This has nothing to do with Bush. My whole point of this was not to worship Bush here. My whole point was that I was blindsided by our government and I refuse to sit back and not be informed with Obama as president. I want to stay in the know so I can make my own decisions and keep tabs on things. I just think that President Obama has made A LOT of promises already and the man hasn't even been pres for a whole week yet and he has already broken some of his promises. I am going to hold this president and any future president's feet to the fire from now on. I don't care if they are dem, pub, or whatever......
It’s something of a tradition– administrations using their final weeks in power to ram through a slew of federal regulations. With the election grabbing the headlines, outgoing federal bureaucrats quietly propose and finalize rules that can affect the health and safety of millions.
The Bush administration has followed this tradition and expanded it. Up to 90 proposed regulations could be finalized before President George W. Bush leaves office Jan. 20. If adopted, these rules could weaken workplace safety protections, allow local police to spy in the “war on terror” and make it easier for federal agencies to ignore the Endangered Species Act.
What’s more, the administration has accelerated the rule-making process to ensure that the changes it wants will be finalized by Nov. 22.
That’s a key date, Nov. 22. It is 60 days before the next administration takes control — and most federal rules go into effect 60 days after they have been finalized. It would be a major bureaucratic undertaking for the Obama administration to reverse federal rules already in effect.
“The Bush administration has thought through last-minute regulations much more than past administrations,” said Rick Melberth, director of OMB Watch, a nonprofit group that tracks federal regulations. “They’ve said, ‘Let’s not only get them finalized; let’s get them in effect.’”
So what are the new rules?
The Washington Independent has highlighted five regulations notable for their potential effect and the way they slipped through the regulatory process. Four could to be finalized by Nov. 22. One was already — on Election Day.
1) The Dept. of Labor proposed a regulation Aug. 30 that changes how workplace safety standards are met. Labor experts contend that the administration, which previously issued only one new workplace safety standard and that under court order, is trying to make it a bureaucratic nightmare for future administrations to make workplace safety rules.
Here’s what it would do:
Currently, if the Occupational Safety and Health Admin. or the Mine Health and Safety Admin. want to introduce a new safety standard on, say, the level of exposure to toxic chemicals, it issues what is called a notice of proposed rule-making. This notice is published in the Federal Register and then debated by labor, business and relevant federal agencies.
The new regulation would add an “advanced notice of proposed rule-making,” meaning OSHA and MSHA would have prove that, say, the said chemical was seriously harming workers.
This would open the door for industry to challenge the validity of the risk assessment and then, if necessary, the actual safety standard that may come from that risk assessment.
“The purpose of this sort of rule is to require agencies to spend more time on a regulation which gives them less of a chance to actually regulate,” said David Michaels, a professor of workplace safety at George Washington University, “You’re adding at least a year, maybe two years, to the process.”
The regulation has not been finalized.
2) The administration proposed a rule that changes the employer-employee relationship laid out in the 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act.
Here’s what it would do:
The Family and Medical Leave Act says that employers must give their workers 12 weeks of unpaid leave if they are sick or need to take care of a family member or newborn. The employer’s health-care staff can check the legitimacy of the family or medical leave claim with the employee’s doctor or health-care provider.
The proposed regulation would allow the employer to directly speak with the employee’s doctor or health-care provider. The employer could also ask employees to provide more medical documentation of their conditions.
Why such a rule — which may threaten an employee’s privacy– is needed is unclear. The only study the Labor Dept. has done on the act was in 2000. The department collected comments from employers before issuing the proposed regulation, but a report analyzing the comments was never issued.
The regulation also would gives employees the right to waive their rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act, making it the first national labor law to be optional. A worker, for instance, cannot waive his right to earn a minimum wage or get paid more for overtime.
The regulation was finalized on Election Day.
3) The Dept. of Health and Human Services proposed a rule Sept. 26 that would expand the reasons that physicians or health care entities could decline to provide any procedure to include moral and religious grounds. The language of the regulation says the department hopes to correct “an attitude toward the health-care profession that health-care professionals and institutions should be required to provide or assist in the provision of medicine or procedures to which they object, or else risk being subjected to discrimination.”
Here’s what it would do:
The rule change seems to apply to abortion. But they are already several rules that say physicians or health-care entities can deny an abortion request. Some women’s health advocates contend that the proposed regulation’s broad language is meant to increase the number of physicians who not only don’t provide abortions but don’t provide contraception.
“Contraception is certainly the target of this rule,” contends Marylin Keefe, director for Reproductive Health at the National Partnership for Women and Families. “The moral and religious objections of health-care workers are now starting to take precedence over patients.”
The regulation is notable for another reason. A rule involving an employee’s religious rights must be referred to the Equal Employment and Opportunity Commission, yet the commission was never told of this proposed regulation.
A bureaucratic battled erupted when EEOC’s legal counsel, Reed Russell, wrote a regulation comment (pdf) blasting both the substance of the proposed rule and its disregard for the rule-making process.
The regulation has not been finalized.
4) On July 31, the Justice Dept. proposed a regulation that would allow state and local law enforcement agencies to collect “intelligence” information on individuals and organizations even if the information is unrelated to a criminal matter.
“This is a continuum that started back on 9/11 to reform law enforcement and the intelligence community to focus on the terrorism threat,” said Bush homeland security adviser Kenneth L. Wainstein in a statement.
Critics say it could infringe on civil liberties.
Here’s what it would do:
“It expands local law enforcement’s ability to investigate criminal activity that it deems suspicious,” said Melberth of OMB Watch. “But what’s suspicious to you may not be suspicious to me. They could be investigating community organizations they think are two or three steps away from a terrorist group.”
The regulation has not been finalized.
5) Before a federal agency approves any construction project– anything from building a dam to a post office — government officials must consult the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service. These two agencies enforce the Endangered Species Act, and they can veto any project that adversely affects an animal on the endangered species list.
Here’s what it would do:
A regulation proposed by the Interior Dept. Aug. 12 would end this approval process. “It destroys a system of checks and balances that have been in place for two decades,” claimed Bob Davison, senior scientist at Defenders of the Wildlife. “[A federal agency] wants to go forward with a project that [it wants] to do. So you need an independent agency to look at the decision.”
Davison is not the only conservation advocate up in arms. The Interior Dept. has received 200,000 public comments, which may affect the final rule.
Or not — the department shortened the comment period from 60 to 30 days in its effort to get the regulation finalized.
In May, White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten vowed that the administration would propose no regulations after June 1. He and White House spokesman Tony Fratto have repeatedly stated their contempt for what they call “midnight regulations.”
Yet with the exception of the Family and Medical Leave changes, each of these regulations were proposed after June 1. And if finalized, they will effect worker’s safety, women’s health-care choices, local police powers and endangered species.
“It was a pretty resounding election,” said Keefe of the National Partnership for Women and Families. “But this administration acts like it still has a mandate.”
A senior White House official has denied that the US president, George Bush, said God ordered him to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.
A spokesman for Mr Bush, Scott McClellan, said the claims, to be broadcast in a TV documentary later this month, were absurd.
In the BBC film, a former Palestinian foreign minister, Nabil Shaath, says that Mr Bush told a Palestinian delegation in 2003 that God spoke to him and said: George, go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan and also George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq.
During a White House press briefing, Mr McClellan said: No, that's absurd. He's never made such comments.
Mr McClellan admitted he was not at the Israeli-Palestinian summit at the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh in June 2003 when Mr Bush supposedly revealed the extent of his religious fervour.
However, he said he had checked into the claims and I stand by what I just said.
Asked if Mr Bush had ever mentioned that God had ordered him into Afghanistan and Iraq, Mr McClellan said: No, and I've been in many meetings with him and never heard such a thing.
The claims are due to be broadcast in a three-part BBC documentary which analyses attempts to bring peace to the Middle East.
Mr Shaath, the Palestinian foreign minister in 2003, claims Mr Bush told him and other delegates that he was spoken to by God over his plans for war.
He told the film-makers: President Bush said to all of us: 'I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan. And I did, and then God would tell me, George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq... And I did.
'And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East. And by God I'm gonna do it.'
The Palestinian leader, Mahmoud Abbas, who attended the June 2003 meeting as well, also appears on the documentary series to recount how Mr Bush told him: I have a moral and religious obligation. So I will get you a Palestinian state.
Mr Bush, who became a born-again Christian at 40, is one of the most overtly religious leaders to occupy the White House, a fact that brings him much support in middle America.
History is littered with examples of people doing the most bizarre and sometimes wicked things on this basis, said Andrew Blackstock, director of the British-based Christian Socialist Movement. If Bush really wants to obey God during his time as president he should start with what is blindingly obvious from the Bible rather than perceived supernatural messages.
That would lead him to the rather less glamorous business of prioritising the needs of the poor, the downtrodden and the marginalised in his own country and abroad.
