What planet R U from that you think Welfare and WIC can even come close truly supporting adequately.
Posted By: Cyndiee on 2009-01-31
In Reply to: There is welfare and wick. - nm
A mother (job training, if you want her to pay taxes back into society, day care, so she can work with a safe place for her chld), a SAFE neighborhood to bring up the child, emotional support, do you even know what clothing and shoes cost, formula, diapers, and if we just keep handing out WElfare, how do we break that "chain" when the child grows and the cycle repeats, the President realizes it takes much, much more than a cheap handout, it takes work programs, work training programs, availabiity of safe, good child care, medical care, nutritional care, educational opportunities.....that was a cold statement without forethought to what it is really like, I have three chldren, my husband and I both work very hard, overtime and all, and it is still unbelievably hard and close!
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
what planet did you drop in on......no, all welfare
nm
What planet do you guys come from?
You actually think people by this stuff as genuine. Again, do you actually think through what you state, or do you state it for the shock effect. I assume it's the latter.
We can and do affect this planet.
While I agree that we can't exactly know how much we have to do with changing cycles on the planet, there is simply NO doubt that we have had a profound impact upon it. Even when I was a kid there were springs we could drink from and rivers we could swim in without fear of chemical burns. The fields were loaded with turtles and other creatures, every pond and creek was alive wtih frogs and tadpoles and fish. Ask your grandparents what they remember the countryside being like before the supreme arrogance of corporate policy poisoned every water source we have. There was a time that tuna fish didn't have mercury in it. On and on. Don't dismiss the concern many have over the impact we DO have on our planet as arrogance - we are certainly having a BAD BAD impact globally.
And true, not just us. However, America along with other industrialized nations and bankers is certainly complicit in the globalization movement (i.e., move into other lands, usurp the resouces from the native people, give them toxic sludge for their crops as a sort of side joke, suck out all their groundwater, make the corporations richer). We certainly don't stand against it politically or financially.
While the planet may survive the sweeping changes its most prolific environment-altering parasites inflict upon it, we probably will not. Just look at Mars if you don't think a planet can die. Regardless of why, it's certainly dead enough. So are we going to wait to be shaken off like pesky fleas - or are we going to make some effort to SUSTAIN our world and keep it in balance rather than continuously insulting it to the point where we DESERVE to be exterminated? Some of us don't have a deep-seated death wish. Some of us don't think money is more important than good living. Some of us are actually fond of this planet. Excuse US for thinking of it that way.
You are supporting the post above...
which is nothing but an opinion by an unidentified author from an obscure website. This website is run by a guy named Jeff Rense. He also does a radio talk show about UFO sightings. Nice research there partner!
Flying around? What planet are you from?
He got on Airforce One following the protocol for protecting the POTUS. You know, Air Force One, the flying command center of the United States? The VP has a separate protocol and was taken to a separate location. Geeze, maybe you should avail yourself of some information before you post from now on.
He wasn't 'flying around.' Sorry to pop your conspiracy theory bubble, darling, but get your head on straight. And maybe you should educate yourself about the Katrina situation before you open your gob and vomit out the same tired 'bush caused katrina' drivel.
OBAMA IS A WEAKLING. GRAB YOUR ANKLES AND WAIT FOR FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS.
Supporting Obama
Well, I support Obama too and I'm a Republican! So how does that work? HA!! I'm sure many on here would call me confused. I'm not confused, just being positive for the president and glad I don't have his job. Now, I would be even more supportive if someone could get rid of Nancy P!
Then maybe a link supporting this should have been
included. Instead, the video link that was provided referred to last year, when Obama wasn't even president.
What planet do you live on?
"When it comes to disease, we have a choice." Just taking the moist obvious, those babies born with fatal anomalies made bad choices? The stillborn infants made bad choices? You must have had a much busier uterus than I did.
Be glad you're not Catholic. Based on your acknowledgement that being judgmental is a sin, you'd be spending a lot of time on your knees in that confessional.
Not supporting sinners
Oh please, So as a Christian, you can chose not to spend money on people who sin?? NEWS FLASH!! Everyone sins, from you, to pastors, to the Pope. No human is free from sin.
