Talk:George H. W. Bush/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Pearl Harbor

"As a student at Phillips Academy, Bush learned of the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941."

Ummmmm.... and so did everyone else. Anyone else see the relevance of that sentence???

Not Conspiracy Theory

There are literally mountains of evidence (that hasn't been destroyed, or kept secret) that implicates G.H.W. Bush in the center of a lot of controversy; None of which is mentioned on his article. Why won't PPGMD, the self-appointed killer of conspiracy theory, allow for these facts to be posted?

Your a nut that simply is posting junk, the first list a deleted was "List of people that Bush I and II killed" christ, you really want me to take you seriously after that. Shape up and stop posting crap, we are well past Assuming Good Faith. I hate Wikipedia (at the moment at least), but I hate ruining descent articles with far out conspiracy junk. PPGMD 03:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't really care about your deletion of my list. By the way, noble editor, I think you meant to use the word "decent"? Anyway, I don't care if you take me seriously; I just wish you would look at the same information I have (which, thus far you have belligerently refused to do) and admit that George H.W. Bush, Richard Nixon, and LBJ are all very likely suspects in the conspiracy to kill John F. Kennedy.

Like many previous users have pointed out, there is so much info concerning G.H.W. Bush that is a part of the public record, and backed by reliable sources; but none of this potentially incriminating information can be found on his page? Years ago, what was thought of folks who accused FDR of knowing about Pearl Harbor before it happened? Howabout that the Lusitania wasn't sunk by the Germans? Or that the CIA was heavily involved, during the 1980's, in the cocaine importation business? What defines a "conspiracy theory." Well, if your rules (which you have adopted from others) were applied as strictly to other widely held notions commonly regarded as being true, i think we wake up to find out that the theory of gravity is a conspiracy theory; Osama Bin Laden, WMDs, the domino-theory, trickle-down economics, plate tectonics, etc. There is so much knowledge that is accepted to be true that really has little or no facts/evidence/sourcing to back it up. Much is accepted through faith along. So, all I have left to say, is to tell you and everyone else to watch the movie "JFK II", and afterwords, you might be able to call me crazy. But, I have a hunch that you will go on working to maintain the complex network of lies and misinformation that is the reason for this country's decline. Peace.

TLDR PPGMD 23:42, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Carlyle Group

I added the information about his Carlyle Group position, which is taken from Carlyle's Wikipedia entry. User:tooptoo 8 September 2006

Siblings

Can someone put GHWB's siblings or if he was an only child?

info about his role in Indo-Pakistani War of 1971

can we have some information of his role as a UN ambassador between 71 and 73 for Indo-Pakistani War of 1971. actually his role as renouncing india as an aggressor is mentioned on the main page of Indo-Pakistani War of 1971. can i have more views on this topic by prominent users. nids 06:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Knighthood

Both this and the Titles of Nobility Ammendment page says he had a GCB from Britain. However, neither bothers to say why. Anyone got a reason? --Mrzaius 00:02, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Presidential Campaign Section

Daikaio12: I retooled the Presidential Campaign section, and added a second section below it to flesh out the results of the election. I also removed the Rove piece from that section, since it is rather out of place and there is no context for it. A section labeled "Presidential Campaign" needs more than that.

Daikaio12: What happeneed to the Presidential Campaign section? The election 1988 info from the Vice President section should belong there.

The dates related to Reagan's state funeral are wrong. I don't know the exact dates, but I do know the Chaney father and son eulogies were not delivered the day before HW Bush went skydiving. Those eulogies were delivered on June 7th or 8th, I belive (I watched them on TV and should remember). Could someone check on that?

For the naming of the George Bush pages, see Talk:George Bush

Rise in politics deletion

Why has information been removed from this page? There used to be a brief synopsis of Bush's political career before the Presidency -- his 1964 run for Senate, his two (three?) terms in the House, his time as Director Central Intelligence. What happened to all that?

It didn't take me long to google up hundreds of pages about Bush and the Kennedy Assassination and Bush and the Bay of Pigs invasion. What's going on here? BL 04:09, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Absolutely agreed. It's like he did nothing important between graduating from Yale and becoming President! I mean, being the US Ambassador to the UN and CIA director seem, to me at least, to be worthy points in his career. If you scroll back to Mid-November 2004, there was plenty of information available, but someone took it out.

It's been readded by Shimgray. So I guess everything's Kool and the Gang now.

