rushmc 23 #51 March 17, 2006 QuoteQuote 3. I think he genuinely cares about RICH people, and that comes through Wendy W. Fixed it. Take a look at his latest budget proposal to see how he cares about needy people. I really have to take a hard look at myself to figure out WHY I read your posts"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #52 March 17, 2006 QuoteYou deny the Clinton-Gore recession? The problem is that in a free-market economy, the government has little or no control over the economy. But yet when times are good, (e.g. 1995-2000), the current administration will claim credit were none was deserved. The problem is that this is a double-edged sword; When times are bad, (e.g. 2000-2004), the people will blame the current administration, even though it wasn't their fault. BTW I'm not supporting Dubya; I think he's a moron."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #53 March 17, 2006 Given the status of the cold war, the aging populace, and the war in Iraq during those 17 years of which you speak, those #'s really should be no surprise to you. GWB is not my hero, by the way, and I do not agree with everything he does. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #54 March 17, 2006 1. Won America loads of friends all around the world.... not 2. Reduced one of the planets nations using most of it's resources ....... not 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #55 March 18, 2006 QuoteDidn't take crap off the Taliban. Went into Afghanistan & overthrew them & blew up the Al Quaeda training camps. um,.... then he got a little distracted after that, but it was good while it lasted. trying to think of the other 9. hmmm.... made a very nice speech recently containing many correctly-pronounced words about how America needs to explore alternative energy sources. hmmmmm... QuoteDidn't take crap off the Taliban. Went into Afghanistan & overthrew them & blew up the Al Quaeda training camps. Thanks for answering. OK, so the net result of the losses we suffered, human and financial (and world reputation) were worth not taking crap? Isn't that kinda like cutting off your nose to spite your face? Ultimately we've done nothing, and now descent countries in the world hate us. I just can't see the long-term benefit from all of this and the short-term is highly costly. Quotemade a very nice speech recently containing many correctly-pronounced words about how America needs to explore alternative energy sources. That's not an accomplishment, that's an aberration! I really can't think of anything but the gun manufacturer legislation that he signed, and even that was more about pro-corp than pro-gun ownership I'm sure. He was going to extend the Assualt gun ban if Congress passed it, but they didn't, so the gun manufacterer thing was purely coincidental. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #56 March 18, 2006 QuoteWhat SpeedRacer said! I think, 'W', started-out good but went downhill, after that. Let's see... 9 more to think of... I'll get back with you on this. Hmmmmmmmm.... Chuck How did he start out well? Got us into a war by omitting intelligence to Congress and at the dismay of most of the world? I just can't see how he started so well. BTW, he killed the Ergonomics Bill started by CLinton and OSHA to give fast help to injured workers. He also killed legislation that would have reduced the amount of arsenic in our drinking water, and that was right out of the blocks, so no one has convinced me how he jumped out of the blocks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #57 March 18, 2006 QuoteStrategery. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice... you can't fool me again. Great reference. I had the Bushism calendar and read that - couldn't believe it was true until Farenheit 9/11 showed the clip at the end. Oh yea, made Michale Moore a multi millionaire. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #58 March 18, 2006 QuoteHey, he did invent a new language - Mexican. Or when talking to the leader of Brazil - "you have blacks too?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #59 March 18, 2006 QuoteBush hasn't been a wonderful president, but he's done things right. I'm not going to come up with 10 because I'm on my lunch hour and don't want to spend all of it thinking about GWB 1. yes, he did respond well in the aftermath of 9/11. Not perfectly, but there was no perfect except in retrospect 2. he and his wife seem to have a strong, mutually-supportive relationship that can be a model to others in the country 3. I think he genuinely cares about people, and that comes through Wendy W. Quote1. yes, he did respond well in the aftermath of 9/11. Not perfectly, but there was no perfect except in retrospect Please, not the, "He isn't perfent but he tries" routine. Lying to Congress about a BJ is impeachment-worthy, but lying to Congress about what a potential enemy has in the way of weapons is responding well? Can you please elaborate on what he did that was a well-tailored response to 9/11? Thanks. Quote2. he and his wife seem to have a strong, mutually-supportive relationship that can be a model to others in the country That's honorable in its own right, but exactly what does it do for the country, remembering he is a servant of the people not his wife? Model to others? If Barkely isn't a role model for your kids, Bush and wife certainly aren't one for us. So did you go have an affair after CLinton did his deed? I don't think 1 person said, "If it's good enough for the pres, it's good enough for me" and left a 20-year monogomous marriage to have an affair. Quote3. I think he genuinely cares about people, and that comes through Uh, ok. He has cut virtually every veterans program by not increasing it at teh rate it takes to maintain the current vets and account for the newly injured die to his war, he's cut educational programs drastically causing universities to virtually double their tuition costs, he's cut senior progs and medicine progs while outlawing going to Canada to buy cheaper. Furthermore, he doidn't turn down 1 death sentence put before him and sent 154 people to their death, probably at least 1, likely several were innocent. I could go on, but please establish how he cares about people...... let's not even get to Katrina response.... Thanks for responding Wendy, but #1 is general vague and 2 & 3 are just friendly rhetoric w/o any reference. I'd love to read a comprehensive response. If you do, include how it helps many people and is generally good for the masses, not just a church group here or there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #60 March 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteStrategery. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice... you can't fool me again. Great reference. I had the Bushism calendar and read that - couldn't believe it was true until Farenheit 9/11 showed the clip at the end. Oh yea, made Michale Moore a multi millionaire. http://www.dubyaspeak.com/mp3/foolmeonce.mp3"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #61 March 18, 2006 Quote1. Won America loads of friends all around the world.... not 2. Reduced one of the planets nations using most of it's resources ....... not 3. Never vetoed a bill."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #62 March 18, 2006 Quote 1. Went to the UN to declare war on Afghanistan and got the world behind us -- I thought that was way cool and I was actually proud of him at that time. 2. Signed the do-not-call registry bill. Probably the greatest thing he's done that's affected my life. 3. Signed McCain's campaign reform bill (albeit begrudgingly, but he did sign it) 4. There have been no terrorist strikes on US soil since 9/11 (even though I really do think that the whole thing could have been avoided in the first place) 5. He sent me a $300 check back in 2001. 6. Billions in aid for Africa's AIDS epidemic 7. PROTECT act of 2003 Also, although it is not an accomplishment, I really admire the fact that he's 60 yrs old and that he can run a seven-minute mile. In my book, that's the single most impressive thing about him. Ok, NOW I am truly scrounging. I don't think I can make it to ten, perhaps I can edit some in later on. edited: a couple more decent accomplishments added from Mr. JACKASS's list. The other items are tenuous at best, fodder for the far right-polarized. To be fair, the thread is about the top 10 accomplishments, so if I debunk some of these that doesn't mean you are objectively wrong, as you may very well be right as the detriment dwarfs the benefit. Quote1. Went to the UN to declare war on Afghanistan and got the world behind us -- I thought that was way cool and I was actually proud of him at that time. Uh, ok, how 'bout Iraq when the UN was and is against us all the way? It's easy to belive that if the UN was against us with Afgan that he would have gone in anyway, as he did with Iraq. What was the benefit of us in Afgan? Anything? Quote2. Signed the do-not-call registry bill. Probably the greatest thing he's done that's affected my life. Seriously? So the fact that telemarketers can't leaglly call is a ground-moving event? Quote3. Signed McCain's campaign reform bill (albeit begrudgingly, but he did sign it) What has been the benefit since? Will things change? Will prosecutors go after violators? Quote4. There have been no terrorist strikes on US soil since 9/11 (even though I really do think that the whole thing could have been avoided in the first place) Ok, there have only been 2 in history, so it's not as if there were 20 during the Clinton years and none since. Furthermore, are we like Domino's Pizza that delivers and once we get out the terrorism will resume at a higher rate? Too soon to rack this one up. Could have been avoided? Not by bombing and screwing in their affairs but by leaving them alone, huh? Quote5. He sent me a $300 check back in 2001. Truely this is one of his greatest accomplishments, even though he gave away the Clinton surplus in teh midst of a war budget and soaring annual deficit and record national debt. Bush will take his debt of 5.5T and double it. Canada's dollar will likely pass us by Bush's term's end. Great thing? Quote6. Billions in aid for Africa's AIDS epidemic That is a legitimate thing, but in all reality he should fix our health system first. But at least he didn't give it to some corporation. Quote7. PROTECT act of 2003 What's this? Is this part of the Patriot Act???? QuoteAlso, although it is not an accomplishment, I really admire the fact that he's 60 yrs old and that he can run a seven-minute mile. In my book, that's the single most impressive thing about him. Meanwhile the country is fiscally crumbling, the world hates us, but Bush is a good runner and that's noteworthy? HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! QuoteOk, NOW I am truly scrounging. I don't think I can make it to ten, perhaps I can edit some in later on. Thanks for replying, and you may be right, but I was looking for accomplishments that are job-related and beneficial for the country. You probably have a couple; do you think he's been a good pres? If you voted for him, are you glad? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #63 March 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteWhat SpeedRacer said! I think, 'W', started-out good but went downhill, after that. Let's see... 9 more to think of... I'll get back with you on this. Hmmmmmmmm.... Chuck How did he start out well? Got us into a war by omitting intelligence to Congress and at the dismay of most of the world? I just can't see how he started so well. BTW, he killed the Ergonomics Bill started by CLinton and OSHA to give fast help to injured workers. He also killed legislation that would have reduced the amount of arsenic in our drinking water, and that was right out of the blocks, so no one has convinced me how he jumped out of the blocks. ___________________________________ Yeah! I got jumped on for that, earlier. I later added to it: "Before he got sworn in!" Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #64 March 18, 2006 Wendy is one of the nicest and most level-headed people here in the S.C. - always polite and nice to everyone (even me, and one might form a strong argument that I don't deserve it). Why do you respond to her so haughtily? I'm the biggest JACKASS here and you don't even grace me with a response and I posted more than her in this thread. Hmph. First my Dublin departure delayed until tomorrow morning and now this. Oh well. Tsk tsk. My gentle feelings have been hurt. Perhaps I'll drink more tequila to compensate. A wee bit o' commentary on your response to sweet Wendy prior to my departure for El Jimador (thanks Clownburner). QuotePlease, not the, "He isn't perfent but he tries" routine. Lying to Congress about a BJ is impeachment-worthy, but lying to Congress about what a potential enemy has in the way of weapons is responding well? Can you please elaborate on what he did that was a well-tailored response to 9/11? Thanks. Perjury is impeachment worthy, for the record, the topic of perjury being irrelevant. It's OK. You can say the 'p' word. It won't hurt you. If you've proof that GWB lied about WMD, then by all means, please present it. Congress, by the way, including the Intelligence Committee's most absent member Monsieur sKerry never bothered to review the intelligence presented to them, with very few exceptions. I suppose they just didn't care, eh? QuoteThat's honorable in its own right, but exactly what does it do for the country, remembering he is a servant of the people not his wife? Model to others? If Barkely isn't a role model for your kids, Bush and wife certainly aren't one for us. So did you go have an affair after CLinton did his deed? I don't think 1 person said, "If it's good enough for the pres, it's good enough for me" and left a 20-year monogomous marriage to have an affair. If you don't think that a strong marriage is something to be admired, then I find your position most odd. What the hell does a thug like Barkley have to do with GWB as far as being a role model goes? This analogy is ludicrous and without meaning. QuoteUh, ok. He has cut virtually every veterans program by not increasing it at teh rate it takes to maintain the current vets and account for the newly injured die to his war Cut by not increasing? WTF are you talking about? Active duty people injured in the war are NOT funded under the VA. Get your facts straight. And what's this 'his war' crock of shit. CONGRESS VOTED TO FUND IT. Quote he's cut educational programs drastically causing universities to virtually double their tuition costs Oh yeah? Which appropriation this year was less than last year? Name it. Name the program. While you're at it, please tell us how GWB spent funds from the Treasury without Congress appropriating the money. CONGRESS APPROPRIATES $$$. All the executive branch does is apportion the appropriated money within the bounds and guidelines set by the appropriation. You've got a problem with education funding? Take it up with the legislature. Quote he's cut senior progs and medicine progs while outlawing going to Canada to buy cheaper. WTF? GWB's new prescription drug plan is going to accelerate the nation's bankruptcy! Dear God man! Watch the news sometime! Quote Furthermore, he doidn't turn down 1 death sentence put before him and sent 154 people to their death, probably at least 1, likely several were innocent. And this says...what...that GWB respected the judicial process put in place by the legislature of the state of TX? You have proof of their innocence? Why didn't you go public with it? Quote I could go on, You haven't gone anywhere yet. Please take that first step. Quote...... let's not even get to Katrina response.... I'd love to get into the Katrina response. The response was abysmal. The FEDERAL government had to come and do the entire thing. The state and local governments failed miserably. The FEDERAL response by FEMA was a goat-fuck. The Feds unscrewed things, got the fuck criticized out of them, and saved the asses of many NawLeans folks. Where's the criticism of the state and local governents? Are you saying Gov. Blanco doesn't care about people? That would be Gov. Blanco (D-LA). I don't think that to be the case at all. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Keith 0 #65 March 18, 2006 Quote5. He sent me a $300 check back in 2001. Hate to tell you this, but that $300 check was an advance on your income tax refund.Keith Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #66 March 18, 2006 Quote6. Billions in aid for Africa's AIDS epidemic NOPE!!! You need to do some research. He actually made it worst. http://www.globalaidsalliance.org/docs/pledge_briefing.pdf#search='President%20bush%20AIDS%20US' On top of this, his administration has refused money to groups that are not "faith based". They have done this abroad and here in the US. Non faith based group across the US has lost major funding and a large number of patients have been affected by this. I know this to be true, firsthand. On top of that, he goes and does this: Bush Abstains From Appointing HIV Experts by Lucile Scott March 15, 2006—An antigay pastor with no HIV-related experience is to be sworn in tomorrow in Washington to help advise President George W. Bush on how best to fight the epidemic. The president hasn’t been one to shy away from making openly political appointments to the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS (PACHA)—or from otherwise beefing up “abstinence-only” influence on government policy and funding. But some of his critics say he has gone too far in choosing the Reverend Herbert Lusk. “The appointment of a minister who is essentially homophobic is very disturbing,” says Ronald Johnson, a PACHA member under President Clinton who is now associate executive director of New York’s Gay Men’s Health Crisis (GMHC). Adds Julie Davids, head of the Community HIV/AIDS Mobilization Project (CHAMP), “[Lusk’s] positions will lead to more infections, more stigma and more marginalization.” The reverend, who presides over the Greater Exodus Baptist Church in Philadelphia, is on the board of the antigay group Alliance for Marriage and has worked alongside Focus on the Family, one of the nation’s most politically powerful right-wing Christian groups. What advocates like Johnson and Davids are asking is this: How will Lusk square his abstinence-till-marriage and anti-same-sex-marriage crusades with PACHA’s mission to develop programs for a disease in which the majority of infections are still among gay men? Carrie Gordon Earll, senior policy analyst for bioethics at Focus on the Family, told POZ of Lusk, “It’s a free country, and he can oppose same-sex marriage if he wants to. It’s a stretch to assume he cannot help people in this community just because of that.” Lusk himself did not respond to an interview request. Four other new PACHA panelists will join Lusk at tomorrow’s swearing-in, including Alan Homer, former president and CEO of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA)—the nation’s largest drug lobby, with a long record of battling efforts to distribute less expensive, generic HIV drugs. What makes PACHA members different from most other presidential appointees is that they are selected and continue to serve without any congressional input. That wasn’t always a problem. When the panel was founded under President Reagan in 1987 (at first, as the President’s Commission on the HIV Epidemic), it was considered a more balanced and science-driven body. Effectiveness often won out over political expediency—to the point where PACHA publicly lambasted Reagan’s HIV policy. Bush Sr. continued that tradition with the appointment of an outspoken Magic Johnson, and Clinton followed suit. “The [Council] was independent,” recalls Ronald Johnson of his time on PACHA. “We directly challenged President Clinton; and at one point, even gave his prevention policies a public F, because he wouldn’t legalize needle exchanges.” All that changed with George W.—starting with the day in 2001 that he threatened to disband the body completely. “It’s not even worth discussing what role this committee could serve,” says Davids of PACHA’s panelists now. “Because all they are is a rubber stamp for bad administration policies.” If you did in fact read this and, also, the pdf link, I hope that you have learned something and will tell others."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Samurai136 0 #67 March 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteYou're missing the point dude. Pork is discretionary spending. You have the option to add it or not. Entitlement spending is non-negotiable stuff...interest payments on the debt. Oh, you want to talk about the debt. The National Debt was $1T when Reagan came into office, now it's $8.2T. That's a $7.2T increase, of which $5.6T was under Reagan's, Bush(41)'s and Bush(43)'s administrations (17 years) and $1.6T was under Clinton's (8 years). So on an annual basis Republican administrations borrow at a rate 64% faster than Democratic ones., and it's speeding up under your hero. The Republican party is NOT the party of fiscal responsibility. The legislated cap on national debt was $8.18 trillion. When we hit $8.2 T the treasury dept submitted a proposal to rasie the debt ceiling or default on loan. Today the Bush administration approved raising the debt ceiling to $9 T?!?!"