Bush pitches alternatives to automakers

Bush and Congress share the goals of reducing reliance or foreign oil, raising fuel efficiency and minimizing emissions that contribute to global warming, and now Bush is pushing his plan to the automakers. His goal is to lower the gas consumption by 20% in 10 years, which will last well after his presidency. While this sounds good, some disagree with his plan. Kevin Curtis, the senior vice president of National Environmental Trust said, " President Bush is leaving fuel economy standards up to chance. His proposal just asks Congress for a bunch of regulatory flexibility and tells the rest of us to hope for the best." It's hard to tell if 20% will help us with our problem. Ten years seems so far away, and especially when there are still Americans buy huge SUV's. I know I can't be complaining too much since I have a Jeep, but people need to know the different choices out there. Bush is also trying to push Hybrid cars and new technology. Do you think Bush’s plan is enough to make a change or if there should be more done to solve this large problem? I feel that one thing that needs to be done is teaching the citizens what they need to do, and how this isn’t something that is going to get better on it’s own. We need to take the right steps to solve this problem, and it needs to happen soon. What are your views on this subject?

18% of Iraqis have confience in the U.S. forces

After seeing results that only 18% of Iraqis have confidence in the U.S. forces, it’s hard to have an optimistic point of view. While it’s great that Americans have such a strong belief on how we should handle this war, it seems like we should see what the Iraqis want. Why haven’t we been thinking about the people stuck in the middle of this war? Where are the polls that show that even the Iraqis aren’t confident in the U.S. forces? This information wasn’t even published by an American news company, but by BBC. The polls show that Iraqis have become less optimistic about their future compared to a poll in 2005. Do you think Americans are being inconsiderate to the Iraqis interest?

Involved in Firing

WASHINGTON (March 16) - The White House is being pulled further into the intensifying probe over federal prosecutor firings amid new questions about top political adviser Karl Rove 's role and as GOP support for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales erodes

This Guy is Nuts

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed cemented his position as al-Qaida's most ambitious operational planner when he confessed in a U.S. military tribunal to planning and supporting 31 terrorist attacks, topped by 9/11, that killed thousands of innocent victims since the early 1990s.

OBAMA, the SECOND black President.

Democrats slam GOP over Walter Reed woes

"By JENNIFER TALHELM, Associated Press Writer Sat Mar 10, 11:13 AM ET

WASHINGTON - An Arizona congressman said Saturday that mold-covered walls, rodent infestations and other problems uncovered recently at Walter Reed Army Medical Center reveal "a catastrophic failure of leadership" by the Bush administration.

Rep. Harry Mitchell (news, bio, voting record), D-Ariz., said in the Democrats' weekly radio address that Congress is acting quickly to hold the administration accountable for underfunding and mismanaging the veterans health care system...

Defense Secretary Robert Gates forced Army Secretary Francis Harvey to resign. Maj. Gen. George W. Weightman, who was in charge of Walter Reed since August 2006, also was ousted from his post.

A bipartisan commission appointed by
President Bush is reviewing the military and veterans health care systems, as are the
Pentagon, the Army and the Veterans Affairs Department."

Firstly, the pairing of the first and second paragraphs of this article is extremely misleading. Walter Reed is not a VA hospital, it's an Army hospital. Rep. Mitchell continuing to fall back on improving VA funding and such has nothing to do with problems at Walter Reed... and unless I'm missing something he has failed to show that Bush is dealing with VA funding "on the cheap", or that it's causing ill effects. As a veteran, I'm fairly confident in the VA system, and I think any negative aspects that exist were there long before the current administration.

Secondly, I don't think the Bush administration had any opportunity to fix this problem beforehand, as they probably were never told there was a problem in the first place- the bureaucratic machine responsible for this one is likely the Army, not the presidency. Now that the problem has been uncovered, I think the Bush administration has taken every appropriate step to fix it- they're cleaning house, and sending in a reviewing commission, to 'micromanage' something the Army should have been able to do itself, and I'm fairly certain from the Army's past reactions to elected officials that plenty of people are now feeling the squeeze to shape up.

I think this article makes about as much sense as blaming Bush for the weather, or the NCAA tournament standings. Do you think this is a case of "straw man" attacks, or do you think the Democrats really think this wouldn't have happened if a D was in the white house? Is attempting to unjustly blame the presidency for negative current events a common occurrence?