Debate, or how to say the same thing over and over again
Bush is a parrot. Kerry at least knows what he is talking about. Bush tries desperatly to appeal to the Middle Class in America. His whole Political Persona is based on his being a plain ole' ordinary country guy. Just a cowboy out on the range.
He tried to say that he was looking out for ordinary Americans and cited the Pell Grants as an accomplishment. Well, the Truth has never been an area where this President has been familiar with. The reality is much less attractive than you would be led to believe if you listen to Bush.
"In the 2000 campaign, Bush promised a maximum grant of $5,100 for each freshman. When Bush released his budget in February, it capped the maximum Pell Grant award to $4,050 for the third year in a row, and the American Association of Community Colleges called it a freeze that would be "a severe blow" to students from low-income families at a time of declining state and local support for public higher education. The White House has argued that the program has a $3.7 billion shortfall, and that raising the maximum award while making the shortfall worse would be irresponsible..."
Talk about Flip Flopping!
No Child Left A Dime
Bush's 2004 budget cut funding for after-school programs from $1 billion to $600 million
It was probably waste anyway though. You know how this Presiden likes to cut spending... Uhh well spending on anything but Bombs.
The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that spending on the war on terrorism and homeland security is responsible for only a small portion of the overall reversal of the deficit, while Bush's tax cuts account for much of the reduction resulting from policy initiatives.
The War is an area where Bush can spend as much as he likes. He can say "look I'm just trying to keep you safe from the shadowy terrorists, the forces of darkness, evildoers, haters and extermists. I have to spend this money because we cannot give in to terror." But we are doing just that. We are giving in to terror. We are allowing this President to lead us down a path of dispair and fear, giving up Civil Rights and creating an atmosphere of mistrust an xenophobia.
Great!
If Bush thinks we should lead the World by example then what the next few years hold for us is a World full of bombs, guns, and W's MD. Isolationism, fear, and desperation. THat is where this President's vision will take the Country.
Personally I'd rather have a President like Kerry who at least wants to try and be civil with the other nations. Anyone who says that it doesn't matter what Germany or France thinks about us 'cause "we are just gonna kick their f*(^g Ass" has never left home. The fact is that other countries are as civilized and have better standards of living in a lot of cases.
The way Bush discredits Federal Healthcare is another example of his double and triple standards. If you use his logic, anything that the Federal Government does is wasteful and innefficient. Why then does he want Homeland Security to be a Federal agency? Why do we have a Military? the answer that he will never give is that there are some services that can not be provided by the private sector as efficently and comprehensively as a Federal program. He should tell all the people living in Europe that their Healthcare system sucks and see how they react.... Oh wait they already have reacted to him... They HATE him. Arrogant, swaggering and dismissive. Great qualities for an asshole but not a President of America.
The debate was a waste of time. Nothing new was said. I hate the whole process. No real questions. Just crap. I am already tired and the heat is just starting to get cranked up.
Any thoughts?
posted by Mistake Master @ 8:27 AM
4 Comments:
Hey, right wing wacko brother here to bring you back to earth. Hehehe.
Pell Grants - 72 million given away. How much more should the government take from all of us in order to give it to someone else?
Idea, what happens if a student flunks out? They don't have to give anything back right? It's a grant after all. I'm opposed to grants altogether. Make it a subsidized loan.
No Child Left Behind - again, similar comment as above. How much really is enough? Is there a point that it becomes too much? Or should people have an unlimited supply of government teats to suckle themselves upon?
Here's a radical thought. Take the revenue that is saved from this and GIVE IT BACK TO THE TAXPAYERS. That's a bad idea though right? After all, the "rich" pay the lions share of the taxes in this country anyway.
but Stew the money was there already. Don't mistake what I am saying. First of all I don't think there should be a tax break for having more children. I think after three kids a family should have to pay more than a single person or a small family of five. Personally I think two kids is enough. I know that it bothers a lot of people who are going to say that if we don't keep having a lot of kids then who will pay for our retirement???!! Any way I think that the more one uses the more they should have to pay. I think taxes (here you go Kevin) should be higher on SUV's. I think you should be taxed higher on a Hummer than a Volvo wagon. It is a less efficient automobile. That should be reflected in the money used to support the infrastructure that it is used in. Now if you want to just do away with roads then that is fine too. Then we will not need to tax anybody. So back to the Pell grants. Right low interest loans. But still a lot of students from low income families can't get a loan, or a loan would not cover all the expenses. I think it is good use of the money. I'd rather see it go there than to Israel to build a new Wall. Or go to GE for a bomb. Or go to the oil companies so that they can get subsidized. Do you realize that if we payed what a gallon of gas really cost to get to the pump, AT the pump, we would be paying the same or more than those Socialist Bastards across the pond there in Europe? ive that money to the poor kids. There is plenty for everybody. How much crap do we need? Poeple in America coluld simplify and save more money than Bush's tax cut would ever give them. And And! we would need Bush. The single issue voters would not need to show up 'cause the taxes were not going to line the pockets of the already rich.
Radical Dude!
There was only one candidate that said that we need to completely overhaul the Tax Code, Forbes!
I with you on and Dennis Hasert on the idea of a consumption or a Value Added Tax, but most democrats are against it, why?
Because that current tax code, does stick it to the rich, imagine paying 45-50% of your income to the governement. No wonder good tax accountants and tax lawyers make sooo much money.
Think Republican, think Tax Reform!
Kev
Er, see when you say "the money was there already", you underscore the tax positive attitude. The money wasn't there. It was TAKEN. By force.
Post a Comment
<< Home