Its really getting so you can't believe anything any leaders says, but, according to this article, Maliki is pushing for the removal of US military from towns and cities of Iraq and for Iraq having the right to have a say in joint military operations so that events such as last week's raid will not happen. If all of this is true, and if it actually takes place, then I would cautiously feel optimistic about Iraq true sovereignty. The more true independence Iraqis are the better chances there are of curbing the violence in the country, IMO.
Aide: Iraqi leader using U.S. angst
The people and government (based on Maliki's statements) want the US out of Iraq. Why are we not complying?
Actually I think you are only half right, the people want the US out, Malaki wants to have his cake and eat it too, he hasn't asked the (or told) the US to leave. It seems to me that he wants the US there to fight insurgents but not to interfere with his death squads and Shiite militias. Maybe someday he (or whoever happens to be in leadership position) will see that US help comes at a high price.
When has King Bush ever complied with his own promises or statements?
Name me one.
revel wrote:Actually I think you are only half right, the people want the US out, Malaki wants to have his cake and eat it too, he hasn't asked the (or told) the US to leave. It seems to me that he wants the US there to fight insurgents but not to interfere with his death squads and Shiite militias. Maybe someday he (or whoever happens to be in leadership position) will see that US help comes at a high price.
Oh,Oh! Revel, try not to be too shocked for again
I agree with you!
cicerone imposter wrote:When has King Bush ever complied with his own promises or statements?
Name me one.
Here are a few.
President Bush did comply with his own promises, when he promised he would:
1. make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them, and subsequently made no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them;
2. support the establishment of a system of home land security, and subsequently did support the establishment of a system of home land security;
3. appoint federal judges who promise to interpret the law and not legislate the law, and subsequently did appoint federal judges who promise to interpret the law and not legislate the law;
4. support a reduction in personal income taxes and capital gains taxes, and subsequently did support a reduction in personal income taxes and capital gains taxes;
5. support federal aid to adult stem cell research, and subsequently did support federal aid to adult stem cell research;
6. not support federal aid to embryonic stem cell research, and subsequently did not support federal aid to ebryonic stem cell research;
...
ican, You're easier than a fish to bait.
HEALTH CARE RHETORIC
A "There are 43 million uninsured Americans - 4 million more than when the current administration took office. George W. Bush will reverse this trend by making health insurance affordable for hard-working, low-income families." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 website]
B "George W. Bush will establish the 'Healthy Communities Innovation Fund' to provide $500 million in grants over five years to fund innovative projects addressing targeted health risks, such as childhood diabetes."
[Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 website]
HEALTH CARE REALITY
A In the first two years Bush was in office, the number of uninsured American increased by nearly four million. Since Bush took office, health insurance premiums have risen by an average rate of 12.5 percent per year. According to a major study, "widespread adoption [of Bush's major health care plan] could drive up the annual deductible paid by workers." [Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 7/8/04; Kaiser Family Foundation, 4/04; USA Today, 4/25/04]
B Bush never established this fund. [Source: The Philadelphia Inquirer, 1/20/04]
ENVIRONMENTAL RHETORIC
George W. Bush "will also ensure that the federal government, which is the country's largest polluter, complies with all environmental laws."
[Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 website]
ENVIRONMENTAL REALITY
For the past three years, the Department of Defense has requested that Congress exempt it from environmental laws and regulations like the Clean Air Act of 1970. The exemptions were requested despite the fact that the Environmental Protection Agency has thus far declined to apply the policies to the military training facilities in question.
[Source: Government Executive Magazine, 4/6/04]
Be patient, ican, I'll be posting many more.
NUCLEAR PROLIFERTION REALITY
HIGHER ED RHETORIC
George W. Bush will "fully fund the Pell grant program for first-year students by increasing the maximum grant amount by more than 50 percent, to $5,100."
[Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 - Education website]
HIGHER ED REALITY
President Bush has frozen the maximum Pell Grant at $4,050 in his FY 2005 education budget. This is the third year in a row that Bush has frozen or cut the maximum Pell Grant. [Source: House Committee on Education and the Work Force 2/2/04]
WELFARE RHETORIC
"To encourage states to help families in crisis, Governor Bush will provide states an additional $1 billion over five years for preventative services to keep children in, or return them to, their homes whenever safely possible." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 - Child Welfare website]
WELFARE REALITY
Bush has proposed allowing states to use the federal funds currently earmarked for foster care room-and-board payments to be used for preventative services. In exchange, states must accept a spending cap on the amount of foster care funding they receive. [Source: Philadelphia Inquirer, 3/24/04]
ENERGY RHETORIC
"To provide energy assistance to low-income Households and Address Short-Term Supply Threats, Governor Bush will expand the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) by seeking the release of $155 million, and directing a portion of oil and gas royalty payments to the program, costing $1 billion over ten years." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 - Energy website]
ENERGY REALITY
Bush's first budget, for the 2002 fiscal year, cut LIHEAP funding by $300 million as compared with the previous year, despite higher unemployment and a colder winter. [Source: CBS, 12/11/02]
JUDICIAL RHETORIC
"To restore confidence in government, George W. Bush will...return civility to the nomination process." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 website]
JUDICIAL REALITY
When Democrats objected to the nomination of William Pryor to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the White House stood by its allies who leveled charges of anti-Catholic bias at the Democrats. When Sen. Patrick Leahy confronted Vice President Cheney about the impropriety of this charge on the Senate floor, Cheney civilly told him to "F*** off." [Source: CBS, 6/25/04]
NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION RHETORIC
"In an act of foresight and statesmanship, [Senator Lugar and Senator Sam Nunn in 1991] realized that existing Russian nuclear facilities were in danger of being compromised. The next president must press for an accurate inventory of all this material. [George W. Bush will] ask the Congress to increase substantially our assistance to Russia in dismantling as many of their weapons as possible, as quickly as possible." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 - Foreign Policy website]
NUCLEAR PROLIFERTION REALITY
Despite repeated claims this spring that he favors further expansion of the successful Nunn-Lugar program, Bush's proposed budget for FY 2005 cuts funding for Nunn-Lugar by 10 percent and cuts the Department of Energy's Russian nuclear security funding by 8 percent. [Source: Carnegie Endowment for Peace, 3/3/0/04]
ican711nm wrote:au1929 wrote:
...
What give dumbo another chance to screw things up even worse than he has already. How many more must die before you understand the extent of his ability to fail?.
Damn it to hell! When are you going to wake up?
"Dumbo," or Bush, or Rumsfeld or America are not now the real issue and never were the real issue. The real issue is what is necessary to be done about the Middle East for the sake of humanity?
You silly prat. They killed 600,000 and f*cked everything up beyond measure.
There's an issue there all right.
ican is not capable of seeing all the destruction and mayhem the Bushco gang has created for this world in their six years in control of the administration. They fail to see the increased cost every day in lives and treasure while Bush continued his "stay the course" rhetoric until he learned that the GOPs running for office next month are in big shettle.
Even active soldiers are beginning to speak out against their involvement in Iraq; something that never happened in our country.
The Bush legacy is kapput!
cicerone imposter wrote:
ican, You're easier than a fish to bait.
HEALTH CARE RHETORIC
...
HEALTH CARE REALITY
...
ENVIRONMENTAL RHETORIC
...
ENVIRONMENTAL REALITY
...
Be patient, ican, I'll be posting many more.
Gad, what a fraud! You ask the following:
cicerone imposter wrote:
When has King Bush ever complied with his own promises or statements? Name me one.
I answered the following:
ican711nm wrote:Here are a few.
President Bush did comply with his own promises, when he promised he would:
1. make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them, and subsequently made no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them;
2. support the establishment of a system of home land security, and subsequently did support the establishment of a system of home land security;
3. appoint federal judges who promise to interpret the law and not legislate the law, and subsequently did appoint federal judges who promise to interpret the law and not legislate the law;
4. support a reduction in personal income taxes and capital gains taxes, and subsequently did support a reduction in personal income taxes and capital gains taxes;
5. support federal aid to adult stem cell research, and subsequently did support federal aid to adult stem cell research;
6. not support federal aid to embryonic stem cell research, and subsequently did not support federal aid to ebryonic stem cell research;
...
