Political: USA Today Gives Bush First Term Report Card

wvrevy

Daddy to da' princess, which I guess makes me da'
Joined
Nov 7, 1999
Messages
8,130
And it ain't pretty :teeth: I've bolded a few things that are of particular interest.
--------------------

Scorecard on the president: A mixed bag

By Judy Keen
USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — Even presidents get job reviews.

President Bush's performance evaluation is underway now, and his scores will be determined by the voters who are weighing whether he has met the goals he set for himself four years ago.

When Bush campaigns, he tells people that examining whether his actions match his promises is one way to gauge whether he deserves four more years. “The only reason to look backward is to best tell who to lead us forward,” he said this month in Stratham, N.H.

Bush's opponent, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, agrees. His campaign, he said in March, is focused on “restoring people's trust that what we say, we mean, and that we mean what we say; that the things we talk about in a campaign are not promises to be broken — they are promises to be kept.”

Voters will judge Bush on his entire record, and the war with Iraq and the failure to capture al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden will be a big part of their judgment. But long before those factors came into play, two speeches — his nomination acceptance in Philadelphia on Aug. 3, 2000, and his inaugural address on Jan. 20, 2001 — outlined Bush's goals for his time in office. Some of his objectives, such as his promise to restore civility to Washington, were broad, and results are difficult to measure. But others, including his pledges to cut taxes and reform Social Security and Medicare, were specific.

Bush's successes, failures and unfinished business define his presidency and are crucial to his chances of winning on Nov. 2. His key promises, in his own words:
The promise:

“We will extend the promise of prosperity to every forgotten corner of this country.”

The record: In 46 states — everywhere except Delaware, Hawaii, Montana and Wyoming — unemployment rates are higher now than when Bush took office. The national jobless rate in July, the most recent figure, was 5.5%. In January 2001, it was 4.2%. During Bush's tenure, 2.6 million manufacturing jobs have been lost.

In campaign speeches, Bush says the economy has “overcome some mighty obstacles.” He says the recession he inherited, corporate executives' mismanagement and the impact of the Sept. 11 attacks and his war on terrorism have slowed recovery, but the economy is improving. But gains in jobs have slowed in the past couple of months, and most Americans are not upbeat about their own situations. A USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll taken last month found that 62% of Americans rate economic conditions in the country only fair or poor.

The promise:

“We will set (Medicare) on firm financial ground and make prescription drugs available and affordable for every senior who needs them.”

The record: In December, Bush signed a law providing prescription-drug benefits for people on Medicare. It won't take full effect for more than a year, but seniors can use discount cards now to save 10%-25% on most medicines. Low-income seniors can get a $600 credit to help pay for drugs. The law encourages seniors to enroll in managed-care programs, which is expected to reduce the overall cost of Medicare.

“For the first time, we're giving seniors peace of mind that they will not have to face unlimited expenses for their medicine,” Bush said when he signed the law.

But in March, trustees of the fund that supports Medicare predicted that it will become insolvent in 2019 — seven years earlier than the previous estimate. The changes enacted last year are expected to slow the growth in Medicare spending, but Bush has not proposed other significant changes to stave off bankruptcy.

In a study released last month, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, a non-partisan group, concluded that the discount cards “offer good value” but found that “frustration and confusion” with the program has been widespread.

The promise:

“Social Security has been called the ‘third rail of American politics' — the one you're not supposed to touch because it shocks you. But if you don't touch it, you can't fix it. And I intend to fix it.”

The record: Bush is still talking about Social Security. “I've got to tell you, I'm concerned about Social Security,” he said this month in Sioux City, Iowa. “For old guys like me, Social Security is fine. It's for the younger workers, those who are just starting to work, we've got to worry about the fiscal solvency of the Social Security system.”

He has only gingerly approached that electrified subway rail. He has described his principles for reform, including a proposal to allow younger workers to invest part of their withholding taxes in the stock market. He appointed a bipartisan commission to study the issue and has ruled out increasing payroll taxes for the fund.

But Bush decided last year that the issue was too complex and too politically risky to tackle in a first term. In March, trustees predicted that Social Security will be out of money in 2042.
The promise:

“When a school district receives federal funds to teach poor children, we expect them to learn. And if they don't, parents should get the money to make a different choice.”

The record: The No Child Left Behind Act, which Bush signed in 2002, embodies those principles. It requires testing of public-school students to measure their reading and math skills. It allows parents of children whose schools' overall test results repeatedly fail to meet the new standards to move their children to different schools.

Every state has produced a required “accountability plan,” but administration officials say the full effect of the law won't be evident for years. Reading and math testing of students in grades 3-8 begins in the 2005-06 school year. The following school year, students will be tested in science at least once in elementary, middle and high school

Opponents say Bush's budgets haven't included enough money to make the program work. The new law encourages converting traditional schools that fail into charter schools, privately run institutions that have more flexibility in hiring and teaching techniques. The Education Department said this month that students in charter schools are doing worse than comparable students in regular public schools.

The promise:

“Every family, every farmer and small-business person, should be free to pass on their life's work to those they love. So we will abolish the death tax.”

The record: Bush's first package of tax cuts, which he signed into law in 2001, did end the estate tax.

But the victory was temporary: Unless Congress votes to continue this tax relief, it will expire on Dec. 31, 2010. Bush says all his tax cuts should be made permanent. A new Congress will take up that issue next year.

The promise:

“We will reduce tax rates for everyone, in every bracket.”

The record: Done, but the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says the middle class now pays a bigger share of all federal taxes and the richest Americans pay less.

The promise:

“We will lower the bottom rate from 15% to 10% and double the child tax credit.”

The record: Bush's 2001 tax cuts did both. But the new $1,000 per-child tax credit is scheduled to shrink to $700 in 2005.
The promise:

“We will transform today's housing rental program to help … low-income families find stability and dignity in a home of their own.”

The record: Bush said in 2002 that he wanted 5.5 million more minority homeowners by 2010. Since then, more than 1 million minority families have bought homes.

The American Dream Downpayment Act, which Bush signed in 2003, provides $200 million each year to help first-time home buyers with down payments and closing costs. The Department of Housing and Urban Development allows housing agencies to use federal rental assistance funds to help low-income families pay mortgages or make down payments.

Although minority homeownership is at 49%, an all-time high, thanks in part to low mortgage rates, minorities still lag. Overall, 68% of Americans own their homes.

The promise:

“We must help protect our children … by finally and strictly enforcing our nation's gun laws.”

The record: Bush says he supports a ban on assault weapons, but critics complain that he hasn't pressured Congress to renew the law, which expires on Sept. 14. Bush also supports giving gunmakers immunity from civil lawsuits.

He said in the 2000 campaign that enforcing existing gun-control laws was the right approach, but last month the Justice Department's inspector general reported that inspections of gun sellers' record-keeping by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives are “infrequent and of inconsistent quality,” and penalties have been sporadic. The report also said the bureau is slow to retrieve guns from buyers who fail federal criminal background checks. The law allows buyers to take their guns before the background check is done.

The promise:

“I will work to reduce nuclear weapons and nuclear tension in the world.”

The record: Last year, Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin signed the Moscow Treaty, in which both agreed to reduce deployment of strategic nuclear warheads by two-thirds by December 2012. Bush has recruited 15 countries to participate in the Proliferation Security Initiative, an effort to thwart shipments and sales of weapons and the materials needed to make them to terrorist groups.

But he hasn't been able to persuade North Korea and Iran to stop their nuclear-weapons programs. The administration is pressing the United Nations to impose sanctions on Iran, and it is negotiating with North Korea with the assistance of South Korea, Japan, Russia and China. Bush has proposed increasing the nuclear stockpile by adding a nuclear-tipped bunker buster.

The promise:

“We will defend our allies and our interests. We will show purpose without arrogance.”

The record: Arrogance is exactly what Bush has been accused of by his opponents at home and abroad. His pre-emption doctrine, which asserts that it's appropriate to take military action to avert emerging threats, revised longstanding U.S. foreign policy and angered some allies in Europe and elsewhere. Bush's decision to go to war with Iraq without the participation of the United Nations or other world organizations also was criticized as arrogant.

Bush says his policies and decisions are driven by necessity, not arrogance, and his supporters say they reflect strength. But his relationships with world leaders, including French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, remain tense because they believe his approach disrespected their concerns.

The promise:

“At the earliest possible date, my administration will deploy missile defenses to guard against attack and blackmail.”

The record: This fall, a prototype of the missile-defense system will be deployed. Bush requested more than $10 billion for the next phase of the program in his 2005 budget. Preliminary tests have raised doubts, however, about how well the system will work.

Bush admits that he hasn't fulfilled every promise, and he tells voters he needs four more years to accomplish his goals.

“We've got more to do for our country,” he said this month. “I want to make our country the best country it can be by improving jobs and improving our schools. I will continue to fight the war against terror. … We have done a lot. I'm here to ask for your help, because there's more to do.”
 
What did the National Enquirer give him? :p
 
This is exactly where our focus should be and your post is exactly the reason why the right doesn't want to focus on issues.



