Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

5.5 Billion for Farmers 100 Mill for Firefighters

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Bush is about as intelligent as a potatoe (notice the spelling Dan Quayle a former Bush official) It doesn't surprise me that he would give a ton of money to the farmers. Don't think he'll see many fires out there in Crawford, Texas where he will be spending this month. But that's another story and I won't bore you with that! Vote the bum out next time!

    Stay safe out there!
    Tom

    Never Forget 9-11-2001

    Stay safe out there!

    IACOJ Member

    Comment


    • #32
      Jaws of Jeff

      FIRST!

      I apologize for seeming like it was just your tough luck. It was not my intent to make it sound that way.

      The fact is that the price of salmon has not gone down in your local super market. You still pay 6bucks a pound whether i get 40 or 80 cents a pound.

      $4.00 a pound for Coho here.

      and im really happy that you would rather see the poor folks from chile make a little money.

      Not so much that as I would like to see prices drop here for things, all kinds of things. Ag welfare and like programs guarantee the farmer a set price for his product. That's crap. The farmer should get what the market will bear.

      To be honest, I could care less if the poor in Chile made money, that's Chiles problem not Americas.

      The thing that will probably happen is that we will be squeezed into forclosure of our loans because the numbers just dont crunch anymore and theres nothing i can do to stop it.

      And I am truly sorry to hear that.

      Guys and gals like you (small businessmen) are part of the lifeblood of this country and you need to be turned loose to do your thing without government intervention to keep the economy moving and growing.

      This country was built on the government staying out of your way.

      who would have thought that farm fish would be the preferred salmon of americans.

      Not me. I didn't even know you could raise salmon on farmstyle like catfish.

      And I think the feds do a play a small role in this, since this is all a part of trade, they need to ensure the quality (food safety) is good and the trade balance is balanced from Chile.

      Any way go ahead and disect this statement and twist it around to where you feel good about your own self.

      I don't need to disect what you say to feel good, I am at ease and secure with my position. It may not be the right one, but as yet it hasn't been demonstrated to be the wrong one. There is no provision in the US Constitution for the federal government to forcibly confiscate any money from an American citizen (that that citizen worked and earned) and give it to an organization or individual that came up short for whatever reason.

      I disect to ask the questions I have of, or to comment on, the statement(s) made. I do have an open mind and it is possible to change it - happens all the time.

      larry cook

      Go out and buy a farm or ranch and see if you can make it pay.

      Got some land, not interested in makin' it pay though, just a couple of cows for slaughter and a horse.

      Please don't knock em until you have been in their shoes.

      Nobody is knocking them. My pop grew up on a family farm in OK (cattle and crops). He saw it wasn't going to pay off and moved on (USAF). My grandparents owned, farmed it and recieved welfare on it until the day they died. I spent my summers working it too, for free. But man, grandma made the best chicken fried steak!.

      In fact, our farmers are the greatest! In spite of the feds getting in the farmers way, they feed everybody in America and have enough left over to feed half, if not more, of the rest of the world!

      EastKyFF

      Farmers are price takers regardless of what the feds do. You are exposing a blistering ignorance of economics to make this statement.

      Every business is price taker. The market sets the price.

      you have brought in a grand total of $60,000 in profit for a thousand acres of production. That's sixty bucks an acre profit.

      Sixty grand a year PROFIT is bad wage? That's less than $15,000 away from being included in daschle and gebhardts evil rich person category.

      So you tell the elevator operator to go to hell, you want more. He tells YOU to go to hell because he's got fifteen farmers behind you that will take that $2.10 a bushel.

      Sounds like the time I applied for a job as an EMT.

      They said "we pay this."

      And I say "Mongo don't work for that, he work for this."

      They say "OK, the next ten guys behind you will do it for less, have a good day."

      And Mongo say "Uhm, well, I, OK. But I ain't gonna drive some weird guy around, put me with somebody normal."

      And they say "You bet, no problem."

      Then I get stuck with HIM... (man he was one weird due)

      And as for your logicless reference to trucking, Wal-Mart, etc., never has any of those industries grossed $0 in a year.

      The farming industry as a whole has never grossed $0 in a year either. Some farmers may have. But a great many independant truckers and mom and pops have, and gone out of business as a result.

      It takes government intervention to stabilize the industry.

      So why are farmers going broke if the feds are stabilizing the industry?

