Another fine Bush and Republican mess. While the rest of the World was dramatically increasing R&D and education spend, Bush and Republicans were busy cutting them.

The result...
Attachments:

That's a very pretty chart. But it's pretty much meaningless without any context. What do the numbers refer to? What does the asterisk mean? What are we measuring since 2004 and 2007?

You might have a very good point, but posting this chart without any other information makes you seem like kind of a dumbass.

---------------------------------
Who knows from whence he came, and who knows where he goes, dot dot dot.

There was modest, but not statistically signficant, improvement in NAEP test scores under No Child Left Behind. However, if you look at NAEP scores going back into the 70s, the improvement under NCLB actually lagged many other education initiatives over the past three decades.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

No CHild Left Behind..is an excellent idea...that will live and/or die based upon funding. Remember..there's plenty of money...it's all a matter of priorities. When we finally decide it's more important to educate our children then it is to kill muslims...we will do just that.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/26/2009 02:11PM by Vince(1).

The Dems continue to blame Bush for stuff.

Good leadership does not continually make excuses because of the past, or the situation inherited. They take stock of the issues, make a plan and execute. They take the blame when things don't work as planned and adjust accordingly.

Time for the Dems to suck it up and lead. Or get out of the way.

Dane Bramage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Dems continue to blame Bush for stuff.
>
> Good leadership does not continually make excuses
> because of the past, or the situation inherited.
> They take stock of the issues, make a plan and
> execute. They take the blame when things don't
> work as planned and adjust accordingly.
>
> Time for the Dems to suck it up and lead. Or get
> out of the way.


I will agre that the Dems are now as..if they ever weren't...responsible for an out of control Defense spending as Republicans.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Dane Bramage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Dems continue to blame Bush for stuff.
>


Two wars without end and a historically shitty economy are the result of Bush's "leadership." Until they are resolved, I'm not sure why Dems should be expected to take the blame for them. Nobody blames Nixon for Vietnam. They blame LBJ. Nobody blames Reagan for inheriting a shitty economy. They blame Carter.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

There is a very long tradition upheld by both parties to over-fund the military and to do a piss poor job of reengineering to address the new world threats. There was abundant evidence prior to 9/11 that military and intelligence agencies needed to refocus on a new kind of enemy....terrorists. This refocusing could have been done and budgets cut (my opinion)...but it wasnt done...and our worse nightmares came true.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is a very long tradition upheld by both
> parties to over-fund the military and to do a piss
> poor job of reengineering to address the new world
> threats. There was abundant evidence prior to
> 9/11 that military and intelligence agencies
> needed to refocus on a new kind of
> enemy....terrorists. This refocusing could have
> been done and budgets cut (my opinion)...but it
> wasnt done...and our worse nightmares came true.

It was cut, by Clinton.

In 1992, the year before Bill Clinton took office the end strengths were:
Army: 610,450
Navy: 541,883
Marines: 184,529
Air Force: 470,315

In 2000, the year before George W. Bush took office:
Army: 481,669
Navy: 373,692
Marines: 173,371
Air Force: 354,321

One of the reasons the military is stretched so much now.

Carter also didn't go gangbusters on trying to fix a hollow military, which resulted in the Iran hostage rescue disaster.

He cut...but he didnt refocus...which let the military to eventually creep back up.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

I get sick of the Democrat's whining, you asked to be elected, you already had a year, and so far created about 33 jobs with a trillion dollars in stimulus pork.

You got the majority, a Democrat in the WH, now get to work and fix this crap!

and stop with the war stuff. Obama is now conducting a Bush-Surge.

sheesh

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He cut...but he didnt refocus...which let the
> military to eventually creep back up.

Once again you spout off your ignorance on subjects you know nothing about.
You were were never there so you simply do not count. Move over Boy. You're
Mommy's calling. Run and hide when the real men come to town and hide behind
her apron strings. Tell us again Vince, how is it you can profess to have
knowledge when you epitomize cowardice in the face of the enemy? 4-F? LOL!

Jerry.Rubin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince(1) Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > He cut...but he didnt refocus...which let the
> > military to eventually creep back up.
>
> Once again you spout off your ignorance on
> subjects you know nothing about.
> You were were never there so you simply do not
> count. Move over Boy. You're
> Mommy's calling. Run and hide when the real men
> come to town and hide behind
> her apron strings. Tell us again Vince, how is it
> you can profess to have
> knowledge when you epitomize cowardice in the face
> of the enemy? 4-F? LOL!


Here you are Vince. Someplace you can't go. Notice the part where
he sings, "We've been cleared and we're not queers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vP514a3k13U

Oh Jerry..stop pretending youve been in every war since the Revolution...you silly queer bait.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Dane Bramage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince(1) Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There is a very long tradition upheld by both
> > parties to over-fund the military and to do a
> piss
> > poor job of reengineering to address the new
> world
> > threats. There was abundant evidence prior to
> > 9/11 that military and intelligence agencies
> > needed to refocus on a new kind of
> > enemy....terrorists. This refocusing could
> have
> > been done and budgets cut (my opinion)...but it
> > wasnt done...and our worse nightmares came
> true.
>
> It was cut, by Clinton.
>
> In 1992, the year before Bill Clinton took office
> the end strengths were:
> Army: 610,450
> Navy: 541,883
> Marines: 184,529
> Air Force: 470,315
>
> In 2000, the year before George W. Bush took
> office:
> Army: 481,669
> Navy: 373,692
> Marines: 173,371
> Air Force: 354,321
>
> One of the reasons the military is stretched so
> much now.
>
> Carter also didn't go gangbusters on trying to fix
> a hollow military, which resulted in the Iran
> hostage rescue disaster.


1992 and 2000 were two very different times. In 1992 the Soviet threat had prett much collapsed and we did not need as large a military. Plus guns, computers and tanks ets need less peopl to operate them and more people to maintain them.

Under you logic - Bush must have de-emphasized th military because the Base Re-Alignment and Closure Act was done on Bush's watch.

You are a moron

Radiophile Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Under you logic - Bush must have de-emphasized th
> military because the Base Re-Alignment and Closure
> Act was done on Bush's watch.


BRAC dates back to 1987. Regardless, Bill Clinton's micro and mis-anagement of the military was pretty bad...almost Johnson/McNamara bad.


Radiophile Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You are a moron

Please do some research before you resort to name calling. Thanks in advance.

Dane Bramage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Please do some research before you resort to name
> calling. Thanks in advance.


You do some research. The so-called "Peace Dividend" began with Reagan and was promoted under Bush and then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney...


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,969386,00.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Lopter57 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Another fine Bush and Republican mess. While the
> rest of the World was dramatically increasing R&D
> and education spend, Bush and Republicans were
> busy cutting them.
>
> The result...


Aside from having a meaningless chart with no references to what the numbers mean, you once again have proven how moronic you truly are. In your mind, I bet the snow storm last week was Bush's fault too.

Ever hear of the American Competetiveness Initiative? Didn't think so.

Now for some facts:

During President Bush’s first term, Federally funded R&D grew in the health sciences field, which was driven by Congress’s mission to double funding in this field by 2004. In his 2006 State of the Union address, President Bush unveiled his plan to overhaul education and Federally funded R&D in math and the physical sciences—chemistry, physics, Earth science, and astronomy. He vowed to substantially increase funding for basic research in science by increasing Federal investments in the NSF, DOE, and the NIST. His plan, the American Competitiveness Initiative, aimed to double for the budget for research in basic science to $50 billion by 2016.

How did President Bush perform?
In 2007, NSF, DOE’s Office of Science, and NIST saw a 9.3 percent increase in funding; a 7.2 percent increase in 2008; and a 15 percent increase in 2009. From 2006 to 2009, Federally funded R&D increased from under $10 billion to $12.2 billion.

Apparently, no matter how much we spend, we still churn out morons like you.

Interesting that most of those cities are run by Democrats.

Wow, this Lopter57 moron takes the stupidity cake hands down.

First, he can barely compose a coherent sentence.

Second, the numbers he is referencing actually show improvement. Every number on that chart represents changes in 2009 average mathematics scores since 2003 and 2007. For the simple minded (like Lopter57), this means that those are improvements in scores. Basically, Cleveland is the only city to get worse in the report. The * indicates a significant(p<.05) score change.

If by "fine Bush and Republican mess" he means, in comparison to 2003, scores for students in large cities were higher in 2009 at both grades 4 and 8, he got it right. Not sure that qualifies as a "mess" though.


FollSmacker hit the nail on the head, dumbass indeed.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> You do some research. The so-called "Peace
> Dividend" began with Reagan and was promoted under
> Bush and then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney...
>

That is what I said, base closing began in 1987; although Clinton screwed up the reduction in force during the 1990's.

Here, maybe this will help you:

http://www.rif.org/

Wow, lopter out stupidified himself on this one. If I am not mistaken, he blames Bush for an INCREASE in test scores and then says Bush cut R&D spending when in fact it was INCREASED during his term. Lopter=FAIL. AGAIN. Seriously, lopter, what the fuck is wrong with you?