When we see more policies reflecting that, it might be easier to believe he has God on his side. And more likely that God might speak to him.
The TV series, which starts on Monday, charts recent attempts to bring peace to the Middle East, from the former US president Bill Clinton's peace talks in 1999-2000, to Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip this year. It seeks to uncover what happened behind closed doors by speaking to presidents and prime ministers, along with their generals and ministers, the BBC said.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 18, 2006 (AP) The White House is refusing to reveal details of tainted lobbyist Jack Abramoff's visits with President Bush's staff.
Abramoff had a few staff-level meetings at the Bush White House, presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said Tuesday. But he would not say with whom Abramoff met, which interests he was representing or how he got access to the White House.
Since Abramoff pleaded guilty two weeks ago to conspiracy, mail fraud and tax evasion charges in an influence-peddling scandal, McClellan has told reporters he was checking into Abramoff's meetings. I'm making sure that I have a thorough report back to you on that, he said in his press briefing Jan. 5. And I'll get that to you, hopefully very soon.
McClellan said Tuesday that he checked on it at reporters' requests, but wouldn't discuss the private staff-level meetings. We are not going to engage in a fishing expedition, he said.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, along with three other Democratic senators, wrote Bush a letter Tuesday asking for an accounting of Abramoff's personal contacts with Bush administration officials and acts that may have been undertaken at his request. The American people need to be assured that the White House is not for sale, they wrote.
McClellan has said Abramoff attended three Hanukkah receptions at the White House, but corrected himself Tuesday to say there were only two _ in 2001 and 2002.
McClellan said Bush does not know Abramoff personally, although it's possible the two met at the holiday receptions.
Abramoff was one of Bush's top fundraisers, having brought in at least $100,000 for the Bush-Cheney '04 re-election campaign and earning the honorary title pioneer. The campaign took $6,000 of the contributions _ which came directly from Abramoff, his wife and one of the Indian tribes he represented _ and donated it to the American Heart Association. But the campaign has not returned the rest of the money Abramoff raised.
Our house........
Is a 600 sq ft cottage. The best part about it is the HUGE fenced in yard (for our dogs). It was all we could afford when we were house hunting. It needs work, I would love just a small addition, but that's not going to happen anytime soon. I guess I have to be happy with the fact that we are not drowning in heat bills.
Our old house
was a 24x32 bungalow, 2 bedrooms, 1 bath. Try squeezing 3 boys, a cousin, and a friend in that. We had just finished remodeling the whole thing when we got flooded out. Then we started building the one on higher ground, but the foundation of the old one started caving in from the undermining of the flood water. The floor and the walls spread 3 feet apart. But we lived like that for 3 more years trying to get the new place done. We finally couldn't wait any longer.
I believe the Democrats will take the House
and pick up seats in the Senate enough to make it very even. When Lieberman is elected as an Independent, I predict he will change his party to Democrat when he gets into the Senate, a direct slam at the Democrats who failed to support him. Lieberman, the only Democrat with a spine, will be the big winner. I am not gnashing my teeth about any of this. Democrats are the one who do the teeth gnashing. They have been gnashing since Bush won the first election and their bitterness and sore loser attitudes have eaten away like a cancer all these years. Democrats have no plan for keeping America safe, or winning the war against the fanatics. They have opposed most of the Bush administration’s domestic surveillance methods. They have opposed aggressive interrogation tactics designed to get information to protect us, including opposition to the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where detainees are treated better than they could expect if they were detained in their homelands... The terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere don’t speak of timetables for withdrawal or bringing their fighters home. They’re in it for the long haul. They believe we are not. A victory by Democrats will validate their view and encourage them to fight harder. Republicans have been far from perfect in this war. They have barely approached mediocrity in their handling of domestic issues. But to change horses and leaders mid-war is a prescription for a longer engagement, because this is a confrontation that will end only in victory or defeat for one side or the other. That’s why the Republicans need to keep their majority and conservatives need to keep the pressure on them to get back to the original GOP principles that brought them that majority. That’s a better strategy than Republicans acting like Democrat-lite. Unfortunately, I think it is too late this time around. But there is always next time. God Bless our troops.
Is this what the US needs in the White House?
??????
I think NOT.
That's where we really need the house cleaning - sm
In the senate & house (congress or whatever that place is where all the politician vote on issues). All of them should be recalled, fired, whatever (and not be sent back to their home state where they can continue with the damage). Pelosi, Dodd, Franks should be the top 3 to go and then quite a few more. People should get more involved in what it is their senator is voting for and if it is not for the good of the people there needs to be a march or something and these so called senators asked to leave. And if they don't leave we need some bouncers to go in and literally remove them from the position. If you have a worker that is fired they are removed immediately from the premises and that should be the way it works with politicians too.
Can they see Russia from their house? A house divided...
Unfortunately, until we can get over ourselves, we won't. I just wonder how bad it will have to get before we wake up.
I guess we'll find out soon.
A house negro? What?!...sm
I have never even heard that term before. What is a "house" negro supposed to mean anyways?
In the White House, someone who has kept the
nm
I sure wish I could afford to buy a house right now!
Almost 1/3 of the houses in my small town that are for sale are foreclosed. They're all cute little Victorians, and I'd just LOVE to have any one of them.
That's how he bought his house......
With the money paid on his book deals.....yes, frugal by choice and probably habit. If I got that much of an advance on my books, the first thing I'd do is buy a gorgeous house in a nice neighborhood to raise my kids.
My house has been broken into, as well...
a far cry from a war on our soil.
Yes, yes. I have 1/2 mile from my house.
x
Considering what we got in the white house, that's all
xx
we already have a racist in the white house
George Bush does not like black people
Mr. Bugliosi went before the house judiciary...
committee when they discussed impeachment, and they were not impressed enough, even with a Democratic majority, to start impeachment proceedings. What I read about that tells me all I need to know. How a seemingly rational human being can think that one man could so manipulate not only this government but foreign governments as well who said the intelligence was real, and ignore the fact that the Clinton Administration was talking regime change in Iraq, even authored the Iraqi Liberation Act...and still think that Bush all alone and by himself lied to the world (these same people who call him a bumbling ignoramus today) and made them all believe it...you can honestly tell me that he was intelligent enough to pull off that kind of hoax with all the checks and balances of this government and in the world...and you really believe that? It is not that I am a Bush fan...because he has done a lot of things I certainly don't agree with. But to try to blame the Iraq war on one man...and lay absolutely NO blame at the feet of the intelligence agencies, the head of the CIA that he inherited from Clinton, or at Congress for voting for it...makes absolutely no sense to me, and I would be saying the same thing if it were a Dem president people were trying to railroad.
Okay, I won't say anything about someone wanting to sell books, since I have not read Bugliosi's. However, as far as brisk sales, I believe "Obama Nation" went straight to #1 on the New York Times best seller list and may still be there. Have you read that one? And "The Case Against Barack Obama" debuted at #5. Just in case you are interested. I am about halfway through that one, and I am putting it to the test...I am independently verifying every point made (amazing what you can find in public record on the internet). Maybe I am not the only one that needs to move out of my "comfort zone" maybe? Perhaps you should too. You might be surprised at what you find, to coin your words.
Frankly, I am not that interested in Bush. He is on his way out. Like I said...I have several problems with him. But, as much as many people would like to, it is just not logical to blame him alone for the war in Iraq. Any more than it would be to blame Obama if he were in the same set of circumstances, or anyone else. I believed Clinton when he said Iraq had WMD and tortured and killed his own people, and I believed Bush when HE said the same thing.
In Bristol's house, choice was never
Who know's? If she had felt comfortable enough to come to her mother about birth control, she may not now be in the position to (In Palin's own word) "grow up faster than we had ever thought." Furthermore, this begs the question of sex education taboos, both in the household and in the schools, parental controls over acess to education, the judgment involved in making these decision about access to education and birth control and so forth. Guess Plain was having a bit of difficulty balancing her priorities while governor. Of course, lost in the shuffle is the fact that no one will ever know how Bristol feels about her siutation, the decisions that she may or may not have made herself and the national spotlight she now finds herself in. This coming out of the ethics-housekeeper's own house. Unwittingly, she has really shone a brand new light on herself and the issues at hand. Way to go, Palin. John McCain probably knows by now that maybe he should have done a bit more homework before he got himself and his party into this pickle.
I really hope that the house does not approve...sm
the bill from the senate with all the addendums. Why can't we have a clean bill without things being added on? The house vote is our last chance and I hope they don't cave without making changes. I am proud to say that one of my senators, Bernie Sanders-I voted against it, and he IS the most liberal senator, not Obama.
With all the Christians in the house, we can't muster up
Wow. Class act, I must say.
