posted
We really are all Americans who love this country and only want the best for our children and grandchildren. We just don't agree on how to achieve this. Just because someone doesn't agree with us doesn't mean they are evil and venal. It is that kind of thinking that has divided us for too long.
For the last 20 years, the only Presidents we have had were Clintons or Bushs. Everybody happy with where we are in our country after these 20 years? What do you think, time for a change?
Let's remember what is at stake in this election.
- Do you believe that a woman should not have a right to choose (except, of course in the case of rape or incest)? If you do - vote for McCain.
- Do you believe that the Republicans or the Democrats should pick the next 3 Supreme Court justices? Are you happy with Justices like Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas?- If you are - Vote for McCain.
- Do you believe that the war in Iraq should continue on its present course and is worth its cost in American lives and wealth?- If you do - Vote for McCain.
- Do you believe that we should continue to spend billions in Iraq but we shouldn't give our troops a 3.9% pay increase?- If you do - Vote for McCain.
- Do you believe that the present health care system in the United States works and it is okay to have 30 million Americans with no health care and another 40 million with only the most minimal and inadequate of coverage - If you do - Vote for McCain.
- Do you believe that the Bush tax "cuts" which benefit only the richest 10% of Americans should be made permanent and there shouldn't be a tax break for those families making less than $100,000 a year?- If you do - Vote for McCain.
- Do you believe that United States foreign policy works just fine and we should be afraid to talk to our enemies?- If you do - Vote for McCain.
- Do you believe that the energy policy we have that has led to $4.25 gas and is based on begging the Saudis to please give us more oil (like Oliver asking Fagin for more portage)- If you do - vote for McCain.
- Do you believe that Bush's policies on the war on terror have worked and made American more safe?- If you do - Vote for McCain.
If you don't believe these things - then Vote for Obama.
I don't know about you, but I can't wait to see a debate between McCain and Obama with 100 million Americans watching. Who do you think will look more impressive and will inspire us?
I have finally made my decision, I want to vote for Obama. I am no longer on the fence. Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a Muslim smuckers obama opposes everything you claim you believe in. There is nothing more opposite than a liberal in the west and a muslim.
By the way...Obama will continue to the war and 95% pof our present policies.
Posts: 1023 | From: The spirit of Horemheb lives within us all | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hammer, name a candidate which is going to side with everything I believe?? Your argument holds no water.
Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by With a name like Smuckers: I have finally made my decision, I want to vote for Obama. I am no longer on the fence.
With a name like Smuckers its must be good! Welcome aboard Smuckers.
May 24, 2008
Some Republican leaders criticize McCain campaign
Herald Tribune Saturday, May 24, 2008
Excerpts:
John McCain's presidential campaign is in a troubled stretch even before his formal nomination, hindered by resignations of staff members, a lagging effort to build a national campaign organization and questions over whether he has taken full advantage of Democratic turmoil to present a case for his candidacy, some of his fellow Republican leaders say.
Some Republicans said they were concerned that the Democrats would soon unify around Obama, and that it was only a matter of weeks before Obama begins unloading a huge round of advertising aimed at defining McCain. If that happens, they said, McCain may soon look back at this period as a time of missed opportunity.
Some leaders of state Republican party organizations said they were apprehensive about the unusual organization that McCain has set up: the campaign has been broken into 10 semi-autonomous regions, with each having power over such things as buying television advertising and the candidate's schedule, decisions normally left to headquarters.
More than that, they said, McCain organizationally still seems far behind where President George W. Bush was in his re-election campaign in 2004. Several Republican Party leaders said they were worried the McCain campaign was losing an opportunity as they waited for approval to open offices and set up telephone banks.
"They finally assigned someone to West Virginia three weeks ago," said Doug McKinney, the state Republican chairman there. "I had a couple of contacts with him and I e-mailed him twice and I never heard back. I finally called and they said that the guy had resigned."
McCain's campaign has transmitted conflicting messages in recent days about how he would present himself, as he has tried to reassure conservatives nervous about his ideological consistency even as he has tried to expand his appeal to moderates and liberals.
"How do you measure success over the course of the spring campaign?" Schmidt said. "This is how: The reality of this race is the Republican Party brand is very, very badly damaged, in some places broken. We've lost Congressional seats in districts that have elected only Republicans for a generation. And Senator McCain is running even or ahead of Senator Obama in most national polls."
Last Sunday, he invited Mike Murphy, his longtime friend and political adviser, who is not involved in this campaign, to his home in Virginia. There, Murphy reportedly gave him a detailed and, at times, tough assessment of what McCain had done wrong.