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian Ken Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #68 March 18, 2006 QuoteI pray that the Republicans keep control of both houses because I don't believe liberalism has any solutions to offer our nation at the federal level. Bush hasn't been a great president, but nor has he been an utter disaster. His spending is perturbing, that's for certain, among other things. Top ten things...let me see... 1. Led us out of the Clinton-Gore recession. Yes, there was a recession - deal with it. Emphasis on the word 'was' because there sure isn't a recession right now. 2. Signed the 'Do Not Call' legislation. Fantastique! I HATE telemarketers. 3. Rejected Kyoto. Fuck those a-holes and their anti-American treaty. 4. $15 billion AIDS relief for Africa. I think $9 Billion ended up going to Africa and the other six to countries all over the world, but don't recall how Congress appropriated the funds. Much needed funding. Good job, GWB. 5. Tax cuts. I like my taxes low, thank you. 6. CAFTA. I support free trade. 7. Kicked the jerkoff Taliban out of power in Afghanistan. Those repressive pieces of shyte are a blight upon the Earth. 8. Promoted drilling in ANWR. The more oil we produce here, the less we need to import. Yes, I know it would not end our dependence upon foreign oil, but it WOULD be more produced here in the US and the wackos screaming about its impact up there really don't have much of an argument. 9. PROTECT Act of 2003 I have no use for cowards masquerading as men who abuse children 9. PROTECT Act of 2003 I have no use for cowards masquerading as men who abuse children There's 10 things, off the top of my head. I can probably think of more. QuoteI pray that the Republicans keep control of both houses because I don't believe liberalism has any solutions to offer our nation at the federal level. By contemporary example, how is it that the Repubs have done better than the Dems have done/would do? QuoteBush hasn't been a great president, but nor has he been an utter disaster. Really? What has he done that makes him not a disaster. Base this on previous few presidents. QuoteHis spending is perturbing, that's for certain, among other things. Other things like what? Stem cell? Arsenic? Medicare/Medicaide? etc.... Quote1. Led us out of the Clinton-Gore recession. Yes, there was a recession - deal with it. Emphasis on the word 'was' because there sure isn't a recession right now. Please establish what indicators define a recession and then illustrate which Clinton #'s support that. Then, describe which Bush policies led us out of the alleged Clinton recession. Quote2. Signed the 'Do Not Call' legislation. Fantastique! I HATE telemarketers. That is irrelevant when the country is wasting away. But you are probably right that that is one of best. Quote3. Rejected Kyoto. Fuck those a-holes and their anti-American treaty. Another world organization we've pissed off. I don't know volumes of this treaty, but feel free to explain how this is a good thing and explain why/what. Quote4. $15 billion AIDS relief for Africa. I think $9 Billion ended up going to Africa and the other six to countries all over the world, but don't recall how Congress appropriated the funds. Much needed funding. Good job, GWB. Not a bad thing, but how about our Aids patients and homeless? Quote5. Tax cuts. I like my taxes low, thank you. And you deficits / national debts at record highs? If we can cut taxes because we have such an enormous GNP and the gov has a surplus, great, I'm there with ya, but when we have to keep borrowing more $$, sinking the value of the buck it is clearly a disastrous move. Quote6. CAFTA. I support free trade. And no tariffs for US corps exporting jobs? Quote7. Kicked the jerkoff Taliban out of power in Afghanistan. Those repressive pieces of shyte are a blight upon the Earth. OK, they are still out there, so what is the net accomplishment? What, in lives and billions, was/is the cost? Quote8. Promoted drilling in ANWR. The more oil we produce here, the less we need to import. Yes, I know it would not end our dependence upon foreign oil, but it WOULD be more produced here in the US and the wackos screaming about its impact up there really don't have much of an argument. And you establish the ecological cost how? Your exhaustive research is done where? please post reference. To say these things off the cuff w/o any knowledge can be dangerous. Quote9. PROTECT Act of 2003 I have no use for cowards masquerading as men who abuse children Although it sounds great to stop this shit, there is usually a downside to great things and this is it: ________________________________________________________________ a) Authorizes wiretapping and monitoring of other communications in the all cases related to child abuse or kidnapping. b) Eliminates statutes of limitations for child abduction or child abuse. c) Bars pretrial release of persons charged with specified offenses against or involving children. d) Prohibits computer-generated child pornography e) Authorizes fines and/or imprisonment for up to 30 years for U.S. citizens or residents who engage in illicit sexual conduct abroad. f) For the purposes of this law, illicit sexual conduct includes commercial sex with anyone under 18, …__________________________________________________ Even Bush’s own US Supreme Court, and yes, it’s his court, disagrees with at least 1 provision in here: “The prohibitions against computer-generated and illustrated child pornography have also been previously ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, when they were included in the Child Online Protection Act.” So I agree with some provisions in there, the likelihood that this law will be misused is great. If