365 days....

--------------

Down on the Ranch, President Wages War on the Underbrush
Bush Conscripts Aides in Tireless Pursuit of Clearing Ground

By Lisa Rein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, December 31, 2005; Page A03

CRAWFORD, Tex., Dec. 30 -- On most of the 365 days he has enjoyed at his secluded ranch here, President Bush's idea of paradise is to hop in his white Ford pickup truck in jeans and work boots, drive to a stand of cedars, and whack the trees to the ground.

If the soil is moist enough, he will light a match and burn the wood. If it is parched, as it is across Texas now, the wood will sit in piles scattered over the 1,600-acre spread until it is safe for a ranch hand to torch -- or until the president can come home and do the honors himself.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/30/AR2005123001326.html

Is that 365 days in the last 5 years he has been president? If so, that's less than taking every weekend off. I would say more Americans take 2 out of 7 days off, this looks like 2 out of 10.

Is that 365 days in the last 5 years he has been president? If so, that's less than taking every weekend off. I would say more Americans take 2 out of 7 days off, this looks like 2 out of 10.

Days on vacation is different than days off.

Kellet, you think Americans take 2 and 1/2 months of vacation every year? :hmm:

Nothing wrong with vacations.

Nothing wrong with vacations.

When your running the most powerful nation on earth... I dont think you need to spend almost 1/2 of it on break.

When your running the most powerful nation on earth... I dont think you need to spend almost 1/2 of it on break.

Today's presidents are never "on break". Their physical location doesn't matter in this day of instant communications.

Kellet, you think Americans take 2 and 1/2 months of vacation every year? :hmm:

No, I was using the logic that if he took 365 days out of the last 5 years it would be less than taking every weekend off. Not counting vacations. That would average 73 days a year, where someone who takes every weekend off takes 104 days a year. Of course that's not the only time off he takes though. Nevermind.

Congress is not in session. No one seems to be complaining about them not being in Washingtoon working to solve (screw) the nations problems. As far as I am concerned, the less he is in DC the better. As hadit has already said, he is never "on" vacation....How many of you can say you are on the job 24-7?

That's true.... it's pretty much a 24/7/365 for 4 years stint, and some go back for seconds...

You never really feel 'off on vacation' when you know there's someone withing 20 yards of you at all times that might hand you a phone that means drop everything and work frenetically for the next 18 hours.

And that's any prez, any party.

Who cares? I mean, do you want to have the president working all the time? Do you think he should be a slave?

I don't know...all I hear is people bitching that the guy can't do a damn thing right. Then, when he's on "vacation", not doing anything, they're still complaining. I don't know, you'd think maybe they'd be happy.

I don't like much of what GWB is doing. But, the man is entitled to some time off. Geez...

That's the perks of being President. If he had to slave 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, who would take the job? This is why it is a coveted position...

Being President is not a leisurely, stress-free occupation. Take a look at the before and after pics of modern Presidents. The stress is incredibly aging - and as hadit noted, the President is on duty 24/7.

Thta's right, Boe, a stressed leader would not be able to make rational crucial descisions. One needs a clear sharp mind.

I remember as a kid seeing before and after pictures of how much Carter aged during his 4 years and being amazed how much he seemed to just shrivel. Regan aged, GHW Bush aged, Clinton, it's hard to say based on hair, since he changed the way it was dyed or not off and on, but his nose grew and his eyes got baggier (seriously, talking typical male aging stuff, but normally this would take decades to chance this much) and we can see it's aged W.

Congress is not in session. No one seems to be complaining about them not being in Washingtoon working to solve (screw) the nations problems.
Congress finally adjourned the week before Christmas, bud. And part of a Senator or Congressman's job is to connect with his or her constituents. That's how many of the members are spending this "break."

Yay, another libs attack Bush and cons defend him thread.

Sign me up for repetitive talking points!

Yay, another libs attack Bush and cons defend him thread.

Sign me up for repetitive talking points!

Pretty silly to squabble over, huh? Bottom line, I wouldn't want the job, no matter how much vacation I got.

LOL.

Thread title is hilarious.

LOL.

Thread title is hilarious.

That's right. The president never really gets a vacation at all.

That's right. The president never really gets a vacation at all.


Pres. Bush has been on a permanent vacation.

Get my drift....:hmm:

Pres. Bush has been on a permanent vacation.

Get my drift....:hmm:

Maybe that's why congressional democrats feel so powerless when they go up against him.

