Evaluation of the policies of George W. Bush and his Republican conservatives on America.
Let's Count the Ways they fail to meet their obligations
Published on March 10, 2006 By COL Gene In Politics



We hear how only the Republicans can protect America from terrorism. It is true there have not been any other attacks in America since 9/11. It is also true that the Bush administration has rallied cooperation among other countries as well as strengthened our own homeland security. However, when you look at the willingness to provide all that is needed, a very different picture emerges. Let's look as some of the security measures that Bush and the GOP has refused to fund:

Provide Radiation detection at the ports. The Democrats supported a 1.5 Billion investment to provide automatic radiation detection on EVERY crane in our ports. The Bush compromise was to include $50 Million in the budget for a $1.5 Billion dollar project.

Provide staffing at the ports that allow for inspection of ONLY 5% of the containers that come into America. What about the other 95%?

Bush included funding for 200 of the 10,000 added Border guards that HE said were required to help secure the Mexican Border. What about the remaining 9,800 guards?

Bush has refused to provide the funding to equip commercial aircraft with anti missile protection similar to what Israel has provided for their commercial aircraft.

Bush has not requested the needed funding to properly staff the Coast Guard which is hopelessly under staffed to protect our shores.

Bush has not increased the size of the active military despite his campaign statements in 2000 that our military was too small to meet its obligations which were far less in 2000 then they are today.

How anyone can assert that Bush and the GOP is the party that can protect us from terrorism in light of the above facts is amazing. We have the money for Iraq. We can grant tax cuts to Big Oil. We can give the wealthiest 5% of Americans tax cuts THEY DO NOT NEED. WE can not find the money to fully protect America!

Comments (Page 2)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Mar 10, 2006
If these systems do not work, why does Air Force One have them installed?What about the issue of nuclear bomb comming into our ports? What about not having enough equipment and ,manpower in our Coast Guard.
on Mar 10, 2006
" If these systems do not work, why does Air Force One have them installed?"


Because it is a single plane with redundant protection that is apt to be attacked. It also has other countermeasures. Do you expect US buses to have all the protection of the presidential limosine?

"What about the issue of nuclear bomb comming into our ports?"


As if terrorists would choose to bring a nuclear bomb into the country with a method they know could be searched, when they could bring it in a half a dozen other ways that wouldn't be. When drug cartels have to resort to using shipping containers as their main mode of smuggling, I might be more apt to agree.

"What about not having enough equipment and ,manpower in our Coast Guard."


We could double the Coast Guard's budget and you could still sit here and claim there isn't enough. There's no standard that you can point to that one person's stance on how it should be funded is any better than anyone else's. If you want to send more money their way, lobby Congress.
on Mar 10, 2006
Bush would rather give the money to his rich supporters
on Mar 10, 2006
There is no money to rebuild the homes in New Orleans


LOL... Like the Millions spent on trailer houses that are sitting in Arkansa, just to have them sit there because New Orleans pasted laws forbiding trailer houses. Now we are spending millions on hotel rooms for those with no homes.
on Mar 10, 2006
None of that money has rebuilt ONE home. They are temporary housing. There has been no decision to rebuild the levies to withstand cat 5 storms and no plan or money to help rebuild 500,000 homes.
on Mar 11, 2006
None of that money has rebuilt ONE home.


So your saying not one person who has received their FEMA check has rebuilt their house?

"In the six months since Katrina struck, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) has approved more than $5.2 billion in disaster loans to over 73,000 homeowners, renters and businesses in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas and Florida." Link

They are temporary housing.


Yes, they are temporary. They are $27,000 each. That is much better then spending another half a Billion on hotel rooms each month. These homes are meant to get residence back in the New Orleans area. So that the work force (to rebuild the homes) returns and businesses have customers again.

"FEMA has spent half a billion dollars on hotel rooms in a program that has been extended numerous times since its original deadline last fall. At the program's peak, FEMA was paying for 85,000 rooms at one time, but it has been scaled back in phases over the past month." Link
on Mar 11, 2006
You refuse to acknowledge the basic issue. Many, if not most, of the people whose homes were destroyed do not have the money to rebuild a permanent home. Even low interest loans require the people to be capable of repaying the loans which in many cases is not possible. SBA makes loans for Business to the best of my knowledge not for private residences. The issue of the levies has not been settled. The Corps of Engineers has only been authorized to restore the levies to Cat 3 storm protection. There can be no rebuilding in the flooded areas until the levies have been made to withstand a Cat 5 storm. The money and decisions has not even been made as to what will be done.

If the levies are not to be strengthened, then home sites will need to be relocated to higher ground which means the people who have lost their homes will need help to first secure a new home site and then the money to build on that new site. We are talking about hundreds of Billions and the money to date has been for temporary housing and clean up of PUBLIC lands. The rubble from most individual home sites has NOT been removed and I see no action that will enable either the rebuilding of 500,000 homes that were destroyed nor a decision on the levies. Thus the Fed has not done what needs doing AFTER the WORST disaster in our history. They are also not doing what needs to be done to protect us from the NEXT disaster - Natural or man made!
on Mar 11, 2006

If these systems do not work, why does Air Force One have them installed?What about the issue of nuclear bomb comming into our ports? What about not having enough equipment and ,manpower in our Coast Guard.


He did NOT say they didn't work fool! They only work on "heat seekers"!

You refuse to acknowledge the basic issue. Many, if not most, of the people whose homes were destroyed do not have the money to rebuild a permanent home. Even low interest loans require the people to be capable of repaying the loans which in many cases is not possible. SBA makes loans for Business to the best of my knowledge not for private residences. The issue of the levies has not been settled. The Corps of Engineers has only been authorized to restore the levies to Cat 3 storm protection. There can be no rebuilding in the flooded areas until the levies have been made to withstand a Cat 5 storm. The money and decisions has not even been made as to what will be done.

If the levies are not to be strengthened, then home sites will need to be relocated to higher ground which means the people who have lost their homes will need help to first secure a new home site and then the money to build on that new site. We are talking about hundreds of Billions and the money to date has been for temporary housing and clean up of PUBLIC lands. The rubble from most individual home sites has NOT been removed and I see no action that will enable either the rebuilding of 500,000 homes that were destroyed nor a decision on the levies. Thus the Fed has not done what needs doing AFTER the WORST disaster in our history. They are also not doing what needs to be done to protect us from the NEXT disaster - Natural or man made!


And you do love to do this: the thread is about how the GOP fails to protect America. So what happens when you start losing ground to superior arguements? You of course change the subject.
on Mar 11, 2006
Drmiler

There is a fool but guess what you can see him by looking in the mirror.

There have not been any arguments that disprove the issues in this Blog. As to the protection issue, it was in answer to other posts that got off subject.

The issues are:

WE are not protecting our ports.

We are not protecting our borders.

We are not providing the resources needed for the Coast Guard and Active Military.

We are not protecting our civilian Airliners.


You and the other Bushies can bluster all you want. These are the facts and ALL Americans KNOW IT.
on Mar 11, 2006
I guess "we're" not Americans, then.
on Mar 11, 2006
You are not where the vast majority are that is for sure!You are like Bush in some sort of dream world and out of touch.
on Mar 12, 2006
Once, Col.; just once. Just once, I'd like to hear about your family, your dog, cat, parakeet, a nice vacation....the undigested contents of your last bowel movement. Anything but Bush and your hatred of Republicans.

Anything at all. You really are the poster child for obsession.
on Mar 12, 2006
The real OBSESSION is the way some on this Blog site support a man and his policies that are NOT SOLVING OUR PROBLEMS and making the future more difficult. The response by Daiwa is a good example. I guess we are not Americans. Is that saying that Daiwa believes we HAVE protected our ports, protected our borders? Etc. If that is the meaning of the response then the problem is a total loss of reality. NO PERSON could believe we are properly protecting our borders for example with 3 million illegal entering last year and 8 million since Bush took over. Every night the elected officials in the Border States document HOW THE FED IS NOT ENFORCING our laws.
on Mar 12, 2006
Col.

How about being realistic. more than 6 million shipping containers enter the US every year . Link(this does not include all the other things like cars and other items that could contain WMD's). If we inspected each one and it only took 20 seconds to inspect each one (even though thats not realistic, realistically about 20 minutes))that means it would take a total of 33,333 hours to inspect them all. Thats 1,388 days. How do we solve that simple problem? If you give it the more relistic 20 minutes per container, its 83,333 days to inspect them all. I am sure the Government would love to hear your solution for all this.

Col. Instead of making nothing but complaints how about a suggestion other than lets throw money at it and hope it goes away. How would you suggest we secure all the containers? Have you even looked at what is currently being done? Here is a example:

Screening and Inspection: CBP screens 100% of all cargo before it arrives in the U.S.- using intelligence and cutting edge technologies. CBP inspects all high-risk cargo.

CSI (Container Security Initiative): Enables CBP, in working with host government Customs Services, to examine high-risk maritime containerized cargo at foreign seaports, before they are loaded on board vessels destined for the United States. In addition to the current 42 foreign ports participating in CSI, many more ports are in the planning stages. By the end of 2006, the number is expected to grow to 50 ports, covering 90% of transpacific maritime containerized cargo shipped to the U.S.

24-Hour Rule: Under this requirement, manifest information must be provided 24 hours prior to the sea container being loaded onto the vessel in the foreign port. CBP may deny the loading of high-risk cargo while the vessel is still overseas.

C-TPAT (Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism): CBP created a public-private and international partnership with nearly 5,800 businesses (over 10,000 have applied) including most of the largest U.S. importers -- the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT). C-TPAT, CBP and partner companies are working together to improve baseline security standards for supply chain and container security. (We review the security practices of not only the company shipping the goods, but also the companies that provided them with any services.)

Use of Cutting-Edge Technology: CBP is currently utilizing large-scale X-ray and gamma ray machines and radiation detection devices to screen cargo. Presently, CBP operates over 680 radiation portal monitors at our nation’s ports (including 181 radiation portal monitors at seaports), utilizes over 170 large scale non-intrusive inspection devices to examine cargo, and has issued 12,400 hand-held radiation detection devices. The President’s FY 2007 budget requests $157 million to secure next-generation detection equipment at our ports of entry. Also, over 600 canine detection teams, who are capable of identifying narcotics, bulk currency, human beings, explosives, agricultural pests, and chemical weapons are deployed at our ports of entry.

Try to be realistic not living in a fairy land where all is green and nice and neat.
on Mar 12, 2006
The estimate I say to provide the equipment to prevent nuclear WMD from being brought into this country was estimated at $1.5 Billion. You are correct; Bush did include SOME funding just like he included a request for 200 of the 10,000 border guards. Problem TOO LITTLE TOO LATE. With the loss in Federal Revenue from just the tax cuts to BIG OIL, we could have provided all the needed equipment for port protection and the badly needed equipment for the Coast Guard. Please tell me why Bush and the GOP thought it was MORE important to give BIG OIL this $12 Billion then using that money to better protect America?
3 Pages1 2 3