we simply gave the cops the right to kick doors down wherever we go, we would have little crime, but little liberty and security. There comes a point where the government is more dangerous than the criminals, hence, the government becomes the outlaw. Didn’t Benjamin Franklin say something about those who would trade liberty for safety deserve neither? This, the patriot Act, RICO and the like were what he was referring to. I’ll go over each letter to explain why I think this is detrimental. a) More warrantless eavesdropping that will be abused. All the gov has to do is claim they were wiretapping a suspected pedophile and they are justified - no requirement to prove the probable cause. b) Slippery slope to having no statutes of limitations. SOL are here for the purpose of not allowing prosecutors to bring up charges 25 years from now when defense witnesses are dead or moved away. c) No bail? 8th requires bail. Rarely is it that pedophiles are a flight risk or a danger to victims/witnesses. d) Computer generated child porn? As repulsive as the idea sounds, there is no victim. I know, it’s supposedly a stepping stone. Again, there is no victim. e) So now they’re changing the jurisdictional boundaries to extend everywhere in the world? That is so whack that it’s incomprehensible. Let their jurisdiction take care of these creeps. f) So now the age of everything is moving to 18. The idea with sexual contact with minors laws has been graduated. The idea is that a person doesn’t become an adult overnight, so the laws protecting these people and the responsibilities afforded them are proportionately equal. This law throws a spin into it by making things 18 across the board, inferring that at 18, overnight these kids become adults….. Ridiculous. We can lynch everyone that steps out of line, but crime will continue at the same rate - deterrence hasn’t been established to change crime rates - we just become more heinous. I noticed you wrote about the cowards masquerading as men who abuse children. Sure they are, but if we allow them to create the standard in which we treat the other 98% of the good people of this country then they have own once again. I don’t care if the cops did kick doors in, there would still be crime, there is no way around it. __________ So do you think all the alleged good that Bush has supposedly done outweighs all the bad, especially the fiscal state of this government? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #69 March 18, 2006 QuoteQuoteSpent $4 Trillion that we don't actually have. Incredible isn't it. And the only "legitimate" answer that has been brought forward the most so far is the do not call legislation. So, he has bankrupted the country (which he seems to do with most economic entities he is associated with) and the bets he has to show for it is a reduction in telemarketing calls.... I know! As much as I appreciate the Bush supporters for responding, usually they don't in whatever board I'm in with these topics, the resounding message has been the telemarketer thing. Geez, there are homeless people, millions of people w/o healthcare, etc and telephone is our central focus? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #70 March 18, 2006 QuoteQuote QuoteAlso, although it is not an accomplishment, I really admire the fact that he's 60 yrs old and that he can run a seven-minute mile. In my book, that's the single most impressive thing about him. I am 60 and I can run a 7 minute mile too. That and $2.00 will get me a cup of coffee. Why is it so impressive?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #71 March 18, 2006 QuoteYou deny the Clinton-Gore recession? You really should bone up on your history. You deny that the PROTECT act of '03 is a good thing? Very odd. You ARE a father, aren't you? If you're serious about curing budget deficits, please tell us how you recommend reducing entitlement spending over the next fifteen-twenty years given the current age demographics. Any decrease in either entitlement or discretionary spending is desirable, but to be serious, 'tis the entitlement spending you have to nip in the bud. I doubt a single GWB bashing leftie can give me ONE entitlement spending cut they would be willing to see go through. The few that know the difference at any rate. QuoteYou deny the Clinton-Gore recession? You really should bone up on your history. Please, it was your assertion that there was a recession, please quickly define a recession and then illustrate how the economy applied to that definition. QuoteYou deny that the PROTECT act of '03 is a good thing? Very odd. You ARE a father, aren't you? It may have positive elements in it, but with all of the snags it chews away at Constitutional protections, even Bush's US Sup Ct agreed with that. If it has 2 positive provions and 10 detrimental, is it a fair tradeoff? Fatherhood has nothing to do with it, other than not wanting your kids to grow up in a country w/o a Constitution. QuoteIf you're serious about curing budget deficits, please tell us how you recommend reducing entitlement spending over the next fifteen-twenty years given the current age demographics. Entitlement spending. I like the spin that term carries, it's as if these WWII and VIet Nam vets are just grubbing around, what free-loaders. QuoteAny decrease in either entitlement or discretionary spending is desirable, but to be serious, 'tis the entitlement spending you have to nip in the bud. Or the tax cuts to the rich, or the 300B+ for the war, or the gross military spending, or the zero tarrif imports, ...... QuoteI doubt a single GWB bashing leftie can give me ONE entitlement spending cut they would be willing to see go through. The few that know the difference at any rate. I would like to see social spending increase. How is it that Clinton was able to carry large social spending, yet still carry a surplus? Oh, I know, he adjusted the taxes based upon GNP and spending. The irony is that businesses made more money under an economy like that than they did under Bush. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #72 March 18, 2006 Quote> There's 10 things, off the top of my head. I can probably think of more. I'll add Eleven and Twelve... 11) Supreme Court Justice John Roberts, Jr. 12) Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, Jr. Two highly qualified jurist. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, retirement in the air OK, and you'll have to wait until we see the decisions they render and how they impact the general population before you can add them, so they are hereby ripped off the list. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #73 March 18, 2006 QuoteDidn't know Hannity coined the phrase, but if he did, then good for him. The fact that GWB/Cheney inherited an economy in recession from Clinton/Gore is irrefutable. Face the fact whenever you like - a fact it remains. Vice facing the fact, you make no comment other than to deride Sean Hannity. I rarely listen to Rush, by the way, but normally do enjoy listening when I do manage to tune in. Been at least three months, I'd wager. QuoteThe fact that GWB/Cheney inherited an economy in recession from Clinton/Gore is irrefutable. It's definately irrefutable due to you not giving us any substantive data to refute! Come on - post it! QuoteVice facing the fact, you make no comment other than to deride Sean Hannity. Who cares about cliche, slander, etc., let's get to substance. You have to fight the fact that Clinton was the first pres in 40 years to leave office with a surplus. QuoteI rarely listen to Rush, by the way, but normally do enjoy listening when I do manage to tune in. Been at least three months, I'd wager. Great, and I like Charlie's Angels reruns, please post OBJECTIVE (gov sources) data. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #74 March 18, 2006 QuoteAs I said...I doubt one Bush bashing leftie will come up with one reduction in entitlement spending they would like to see. You said (wrote) that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #75 March 18, 2006 QuoteYou're missing the point dude. Pork is discretionary spending. You have the option to add it or not. Entitlement spending is non-negotiable stuff...interest payments on the debt. medicare, medicaid, SS, welfare & other services, Retirement/disability - that sort of thing. I just heard a presentation on the FY05 budget breakdown last year and have the PPT handy for some odd reason. FY05 Budget was about $2.396 Trillion. Of that, $1.381 Trillion was Mandatory funding, $178 billion on interest payments, and $837 billion in discretionary funding. DoD took $421 billion of the discretionary funding in FY05. What do leftists propose to do to decrease the mandatory entitlement spending over the next 15-20 years? If the answer is nothing, then they have no credibility on deficit spending, as the main cost driver for the deficit IS entitlement spending...which, due to age demographics, WILL increase over the next 15-20+ years. It all links to the GNP. If this country were doing well in the global market, say in the 90's, then we can have more discretionary spending. We aren't doing as wellnow, so we must end that, esp with the military. QuoteWhat do leftists propose to do to decrease the mandatory entitlement spending over the next 15-20 years? Increase the GNP via better, cheaper products. If we need to pass legislation reducing the amount of $ CEO's may earn, then great. We need to start to manufatcure goods and become more competitive in the global market, but we must establish tarriffs for imported goods. Quote...as the main cost driver for the deficit IS entitlement spending...which, due to age demographics, WILL increase over the next 15-20+ years. Don't worry, interest on Bush's national debt will dwarf that, then US currency will become as desireable as confed cash and it won't matter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 3 of 6 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Lucky... 0 #71 March 18, 2006 QuoteYou deny the Clinton-Gore recession? You really should bone up on your history. You deny that the PROTECT act of '03 is a good thing? Very odd. You ARE a father, aren't you? If you're serious about curing budget deficits, please tell us how you recommend reducing entitlement spending over the next fifteen-twenty years given the current age demographics. Any decrease in either entitlement or discretionary spending is desirable, but to be serious, 'tis the entitlement spending you have to nip in the bud. I doubt a single GWB bashing leftie can give me ONE entitlement spending cut they would be willing to see go through. The few that know the difference at any rate. QuoteYou deny the Clinton-Gore recession? You really should bone up on your history. Please, it was your assertion that there was a recession, please quickly define a recession and then illustrate how