I’d like to hear more. How will this affect funding for public schools.
So now that the earmarks are going to Democratic districts instead of Republican districts, Bush has suddenly gotten religion on earmarks and balanced budgets. We need to impose fiscal discipline but the sentiment I hear around DC is that we have had 6 years of pork barrel politics to “buy off America” and have left Democrats with the tab.
The Republicans just won’t abandon their ludicrous attempts to make the tax cuts to the rich permanent. I don’t have a problem with ALL the Bush tax cuts, just the ones on capital gains and qualified dividends (and perhaps a few others).
Bush made some comments about reform of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and FHA. This could REALLY help our current financial crisis. Its a good idea, I wonder if he has any idea of what he means by this.
Bush has no idea how to reform health care. It would cost us about $66 TRILLION to fully fund medicare, medicaid and social security. The Medicare/medicaid portion represents the vast majority of that amount. Making medical costs deductible (an idea which has some merit) and privitization isn’t going to fix that.
Pell grants for kids? I’d like to hear more, Kennedy normally stands up whenever we spend more money on education so I wonder what Bush isn’t telling us.
Bush finally got religion on global warming, which kinda blew my mind.
It was also good to hear him ackowledge that the enemy is al Qaeda.
It was also good to hear him acknowledge that there are a LOT of problem that can be addressed (Burma, Sudan, malaria, AIDS, etc.) without calling anyone an axis of evil or trying to invade anyone.
That’s your reality. Not mine. 
In the perfect world, (my perfect world) there would be lower taxes and small government; as a result, corporations would grow stronger; this results in low unemployment rates and a stimulated economy.
It’s true what I said about the focus group though. The democrats in the room clearly did not like the idea of making Bush’s tax cuts permenant. They have no idea how valuable this would be… they’re thinking it will only benefit the wealthy. There’s that class warfare thing going on with these people, apparently. And what if the wealthy or corporations did beneift from tax cuts? Who benefits when corporations are profitable and successful? employees.
What will happen if Obama starts raising taxes on small business owners? This will only stifle their growth.
So somebody still believes in the “Trickle On” theory?
How amusing.
As an aside, why was Bush smiling when he condemned genocide in Sudan? :dubious:
I was surprised he mentioned global warming. And angry when he was all self-righteous about it. Where was his awareness of this when it came time to ratify the Kyoto Protocol?
Not all of Bush tax cuts were bad. It reduced the marraige penalty and reduced taxes for the poorest members of society. The really obnoxious part was the tax cut for capital gains and qualified dividends.
Due to the existence of things like 401Ks and IRAs, capital gains and qualified dividends only represents 1% of the income of the average household that earnd 100K. It only represents 10% of the income of households that earn 500K. It represents MOST of the income of people who earn over $10 million/year.
If we can get rid of those items and a couple of other obnoxious items (but those two are the worst), I’d be OK with making the rest of t permanent if we can balance the budget.
Unfortunately, the facts have a liberal bias.
What, like how reality is sexist and racist?
I’m pretty sure that’s a Colbert quote.
No, it’s not irrelevant. The concept is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. We’ve already rejected vouchers as being detrimental to our public schools while funneling taxpayer money into private religious institutions. Trying to bamboozle us into an already rejected program by calling it something you know we support is outrageously offensive.
I’ll tell you what really chapped my hide is when he had the audacity to call Social Security an “entitlement program”. Entitlement program? W?T?F? I contribute to Social Security! That money is mine. And I damn well better be able to get it out when I’m eligible to start receiving it!
This was clearly not a “State of the Union” address, either. I kept waiting and waiting for him to tell me what the actual state of the union was, and he never bothered to even bring it up. All I heard was a campaign speech. It was a disgusting display, and any decent human being would’ve been ashamed to have given it.
Any honest discussion and debate on earmarks should include details as to:
[ul]
[li]The number of earmarks (and dollar value) inserted into legislation by Democrats. [/li][li]The number of earmarks (and dollar value) inserted into legislation by Republications.[/li][li]The number of earmarks (and dollar value) inserted into legislation on behalf of the White House.[/li][/ul]
Unfortunately, my Google searching tonight doesn’t seem to be working. Searches are overloaded with current news and commentary and not historical information. The last figures I had several months ago indicated the Bush White House accounted for almost half of all earmarks when the Republicans held Congress.
I disagree with almost every Bush policy there is, but “rebut” and “debunk” are not the same thing.
When he’s actually lying about what actually happened and which programs he did or did not support, then it’s debunking. If it were purely a matter of opinion, you could call it a rebuttal. It’s not, however.
Who gives a shit? The purpose of education spending is to benefit students. If these Pell grants benefit students, their impact on public schools is a matter of no importance.
Regards,
Shodan
That’d be because the health of the public school system has no impact on students?
No, it would be because the health of the public school system is not an important factor compared to how well the students are learning. As mentioned.
Anything else you would like to have read to you?
Regards,
Shodan
It’s worse than that. It’s full of straw men and red herrings, which is to be expected from a biased source like that. Same reason I wouldn’t check the Heritage Foundation for a “debunking” of an Obama speech.
-
Note that on this page, TP quotes Bush as saying that spending on vets has increased 95% over the past 7 years. Nothing that they offer contradicts that. All the facts they list could happen concurently with increased spending.
-
On this page, TP quotes Bush as saying that 1.4 million Africans are being treated for AIDS. None of the facts listed contradicts that claim.
-
On this page, TP quotes Bush as saying the MCA as changed the way we deliver aid. The two facts they list do not contradict what he said.
I’m not going to bother checking them all, and some of them might even constitute a debunking if they actually address statements and directly contradict them. But “Bush is a big ol’ meanie who hates babies” does not count unless Bush has claimed that he is not a big ol’ meanie who hates babies.
It’s easy just to drop into a thread, leave a link, and say that so-and-so has debunked whatever. But just because you are predisposed to believe so-and-so over whatever doesn’t mean that a debunking ever took place.
Which students? The ones being taught at christian madrasahs on the public dime, or those left behind in the impoverished public school system?
How does building factories in Asia reduce unemployment in America?
The ones who can read. Ask one of them to help you.
Regards,
Shodan