First rant for the new redesigned blog: President Bush's October 4th press conference in the Rose Garden; this is the first time he has taken questions from the press in this format since May 2005.
These comments were made at the time of the press conference. They are the opinions of the author at the time when it was published and may not reflect the current views and opinions of the author.
"Outstanding individual" -- Harriet Miers may have outstanding credentials but she has no experience as a judge, and while her "stellar record" is in law, from my understanding there is a bit of a difference between being a lawyer and being a judge.
"[She will not] legislate from the bench" -- Considering she has no experience on a judicial bench, this statement has no material evidence to back it up.
Budget cuts for "non-security spending" -- a dangerous statement, in my opinion. There better be a good, strong, loophole-less definition for "non-security" budget items.
Private sector will "drive" reconstruction along the Gulf Coast -- Halliburton anyone? Now that I think about it, where the heck is Cheney?
More refining capacity -- Bush (or maybe his speechwriter?) makes a good point here that I actually agree with. The issue is that people don't want a refinery in their backyard.
"The Patriot Act is getting results" -- How are we supposed to know what results it is having if someone served with a subpoena under the Patriot Act also restricts the individual(s) from saying that they have been served with said subpoena?
"Restrict Constructionists" -- An interesting statement from an administration that likes to twist political theory to their liking.
Apparently Miers "shares [Bush's] philosophy" -- I seriously doubt that she is the "best person [he] could find" and, coincidently, shares philosophy. Bush also thinks that she will keep that philosophy "twenty years" from now.
Haha! NBC's White House correspondent got the nail-on-the-head question: Miers position on abortion. Bush supposedly did not conduct a "litmus test" (his own words) on any of the judicial nominees...but remember, he said that she shares his philosophy. He said that he had never discussed the issue with Miers even on a personal level -- granted, a cheap shot question, but he doesn't have to (and shouldn't, in my opinion, regardless of the answer) answer the question.
So we are cutting non-discretionary spending and non-security spending; while the budget is a "pie," if you will, where an increase in one part requires a decrease in another part, we can't keep cutting the same types of programs over and over and other. There may have been 150 programs that were "eliminated or streamlined" as a result of the budget but there's only so much eliminating and streamlining that can be done.
It's good to know that Bush is "still a conservative" (a reporter actually asked him that -- good thing he didn't trip on the answer!).
Bush says that he "takes responsibility" for the failures in the federal repsonse to Hurricane Katrina. Good to know. Now help local and state officials rebuild.
Uh-oh...a quesiton on bridging the gap caused by poverty...and from a minority, no less (the reporter is a black female -- I don't know from what bureau, however). Bush claims that economic vitality and small business ownersihp will help close that gap. Education (or the lack thereof) is a valid reason, in my opinion (though Bush might not be the best person to be in charge of that...No Child Left Behind has not done a lot, other than put pressure on schools, and faith-based methods are very much debated in a division of church and state kind of world).
Bush claims that by elevating minorities, specifically African Americans, to positions of authority, where they can do good work, will help gain his vote in those communities. I argue against that completely. If changes in the communities needs to happen, moving them out of local and state governments simply puts them further away from the core of the problem.
's