<Living in the Eemian The Oil Drum Tuesday Open Thread....>

176 comments on What the right hand giveth . . . .

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Leanan on February 21, 2006 - 7:13am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
But Bush applied to get into TU.  He was rejected, and ended up going to Harvard instead...  
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Don Sailorman on February 21, 2006 - 9:44am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Um . . . Leanne, didn't Bush go to Yale, join the Skull and Bones society (along with Kerry) and thereby become part of the Global Conspiracy based on the Trilateral Commision which is using the Black Helicopters of FEMA as part of the plot to Take Over. Katrina, of course, was part of the plot.

Pretty please with sugar on top, let us stop picking on Bush. Bush is not the problem. The Bush administration is not the problem. The Deep Problems go much deeper.

Bush, Cheney and Co. are merely symptoms of much more serious disorders.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on February 21, 2006 - 9:55am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Bush applied to TU for law school.  Or business school? Something like that.  He was rejected and went to Harvard Business School instead.

I thought he was a big-time Longhorns fan, and I don't see how saying so is "picking on" him.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Descolada on February 21, 2006 - 11:06pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Just to make sure, here.. you mean UT, right?  Because TU would be Texas University, which doesn't exist.  The closest there is Texas State University, which used to be called Southwest Texas State University, so I don't think it's the same issue.  But, this thread has gone south...  My original point is that the UT system is benefitting greatly from Bush & Co. And the point that I made was that alot of research is being shifted to them and away from federal labs like Los Alamos.  If I remember correctly, UT stole away a contract for high energy physics research.  But I don't remember exactly, so I could be wrong.  

In the interest of full disclosure, I attend UT - San Antonio.  It's in the UT system, yes, but it's kind of removed from UT - Austin.  Unlike in California, where there are like three or four big, powerful schools under the UC system, UT Austin completely outperforms the other schools in the system.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on February 21, 2006 - 11:15pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Just to make sure, here.. you mean UT, right?  Because TU would be Texas University, which doesn't exist.

Good-bye to Texas University
So long to the Orange and White.
Good luck to the dear old Texas Aggies,
They are the boys who show the real old fight.
The eyes of Texas are upon you.
That is the song they sing so well (sounds like hell!)
So, good-bye to Texas University...

;-)

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
MikeCotton on February 22, 2006 - 12:30am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
This thread has gone south, but just in keeping with times...

A real Aggie would have used the term 't.u.', so I'm going to have to doubt your Farmer-cred, Leanan.  

No offense.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on February 22, 2006 - 9:02am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I'm actually not an Aggie.  My sister is.  She's not a farmer, though.  Her undergrad degree from A&M is in economics.  

My alma mater is RPI:

e to the x, dy/dx, e to the x dx
Cosine, secant, tangent, sine,
3.14159
Square root, cube root, log of pi,
Dis-integrate them RPI!

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Gets IT on February 22, 2006 - 2:49pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Only in number of parties.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
LJR on February 21, 2006 - 10:41am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
So who DO we pick on?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
steverino on February 21, 2006 - 12:21pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
don, you are way out of line here....don't blame bush?....are you kidding??...who exactly got us into this mess in iraq?..jessica simpson?...who is the main decision maker in our foreign and domestic policy?...bodie miller?..who is stripping the fiscal budget to finance that war at the expense of all domestic policy?...ang lee?...who's running this country into the ground?..miss piggy?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on February 21, 2006 - 12:46pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
who's running this country into the ground?

Dick Cheney?

The results of a new Time poll were announced yesterday.  Roughly half of Americans believe that Dick Cheney "does not have America's best interests at heart."  Bill Schneider, CNN's political analyst, said that it's because Cheney is seen as an oil man, and Americans have a deep distrust of big oil.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
step back on February 21, 2006 - 5:08pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
don, you are way out of line here....don't blame bush?....are you kidding??...

Why do we humans engage in the "blame game" so much and where does it get us to in this particualr situation?