Murphy urged him to tone down his attacks on Obama and stop coming across as so angry. He recommended that McCain concentrate on running as a reform candidate to strip that issue from Obama, and to make greater efforts to distance himself from Bush, according to Republicans familiar with the conversation.
Some of McCain's associates said that McCain may be interested in bringing Murphy back on board but that his current circle of advisers was resisting that.
McCain's associates said the campaign had failed to anticipate the extent to which the news media would use the policy to examine McCain's staff. The result was a run of damaging stories and resignations that highlighted not the policy itself but the backgrounds of top campaign officials, including Rick Davis, the campaign manager, and Black, both of whom have long lobbying backgrounds.
Reed said he had been struck by the apparent lack of coordination between the White House and McCain, pointing to last week when Bush gave a speech in Israel that was taken as an attack on Obama's foreign policy credentials on the same day that McCain was giving a speech in Ohio intended to lay out his vision for the presidency.
"The speech he gave in Ohio was probably the best speech of the campaign," he said. "That was just devastating."
McKinney, the Republican chairman in West Virginia, said McCain's identification with immigration legislation that would eventually permit some illegal immigrants to apply for citizenship continued to be highly problematic for him.
"But it doesn't matter what we think - Senator McCain goes his own way," McKinney said. "Always has and always will." - Source
.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You cannot be a Muslim and a western liberal at the same time smuckers. That would be like being a Nazi and a Jew at the same time. All of the social decadance that Muslims complain of in the west is sponsored by the left. Conservatives are the defenders of traditional values, for the most part.
Myra, Nobody said John McCain's campaign was not without problems but they will not be enough to lose to a black liberal. Democrats have not carried the white vote since 1964, that is why they usually lose presidential elections, it will be much worse this time around.
-------------------- The spirit of Horemheb lives on within us all. Posts: 1023 | From: The spirit of Horemheb lives within us all | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by With a name like Smuckers: Do you believe that we should continue to spend billions in Iraq but we shouldn't give our troops a 3.9% pay increase?- If you do - Vote for McCain.
Which Presidential Candidate is Really for Our Veterans?
Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America is the nation's first and largest group dedicated to the Troops and Veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the civilian supporters of those Troops and Veterans.
FAILING GRADES: McCain's record on supporting veterans is one of the worst in the Senate. IAVA has given him a grade of a "D" for voting against veterans' priorities so often between 2000 and 2006. A scorecard of roll call votes compiled by the Disabled American Veterans found that McCain has voted for veterans funding bills only 20 percent of the time. For example, in May 2006, he voted against an amendment providing $20 billion to the Department of Veteran Affairs's (VA) medical facilities.
In April 2006, he was one of just 13 senators to vote against providing $430 million to the VA for outpatient care " and treatment for veterans."
McCain has drailed against comprehensive universal health care and wants to give veterans the " freedom to choose to carry their V.A. dollars to a provider that gives them the timely care at high quality and in the best location." But as New York Times columnist Paul Krugman notes, "[T]he Veterans Health Administration is one of the few clear American success stories in the struggle to contain health care costs. ... [I]t's an integrated system -- a system that takes long-term responsibility for its clients' health -- to deliver an impressive combination of high-quality care and low costs." McCain's plan, however, would "privatize and, in effect, dismantle the V.A." In his narrow-sighted focus on eliminating earmarks, McCain may also cut funding for military housing.
posted
This is just nonsense. The VA is trying to close down many of its government run hospitals and let vets get their care from the same excellent system we all use. There is no one more pro military leader than john Mccain but he , like the majority of us, understand that the old system created after WW II has to be reformed. Care for the vets will actually improve. As for universal health care it is probably the stupidest idea proposed by civilized man. It is nothing more than a rationing system that will never pass here because it is too expensive. These people want to raise taxes and increase spending by over a trillion dollars.
Besides Myra, you do not really care about the American military.
-------------------- The spirit of Horemheb lives on within us all. Posts: 1023 | From: The spirit of Horemheb lives within us all | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." (Sign hanging in Einstein's office at Princeton) Leap and the Net will Appear. Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by With a name like Smuckers: Oh, now you're telling me how to be a Muslim? LOL
Hammer excels at telling people who they are and how they should be... Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The point is Myra that the article you used was dishonest. The VA has been in the process of phasing out of those old government run hospitals for some time. That being the case any effort to fund them and maintain them at their old levels will be resisted and defeated. What the writer did not say was that Senator McCain favors BETTER care for our vets through a reformed VA using private sector medicine.