      In 1937 the feds decided they should set the price (stabilize the market?) with the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act. In 1938, the feds started to support prices for NOT growing crops. Since that time worse has been done. And the number of farmers has decreased to now what is an all time low of roughly 1.9 million with over half being less than 1,000 acres.

      Why are we at the lowest point in our history for farmers if the feds are stabilizing the industry?

      Because there is the possibility that transportation problems, herd diseases elsewhere, or other issues could disrupt the flow of that cheaper milk. The Vermont farmers would no longer be around to back it up.

      Yeah right. Probably had nothing at all to do with buying the votes of a few counties

      Thanks for the feedback on this Dalmation90.

      Oh, ha ha, chemicals in food are funny until we get sick.

      What legal and properly used chemicals in food are making us sick?

      F02

      (backfired on sugar when corn sweetner replaced it,damn coke ain't tasted right since.)

      Yeah, but the original Dr. Pepper recipe is alive a cookin' in Dublin Texas.

      Hey, can anybody remember what Steinbecks novel The Grapes of Wrath was about?

      NY Smokey

      You surprised me. Usually you have something interesting to say.

      Bushs intellegence? The NY voters proved themselves to be only slightly smarter than some of those in Florida by voting hitlary in office.

      notice the spelling Dan Quayle a former Bush official

      Wow, you're so witty, how do you come up with them. Hey, did you here the one about gore touring Monticello and asking who the statue were? Or when he said:
      • Micheal Jackson was the greatest basketball player
      • "If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure"
      • "The Holocaust was an obscene period in our nation's history. I mean in
        this century's history. But we all lived in this century. I didn't live
        in this century."
      • "I stand by all the misstatements that I've made"
      • "We're all capable of mistakes, but I do not care to enlighten youon the mistakes we may or may not have made."
      • "It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impuritiesin our air and water that are doing it."
      • "I was recently on a tour of Latin America, and the only regret I have
        was that I didn't study Latin harder in school so I could converse with
        those people."
      • "If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure."
      • "I am not part of the problem. I am a Democrat."


      Were you whinning like this when clinton wasn't giving FDs squat, only asking to confiscate MORE of your money and all the while giving the farmers money they've been getting since the '30s? Or do you think all that farming money just started pouring out under the Bush watch.

      Bum? the clintons have never even owned their own home. Americans continue to have our money confiscated to pay for the one they "bought" in NY.

      Now bill goes to Harlem to K a little A and drives the rent up in the area, driving the small business man out of business. Quite a contradiction for always fighting his hardest for the hard working American people isn't it, now only the evil rich can afford to be in his 'hood...
      It's only my opinion. I do not speak for any group or organization I belong to or associate with or people I know - especially my employer. If you like it, we can share it, you don't have to give me credit. If you don't, we are allowed to disagree too (but be ready to be challenged, you may be on to something I'm not). That's what makes America great!

      Comment


      • #33
        "I apologize for seeming like it was just your tough luck. It was not my intent to make it sound that way."

        "Guys and gals like you (small businessmen) are part of the lifeblood of this country."

        Now that's a switch. What happened to "Yabba dabba, market forces, yabba dabba, bad businessmen"?

        "Ag welfare and like programs guarantee the farmer a set price for his product."

        Yes, because their costs of inputs (seed, fertilizer, fuel, machinery) are beyond their control and they are at the mercy of the buyers. They guarantee a MINIMUM price, one that covers his behind and keeps him fed and in business.

        And if you're wanting the food safety and trade balances to be good with Chile, you'd better be in favor of keeping American farmers competitive, because if Jeff and the other salmon guys don't get some help sometimes, all the salmon will come from Chile.

        "Every business is price taker. The market sets the price."

        In a greater sense, yes. But Wal-Mart can sell its products at the price it chooses because they're banking on you not fooling with driving across town to K-Mart to save eight cents on a nail file. Meanwhile, if the farmer doesn't get what he asks for a product, there's another seller ten feet behind him.

        "Sixty grand a year PROFIT is bad wage?"

        Look at the profitability. Sixty dollars per year, per acre over a lifetime? More profitable to build houses on it.

        "Sounds like the time I applied for a job as an EMT."

        But all EMT's are not created equal. Some are good, some are not. Had they found out the guy who would take less is a lousy employee, they might call you back. Corn is corn is corn is corn. The grain elevator is not going to decide Farmer B's corn was not as good and then call you to bring yours back.

