Earlier today, fellow Milblogger Greyhawk at the Mudville Gazette observed:
Emerging theme of the Democratic response to the Republican convention speeches:
Schwarzenegger is not a Republican
McCain is not a Republican
Zell Miller is not a Democrat
After listening to the spending proposals in the first half of Bush’s speech, we can now add to that:
George Bush is no fiscal conservative
Bush could have saved us from having to listen to an hour of his grating diction by walkingto the microphone and stating:
I accept the nomination, and if I win, I intend to fund every imaginable program possible so the Democrats can’t say I am mean.
On domestic issues, the choice is between a guy who wants to take more of the money I’ve earned and give it to people who didn’t earn it, and a guy who wants to take more of the money I’ve
Bush’s domestic agenda would have been welcome in the Democratic Party in 1980 and 1984 … and Reagan would have trounced him.
On domestic issues, I’m starting to feel about the GOP as Zell Miller does about the Democrats.
It’s still a whole lot easier to argue and debate these kinds of issues if your cities aren’t laying in nuclear ruin or tens of thousands of your citizens aren’t suffering the effects of chemical or biological weapons.
As much as you may disagree with Bush’s domestic agenda he’s still a damned sight better choice than the other guy.
Besides, real tax reform may provide the kinds of revenue necessary to fund some of his more palatable programs.
So, John, did you miss the last half of the speech, or what?
The rich get richer and the poor get poorer with Bush’s ‘tax cuts’. Then there are the few people who actually stick up for the rich tax cuts. Uh yeah, they create businesses and stuff. The employees of the businesses I see don’t really matter, and this is taken with common sense at all the corporate jobs people have worked at, people have been fed up with them like they are being squashed on. You tell me a corporation that does good for it’s employees in modern times? How much profit can they take in, and not share with the employees. The ratio is way fucking off with that shit, alot of modern corps steal from the labor employees provide with little or no gratuity when you know, with all that cash these big business corps have, Bush doesn’t give the little guy those tax cuts, we rarely see those, his homies are gettin’ em. It’s not happenin, your lucky to tell me a handful. Mcjobs are everywhere, but you know what, it’s hard to even get hired at one of those nowadays. I mean the list of problems with Bush is so fucking long, I think we’re almost getting to the edge of another revolution, anarchy style. It’s not happenin, your lucky to tell me a handful. Mcjobs are everywhere, but you know what, it’s hard to even get hired at one of those nowadays. Health care is out of reach for a good percentage of Americans, and there was a great program called Healthy Families here in California until Arnold cut that and all that shit for the disabled which really pissed me off. You can’t go backwards in a society, and that’s all that’s happened under Bush’s America, we don’t move forward…we move backward. Most of the jobs under Bush’s supposed economic growth have been nothing but tons of petty minimum wage jobs. I mean you can work minimum wage, if you have like 3 or 4 other contributors to income n shit. How a business like Wal-mart can get away with what it does is disgusting.
Republicans: Taxes should be lowered (but we’re just going to shift the burden of paying for the same programs to another generation. With interest!)
Democrats: Ummm, maybe we should pay for this now?
Gotta love the new century consevative. Have your keynote speaker:
*accuse John Kerry of wanting to dismatle the American military. *question Kerry’s patriotism after he volunteered for combat duty. *Support a guy guy named Bush who never in his life has made a sacrifice for his country
*accuse Kerry of opposing weapons systems that the VP Dick Cheney opposed also
I know, conservatives, I know. Facts mean nothing. It’s all about what you can get away with lying about. The only way the conservative can win is thru deceiving the voters. Tell the voters that jobs are up when more than a million have been lost. Tell them that the economy is great even though Bush sqanndered the record surplus in 18 short months. Tell them that Bush is leading the fight on terror as Osama bin Laden (remember him, conservatives?) plots his next mass murder. Tell the voters that it doesn’t matter if there are no Iraq WMDs, that it doesn’t matter if there are no Iraqi ties to al qeada. Tell them that it doesn’t matter that there were no Iraqis amongst the 9/11 terrorists. Bush is guided by God so how can he be wrong?
In the end, all you have, conservatives, are lies and deception. You might win. That’s all that counts, right conservatives?
Justin O, you are a retard with zero knowledge of how the real world works.
That aside, the IRS has released the data on how the tax cuts worked. I’ve got good news for you, and bad news. The good news (for you) is the middle class shrank. “Hooray,” you say, “Bad Evil Republicans!”
Here’s the bad news. So did the poor class.
Which means a bunch of poor people moved up into the middle class. And in even worse news for you, that still wasn’t enough to staunch the hemorrhage of middle class earners into the upper class.
Your base is shrinking, dear liberals. Read it and weep.
That’s it, Toren. Make things up when the facts don’t support you. What the #$%* are you talking about? Remember the figures on poverty a couple weeks ago? The number of those that sank into poverty from 2001 – 2002 increased at a record rate.
But, hey, never let facts get in the way of a good conservative spin (or lie).
*accuse John Kerry of wanting to dismatle the American military.
Yes, and he had the voting records in his hand after his speach to back it up.
*question Kerry’s patriotism after he volunteered for combat duty.
“Patriotism” Appears only once in Zell Millers speach when speaking about the leaders of his party, he said “It is not their patriotism – it is their judgment that has been so sorely lacking.”
*Support a guy named Bush who never in his life has made a sacrifice for his country.
Yes, but he served (as did I, although I don’t recall any significant sacrifices). Any your point is?
*accuse Kerry of opposing weapons systems that the VP Dick Cheney opposed also.
Maybe you would care to make a side by side comparison their voting records over the years? You would be embarassed, but of course you would never even look at it anyway.
The rest of your rant isn’t worth the effort. Drop the talking points that your liberal friends masterbate all over you and get a clue. Try thinking for yourself if that is possible, you just might like it.
A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul. ~George Bernard Shaw~
Harry in Atlanta
This truly is Bush’s blind spot. Like his father he somewhat demisses the fiscal conservatives in his party. Bad move. A great many peole are conservatives because they desire less government and more fiscal restraint. Bush believes in none of this and is using the WOT as cover. But he had better be careful and remember what happened to dear ‘ol dad when the conservative base of the GOP had gotten their fill of Bush Sr.’s empty promises. The conservatives despised Bill Clinton but they detested George Bush Sr.’s complete lack of backbone and honesty even more, they have their principles and they stick to them. It is a lesson that is seemingly lost on W. and his RINOs. Because unlike Democrats who will elect a bag of vomit if it is a registered Democrat rather than do what may be in the best interest of the country, conservatives will stick to their principles and suffer through a another douchebag like John Kerry to make the point to fiscal and regulatory girlieman-Republicans one more time.
If Americans are so poor, why then are Michael Moore and the rest of entitlement program supporters in Hollywood soooooooo rich?
Call it PRIORTY ECONOMICS: Why not spend more of your earned income taking care of yourself instead of spending all your hard earned money entertaining yourself.
Something is wrong when you complain you cannot afford good health care insurance while Michael Moore earned $100 million plus in a few short months. The list goes on and on as to how much money is spent choosing ‘entertainment’ instead of choosing to spend our hard earned dollars taking care of our own lives. Entertainment is the opiate of the masses.
STOP FUNDING RICH SOCIALIST!
yeah, sure, whatever you say. Just don’t let the facts hit you in the ass on your way out.
Oh, and Canada sucks
Joe – you’re not actually refuting anyone there. Far North says “poverty has risen”; you say: “the tax cuts mean 8 million people no longer pay federal income tax”. These two statements are entirely consistent.
Sorry, I did make a mistake. It wasn’t IRS data, it was census data.
And here it is.
The key graph is here.
Thank you for playing, though. Have a nice day.
Actually, John, the two statements have very little to do with one another. Because, in case you failed to notice, the lower bound of the lower tax bracket moved up in dollars, which means that, all else being equal, fewer people payed income tax in the lower bracket.
That was the first post I truly enjoyed in a while.
It’s not about conservatism (with or without quotes). It’s not about country. It’s all about George: “I wanna be prezinint, Mommy. Or I’ll hold my breath until I turn blue!!!” (Or orange, or purple, or whatever the Benjamin & Moore paint strip of the week may be.)
This man shouldn’t be a dogcatcher. Because I like dogs…
Well, if it’s any help, I consider Schwarzenegger and
McCain Republican. Never doubted them for a moment.
Considering that kids cruise the Net and maybe happen by here, I’ll pass on the opportunity to say what I think Miller is.
“As much as you may disagree with Bush’s domestic agenda he’s still a damned sight better choice than the other guy.”
With all due respect, I disagree. Bush has shown what he’s capable of; he’s a known quantity. And what he’s done, his decision making, his policies and his results make him the worst president since at least Calvin Coolidge.
In fact, his performance, his approach and his results are so bad, I continue to be amazed that more Republicans don’t throw up their hands and say “enough.”
Kerry may or may not turn out to be outstanding among presidents, if enough voters come to their senses and elect him. But I really believe a lot of people will look back after his first term and say he did a much better job than his predecessor.
Also, I think they will learn he really means business when it comes to dealing with terrorists. He may not be Superman but he’s no patsy.
Me: These two statements are entirely consistent.
Slartibartfast: Actually, John, the two statements have very little to do with one another.
I know. And the two statements above are also entirely consistent. I’m slightly perplexed as to what your point was…
“On domestic issues, the choice is between a guy who wants to take more of the money I’ve earned and give it to people who didn’t earn it.”
Roofer, I doubt your car is 100% efficient, that your kids never get less than an ‘A’ in school, that you never spent a dollar foolishly. You-know-what happens. Life is like that.
If you really want to make absolutely sure no one you deem unworthy ever gets hold of a nickel you’ve earned, you’d better set yourself up in a wilderness camp in the Alaskan outback, prepared to shun society and live off the land. Down here in civilized society, we’ve got to help one another along to keep things decent and livable. It’s an unfortunate fact of life that we’ve never quite found a way to do that with complete precision and 100 percent efficiency. That means a few unworthy loafers get hold of a few unearned nickels. Such is life.
I urge to consider how it sounds to others, to hear someone say in effect: It means nothing to me if 100 people
Conservative attitude check:
“Justin O, you are a retard with zero knowledge . . .”
Uh huh. Sure enough.
“No good whatever will come from that warped and mock morality which denounces the misdeeds of men of wealth and forgets the misdeeds practiced at their expense; which denounces bribery, but blinds itself to blackmail; which foams with rage if a corporation secures favors by improper methods, and merely leers with hideous mirth if the corporation is itself wronged. The only public servant who can be trusted honestly to protect the rights of the public against the misdeeds of a corporation is that public man who will just as surely protect the corporation itself from wrongful aggression.”
So, by “consistent”, you mean “almost entirely unrelated”? This is English we’re speaking, correct?
There is a big difference between voluntarily giving money to those who are “unworthy” and having it forceably taken away.
By the way, both parties believe in redistribution of wealth. The only difference is how it is redistributed. That is why W. had better tend to the fiscal conservatives of the party. They may leave in droves.