These little socialists among us never fail to amuse me. All of the prosperity we have we have was built with capitalism. Drive down any major street in California and capitalism looks back at you everywhere you look. Socialism was rejected by the public in the United states a century ago. Further, socialism is a product of the industrial revolution. Since the 1950's we have moved from industrialism into the 'technological' revolution. Socialism will not work in a technological society. It would be very much like trying to reconsitute our economy on the old medieval manor system. Thus forward thinking people want to remove programs like the old VA from government control and reconstitute them in the private sector.
Posts: 1023 | From: The spirit of Horemheb lives within us all | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Hammer: The point is Myra that the article you used was dishonest. The VA has been in the process of phasing out of those old government run hospitals for some time. That being the case any effort to fund them and maintain them at their old levels will be resisted and defeated. What the writer did not say was that Senator McCain favors BETTER care for our vets through a reformed VA using private sector medicine.
These little socialists among us never fail to amuse me. All of the prosperity we have we have was built with capitalism. Drive down any major street in California and capitalism looks back at you everywhere you look. Socialism was rejected by the public in the United states a century ago. Further, socialism is a product of the industrial revolution. Since the 1950's we have moved from industrialism into the 'technological' revolution. Socialism will not work in a technological society. It would be very much like trying to reconsitute our economy on the old medieval manor system. Thus forward thinking people want to remove programs like the old VA from government control and reconstitute them in the private sector.
Hammer,
I am surprised you would say something like that about socialism! America is on the way to its benevelent socialsim and many times it is the dark side that promotes this view. The socalled moral majority in its many manifestation and permutations tries to enforce morality through laws and that is truly unjust! I am really bitter now!! America's benign socialist creeping policies have exceed even the former Soviet Union and satellite dupes with regards to tightening of civil liberties to such an extent that people are welcoming it with open arms!
Funny thing is that "illegals" come here as hard working people and their employers knowingly accept their services while looking the other way! 12 milllion illegals in the US but they cannot be found. How can John McCain vote against the education benefits for GI and those same VFW do not see behind the smoke screen and mirrors? John McCain's response is that if you make benefits too generous, people would not want to re-enlist? Does a GI have to go through 10 tours to see that benefit materialize? I swear that John McCain knows and realizes that when the tour durations goes up, a certain percentage of GI will never return to collect so more money, though less benefits that can be turned over for the set that comes home alive. If that is the play book strategy, then I do not want John McCain to be president.
P.S. I am a veteran! Semper fi
As we had exchanged notes before, John McCain, depsite his record, can still win due to Clintonesque Machiavellian street fighting that would cause her surrogates to go to McCain! If everyone play the party line, then the obvious choice has to be Obama! I say this because the talking head always pretend they vote the party but previous voting records have shown that when people become pissed off, they vote against their best interest and empower their rivals.
Tim Wise for President A True American Patriot, if there ever was one!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Hammer: The point is Myra that the article you used was dishonest. The VA has been in the process of phasing out of those old government run hospitals for some time. That being the case any effort to fund them and maintain them at their old levels will be resisted and defeated. What the writer did not say was that Senator McCain favors BETTER care for our vets through a reformed VA using private sector medicine.
These little socialists among us never fail to amuse me. All of the prosperity we have we have was built with capitalism. Drive down any major street in California and capitalism looks back at you everywhere you look. Socialism was rejected by the public in the United states a century ago. Further, socialism is a product of the industrial revolution. Since the 1950's we have moved from industrialism into the 'technological' revolution. Socialism will not work in a technological society. It would be very much like trying to reconsitute our economy on the old medieval manor system. Thus forward thinking people want to remove programs like the old VA from government control and reconstitute them in the private sector.
Hammer, have you ever been attended to at a VA clinic? I bet the answer is a soft, NO! That's because like Bush, you're a draft dodger, and have never worn a uniform. My point in all this is, you have no idea of the quality of the VA health care system except for what you may have heard third hand.
In the REAL world, Mr. Hammer, veterans can be afflicted with serious exposures and illnesses that the private sector cannot deal with. Once I was exposed to chemical agents which Army medical personnel who had been trained to handle such incidents quickly identified and responded appropriately by administering the proper counter agents, which they readily had on hand. I would hate to wonder how I would have fared in a private medical industry who make decisions on what not to stock based on their bottom line. No, Mr. Hammer, you can keep your republican owned privatized military health care system whose main priority would be to appease Shareholders and Wall street rather then the people they should serve. This form of capitalism you are so fond of hyping is at a serious inflection point. The managers and administrators are incapable of making their numbers by creating additional value, so they panic and make Wall street's numbers by cutting services, personel, and inventory. Usually, these things are vital to their growth and vitality, but they know no other way, so that's what they do. Anyone eager to inject our nations veterans into this type of system is just demented and of poor judgement.
Luckily, military brass are much smarter then you, and would never, ever, ever endorse such a bad decision. If you think military enrollment is alarmingly down now, if they enacted the tremendously stupid system you suggest, enlistment would decline another 40-50%.
Having FIRST hand experience in both the VA and private medical systems, I can tell you without any guess work or poorly informed opinion, the VA system beats any of the private HMOs such as Keiser, Blue Cross that I've been a part of. Really, there is no question about this, and if you were a veteran, you'd realize this also. But you're not, so your opinions are really, worthtless.
Hey Yazid, when I was active duty, beating up on marines was one of my favorite past times. Got 12 stitches in my head to prove it. -Muddog
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
TL you must be going off of the idea that since mostly the only thing America has going for her is her military anymore...except you seem to forget something. MOST Americans want more for our country than SIMPLY military.
You also seem to forget that it isn't the PRESIDENT who makes the military decisions, he has advisors who are experienced in these things, usually people he trusts, who give him the advice and he goes from there. You think Bush's time in the military (when he actually showed up when he didn't have his father fixing his papers for him) have given him experience to run an entire military the size of America? No way.
If you look at the history of American Presidents, sometimes it isn't about experience entirely. In fact, in my opinion the only person who can really ever have experience being President is...ummm, the President him/herself. But everyone is entitled to his/her own voice and vote, so I'm sure your own husband will be voting for McCain it seems. Best of luck.
Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: How can someone like Obama to be elected Commander-in-Chief if he never served in the military? That must be a joke IMHO!
Bush never served in the Military. Skipping out does not constitute service. The joke has been on us. Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Only 4 of the first 10 Presidents were military veterans. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison did not serve. (Jefferson & Madison were in a militia.)
Between 1908 and 1944 none of the Presidents was a veteran (we know Roosevelt could not have served if he wanted to).
Bill Clinton didn't serve, in fact, only twelve of our presidents served as generals:
1. George Washington 2. Andrew Jackson 3. William Henry Harrison 4. Zachary Taylor 5. Franklin Pierce 6. Andrew Johnson 7. Ulysses Simpson Grant 8. Rutherford Birchard Hayes 9. James Abram Garfield 10. Chester Allan Arthur 11. Benjamin Harrison 12. Dwight David Eisenhower
Serving in the military really has no bearing on the President - these days I think very little experience is necessary, as we can see with the current administration. Posts: 13440 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Gold joins arms with Smuckers to sing "coom by ya". Invites Myra to join us...
-------------------- "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." (Sign hanging in Einstein's office at Princeton) Leap and the Net will Appear. Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Happy Memorial Day to you too Myra....and you too squid, uh..I mean yazid. Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
yazid, People have said that we are on our way to socialism for decades. Nothing could be further from the truth. For the past three or four decades Americans have been willing to tolerate a federal tx rate of around 20%. What that means is that we are around 20% socialist and even less when you consider that the government operates none of our basic industries. Socialism is being rolled back all over the world as nations move from industrialism to technological economies.
The future of mankind is centered on global capitalism. The quicker we accept that and discard these silly utopian ideas many on this board have the happier we will be.
As for the VA hospitals, they are doomed. They were created after WW II when 15 million troops were coming home. We simply do not have enough vets now to justify costly VA hospitals run by the federal government. We are moving to a voucher system that will give the vets much much better care at a much smaller cost.
-------------------- The spirit of Horemheb lives on within us all. Posts: 1023 | From: The spirit of Horemheb lives within us all | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Hammer: We are moving to a voucher system that will give the vets much much better care at a much smaller cost.
Rural veterans struggling with post-traumatic stress disorder should get federal help to pay for private care if Veterans Affairs facilities are too far away, U.S. Rep. Steve Kagen testified Thursday.
Under his proposal, veterans who live 30 or more miles from a VA medical facility would have the option of getting more readily accessible care for problems such as combat stress and drug and alcohol abuse. Families also would be able to use federal vouchers for mental health counseling if a health professional concluded it would help in a veteran's treatment.
