|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Feb 13, 2005 11:12:29 GMT -5
Since President Bush has been generally beaten up here I thought I would post another example of O'Reilly type commentary...
From the Washington Bureau....
The Presidents latest proposal freezes federal spending on EDUCATION..(I can hear the teachers whinning already) at 51 BILLION .
That mark is still a 39% INCREASE since fiscal 2001.
The great President Clinton increased federal spending on EDUCATION by only 27 % over 8 years.
Medicare Reform..the Biggest expansion since president Johnson (democrat) created it.
Every body wants better health care..nobody wants to pay for it....
So we expand health care ,education and social security for lower income people...and give a tax break to people already taxed more than everyone else.
We can do more by 2 means ,either increase revenue or decrease intitlements...or both.
Medicare was created by Johnson without a proper funding means...It didnt win him re-election..It will cost trillions of dollars....
Social security ..Franklin Rooosevelts New deal..
expanded way past.. what it was originally designed for....
Everyone wants free medical and a great Social security system...The debate is are we obligated to provide it and at what cost...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2005 12:36:17 GMT -5
Since President Bush has been generally beaten up here I thought I would post another example of O'Reilly type commentary... Sorry. I stopped reading at this point. |
|
|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Feb 13, 2005 14:17:05 GMT -5
Fair and balanced....or anytime... anytime ...anytime.?
The numbers speak for themselves...
Real people just dont listen to one side of any argument...oops I guess they do...
I think people should stop listening to idealogies that have nothing in common with their lifestyles...
Example ..I dislike snowmobiles..therefore everyone should not own snowmobiles. Why?
because so and so says they are bad for the environment...or because someone else supports them.
Being against something for the wrong reasons is not right...and being against a President ALL the time as the democrats are is PLAIN UN AMERICAN...
When O'Reilly asked the president of the Unions if there was 1 thing about President Bush they could support and he replied NO, it spoke alot about why this country is in disarray.
Its all about electing democrats and slamming Republicans....not what the majority of voters needs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2005 14:25:49 GMT -5
First of all, I referred to O'Reilly, not Bush. When a person has a track record of lies and distortions, you learn not to pay attention to anything he has to say. Certainly not if you're interested in facts or truth.
As for W, see point above.
Funny, you should bring this up, however. Just what exactly has W done that I should be behind? I can't think of a single thing. It has nothing to do with Republicans and Democrats, I am _specifically_ talking about our President.
|
|
|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Feb 13, 2005 21:34:39 GMT -5
Lets see ...All the previous presidents ALWAYS spoke the truth and never lied or with held information from the press or congress.
Then ..big,bad,mean... President Bush cheats and lies his way into office ...all by himself.
All he wants is war,rich people to pay no taxes...and for everyone else not to have a job...
He wants to send your job overseas so there can be more poor people...
He wants a skyrocketing federal budget so interest rates will go sky high....and poor people will starve in the streets...
He wants fewer Rich people so he can have the best seats at Hawaii's home games...have the best tee times and drink more fine French Wine..
He wants more walmarts ...one on everystreet corner...
No union jobs ,....anywhere.
gee how did he get elected...that no good ,gun tooten,cheap,lying ..Texas Bragard?
Because he was a better man than Kerry and the Republicans stand for more than opposing everything?
Whats that say about the democrats ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Feb 13, 2005 23:39:20 GMT -5
The Presidents latest proposal freezes federal spending on EDUCATION..(I can hear the teachers whinning already) at 51 BILLION . In terms of the percentage of wage increase for salaried jobs for schools employees, teachers have one of the lower increase rates over the past 20+ years. Position; 1980 salary; 2003 salary % change in salary from 1980 to 2003 Superintendent; $39,344.00; $126,268.00 220.93% Typists/data entry clerks; $8,359.00; $25,793.00 208.57% Accounting/payroll clerks; $10,479.00; $32,154.00 206.84% Principals:Junior high/middle; $26,625.00; $80,708.00 203.13% Secretaries; $10,331.00; $31,295.00 202.92% Assistant principals:Elementary; $20,708.00; $62,230.00 200.51% Administrators for finance and business; $27,147.00; $81,451.00 200.04% Deputy/assoc. superintendent; $37,440.00; $112,104.00 199.42% Principals:Elementary; $25,165.00; $75,291.00 199.19% Secretaries; $8,348.00; $24,853.00 197.71% Principals:Senior high; 29,207.00; $86,452.00 196.00% Librarians; $16,764.00; $49,611.00 195.94% Assistant superintendent; $33,452.00; $98,623.00 194.82% Administrators for staff personnel services; $29,623.00; $85,041.00 187.08% Assistant principals:Junior high/middle; $23,507.00; $67,288.00 186.25% Assistant principals:Senior high; $24,816.00; $70,847.00 185.49% Administrators for Instructional services; $29,790.00; $84,640.00 184.12% School nurses; $13,788.00; $39,165.00 184.05% Classroom teachers; $15,913.00; $45,026.00
