Under Bush, OSHA Mired In Inaction

Worker Safety Regulations Rolled Back As Administration Responded To Industry Pressures

(Washingtonpost.com)  This story was written by R. Jeffrey Smith.

---

In early 2001, an epidemiologist at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration sought to publish a special bulletin warning dental technicians that they could be exposed to dangerous beryllium alloys while grinding fillings. Health studies showed that even a single day's exposure at the agency's permitted level could lead to incurable lung disease.

After the bulletin was drafted, political appointees at the agency gave a copy to a lobbying firm hired by the country's principal beryllium manufacturer, according to internal OSHA documents. The epidemiologist, Peter Infante, incorporated what he considered reasonable changes requested by the company and won approval from key directorates, but he bristled when the private firm complained again.

"In my 24 years at the Agency, I have never experienced such indecision and delay," Infante wrote in an e-mail to the agency's director of standards in March 2002. Eventually, top OSHA officials decided, over what Infante described in an e-mail to his boss as opposition from "the entire OSHA staff working on beryllium issues," to publish the bulletin with a footnote challenging a key recommendation the firm opposed.

Current and former career officials at OSHA say that such sagas were a recurrent feature during the Bush administration, as political appointees ordered the withdrawal of dozens of workplace health regulations, slow-rolled others, and altered the reach of its warnings and rules in response to industry pressure.

The result is a legacy of unregulation common to several health-protection agencies under Bush: From 2001 to the end of 2007, OSHA officials issued 86 percent fewer rules or regulations termed economically significant by the Office of Management and Budget than their counterparts did during a similar period in President Bill Clinton's tenure, according to White House lists.

White House officials have dismissed such tallies, emphasizing in recent regulatory overviews that their "objective is quality, not quantity," and that heavy restrictions on corporations harm economic performance. During Bush's presidency, they said in a September report, average annual regulatory costs were kept 24 percent lower than during the previous two decades. OSHA says it has issued many rules of lesser consequence that nonetheless clarified industry responsibilities.

But this record has been controversial among occupational health experts and career OSHA staff.

"The legacy of the Bush administration has been one of dismal inaction," said Robert Harrison, a professor at the University of California at San Francisco and chairman of the occupational health section of the American Public Health Association. It has been "like turning a ketchup bottle upside down, banging the bottom of the container, and nothing comes out. You shake and shake and nothing comes out," Harrison said.

More than two dozen current and former senior career officials further said in interviews that the agency's strategic choices were frequently made without input from its experienced hands. Political appointees "shut us out," a longtime senior career official said.

Among the regulations proposed by OSHA's staff but scuttled by political appointees was one meant to protect health workers from tuberculosis. Although OSHA concluded in 1997 that the regulation could avert as many as 32,700 infections and 190 deaths annually and save $115 million, it was blocked by opposition from large hospitals.

In the summer, the agency decided against moving further toward the regulation of crystalline silica, the tiny fibrous material in cement and stone dust that causes lung disease or cancer. OSHA promised a scientific peer review of the health risks by early 2005 and then by early 2007, but it never acted. Regulating silica exposures would have prevented an estimated 41 silicosis deaths and 20 to 40 lung cancers annually, according to OSHA.

In the spring, political appointees quietly scrapped work on another long-pending regulation of hazardous exposure to ionizing radiation in mailrooms, food warehouses, and hospitals and airports. It cited "resource constraints and other priorities" -- the same reason officials gave for withdrawing more than a dozen regulatory proposals in 2001.

Former OSHA director Edwin G. Foulke Jr. and other Bush appointees dispute the criticisms and say the agency carefully directed its scarce resources at the most dangerous workplaces, notably levying heavy fines after major workplace disasters. Foulke also expressed pride that a drop in reported workplace injuries that began in 1974 continued unabated under Bush and said that "we've done, I think, a really good job of moving things along" in rulemakings that proved to be more complex and time-consuming than he had anticipated.

Labor advocates, academic scholars and some OSHA officials have said that the decline in reported injuries is partly the result of a 14 percent drop in U.S. production and manufacturing jobs since 2001 and a 2002 change in the government's record-keeping rules.

'It Was Window Dressing'

The agency's first director under Bush, John L. Henshaw, startled career officials by telling them in an early meeting that employers were OSHA's real customers, not the nation's workers. "Everybody was pretty amazed," one of those present recalled. "Our purpose is to ensure employee safety and health. . . . He just looked at things differently."

Within two years, Henshaw, an industrial hygienist who had worked for Monsanto and another chemical firm, withdrew 26 draft regulations on OSHA's public calendar, including rules meant to limit workplace exposure to air contaminants, highly hazardous chemicals, and shipyard and scaffolding hazards.

In many cases, the agency cited "resource constraints" as the reason. But Charles Gordon, a Labor Department lawyer who worked on OSHA regulations in the solicitor's office from 1975 until January, said that "all the work had been done" on many of the rules, including laborious, peer-reviewed risk assessments and economic analyses.

Henshaw, acting in concert with legislation passed by the Republican majority in Congress, quickly withdrew a proposed regulation -- drawn up during the Clinton administration -- meant to curtail ergonomic problems, which OSHA studies have said cause 60 percent of workplace injuries. He promised, instead, to issue nonmandatory guidelines and to cite violations under a general OSHA statute promoting safety.

But Richard Soltan, who retired from OSHA in 2006 after seven years as the Philadelphia regional administrator and 11 years as a deputy administrator, called Henshaw's promise "a sham." "I don't think we prosecuted two cases," Soltan said. "It was window dressing."

"I took the agency where I could take it," Henshaw said in an interview. "I had a fairly good control on the enforcement side, and we tried to do everything we could to enhance the enforcement," partly by partnering with the Environmental Protection Agency and the Justice Department to pressure or punish willful, chronic violators.

But Henshaw said that "there wasn't a whole lot of political will for more rules and burdens on industry," either in the Bush administration or among congressional Republicans. Instead, there was "some interest in improving existing rules on the books," he said. "We focused on improving what we had."

Under Bush, the agency was reluctant even to issue health warnings that fall short of regulations, if doing so might make it easier for workers to collect damages for diseases. In the draft beryllium bulletin, for example, the key dispute concerned OSHA's endorsement of a blood test that detected sensitization to beryllium, a precursor to disease -- and to lawsuits.

In the end, OSHA added a footnote casting doubt on the test's validity, a decision that Lee S. Newman, a beryllium expert at the University of Colorado, called "profoundly disappointing" and part of a larger effort by Brush Wellman, the beryllium manufacturer invited to comment, "to try to mitigate" the test's use.

Patrick Carpenter, a spokesman for Brush Wellman, said that the draft "contained factual errors" and expressed satisfaction at the outcome. Infante, the epidemiologist, said the episode was "the last straw" that provoked him to resign in 2002.

Battle Over Asbestos Bulletin

That year, Ira Wainless, a senior industrial hygienist at OSHA, finished drafting a warning to auto mechanics that brake linings contained dangerous asbestos fibers. Health experts and lawmakers had called for such a bulletin, but attorneys for major car and brake manufacturers worried that it would be cited in lawsuits by mechanics seeking damages for asbestos-related disease.

Although Wainless's draft was approved by all of OSHA's directorates by mid-2003, Richard Fairfax, director of enforcement programs, was mindful of industry concerns. "Our recommendation is not to go forward," he said in a note to the head of the agency's science and technology office. "With the various asbestos litigation in progress and the compensation issues, the issuance of this may complicate matters."

A senior OSHA health enforcement official told Wainless's boss in an internal note that year that "we are under the understanding . . . it was NOT supposed to be going out." Wainless persisted, however, and over the next two years sent four drafts to Henshaw's office to meet what another OSHA official described in an internal e-mail as "requests for minor changes" by the agency's deputy director.

Before the bulletin's eventual publication in July 2006, which occurred after heavy pressure by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), OSHA omitted a statement that brake-lining imports commonly contained asbestos. It also modified its warning that linings were "a substantial source of exposure," referring instead to "potential exposure."

Days after publication and seven months after Henshaw's retirement from OSHA, he sent its science director an e-mail demanding that the warning be withdrawn and redone to express a "more balanced" view. Henshaw did not tell the career official that he had since been employed as a $350-an-hour courtroom witness on behalf of an asbestos-products firm and had testified for companies in two other asbestos lawsuits filed by auto mechanics.

In a subsequent deposition, Henshaw said he had contacted the agency to complain "as a private citizen." He also said a lawyer representing asbestos and auto firms -- who subsequently hired him as a consultant -- had contacted him about the OSHA bulletin's language.

Wainless's boss, David Ippolito, responded to Henshaw's complaint by proposing to suspend Wainless for 10 days without pay because the bulletin had not referenced an industry-financed study, which concluded that auto mechanics were typically exposed to asbestos levels below OSHA's workplace limits. Wainless had told his supervisors that the study had been disputed by other scientists.

Plans to revise the bulletin and act against Wainless were dropped after an account of the suspension proposal appeared in the Baltimore Sun. But the Labor Department maintains that the health bulletin "was not needed and could have confused the affected public," spokesman David James said recently.

Dissatisfaction With Leadership

In 2006, Henshaw was replaced by Edwin G. Foulke Jr., a South Carolina lawyer and former Bush fundraiser who spent years defending companies cited by OSHA for safety and health violations.

Foulke quickly acquired a reputation inside the Labor Department as a man who literally fell asleep on the job: Eyewitnesses said they saw him suddenly doze off at staff meetings, during teleconferences, in one-on-one briefings, at retreats involving senior deputies, on the dais at a conference in Europe, at an award ceremony for a corporation and during an interview with a candidate for deputy regional administrator.

His top aides said they rustled papers, wore attention-getting garb, pounded the table for emphasis or gently kicked his leg, all to keep him awake. But, if these tactics failed, sometimes they just continued talking as if he were awake. "We'll be sitting there and things will fall out of his hands; people will go on talking like nothing ever happened," said a career official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to a reporter.

In an interview, Foulke denied falling asleep at work, although he said he was often tired and sometimes listened with his eyes closed. His goal, he said, was to create the best agency he could, partly by putting in place "performance metrics" not previously used at OSHA.

Foulke said his senior staff appeared "pretty enthusiastic," but he acknowledged that there were grounds for tension with others. Leadership, he said, is "taking people down a path they don't want to go, until you get them to a place where they realize this is where they need to be."

A $112-an-Hour Consultant

The agency's budget and its field staff declined during the Bush administration, even as its responsibilities -- and the total number of workers -- grew.

The gap caused some inspectors to complain that they lacked adequate gear to monitor workplace chemicals and other hazards. Efficiency became a key agency buzzword and, to help improve it, Foulke arranged for OSHA to hire Randy Kimlin, an acquaintance from South Carolina, as a $112-an-hour consultant beginning in 2006.

The work was lucrative for Kimlin, a former employee of Union Carbide -- a firm that frequently clashed with OSHA -- and a former president of a Greenville-based chemical firm. For his part-time advice over a 22-month period beginning in May 2006, OSHA paid Kimlin $513,403, a salary higher than that received by Vice President Cheney, any member of Congress and Foulke himself during that period.

Kimlin was paid an additional $97,730 in reimbursements for nearly weekly flights back to South Carolina and for a hotel room on Capitol Hill, all granted under a subcontract with Washington-based TATC Consulting that was awarded without competition.

Kimlin did not return calls to his office and home. But Brian Peters, who oversaw the contract for TATC, said Kimlin's role was to help arrange staff meetings and shift OSHA from a culture of inspections to less confrontational "compliance assistance." Others at OSHA said Kimlin played a large role in day-to-day operations and personnel decisions.

The arrangement attracted criticism inside and outside the agency because Kimlin lacked experience in regulating or meeting planning. Half a dozen officials also privately questioned two retreats that he organized at a cost of at least a half-million dollars and that resulted in a 22-word change to the agency's mission. Instead of fulfilling a longstanding pledge to "assure the safety and health of America's workers," the new mission would be to "promote" safety and health, with employers "responsible" for providing safe workplaces.

Asked why the agency did not hire Kimlin as a full-time federal employee, at a lower cost, Foulke said he left that issue to others. He was, he said, just an OSHA lawyer, not a personnel specialist. Foulke also said that "in the private sector" it is common to have staff retreats to discuss mission statements.

"This is critical," Foulke said, "to the company." He paused briefly before clarifying, "to the country." Foulke resigned Nov. 9 and the next day began work at an Atlanta law firm that represents companies accused of workplace safety violations.

Staff researchers Madonna Lebling and Julie Tate contributed to this report.

[rudy6543]

Actually "mired in inaction" could describe the whole Bush administration......


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by raflin0010 at 11:15 AM

Yep! Think back to the energy crisis created by Enron in California and how Bush refused to step in at all.

[thechooch1]

Can''t wait to get ride of this administration! How refreshing to see Obama appoint scientists to the head of scientific agencies instead of the current political hacks!

[terrapin78]

These types of actions are part of the reason the Bu$h (Mis) Administration will be harshly judged by history.

I will be one happy American to see the Bu$h family demoted to the villain status the deserve. They have done America harm and I hate them (all) for this harm!

[briannorwood]

Wait a minute here! Is this article implying that the Bush Administration is incompetent?

Geeez! Who wudda'' thunk?

[navyjimfl]

Laura Bush says her husbands presidency is not a failure......what else do you expect her to say but the bold truth is that his presidency is a great failure......Mrs. Bush says George liberated Afgans, Iraqi''s and others.....she is deluding herself.....he has killed thousands of americans and other nato forces and both Afgan and Iraq will be under the control of dictators years from now after we pull out......war and financial ruin....worse the U.S. has ever seen.....that''s his legacy.....

[debinok1]

This all falls in a direct line with Bushs regulate yourself trikle down policies. the only thing regulated were the employees and the only thing that trickled down was debt. Regardless of what Bushs two favorite ladies say, Bush will go down in history as a warmonger who in a matter of eight years destroyed the american way of life in one fell swoop.

[windmaster12]

Bush and Co. could care less about U.S. workers --

As he doesn''t care about the dead and disabled soldiers
who fought his Corporate war of Choice for Profit.

They are the Ruling class -
We are the peasants
What we need now is a French Revolution--
Sending George, Cheney, and all the rest of the war Criminals to The Hague
For Crimes against humanity-

Laura Bush was dumb enough to marry Dumbya!!!
Half the Country was dumb enough to elect him twice-
Now we reap the fruits of their ineptitude!!!
As late as Sept. Bush was saying the economy was Sound--

Speaks volumes about his Competence!!!!

One more nail in the idiot-sons coffin - there''s so many already....
Might be awhile before the GOP finds it''s way out of the wilderness..

Wait a minute here! Is this article implying that the Bush Administration is incompetent?

Geeez! Who wudda'''' thunk?

Posted by briannorwood
-----------------
Whaddaya mean, incompetent.
They got is in a war in Iraq - goal achieved.
They all but obliterated the middle class - another goal achieved.
The rich got a lot richer - another goal achieved.
Government stopped functioning - another goal achieved - remember Ronnie Raygun?
I think they pretty much achieved their goals.

[walt1944-2009]

The Great Emperor Bush is unconcerned about charges that he and his court were influential in killing many attempts by OSHA to implament safer working conditions for workers.

After all, the Great Emperor feels that forcing businesses to conform to governmment regulations would cost the company money which the Great Emperor is opposed to. Best to let the average worker spend their own money of safety supplies than have the company provide it for them. Either that, or the worker can put up with safety issues and suffer the consequences.

Naturally, the Great Emperor Bush II, who hasn''t done even 15 minutes of physical labor in his entire life (his wife doesn''t even know how to turn a gas range on!!!), believes that American workers are "over-paid whiners" and as punishment, has had almost all manufacturing jobs and half the white-collar jobs sent to China, where workers don''t "whine" so much!!!

Besides, China has no "OSHA" so if their workers develop health problems or are killed or injured from unsafe working conditions, replacements are immediately at hand!!!

SIG HEIL, AMERICAN WORKERS ARE "WHINERS"!!!, BUSH!!!

[bjcone8559]

Oh please, all you Obamaanics, he has not proven anything yet and you are congratulating him. Grow up. The media is slanted, articles are biased, and thr truth might be exaggerated. People are incompetent, one man ( Bush) is not responsible for evrything...remember that when Obama fails you.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by peace4321






Whatever you do... don''t let the truth cloud your thoughts.

The Golden Rule...He who has the gold RULES!!!!

Some things never change.

Posted by kevinkkloste
---------------------
Corollary:
He who owns the gold best not sleep too soundly at night.

[terrorislame]

YES,it`s the Post`s Fault !
The washington post is the most liberal news paper in the country so who cares what they say! they are losing money dailey because people are canceling their subscription to them, you don''''t hear that from these morons do you! Well they are losing money big time because they lie!

Posted by libssuck3 at 12:30 PM : Dec 29, 2008
Workers Have NO Rights!
Who needs a hand or a leg or even Eyes ?
Eyes could only help one see The Truth !
And the GOP Sect Will NOT Allow This To Happen !

[kazoodan]

The washington post is the most liberal news paper in the country so who cares what they say! they are losing money dailey because people are canceling their subscription to them, you don''''t hear that from these morons do you! Well they are losing money big time because they lie!

Posted by libssuck3 at 12:30 PM : Dec 29, 2008

O''Reilly couldn''t have said it better himself.

[kazoodan]

With G.W. Bush we got what we paid for....Less friggin federal bureaucracy.

With NObama you neo-Marxist will get exactly what you paid for....

So friggin much federal bureaucracy and regulations, you won''''t even recognize our once great nation by the end of his term.

Posted by GoGWGo at 01:06 PM : Dec 29, 2008

You mean by the end of Bush''s term, right?

[terrorislame]

With G.W. Bush we got what we paid for....Less friggin federal bureaucracy.
YES,...We KNEW the GOP Sect bought the elections!"The Company Store " Ruled for 8 Long years Too !
Now,The ''Reign of Serfdom " is Over for You Shrubbies! Instead of getting paid to ignore the LAWS of the Land!,..You`ll HAVE to Abide by them Now!
THE GOP Imploded ! It`s OVER ! Get a Real JOB BUSHCO. Suckkies!

[kazoodan]

Oh please, all you Obamaanics, he has not proven anything yet and you are congratulating him. Grow up. The media is slanted, articles are biased, and thr truth might be exaggerated. People are incompetent, one man ( Bush) is not responsible for evrything...remember that when Obama fails you.

Posted by peace4321 at 12:38 PM : Dec 29, 2008

That''s the problem with you Bush apologists. You don''t hold him responsible for ANYTHING.

[debinok1]

Under Bush they also made it LEGAL to fine employees for having toxins in their blood that they are exposed to AT WORK. Amazing concept isn''t it, If the employee gets sick from something he works around it''s his own fault.

"Under Bush, OSHA Mired In Inaction"

DUH!

Along with every other "inaction" he''s taken. I''m surprised he hasn''t exploded because of his inability to take a bowel movement. One can still but hope.

"With G.W. Bush we got what we paid for....Less friggin federal bureaucracy."

Posted by GoGWGo at 01:06 PM : Dec 29, 2008


Really? Better try looking again the bureaucracy under Bush grew, we have more of it than ever. They just didn''t do anything. The cost of government grew under Bush and employees increased.

Go do your homework, the only thing taht got cut were the rules and oversight.

[physiotele]

you can''t blame Bush for being stupid. the people you can blame are the ones who voted for him, now they are really stupid and responsible for letting bush become the worse president in history.

[mitch5511]

"The agency''s first director under Bush, John L. Henshaw, startled career officials by telling them in an early meeting that employers were OSHA''s real customers, not the nation''s workers."

That says it all right there. The directive came from Bush and his minions carried it out.

[irmcvet971]

First they, the Fascist lead by Bush, deregulate the Banking Industry and we have a TOTAL Financial Melt Down. Now I wonder what THIS insanity will do to our HEALTH CARE System, which is NOW the worst in the Industrialized World as it stands! We as a PEOPLE, made a VERY bad decision listening to these "Trickle Down" Snake Oil Salesmen!!

[kazoodan]

All you idiots, just don''''t quite understand do you. Your nothing more than idiots who think bush is so bad. Well if bush is so bad why are you guys even bothering. You have your homes, and guess what, the Dow had it highest gain with bush in office.

Posted by DJ_Houston at 02:00 PM : Dec 29, 2008

This is a lie. The largest increase in the Dow happened during the Clinton Admin. Look it up.

[irmcvet971]

Oh please, all you Obamaanics, he has not proven anything yet and you are congratulating him. Grow up. The media is slanted, articles are biased, and thr truth might be exaggerated. People are incompetent, one man ( Bush) is not responsible for evrything...remember that when Obama fails you.

Posted by peace4321 at 12:38 PM : Dec 29, 2008

OH PLEASE!! The AMERICAN PEOPLE were going to make a change AWAY from Bush and the REPUBLICAN PARTY regardless. THEY have collectively given this YOUNG, VERY INTELLIGENT Man from Illinois the job of changing the direction of this nation. It''s about BUSH! It''s about HIS economic POLICIES!! It''s about OUTRIGHT LIES to American''s about a WAR that did NOT have to be. It''s all those things PERIOD!! Bush was a LOUSY President, America pretty much agrees on this point.

[irmcvet971]

All you idiots, just don''''t quite understand do you. Your nothing more than idiots who think bush is so bad. Well if bush is so bad why are you guys even bothering. You have your homes, and guess what, the Dow had it highest gain with bush in office.

Posted by DJ_Houston at 02:00 PM : Dec 29, 2008

I guess some of us want to give up OUR collective responsibilities as a CITIZEN. Give it ALL up in favor of the "Party" and the Fuhrer?? When George Bush came into power he had a nation at peace, great economy, balanced budget and SURPLUS! It is OUR job.. YOU know the part about WE THE PEOPLE??? It''s OUR job to tell him exactly what kind of job he has done. Just how much failure is YOUR PARTY worth??

[kazoodan]

Didn''''t do anything? Hmmm. How many times were we attacked under Bill Clinton? He did nothing BOTH times. We got attacked under bush ONE time and ONLY one time. Gee that says he did something

Posted by DJ_Houston at 02:05 PM : Dec 29, 2008

This is also a lie. The perpetraters of the first Twin Tower bombing were apprehended and now sit in jail. While Clinton did not respond to the Cole bombing, no action was taken by Bush either, except as part of the post 911 ''War on Terror''.

[irmcvet971]

Umm, first Clinton deregulated the Banking Industry moron

Posted by DJ_Houston at 02:17 PM : Dec 29, 2008


Your point?? You fascist love to do this. Find ONE democrat that happened to vote with the WRONG side or in this case a Democratic President who signed the REPUBLICAN BILL to deregulate the Industry and NO PROBLEM!! We just OVERLOOK EIGHT YEARS OF IGNORANCE AND FLAT OUT IGNORING EVERYTHING! LOL It was GEORGE W. BUSH in charge you poor loser. HE could have put people in the position at the SEC and WATCHED at the very least!!

[bjcone8559]

That is if Obama even gets in office


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by DJ_Houston



WHAT THE HE11 DOES THAT MEAN???

ARE YOU THREATENING THE LIFE OF THE NEXT PRESIDENT??

Didn''''t do anything? Hmmm. How many times were we attacked under Bill Clinton? He did nothing BOTH times. We got attacked under bush ONE time and ONLY one time. Gee that says he did something


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by DJ_Houston at 02:05 PM : Dec 29, 2008


And Bush''s response? The cost in $ and lives? The severity of the actions? The reasons? The place? All proved wrong. The guy we need to catch, still at large. The information included in intelligence briefs to Bush PRIOR to 911 and ignored? Oh, yeah, great job.

And in case you haven''t noticed, terrorists don''t work on our time schedule, they work on theirs. And it might just be pointed out that his actions have actually increased the activity of the terrorists and more reason to attack.

[bjcone8559]

Listen up wingnuts.

9/11 happened on Bush''s watch. He was told via intelligence briefings that Bin Laden planned on using airplanes as weapons. He did nothing. Then after the fact, he used 9/11 as an excuse to attack Iraq.

Where is Bin Laden?

[bjcone8559]

Hell the Kenya Government put a gag order on his family. Hello, Ding Dong and it is not Avon


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by DJ_Houston

I honestly have not heard that. I do know, however, that the Bush family''s assets were frozen during WWII for supporting Hitler... look it up.

[bjcone8559]

All you idiots, just don''''''''t quite understand do you. Your nothing more than idiots who think bush is so bad. Well if bush is so bad why are you guys even bothering. You have your homes, and guess what, the Dow had it highest gain with bush in office.

Posted by DJ_Houston


I for one will keep making noise about the crimes of the Bush/Cheney gang in hopes the next justice department will act. If enough of us let our feelings be kn own, then just maybe Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfield, Wolfowitz and the rest of their crime cartel will be brought to justice. (Justice being a firing squad)

[hdc77494]

The breathless assertion that regulation of silica would prevent 20-40 cancer deaths is revealing. I can just imagine the millions of dollars contractors (and their customers)would have to spend to prevent concrete dust, not to mention the California air quality board demanding that they capture all such dust. So we spend billions to "save" a hypothetical 20 people? Give me a break. Not that the economy has tanked is a great time for Obama''s team to draft all kinds of regulations regardless of cost, and of dubious value to society. All I see are more jobs for lawyers and less for the rest of us.

[terrapin78]

Listen up wingnuts.

9/11 happened on Bush''''''''s watch. He was told via intelligence briefings that Bin Laden planned on using airplanes as weapons. He did nothing. Then after the fact, he used 9/11 as an excuse to attack Iraq.

Where is Bin Laden?


Posted by nowaymcgoo

Listen here mcgoo, you really want to get on the name calling? I don''''t think so. Yes we went to Iraq, but you know what, Like it or Not there is a vast improvement in that dam country.

Posted by DJ_Houston at 02:36 PM : Dec 29, 2008


But we went in on a lie. And when you go on a lie there is no victory to win.

You Texas mf''s are *******''s like your illustrious leader, GWB or is it Sarah Palin now?

[terrapin78]

The US would be much better off if we never have another Texan in the White House. We are 2 for 2 with them (stupid wars started) and we cannot afford another false war by Texans.

[bjcone8559]

The breathless assertion that regulation of silica would prevent 20-40 cancer deaths is revealing. I can just imagine the millions of dollars contractors (and their customers)would have to spend to prevent concrete dust, not to mention the California air quality board demanding that they capture all such dust. So we spend billions to "save" a hypothetical 20 people? Give me a break. Not that the economy has tanked is a great time for Obama''''s team to draft all kinds of regulations regardless of cost, and of dubious value to society. All I see are more jobs for lawyers and less for the rest of us.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by hdc77494


Wow, since you feel that way, you surely wouldn''t object if those 20-40 people were your parents, children and other family members.

You republicans are disgusting.

[ioweign]

Well considering congress approved the war in the first place. I guess the DOJ would have to go after congress.

Posted by DJ_Houston at 02:42 PM : Dec 29, 2008

Congress approved the use of force based on Bush/Cheney intel...

[bjcone8559]

Listen here mcgoo, you really want to get on the name calling? I don''''''''t think so. Yes we went to Iraq, but you know what, Like it or Not there is a vast improvement in that dam country.

Posted by DJ_Houston at 02:36 PM : Dec 29, 2008



You know what, you''re right... they now have a democracy. And they will continue to have one as long as we hold gun on them.

Wake up!

[bjcone8559]

Does not matter, they still approved the war. They are still responsible.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by DJ_Houston


A guy I know went to a dishonest doctor who lied to him and said he had cancer, then prescribed a treatment for which the doctor would get a kickback.

He came to me and asked if I thought he should take the treatment. I said that based on the fact that his doctor had recommended it he probably should.

To this day this guy blames me because his hair fell out.

CONGRESS WAS LIED TO , FOOL. JUST LIKE THE REST OF US.

[centerfall94]

CONGRESS WAS LIED TO , FOOL. JUST LIKE THE REST OF US.

Posted by nowaymcgoo

Well if congress is stupid not to investigate in the first place that is there fault. They have the right to investigate but they didn''''t. Therefore, Bush will NOT be charges with any crimes. PERIOD. Get over it

Posted by DJ_Houston at 03:01 PM : Dec 29, 2008

Bzzt WRONG.

We''lll get over it once Bush and Cheney are in iron shackles at the Hague for war crimes and high treason.

[bjcone8559]

Well if congress is stupid not to investigate in the first place that is there fault. They have the right to investigate but they didn''''t. Therefore, Bush will NOT be charges with any crimes. PERIOD. Get over it


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by DJ_Houston


First, you might do a little reading. Cheney made sure the intelligence was cooked before it was presented to congress. There was basically no way to get to the truth. When one of the claims was debunked (the yellowcake uranium lie) a covert CIA agent was outed by these criminals as a warning to anyone not to cross the administration.

Second, you are probably right, these murders and thieves will probably not pay for their crimes... we will.

[centerfall94]

We''''''''lll get over it once Bush and Cheney are in iron shackles at the Hague for war crimes and high treason.

Posted by Centerfall94

Well don''''t hold your breath on that one. OK. You may die

Posted by DJ_Houston at 03:06 PM : Dec 29, 2008

Yea, I''m sure that''s what you would have said a year ago if someone told you that we''d elect a black president in 2008.

[bjcone8559]

BTW, you mentioned treason. What did bush do that was Treason


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by DJ_Houston


You might ask Valerie Plame for one.

[ioweign]

First off, I am not racist, secondly I am saying that ONE no one has even suggested charges be brought up, and two, even if they did, they would have to include members of congress since they approved the war.

BTW, you mentioned treason. What did bush do that was Treason

Posted by DJ_Houston at 03:11 PM : Dec 29, 2008

According to your logic, you write a bad check.

Cash it in a bank.

That makes the bank teller as guilty as you...

BTW, you mentioned treason. What did bush do that was Treason

Posted by DJ_Houston
-----------------
Four words...
"The Downing Street Memo"

[bjcone8559]

You might ask Valerie Plame for one.

Posted by nowaymcgoo

I said bush not libby


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by DJ_Houston



LMAO!!

Nice try, but I know you can''t be that shallow... you can type.

[you_fools]

lobbying is the down fall of our government..




Here is a note to all those that think Bush should go up on war crimes.. Afer two years if Bush is not put up on war crime charges then you can leave this country and live else where.. and if he does go up on war crimes I will leave..

Well considering congress approved the war in the first place. I guess the DOJ would have to go after congress.

Posted by DJ_Houston at 02:42 PM : Dec 29, 2008


Actually---No "war" was approved by Congress as only Congress can declare war, and they haven''t.

Bush argued that he did not need congressional approval to invade Iraq, ultimately both houses of Congress approved a "resolution" authorizing him to do so. The U.S. invaded Iraq on March 19, 2003

Key word--- Invasion of a Soverign country and at that point the US threw away over 200 years of history.

The war powers act was not invoked.

[bjcone8559]

OK so you want to be a tough guy.. OK answer me this, Why would four different websites who had a photo image of Barracks B/C all have a different image. They are not even closely the same as examined and reported by an expert released on December 23 by By Ron Polarik, PhD. Now tell me why they are all different? And then tell me why he posted an image instead of producing a physical copy as requested


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by DJ_Houston


Oops... I didn''t realize you were one of THOSE whack-os.

Did you see the UFO last night? Better answer the door, it might be Bigfoot!


ROFLMMFAO!!!