It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Thou Shalt Not Speak Ill of Bush

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 03:46 AM
link   


Consequently, the enormous White House effort to threaten, cajole, and even bribe House members to get the last votes for passage was a slap in the face. I suddenly realized that the White House did want this bill to pass and was not just playing some clever political game designed by Karl Rove, and I concluded that George W. Bush is no conservative.

I found myself increasingly alienated from President Bush and the whole Republican establishment. I didn’t become a Republican to create new entitlement programs and hugely expand the size of government. That’s what Democrats do.


link

There isnt much that I can say the article says it all.
Bush is the only politican I know of who has alienated his core supporter base.
Perhaps an American can explain why conservatives dont like Medicare.




posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I haven't read this guy's book, and it's unlikely I ever will. I've already made my judgement about the Bush administration.

I can, however; provide some insight on medicare for those of you fortunate enough to have problems with a government other than BushCo.


U.S. citizens and residents pay taxes for a long list of things, including income tax. And what we think of as "income tax" breaks down to a percentage of one's income, plus money for social security (a government held retirement fund), plus money for medicare and medicaid. Medicare is for the elderly and disabled, medicaid is for children and the poor.

Republicans (in a broad sense) hate it because it's taking their hard earned money to support people who aren't working.
Republicans tend to have a higher income than Democrats, and our tax system is weighted to take more money from people with higher incomes.
At minimum wage, people pay about 8% of their income to income tax. Plus medicare and social security which bumps the amount up to about 15%

My husband, earning slightly less than 50K per year pays 31% of his income to tax. The playing field levels off somewhere in the multiple hundred thousand dollar range. Never having earned that kind of money, I wouldn't know.

Even though social security and medicare are separate, additional taxes levied on income; the money all goes into the same pile. And the government spends every penny.
Republicans like to know exactly where there money is going. They would prefer to pick and choose who to support and who to deny. Democrats want to support everyone equally -as long as it's people who are poor. Neither group is right. And the poor and elderly are left to hang in the breeze.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   
Rich people pay more? Because they make more!!! How to explain this to money grubbing republicans.....

Ok, 100,000,000 people make A dollar a year, and pay 10% of that, or .10 cents each. That equals... doing the calculation... 10 million a year.(I even used a calculator to make sure that was right) Now lets call them democrats.

Now 1, thats ONE, ICHI, UNO, UN, whatever, person makes 100,000,000,000,000 dollars a year and also pays 10%, that is 10 trillion a year, but he makes a Hundred Trillion a year, now, the republican answer is the person making a Hundred Trillion a year is being shafted while the dems, or poor people, are raping the country, and so must be killed.

But actually looking at the numbers, the republican still has 90 TRILLION dollars left, while the people who also pay 10% of what they make, have 90 cents each.

Also, what republicans don't like getting out, besides the truth, is the people on Medicare, get this, PAID TAXES! They are getting their tax money back! You don't have an 80 year old man going around beating 20 year olds to death for their money because they aren't using that money they are using the money they paid into the system when they worked!



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   
this reminds me of what o'reilly said about a TEACHER who compared bush to hitler

"nobody should speak ill of a wartime president" (paraphrased)

he said that the school district should have fired him for the dissent.

i'll admit, no matter how much i hate bush, pulling the hitler card out, unless specificly barring the genocide factor, is a little extreme.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11



I found myself increasingly alienated from President Bush and the whole Republican establishment. I didn’t become a Republican to create new entitlement programs and hugely expand the size of government. That’s what Democrats do.


link


Perhaps an American can explain why conservatives dont like Medicare.




Republicans spend as much as Democrats, just for other things. Those of you who wanted to lower your taxes are now paying user fees (for example, to let your child ride a bus to school) My share of the last round of tax cuts went to pay for higher insurance costs, utilities, homeowners association fees, the list goes on and on; I'm still at square one. Chutes and Ladders anyone?
We are in debt for generations now, thanks to the elective war in Iraq.
RE Medicare. Because it's not a business. Notice how quickly tax dollars are being spent for the new drug program, drugs supplied by business. Tax dollars for govt is bad, tax dollars for business is good. Halliburton etal. Public education--the same people who criticize public schools are first in line for tax dollars (vouchers) to fund their own schools. Again, Republicans spend as much (or more!) $, just for their own priorities.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
this reminds me of what o'reilly said about a TEACHER who compared bush to hitler

"nobody should speak ill of a wartime president" (paraphrased)


Are we at war?

Let's get this straight, folks. Bush declared a "war on terrorism," which sounds like a metaphor similar to LBJ's "war on poverty," but both Bush and O'Reilly seem to want to take it literally.

Since "terrorism" isn't a concrete, finite opponent, but rather a military tactic that can be used by anyone, has always been practiced by some, and will always be practiced by some, this is a war that can never be won. And since "terrorism," however frightening and annoying it may become, can never force us to make peace, since it has no authority capable of negotiating with our diplomats the way a nation would, it is also a war that can never be lost.

Since it can never be won and can never be lost, it can never end, and we will always be at war.

This means that every president from now on will be a "wartime president," and so, by O'Reilly's formulation, immune from criticism.

Pretty clever, no?



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Two Steps Forward

Since it can never be won and can never be lost, it can never end, and we will always be at war.

This means that every president from now on will be a "wartime president," and so, by O'Reilly's formulation, immune from criticism.

Pretty clever, no?


The likes of O'Reilly will defend the likes of Bush using the logic you outlined above that is untill a Dem is elected. Once a non Republican is elected O'Reilly will do a massive backflip and start attacking the occupant of the Whitehouse.



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 01:10 AM
link   
And when a dem is elected president he/she will be blamed for the fallout - literal (DU) and figurative - from this absolute fiasco of 8 years of misrule by both Bush and his toadies in Congress. This is what they do. They are the party of screaming FPs - Finger Pointers: Or the party of BSers - (er...) Blame Shifters.

Aside from the obvious negative outcomes of the policies they inflict on us - the injury, death, destruction and waste of economic and ecological resources - it is, ultimately, very embarrassing for humanity. The system - our system - has failed so utterly that, in spite of my vociferous and public outcry against this regime and its evil tactics, I can't help but feel somewhat responsible by participating on any level - even as an opponent.

Because in one sense to oppose something is to grant it merit - the merit of opposition. Perhaps we should all simply turn away and ignore them. Do you suppose they will go away and leave us to screw up some other race of beings? I don't know that I could wish that even on another star system, billions and billions of light years away.



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 10:17 AM
link   
We do live here and now, one point in time, but remember we are a point in history (the big picture) also. Life goes on. We must not dispair, ever. In America we can vote them out as easily as we vote in. There is always the "loyal opposition", there must be. So keep on opposing.
What is missing these days in Washington (except by a few good men/women) is character-- honesty, respect, dignity. Yes, whatever party is in power will be blamed for whatever happens, but I would rather have one man in the Whitehouse, for example, who screws one person, than one man who screws a nation.



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11
Perhaps an American can explain why conservatives dont like Medicare.


The reason why I think that is so is because the rich conservatives like to keep all of their money. And besides donating to charities to keep a "public face", they rather see the poor as a blight of America.

Sadly, I always wonder about the poor and Middle-Class conservatives who complain about social security and health care. What happens if the President and Congress cuts the "Meals on Wheels" program and they won't have a hot meal to eat? What would happen if there wasn't any social security program anymore and they had nothing to live on? What would happen if the job training programs disappeared and they have no other way to learn a trade in order to make a living? And what if Medicare disappeared and they have a catastrophic illness? How on earth would they pay for rising medical costs when insurance runs out? What if your kids want to go to school and you're tapped out of money? What if the kids can't find a job and have to go to financial aid? Yet, that Financial Aid office turns them down because of government cuts?

The problem is simple. It's easy to blame people who are poor and supposedly "sucking off the system". But when it happens to you or the ones you care about, are you doing the same? Or being glad that the government is there to help you?



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join