Political Hippo Circle Jerk - America, farg YEAH!

[ATV]

If it's the latter, the capability to comprehend how the economy works is significantly outside of your grasp.

Ahh, thought so.

[ice grillin you]

How have the inner cities become better/richer since the dems have been running them? 

you do realize there are poor people outside the inner cities right?...or are you one of those that thinks the ghettos are filled with poor negros and everywhere else is candyland filled with gooey gum drops and unicorns grazing in lemon grass fields

also its not just about the poorest of the poor...the middle class also gets ignored during pub presidencies falling from the middle class and becoming poor

[phillymic2000]

yeah, I'm talking about the life in dem run big cities. you blame the pubs for the poor getting poorer, my point is what has the local and state dem's done for the poor? hold the cash out in front of them to keep them voting dem over and over and no big changes for them. 

[ATV]

^ No point.

[ice grillin you]

yeah, I'm talking about the life in dem run big cities. you blame the pubs for the poor getting poorer, my point is what has the local and state dem's done for the poor? hold the cash out in front of them to keep them voting dem over and over and no big changes for them. 

they dont cut things like funding for after school care so that poor mothers can work full time and not pay exhorbitant child care prices

they dont cut funding for organizations that feed and house the homless so they arent forced to go out on the street and freeze or starve to death

the dont cut funding for aids research in poor communities to stop the spead of and educate the poor on the disease

i could go on forever but somehow i dont think youll ever be convinced

[Wingspan]

Only one of those is actually true though.

There is actually nothing accurate about your first line. Check out the philly budget lines the next time the city bails out septa, and look at what they cut to keep the fare at $2 a ride.

A mother working full time is the one paying child care...not the stay at home.

[ice grillin you]

negative

and stop stalking me psycho

[Wingspan]

Stop being so wrong about things.

[ice grillin you]

The past week has highlighted the moral priorities of Washington Republicans.  After delivering a speech at the National Prayer Breakfast reminding Americans of God's "charge to feed the hungry, to reach out to the poor, to bring aid to the widow or the orphan," President Bush signed budget legislation for Fiscal Year 2006 that abandons this moral calling. (President Bush, National Prayer Breakfast, 2/2/06)   Then, he presented a budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2007 that demands even further cuts to programs that provide critical food, health, and education assistance to the neediest Americans. 

The American people know that actions speak louder than words.  And they know that the record of Washington Republicans is out of step with American values and traditions.  Individual Americans, religious leaders and local community organizations are doing their part to answer this moral calling.  Yet time after time, Republicans in Washington have provided handouts to special interests and multi-millionaires while cutting assistance for vulnerable Americans and dramatically increasing the debt burden on our children and grandchildren.  These budgets are not just fiscally irresponsible and shortsighted, they are immoral.

Bush Abandons Moral Charge to "Feed the Hungry"
Bush Fiscal Year 2007 budget cuts food program for senior citizens, pregnant women, and children.  According to the Los Angeles Times, "Another program new to Bush's hit list is the Agriculture Department's commodity supplemental food program, which provides food packages to low-income elderly people, pregnant women and infants." (2/6/06)


Bush Abandons Moral Charge to "Reach Out to the Poor"
Bush budgets cut Medicaid health care coverage for the nation's poor and disabled.  The Fiscal Year 2006 budget reconciliation bill President Bush signed this week cuts Medicaid by $6.9 billion over five years.  According to the Washington Post, "Congressional Budget Office documents estimated that Medicaid changes would impose new costs on 13 million poor recipients and end insurance coverage for 65,000 Medicaid enrollees..." (Washington Post, 2/6/06)  "About one-third of those affected would be children and almost half would be individuals with income below the poverty level... About 60 percent of those losing coverage would be children." (Congressional Budget Office)  More than 50 million low-income people depend on Medicaid for their health care.  Through legislative proposals and regulatory changes however, President Bush has requested an additional $17 billion in Medicaid cuts over five years in the Fiscal Year 2007 budget presented earlier this week.

Bush budget reconciliation bill cuts assistance for needy families.  The budget reconciliation bill just enacted makes "changes to the basic welfare program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, that would push states to tighten work requirements for women on assistance, a provision pushed hard by the administration for nearly four years." (Washington Post, 2/6/06)

Bush Fiscal Year 2007 budget cuts housing assistance for the poor, disabled, and elderly.  President Bush's Fiscal Year 2007 budget would cut funding for programs to assist the elderly with housing costs by $190 million (or 25 percent) and cut funding for programs to assist persons with disabilities with housing costs by $118 million (or 50 percent).  The President's budget would also freeze funding for the Homeless Veterans Reintegration program, which helps homeless veterans become employed in urban and rural areas.

Bush Fiscal Year 2007 budget cuts funding for rural education.  The President's budget freezes funding for two vital rural education school improvement programs:  the Small, Rural Schools Achievement program which helps fund rural local educational agencies, and the Rural and Low-Income Schools program, which targets rural local education agencies that serve poor students.
 

Bush Abandons Moral Charge to "Bring Aid to the Widow or Orphan"
Bush Fiscal Year 2007 budget eliminates Social Security death benefits.  The Bush budget would eliminate the $255 death benefit provided by Social Security to the families of those who die.  While modest, this benefit is important to many families who need assistance in order to bury their loved ones with dignity.

Bush Fiscal Year 2007 budget cuts funding for children.  From health care to child care, President Bush's budget underserves America's children:

Cuts funding for children's health care.  "Mr. Bush will propose eliminating programs to treat people with traumatic brain injuries and to improve emergency medical services for children." (New York Times, 2/5/06)
Cuts to children's hospitals.  Free-standing children's hospitals depend upon the federal government to support the training of health professionals.  But the President has proposed to cut the Children's Hospitals Graduate Medical Education (GME) program by $198 million – from $297 million in Fiscal Year 2006 to $99 million in Fiscal Year 2007. 
Cuts to child care assistance.  The Bush budget also calls for $1.03 billion in child care funding cuts over the next five years, denying more than 400,000 children from receiving child care in 2011 as compared to 2005 levels. (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities)  The Fiscal Year 2006 budget reconciliation bill already cut $572 million in foster care funding, limiting the ability of grandparents and relatives to care for neglected children and limiting federal matching funds for some state administrative costs.
Bush supports largest education cut ever.  President Bush's Fiscal Year 2007 budget proposes the largest cut to federal education funding in the 26-year history of the Education Department – a $2.1 billion reduction, or 3.8 percent below the Fiscal Year 2006 level.  Nearly one-third of the 141 programs the President proposes to cut or eliminate are education programs.  Hurricane-torn Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama are among 29 states projected to receive a cut in Title I education grants, which provide needed resources to local school districts to help disadvantaged students succeed academically. 



Cuts to Programs That Help Vulnerable Americans Used to Finance Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthy—Not to Reduce the Deficit
Cuts for the poor, elderly, disabled, widows, mothers, and children dwarfed by cost of Bush tax breaks for multi-millionaires.   The cost of the Bush tax breaks over ten years just for those with annual incomes greater than $1 million is projected to be $648 billion. (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities)  This is more than six times the President's proposed cut in Medicare and dwarfs the other cuts that would harm Americans in greatest need.  If the President were willing to reconsider just a small fraction of his tax breaks for special interests and multi-millionaires, these harmful cuts could be avoided with no impact on the deficit.

Republican Senator Voinovich calls Bush deficit-reduction claim disingenuous.  "'I do not know how anyone can say with a straight face that when we voted to cut spending in December to help achieve deficit reductions, we can now turn around a short while later to provide tax cuts that exceed or cancel out the reduction in spending,' Senator George V. Voinovich (R-Ohio) said yesterday, as the Senate took up a procedural motion that would allow tax-cut negotiations to begin.  'We cannot afford these tax cuts.'" (Washington Post, 2/6/06) 

Republican policies have increased deficits and debt.  Washington Republicans' expensive handouts for special interests and multi-millionaires have helped create record-breaking budget deficits that will leave a fiscal burden on future generations.  President Bush inherited a unified budget surplus of $236 billion from President Clinton, the largest in American history.  Budget surpluses were expected to continue for another ten years when President Bush took office in January 2001.  By 2002, however, the unified federal budget had returned to a deficit of $158 billion and deficits have since reached record highs.  Last year, the deficit was $319 billion, higher than in any year before President Bush took office. (Office of Management and Budget)  Despite President Bush's claims that the budget cuts enacted for Fiscal Year 2006 will trim the deficit, he now projects that the deficit this year will be $423 billion—the highest in American history.  Meanwhile, the President's budget would increase debt to $12 trillion by 2011, more than double the $5.7 trillion of debt when he took office.

[Wingspan]

That wasnt my point. The local goverments cut funding to the same programs on a state and city level (which is a bigger piece of the pie anyway).

Goverments, of led by both parties cut funding to programs that are needed in poorer areas.

[ice grillin you]

of course

but over history pub regimes cut them more...and by a titantic porportion

do some reading up on everyones favorite son ronald reagan...he was the devil personified

[ATV]

All the poor, black, uneducated, single mothers in these inner cities should just hurry up pick themselves up by their bootstraps already.

John McCain and his second wife did.

[ice grillin you]

so should all the meth lab building out of work farmers


stupid poors

[ATV]

No, the people in shacks in appalachia have had Repubelican mayors, councilmen, and other representatives. They've already pulled themselves up by their bootstraps.

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

It's hilarious how we are completely ignoring the opportunity to talk about the spending plans and economic pitfalls in the two candidates' platforms and are instead going back to trite partisan banter.

When I say "we," what I really mean is the leftists that don't give a rat's ass that Obama's plan doesn't make a lick of sense.  It simply has to be better, because Bush was bad and Reagan was bad.  Forget the fact that both Reagan and Bush spent way more money than they should have on stupid shtein and completely abandoned fiscal conservativism.  It only stands to reason that McCain will do the exact same thing, because he's a Republican.

Seriously, watching you guys circle jerk is beyond sad.  I would rather see a picture of Bob Barr naked.  (rjs, help a brother out?)