And you now pretend your stupid question was merely your way of baiting me so you could list promises Bush has not complied with.
You could have at the outset listed promises Bush has not complied. I can add a few myself. I'm sure others participating in this forum could do the same.
I don't believe you were baiting me, since there was no real need for you to do so.
I believe that your claim to have baited me is pure fraud to cover up the demonstrated stupidity of your original question.
Go ahead some more to "bait me", if that is what your endangered ego requires! I can be compassionate when I want.
ican, You still don't get it. Your list of promises kept doesn't help most Americans, while the ones I listed affects not only Americans, but almost everybody else on this planet.
Your list:
1. make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them, and subsequently made no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them;
That speech was all balther with no substance; maybe you haven't noticed, but terrorism has increased under Bushco.
2. support the establishment of a system of home land security, and subsequently did support the establishment of a system of home land security;
The system of home land security is an oxymoron - Bush style. He just approved the building of a 700 mile fence between the US and Mexico. Do you know how effective that will be? The department of homeland security is so disorganized and demorralized, it's a wonder they still exist!
3. appoint federal judges who promise to interpret the law and not legislate the law, and subsequently did appoint federal judges who promise to interpret the law and not legislate the law;
You're more ignorant than I thought; judges make subjective interpretations of the laws often. Promise? god, you are stupid.
4. support a reduction in personal income taxes and capital gains taxes, and subsequently did support a reduction in personal income taxes and capital gains taxes;
FYI, most of the tax breaks went to the wealthy and corporations, while many middle class families have fallen into poverty with no health insurance. All tihs while our country fights a costly war, and the federal deficit becomes a handicap for our economy. Grow up!
5. support federal aid to adult stem cell research, and subsequently did support federal aid to adult stem cell research;
That Bush would impose his religious beliefs on the rest of society only shows how conservatives have lost sight of being a conservative of less government intrusion into our lives. There are many in this country that wants embryonic stem cell research to proceed without any handicaps by the federal government.
6. not support federal aid to embryonic stem cell research, and subsequently did not support federal aid to ebryonic stem cell research;
Same as above.
Now, look at my list to see if the subject being discussed has greater impact on more Americans and has greater importance to more people.
Here's an analysis of Bush's department of homeland security.
A Fight Against Terrorism -- and Disorganization
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 9, 2006; A01
Early this summer, a new strategy for combating terrorism, described by its authors as "revolutionary" in concept, arrived on President Bush's desk. The highly classified National Implementation Plan for the first time set government-wide goals and assigned responsibility for achieving them to specific departments and agencies.
Written by officials at the National Counterterrorism Center, under a directive signed by the president last winter, the 160-page plan aspires to achieve what has eluded the Bush administration in the five years since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks: bringing order and direction to the fight against terrorism.
In the years since Bush stood atop the smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center and pledged retaliation against "the people who knocked down these buildings," the federal government has undergone an unprecedented expansion and reorganization.
Yet the counterterrorism infrastructure that resulted has become so immense and unwieldy that many looking at it from the outside, and even some on the inside, have trouble understanding how it works or how much safer it has made the country.
Huge amounts of money have been spent -- $430 billion so far on overseas military and diplomatic counterterrorism operations, according to the U.S. comptroller general, a tripling of pre-9/11 expenditures for domestic security programs to an estimated $50 billion to $60 billion this year, and untallied billions more in state and local money.
Institutions historically charged with protecting the nation have produced a new generation of bureaucratic offspring -- the Pentagon's Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA) and Joint Intelligence Task Force for Combating Terrorism (JITF-CT), the Treasury Department's Office of Intelligence and Analysis (OIA), and the FBI's National Security Service (NSS), to name a few -- many with seemingly overlapping missions.
