Obama the fiscal conservative. Got it?
“These savings, large and small, add up,” says President Barack Obama today. Yes, but…
They don’t add up to much. In his $3.5 trillion budget, he’s proposing about 120 budget cuts, the largest share of them from the military, that amount to about $17 billion. That’s one-half of one percent. Meanwhile, domestic spending gets generous increases.
One of his proposals is to eliminate funding for the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, which provides financial assistance to states to help defray the cost of jailing illegals who commit crimes. That’s a popular program that former President Bush also tried to kill — and couldn’t. Others he proposes for elimination have already been rejected by his party in Congress.
These cuts are the equivalent of Cabinet secretaries proposing to reduce the budget by buying office supplies in bulk.
It is a game, of course. The deficit’s likely to surpass $1.5 trillion this year. But you do have to hand it to the President. He is masterful in focusing attention where he wants — on “savings, large and small” while spending large.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
68 comments Add your comment
GayGrayGeek
May 7th, 2009
12:23 pm
Gee, Jim, where was your outrage when your idol Shrub was giving away three-quarters of a TRILLION dollars to Wall Street?
Oh, that’s right. That money went to BIG BIDNESS, so it was just Hunky-Dory-OK with you Hypocritical (as well as Hypercritical) WingNuts.
Jefferson
May 7th, 2009
12:24 pm
The gov’t never gets what they pay for because they are overcharged and underserviced. You can blame gov’t, but its the vendors and contractors who are the bad guys.
Poultry
May 7th, 2009
12:30 pm
@GayGreyGeek,
Not only are you full of beans, you’re a drag on Gaydom. STFU.
…and I’m not even gay.
Peter
May 7th, 2009
12:31 pm
Spending LARGE would Be Dick Cheney and his cost Plus contracts Jim, for Bush’s made up WAR !
Part of the Rebublican “Faulty Intelligence” Program……
Reality Check
May 7th, 2009
12:32 pm
Hey Jim,
We are purchasing F-22’s @ 1.5 Billion dollars each: We have already purchased 120 of them already with pending orders for several more…. Please explain to me why despite two wars, not a single F-22 has seen ONE SECOND of combat? I am just wondering… The rightys always harp about deficits, but don’t want to cut money from a place that is giving us no return on money invested…. Just asking……
GayGrayGeek
May 7th, 2009
12:34 pm
I see the ol’ Chicken is a Good Little WingNut, insisting that anyone who disagrees with them should shut up. “Land Of The Free (To Think Exactly Like Me)”, right?
Poultry
May 7th, 2009
12:36 pm
Oh, well Heavens! My first post was nullified by the AJC watchers, and I shan’t give them the pleasure of a repeat of their reprehensible prejudice, so y’all just will have to make do without benefit of my sagacious advice for the day. That would be “AJC”, as in ajc.com.
Thank you.
Bo Chambliss LOBBYIST
May 7th, 2009
12:57 pm
Dad is really mad about this, lots of his Lobbyist Clients are going to be hurt by this. Can you imagine the damage that stopping making direct payments to non farmers at only $250,000.00. The whole economy will come apart if that happens. George Bush was wrong to veto this necessary spend and Dad will fight to the end to keep rich non farmers RICH.
Redneck Convert
May 7th, 2009
12:58 pm
Well, these Obama budget cuts don’t amount to the part of my income I spend on Skoal. There’s trillions of dollars he wants to spend on a bunch of junk. He ought to do what the Republicans want him to do about the economy. Nothing. Just cut taxes some more.
This Chicken guy must of wrote a real stinker of a post to get it blocked by the AJC. It’s just a shame they cut out all the names he’s calling the people that don’t agree with him. Heck, those alone would cause me to pay for a AJC paper.
Have a good p.m. everybody.
Non-progress Progressives
May 7th, 2009
1:02 pm
Yeah we don’t need to be hearing any more from the progressive/lib left about budget deficits from now on. Wow, cutting .4% out of the budget – stop the press! Methinks Americans are going to get just as sick of these far leftist bonehead hypocrites running Washington now as they were over the non-conservative Conservatives.
Also, take note how the Obama-friendly media is choosing to run stories about Obama date night and what kind of hamburger he and Hair Plugs had the other day instead of news they ran under Bush’s term like deficits, job losses, broken campaign promises, et al. This administration is all about the image, and only about the image. The media is only happy to entertain that further.