I will continue to fight the war against terror. …

Since he now claims that he doesn't think we can win the war on terror, I don't think he has any business being in charge of it.


What a message to send to terrorists! We can't stop you, but we're going to make it a little tougher on you????


If that's not a flip flop from the cry of "bring it on", I don't know what is!

<center><IMG width="300" SRC="http://www.seeyageorge.com/shop/images/194.gif"></center>
 

Since he now claims that he doesn't think we can win the war on terror, I don't think he has any business being in charge of it.

Of course, you take this completely out of context! I heard what President Bush said, & I think he's exactly right. Do you think we can completely rid the world of all terrorists? If you do, I've got a bridge to sell you.

We've already made it more difficult for Al-Queda. It will take a long time, but I believe we can continue to make America & other freedom-loving countries safer.

Just the thought of John Kerry (or any other liberal) in charge of our national security scares the heck out of me! W in '04!
 
How about John Kerry's report card? He was in the Senate for most of 20 years and there isn't one bill with his name on it. How many votes has he missed? He was voted the most liberal of all the senators, even to the left of Teddy Kennedy. The only way he can even enter a presidential race is to move to the center. The Democratic convention wasn't an example of who Kerry is. It is his masquerade towards the center so he can fool the undecided.
 
Originally posted by DawnCt1
He was voted the most liberal of all the senators, even to the left of Teddy Kennedy. The only way he can even enter a presidential race is to move to the center. The Democratic convention wasn't an example of who Kerry is. It is his masquerade towards the center so he can fool the undecided.

Kerry was rated the most liberal in 2003 based in part on a few votes that he missed that would have pushed him closer to the center. I believe he averaged about 7th most liberal Senator during the time he has served. I can't find the article I read on this, but saying that Kerry is the most liberal Senator is very misleading.

-Josh
 
I'm pretty amazed that USA Today unloaded on Bush. I thought it was pretty Bush friendly 4 years ago.:confused:

Oh, wait a minute. Perhaps the editorial staff has actually looked at his record and not just his rhetoric! :eek:
 
Originally posted by JKanownik
Kerry was rated the most liberal in 2003 based in part on a few votes that he missed that would have pushed him closer to the center. I believe he averaged about 7th most liberal Senator during the time he has served. I can't find the article I read on this, but saying that Kerry is the most liberal Senator is very misleading.

-Josh

That's hysterical!!! He got "credit" for votes he missed! Actually, that's not bad. The more votes he misses, the better off the USA is. :p
 
Originally posted by JKanownik
Kerry was rated the most liberal in 2003 based in part on a few votes that he missed that would have pushed him closer to the center. I believe he averaged about 7th most liberal Senator during the time he has served. I can't find the article I read on this, but saying that Kerry is the most liberal Senator is very misleading.

-Josh

How about one of the most liberal Senators? Is that misleading?

7th out of 100. That's pretty darn liberal!
 
Originally posted by DawnCt1
How about John Kerry's report card? He was in the Senate for most of 20 years and there isn't one bill with his name on it.

Is that the best you can do to defend Bush's abysmal record? I guess it's a case of Bush isn't any good, but then neither is Kerry?

This gets really easy when the extremists keep saying the same thing over and over again................


The Republican strategy is to portray Kerry as having accomplished very little in his Senate career simply because his focus wasn't on sponsoring bills and cutting deals.

It's a smart move, but for those who don't just swallow anything they're told, it's easy enough to see that the claim is not true.

Just one example...

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/fe...409.sirota.html

"Kerry developed a very different record of accomplishment--one often as vital, if not more so, than passage of bills. Kerry's probe didn't create any popular new governmental programs, reform the tax code, or eliminate bureaucratic waste and fraud. Instead, he shrewdly used the Senate's oversight powers to address the threat of terrorism well before it was in vogue, and dismantled a key terrorist weapon. In the process, observers saw a senator with tremendous fortitude, and a willingness to put the public good ahead of his own career. Those qualities might be hard to communicate to voters via one-line sound bites, but they would surely aid Kerry as president in his attempts to battle the threat of terrorism."

<center><IMG width="200"SRC="http://www.seeyageorge.com/shop/images/194.gif "></center>
 
Of course, you take this completely out of context! I heard what President Bush said, & I think he's exactly right. Do you think we can completely rid the world of all terrorists?

I thought you Republicans liked the 10 second sound bite?:)

But no, I didn't take it out of context at all. Here's the paragraph..

"I don't think you can win it," the president said, when asked if the war on terrorism can be won. "But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world."

I don't see where it changes much. Can the war be won? Not according to Bush.

