December and other conservatives..your take on this page.

Liberals and the resrt of us chime in if it makes you mad you like it did me.

Does Bush say one thing and do another?

Bush wants to kill the ethanol subsidy? Cool. He just went up in my estimation.

Well, let me ask you something.

Do you think that it is government’s responsibility to fund every single project or program that’s proposed?

I’m not against cutting any programs. They’re all up for grabs so far as I’m concerned. I derive no particular pleasure saying that, but we can’t do everything for everyone, no matter how much we try, and it’s absurd to fire off criticism saying that the budget doesn’t have enough funding for this and for that.

The President puts the money where he feels it will have the most effect. When the Democrats are in charge, they’ll do the same thing, and then you’ll sit back with your self-satisfied smile muttering how you really stuck it to those Republicans and the talking heads will complain about it, and nothing will really change except the people doing the self-congratulation or the complaining.

Looking at the big picture, it really doesn’t matter. I don’t depend on the government to help me with every little thing I do, nor will I ever do so. It would only lead to disappointment.

In response to your question, yes, he says one thing and does another. Just like every other President that ever was and ever will be. So what’s your point? Do you have one, or are you trying to make your mark as the new liberal december?

laughing Is that a serious question? I thought we’d established this pattern long ago.

To add fuel to the fire, here’s a real gem. Here’s what the Bush Administration says the 2004 budget will do for education.

Here’s what they’ve really done: Cut funding to schools serving military families

So, in one move, Bush is cutting education money and dropping support for military families. Oh yeah, “unprecedented” indeed.

So, does Bush say one thing and do another? Look behind his back when he’s making promises. His fingers are crossed.

What do you think I should be getting from this page?

That our beloved leader is two faced. And a panderer.

I think it is the reponsibility of the President to fund what he tells the country he will fund. Don’t you agree?

Do I really have to dig up dirt on Clinton, Carter, Johnson, Kennedy, Truman, Roosevelt, etc. just to make you rethink how hypocritical that statement is, Reeder?

So because they supposedly did it…it makes it right for Bush to do it?

Of course not. But for you to expect him to turn the trend of politicians not coming through on thier promises is naive at best.

I’ll be sure to remind you of this thread in 2004 when the Democrats take the White House, Reeder.

I can’t see how it’s hypocritical.

It might be hypocritical if a President said it, but I don’t think Reeder is a president.

True, but it is probably not naive to expect him to come through on at least some of his promises.

Shit. I am in GD. didn’t realize. Bye.

(someone throw me a rope!)

No, what’s hypocritical is that historically, Presidents (and politicians in general) do not come through on their promises. But he would expect Bush to do it, even as he knows that it wouldn’t happen with any President at any time.

This thread is just a bunch of pointing out the obvious and scoring cheap points from it.

Yes I do.

And I am disappointed in this.

At least, as disappointed by this (and other things Bush has done) as I was when candidate Bill Clinton proposed a middle-class tax cut (remember that?) And sundry other things politcians do and/or say.

All candidates lie to us. (AD, I would have included some Republicans on that list – I’m not trying to pick a fight here, I’m trying to quell one).

Except, maybe Carter – and look what a successful President he was.

But, did Bush wave his finger at the cameras and deny saying those things? Just like when Clinton denied having sex with Monica when he in fact had her suck his penis and lick his asshole in the Oval office.

I don’t intend to debate, because the topic is just too broad. If you choose one area, we could perhaps research it and get the facts. Just a couple of general observations.

  1. Material from an interest group is likely to be full of spin or even inaccuracies. Their claims should not be accepted without careful analysis.

  2. “Cut” is a funny word in government. It usually means a cut from a proposed budget, so a “cut” can actually be an increase from last year.

  3. One would have to check to see whether other sources of funding replace some of these “cuts.”

  4. Avalonian Note that the groups asking for money always make their best case. We don’t know if the 12% cut was from last year’s spending level or from an earlier budget. We don’t know the reason for the cut, e.g., whether other money would be taking its place.

Even if we take Patty Murray’s claim at face value, her statement doesn’t contradict Bush’s boast that, “The budget provides unprecedented levels of education funding to help strengthen America’s schools.” He did not claim that every single segment of education funding was at an unprecented level. AFAIK the overall federal education spending is indeed the highest in history, and by a considerable margin.

He is coming through on a few, very few, of his promises. Taking a few examples and saying that is representative of the whole is a bad way of proving your point. He’s just not funding the programs you want him to, that’s all.

Incidentally, the fact that he’s not funding some of that stuff annoys me, but so flirkin what? To repeat what I said above: He’s a politician. Period. If you trust any of them to keep their promises you’re fooling yourself.

I would have too if it hadn’t been such a blatant conservative bash. I just wanted to poke a little with the stick to see what the REAL motivation for this thread is, because the OP is such a blatant tr… well, you know the rest of it.

on that I agree wholeheartedly