Yes, I don't want to suggest that wikipedia join the cacophony of those vehemently critical of GHWB and his son, but if a debunking of something as trivial as the scanner story is linked, how about linking something that addresses the more historically important accusations against him? I haven't searched around, but here is one possible link. It was politically motivated (as stated in its introduction, it's a plea against his possible 1992 re-election) but very it's thorough (albeit perhaps a bit too presumptuous.) There must surely be other sites, maybe better suited for a link in this article, but much of this unauthorized bio should be available for someone interested. What it lacks in objectivity it makes up for by citing references to the information upon which its presumptions are made, and by addressing the fact that objectivity is a bit hard when any pertinent documents have been destroyed or classified as secret. Maybe it should be linked at the bottom. (I recall that MLK Jr.'s wiki-page has both pro-MLK and,incidentally, more anti-MLK Jr. links) http://www.tarpley.net/bush1.htm

Why remove the presidents table from George H. W. Bush? It has a much right to belong there as pages for other presidents. --65.73.0.137

The maps of the presidential elections are inconsistent with what all of us really see during an election. Republican states should be red and democratic states should be blue. In the article, red states are blue and blue states are red. Why not be consistent?

New Portrait

I put up a new photo of Bush.- User:MikeAssad

I don't think it is appropriate. The photo in the chart should always be the "official" portrait, if possible, from when the President was in office. A recent photo is not as good, it could potentially confuse people. user:J.J.

He's still a very visible figure. It should be the official portrait for, say someone like Nixon, who is dead, but GHW is still very active and speaks a lot. Mike 03:18, May 23, 2004 (UTC)

All of the other presidents have either their official portrait or their official photo. Jimmy Carter is also "very active and speaks a lot," and Wikipedia is using his presidential photo. Same deal for Bill Clinton. Chrisn4255 21:26, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

Spaces in H. W.

Should there be spaces between the "H" and "W"? Shouldn't it be "George H.W. Bush" instead? User:MikeAssad

There shouldn't be any spaces. 69.19.2.225 05:18, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The funeral pic in this article

Unlike the Barbara Bush article, this one has copious white space. Is there any other good reason to have it gone from here? WhisperToMe 05:41, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

In the funeral pic, he is not the main subject. There is good reason to find one that is more relevant to the subject at hand. I'm sure many exist online. The Reagan library one already portrays all the fmr presidents.--Jiang 00:27, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

okay...added some more. --Jiang 01:43, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

Gerald Ford and George Bush Sr. are 7th Cousins

For my fellow genealogy buffs. President Gerald Rudolph Ford and George Herbert Walker Bush "Sr." are 7th cousins. Their common ancestors are Hendrick “Henry” Vanderburgh b.1685/86 and Maria Magdalena Knight . Their family’s resided in the Dutchess County, New York area. Lori Brill McKee lbrill@kdsi.net

Iran-Contra

Shouldn't there be some information on Bush's involvement in Iran-Contra and his midnight pardons of the major Iran-Contra players like Caspar Weinberger?KrJnX 15:44, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Go for it! Off the top of my head, Bush was cleared by the Congressional committee, and no charges against him were presented to the grand jury by the Office of the Independent Counsel. The other five pardoned by him on December 24, 1992 were Alan Fiers, Robert MacFarlane(sp?), Clair George, Duane Clarridge(sp?), and Elliott Abrams. Hope that's enough to get you started. Ellsworth 17:15, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Zapata Oil

Removing this until a source is cited

Bush ran a company called Zapata Oil which is rumoured to have operated as a CIA front and to have been involved in the Bay of Pigs fiasco.

Articles should not include mere rumors unless they are in and of themselves significant in some way.

Ellsworth 17:34, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Quote

One quote, and it's that athiest quote? I don't doubt he said that, but it hardly seems representative. He isn't all that well known for his position on athiesm. How about "Read my lips, no new taxes"? How about something relating to the invasion of Iraq?

"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God." [http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=George_H.W._Bush_and_the_Atheists]

I removed from article. Disinfopedia is not, I think, regarded as a reliable NPOV source. Am I right on this? Ellsworth 19:27, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Gulf war

I edited the paragraph on the Gulf war and Bush's reasons for not going further–the section made it look like the US did not invade Iraq in 1991, when it did - it occupied a section of territory south of the Euphrates river until the cease-fire agreement. Ellsworth 23:15, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Reagan link

Whats with that Reagan link in the table on the right? (edit) sorry, I understand now. I think it is a bit confusing though...

---

What's confusing about it? 69.19.2.225 12:27, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Incorrect Successor

The bio lists George H.W. Bush's successor as Vice President as Albert Gore. In fact, his successor was his own VP Dan Quayle.