        "The farming industry as a whole has never grossed $0 in a year either. Some farmers may have. But a great many independant truckers and mom and pops have, and gone out of business as a result."

        No, not $0 with full expenses. That would be like hauling stuff all year, paying drivers, buying fuel and tires, and then nobody paying you and you not being able to sue.

        "So why are farmers going broke if the feds are stabilizing the industry?"

        Because those "bad managers" you refer to still exist. It's not an economic utopia; bad operators are still supposed to go out of business. It's just that good ones can't go out, or we have a large problem.

        As for the Ag Marketing Act and the Vermont dairies, I don't dispute that many of the programs are imperfect. I only say that the government needs to do a certain amount to keep the industry efficient.

        "What legal and properly used chemicals in food are making us sick?"

        Well, we won't know until we've eaten them for 30 years. Nobody thought DDT was so bad, either. Ask your dad about it--mine used to see his dad come in powdered white with the stuff. Then, shazam! In 1989, he comes down with cancer. Huh!
        “I am more than just a serious basketball fan. I am a life-long addict. I was addicted from birth, in fact, because I was born in Kentucky.”
        ― Hunter S. Thompson

        Comment


        • #34
          Mongo -

          Amen!

          NYSmokey - Apparently you prefer someone who cleverly (and sometimes not so cleverly) lies to you. Hmmm. To each his own, buddy, to each his own.
          "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

          Joe Black

          The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

          Comment


          • #35
            Mongo Mongo Mongo..when will you learn?

            ***Then why when he cut it, all you democrats were screaming that Bush screwed us?***

            Who said I was a democrat? You assumed again. Just because I don't like Mr. Bush does not mean I am a democrat. I vote for the person who I feel best represents what I want from this country and our government. Yep I was ****ed they cut the grant, but I would have yelled at any politician that had done this, it had nothing to do with the fact that it was Mr. Bush.
            Never forget those who went before and sacrified to make us better and stronger as a fire service and a nation. 09-11-01 forever etched in time and our memories. God Speed Boys!

            Comment


            • #36
              Hi there EKyFF -

              I'm gonna pull a Mongo here, and comment on some of the things you've said. It's more like a debate that way, innit?

              OK, let's start with your first statement about Ag welfare programs guaranteeing a set price - "Yes, because their costs of inputs (seed, fertilizer, fuel, machinery) are beyond their control and they are at the mercy of the buyers. They guarantee a MINIMUM price, one that covers his behind and keeps him fed and in business."

              Hmmm, like the costs of ANY business' inputs are totally under their control? Name a couple for us, would ya? You think the government should set prices for Sony's products, for example? (hmmm, maybe I could get that home theatre system I've been lusting after...)

              Next, you said, in regards to the fact that every business is a price-taker: "In a greater sense, yes. But Wal-Mart can sell its products at the price it chooses because they're banking on you not fooling with driving across town to K-Mart to save eight cents on a nail file. Meanwhile, if the farmer doesn't get what he asks for a product, there's another seller ten feet behind him."

              OK, but how about the people who live around the corner from K-Mart? They have little incentive to drive across town to save 4 cents on a thimble. Wal-Mart can sell its products at the price it chooses because it chooses that price based on what people are willing to pay for the nail file. Hmmm, wait, so Wal-Mart CAN'T sell at a price it chooses, really. I'm sure Wal-Mart would looooove to sell that nail file for $100. But then no one would buy it. They'd drive across town to K-Mart. So Wal-Mart IS a price taker - doesn't matter if it's in a "greater" or "lesser" sense - BUSINESSES ARE PRICE TAKERS. PERIOD. So the market protects the interests of the consumer by providing products at a price that consumers are willing to pay, and also provides input to Wal-Mart and its suppliers about how many nail files to produce, how much those files need to cost the manufacturer in order to turn a profit, etc., etc. When you set an artificial price level, you glean no information from that price. Consumers don't necessarily benefit, because that price floor keeps prices artificially high. Maybe they could go lower, and consumers would pay less at the market. In addition, now food producers really have no friggin' clue how much or how little food to produce in order to get to a price point that maximizes their profits. Maybe if they had that input, then there'd be a bit more rationality to the way and the amount of farm products that are produced.

              OK, next you said: "Look at the profitability. Sixty dollars per year, per acre over a lifetime? More profitable to build houses on it."

              Well, I have two thoughts on this issue. The first is just a knee-jerk reaction, that says - hey, this is America. If you want to farm your land, you farm your land. If you want to build houses on it, you build houses on it. If you want to **** all over it and sit in the middle of it and hum "Kumbaya", then go for it. So, if building houses is gonna make you more money, and if "more money" is what's important to you and your family, then WHAT'S STOPPING YOU? If having a family farm is important to you (maybe it's been passed down generation to generation), and I can certainly understand this, then farm the damn land. But you then give up the profit that you would have made by building houses. It comes down to choices, EKy. Choices have consequences, some good and some bad. Being an adult in America means that you make those choices, and you live with the results, which hopefully you've thought about before you make the choice. So I guess what I'm saying is that if family farmers can make more money by building houses, and they want more money, then go ahead and build the damn houses! If you choose to keep farming the land, don't expect my confiscated wages to keep you afloat. Live with your well-thought-out choice, and find a way to make it work. If your products are priced right, I might even buy 'em!

              My second thought is this - if 60 grand per year isn't enough for you, then maybe you need to look at the line of business that you're in. I'm not making any judgement on whether or not 60 grand annually is a lot of money or not (I know a lot of people who'd like to have 60 grand a year jobs, though...). I'm just saying that out here in the real world, if we're not satisfied with the money we're making, we generally can do one of two things - learn to live within the means provided by that job, or find another line of work. Do you think the fry cook at McDonald's should get federal subsidies (again, my confiscated wages) because his wages suck ***? NOT.

              There's a lot more, but I'm running out of time, here. Let's do one more: "Well, we won't know until we've eaten them for 30 years. Nobody thought DDT was so bad, either. Ask your dad about it--mine used to see his dad come in powdered white with the stuff. Then, shazam! In 1989, he comes down with cancer. Huh!"

              You make a few very glaring assumptions here. First, that the salt-o-the-earth family farmers don't use any chemicals on their crops. Bullsh*t. Second, you subtly assume that there could have been some way for DDT users to have known that its use would cause cancer, and that they did it anyway. Another straw man that you conveniently set up to knock over. Finally, by extension, you make an assumption that TODAY'S large farming concerns know that the chemicals that they're using are making people sick, or that people WILL become sick at some point, and are still using them. Please, if you would, back that up with some scientific facts, or at least some statistics. And lastly, answer this - are the chemicals that "family farmers" use different in some way than those that the large farming concers use? If not (and I suspect they're not), then aren't the family farmers poisoning America?
              "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

              Joe Black

              The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

              Comment


              • #37
                EastKyFF

                What happened to "Yabba dabba, market forces, yabba dabba, bad businessmen"?

                Where did I say bad businessman?

                because their costs of inputs (seed, fertilizer, fuel, machinery) are beyond their control and they are at the mercy of the buyers.

                Well gee. If the feds are going to regulate prices on the end product, doesn't it make sense that they ought to be regulating the prices on what the farmers have to pay for stuff they need to get to the end product?

                They guarantee a MINIMUM price, one that covers his behind and keeps him fed and in business.

                And what about mom and pops behind?

                Large chain stores are running mom and pops out of business across America. Why do you let this continue?

                you'd better be in favor of keeping American farmers competitive,

                I am.

                Wal-Mart can sell its products at the price it chooses because they're banking on you not fooling with driving across town to K-Mart to save eight cents on a nail file.

                And...

                Meanwhile, if the farmer doesn't get what he asks for a product, there's another seller ten feet behind him.

                Or across town, just like WalMart and K-Mart?

                Look at the profitability. Sixty dollars per year, per acre over a lifetime? More profitable to build houses on it.

                Yep, a good piece of land can draw $100K or better in a New York minute here.

                But all EMT's are not created equal.

                Depends on who you ask right captstan?

                We all take the exact same test and the patch is just as blue. But that's a whole 'nuther thread.

                And I agree with you.

                The grain elevator is not going to decide Farmer B's corn was not as good and then call you to bring yours back.

                Nope.

                I only say that the government needs to do a certain amount to keep the industry efficient.

                So do I. Like getting out of the farmers way and letting them do what they know how to do.

                Nobody thought DDT was so bad, either.

                DDT has been heavily studied and there is no link to it and cancer. I grant that our benevolent federal government has classified it as a probable carcinogen (because of the scare campaign waged by the treehuggers), but to date no verifiable studies have been done to demonstrate that is causes cancer in humans.

                Then, shazam! In 1989, he comes down with cancer. Huh!

                Sorry to hear about your dad.

                hctrouble25

                Who said I was a democrat? You assumed again.

                Naw, I didn't assume, I guessed.

                Was I right? Or are you an independant that mostly votes democrat?

                I vote for the person who I feel best represents what I want from this country and our government.

                Doesn't everybody?

                but I would have yelled at any politician that had done this, it had nothing to do with the fact that it was Mr. Bush.

                Well, sister, where were you when billy-boy cut it?

                BucksEng91

                Nice post Bucks.

                [ 08-16-2001: Message edited by: mongofire_99 ]
                It's only my opinion. I do not speak for any group or organization I belong to or associate with or people I know - especially my employer. If you like it, we can share it, you don't have to give me credit. If you don't, we are allowed to disagree too (but be ready to be challenged, you may be on to something I'm not). That's what makes America great!

                Comment


                • #38
                  I am independent that has about a 65% democrat vs. 35% republican voting record. And yes I wrote letters to Pres. Clinton as well. I don't just pick on the conservatives don't worry.
                  Never forget those who went before and sacrified to make us better and stronger as a fire service and a nation. 09-11-01 forever etched in time and our memories. God Speed Boys!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Gee, we're all glad you're not attacking conservatives, HC! Phew!! We were worried you'd turn your rapier wit on us...

                    Don't get your knickers bunched up, I'm just kiddin' with ya. I know how thin skinned you liberals can be...

                    [ 08-16-2001: Message edited by: BucksEng91 ]
                    "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

                    Joe Black

                    The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Bucks, you just made me fall outta da chair from laffin'

                      hctrouble, if I may, what do you agree with the democrats on besides more federal intervention in our lives?
                      It's only my opinion. I do not speak for any group or organization I belong to or associate with or people I know - especially my employer. If you like it, we can share it, you don't have to give me credit. If you don't, we are allowed to disagree too (but be ready to be challenged, you may be on to something I'm not). That's what makes America great!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        I see two things at work in your line of reasoning, EKy. Don't take it personally, I just want to explore these lines a bit, because I love sociology and politics almost, but not quite as much as I love firefighting. Indulge me for a minute.

                        The first thing I see is a thread of, for want of a better word, sentimentalism, or even romanticization (Wow! Is that a word?) of the American family farmer. You know, Farm Aid and all that jazz? Implicit in your complaints about large combined farming companies is that they are somehow less desirable than 20 family farmers eking out a living. The only reason I can rationally see for this is that you're romanticizing the role of the American farmer. Not that I completely disagree or think that it's parochial or silly. American farmers are, in a sense, avatars of our cultural and historical heritage. The image of the frontier farmer, homesteading, putting up fences, walking the line, working the fields with his young sons...quintessentially American! And for that reason, people tend to get sentimental about it. I'm not immune to it, believe me. Patriotism and patriotic images bring a tear to my eye and a burning in my heart every time. But when you get all sentimental about something, you tend to ignore its less than ideal aspects, and you tend to discount or minimize the positive aspects of competing images or concepts. That's the case with family farming vs. large "corporate" farms. This is why you can criticize the "corporations" while completely and conveniently ignoring the fact that nearly everything the corporate types do, the family farmer also does, just on a smaller scale (but probably with just as large an impact, when you take the entire aggregate family farming community). Anyhow, that's how I see it.

                        Second - you assert that family farmers should be considered a special case, apart from all other small businesspeople, but you fail to make a convincing argument why this is so. I know, I know, national interest...yada yada. But you know what? In some sense, every business in America is important to the national interest. Every business faces challenges, problems, and disasters of one kind or another that could wipe them out. For some reason, you make a moral distinction about farmers (and maybe this relates back to the sentimentalism) that somehow values the protection of their livelihoods more than the protection of, say, Mom and Pop's convenience store on the corner (which faces its own unique set of problems that farmers rarely if ever have to face, such as, oh I don't know...armed robbery? Or how about just a good old structure fire?) Arguments about national interest aside, there is really no concrete basis for the moral distinction you draw between the farmer and other businesspeople. And let me ask you this - the special, protected status that you want for farmers...does that also extend to Farmco Incorporated, a publicly owned and traded company? Or just to Farmer Bob and his family? If you want to argue that farming is vital to the national interest, then you'd have to agree that the huge farming conglomerates rate the same special protections, right?
                        "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

                        Joe Black

                        The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Don't you get it yet...it has nothing to do with liberal vs. conservative....or democrat vs. republican. If a politician and his platform work for me then that is who I vote for. Am I happy that Bush gave us some money back? Sure. Am I happy that he took away funding to family planning organizations? No. Some things I agree with some things I don't...overall I didn't feel that Mr. Bush was the right choice for me.

                          And don't worry I am not as thin skinned as some might think.....I can take it and dish it out in pretty equal amounts.
                          Never forget those who went before and sacrified to make us better and stronger as a fire service and a nation. 09-11-01 forever etched in time and our memories. God Speed Boys!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            HC -

                            When you said, "If a politician and his platform work for me then that is who I vote for", are you assuming that this is not what everyone does?

                            And how did the President cut funding for family planning organizations? Maybe I'm wrong on this, and you can correct me, but I'm only familiar with him withdrawing American taxpayers' (read: OUR money) funds from funding overseas abortion clinics and such. I don't care really what your view is on abortion. I just love a President who has his priorities straight - stop spending my confiscated wages to support FOREIGN organizations that have nothing to do with the national interest or security of the United States. If you, as a private citizen, wish to financially support such organizations, then you can send them a check.
                            "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

                            Joe Black

                            The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              When you said, "If a politician and his platform work for me then that is who I vote for", are you assuming that this is not what everyone does?

                              Nope just making my point that calling me a liberal is crap and that I am neither a republican or democrat..I vote based on what works for me...and for the record some people do only vote one way..my father would vote for satan if he ran and was a republican. He just hates the democrats.

                              And how did the President cut funding for family planning organizations? Maybe I'm wrong on this, and you can correct me, but I'm only familiar with him withdrawing American taxpayers' (read: OUR money) funds from funding overseas abortion clinics and such. I don't care really what your view is on abortion. I just love a President who has his priorities straight - stop spending my confiscated wages to support FOREIGN organizations that have nothing to do with the national interest or security of the United States. If you, as a private citizen, wish to financially support such organizations, then you can send them a check.

                              US organizations monies were also cut. I read a statement in USA Today from one of Bush's people that stated these organizations were using their funds to promote abortion. Of course this is not the case...these organizations provide condoms, birth control pills, and education to young adults and adults about abstinence, sexually transmitted diseases, etc. WE need MORE of these programs NOT LESS. But yes if a person asks about abortion they will also give them information on this. That is where Bush's basis for taking away money came from.
                              Never forget those who went before and sacrified to make us better and stronger as a fire service and a nation. 09-11-01 forever etched in time and our memories. God Speed Boys!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                HC -

                                Can you give me a link, or some substantiation for your explanation of the "family planning funding cut"? I don't recall this story at all, and I follow these things pretty closely. I strongly suspect it's nothing more than hearsay, or more demagoguery from an increasingly desperate Democratic Party propaganda machine. You probably fell for the whole "President Bush is for arsenic in the water" thing too, didn't ya?

                                My previous statement about all of us voting for who we think is best for us still stands. If your dad believes that the Republican Party best represents his interests and values, I don't blame him for voting Republican. I don't see how your anecdote makes my assertion untrue.

                                I generally find that "moderates" and "independents" cast themselves as such because they've taken no real time to research party platforms, and compare them to where they stand on issues. Or, worse yet, they don't even know where they stand on issues. In addition, it's not necessary for a person to agree with every single plank of a party's platform to identify with that party. If you generally vote 65% Democrat, as you stated, then you're liberal, by at least a 15% margin. If you don't like that analysis, tough. Sorry 'bout that. Doesn't mean you're a bad person, doesn't mean you're not a good American. It just means that you subscribe to a political philosophy that conflicts with mine (and the Constitution... ).

                                Nice subtle dig at Republicans, too: Satan = Republican. You're quite the spin-meister, HC.
                                "Let's roll." - Todd Beamer, one of a group of American soldiers who handed the terrorists their first defeat.

                                Joe Black

                                The opinions expressed are mine and mine alone (but you can borrow them )and may not reflect those of any organization with which I am associated (but then again, they just may not be thinking clearly).

                                Comment

                                300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

                                Collapse

                                Upper 300x250

                                Collapse

                                Taboola

                                Collapse

                                Leader

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X