Say goodbye to your beach house
It will be gone if the O has anything to say about it.
White house butler guy.....you can't be serious.
He will be one of Obama's top advisors. You can't be that naive.
As to the Chicago political machine...google it. The Daleys of Chicago...crooked as a dog's hind leg comes to mind...you don't remember the current Mayor daley's dad?
Can't believe you never heard of the Chicago political machine. Obama was part of it, and he is bringing it with him to the White House. Yeah, that concerns me...and last time I looked, I have a right to be concerned.
The White House Butler guy
Ever see One Life to Live. Remember Asa Buchanan's butler, Nigel? Nigel knew more about Asa than his own family. OF COURSE, I understand what a Chief of Staff is. The position still sounds like a great big butler to me...one who sees all and knows all, exercises great discretion and is trusted by his employer.
To begin, I live in a parallel universe from you. I have no reason whatsoever to Google Chicago politial machine. I have seen the term thrown around here and there in paranoid rants and I am also acutely aware of how Chicago politics has been depicted by the right-wingers ever since the 60s...my mom being my prime source on that one (a Goldwater republican). I do not share this world view. When I think of Chicago politics, I think in terms of ideology, but that is a different story from this.
I was simply trying to get you to explain YOUR take on it and also why it is that you find so much fault ALREADY with Rahm Emanuel. He certainly will not be Obama's only advisor. As a matter of fact, Obama is bound to surround himself with many, many advisors from both sides of the aisle who represent a very WIDE variety of viewpoints, all of which he will listen to, consider, draw conclusions, formulate plans and policy initiatives and execute what he feels best. That's my thing. I was simply trying to get you to explain yours.
Humor police in the house....(sm)
The intent of the post was not to compare an embryo to a turkey, but rather simply a joke saying that she would take up one cause but not the other. If you read the posts below you might understand the joke.
However, since you mentioned it, I'm sure I could make that comparrison. Our ideas of when life begins are obviously not the same.
Maybe you should e-mail the White House and
tell them GP wants to know!
Fair Pay Act passes in House
Bet SP and Coulter have their drawers in an uproar of this one.
House passes Obama
The stimulus package passed by a vote of 244-188. Eleven Democrats voted against the measure, while no Republicans supported it.
Nice to see the WH being used as a party house - NOT
I can hear founding fathers rolling over in their graves. Who knew that we'd have someone who thinks the white house is his own little party houses with Wednesday night Conga lines. And hey, who needs music awards anymore, their being given away behind closed doors at the WH. If it's going to be a party house maybe they should have the decency to take down the pictures of our founding fathers. What a disgrace!
I know for us $25,000 is a lot of money, but in the big picture, that is not a drop in the bucket...
I am sure though if he could go somewhere without all those people going with him that he would be more than happy at this point to do it. I know I would. I do not begrudge him one minute of happiness with his family because the rest of the time everybody in this country is trying to tear him apart. I grew up with guns in the house.
My father had gun racks and he always kept one rifle loaded in case someone tried to break into the house. All three of us kids knew it and we also knew not to touch it. My dad taught us how to shoot, the safe way to use guns, and what NOT to do with a gun. I think the problem with a lot of gun related accidents is that parents hide the guns and don't teach their kids the dangers and how to properly handle guns.
If you take guns away from the law-abiding citizens....it won't stop the criminals from getting them and then we will have nothing to protect ourselves with. That is common sense really. It will just create an even bigger black market for guns and only the unlawful citizens will buy them illegally like that which will leave the lawful citizens unprotected from criminals.
At age 79, Rep. John Dingell is known for his prickly demeanor and blunt words, which have earned him respect. Rep. Dingell's Web Site
Morning Edition, December 13, 2005 · John Dingell (D-MI) marks 50 years in the House on Tuesday. Only two others in history have served longer.
Dingell came to Congress in December 1955, when he won a special election to replace his late father. Dingell speaks fondly of working on massive, important legislation he helped shepherd through Congress, including Medicare, food stamps, student loans, consumer product protection and the Endangered Species Act.
There are a few disappointments, Dingell says. In every single Congress for the last 50 years, he has introduced a bill to create a national health care system -- and it has never passed. The Patient's Bill of Rights he championed in the 1990s also failed. And now, with Republicans in control of the House, Senate and White House, Dingell worries they're dismantling the earlier work of his career.
But you have your choice between sitting back and being depressed and letting it go forward, or standing and fighting, he says. I choose the second course.
marks the location of current message within thread