New laws have broadened domestic enforcement powers, and the Justice Department has been radically restructured to emphasize counterterrorism. The FBI, where counterterrorism now accounts for half of all investigations, has nearly doubled its budget to $6 billion since 2001 and added 7,000 employees. Twenty-two domestic agencies have been combined under the new Department of Homeland Security, while separate counterterrorism divisions now exist in virtually every nook and cranny of the federal government, from the Transportation Department to the Food and Drug Administration.
Outside Washington, 42 states have established intelligence "fusion centers" -- centralized locations where local, state and federal officials operate joint information-gathering and analysis operations.
The proof that it is all working, White House officials often say, is that there has been no attack on U.S. soil since 2001.
But critics say that after nearly five years, the fight against terrorism often seems like a chaotic work in progress.
"It's as if we're at 2002 and not 2006 in terms of where we are," Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, said in an interview.
The ad hoc construction, adding layer upon layer with none taken away, has left intelligence and security agencies competing for turf. Deadlines for priorities have been missed. DHS, for example, has repeatedly delayed supplying a congressionally mandated list of the nation's critical infrastructure, and a blueprint for information-sharing among federal, state and local entities has been slow to get off the ground.
Continuity and coherence have been undercut by rapid turnover among top officials, particularly in the institutions responsible for domestic security and preparedness.
DHS's cybersecurity division has been run by an acting director since the last full-time appointee -- the third person to leave the post in a year -- resigned in October 2004. In April, the FBI's sixth counterterrorism chief since 2001 tendered his resignation after 10 months on the job. Many with government training and security clearances resign or retire, only to sign on at far higher salaries with the burgeoning private-sector security industry.
At the state and local front lines, officials complain of limited input in the development of homeland security policies and impenetrable layers of federal secrecy -- including as many as 90 categories of "sensitive but unclassified" information -- that limit the usefulness of terrorism alerts they receive from Washington, according to separate surveys this spring by the National Governors Association and the Government Accountability Office.
On paper, at least, the man in charge of much of the counterterrorism effort is Director of National Intelligence John D. Negroponte. His office was created last year under the 2004 Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act to fix two widely acknowledged problems. The first was the intelligence community's pre-9/11 failure to collect and share information that might have warned of the al-Qaeda attacks. The second problem was the confusion and competition spawned by post-9/11 attempts to fix the first.
Negroponte supervises the 16 agencies that make up the federal intelligence community and is the president's chief intelligence adviser. Directly under him, the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) is the central repository for terrorism information collected throughout the community. Its several hundred analysts integrate intelligence, figure out what it means and redistribute it across the government. The center's strategic planning division provides what NCTC Director John Scott Redd has called "the missing piece" between White House policy decisions and the operational departments and agencies that carry them out.
"We've done a great deal" in the years since 9/11, said one of a number of counterterrorism officials interviewed for this article, all of whom agreed to speak only if their names were not used. "There's a lot more we need to do. A lot more."
The official added: "The American people ought to have some faith that we're working on it."
Beyond the Military Approach
It was only natural that the military would take the lead in fighting terrorism after Sept. 11. In Afghanistan and other al-Qaeda locales, U.S. forces produced victories that were substantive and quantifiable, as well as politically useful to the administration.
Other parts of the government had important roles. But the Defense Department, buttressed by its intrinsic organizational skills, its traditional role as the recipient of the lion's share of the intelligence budget, and the zeal and policymaking influence of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, quickly grew to dominate much more than the war-fighting effort.
The Pentagon has clashed repeatedly with the CIA and the State Department as it has sought to expand its counterterrorism mission. Last year, both protested a secret Pentagon program that sends Special Forces units in plain clothes on intelligence-gathering missions to countries where no war is in progress and with which the United States has friendly diplomatic relations.
The Pentagon argued that troops report to their commanders and the defense secretary, not the secretary of state or the CIA director, and do not need to seek permission from or even to inform local U.S. ambassadors or CIA station chiefs. And, it said, the military needs its own "situational awareness" of possible future combat areas.
When the level of animosity peaked last summer, Rumsfeld and then-CIA Director Porter J. Goss were prodded by Michael V. Hayden, then deputy director of national intelligence, to negotiate an agreement to delineate intelligence-gathering responsibilities. Under a separate memorandum of understanding, the Pentagon and the State Department agreed that ambassadors would be informed of all military activity in their countries and given the opportunity to object.
Beyond the turf battles, however, counterterrorism officials grew concerned that U.S. strategy needed to expand beyond what one called the "whack, capture, interrogate and whack again" approach of the military. "Our thinking has matured radically since 2001," he said. "Then, it was looked at as the al-Qaeda network. Now, it is seen as looser, more diffuse, and also in our own country, in Western Europe and Canada."
"The military can't be the big hammer" anymore, he said, because al-Qaeda and its affiliates "are not the nail."
"You'll never win unless you can get to the sources of radicalization," he added. ". . . As the threat has changed, we've tried to adapt. But it's taken some time. As an American taxpayer, I wish we could have gotten it right in October 2001."
The "changing paradigm" applies at home as well as overseas, said a senior FBI official. The FBI operated on the assumption that "al-Qaeda was 'The Sopranos,' with a boss, an underboss, the consiglieri and the captains who ran the cells," the official said. "It was comfortable for us to understand."
New initiatives such as the National Implementation Plan were launched to eliminate overlap and set priorities for what the administration now calls the "long war." Beyond drawing sharper lines of responsibility, officials said, the plan is designed to drag the nation's counterterrorism strategy back from military dominance, better balancing the military "whack" with diplomacy and the "hearts and minds" campaigns that are now seen as critical to long-term victory.
Bush was briefed on the plan on June 26. A White House official said the plan reflects Bush's feeling that the terrorism fight is "all-encompassing," including military attacks but also "the war of ideas and the softer side, the long-term battle."
Within half a dozen broad objectives, the document designates lead and subordinate agencies to carry out more than 500 discrete counterterrorism tasks, among them vanquishing al-Qaeda, protecting the homeland, wooing allies, training experts in other languages and cultures, and understanding and influencing the Islamic psyche.
Achieving agreement among more than 200 department and agency representatives over 10 months of often-torturous negotiations was "a heroically ambitious exercise," said a senior administration official who participated in the process. "A couple of months ago, everybody was still shaking their heads."
The plan is expected to prompt a rewrite of the president's February 2003 National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, which emphasized the physical elimination of terrorist networks while making largely symbolic bows to international partnerships and addressing the "underlying conditions that terrorists seek to exploit."
Eventually, officials acknowledged, it will also require a reconfiguration of the intelligence budget, now heavily weighted toward the military. No one expects that to happen overnight -- early proposals to shift spending brought a sharp protest from Rumsfeld.
But even at the Pentagon there are signs of turf-war fatigue. "Two years ago, we didn't have anything," said Brig. Gen. Robert Caslen Jr., who until June was the Joint Chiefs of Staff's deputy director for the terrorism fight. "Every department of government had its own idea on who was the enemy. Now we have a strategy and a plan that gives specific tasks and responsibility," he said.
Others are guardedly optimistic that the plan can be implemented. "It's going to alleviate a lot of the turf tensions and the growing pains," said one senior counterterrorism official. "But they're not going to go away."
This was created by the party that believes in small government.
U.S. Is Said to Fail in Tracking Arms for Iraqis
By JAMES GLANZ
Hundreds of thousands of weapons intended for Iraqi
security forces were not properly monitored, a new federal
report said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/world/middleeast/30reconstruct.html?th&emc=th
Did you expect anything different? Is this any way to run a railroad?
Your list:
1. make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them, and subsequently made no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them;
That speech was all balther with no substance; maybe you haven't noticed, but terrorism has increased under Bushco.
Terrorism in America has decreased to zero, since Bush made that promise and complied with it. But terrorism has been rising in Iraq from the monthly average of 1,024 for the 3 year period January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2005 to a monthly average of 1,742 for the 9 month period January 1, 2006 to September 30, 2006.
Can you guess why terrorism in America has decreased? Has it anything to do with the restrictions now imposed on public transportation in and out of the US? Do you also know that over 90 percent of containers coming into the US is not inspected? It's good that you now feel secure, but it's simply out of ignorance. Especially since the Homeland Security Department is in shambles with resignations from those with real experience.
But the monthly average for the 132 month period of Saddam's regime after the Quwait war, 1992 through 2002, was 4,738. That's more than 2.7 times the current rate. While the current rate is still intolerable, it at least represents an improvement from what it was during Saddam's regime.
2. support the establishment of a system of home land security, and subsequently did support the establishment of a system of home land security;
The system of home land security is an oxymoron - Bush style. He just approved the building of a 700 mile fence between the US and Mexico. Do you know how effective that will be? The department of homeland security is so disorganized and demorralized, it's a wonder they still exist!
While I think the 700 mile fence promise is stupidly inadequate, home land security is not an oxymoron, for it has so far worked fine. I think you are confusing it with our muddled department of immigration. Our department of home land security will prove inadequate if the government repeals its currently legal power to closely monitor US and foreign communications to detect terrorist plans to terrorize Americans.
See my answer, above.
3. appoint federal judges who promise to interpret the law and not legislate the law, and subsequently did appoint federal judges who promise to interpret the law and not legislate the law;
You're more ignorant than I thought; judges make subjective interpretations of the laws often. Promise? god, you are stupid.
Yes, judges do that. But too many judges now make subjective judgments about what the law should be rather than what the law is.
4. support a reduction in personal income taxes and capital gains taxes, and subsequently did support a reduction in personal income taxes and capital gains taxes;
FYI, most of the tax breaks went to the wealthy and corporations, while many middle class families have fallen into poverty with no health insurance. All tihs while our country fights a costly war, and the federal deficit becomes a handicap for our economy. Grow up!
One of the fundamental principles that must be followed for our Republic to survive and not itself be consumed by a tyranny, is that minorities must not be allowed to discriminate against majorities, and majorities must not be allowed to discriminate against minorities. A 39.6% income tax rate on the most wealthy and a 15% tax rate on the least wealthy is a clear violation of that principle in that a majority was discriminating against a minority. A minor correction of that violation was achieved when Bush supported a reduction of the maximum rate from 39.6% to 35%. By the way, he clearly offset that correction when he also supported a reduction of the minimum 15% tax rate to 10%.
It's not a matter of "discrimination" when our country is at war. Cutting taxes only worsens the future economy of our country for the long-term, because interest payments become a larger portion of expenses for the government, and takes away the necessary funding for the good and safety of our country. It also encumbers our children and future generations to pay off this huge debt.
5. support federal aid to adult stem cell research, and subsequently did support federal aid to adult stem cell research;
That Bush would impose his religious beliefs on the rest of society only shows how conservatives have lost sight of being a conservative of less government intrusion into our lives. There are many in this country that wants embryonic stem cell research to proceed without any handicaps by the federal government.
There are many in this country that do not want embryonic stem cell research to proceed without any handicaps by the federal government, because it discriminates against that minority called human embryos. This country's government has traditionally imposed religous beliefs on the people. Thank God for that! For example: "Thou shall not murder; Thou shall not steal; Thou shall not bear false witness;" etc.
"Many" just doesn't cut it; the majority of Americans want stem cell research to proceed. Your other arguments using christian values belong in church and not in national policies.
6. not support federal aid to embryonic stem cell research, and subsequently did not support federal aid to ebryonic stem cell research;
Same as above.
Same as above.
Now to your new question as reworded by me: Do Bush's promises that he has complied with have more or less impact on more Americans and have greater importance to more people than Bush's promises he has not complied with?
Using his religious' beliefs to impact all Americans is just plain wrong. Even many christians want embryonic stem cell research to proceed without any handicaps by the feds.
Cicerone, none of these topics you discuss rise to the same level of importance to humanity as do the six examples I gave.
cicerone imposter wrote:HIGHER ED RHETORIC
George W. Bush will "fully fund the Pell grant program for first-year students by increasing the maximum grant amount by more than 50 percent, to $5,100."
[Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 -- Education website]
HIGHER ED REALITY
President Bush has frozen the maximum Pell Grant at $4,050 in his FY 2005 education budget. This is the third year in a row that Bush has frozen or cut the maximum Pell Grant. [Source: House Committee on Education and the Work Force 2/2/04]
Pell Grants are unlawful and should be terminated! The federal government has not been delegated by our Constitution the power to act as a charity. For it to act as a charity is a violation of the "supreme Law of the Land." Charity is properly and legally a private function and not a governmental function.
Quote:
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/charity
Main Entry: char·i·ty
Pronunciation: 'cher-&-tE, 'cha-r&-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
Etymology: Middle English charite, from Anglo-French charité, from Late Latin caritat-, caritas Christian love, from Latin, dearness, from carus dear; akin to Old Irish carae friend, Sanskrit kAma love
1 : benevolent goodwill toward or love of humanity
2 a : generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering; also : aid given to those in need b : an institution engaged in relief of the poor c : public provision for the relief of the needy
3 a : a gift for public benevolent purposes b : an institution (as a hospital) founded by such a gift
4 : lenient judgment of others
synonym see MERCY
Quote:The Cycle of Democracy--Alexander Tyler, 1778:
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship.
WELFARE RHETORIC
"To encourage states to help families in crisis, Governor Bush will provide states an additional $1 billion over five years for preventative services to keep children in, or return them to, their homes whenever safely possible." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 -- Child Welfare website]
WELFARE REALITY
Bush has proposed allowing states to use the federal funds currently earmarked for foster care room-and-board payments to be used for preventative services. In exchange, states must accept a spending cap on the amount of foster care funding they receive. [Source: Philadelphia Inquirer, 3/24/04]
Federal welfare programs are unlawful and should be terminated! The federal government has not been delegated by our Constitution the power to act as a charity. For it to act as a charity is a violation of the "supreme Law of the Land." Charity is properly and legally a private function and not a governmental function.
ENERGY RHETORIC
"To provide energy assistance to low-income Households and Address Short-Term Supply Threats, Governor Bush will expand the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) by seeking the release of $155 million, and directing a portion of oil and gas royalty payments to the program, costing $1 billion over ten years." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 -- Energy website]
ENERGY REALITY
Bush's first budget, for the 2002 fiscal year, cut LIHEAP funding by $300 million as compared with the previous year, despite higher unemployment and a colder winter. [Source: CBS, 12/11/02]
The Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program is unlawful and should be terminated! The federal government has not been delegated by our Constitution the power to act as a charity. For it to act as a charity is a violation of the "supreme Law of the Land." Charity is properly and legally a private function and not a governmental function.
JUDICIAL RHETORIC
"To restore confidence in government, George W. Bush will...return civility to the nomination process." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 website]
JUDICIAL REALITY
When Democrats objected to the nomination of William Pryor to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the White House stood by its allies who leveled charges of anti-Catholic bias at the Democrats. When Sen. Patrick Leahy confronted Vice President Cheney about the impropriety of this charge on the Senate floor, Cheney civilly told him to "F*** off." [Source: CBS, 6/25/04]
Your description is pseudology! Chenney gave that response outside the Senate chamber to an uncivil Leahy remark.
NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION RHETORIC
"In an act of foresight and statesmanship, [Senator Lugar and Senator Sam Nunn in 1991] realized that existing Russian nuclear facilities were in danger of being compromised. The next president must press for an accurate inventory of all this material. [George W. Bush will] ask the Congress to increase substantially our assistance to Russia in dismantling as many of their weapons as possible, as quickly as possible." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 -- Foreign Policy website]
NUCLEAR PROLIFERTION REALITY
Despite repeated claims this spring that he favors further expansion of the successful Nunn-Lugar program, Bush's proposed budget for FY 2005 cuts funding for Nunn-Lugar by 10 percent and cuts the Department of Energy's Russian nuclear security funding by 8 percent. [Source: Carnegie Endowment for Peace, 3/3/0/04]
Despite claims otherwise, I think confirmation that the Russians are spending this money the way they say they are, is inadequate. Even if the Russians could be trusted to do what this funding requires, the controls in this program are inadequate for preventing the Russians from building new weapons.