Maybe that's why congressional democrats feel so powerless when they go up against him.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D


Keep posting, so I can keep laughing.

hadit, Pre.Bush is a disgrace.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D


Keep posting, so I can keep laughing.

hadit, Pre.Bush is a disgrace.

That remains to be seen. It is very difficult to judge a president's impact during his administration. For example, many people thought Bill Clinton was a wonderful president. The further we get from his regime, the clearer the picture gets of the 8 year party he threw in the White House and his neglect. FDR was thought to be a hero, so much so he was elected 4 times. Distance has shown us the disasters he brought on us. Reagan was thought to be a dunce. Now we see how clear his vision was, and how significant a role he played in bringing down the Soviet empire. Check back in 10 years after the manufactured scandals go away.

That remains to be seen. It is very difficult to judge a president's impact during his administration. For example, many people thought Bill Clinton was a wonderful president.

What kind of an impact: positive or negative?

Pres. Bush is a liar and a deceiver. I'm judging the man by his own present day words and his present day actions. Not 10 yrs from now - but today.

The further we get from his regime, the clearer the picture gets of the 8 year party he threw in the White House and his neglect. FDR was thought to be a hero, so much so he was elected 4 times. Distance has shown us the disasters he brought on us.

Don't know too much about those 2. My present level of interest in US politics started primarily during the 2000 election which included the bogus Florida election, and furthered by 9/11.

Reagan was thought to be a dunce.

I readthat Ronald Reagan tried to argue that ketchup was a vegetable, and that trees cause more pollution than automobiles. Now you tell me....

Now we see how clear his vision was, and how significant a role he played in bringing down the Soviet empire. Check back in 10 years after the manufactured scandals go away.

Don't know too much about how significant a role he played in that, but I've heard that he was very significant, and I've also heard the exact opposite. So maybe that depends on what school of thought you happen to be a student of. I don't mind giving a man credit where it's due though.

Bottom line is this: A man who lies as much as the president, I will never endear myself to. The man in my avatar is an example of the kind of leaders I respect and admire.

Pres. Bush is a liar and a deceiver. Don't you ever tire of that mantra? Does it bring you inner peace to repeat it?

This is an example of a direct lie: "I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinski"

now...If he would have said:

"There is no reason to believe I had sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky" Then he wouldn't be a liar...just incorrect with his facts..even after the jizz-stained dress was brought out

In similar fashion, Bush was incorrect with his facts...but not a liar


Now get over it


. My present level of interest in US politics started primarily during the 2000 election which included the bogus Florida election, and furthered by 9/11. interesting



I readthat Ronald Reagan tried to argue that ketchup was a vegetable, and that trees cause more pollution than automobiles. Now you tell me.... You're basing your opinion about the intelligence of a US President by these two trivial quotes?


Don't know too much about how significant a role he played in that, but I've heard that he was very significant, and I've also heard the exact opposite. So maybe that depends on what school of thought you happen to be a student of. I don't mind giving a man credit where it's due though. school 1: Thatcher, Reagan, Pope John-Paul II, and Gorby played significant roles.

school 2: What world leaders said and did was irrelevant, the USSR was gonna crumble and at that time anyways

You decide which makes more sense

Bottom line is this: A man who lies as much as the president, I will never endear myself to. lol...you can't help but come full circle and return to your comfort zone

The man in my avatar is an example of the kind of leaders I respect and admire. wow...was that before or after he was a member of the "nation of islam?"

What kind of an impact: positive or negative?

Pres. Bush is a liar and a deceiver. I'm judging the man by his own present day words and his present day actions. Not 10 yrs from now - but today.


You're also basing your opinion abouther he is a liar and deceiver on highly partisan sources that care little about the truth when it comes to the possibility of getting rid of Bush. That's why it takes a while to get the real scoop on a president.


Don't know too much about those 2. My present level of interest in US politics started primarily during the 2000 election which included the bogus Florida election, and furthered by 9/11.


This is a great example of what I am talking about. I sense that you would have had absolutely no problem with the results of the 2000 election had Gore succeeded in his attempt to steal it. It wasn't bogus. Multiple analyses and recounts have established the Bush did indeed win Florida, but your sources are not satisfied because of their severe partisanship.


I readthat Ronald Reagan tried to argue that ketchup was a vegetable, and that trees cause more pollution than automobiles. Now you tell me....


Reagan didn't personally say anything about ketchup, and trees do cause pollution, believe it or not.


Don't know too much about how significant a role he played in that, but I've heard that he was very significant, and I've also heard the exact opposite. So maybe that depends on what school of thought you happen to be a student of. I don't mind giving a man credit where it's due though.


Reagan was very clear about the Soviet Union and realized that he could eliminate it as a threat by simply outspending it militarily. He was able to bring it down without firing a shot. Previous presidents feared the USSR. He didn't. That's leadership.


Bottom line is this: A man who lies as much as the president, I will never endear myself to. The man in my avatar is an example of the kind of leaders I respect and admire.

Again, your sources on the lying are not very credible themselves. You have to get some distance from large events to really understand them. The president's enemies are still trying to gain politically from him, and cannot be trusted to give unbiased information.

Don't you ever tire of that mantra? Does it bring you inner peace to repeat it?

It ain’t my fault that the president is a liar and a deceiver. It’s true.

This is an example of a direct lie: "I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinski"

now...If he would have said:

"There is no reason to believe I had sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky" Then he wouldn't be a liar...just incorrect with his facts..even after the jizz-stained dress was brought out
In similar fashion, Bush was incorrect with his facts...but not a liar. Now get over it

Never lost any sleep over it. He’s still a disgrace though.

G.W. Bush is a liar. I recommend you read a book called Fraud - The Strategy Behind the Bush Lies and Why the Media Didn’t Tell You. It’s a great book by Paul Waldman. He documents lies that George told before he even became president as well. Read that book and get back to me on whether or not the man is a liar.

You're basing your opinion about the intelligence of a US President by these two trivial quotes?

Do you believe that ketchup is a vegetable? Do you believe that trees cause more pollution than automobiles?

school 1: Thatcher, Reagan, Pope John-Paul II, and Gorby played significant roles.

school 2: What world leaders said and did was irrelevant, the USSR was gonna crumble and at that time anyways

You decide which makes more sense

I can care less about Reagan right now.

lol...you can't help but come full circle and return to your comfort zone

What? Am I supposed to think that Pres. George W Bush is some freedom fighter? Was this guy ever on the front line like a John Brown or a Malcolm X or a Sojourner Truth or a Harriet Tubman? I think not. The man is a liar, and so are his cohorts. F’in coward, he wouldn’t even come before the 9/11 commission by himself. Had to have Cheney holding his hand. Face the facts: he’s a coward, a liar and a disgrace.

wow...was that before or after he was a member of the "nation of islam?"

I don’t separate the 2. I don't admire criminals. But did he die a pimp, a drug user, a robber, a criminal or a hustler? No, he didn’t. He changed – for the better.

You're also basing your opinion abouther he is a liar and deceiver on highly partisan sources that care little about the truth when it comes to the possibility of getting rid of Bush.

Like you really know where I get my info. ok, we'll take your assumptions as fact. :rolleyes:

That's why it takes a while to get the real scoop on a president.

Read the book I recommended to Caddis. It shouldn't take long thereafter to get the scoop on who and what GW Bush is. A liar.

This is a great example of what I am talking about. I sense that you would have had absolutely no problem with the results of the 2000 election had Gore succeeded in his attempt to steal it.

More incorrect assumptions from you is what those statements above are.

It wasn't bogus.

Yes it was.

Multiple analyses and recounts have established the Bush did indeed win Florida, but your sources are not satisfied because of their severe partisanship.

The fix was in before the vote took place. Eligible voters wrongly purged from voter rolls, thousands wrongly classified as felons, you know, **** like that. That's what you fail to acknowledge.

Furthermore, if this country would practice what it preaches and allow true democratic elections, you know a real one where the majority vote-getter wins, then Gore would've been president in 2000 regardless.


Reagan didn't personally say anything about ketchup, and trees do cause pollution, believe it or not.

I'll reference my source ASAP. Bear with me, it may take a day or 2.


Reagan was very clear about the Soviet Union and realized that he could eliminate it as a threat by simply outspending it militarily. He was able to bring it down without firing a shot. Previous presidents feared the USSR. He didn't. That's leadership.

I can care less about Reagan right now. Don't know too much about him, don't care to know anything right now either.

Again, your sources on the lying are not very credible themselves.

How in the hell do you know????????????? Have you even read (at the very least) the book by Waldman????????????

huh????????????


You have to get some distance from large events to really understand them. The president's enemies are still trying to gain politically from him, and cannot be trusted to give unbiased information.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

It ain’t my fault that the president is a liar and a deceiver. It’s true. ahhhhhmmmmmmmm, ahhhhmmmmmmmmm, ahhhhhmmmmmmmmmmm


G.W. Bush is a liar. ahhhhhmmmmmmmm, ahhhhmmmmmmmmm, ahhhhhmmmmmmmmmmm

The man is a liar, and so are his cohorts. ahhhhhmmmmmmmm, ahhhhmmmmmmmmm, ahhhhhmmmmmmmmmmm

Face the facts: he’s a coward, a liar and a disgrace. ahhhhhmmmmmmmm, ahhhhmmmmmmmmm, ahhhhhmmmmmmmmmmm




Do you believe that ketchup is a vegetable? No...it's a fruit :|

Do you believe that trees cause more pollution than automobiles? depends on what definition of "polution" you happen to be using and what you mean by "more".....essentially I am using the "depends on what the meaning of 'is' is" defense :|



I don’t separate the 2. I don't admire criminals. But did he die a pimp, a drug user, a robber, a criminal or a hustler? No, he didn’t. He changed – for the better.more power to you then....I can think of many more people to respect and admire who never needed to change nor were members of loony religious race-based cults.

Reagan didn't personally say anything about ketchup,

Well, here's what I read:

Copyright 1981 The Washington Post
| October 30, 1981: Section 1; Federal Triangle; A29
|
| Ketchup Set to Pour Again In School Lunch Rules
|
| President Reagan says those controversial regulations declaring that
| ketchup would be considered a vegetable in school lunches came about
| because "somebody got overambitious in the bureacracy." Agriculture
| Secretary John R. Block, whose agency wrote the rules, offers a
| different explanation.
|
| "We did not withdraw the rules because they were in error," Block said
| in a speech released yesterday. "Both President Reagan and I felt they
| were in tune with the administration's philosophy. Unfortunately, they
| were misunderstood and misinterpreted . ... The intent and thrust will
| not be changed" when the rules are reissued.

http://homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/chris.holt/home.informal/bar/politics/ketchup


and trees do cause pollution, believe it or not.

According to what I read, Pres. Reagan stated that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do. So he took it a bit further by making the comparison to pollution caused by automobiles. Also, as I understand it, his claim was unproven at the time he made it.

Well, here's what I read:

Copyright 1981 The Washington Post
| October 30, 1981: Section 1; Federal Triangle; A29
|
| Ketchup Set to Pour Again In School Lunch Rules
|
| President Reagan says those controversial regulations declaring that
| ketchup would be considered a vegetable in school lunches came about
| because "somebody got overambitious in the bureacracy." Agriculture
| Secretary John R. Block, whose agency wrote the rules, offers a
| different explanation.
|
| "We did not withdraw the rules because they were in error," Block said
| in a speech released yesterday. "Both President Reagan and I felt they
| were in tune with the administration's philosophy. Unfortunately, they
| were misunderstood and misinterpreted . ... The intent and thrust will
| not be changed" when the rules are reissued.

http://homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/chris.holt/home.informal/bar/politics/ketchup




According to what I read, Pres. Reagan stated that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do. So he took it a bit further by making the comparison to pollution caused by automobiles. Also, as I understand it, his claim was unproven at the time he made it.

None of which detracts from the fact that he made the right decisions when it came to the Soviet Union. It's gone in large part because he decided to stare them down.

None of which detracts from the fact that he made the right decisions when it came to the Soviet Union.

Who said it detracted from….I didn’t.
I was merely replying to the comments you made in your post about what Reagan did (or did not) say about ketchup being a vegetable and trees causing more pollution than automobiles.

RR? What a ****ing asshat. He had no respect for Freedom of Speech, in the least, and disdain for the democratic process. May his time in hell suite him well.

I actually would like a President who didn't run things from Washington.

RR? What a ****ing asshat. He had no respect for Freedom of Speech, in the least, and disdain for the democratic process. May his time in hell suite him well.

Opposing the USSR was a terrible crime. But this type of hatred comes from him winning as often as he did.

RR? What a ****ing asshat. He had no respect for Freedom of Speech, in the least, and disdain for the democratic process. May his time in hell suite him well.Strong emotions from someone who wasn't even born when Reagan became President yet grew up with BJ Clinton.

Strong emotions from someone who wasn't even born when Reagan became President yet grew up with BJ Clinton.

Iv seen enough footage of Reagan to know the man was a basterd. Appearintly opressing free speech in america and training terrorists is awesome compared to getting a blowjob, ala the motto of the right.

Iv seen enough footage of Reagan to know the man was a basterd.


:rolleyes:

Clips and soundbytes....excellent resource material.