If the
Churchill's MOM
May 7th, 2009
1:08 pm
The New York Times is really after Our next President’s Daughter, they have no shame comparing the semi virgin Brook to Britney Spears. Ms. Spears was married when she had childeren. They are trying to make Levi a hero but would you want your daughter to date someone like Levi?
“Just because you’re wearing high-heeled sexy shoes doesn’t mean you should have a baby,” said Neil Cole.
I believe we can all rally around this sentiment.
Cole is the head of Iconix, a company that makes the Candie’s line of teen fashions. A couple of years ago, under fire from critics who accused him of dressing high schoolers like tarts, he established the Candie’s Foundation, which fights teen pregnancy. And there he was on Wednesday introducing the foundation’s new teen ambassador, Bristol Palin.
Palin is not in any way to be confused with the new Candie’s brand spokesperson, Britney Spears. Bristol is the one endorsing abstinence; Britney is the one promoting “hot bottoms.”
Can I say upfront that this is a terrible, terrible idea? Not the sexy clothes. Perhaps in the best of all possible worlds we would not have 12-year-olds dressing as if they were auditioning for a leading role in “Girls Gone Wild,” but history suggests that resistance is futile. There was one minute back in the late 1960s when the women’s movement tried to convince everyone that being liberated involved wearing sensible shoes. It was not a success. Really, you should never try to impose feminist principles that even Gloria Steinem refuses to pay attention to.
But surely, when it comes to combating teen pregnancy, the Palin family has done enough damage already. What worse message could you send to teenage girls than the one they delivered at the Republican convention: If your handsome but somewhat thuglike boyfriend gets you with child, he will clean up nicely, propose marriage, and show up at an important family event wearing a suit and holding your hand. At which point you will get a standing ovation.
Now a single mom on the outs with the father of her baby, Bristol wants a new kind of happy ending.
“I just want to go out there and promote abstinence and say this is the safest choice,” she said on “Good Morning America.”
“It’s not going to work,” said her ex-boyfriend, Levi Johnston, in a dueling early-morning interview.
If you have ever watched Levi Johnston on TV for two minutes you will appreciate how terrifying it is when he has the most reasonable analysis of a social issue.
Because Bristol’s own philosophy seems, at minimum, tentative, it’s hard to tell whether she believes that cheerleading for abstinence should be coupled with education about birth control methods. She and Levi used condoms, except when they didn’t.
Her mom has said in the past that she opposes “explicit” sex education, which kind of sounds like … sex education. And while encouraging kids to wait is obviously fine, the evidence is pretty clear that abstinence education is worse than useless. Texas, where virtually all the schools teach abstinence and abstinence alone, is a teen pregnancy disaster zone. “It’s had one of the highest rates for as long as I can remember,” said David Wiley, a professor of health education at Texas State University.
Bristol appeared Wednesday at Event to Prevent, a teen town hall, during which she said very little except to assure her audience that having a baby is no picnic. (“You have so much responsibility. It’s just hard work all the time.”) It’s hard not to suspect that for her, being the anti-pregnancy ambassador is just a good excuse to get out of Wasilla.
But where were her parents? Her mom ought to know by now that the only way to protect your family from becoming tabloid fodder is to make it clear to the media that the kids are absolutely, totally off limits. You can’t put them on network TV one day and then complain the next when a reporter asks whether the baby’s other grandmother is still facing drug charges.
“We contacted the governor’s office, and the next thing we knew Todd Palin was on the phone and said Bristol wanted to talk,” Cole said, explaining how his ambassador had been recruited. And indeed, there was Todd, beaming as his beautiful daughter stood in front of about 50 shrieking photographers, smiling a fixed smile.
We have seen so many bad plans about breaching the public-private divide lately. Elizabeth Edwards’s book tour. Eliot Spitzer’s media blitz. (Can we point out here that when 51 percent of the public tells pollsters that they would rather have Spitzer as governor than the current incumbent, David Paterson, that is not the same as saying they would like Spitzer to come back? You could probably get 51 percent of the voters to say they would rather have Vlad the Impaler than David Paterson. Or at least 30.)
But when a teenager goes out on this kind of mission, you have to wonder where her parents’ heads were. What does this say about Sarah Palin’s judgment?
Although we’ve sort of answered that question before.
*************Handel 2010**********PALIN MCCAIN 2012*************
Non-progress Progressives
May 7th, 2009
1:13 pm
“We are purchasing F-22’s @ 1.5 Billion dollars each: We have already purchased 120 of them already with pending orders for several more…. Please explain to me why despite two wars, not a single F-22 has seen ONE SECOND of combat? I am just wondering”
Reality check – it’s called staying on top of technology for FUTURE possible needs. Idiots like you who think we can continue to use 30 year old F-15s for air superiority are just – well – not too bright. Nobody knows what the future holds. Besides, Russians are building some top front line fighters that can possibly wipe out any aircraft we have now sans the Raptor. They are selling these aircraft to other nations.
We have the F-35 that is replacing the F-16 and F-18C/D models (but not the larger E/F models). If people like you were running this nation, we’d still be using F-4s. After all, they were first deployed in 1959 and weren’t first used in combat until 1965.
One final note: the F-22 has not been deployed overseas yet. Like during WWII, P-51s based in Kansas didn’t see much combat either. The alleged thinking of you progressive leftists is laughable.
Big Bucks GOP-doing the Lord's work
May 7th, 2009
1:14 pm
It is my understanding that most of the items Obama is trying to kill are items that George W Bush tried to kill but The Lobbyist controled Congess would not let him. Can’t wait to see the Republican list of budget cuts.
Copyleft
May 7th, 2009
1:16 pm
Gosh, Mr. Wooten (IRAQ) is all-of-a-sudden worried (IRAQ) about wasting a trillion (IRAQ) dollars!
I wonder (IRAQ) where that sudden burst (IRAQ) of fiscal conservatism (IRAQ) came from (IRAQ)? There was certainly (IRAQ) no sign of it before (IRAQ)….
Oh, sorry… did I type that out loud? Silly me.
Big Bucks GOP-doing the Lord's work
May 7th, 2009
1:17 pm
Non-progress Progressives 1:13 pm
Are you really F22 Guy?? You 2 are the only ones who think we should waste this money. Do you know more than Sec. Gates and the Joint Chief of Staff?
JLK
May 7th, 2009
1:17 pm
“…the Obama-friendly media is choosing to run stories about Obama date night and what kind of hamburger he and Hair Plugs had…”
Sean Hannity is Obama friendly media? That’s where I saw the hamburger footage, followed by Shortie’s sneering at the President’s choice of condiment. “Dijon mustard!” sneer snicker — run clip of Grey Poupon commercial — snicker sneer, followed by his uber-keen journalistic commentary, “Mr. Obama has been watching too much television!” Um… what? A preference for mustard over ketchup (shout out to Kerry, whose b— own ketchup) is not only newsworthy, but sneerworthy? It’s un-American to put a different something on your hamburger than what Hannity puts on his? Wow, what would we do without Fox “news” to keep us informed?
Red
May 7th, 2009
1:24 pm
“If people like you were running this nation, we’d still be using F-4s. After all, they were first deployed in 1959 and weren’t first used in combat until 1965″
NonProgressive who were we at war with in the period 1959-1965? Need to have a war to use a fighter plane, we are in the middle of 2 wars now but these big dollar waste set on the ground.
Non-progress Progressives
May 7th, 2009
1:28 pm
“Need to have a war to use a fighter plane, we are in the middle of 2 wars now”
Red – that’s my whole point. The F-4 was not used in combat until 1965. The F-22 is not a GROUND ATTACK aircraft, although it *can* do that job. It’s an aerial superiority fighter. Now, you tell me, what aerial threats are there that we need to take care of CURRENTLY overseas in two war fronts? Those wars are currently IRRELEVANT to the mission of the F-22. Our current ground attack/close air support aircraft are doing a good job for the time being – along with UAVs. Geez, do we have to spell everything out for you non–thinking progressives?
Non-progress Progressives
May 7th, 2009
1:30 pm
“Sean Hannity is Obama friendly media?”
JLK – why don’t you think about my words REAL HARD: “Obama friendly media.” Nothing but idiots here!
Ward
May 7th, 2009
1:31 pm
Face it, no one now, and no one in the future is going to go to Washington to CUT THE BUDGET. The only real power these dullards have is allocating the taxes they confiscate and that POWER is the only reason they go there. Occasionally someone will present the pretense of action, promising a leaner government (Obama) or cutting taxes (Bush), but somehow SPENDING ALWAYS GOES UP. They may adjust annual spending increases downwards, but in the end, spending goes up. It’s just too deeply embedded… when cutting $17 BILLION results in a less than 0.5% spending cut, things have gotten to damned big.
We’ve heard a lot about the evils of mismanaged corporations that have gotten ‘too big to fail’… how does that NOT apply to the Federal Government as well?
Non-progress Progressives
May 7th, 2009
1:33 pm
BTW: I thought you non-progress Progressives always said that Fake News and Hannity weren’t really news media anyway. Amazing how you people are all over the map based on your argument at the time. Ok, I’m dumbing down just interacting with you walking scarecrows. Buh-bye.
JLK
May 7th, 2009
1:52 pm
Non-PP, to call you a “tard” would be an insult to the kind-hearted people born with downs syndrome. Only ignorant schmucks insist on carving everything up into black & white, right & left, real news vs. liberal media. I trust no one single source of news, and make a point of rotating through the various broadcasts and publications regularly. Then I make up my OWN mind. YOU blather on about the Obama loving media showing the hamburger, but I only saw it on Hannity when checking in to see if Fox was distributing any actual news at the time. Nope. Just sneering over mustard. Now please hold a hankerchief under your mouth while you blather. The foam is dripping on your shirt which, I’m sure someone else must launder for you.
Ray Pugh
May 7th, 2009
1:53 pm
I sure hope the machines don’t become sentient any time soon, because if they read Wooten’s blog (and the comments that follow), they will determine humans are mindless pests and exterminate us…
Peter
May 7th, 2009
1:54 pm
Jim…Where were you when during the Bush administration the entire economy almost imploded ?
Cost Plus contract…..nothing mentioned.
Bin Laden is free…..nothing mentioned.
Bush the ONLY President in the History of the US to have a war and cut taxes……..nothing mentioned.
Zero checks and balances for wall street …… nothing mentioned.
Bernie Madoff steals Billions………..nothing mentioned.
How many Ponzi Scheme’s has there been……..nothing mentioned.
Wall street fell through the floor during the Bush administration…….. nothing mentioned.
Unemployment at decades high………. nothing mentioned.
Rush wants the country to fail……….nothing mentioned.
Rebublican’s not in control………..so nothing new in a positive idea from Jim !
Jim…..I read your thoughts today and realize…….Nothing Mentioned !
Red
May 7th, 2009
1:56 pm
“Geez, do we have to spell everything out for you non–thinking progressives?”
So who do we need to have air superiority over? The Russians are broke and the Chineese own us. Bush tried to kill the F22 but kicked the can down the road with 4 more to elect Saxby, that worked but the taxpayers are paying a big price.
Big Bucks GOP-doing the Lord's work
May 7th, 2009
1:59 pm
Non-progress
How about answering my question, Do you know more than Gates and the Joint Chief of Staff? If so where did you gain this knowledge?
Get Real
May 7th, 2009
2:19 pm
Debating Wooten’s outdated rhetoric, which has long been dismissed by FACTS is futile. Why? Because he’s not a real journalist. A real journalist would’ve called Bush on the trillions he spent on a war that has done what for our country’s national security? If Obama hadn’t enacted government spending, he would be spewing that the guy isn’t doing anything. Seems that the GA Labor Commissioner is glad to have the stimulus funds, as well as GEFA. But old man Wooten only sees things in Red and Blue. Whether he writes crap or the truth, he still gets paid. So enjoy your retirement Wooten, we deserve it.
Get Real
May 7th, 2009
2:21 pm
….. and 45% of the stimulus were tax cuts. I guess that were tax cuts for the wrong people in Wooten’s eyes.
El Jefe
May 7th, 2009
2:23 pm
Get Real,
A real journalist would have investigated both Bush and Obama. But the real journalist are not on any major paper or the AJC. The press today, will print anything the messiah says.
Reality Check
May 7th, 2009
2:26 pm
Non-Progressive:
Are you really that blind? Are you really that stupid??? My son completed two tours in Iraq without sufficient body armour yet idiots like you insist on 1.5 Billion for planes that don’t fit our mission. His Best Buddy was KILLED in Iraq when his Hummer Without armour plateing was hit By an IUD…. But we can spend hundreds of Billions of dollars to build weapons to fight traditional wars when 21 century enemies don’t do Air to air combat. Those purchases have nothing to do with staying on top of the latest and greatest… Its all about taking care of fat cat defense contractors. We all know it, some like you are just to indoctrinated to admit it.
Californication
May 7th, 2009
2:37 pm
How can you spend more in 100 days than Bush did in 8 years and 2 wars? Elect BO, CopyLeft how come you are not complaining about that? If Iraq is a problem then BO should be a big problem for you, please use logic to explain that?
hryder
May 7th, 2009
2:39 pm
Those people who want the government to do nothing regarding the current “crisis” are, in my opinion, correct. We know now that doing something has created many problems more severe than the original and will in time cause more discomfort for more people than if nothing had been done other than prosecuting the criminals and Congressional members whose lawbreaking and meddling created this “crisis”.
Peter
May 7th, 2009
2:53 pm
Hey Reality Check…Thank you for your story……. I am truly sorry for your son’s buddy……. I find it Amazing the guys in Iraq were cutting away any metal they could find to “create” armor for the Hummers.
The folks here really don’t want to hear how the soldiers were never equipment to go into combat.
But hey those cost Plus contracts….. talk about a total bilking of AMERICA by Big Mouth Cheney !
Nothing from Jim about those issues !
F22 Man
May 7th, 2009
2:54 pm
Saxby was out playing gold & I’m out of a job.
Shortly after the announcement by Mr. Gates, Lockheed’s chief executive, Robert J. Stevens, said in a memorandum to employees that while some of the recommendations were disappointing, “I embrace Secretary Gates’s call to put the interests of the United States first — above the interests of agencies, services and contractors — and I will support him in every way.”
The shift in thinking about the F-22 was detailed in an op-ed article on Monday in The Washington Post by Michael Donley, the Air Force secretary, and Gen. Norton Schwartz, the service’s chief of staff.
Before the announcement by Mr. Gates, both had fought hard for the F-22, saying the Air Force needed it as a hedge against Russia and China and even a possible war with Iran. They had advocated buying 60 more of the planes, which would have brought the Air Force’s fleet to 243. But in their essay, Mr. Donley and General Schwartz wrote that “the time has come to move on.”
F22 Man
May 7th, 2009
2:58 pm
playing golf for gold is more like it.
Steven Daedalus
May 7th, 2009
3:04 pm
Jim and hypocrite are interchangable.
Algonquin J. Calhoun
May 7th, 2009
3:26 pm
Poultry
May 7th, 2009
12:30 pm
@GayGreyGeek,
Not only are you full of beans, you’re a drag on Gaydom. STFU.
…and I’m not even gay.
Yeah, you’re gay! You shut the f*&% up! GGG got it absolutely right. Why don’t you go pluck yourself?
Copyleft
May 7th, 2009
3:41 pm
Calif: I’ll be happy to explain it to you.
The folks shrieking about wasteful spending are not me, but the right-wingers. They are the hypocrites, because they were perfectly okay with blowing a trillion on Iraq (not needed) and are now whining about spending that much on ourselves (definitely needed).
Iraq was dead-wrong and stupid and wasteful, of course… but I wasn’t opposed to Iraq just because I thought it COST too much. I was opposed to it because we didn’t need to invade! And, as it turns out, I was right.
No, the spending obsession is entirely the right-wing’s problem… and as I’ve pointed out, they’re utter hypocrites about it.
DebbieDoRight
May 7th, 2009
3:49 pm
Godly Republicans………..All of you are just so……Godly and upright. Why your outstanding moral back bone is an inspiration to us all. Why change? If it didn’t work for eight years plus, just keep on plugging away at the same rhetoric and by golly it’s gonna HAVE to work sometime. Just because all of your ideologies failed in the past couple of years only means that you, (Godly Republicans), weren’t EXPLAINING it well — it had NOTHING to do with the conception; just the explanation!!
You Godly republicans wanted less government, then preceded to involve the government in the personal lives of americans more than any other party in the history of America!!! Bailouts, Terri Schiavo, wiretapes, torture, teenage pregnancy, gay marriage, et al.; if it weren’t for you Godly Republicans tell us what we can’t do; why were would we be? Why without Anne, and Rush telling we lowly law abiding GODLESS americans what they thought of our morals, (while having absolutely none of their own); heck we’d be LOST.
Thank you Godly republicans for showing us the way. Don’t worry about preaching what you’re not practicing — just keep preaching it anyway and MAKE everyone else practice it!!
Still Munchin the Carpet
May 7th, 2009
3:55 pm
Jim, a few months ago you were sporting a limp woody over the way that those horrible earmarks were destroying the very fabric of our Nation. You and Gimpy McCain raged over the waste represented by the $16.9 billion these earmarks cost last year.
Yet today, you piffle piffle at Obama’s effort to remove $17 billion in waste from the budget. It is exactly this kind of pathetic inconsistency and lack of principle that makes your continued employment in “journalism” a mystery and near-crime. I’d call you a mendacious water-carrying hack, but it isn’t worth the breath.
Has the senile dementia set in so firmly that you are unable to see this?
Peter
May 7th, 2009
4:12 pm
Hey……..DebbieDoRight ……you forgot to mention the biggest Rebublican scam of them all…….
George Bush “Prayed”… to “HIS GOD”……Before attacking Iraq !
I maybe it was really a “Confession”….because all along he knew about the “Faulty Intelligence”….that would eventually come to us as his Biggest Lie !
More Rebublican Family Values !
Poultry
May 7th, 2009
4:13 pm
I would just add, for what it’s worth, that the F-22 is a really great plane.
Billy Bob the anti-THUG
May 7th, 2009
4:38 pm
GigglingGayGuy
You mention the $700 billion Troubled Asset Repurchase Program which, among several sub-programs, includes the Capital Purchase Program. The CPP accounts for most of the current expenditures under TARP and totals $195 billion in preferred share purchases and warrants issued to the U.S. Treasury. An additional $101 billion of TARP monies has been used in other loan and capital purchase programs including the $40 billion currently extended to AIG. This is the current extent of TARP funds, $296 billion, and these figures are as of February 2009.
As most reasonable individuals can see, the TARP program is all about investments in the financial services industry, including GMAC (which currently has a $21 billion loan). However, once the industry/sector stabilizes, all TARP monies are intended to be repaid to the Treasury. There were no grants or outright expenditures under the TARP program only investments which were to be repaid.
I’m impressed that you can even compare Obama’s projected $3.5 TRILLION dollar budget ($1.5 billion deficit) with a lending/investment program like TARP.
Billy Bob the anti-THUG
May 7th, 2009
4:52 pm
Giggler
To further support my point, I’d add this comment from the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (TARP)
This provision was a big factor in the eventual passage the EESA. It gives the taxpayer the opportunity to “be repaid.” The recoupment provision requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to submit a report on TARP’s financial status to Congress five years after its enactment. If TARP has not been able to recoup its outlays through the sale of the assets, the Act requires the President to submit a plan to Congress to recoup the losses from the financial industry. Theoretically, this prevents TARP from adding to the national debt. The use of the term “financial industry” in the provision leaves open the possibility that such a plan would involve the entire financial sector rather than only those institutions that availed themselves of TARP
Author’s Note: the $21 billion extended to GMAC mentioned in the previous post should have read to the auto industry. -Ed.
DebbieDoRight
May 7th, 2009
5:14 pm
Peter: Good One!!1
Still Chewing the Carpet
May 7th, 2009
5:15 pm
A mendacious, water-carrying hack. You can delete, you old coward, but it does not change the facts.
Ga Values
May 7th, 2009
5:27 pm
The Aston Martin is a great car but my Nissan truck hauls the horse feed to the barn. Too many of these big spenders want to buy an Aston Martin (F22) when we need a truck (A10, F18, etc.)
Ga Values
May 7th, 2009
5:31 pm
Billy Bob the anti-THUG 4:38 pm
How is our “Investment” in AIG going? Most of what I read about TARP says we’ll be lucky to end up with 30 cents on the dollar from our TARP “investment”. I retired at 50 by not using that type investment plan, I suggest you do the sime.
AAMM
May 7th, 2009
5:35 pm
Do you want restrictions on abortion and marriage OR government to stay out of our lives as much as possible?
Do you want government mandated universal medical care OR a private medical system affordable only for some?
Do you want Regulation of financial firms OR wild boom/bust cycles?
Do you want Regulation of the environment OR a poisoned & unstable one?
Either say what level of taxes is acceptable and exactly how we as a country can live with it, or drop the topic. Starting from ZERO taxes, would you impose any? And if so, EXACTLY how and how much?
Life is about choices. As long as Republicans like this one talk out of both sides of their mouth, no one is going to listen to them any more. Their time of winning by pretending we can always have our old cake and eat it too are way way over.
Poultry
May 7th, 2009
6:01 pm
@AAMM,
Ahma thinkin’, ah wants mah Mammy!
Isn’t that how Democrats vote?