the economy applied to that definition. QuoteYou deny that the PROTECT act of '03 is a good thing? Very odd. You ARE a father, aren't you? It may have positive elements in it, but with all of the snags it chews away at Constitutional protections, even Bush's US Sup Ct agreed with that. If it has 2 positive provions and 10 detrimental, is it a fair tradeoff? Fatherhood has nothing to do with it, other than not wanting your kids to grow up in a country w/o a Constitution. QuoteIf you're serious about curing budget deficits, please tell us how you recommend reducing entitlement spending over the next fifteen-twenty years given the current age demographics. Entitlement spending. I like the spin that term carries, it's as if these WWII and VIet Nam vets are just grubbing around, what free-loaders. QuoteAny decrease in either entitlement or discretionary spending is desirable, but to be serious, 'tis the entitlement spending you have to nip in the bud. Or the tax cuts to the rich, or the 300B+ for the war, or the gross military spending, or the zero tarrif imports, ...... QuoteI doubt a single GWB bashing leftie can give me ONE entitlement spending cut they would be willing to see go through. The few that know the difference at any rate. I would like to see social spending increase. How is it that Clinton was able to carry large social spending, yet still carry a surplus? Oh, I know, he adjusted the taxes based upon GNP and spending. The irony is that businesses made more money under an economy like that than they did under Bush. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #72 March 18, 2006 Quote> There's 10 things, off the top of my head. I can probably think of more. I'll add Eleven and Twelve... 11) Supreme Court Justice John Roberts, Jr. 12) Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, Jr. Two highly qualified jurist. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, retirement in the air OK, and you'll have to wait until we see the decisions they render and how they impact the general population before you can add them, so they are hereby ripped off the list. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #73 March 18, 2006 QuoteDidn't know Hannity coined the phrase, but if he did, then good for him. The fact that GWB/Cheney inherited an economy in recession from Clinton/Gore is irrefutable. Face the fact whenever you like - a fact it remains. Vice facing the fact, you make no comment other than to deride Sean Hannity. I rarely listen to Rush, by the way, but normally do enjoy listening when I do manage to tune in. Been at least three months, I'd wager. QuoteThe fact that GWB/Cheney inherited an economy in recession from Clinton/Gore is irrefutable. It's definately irrefutable due to you not giving us any substantive data to refute! Come on - post it! QuoteVice facing the fact, you make no comment other than to deride Sean Hannity. Who cares about cliche, slander, etc., let's get to substance. You have to fight the fact that Clinton was the first pres in 40 years to leave office with a surplus. QuoteI rarely listen to Rush, by the way, but normally do enjoy listening when I do manage to tune in. Been at least three months, I'd wager. Great, and I like Charlie's Angels reruns, please post OBJECTIVE (gov sources) data. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #74 March 18, 2006 QuoteAs I said...I doubt one Bush bashing leftie will come up with one reduction in entitlement spending they would like to see. You said (wrote) that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #75 March 18, 2006 QuoteYou're missing the point dude. Pork is discretionary spending. You have the option to add it or not. Entitlement spending is non-negotiable stuff...interest payments on the debt. medicare, medicaid, SS, welfare & other services, Retirement/disability - that sort of thing. I just heard a presentation on the FY05 budget breakdown last year and have the PPT handy for some odd reason. FY05 Budget was about $2.396 Trillion. Of that, $1.381 Trillion was Mandatory funding, $178 billion on interest payments, and $837 billion in discretionary funding. DoD took $421 billion of the discretionary funding in FY05. What do leftists propose to do to decrease the mandatory entitlement spending over the next 15-20 years? If the answer is nothing, then they have no credibility on deficit spending, as the main cost driver for the deficit IS entitlement spending...which, due to age demographics, WILL increase over the next 15-20+ years. It all links to the GNP. If this country were doing well in the global market, say in the 90's, then we can have more discretionary spending. We aren't doing as wellnow, so we must end that, esp with the military. QuoteWhat do leftists propose to do to decrease the mandatory entitlement spending over the next 15-20 years? Increase the GNP via better, cheaper products. If we need to pass legislation reducing the amount of $ CEO's may earn, then great. We need to start to manufatcure goods and become more competitive in the global market, but we must establish tarriffs for imported goods. Quote...as the main cost driver for the deficit IS entitlement spending...which, due to age demographics, WILL increase over the next 15-20+ years. Don't worry, interest on Bush's national debt will dwarf that, then US currency will become as desireable as confed cash and it won't matter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites