’s US) Representative Allen (D) believes that the increased testing, retraining teachers and other new requirements will cost Maine a lot more than that.

"REP. TOM ALLEN: Back home, the school districts don't have the money to fulfill all the mandates that the federal government has now imposed on them through this law.
Merrow’s closing comment: “Maine is not alone. Other rural states - Alaska, Montana, Vermont, New Hampshire, Nebraska - have expressed their concerns about No Child Left Behind. A law that seems certain to continue to have a dramatic effect on public education."

Last, there is a great article in the Washington Post from a former school principal on the “illusion” of the bill. I disagree with his end comment about vouchers at the end, but liked the rest of it. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37561-2003Sep19.html>

1> The recession did not officially start until March 2001. Interestingly enough this was around the time of the House vote on the bankrupting tax cuts (The first ones).

2> Clear skies is a sham. It is voluntary for one thing. One need only try to look through the air in Houston, TX to see how well voluntary polllution-prevention programs woirked for him is Texas.

3> The Education Bill falls short of doing anything besides increasing standardized testing. It doesn't go far enough, and does little other than to give the GOP statistics on why education should be defunded. It was bipartisan, but Kennedy, who was a supporter, has since criticised the measure and the implementation thereof.

That Bush also inherited the Clinton military with which Bush has now engaged in war and clams they did an excellent job. Get them to admit that Clinton left him with a strong military.

It's productive, to the point and arms us all with the knowledge we need to counter the repukes for the upcoming election. I like to lay this kind of stuff on them and watch them completely shutdown for a minute or two, and their only comeback is to decry the name Clinton in some off subject kind of way, that's when you know you got 'em.

Not March 2000.