(Inquisitive lemming minds want to know ^..^  )

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Don Sailorman on February 21, 2006 - 5:24pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Steverino,
I appreciate that you do not like Bush. But obsessing on Bush is like picking at a plantar wart when you have malignant melanoma. In other words, what I am suggesting is that all this Bush bashing is a HUGE fallacy of lack of proportion. Note the following:
  1. Under our systems of checks and balances, a president can do squat without Congress. A president may propose, but Congress appropriates the funds (or does not do so) and thus the power of the President to by himself do horrible things is very limited under our system of government. Congress and demosclerosis of Congress--structural problems, in other words, I think are about 100 to 500 times more serious than the fact that Bush is, to be polite, not likely to be remembered as one of our great presidents.
  2. There are huge urgent issues out there: developing substitutes for fossil fuels, dealing with climate change, stabilizing population, just to name three of the big ones. The more emotion and energy and time spent bashing Bush, the less there is to go at the big problems.
  3. Compared to the screwups of other presidents, such as J.F.K. and L.B.J. in getting the U.S. into the Vietnam War (a far, far, bigger and bloodier war than Iraq) G.W.Bush is not an especially heavy hitter as creating disasters go.
Thus I conclude that Bush bashing is counter productive.

Get over it. Get down to very serious issues.

In three years Bush will be gone. NONE of our serious problems can be mitigated much by his going, no matter who his successor is.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
prole on February 21, 2006 - 5:46pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
As Harry Truman used to say:

"The buck stops here!"

So in that vain, Bush bashing is totally appropriate.  He claims to be a leader but does not set an agenda that anyone can understand or follow.

Seems like a failure of leadership to me.

It also seems that you are overly sensitive to criticism of him.

Might you be a Bush supporter that does not like facing facts i.e. Bush is a failure!

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
steverino on February 21, 2006 - 7:19pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
listen,,,i know bush isn't the only problem here....but what could have been done with that 400 billion "invested" in the middle east... if just anyone in power would do one right thing with a decent fraction, say $30 billion...ie one month in iraq used for jump starting renewables in this country..blah , blah, blah ..bush controls congress , no checks and balances...i know, it's stupid to argue politics
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
wkwillis on February 22, 2006 - 8:44am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I wish that was the case.
Bush Jr. can ignore the Supreme Court, ignore the Senate or House when picking which version of a bill to sign (which will give the small states fits when they figure that out), print money whenever he wants and to hell with the debt limit, move money from one appropriation area to another if Congress doesn't give him what he wants, and God knows what else he's doing that we don't know about.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
enviro attny on February 22, 2006 - 9:39am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Bush gets the blame for the destruction of america.  After Sept 11, he had the opportunity to ask Americans to work together for the future by eliminating oil. Something as simple as a $5000 cash rebate for hybrid cars 5 years ago would be making a substantial impact now.  Throw in actual sacrifice like (gasp) investing in rail systems instead of tax cuts, and we would be in much better shape.  Instead, he decided to enter into illegal wars, make rich people richer and totally destroy our country.

Bush will be the cause of more death, pain and hatred than any leader in the history of the world, simply because he deliberately didn't do anything.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
kkinder on February 21, 2006 - 5:00pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

The Bush people are smarter than you think. I've been pushing my Democratic representation in Congress to address peak fossil energy production, and the most they do is accuse the oil companies of excessive profits -- which might be true, but it isn't the point. We all knew that if the Democrats wouldn't own the issue, the Republicans would, and that's exactly what's happening. The Republicans will cast themselves as the party of energy progress and the Democrats as the party of the past, with only the latter being true.

Nevermind that Bush's entire notion of biomass is flawed, that he won't increase fuel standards for SUVs, that he won't admit global warming is in full swing. Reality isn't important when you have a news media that does little more than regurgitate what the party line is.

Welcome to Amerika. As Bill Moyers said:

One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the Oval Office and in Congress. For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power in Washington. Theology asserts propositions that cannot be proven true; ideologues hold stoutly to a worldview despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality. When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind. And there is the danger: voters and politicians alike, oblivious to the facts.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on February 21, 2006 - 6:06pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Sometimes I wonder if they know what's coming, and are looting the country now, while they can.

I am a political independent, and have voted for both Republicans and Democrats.  I voted for the current president's dad, and would do so again.  

But something has changed now.  I used to feel that politicians, whatever their foibles, had the best interests of the country at heart.  I no longer believe that.  The group in power now doesn't seem to care about the damage they are doing to the country.  They are acting like there is no future.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Agric on February 22, 2006 - 5:33pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I feel you are correct (though I would not have voted for Bush Snr.), I sense a wilful contempt for many things I hold dear and important in this US regime. I think your now belief is correct, and I conclude that there is no future while their like is in power.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.

176 comments on What the right hand giveth . . . .

Comments can no longer be added to this story.