I assume that Mr. Gore is listed because he came into office when a Democratic Administration took office, ending the control of the Executive Branch the Republicans maintained since 1981.

If so, this assumes a relationship between political parties and the Consititional offices of the Executive branch that does not exist, at least formally. The US Constitution does not make any reference to political parties and office holders do not represent the parties.

Whatever the reason, the line of Vice Presidential succession was from George H.W. Bush to J. Danforth Quayle.

Political history section

It seems someone deleted any history of his time before becoming President way back in November, and for some reason the vandalism was never caught (! - see [1]). I've added this back into the article, with the exception of the line about him in the CIA. I don't know if this is accurate, but a google on 'bush 1959 cia' [2] throws up a lot of links that look mildly, um, suspicious. Fails the sniff test, that sort of thing; as such, I've left it out for now. (The removed sentence, incidentally, was "It is believed he joined the CIA as agent in 1959, and was involved in the Bay of Pigs Invasion in Cuba in 1961." - it was originally the first line under "Rise in politics", to save anyone looking for it. Shimgray 21:22, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Also missing is any mention of the invasion of Panama "Operation Just Because".(SJL)

objectiveness

Again, I am amazed at the level of detail that is spent on embellishing any derogatory implications in this article and the article on George W. Bush, yet the lack of detail on other articles, such as the one on Bill Clinton. In fact, if there is a mention of a derogatory implication in Bill Clinton's article, it is then justified by mentioning that someone in the Republican party had once been accused of the same incident(which I see no documentation of). I certainly hope that people, especially young impressionable folks, will also compare the objectiveness of your authors and view a lot of this as one sided commentary. baby boomer

What, specifically, do you mean? 69.19.2.225 12:29, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

American Indian Ancestors

George Herbert Walker Bush and his son George Walker Bush are the first USA Presidents descended from American Indians -- the Wampanoags of Massachusetts and Narragansett (tribe) of Rhode Island.

So the Rule by American Indians or Breeds of their own land "returns" after being lost 300 years before.

That's interesting; can you show this descent?

Here it is , adding real tomahawk power to the "chief" of CINC / commander in "chief" ...

rejected important addition to main article)

<<

Early American Ancestors

Through George Herbert Walker's American Indian ancestors, his two

descendants, the two Bush Presidents of the USA ([[George Herbert Walker

Bush]] and his son George Walker Bush), claim to be the only two American

Indian descended US Presidents in US History. It is popular today to claim American Indian ancestry, and proof is difficult to come by. There is a perceived political benefit from such claims, so the reader should not assume this claim is valid unless presented with proof.

These American Indian ancestors included sachems or chiefs of the

Narragansett (tribe) of Rhode Island and Wampanoag tribe of

Massachussetts.

Source to Walker Bush American Indian ancestors

The Bush Family (2004) ISBN 0-595-66806-2 Language English 290 pages

giving the line to today as follows :

1 Tashtassuck - Sachem of the Narragansett Tribe b: ab 1530 d: aft 1620

2 Wessonsuoum of the Narragansett Tribe b: bef 1520

 + Keneschoo of the Narragansett Tribe b: ab 1525

3 CANONICUS - SACHEM OF THE NARRAGANSETT TRIBE b: 1562 d: 4 JUN 1647

 + Posh-Pw - of the Narragansett Tribe b: 1565

4 Daughter of Canonicus - Princess of the Narragansett Tribe b: 1567

 + IYANNOUGH - SACHEM OF THE WAMPANOAG TRIBE b: 1554 d: 1641

5 IYANNOUGH - SACHEM OF THE WAMPANOAG TRIBE b: 1595 d: 1623

 + "Mary" Noepe - Princess of the Wampanoag Tribe b: ABT 1597

6 MARY HYANNO of the WAMPANOAG TRIBE b: ab 1623 d: 1660

 + Augustine (Immigrant, 1638 “Confidence”) Bearse b: 1618 d: aft 1686

7 Sarah (President Bush Ancestor) Bearse b: 28 MAR 1646 d: 30 MAR 1712

 + John (President Bush Ancestor) Hamlin b: 26 JUN 1644 d: 1718

8 Ebenezer Hamlin b: 12 MAY 1683 d: 1736

 + Thankful Hamlin b: 24 AUG 1689 d: 15 JAN 1768

9 Thankful Hamblin b: 6 AUG 1715 d: AFT 1768

 + Joseph Bangs b: 30 JAN 1713 d: ABT 1757

10 Lemuel Bangs b: 31 DEC 1739 d: 9 MAY 1824

 + Rebecca Keeler b: 29 APR 1751 d: 24 FEB 1812

11 Elijah Keeler Bangs b: 4 JUN 1780 d: 13 SEP 1846

 + Esther Stackhouse b: 17 OCT 1787 d: 27 SEP 1819

12 Mary Ann Bangs b: 15 JUN 1817 d: AFT 1876

 + Joseph Ambrose Beaky b: 14 JUN 1818 d: 27 JAN 1858

13 Martha Adela Beaky b: 1 JUN 1841 d: 1 JUL 1917

 + David Davis Walker b: 19 JAN 1840 d: 4 OCT 1918

14 George Herbert Walker b: 11 JUN 1875 d: 24 JUN 1953

 + Lucretia "Loulie" Wear b: 17 SEP 1874 d: 28 AUG 1961

15 Dorothy Walker b: 1 JUL 1901 d: 19 NOV 1992

 + Sen. Prescott Sheldon Bush b: 15 MAY 1895 d: 8 OCT 1972

16 PRESIDENT GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH b: 12 JUN 1924 d: Living

 + FIRST LADY BARBARA PIERCE b: 8 JUN 1925 d: Living

17 PRESIDENT GEORGE WALKER "DUBYA" BUSH b: 6 JUL 1946 d: Living

 + FIRST LADY LAURA LANE WELCH b: 1946 d: Living

  18 Living (twin) Bush 
  18 Living (twin) Bush 

17 GOV. JOHN ELLIS "JEB" BUSH b: 11 FEB 1953 d: Living

 + Living Gallo

>>

Bush ancestors

I've heard that George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush (our current president) are related to the British Royal Family, whose descendants include Ret. Gen. Colin Powell and Sen. John Kerry (who ran against Bush jr. in the 2004 election). Genealogists compiled the Bush family tree that indicates and denotes ancestry to the Hanovers and Windsors, plus the possibility the Bush family also descended from the Spanish Hapsburgs and Spanish king Carlos V is a distant relative. It's widely said Colin Powell, a Jamaican-American with European "white" blood had a great-grandfather was a duke and surely related to Prince Charles, the heir of the British throne. Can anyone send me a link to verify the source of these findings in the Bush family ancestry? --Mike D 26 20:16, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Earliest Bush Family Ancestors

Books detailing earliest family tree for Bush Family and other US Presidents at this link

(and showing descent from Mohammed, Jesus / Holy Grail Family , India Emperors and China Emperors, and heroes Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Mark Anthony; Kings across all Europe and the Middle East, including Kings of Jerusalem , and including tyrants Nero's family and Herod ...

bamm.com link to books with other early ancestors of Bush family

/ early Bush family ancestors

Thanks and nevermind what I said...a fellow Wiki has the links I been looking for. In the future, I could edit the articles (G.W. Bush and G.H.W. Bush) to add the ancestry information. Wikipedia expects us to keep a footnote on the sources of any recently added/reverted info. However, any actual lineage from Jesus Christ, Mohammed and emperors of Japan crosses theological boundaries. But the Bushes aren't qualified to be "gods" or deities no matter what their family tree shows, like they are holders of the holy grail...LoL. --Mike D 26 20:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

"Blue states"

I think this line should be modified:

including Pennsylvania, Illinois, and California, which have since gained the reputation as "blue states" that favor the Democratic Party in presidential elections.

Pennsylvania is considered a swing state that only very mildly favors Democrats, unlike the other two which were considered all but impossible for the younger Bush to win in the 2004 election.

Maryland might be a better choice. More a thought than a complaint, I suppose.

69.19.2.225 12:26, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of red states and blue states, has anyone else noticed that on the US map that shows the results of electoral colleges by state, the Republican victories are blue states and the Democrat victories are red states? Perhaps this can be fixed. 210.216.45.65 08:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC) Anonymous

Amassador Bush?

What is your source for this "official protocol"? I googled "Ambassador Bush" and couldn't find any present-day references to Bush by that name. And besides, wouldn't his highest previously held title be Vice President or President of the Senate? --Canoeguy81 06:43, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

He was the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations from 1971 to 1972, then the US Envoy to China in 1974-1975.

1988 Campaign

I dropped the bit about "Dukakis inherited the program and played no part in deciding whether to furlough Horton". True, the program began under Frank Sargent, but Dukakis vetoed legislation which would have made prisoners of Horton's class ineligible for furlough. He supported furloughs until the spring of 1988 when the publicity from the Horton case impelled the Mass. legislature to abolish it. Ellsworth 20:13, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I dropped this portion of a sentence about Horton:

furlough program administered by a Republican Governor, but conotated to have been administered by Dukakis (1990 CQ Almanac 487).

As noted, the furlough program was instituted under Frank Sargent, but Horton actually escaped during Dukakis's second (nonconsecutive) term as governor, in 1986. Therefore, at that time, the program was in fact being "administered" by Dukakis, to the extent that the governor had any hand in "administering" it. Ellsworth 00:05, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

NOTE: If you look up Barbara Bush's wiki it shows that they had 6 children, but here on George H.W. Bush's wiki it shows they have 7. Which is it?

Barbara's page is probably leaving out Pauline Robinson Bush ("Robin") who died in childhood. Mwanner 20:33, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

No, George & Barbara did have 6 children (including Robin). 1)George W. Bush (b.1946), 2)Pauline R. "Robin" Bush (1949-53), 3)John Ellis "Jeb" Bush (b.1953), 4)Neal Mellon Bush (b.1955), 5)Marvin Pierce Bush (b.1956) & 6)Dorothy Bush (married) (b.1959). Mightberight/wrong 15:57, 1 November 2005

NPOV Dispute

This page is pretty quiet. Is there still a need for the NPOV marker? Willhsmit 28 June 2005 18:44 (UTC)

NPOV Dispute

I don't think it does, I made some changes myself to rather "non-encyclopedia" style adjectives. Others still have problems?

My feeling is that unless there is an actual argument going on, then the marker should be removed. DJ Clayworth 8 July 2005 16:22 (UTC)

Havill's allegation that HW could have been Deep Throat

I have pulled the following from the article on the assumption that it is now only of historical interest:

It has been alleged by Watergate researcher Adrian Havill that there is a possibility that Bush could have been the infamous leaker "Deep Throat" of Watergate fame. Havill, in a letter to poynter.org, said he began to suspect Bush when the President's son, current-President Bush, who dislikes the press, gave Bob Woodward seven hours of interviews for his first book on the latter's administration. Also, during the time Bush was Ambassador to the United Nations in New York he would return to his Washington home on weekends, which Havill alleges to have coincided with seven of the eight known meetings between Deep Throat and Woodward.

Havill claimed that Bush had motives for embarassing President Nixon, because in 1970 Nixon had urged Bush to leave his "safe" seat in Congress, hinting that there would be a position as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury available to him if he failed to win Yarborough's U.S. Senate seat. When Bush lost, Nixon changed his mind and asked him to take up the UN post instead. Havill also alleged that the Nixon hinted that Bush could be a potential replacement for Vice President Spiro Agnew on the 1972 Republican ticket. Instead, in 1973, he was assigned the low-profile job as Chairman of the Republican National Committee. Bush would later be the first high-level Nixon administration official to request that the Nixon resign to end the ongoing Watergate scandal. The allegation of Bush being Deep Throat was debunked On May 31, 2005, when retired FBI Assistant Director W. Mark Felt revealed himself to be "Deep Throat."

I suppose someone might want to try to salvage some of the second para? Tends to run pretty deep into constructions like "Havill also alleged that Nixon hinted that Bush could be..." for my taste. Mwanner July 7, 2005 00:52 (UTC)

RE: Havill's allegation that HW could have been Deep Throat

I added all those "hinted" and "alleged" because the previous version basically assumed these were given facts (which they certainly aren't. I agree, unless there is some evidence all this Nixon/Bush slighting, etc. (which would assume Havill has some concrete evidence of these events) I suggest it be nixed. I tried to tone it down so it was at least tolerable.

Bush's anti-atheist comment..

Are you sure this is disinformation? I've seen it all over the internet and haven't seen any dispute.

"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

This is reported to have been said by GHWB during an interview with Robert I Sherman, a reporter for the American Atheist news journal while at O'Hare International Airport on August 27, 1987. It is definitely all over the Internet but this at least provides a source: http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/aa011.htm

Accuracy not withstanding, this is one of the worst run-on sentences I've ever seen. Also, most of the detail here seems irrelevant. I've edited this down to the salient point. I normally wouldn't post in an article's talk about such an edit, but this feels like a hot button issue. (full disclosure: I'm an atheist that is appropriately enraged by the suggestion that those who believe there is no god cannot be patriots.) Pokerriot 07:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Bushes?

This line is right at the beginning of the post-presidency section: "Since his final election campaign, Bush has largely retired from public life. The Bushes live in Houston, Texas and their summer home in Kennebunkport, Maine."

Is Bushes really the correct thing here? Cookiecaper 18:37, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

No, I don't think so. Since it's a last name (and doesn't end with an 's') then it should be Bushs. - August 29, 2005

Trawler Strafing Story

This accusation that is stated as fact without naming his accuser. I see justification is given in the edit comment as The Observer August 8 1993 page 15. Is that a British weekly paper being referred to there? Way back on page 15 no less? The only thing I could find on this accusation which unfortunately predates the internet (only found on fairly fringe websites at that) is that The Observer interviewed Manuel Noriega at that time, who repeated unproven allegations on the subject. keith 09:43, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

What accuser? It's a violation of the GC to strafe lifeboats, so if he did it he clearly violated the GC. You don't need an accuser to point out that obvious fact. Sorry about the lame source, but it was the best I could do with Lexis/Nexis, which I don't think has very thorough coverage that far back. I recall reading articles in the Atlantic Monthly and seeing network news reports back in 93, but then I can't cite my memory. But I still don't see why the current source is inadequate, and the article I read (which I can email to you if you like, but I won't post it due to copyvio concerns) does not mention Noriega. Gamaliel 20:30, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. In fact the Geneva Convention only applies to strafing unarmed vessels. Which is a good example of why you should give sources for legal opinions and not state them as fact, or you end up with egg on your face as well. Because according to [3] in [4], which took me about 30 seconds to find, the entire controversy in 1993 died when divers "found mounds of small arms munitions lying on the deck, as well as a large gun mount laying on its side with a munitions box nearby that contained 75 mm anti-aircraft shells". They even give pictures. keith 01:24, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I still don't think you need a lawyer to state the obvious, but in any case the new information you found has rendered the matter moot. Apparently the boats were not lifeboats as the news sources indicated. Congratulations on your speedy searching skills; I didn't think that google would be much use on a ten year old news story so I limited my search to Lexis/Nexis. Gamaliel 01:34, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

1989 - 1997?

Factually wrong, it shows that American Rightwingers enjoy trying to "Rewrite" History. Right Wingers in he US are like the Tories, they change the facts to suit themselves. The Presidents "daddy" was in power from 1989 - 1993. In 1993 William Clinton became President.

Pat Robertson claimed George H. W. Bush contains the antichrist

On January 14th 1991 On his television show The 700 Club, Pat Robertson declared: "You say you're supposed to be nice to the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians and the Methodists and this, that, and the other thing. Nonsense, I don't have to be nice to the spirit of the Antichrist."

Bush 41 was president in 1991 and he's an Episcopalian.

A prediction in the prophecies of Nostradamus was that the AC / AntiChrist comes from "beyond Cathay" - or the Pacific Ocean (which is beyond Cathay) and noting that Bush Sr was shot down in the Pacific and miraculously rescued.

In addition, Nostradamus in using acronyms to disguise on purpose persons to prevent his having troubles with officials , repeatedly referred to an/ the AC / Antichrist figure as "Mabus" - which some decode to be Am(erican)Bus(h)- the Ma being transposed to Am.

References

Why the long further reading section when we don't have a single reference, which is much more important? If any of the books mentioned were used as sources, please, let's cite them as references. Johnleemk | Talk 12:01, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Where's the Republican VP candidates template?

The list of Republican Party VP candidates (from Dayton to Cheney), is missing. Mightberight/wrong 15:47, 1 November 2005

Zapata Oil

What drivel.

Bushuru or Bushusuru?

The cited source for this trivia, Metro Newspapers [5] states that the spelling for this Japanese verb is "bushuru", yet an anonymous editor has changed the text [6] asserting that the correct spelling is "bushusuru". Is there anyone from Japan who could help resolve this dispute? Hall Monitor 23:55, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I am certain that any native speaker will agree that bushuru is incorrect; any person taking a first year course in Japanese knows that the verbiage is all wrong. Just find a high school Japanese teacher, they'll tell you the same. I mean, come on! There is some precedence to the whole mistranslation; Gojira, Godzilla?--69.212.39.19 07:40, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately I do not have immediate access to a Japanese language teacher. After doing some additional research, I have located a book, "Secret Lives of the U.S. Presidents" (Quirk Books, 2004, ISBN 1-931686-57-2) which does in fact refer to this verb as "bushusuru". What I have done is left an in-line comment that the Metro Newspaper did refer to the verb as "bushuru" so that a more qualified language expert can make the necessary changes to the article later. For now it is best that both sources are cited. Hall Monitor 19:38, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Combines father and son

The section titled "Bush Before Presidency" is inexplicably about George W Bush, 43rd President, not George HW Bush, 41st President. I'm not a Presidential scholar and hate to edit this article, but that's wrong.

Iran hostage crisis

User:Belginusanl continues to make misleading changes to this page, as well as Iran hostage crisis and October surprise conspiracy. The conspiracy has been widely discredited, and more specifically, Bush's alleged involvement was shown by Newsweek to be false (he was in another place when he was supposed to be in Paris, etc). I feel that any discussion of the conspiracy should include the fact that it has been generally discredited, as to suggest otherwise (or simply not to make a statement about it) is misleading to the point of pushing a POV. Simishag 23:23, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Infobox question

Because George H. W. Bush was both a president and a vice president, would anybody mind me changing the code at the beginning of the page to make the page similar to William Howard Taft who was both a chief justice and president? I want to do it merely so that the flow of successor/predecessor in the chain of vice presidents is not broken. --MZMcBride 03:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Pro-choice or Pro-life

I've heard some claim Bush 41 was pro-choice. Any facts on this?--69.249.195.232 00:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

• There is an apocryphal story that Barbara was, but that she had to keep quiet because GHWB was publicly pro-life. --evrik 00:30, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

This character was president of a populous nation that liked to throw its weight around, is partly responsible for the darling Dubya, and has made millions. I expect the article to be full of what he did to the US and the world. But no: we read, inter alia, a whole uninteresting paragraph about some reference in The Simpsons. Can't somebody make a Simpsonspedia and chuck all this stuff there? Or do I misunderstand and must WP articles be written to satisfy thirteen-year-olds?

If this stuff really is trivia (as I think), cut it. If it isn't, move it or at least retitle it. -- Hoary 15:06, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

GA nomination ... failed

I am placing this article's GA nomination on hold for 7 days to address a few fixes. Overall a great article - only a few things strike me as needing to be fixed. Primarily, although the article is cited, I think it needs footnotes in several key places so readers can easily tell where the passage is sourced and verified. By "key places" I mean passages that are potential fodder for edit wars, such as statements about Bush changing his position on various issues. I request the following fixes:

• In the section "Postwar: Yale, family, oil business", a footnote citation for the Skull and Bones involvement since it is a theme in the article.
• In the section "Congressman and failed Senate campaigns", a footnote citation for the following paragraph, especially the comment about being called "Rubbers". If no citation is available, the paragraph should be removed:

During his career in the USA House of Representative Bush was very supportive of contraceptives and family planning. So much so that he was known as "Rubbers". He was a supporter of Planned Parenthood, of which his father Prescott had been the financial chairman. He criticized Pope Paul VI for his encyclical Humanae Vitae which reiterated the Roman Catholic Church's opposition to contraceptives.

• The section "1980 presidential campaign" needs to be copyedited and wikified.
• In the same section, the statement "When Reagan chose Bush as his vice presidential nominee Bush had to change his stance on abortion, previously he had supported keeping it legal but after becoming Reagan's vice presidential nominee he was opposed to abortion." needs a footnote citation.
• I'm not sure why the sections "Tiananmen Square (April–June 1989)" and "Fall of the Berlin Wall (November 1989)" are in the article. They don't mention Bush. If kept, they should concisely summerize his notable policies regarding those events.

Thanks! --Aguerriero (talk) 17:40, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Altough some minor concerns were addressed, at least two major points weren't modified or addressed. Adding to this the non-stability of the article and the fact that there is some concern over the utility of the Trivia section, the article was failed. Lincher 17:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced statement: campaign finance

"Skull and Bones members provided support during his presidential campaign rallying huge sums of money for advertisment."

I have no idea whether this is true or not. 213.54.17.19, please cite your sources.--QuantumEngineer 22:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Date of Connection between Neil Mallon and Prescott Bush

"[Bush's] employer at Dresser, Neil Mallon, who was a close family friend dating back to Skull & Bones at Yale in 1918 along with Prescott."

According to the list of Bonesmen floating around the internet--see e.g.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/viewtopic.php?topic=37055&forum=4

Neil Mallon and Prescott Bush were both 1917 inductees, not 1918. This list doesn't look authoritative, but is there is a better source?72.61.73.16 23:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Abortion

As mentioned previously in the discussion page, this sentance needs a citation: "When Reagan chose Bush as his vice presidential nominee Bush had to change his stance on abortion, previously he had supported keeping it legal but after becoming Reagan's vice presidential nominee he was opposed to abortion." If one can't be found, should the sentance be removed? Arx Fortis 15:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I already have deleted that sentence, which I wrote. FDR | User talk:FDR 12:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I have now deleted all the information that I wrote in the article about Bush ever having been pro-choice. So could you cross out your criticism since the statement is no longer in the article at all. It is entirely up to you, just a suggestion. FDR | MyTalk 17:48 11 August 2006 (UTC)

What criticism? I simply asked for a reference. Arx Fortis 23:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

13 links

Do we really need 13 links to the same site (www.presidency.ucsb.edu)? Can't we select a "main" link. If people can find his article on Wikipedia, they should be able to find what they want there. Arx Fortis 03:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Since there is no discussion, I will clean up the External Links section. I see no reason to list that many links to different pages on the same cohesive website.

Vandalism

There was an inordinate amount of vandalism in the "Trivia" section of this article. Can an administrator ban the IP which is responsible? The IP is 70.16.153.92. I'd do it myself, but I'm still a (relatively) new Wikipedian. Yale2010 18:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

This Article needs an Overhaul

It is difficult to discern fact from fiction in this article. This man is widely known to have a dark side (at least) and yet the whole article is a glowing review of his entire career. What about his father funding the Nazis, W.A. Harriman, Herbert Hoover, Nixon, Operation Zapata, the JFK assassination, etc.? Even the New World Order is given a thumbs-up! What if Wikipedia grows some balls and actually stands for consensus, democracy, and truth rather than the establishment line? Edit the crap out of this page!

Trivia Inaccuracy

In the Trivia section, it says: "He is the only President to have been a World War II U.S. Navy combat aviator. He was the last U.S. President to have been a veteran of that war. The other World War II veteans were Eisenhower; Kennedy; Johnson; Nixon; Ford; Carter; Reagan."

I can not find that Reagan was actaully in WWII (although he pretended to be on TV). Futhermore, Reagan was born in 1911, making him in his 30s when the war began....Perhaps this needs to be edited.

Reagan served in the U.S. Army stateside making training films.Awotter 07:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

George Herbert Walker Bush (born June 12, 1924) was the 41st President of the United States of America (1989–1993).

---

According tho this listing found in Wikipedia, George HW Bush was president of the US for 104 years. Someone care to edit the typo?

How do you figure that, 1993-1989 = 4 years. PPGMD 23:06, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I was mistaken about the typo

Two Proposals

First, there is a serious lack of information in this article regarding Bush's life up until 1964. For this reason, the article presents Bush as just a politician, rather than a (crooked) businessman who got into politics, and frankly, all the info on his various senate races, etc., is really frickin' BORING. SO the first suggestion is to add to the early sections of his life, especially Business Ventures. Second, I propose that the tables at the end, with the names of who preceded and succeeded Bush in every office he held, are meaningless and uninformative and should be removed. All in Favor?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alex Laubin (talk • contribs) 02:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I think more information on his early life would be useful, and I think the tables on who preceded and succeeded Bush should stay. --Pixelface 11:03, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Requested minor edits

This article has been protected against editing by anonymous or new users, allegedly due to a spate of vandalism. Unfortunately, this policy has either not deterred newer vandalism, or was implemented without carefully removing all instances of old vandalism. For example, the "Early Years" section refers to President Bush in one instance as "Shrub," even though this term properly refers to his elder son, is not appropriate for a Wikipedia article, and is not anteceded by any sort of "George, sometimes known as 'Shrub,'" introduction (and is therefore probably jarring and/or confusing for users who don't recognize the (incorrect) reference.)

Bush siblings

In the "Marriage, Yale, and Skull & Bones" section, GHWB's children are listed as: George Walker Bush, Pauline Robinson Bush ("Robin", 1949-1953, died of leukemia), John Ellis "Jeb" Bush, Neil Mallon Bush, Marvin Bush, and Dorothy Walker Bush. The link to the last one, Dorothy, goes to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Walker_Bush">Dorothy Walker Bush (July 1, 1901 - November 19, 1992)</a>. The current president GWBush has a sister Dora Bush Koch, I believe. Someone please fix this. Thanks

Did Bush actually say this?

I was reading this essay by Ward Churchill which attributes the following quote to GHWB: "The world must learn that what we say, goes." Does any editor know whether he really said that? Dianelos 11:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

2 typos

"labelled" should be "labeled" under the 1980 presidential campaign section. American spelling, and all.

"phillosophical" should be "philosophical" under the Trivia section. Thanks. --198.185.18.207 16:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing those out; I've fixed it now. Flcelloguy (A note?) 03:02, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Man, SEMI just off... I could have done them myself. Oh well... --198.185.18.207 19:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC)