Bush's speech...
POSTED BY: Khyron
UPDATED: Saturday, February 3, 2007 22:04
VIEWED: 12155
PAGE 8 of 11
And now, to FINALLY respond the the actual thread topic:
A future of hope and opportunity begins with a growing economy — and that is what we have. We are now in the 41st month of uninterrupted job growth
ie.: Since the economy crashed in 2001. I think people winced when they heard this.
http://oregonstate.edu/Dept/pol_sci/fac/sahr/famin.htm
http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/bp162
First, we must balance the federal budget. We can do so without raising taxes. What we need to do is impose spending discipline in Washington, D.C. We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009 — and met that goal three years ahead of schedule.
I think we all know this is an attempt to strangle the government
Next, there is the matter of earmarks… cut the number and cost of earmarks at least in half by the end of this session.
This is something I can get behind. But why not just eliminate them entirely?
Finally, to keep this economy strong we must take on the challenge of entitlements. Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid are commitments of conscience — and so it is our duty to keep them permanently sound. Yet we are failing in that duty — and this failure will one day leave our children with three bad options: huge tax increases, huge deficits, or huge and immediate cuts in benefits. Everyone in this Chamber knows this to be true — yet somehow we have not found it in ourselves to act.
“Wolf! Wolf!” cried the boy.
We must increase funds for students who struggle — and make sure these children get the special help they need. And we can make sure our children are prepared for the jobs of the future, and our country is more competitive, by strengthening math and science skills. The No Child Left Behind Act has worked for America's children — and I ask Congress to reauthorize this good law.
But not to fund it.
Tonight, I propose two new initiatives to help more Americans afford their own insurance. First, I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents. Families with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $15,000 of their income. Single Americans with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $7,500 of their income.
Is that on the first several thousands or last thousands?
At the same time, this reform will level the playing field for those who do not get health insurance through their job.
Unfocused, tosses lots of $$$ at people who’re already covered at the expense of ppl who are not. DOA
Extending hope and opportunity in our country requires an immigration system worthy of America with laws that are fair and borders that are secure. When laws and borders are routinely violated, this harms the interests of our country. To secure our border, we are doubling the size of the Border Patrol — and funding new infrastructure and technology.
Great. Good start.
Yet even with all these steps, we cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border — and that requires a temporary worker program.
No
We will enforce our immigration laws at the worksite, and give employers the tools to verify the legal status of their workers — so there is no excuse left for violating the law.
Does he mean he isn’t doing that NOW?
It is in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply
and blah blah blah…
and they will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change.
which isn’t happening and over which we have no control.
…one question has surely been settled — that to win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy… Our success in this war is often measured by the things that did not happen. We cannot know the full extent of the attacks that we and our allies have prevented — but here is some of what we do know: We stopped an al-Qaida plot to fly a hijacked airplane into the tallest building on the West Coa
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:And he never will. He's a Troll.
Originally posted by SignyM:
Still, you have not attempted to substantively refute the arguments in the other thread, and I will keep pointing out for the forseeable future.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think he's confused more than anything.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I appreciate your comment storymark.
italics ("Well, not everyone is foolish enough to still believe that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. I'm in awe that you'd actually admit to that.")
I agree with you that 9/11 didn't have anything to do with Iraq. I guess your saying that is OK to defend one's country but not to attack other countries. When a country attacks a country that hasn't provoked it is not defence. If Iraq did not attack America then was morally wrong for America to attack Iraq.
What was was the reason that America invaded Iraq?
One reason America invaded Iraq might have been to change Iraq into a functioning stable democracy. A functioning democracy had a good chance of discouraging terrorism. A few reasons why Iraq had a good chance of becoming a functioning democracy was Iraq's had demonstrated a previous leadership role in the region, support of women in professional roles, a support for moderate muslims and support for research and educational opportunities.
In group theory, a group works most successfully if there is one clear leader. When you have one clear leader, rather than many leaders fighting for the top role, a group will united and work together. If a group doesn't have a clear leader it often becomes fragmented and falls apart and is unproductive and prone to conflict. So perhaps the American leadership wants Iraq to became a good leader country, then other countries in the region would follow Iraq's example of democracy.
Not that I agree just putting this idea to you to respond to.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Funny because there's always the big thing about how the Middle East needs Democracy, but no one seems to mention it's already got it. Probably because the pre existing democracies are Anti-USA, but since the majority of people in them are Anti-USA surely that means they're doing pretty well, democratically speaking.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Funny because there's always the big thing about how the Middle East needs Democracy, but no one seems to mention it's already got it.
______________________________________________________
Oh you mean like how Sadaam Hussein won 99% of the democratic election.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:No I mean like how Iran's government is elected in unrigged elections, which actually puts it slightly ahead of the US at the moment.
Originally posted by mazaen:
Oh you mean like how Sadaam Hussein won 99% of the democratic election.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No I mean like how Iran's government is elected in unrigged elections, which actually puts it slightly ahead of the US at the moment.
_____________________________________________________
Oh you mean how Iran's religious leaders choose the candidates that run for the elections.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:And that's different from how US corporations choose the candidates that run for elections, how exactly?
Originally posted by mazaen:
Oh you mean how Iran's religious leaders choose the candidates that run for the elections.
Iran isn't a perfect example of democracy, but it is a democracy and it is improving. On the other hand the US government has a long history of supporting non-democractic regimes when the democratic alternative is not to their liking, for instance General Pinochet and Chile.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME