After all the damage he has already done to the world, this really is the least we can do.
Hopefully this is only the first of a long trend!
That would be funny if it passes.
… pure in heart and deed …
dunno what you do with waste water over there, but here in London the wastewater treatment plants purify the wastewater so well that it's sent back into the system, and used all over again.
It's reckoned that every glass of London water is drunk about 6 times!
So you want to honour George W by associating his name for ever with ultimate quality of purity?
Ooh … that's so touching!
What a great idea, we should adopt it for some of our Ex and present PMs, all though they should not have such a high status as an American president, maybe we could name individual toilet pans after them.
We can dedicate the parking lot to them.
Note that the op is a bit out of date: This will be on the ballot.
If it were anywhere besides SF, I wouldn't expect it to pass, but SF is probably the most liberal city in the US.
Of those, how many times is it treated? :tongue2:
Never did trust that English ale.
This is an insult to turds everywhere.
The funniest part is that the utilities commission is somewhat upset about the image Bush's name will give such a fine city works facility.
I wonder if the taxpayers think they are getting their moneys' worth out of their public servants?
It's pretty clear how San Franciscans feel about one of them.
My ex-girlfriend's buddy was one of the principal organizers behind this, a junior city planner for San Francisco that graduated fairly recently from UC Irvine. He and the organizers are mostly pretty young and bright people and I personally thought it was idiotic that this was what they decided to put their energy into, of all things. She got a kick out of it, but it seemed incredibly stupid to me. When you have the marketing and organizational ability to run the tight and successful campaign they ran, I think you owe it to yourself and to your city to get a better piece of legislation passed than this.
The importance is high. The symbolism will most certainly stick around for awhile, which raises the standard for future presidents.
Symbolic legislation is mostly a lame duck. Future generations will likely only laugh or roll their eyes. L.A. recently passed a symbolic ban on the use of the 'N word' even though the most prominent use is among those it is supposed to denigrate.
I love how Americans spend more time insulting their President in a creative way, rather than trying to fix the problems within the system itself, that led to such a President.
Nothing like acting like a grade schooler about the whole thing, eh?
Way to make a sweeping generalization about Americans. I presume your from Canada eh?
Re: … pure in heart and deed …
hmmm---maybe they should name only the pipes after him...
'George W. Bush Memorial Sewer System'
motto: 'From beginning to end, it's all for sh*t'
No, I am from America.
I'm sort of annoyed about the whole pseudo-politically active attitude going around. Whenever I mention Bush around someone, or in fact anything related to politics, I'm going to hear derogatory comments about Bush with little to no justification. However, how many of those people are actually going to vote? Probably a small number, if any at all. I'm rather apathetic to the whole thing, as my calling isn't being the next organizer of some political activity program, and at least I fit the bill, instead of being an ignorant activist for some TV and radio sponsored cause, who in actuality, doesn't care about anything but the media the said view was voiced through.
Honestly, I have no idea how my generalizations can elicit such rancor. I'd say that there is justification behind my statements, but then again, I'm not right, because I'm making a generalization that's poorly supported to begin with and I'm more less reflecting on what I believe is the mainstream attitude.
In short, please leave me alone; I'm extremely sorry for offending you with a single sentence over the net.
Little to no justificiation? That is an absurd statement. How many times does the Supreme court have to rule against him before supporters start to take note?
Considering how many Americans feel betrayed and disenfranchised by his actions and those of his supporters, it seems the least that can be done. But I agree, putting him on trial for war crimes would be far more productive. The fact that he hasn't been impeached only speaks to the failure of the system generally.
Separate names with a comma.