VA official Gerald Cross said his agency "strongly opposes" the bill as written because non-VA mental health providers could decide who qualifies for care.
Richard Weidman of the Vietnam Veterans of America said the bill could allow the VA to shirk its responsibilities to a new generation of veterans.
"We can envision scenarios in which VA managers, rather than hiring the psychologists and psychiatrists they need ... outsource mental health (services) to the detriment of veterans and their families," Weidman said.
But Christopher Needham of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States said strong congressional oversight could prevent VA officials from using a voucher system to avoid investing in personnel and facilities.
"These men and women cannot afford to wait for VA to develop these in-house systems. For that reason, we support the proposal to contract for care," Needham said.
.
Posts: 1549 | From: California, USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good points. The key is to provide these people with the best care avilable where they live.
-------------------- The spirit of Horemheb lives on within us all. Posts: 1023 | From: The spirit of Horemheb lives within us all | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Hammer: We are moving to a voucher system that will give the vets much much better care at a much smaller cost.
Rural veterans struggling with post-traumatic stress disorder should get federal help to pay for private care if Veterans Affairs facilities are too far away, U.S. Rep. Steve Kagen testified Thursday.
Under his proposal, veterans who live 30 or more miles from a VA medical facility would have the option of getting more readily accessible care for problems such as combat stress and drug and alcohol abuse. Families also would be able to use federal vouchers for mental health counseling if a health professional concluded it would help in a veteran's treatment.
VA official Gerald Cross said his agency "strongly opposes" the bill as written because non-VA mental health providers could decide who qualifies for care.
Richard Weidman of the Vietnam Veterans of America said the bill could allow the VA to shirk its responsibilities to a new generation of veterans.
"We can envision scenarios in which VA managers, rather than hiring the psychologists and psychiatrists they need ... outsource mental health (services) to the detriment of veterans and their families," Weidman said.
But Christopher Needham of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States said strong congressional oversight could prevent VA officials from using a voucher system to avoid investing in personnel and facilities.
"These men and women cannot afford to wait for VA to develop these in-house systems. For that reason, we support the proposal to contract for care," Needham said.
.
The problem with this proposal is, if you look state to state at what they spend for health care, what you will quickly see is this;
Northern states such as, Washinton D.C, Maryland, New Jersy, New York, Mass., Mich., spend on annual mental health an average of $300-800 million per year on mental health services.
Now, looking at Western, central, and soutern states like, California, Utah, Iowa, Southern Virginia, North/South Carolina, GA., TN., Texas, Alabama, ect., their annual budgets are and have been for the last 40 years absurdly dismal in comparison, averaging between $16-35 million annually.
What this indicates is southern states are not prepared to support average mental illnesses for it's citizens, much less veteran war trama as well as it's northern counterparts.
Take a look at your HMO you have now and see what little mental health care is supported. If it supports any at all, it will be for a brief period such as 6-12 visits/year. Hardly indicative of a program capable of supporting the specialized care a veteran would require.
As an indication, look at the US geographic map for suicide and suicide by handgun in the US. Note the concentrations in West, central, and southern US relative to the Northeast. Statistically, this says veterans in the NE US would positively receive a higher quality of mental health care then the other 3 geographic areas. This is what this whole change is about. The high suicide rate among veterans. This stats show suicide rates among average citizens. CDC US Suicide By Geography CDC US Suicide By Handgun By Geography
If you examine the CDC state by state spending for mental health care, you may see why these states have higher suicides. For comparison, Maryland spends approx. $150 annually per capita, New York $200 per capita, Pennsylvania's $186 per capita ; compared to Texas $37 per capita, and North Carolina's $50 per capita expedature for annual mental health care. To me, that says Texas, North & South Carolina, and many other states are NOT where a veteran requiring mental health care wants to be, and they will NOT be able to ramp the system up in the short term to increase the present retarded quality of health care.
This failed proposal has absolutely no chance of passing. If you look at these region's state by state lax mental health care budgeting over the last 30-40 years, it becomes clearly obvious they are nowhere prepared to offer quality veteran's health care approaching that of the US VA.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:As for the VA hospitals, they are doomed. They were created after WW II when 15 million troops were coming home. We simply do not have enough vets now to justify costly VA hospitals run by the federal government. We are moving to a voucher system that will give the vets much much better care at a much smaller cost.
No doubt there is truth in your statement but the pork prophets (our senators and others) but no one wants to do anything because of the 'tit for tat' syndrome! You vote for my pork and I will vote for your pork! And the people are still being deceived? Whose fault is it?
In my area (Midwest-Illinois) there are 3 VA hospitals within an area of 30-90 minutes drive of each other and no one wants to cut out the excess pork!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Did someone say, PORK? Cut corporate welfare out and we'd have plenty of money to give veterans the care they deserve, as well as properly educate America's youth.
-Energy legislation actually gave oil companies over $2.5 billion in subsidies even as they raked in record profits.
-One veteran of the Western oil patch, independent driller Jack Grynberg, of Centennial, Colorado, charges that the industry owes the federal government more than $30 billion in unpaid royalties for natural gas alone.
-The federal appeals court in Cincinnati struck down in September part of a $281 million state and local tax incentive deal that Ohio officials brokered in 1998 with automaker DaimlerChrysler.
- Wal-Mart gets $37 million from Uncle Sam in the transportation bill.
- In 2004 alone, the Forest Service spend more than $48 million on its timber program and receiving less than $800,000 in revenue.
-Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham joined Gov. Jeb Bush in Orlando, Florida to announce the Southern Co's $235 million gift .
-The Central Valley Project (CVP), a federal water system in California originally intended to help destitute farmers recover from the Great Depression, is now funneling close to $416 million worth of subsidized water to corporate fat cats at the expense of the rest of us.
- Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer (and welfare queen), has benefited from more than $1 billion in economic development subsidies from state and local governments across the United States.
-Jeb Bush's bold plan to lure the prestigious Scripps Research Institute with more than $500 million in state and local money promises to be one of the nation's most expensive government incentives ever.
-A new study commissioned by the National Education Association (NEA) reveals that local policymakers nationwide are doling out tax breaks and other subsidies to corporations with little or no accountability. Moreover, these tax handouts often come at the direct expense of public schools, with school boards lacking any input in the decision.
-Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) This country has a $6 trillion national debt, a growing deficit and is borrowing money from the Social Security Trust Fund in order to fund government services. We can no longer afford to provide over $125 billion every year in corporate welfare - tax breaks, subsidies and other wasteful spending - that goes to some of the largest, most profitable corporations in America.
-At a time when the government is under-funding veterans' needs, education, health care, housing and many other vital services, over 80% of the subsidies distributed by the Export-Import Bank goes to Fortune 500 corporations. Among the companies that receive taxpayer support from the Ex-Im are Enron, Boeing, Halliburton, Mobil Oil, IBM, General Electric, AT&T, Motorola, Lucent Technologies, FedEx, General Motors, Raytheon, and United Technologies.
In comparison, Under President's 2008 budget, Child Welfare Services are funded at $287 million.
If this is CAPITALISM, why are these hugely profitable companies receiving social handouts (welfare) using taxpayer dollars? Why aren't their PROFITS being used to expand their businesses especially since they employ fewer Americans by outsourcing to foreign countries.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." (Sign hanging in Einstein's office at Princeton) Leap and the Net will Appear. Posts: 3891 | From: No good deed goes unpunished. | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Conservatives are the defenders of traditional values, for the most part.
Well, I declare, I am bitter about the profundity of this statement! May I ask if these are "black" Conservatives or "white" conservatives?
Hammer opined
quote:Myra, Nobody said John McCain's campaign was not without problems but they will not be enough to lose to a black liberal
Is the presumptive premise the same with a white liberal? Just relying on the impression and illusion you would like to create!
Why not use liberal to reflect the reality and that would apply to everyone regardless of colour, ethnicity or race?
I would say I would be true Conservative because there is no such thing (in my consciousness) as a white evil, black evil, Hispanic evil, Asian evil, illegal evil etc. It sounds so evil and contrived if one claims to possess traditional values within a 'democratic' society!
just my tuppance!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
yazid, In terms of race modern liberals want assured outcomes, conservativeds do not. All I owe you as a responsible citizen is an opportunity. To provide you with an outcome (i.e. affirmative action) is not a moral position. there is no racial componet to citizenship. You are either a citizen or you are not.
-------------------- The spirit of Horemheb lives on within us all. Posts: 1023 | From: The spirit of Horemheb lives within us all | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^hmmm...odd that 75% of Affirmative Action benefits are awarded to white women with white husbands. They must be all democrats. Riiiight!
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
i would rather see him dead then our next prez!!! hes as bad as bush!!! his views he is racist.
-------------------- your ass is so tight when you fart only a dog can hear it.when you queef only a cat can hear that one. Posts: 9776 | From: You like If only mosquitoes sucked fat instead of blood. | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic