Deegan said:We are doing it right now, of course we do, it's the one that the Dem's are complaining about, and fighting every inch of the way.:roll:
Caine said:Did you bother reading all the comments I made about where thier plan is taking us?
I guess you agree with all that stuff cause your already fine doing your sales executive crap and getting your phat bonus from Uncle George every year....
You don't give a **** about social security because you most likely won't need it, or have the knowledge to use it when it is "Privatized"
Probably didn't fight in the war or have friends or family who did.
Didn't watch someone get killed for protecting a "trash dump Site"
Don't care that veterans are getting thier benefits cut... don't care about medical insurance because you can afford it.....
Am I right?
Deegan said:No, actually you could not be more wrong.
My son is in the Air Force, and is going to Iraq any day now. My entire family has fought in every war this country has seen, two uncles in Nam, my father was a Medivac pilot, and was shot down, he did survive, but was never the same. My grandfather was in the 817th tank destroyer division, and drove a tank for 3 years in Germany, and was there when they freed a death camp there, something he never forgot, till the day he died, and I'll never forget his stories. I tried to join before college, and was denied because of a medical condition, something silly I thought, but my dream to be an Air Force pilot was not to be. I care very much about S.S, and I am concerned that if nothing is done, there will not be a program for those who need it most. I hope I don't need it, but i don't know, you never know. I worked hard to get where I am at, and my "phat bonus" is something I earned, and I don't apologize for that, EVER.
To your other questions, I believe my answer covers those as well, and I think my party does more for vets then the other, that is the main reason I am a Republican.
Anything else, or does that about cover it?
Again, as I have in the past, thank you for your service.
Caine said:Don't you feel concerned that the "Plan" of the Republican party is not working well when it comes to VA Benefits?????
Being a Member of VFW, I get alot of info from them, and even the VFW seems to have a problem with the lowering benefits, and poor quality of the system... if we can't provide adequate healthcare for our entire country, at least we can provide quality healthcare to our veterans... am I right??
I know what your thinking, and to go and answer your claims... I don't know and Don't care WHICH party has a plan for it... But veteran benefits are an important part of respect that the veterans deserve for thier hard work and sacrifice for this country.......... And I don't give a **** which party it is, nobody should mess with a veterans benefits.
Caine said:When looking at the direction our country is going, im certain you must ask yourself this question. Do the Republicans have a Plan for the Future? Many issues that make me ponder this have to do with thier "plan" for Iraq. The "plan" it to stick to the original "plan". Is that really a plan for the "future"? Change is necessary, where would this country be without it? Also, one must look at the fiscal issues concerning our nation at the moment. The "plan" for the war was that the oil revenues would pay for the cost of the war. Instead, I have noticed that the future of the Social Security plan has paid for the War instead. Many people believe that this should be privatized, I ask you then, just how that is going to work for people who know nothing of the market, and don't make the kind of money to afford to pay someone for advise on it. The government refuses to address national medical insurance, as restrictions on foreign drugs cause drug costs to go through the roof, as well as medical insurance, and drug companies are making record profits. Millions and Millions of Americans are unemployed, yet the President and his party are allowing illegal immigrants to come over and take jobs he says "Americans' won't do". Many companies are forcing employees to quit smoking by a certain date or be fired because medical insurance is getting too costly. We are at war overseas, yet the government is cutting VA benefits to those who have fought in past wars in order to pay for this one. Americans here at home are suffering because the main focus of our government is a "Nation-Building" war in which the President himself said he does not agree with before being elected in 2000. The White House administration led by President Bush has come under legal scrutiny, as well as the Republican House Chair for illegal actions, and a Californian Republican congressman as well, for accepting bribes.
With all these problems, you must ask... Do the republicans really have a plan for the future??????
You don't give a **** about social security because you most likely won't need it, or have the knowledge to use it when it is "Privatized"
Probably didn't fight in the war or have friends or family who did.
Didn't watch someone get killed for protecting a "trash dump Site"
And I don't give a **** which party it is, nobody should mess with a veterans benefits.
Deegan said:You would know better then I, but my father, and uncles have said it has gotten better. My father just had a tumor removed from his brain, and he don't pay a penny for the procedure, he was even sent out of the VA for the operation, so he could get the best care, or doctor actually. I just called my uncle, and he says he has never had a problem, no matter the admin. This is one area where these politicians can never wiggle, they may try, but they know these armed men will form a militia quick like.
ptsdkid said:I don't see where the VA is cutting benefits. I'm a 100% disabled veteran with PTSD and I have never had a problem getting any medicine, any help, or any services from the VA--and they are all free. Is there a specific benefit that you're overly concerned about?
VFW SIte said:Washington, Nov. 8, 2005 - In 1932, more than 20,000 World War I veterans marched on Washington in an attempt to obtain benefits from a government that felt no need to compensate them for their service. President Herbert Hoover called in the military and drove this "Bonus Army" out of town at the end of a bayonet.
"Bayonets aren't pointed at us anymore," said Robert. E. Wallace, executive director of the Washington Office of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the U.S., "but they might as well be because the federal government is once again committing a tremendous injustice. Their target this time is 72,000 military veterans who have been diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD."
The government's plan is to reduce or eliminate the benefits of those who are rated 100 percent disabled from an impairment that's just as debilitating as the worst physical wound.
Yes, Lets hope this isnt the only plan the republicans have for OUR country... we have problems here at home too..ptsdkid said:Someone else mentioned that the Republican plan is already in progress with fighting the terrorists in their back yard so as not to have mushroom clouds hovering over our populated cities.
Could you imagine how bad poverty would be without this program???[/quote]FDR's New Deal started the socialization of America. That then led to LBJ's Great Society where government dependency became the liberal ideology. People expected to reap cradle to grave benefits without lifting a finger.
Yet we gave "HAND OUTS" in the form of tax cuts, and have no plans to change the next round of tax cuts despite our record deficit? We're talking about a Plan here.. thats no planNow the deficits were to be expected since Bush took the reigns from the last year of Clinton's recession. Add to that recession the fact that we were attacked on 9/11 leaving approximately 1 million Americans without a job. Add to that the cost to repair the damages from the many hurricanes, floods, and fires throughout our nation, and you can readily see where the money has gone.
Yes they are unemployed.Millions and millions of Americans are unemployed?
As booming as the economy during Clinton's administration?[/quote]You failed to mention that our current unemployment rate is the lowest it's been in years. We are on a two year span of a booming economy, but you won't hear that in the liberal media outlets.
What does JFK have to do with the Republican plan for the future? And yes, the next time a Democrat DOES take presidential office, he WILL have to raise taxes to try to repair the debt that the republicans could care less aboutAnd it was JFK that cut taxes repeatedly; something that goes against the grain of the Democrat platform since they want to raise your taxes any chance they get.
Baming it on the DAs? What about the republican in California who was accepting bribes and finally admitted to it?The legal scrutiny of some Republicans has come from liberal attornies etc. None of these Republicans have been convicted.
The "stock market" is not actually a safe investment, and depending on where your money goes, you could LOSE money, even WITH mutual funds. Not to mention the garbage collectors, mcdonald's workers, and other low income people who know nothing about the stock market.Privatizing 6% of Social Security doesn't go far enough. They should destroy Social security as we know it. Did you know how much return you get on your SS monies? Figuring you get your due at age 65--your return on this lifelong investment is -6%. If you were to sock just 6% of your SS monies into the stock market, your return would be approximately +7% over the same time period. This is investing that 6% in a mixture of the Fortune 500 stocks or in a similar mutual fund.
Yes, lets give more of the money the government doesn't have back to the people... and lets give an extremely large percentage of that to the people who already have enough to buy small countries. Excellent way of keeping our nation out of debt.Tax cuts for the rich? That liberal mantra has been dying a slow death. Tax cuts benefit everyone, and that includes rich liberal senators like John Kerry and Ted Kennedy. Most poor people don't even pay taxes. The top 1% of the wealthiest Americans pay over 95% of all our taxes. Time for you liberals to bark up another tree; red-stated America isn't buying your doom and gloom scenarios any longer.
Caine said:Yes they are unemployed.
From http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
The unemployment rate was unchanged in November at 5.0 percent. The jobless
rate has ranged between 4.9 and 5.1 percent since May. The number of unemployed
persons, 7.6 million, was essentially unchanged in November. The unemployment
rates for adult men (4.3 percent), adult women (4.6 percent), teenagers (17.2
percent), whites (4.3 percent), and Hispanics or Latinos (6.0 percent) showed
little or no change in November. The jobless rates for blacks (10.6 percent)
and, specifically, for adult black women (9.1 percent), rose over the month.
In November, the unemployment rate for Asians was 3.6 percent, not seasonally
adjusted. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)
Could you imagine how bad poverty would be without this program
Yet we gave "HAND OUTS" in the form of tax cuts, and have no plans to change the next round of tax cuts despite our record deficit? We're talking about a Plan here.. thats no plan
Yes they are unemployed.
As booming as the economy during Clinton's administration?
And yes, the next time a Democrat DOES take presidential office, he WILL have to raise taxes to try to repair the debt that the republicans could care less about
The "stock market" is not actually a safe investment, and depending on where your money goes, you could LOSE money, even WITH mutual funds. Not to mention the garbage collectors, mcdonald's workers, and other low income people who know nothing about the stock market.
Bustabush said:I sugesst you check out the Welfare pros and cons thread.
Tax cuts are great and should continue. But if you would like you are free to give the gov more of your money. I'm sure they will be glad to take it.
They need to get a job! :rofl
What the heck do you mean? What did Clinton do to get people jobs?
Or may just to fund more useless programs like the public schools and welfare.
They need to learn! If you think the gov is going to make anyone "Socially Secure" your out of your mind.
Bustabush said:Tax cuts are great and should continue. But if you would like you are free to give the gov more of your money. I'm sure they will be glad to take it.
They need to get a job! :rofl
Or may just to fund more useless programs like the public schools and welfare.
They need to learn! If you think the gov is going to make anyone "Socially Secure" your out of your mind.
Caine said:Many issues that make me ponder this have to do with thier "plan" for Iraq. The "plan" it to stick to the original "plan". Is that really a plan for the "future"?
Caine said:Change is necessary, where would this country be without it?
Caine said:Also, one must look at the fiscal issues concerning our nation at the moment. The "plan" for the war was that the oil revenues would pay for the cost of the war.
Caine said:Instead, I have noticed that the future of the Social Security plan has paid for the War instead. Many people believe that this should be privatized, I ask you then, just how that is going to work for people who know nothing of the market, and don't make the kind of money to afford to pay someone for advise on it.
Caine said:The government refuses to address national medical insurance, as restrictions on foreign drugs cause drug costs to go through the roof, as well as medical insurance, and drug companies are making record profits.
Caine said:Millions and Millions of Americans are unemployed, yet the President and his party are allowing illegal immigrants to come over and take jobs he says "Americans' won't do".
Caine said:Many companies are forcing employees to quit smoking by a certain date or be fired because medical insurance is getting too costly.
Caine said:We are at war overseas, yet the government is cutting VA benefits to those who have fought in past wars in order to pay for this one.
Caine said:Americans here at home are suffering because the main focus of our government is a "Nation-Building" war in which the President himself said he does not agree with before being elected in 2000.
Caine said:The White House administration led by President Bush has come under legal scrutiny, as well as the Republican House Chair for illegal actions, and a Californian Republican congressman as well, for accepting bribes.
Caine said:With all these problems, you must ask... Do the republicans really have a plan for the future??????
Caine said:Could you imagine how bad poverty would be without this program???
Scarecrow Akhbar said:Until the plan fails, there's no reason to abandon it. Certainly the proper course in Iraq is the one we're currently following, ie help them out, remain as a stabilizing force, and ease out when it's proper.
I hate getting to the soda machine and discovering I don't have enough change. Other than that, change should be considered only on a "as needed" basis.
Was that written somewhere that I missed? Can anyone cite an official document as a source for this? Certainly it would have been easier to drill ANWAR for oil. Gotta wonder why the lefties oppose this.
The Democrats in late 70's or early 80's started raiding Socialist Security funds. No point in trying to blame the Repubicans for that, they're just carrying on with the change the Democrats started. Everything's gotta change.
Many of us don't feel that Socialist Security should be privatized. Ending is a better solution. As for ignorant people that won't learn about the market, if you're concerned about them, you're free to help them with your own money. They're clearly not an obligation that should be forced on everyone.
(And, of course, the program would have to be phased out, it's like a heroin addiction and can't be done cold turkey)
Not the fed's business. The reason it's so expensive is the fed's interference in the first place. You want national medical insurance? Go live in Canada for a while.
As do the Democrats when they're in power. Not a partisan issue, neither party will fix it.
Recommend the correct start: cut the hammock down. End all welfare payments to everyone. then see how many jobs there are that "americans won't do". Also eliminate the minimum wage and let free markets, not politicians buying votes, determine what a fair wage is.
Yeah, if the government would let employers cancel medical insurance, or better yet, let employers let employees pay for their own medical insurance, this wouldn't be an issue.
Typically it's the Democrats forcing the anti-tobacco hysteria that in turn justifies this sort of response.
That's real issue.
Remember what you said about "change"? Bush's attitude on this changed as a result in the change in the integrity of the World Trade Center.
Fair enough. If they broke laws, hang'em.
Well, yeah. It's the same plan as the Democrats. Buy votes with deficit spending, pay off friends with government action, get re-elected.
What? Not even a real conservative would agree with you on some of this junk.....
You aren't a good representative of a Conservative (at least I hope not) so Im not going to take these comments seriously.
And public schools are USELESS?
And welfare.....I think it's a good program, there's just too many people that abuse it 'cause they're lazy and/or think the government owes them something.
And where do you suggest they learn?
There's books, but those aren't easy to understand if you have no clue to begin with.
How do you suggest the poor PAY for thier "private" schools then????Bustabush said:Hello Cain,
Indeed they are. But this is a topic for a new thread. I shall make one in the Education Forum.
Get a clue. I'm sorry but it's not my job (or anyone elses) to spoon feed the poor.
The die is cast. Rubuttle?
Sure, but when the poor start getting MORE poor and start rioting, and the cops are right there with them because even the cops can't afford to live in a society that it seems you would like to create (with no public education and basically not giving a **** about the poor), do you think the government is going to protect you then? It will be another civil war and we will be no better off than some of these other countries with problems.
Bustabush said:Hi Cain,
I don't think so. We are getting a bit off topic shall we continue this in the other threads?
Caine said:How do you suggest the poor PAY for thier "private" schools then????
Where is a poor man working as a construction laborer, and his wife working at the local sears going to pay for thier three children to attend private school at a whopping 11 THOUSAND per child per year?????
Thats.... 33 thousand... more than the construction laborer makes, and most of the sears salary as well. I guess you agree with Bush while he is attempting to widen the gap between rich and poor, destroying the middle class.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?