• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

George W. Bush

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
Bush is a small, small man. I'll bet he can't stand it that Daddy likes Clinton. Link below; my emphasis.

"Bush-administration officials privately threatened organizers of the U.N. Climate Change Conference, telling them that any chance there might’ve been for the United States to sign on to the Kyoto global-warming protocol would be scuttled if they allowed Bill Clinton to speak at the gathering today in Montreal, according to a source involved with the negotiations who spoke to New York Magazine on condition of anonymity.

Bush officials informed organizers of their intention to pull out of the new Kyoto deal late Thursday afternoon, soon after news leaked that Clinton was scheduled to speak, the source said.

The threat set in motion a flurry of frantic back-channel negotiations between conference organizers and aides to Bush and Clinton that lasted into the night on Thursday, and at one point Clinton flatly told his advisers that he was going to pull out and not deliver the speech, the source said.

“It’s just astounding,” the source told New York Magazine. “It came through loud and clear from the Bush people—they wouldn’t sign the deal if Clinton were allowed to speak.” Clinton spokesman Jay Carson confirmed the dustup took place and that the former president had decided not to go out of fear of harming the negotiations, but Carson declined to comment further."


http://newyorkmag.com/nymetro/news/people/columns/intelligencer/15314/index.html
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
SOME MORE FACTS:
The treaty was negotiated in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997, opened for signature on March 16, 1998, and closed on March 15, 1999.
During the Presidancy of Clinton
Why didn't he send it through???

The United States, although a signatory to the protocol, has neither ratified nor withdrawn from the protocol. The protocol is non-binding over the United States until ratified.

On July 25, 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was to be negotiated, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed by a 95–0 vote the Byrd-Hagel Resolution (S. Res. 98), which stated the sense of the Senate was that the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing as well as industrialized nations or "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States". On November 12, 1998, Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the protocol. Aware of the Senate's view of the protocol, the Clinton Administration never submitted the protocol for ratification.

Again if it was so important for Billy why not "push it through" was it the 95 who stood against it? or the five lame members who supported it.??

Maybe some more thruth will help you decide.....


This is a challenge that requires a 100 percent effort; ours, and the rest of the world's. The world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases is China. Yet, China was entirely exempted from the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol. India and Germany are among the top emitters. Yet, India was also exempt from Kyoto. . . . America's unwillingness to embrace a flawed treaty should not be read by our friends and allies as any abdication of responsibility. To the contrary, my administration is committed to a leadership role on the issue of climate change. . . . . Our approach must be consistent with the long-term goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. Whitehouse.gov President Bush Discusses Global Climate Change.

Even while China heads for the Number one spot while we head down the chart,,,,,China is exempt........

Lets see we are reducing gas levels, yet must conceded (surrender) our right to have an industry...yet China is increasing thier Gas levels, and they are exempt????

Disagreeable would you sign a deal with me to give me all your ranch equipment, while I have plenty and am aquiring more????

Signing a flawed agreement is wrong,,,,supporting the priniple of reducing green house gases, and working towards that goal is commendable, thus I support the Presidents stratigy.........
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
4,716
Reaction score
1
Location
NW Panhandle Texas
Clinton spokesman Jay Carson confirmed the dustup took place and that the former president had decided not to go out of fear of harming the negotiations, but Carson declined to comment further."
Hmmmmm according to this ..........
Clinton: Bush 'Flat Wrong' About Greenhouse-Gas Emissions
Friday, December 09, 2005


MONTREAL — Former President Clinton told a global audience of diplomats, environmentalists and others Friday that the Bush administration is "flat wrong" in claiming that reducing greenhouse-gas emissions to fight global warming would damage the U.S. economy.

With a "serious disciplined effort" to develop energy-saving technology, he said, "we could meet and surpass the Kyoto targets in a way that would strengthen and not weaken our economies."

Clinton, a champion of the Kyoto Protocol, the existing emissions-controls agreement opposed by the Bush administration, spoke in the final hours of a two-week U.N. climate conference at which Washington has come under heavy criticism for its stand.

Most delegations appeared ready Friday to leave an unwilling United States behind and open a new round of negotiations on future cutbacks in the emissions blamed for global warming.

"There's no longer any serious doubt that climate change is real, accelerating and caused by human activities," said Clinton, whose address was interrupted repeatedly by enthusiastic applause. "We are uncertain about how deep and the time of arrival of the consequences, but we are quite clear they will not be good."

Canadian officials said the U.S. delegation was displeased with the last-minute scheduling of the Clinton speech. But U.S. delegation chief Paula Dobriansky issued a statement saying events like Clinton's appearance "are useful opportunities to hear a wide range of views on global climate change."