182.95%Administrators for public relations/information; $24,021.00; $67,298.00 180.16% Subject area supervisors; $23,974.00; $66,582.00 177.73% Counselors; $18,847.00; $51,706.00 174.35% Library clerks; $6,778.00; $18,170.00 168.07% Administrators for Technology; $0.00; $73,931.00 N/A HOURLY WAGE RATE Teacher aides:Noninstructional; $3.89; $10.98 182.26% Teacher aides:Instructional; $4.06; $10.93 169.21% Bus drivers; $5.21; $13.85 165.83% Cafeteria workers; $3.78; $9.98 164.02% Custodians; $4.88; $12.40 154.10% |
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Feb 13, 2005 23:55:01 GMT -5
The Presidents latest proposal freezes federal spending on EDUCATION..(I can hear the teachers whinning already) at 51 BILLION . That mark is still a 39% INCREASE since fiscal 2001. The great President Clinton increased federal spending on EDUCATION by only 27 % over 8 years. How much of that increase was related to the NCLB act? An act that has caused more problems for schools that it has solved, has caused far more expense for schools than was funded for implementing it, and certainly didn't get heavily spent on general teacher salary increases. The medicare reform was for his pet project the prescription drug benefit program that to this point provides the majority of seniors less in terms of benefits and savings that they're required to pay in terms of premiums, copays, and deductibles. Expand health care? There are by far more people that are totally without any type of health care since GWB took office than there were before he took office. Plus, GWB's "reform" will add even more trillions to the cost of Medicare without any useful functionality. Plus, GWB's proposed and heavily lobbied change to Social Security by adding personal accounts does absolutely nothing to help solve the problem of the Social Security fund eventually running out of its surpluses. OTOH: That change WILL cost multiple trillions of dollars while not helping resolve the problem. GWB has done little other than spend money in excessive amounts on solutions to problems that don't impact the problem in a positive manner, or on things like invasions of other countries that break international laws. |
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Feb 14, 2005 0:02:45 GMT -5
President Bush cheats and lies his way into office ...all by himself. Nah, he had lots of help from his PNAC cronies.  That about sums it up. He did a better job of telling some key groups in the polulace what they wanted to hear. The Republicans were better at spinning negative things against their opponents, better at misdirection when something negative was happening to their candidate(s), and better at telling people what they wanted to hear rather than telling them what they actually planned to do to / for those same people. They need to learn how to spin tales and tell lies better? |
|
|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Feb 14, 2005 9:16:28 GMT -5
According to president Clinton at winter democrat meetings...
We need to elect more democrats at local and state levels, and get our message out.
The fact is the message was delivered by the mainly left media and newsprint....The democrats raised a record amount of money ,and had vast Union support along with minority get out the vote .
Could it be the message was heard and rejected ?
And that people resent Hollywood dictating agendas.
Or that win at any cost...including attacking ..without showing how you would fix anything, might not work.
The democrats have wed themselves to gay marriage,gun control,anti war and socialism.... these are not traditional moral values.
And these candidates representing only these values ..and winning only New England,Minnesota and California will never win the White house ...ever
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2005 10:29:47 GMT -5
Bill-baby, let's cut to the chase.
Don't pretend that W is for anything (funded by the Federal government) other than anti-terrorism (now that we were attacked on his watch) and increased military spending. All he really wants is for government to get out of the way of Big Business.
I take that back. He also wants the Fed involved in issues that appeal to his Wacky Christian base.
But don't give me any crap about how he has done this and done that and received no credit for it. He wants to dismantle as much as he can.
And know what? That's fine. But TELL THE TRUTH and then see if the rest of America votes for it.
Furthermore, please note how W has run his last 3 elections. Never once did he go after the issues involved with men like McCain, Gore and Kerry. It was all about _nasty_ personal attacks. Period.
That's how these creeps operate.
And, surprise-surprise, America is full of stupid people who will believe anything they are told.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Feb 14, 2005 12:42:07 GMT -5
The fact is the message was delivered by the mainly left media and newsprint....The democrats raised a record amount of money ,and had vast Union support along with minority get out the vote . Did you know that just saying something is a fact doesn't actually make it a fact? The fact is I have no clue as to what you're trying to say there. The conservative masses seem to love Hollywood dictating to them. How else do you explain Ahnuld being elected guvnew of CaliLand and the push to have the constitution changed in order to get him elected as presistent? Isn't the win at any cost and refusing to say how you'll fix anything the primary Republican method? In the debates Bush / Cheney did exactly that, while Kerry / Edwards actually explained their ideas for fixing things. The Republicans "wed" themselves to fear-mongering and telling lies to their constituents in order to gain votes, I guess that's a fine traditional moral value. Before the election the tell their "followers" they're going to push for a change in the constitution to ban gay marriages. After the election their "followers" are not so happy that Bush II no longer thinks a change to the constitution is necessary in relation to gay marriages. Before the election they tell their "followers" that all is well in Iraq and that they're going to get to the bottom of things and find out why their pre-invasion intelligence was incorrect about things like WMD. After the election their "followers" are finding out that things in Iraq are getting continuously worse with more of their families getting killed during the "reconstruction phase" than died during the "war phase". They're also finding out that Bush II and his cronies were told repeatedly that there were no WMD, there was no connection between Iraq and 9/11, and that the PNAC'ers were going after their own personal agendas. They're finding out that the administration has been very busy trying to suppress evidence against themselves regarding both 9/11 and their war in Iraq. More fine traditional "moral values". As for gun control. The 2nd amendment gives the "right to bear arms" ONLY in relation to being part of an organized militia. How many of the people that own guns are spending time doing the work of a militia? The assault weapons ban that Cheney and his NRA friends worked hard to prevent being renewed is another fine way of showing "moral values". I'm not sure why you're trying to call the Republicans socialists though. Unfortunately, the way GWB is increasing the national debt there may not be a White House to worry in the not too distant future. His plans for cutting the deficit in half (a deficit he created totally on his own by the way) is to create new initiatives that cost very little during his own remaining years in office then skyrocket to costing hundreds of billions of dollars after he's out of office. His motto, like those of the other recent "conservative" presidents before him is to "spend, spend, spend, spend, and let someone worry about paying for it after I'm out of office". The worse thing about Bush II is that his spend like there's no tomorrow attitude is aimed at things that don't bring any positive gains of any kind in return for his massive expenditures. |
|
|
|
Post by goGopherBill on Feb 14, 2005 15:55:41 GMT -5
Ha!..you're weakening ,my fine friend..
Dont know What I mean?...usually I dont all the time either but here goes...
The fact that most journalist in this country tend to be left of center along with most college educators should be beyond debate.
There was no press preventing any democratic story,slant, attack or myth...as in CBS.
IT was not a lack of funds keeping the message bottled up...all mass media gave more than equal time to the Democrats...
Only Fox gave any time to the Republicans in any form of debate...clue..check ratings...its not CBS or NBC thats winning..
So some where along the line the myth that President Bush only represents rich people must be wrong.
Your WMDs argument rings hollow...The ability to spred hatred ..religious zealots are as much a danger to our nation as Bombs...Chemicals can be made and processed quickly...Iraq ..and yes Iran may be next or even North Korea...
Being French(running ,hiding..surrendering ) is not an option.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2005 16:14:33 GMT -5
Ha!..you're weakening ,my fine friend.. Dont know What I mean?...usually I dont all the time either but here goes... The fact that most journalist in this country tend to be left of center along with most college educators should be beyond debate. You're talking to Gorf, but still... Most _credible_ journalists, you mean, not most journalists. The reason they are left of center is because they are intelligent--just like the college educators. The news media, however, is dominated by Conservatives. This is simply not true. Look at CBS's reaction to the Rather story. Everyone was all up in arms about the memo and people got fired. Meanwhile, the story has just gone away. Why is that? Even the secretary said the sentiments in the memo were factual. What is going on? Where do all these Bush documents mysteriously disappear to? Big Business owns W, lock, stock and barrel. NOT the reasons given for going to war. NOT the reasons presented to the U.N. (or the French). So. Do we attack Iran or North Korea first? |
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Feb 14, 2005 17:05:47 GMT -5
Your WMDs argument rings hollow...The ability to spred hatred ..religious zealots are as much a danger to our nation as Bombs...Chemicals can be made and processed quickly...Iraq ..and yes Iran may be next or even North Korea... Being French(running ,hiding..surrendering ) is not an option. Iraq did nothing to provoke us, therefore invading Iraq was breaking international law which we claim to support and was an act of terrorism which GWB and his cronies claim to be trying to prevent. The neocons that are currently "leading" our county are all about saying one thing that sounds good to the gullible masses then turn around and do things that slap everyone that actually trusts them in the face. They talk about nuclear (or is that nucular?) disarmament as if they want everyone to believe they think that's the best thing for everyone. Then they turn around and ask for money to create the nuclear bunker buster missile and cut funds for destroying our own massive nuclear stockpiles around the country that have been "in process" of being destroyed for over 20 years. As more is released to the public about the 9/11 reports and the "intelligence" findings that lead up to their decision to invade Iraq it seems the likelihood of our finding out that they lied to the public (and potentially even under oath) is growing. If that actually does get proven, will the zealots like Ken Starr actually go after GWB and his cronies as vehemently as they went after Clinton? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2005 18:24:33 GMT -5
Gorf, I still go back to our flight home from San Diego 9/9/01. They were on the watch for _something_. I've never heard more alarms going off at security. As for Bill, remember he tried to fly without any ID at all this past year. I think he's a malcontent. A rabble-rouser! |
|
