U.S. refuses to join U.N. plan for women From AP via Yahoo: UNITED NATIONS - The United States has refused to join 85 other heads of state and government in signing a statement that endorsed a 10-year-old U.N. plan to ensure every woman's right to education, health care, and choice about having children.
and
President Bush's administration withheld its signature because the statement included a reference to "sexual rights."
posted by Skygazer on Oct 14, 2004 - 48 comments

The bait and switch. A last-minute revision by House and Senate leaders in the tax bill that President Bush signed today will prevent millions of minimum-wage families from receiving the increased child credit that is in the measure.
posted by four panels on May 29, 2003 - 21 comments

Powell's address to the UN. In a direct, long and rich presentation, Colin Powell has laid the cards on the table, and presented what's likely to be our most explicit case for war. While it's difficult to separate the larger issue of War on Iraq from just this presentation, I'm interested in other takes on Powell's speech. Anything substantially new? Truly irrefutable? Strong enough to justify immediate action? Does this have more heft coming from Powell (considering he's more trusted than Bush on this issue), or is he acting as a mouthpiece? Or, to be succinct, did Colin change anyone's mind? At the very least, he satisfied my need to know more about why our administration is acting so urgently.
posted by kokogiak on Feb 5, 2003 - 227 comments

The tide is turning. A new poll from the Pew Research Center indicates that the Bush Administration is losing support for a war against Iraq, with only 29% favoring war if U.N. inspectors fail to find weapons of mass destruction. Polls are looking considerably worse in Great Britain, where 47% of the public disapprove of an attack on Iraq, compared to just 30% in favor of such an attack. Blair is certain that he can get the British public to support war, however, even if Britain goes to war without U.N. support. "When and if that time came, people would find the reasons acceptable and satisfactory because there is no other route available to us."
posted by insomnia_lj on Jan 21, 2003 - 55 comments

Sean Penn totally disses President Bush in the Washington Post but because he did it in a full page ad and not an op/ed column it is totally unlinkable to those of use on the web, and therefore dies on the vine. Two questions: How can one find the full transcript to Penn's advertisment, and why is it that only Republican movie stars are allowed have their voices heard in political discussions?
posted by tsarfan on Oct 19, 2002 - 64 comments