So DID he or DID he NOT speak??????
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
10,912
Reaction score
7
I dont think Bush and Clinton do like each other...I think they work together for a join cause be it the tsunami, etc. If you listen, Bush will say something sharp and snide @ times and even though I am a 100% Clinton fan....he snaps out a few zingers @ the old man at times also.
 

jigs

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
8,439
Reaction score
0
Location
KANSAS
personally, I wish that after deer season is over, they would open a Clinton season. I will gladly shoot either the buck or the doe !

I can not understand how women like this guy. he is a womanizer, cheater, basically a rapist and a drug smuggler.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
10,912
Reaction score
7
Helles Belles.....1/2 the men in the world that us women come across in our lifetime are or have been one of the things yoiu've listed jigs!!!

But...even today...he can go anywhere in the world and the country/people like him, welcome him. It seems that you can't GW anywhere....as the whole world erupts in protest.

People like Clinton.....and Bush has ' zip, zero, nil" for personalilty..and YES personality is a HUGE part of being PREZ!
 

jigs

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
8,439
Reaction score
0
Location
KANSAS
I'd like to see him try it on my wife.....that little blonde gal packs more whoop-ass than you can believe!
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
Steve said:
SOME MORE FACTS:
The treaty was negotiated in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997, opened for signature on March 16, 1998, and closed on March 15, 1999.
During the Presidancy of Clinton
Why didn't he send it through???

The United States, although a signatory to the protocol, has neither ratified nor withdrawn from the protocol. The protocol is non-binding over the United States until ratified.

On July 25, 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was to be negotiated, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed by a 95–0 vote the Byrd-Hagel Resolution (S. Res. 98), which stated the sense of the Senate was that the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing as well as industrialized nations or "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States". On November 12, 1998, Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the protocol. Aware of the Senate's view of the protocol, the Clinton Administration never submitted the protocol for ratification.

Again if it was so important for Billy why not "push it through" was it the 95 who stood against it? or the five lame members who supported it.??

Maybe some more thruth will help you decide.....


This is a challenge that requires a 100 percent effort; ours, and the rest of the world's. The world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases is China. Yet, China was entirely exempted from the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol. India and Germany are among the top emitters. Yet, India was also exempt from Kyoto. . . . America's unwillingness to embrace a flawed treaty should not be read by our friends and allies as any abdication of responsibility. To the contrary, my administration is committed to a leadership role on the issue of climate change. . . . . Our approach must be consistent with the long-term goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. Whitehouse.gov President Bush Discusses Global Climate Change.

Even while China heads for the Number one spot while we head down the chart,,,,,China is exempt........

Lets see we are reducing gas levels, yet must conceded (surrender) our right to have an industry...yet China is increasing thier Gas levels, and they are exempt????

Disagreeable would you sign a deal with me to give me all your ranch equipment, while I have plenty and am aquiring more????

Signing a flawed agreement is wrong,,,,supporting the priniple of reducing green house gases, and working towards that goal is commendable, thus I support the Presidents stratigy.........

ROTFLMAO! Spin all day, Steve. The article is about the fact that Bush threatened to walk out of the talks if Clinton was allowed to make a speech, not about the value of a treaty. It's a personal thing with him. You remember that he got us into Iraq because of his personal hatred of Saddam? Clinton, on the other hand, was willing to give up the speech if it meant that the talks would go on. Bush is a small, scared, little man.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
MsSage said:
Clinton spokesman Jay Carson confirmed the dustup took place and that the former president had decided not to go out of fear of harming the negotiations, but Carson declined to comment further."
Hmmmmm according to this ..........
Clinton: Bush 'Flat Wrong' About Greenhouse-Gas Emissions
Friday, December 09, 2005


MONTREAL — Former President Clinton told a global audience of diplomats, environmentalists and others Friday that the Bush administration is "flat wrong" in claiming that reducing greenhouse-gas emissions to fight global warming would damage the U.S. economy.

With a "serious disciplined effort" to develop energy-saving technology, he said, "we could meet and surpass the Kyoto targets in a way that would strengthen and not weaken our economies."

Clinton, a champion of the Kyoto Protocol, the existing emissions-controls agreement opposed by the Bush administration, spoke in the final hours of a two-week U.N. climate conference at which Washington has come under heavy criticism for its stand.

Most delegations appeared ready Friday to leave an unwilling United States behind and open a new round of negotiations on future cutbacks in the emissions blamed for global warming.

"There's no longer any serious doubt that climate change is real, accelerating and caused by human activities," said Clinton, whose address was interrupted repeatedly by enthusiastic applause. "We are uncertain about how deep and the time of arrival of the consequences, but we are quite clear they will not be good."

Canadian officials said the U.S. delegation was displeased with the last-minute scheduling of the Clinton speech. But U.S. delegation chief Paula Dobriansky issued a statement saying events like Clinton's appearance "are useful opportunities to hear a wide range of views on global climate change."


So DID he or DID he NOT speak??????

If you'll follow the link in my post you'll find that, yes, Clinton did speak. The organizers refused to give in to the Bush bunch's threats.
 

Latest posts

Top