<center><IMG width="200"SRC="http://www.seeyageorge.com/shop/images/194.gif"></center>
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
1. Is that the best you can do to defend Bush's abysmal record? I guess it's a case of Bush isn't any good, but then neither is Kerry?



2. "Kerry developed a very different record of accomplishment--one often as vital, if not more so, than passage of bills. Kerry's probe didn't create any popular new governmental programs, reform the tax code, or eliminate bureaucratic waste and fraud. Instead, he shrewdly used the Senate's oversight powers to address the threat of terrorism well before it was in vogue, and dismantled a key terrorist weapon. In the process, observers saw a senator with tremendous fortitude, and a willingness to put the public good ahead of his own career. Those qualities might be hard to communicate to voters via one-line sound bites, but they would surely aid Kerry as president in his attempts to battle the threat of terrorism."

<

1. I don't have to defend President Bush's record. He has done a great job and his record speaks for itself.

2. This is a joke right? He addressed the threat of terrorism? If that is so, how have we been hit so many times from the first attack on the WTC, to the Cole, to the embassies, etc. Secondly, what has he EVER put ahead of his own interests. He voted against every weapons system we have ever had, including the ones that one the Gulf War and this war. He was all for a nuclear freeze when RR was winning the cold war. He voted to gut the CIA to such a degree that even Kennedy couldn't support it. He didn't support the Gulf War despite the huge coalition, including Germany and France, that he thinks so highly of. He has ALWAYS BEEN ON THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY and you want him to be president??? Scary thought!
 
I was going to spend some time looking up quotes from Bush claiming that he was winning the war on terrorism, but I don't have to go any further than his own website....


http://www.georgebush.com/search/search.aspx

Bush-Cheney '04 Launches Winning the War on Terror Tour


Bush-Cheney '04 Continues Winning the War on Terror Tour

Vice President Says Tough Approach Necessary to Protect Our Nation and Win War on Terror

President Bush Outlines Successes in Winning the War on Terror

And it goes on and on. Apparently he used to think we could win.
This has got to be the major flip flop of the century!


. I don't have to defend President Bush's record. He has done a great job and his record speaks for itself.

Ok, Dawn. Just because you say so??? That's a great argument. The only problem is it's a little short on being factual.


<center><IMG width="200"SRC="http://www.seeyageorge.com/shop/images/194.gif "></center>
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
I thought you Republicans liked the 10 second sound bite?:)

But no, I didn't take it out of context at all. Here's the paragraph..



I don't see where it changes much. Can the war be won? Not according to Bush.
<center><IMG width="200"SRC="http://www.seeyageorge.com/shop/images/194.gif "></center>

OK, so how can it be won, once & for all? No more terrorist threat. BTW, you still left out much of the conversation.
 
Originally posted by jimmiej
OK, so how can it be won, once & for all? No more terrorist threat. BTW, you still left out much of the conversation.

Don't ask me, I never said it could, the President did.

It's a long article...here's the link...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5865710/

Still doesn't change what he said...

<center><IMG width="200"SRC="http://www.seeyageorge.com/shop/images/194.gif "></center>
 
Hmmmm.

USA Today, published by Al Neuharth, not exactly to the right of center on issues.

And they don't like GW's job performance?

Hey, now there's a surprise for ya'.

Just wonder if did they same thing (grading one's job performance) to Big Bill C. when he ran against Bob Dole.
 
I just wish that someone would explain how President Bush and his ilk are going to pay for all of these things. He seems ready to spend money like a madman and there is never a mention of where the funds are going to come from.
 
Originally posted by Planogirl
I just wish that someone would explain how President Bush and his ilk are going to pay for all of these things. He seems ready to spend money like a madman and there is never a mention of where the funds are going to come from.

Congress spends the money. The President can only suggest. I think our safety is worth a lot of money.

There are areas that need to be cut, but I'd look hard before cutting our military. That's part of our problem. President Clinton slashed military spending.

peachgirl, I disagree with you that the first quote is not changed after reading the entire conversation. Whether he initially said it could be won or not, maybe time & situations have changed his overall outlook about the future of the war on terrorism.
 
Originally posted by peachgirl
Don't ask me, I never said it could, the President did.

It's a long article...here's the link...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5865710/

Still doesn't change what he said...

<center><IMG width="200"SRC="http://www.seeyageorge.com/shop/images/194.gif "></center>

It certainly won't be won in the traditional sense with a truce, peacetreaties and surrender. I think that the president made it clear that we have to change the environment that breeds terrorism. Its a long haul. I would rather fight that abroad than here. Wouldn't you? Political correctness aside; the war on terror is a religious war, whether anyone wants to or can admit it aloud.
 












Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE













DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter DIS Bluesky

Back
Top