Another reason not to participate in organized religion. Full of hypocrisy.
socialism for a shrinking planet
Im not beating around the bush. Im amazed there is a leader who is that compassionate to care for all of his people. I cant remember a time when America had a leader like that. Closest I can think of is when Social Security was created. Socialism is a fair ideology for all the people of a country. Capitalism certainly isnt, that is unless all a person cares about is making as much money as they can and then locking themselves away in a gated community, driving on the outskirts of the ghetto areas of downtown so they dont have to see how the unfortunate ones live. I, on the other hand, care about people. I put caring before money. All Americans should have a well paying job, a chance to go to college, even if you cant afford it, a roof over your head, a full belly at night, medical care. One major thing that eats away at me is knowing some people do not go through life happy because their whole life is a neverending struggle, mostly due to no fault of their own. I see the writing on the wall, too bad the fat cat capitalists who are so greedy and hording that money away dont. As the population grows in the world, supplies and resources will dwindle. Government programs will have to be created to take care of the people whose only fault is they werent born with a silver spoon in their mouth and not born when houses were inexpensive, college was easy to get into and inexpensive, jobs were plentiful and not outsourced, etc. The masses will out-mass the greedy capitalists and then we will see something like what is happening in Venezuela now..Equality for ALL Americans in the basic needs of life and dignity. Sure there are some fat cat capitalists who are truly good people and are helping the unfortunate and I applaud them but from what I have seen, the majority of the super rich, dont give a darn about the working class or working poor or poor. No person should die on the street for lack of housing or only have a minimum wage job so they cant afford to rent or buy. No person should go to bed at night hungry even though they have worked one or two jobs but had to choose between the rent, gas or food. I see where Capitalism can go hand and hand with Socialism and that is what truly is going to happen. America, the richest country on earth, yet we dont have medical care for our citizens, we have homeless in the streets, maternity leave is not paid for, we take the less amount of vacation days than any other industrialized country. When Kruschev visited America for the first time, he asked why did America have homeless. He stated that The Soviet Socialists Republic did not have homeless, they might have a few families living in the same apartment but they werent homeless. How shameful for America. America might have been great a few decades ago but it is leaving much to want for now and it will only get worse with the division of the classes..poor, working poor, middle class, rich and super rich, which is happening now, and the dwindling resources and opportunities. Now, go ahead, call me a raging lunatic. You have your right to your opinion, however, this is my take on today's America and it makes my heart heavy.
Supporting them would be bringing them home, and then there would...sm
not be such a wish list.
We had a friend stationed in Iraq (she is back now, thank God) and we sent her some lotions and things she asked for, but I'll admit I didn't know there were wish lists like this on the web. From the contacts I have over there with my uncle and brother in law (back now thank God) being males they told us not to send anything because they have/had everything they needed. I have searched the web just now and found many on the web, and I will do whatever my heart and pocketbook leads me to do as far as sending care packages.
You can't judge a book by it's cover. Just because you have 8 boxes in your office ready to go doesn't make you anymore patriotic than the next man.
Hillary has gone from supporting to decrying the war. sm
She has flip-flopped on that issue so many times, even her own party is unhappy with her. Also, her statement about "taking things away for the common good" should send cold chills down anyone's spine if you are cognizant at all of history. We are on the slippery slope of a depression. All we need is higher taxes and more entitlement programs and all of us, every one of us, will suffer, not matter what political party you belong to. We need a fiscal conservative from one of the parties to step forward and bring us through this. It will not be Hillary.
NOW supporting Obama/Biden...
http://www.now.org/press/09-08/09-16.html
YOU should be ashamed for supporting a candidate
nm
The sheep are supporting Obama because of his
nm
But McCain supporting it went against his own statements -
to paraphrase, during one of the debates, he said he had a pen and he would use it to veto any bill that had pork barrel spending in it and that he would make the names known of people who wanted that spending.
Bush wants to nuke the planet first, ask questions later.
I hope the Congress isn't stupid enough to go along with this idiotic plan and once again trust Bush's lying claims about who has WMD and who doesn't. Bush isn't going to be happy until he blows up the entire planet. It's becoming clearer every day that he meant what he said when asked about his legacy, he responded with, Who cares? We'll all be dead. 
Pentagon Revises Nuclear Strike Plan
Strategy Includes Preemptive Use Against Banned Weapons
By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, September 11, 2005; A01
The Pentagon has drafted a revised doctrine for the use of nuclear weapons that envisions commanders requesting presidential approval to use them to preempt an attack by a nation or a terrorist group using weapons of mass destruction. The draft also includes the option of using nuclear arms to destroy known enemy stockpiles of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.
The document, written by the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs staff but not yet finally approved by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, would update rules and procedures governing use of nuclear weapons to reflect a preemption strategy first announced by the Bush White House in December 2002. The strategy was outlined in more detail at the time in classified national security directives.
At a White House briefing that year, a spokesman said the United States would respond with overwhelming force to the use of weapons of mass destruction against the United States, its forces or allies, and said all options would be available to the president.
The draft, dated March 15, would provide authoritative guidance for commanders to request presidential approval for using nuclear weapons, and represents the Pentagon's first attempt to revise procedures to reflect the Bush preemption doctrine. A previous version, completed in 1995 during the Clinton administration, contains no mention of using nuclear weapons preemptively or specifically against threats from weapons of mass destruction.
Titled Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations and written under the direction of Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the draft document is unclassified and available on a Pentagon Web site. It is expected to be signed within a few weeks by Air Force Lt. Gen. Norton A. Schwartz, director of the Joint Staff, according to Navy Cmdr. Dawn Cutler, a public affairs officer in Myers's office. Meanwhile, the draft is going through final coordination with the military services, the combatant commanders, Pentagon legal authorities and Rumsfeld's office, Cutler said in a written statement.
A summary of changes included in the draft identifies differences from the 1995 doctrine, and says the new document revises the discussion of nuclear weapons use across the range of military operations.
The first example for potential nuclear weapon use listed in the draft is against an enemy that is using or intending to use WMD against U.S. or allied, multinational military forces or civilian populations.
Another scenario for a possible nuclear preemptive strike is in case of an imminent attack from adversary biological weapons that only effects from nuclear weapons can safely destroy.
That and other provisions in the document appear to refer to nuclear initiatives proposed by the administration that Congress has thus far declined to fully support.
Last year, for example, Congress refused to fund research toward development of nuclear weapons that could destroy biological or chemical weapons materials without dispersing them into the atmosphere.
The draft document also envisions the use of atomic weapons for attacks on adversary installations including WMD, deep, hardened bunkers containing chemical or biological weapons.
But Congress last year halted funding of a study to determine the viability of the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator warhead (RNEP) -- commonly called the bunker buster -- that the Pentagon has said is needed to attack hardened, deeply buried weapons sites.
The Joint Staff draft doctrine explains that despite the end of the Cold War, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction raises the danger of nuclear weapons use. It says that there are about thirty nations with WMD programs along with nonstate actors [terrorists] either independently or as sponsored by an adversarial state.
To meet that situation, the document says that responsible security planning requires preparation for threats that are possible, though perhaps unlikely today.
To deter the use of weapons of mass destruction against the United States, the Pentagon paper says preparations must be made to use nuclear weapons and show determination to use them if necessary to prevent or retaliate against WMD use.
The draft says that to deter a potential adversary from using such weapons, that adversary's leadership must believe the United States has both the ability and will to pre-empt or retaliate promptly with responses that are credible and effective. The draft also notes that U.S. policy in the past has repeatedly rejected calls for adoption of 'no first use' policy of nuclear weapons since this policy could undermine deterrence.
Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.), a member of the House Armed Services Committee who has been a leading opponent of the bunker-buster program, said yesterday the draft was apparently a follow-through on their nuclear posture review and they seem to bypass the idea that Congress had doubts about the program. She added that members certainly don't want the administration to move forward with a [nuclear] preemption policy without hearings, closed door if necessary.
A spokesman for Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said yesterday the panel has not yet received a copy of the draft.
Hans M. Kristensen, a consultant to the Natural Resources Defense Council, who discovered the document on the Pentagon Web site, said yesterday that it emphasizes the need for a robust nuclear arsenal ready to strike on short notice including new missions.
Kristensen, who has specialized for more than a decade in nuclear weapons research, said a final version of the doctrine was due in August but has not yet appeared.
This doctrine does not deliver on the Bush administration pledge of a reduced role for nuclear weapons, Kristensen said. It provides justification for contentious concepts not proven and implies the need for RNEP.
One reason for the delay may be concern about raising publicly the possibility of preemptive use of nuclear weapons, or concern that it might interfere with attempts to persuade Congress to finance the bunker buster and other specialized nuclear weapons.
In April, Rumsfeld appeared before the Senate Armed Services panel and asked for the bunker buster study to be funded. He said the money was for research and not to begin production on any particular warhead. The only thing we have is very large, very dirty, big nuclear weapons, Rumsfeld said. It seems to me studying it [the RNEP] makes all the sense in the world.
Barney Frank.....what planet did he fall off
Barney Frank wants less govt and state rights when it comes to drugs.... but he wants "regulation" and "more enforcement" when it comes to everything else that takes away MY rights...... what a joke!
At least I will be on the other side of the planet from you when your vale of tears start.
NM
Really? Pubs in charge of the purse strings? What planet
...no wonder we're in this mess, and it will only get worse.
No, you are not even close to getting it.
You still think I believe people should priotize other things over their kids' health. I don't believe that, and I definitely don't do that. My children are definitely well cared for. I just think the middle-class deserves a break now and then, and I think a break in insurance costs for their kids would be an amazing gift to the good people of the working class.
I am not the only one not close to getting it....
why then not get a tax break resulting in a refund for paying the premiums yourself? That is a break. But you completely discount that. Bush offered that, Democrats weren't interested. Now you tell me why that is not giving the middle class a break toward more affordable health care. No, not FREE, but more affordable. My kids are well cared for too. But I do not think you, or anyone else, should have their taxes raised so that I can get free insurance for my kids.
Not even close...nm
x
Close, but not quite
Actually, the man behind the curtain in the Emerald City (which, after all is GREEN) is AL Gore!
close up of him checking
his watch every few minutes.
Pay close attention to what's NOT being said
This is a big story because imagine if that had happened to another presidential or vice-presidential candidate, that members of their follow church members were murdered in seperate killings.
Not even a liberal journalist can find ONE time Obama spoke about this while he was in that church. He has NEVER demanded more be done to find the killers. It's more like out of sight, out of mind.
Remember Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian leader.....he says there are NO gays in his country. Right!!
Since Obama is from a strong Muslim background, just makes me wonder what his true feelings are on this matter.
Close, 22 in December
But you have to start somewhere right? I could be like the majority of "kids" my age, buying $200,000 dollar homes, brand new cars, having babies, and then going "OH CRAP, credit doesn't mean free??"
My point of the post was that it's not fair for those who make more to have to give to those of us who make less. We have to climb our way up the economic ladder just like everyone else. If someone LEGITIMATELY needs help, let's give it to them.
But it shouldn't take the government to do that.
close friend
My best friend had an abortion when she was a senior in high school. She was afraid to tell her parents. I took her and her boyfriend paid for the procedure. He did not go with her. Fast-forward 24 years. She has 3 children and has been married for 20 years. Does she regret her decision? Some days she does. Would she do it again? She says she would. She has talked about it with her teenage son and hopes that her children will never have to make the choice. She is a conservative Christian now (Assembly of God) and she still fights for abortion rights.
Tell us who a few of his close friends
shadowy backgrounds. If he and all his followers insist that all his questionable past associations mean nothing, then where are the ones that do mean something to him? Someone had to influence his life.
What I have heard, and I am close to you
in Atlanta is that lots and I mean lots of illegals have left the country because of our economy and being unable to find jobs. Heard this not too long ago. If our economy is suffering, then theirs is also. Grady is clamping down after bleeding for years.
Be careful, you are getting too close to
proving your point. Some folks on here don't want to see you do that! Not if it disagrees with their infatuations, even when they know deep inside it is the truth. This dude wrote this junk before the election and Obama loved it! Enough so that he had the man's wife, Beyonce (sp), peform at the inauguration! and Jay-Z was in the guest of honors spectators seats. Racism? Heck NO!
If you looked really close to
Nancy Pelosi you would have seen the large brown on her nose. That is what that was all about. Look at me.....I'm Obama's right hand woman and I'm going to applaud and give a standing O for every little thing he says whether it is stupid or not. Woo hoo! Personally, I'm surprised the dems didn't do the wave or something. I wonder what kind of kool-aid they served last night. Hmm.
Close, but still no cigar.
Going a step further, maybe this will help explain.
The Amish are fundamentalist Christians who govern entire communities by religious principles. They are also completely nonviolent, do not seek converts, and will live in harmony with neighbors who are not of their faith.
The Branch Davidians were about as fundamentalist (to their own sect) and out-there as you can imagine. They did have a program of conversion, some would say there were instances of forced conversion. They fortified their headquarters and stockpiled weapons for what they perceived as impending government attack against them, but still never tried to overthrow the government.
There are fundamentalist Christian groups who are violent on single issues (bombing abortion clinics, for instance) or who are intolerant on single issues (racial purity or ''God hates fags''). Still, can we name any organized umbrella under which an intolerant and violent coalition of Christian fundamentalists advocates the overthrow of government, conquest of non-Christian countries and replacement of all secular law with religious law? That would be the Christian equivalent of Islamism.
All Islamists are fundamentalist Muslims. All fundamentalist Muslims are NOT Islamists.
You don't pay very close attention then do you?
O'Reilly has defended Obama on many occasions, trying to find some middle ground as to why he has done or not done some things.
He isn't far right by any means but on the other hand, there's nothing wrong with wanting to preserve our constitution as written.
If he's so far right conservative, it's funny then how FOX news has run circles around all the other news outlets in the ratings. Even adding all of the others' ratings together, FOX news still trumps them big time. That means all the liberal idjits out there are losing ground big time. Those MSNBC/NBC/CNN hate mongerers out there are losing ground big time.
Could it be folks are finally realizing Obama isn't living up to all those promises? It's finally starting to dawn on them this isn't the man for the job. The ratings are proof positive people in this country are ready to hear the truth, not the far left immoral agenda....
The Jesus that I know was very close to...sm
Mary Magdelene a prostitute. He did not agree with her profession, but he loved her and saw her value apart from what she did to survive. Things are not ever just black and white, good and bad. Because Obama does not agree with you on certain heartfelt beliefs does not mean that Jesus would not support him in his efforts to bring peace to the world.
Pay close attention.....
I have read this and it made my skin crawl...
pay close attention to what she is saying...
Like imperialists of Old World Europe, the ACP sees their constituents not as free thinking individuals who best know how to go about achieving and creating their own means for success. Instead, the ACP sees his constituents as a flock of ignorant sheep that need to be led -- oftentimes to their own slaughter.
How many tried to point out BEFORE the election that this man is a racist individual with absoutely no concern for the American people. He is an African Muslim through and through and ANYONE who truly took the time to find out anything about Obama would have seen him for what he truly is, a person who is very loyal to Africa, thinks the African colonial views are best and has started enforcing HIS beliefs one after another on this country.
"Lambs to the slaughter"!! Only those with blinders on think he is going to be the answer to their prayers....
ACORN obsessed with the color his skin as did most ALL black people and whites that voted for him...
It sickened me then and it sickens me even more now. I have said it all along. That man is NOT an American, STILL has produced no VALID birth certificate(not a surprise), has no loyalty to this country and never will, and is a Muslim through and through, just like his father. He spells it all out in his book and truly like "lambs to the slaughter" they still voted that non-American into office.
Now we ALL pay the price!!
Too many most that put O into office will NEVER read this article and even if they could read and did read it, they wouldn't comprehend a thing this indivdiual is trying to say...
She is right. He has no interest in what the American people want, only what he sees as right and only dictators do what he is doing to this country!
'lambs to the slaughter'
'nuf said!!
That is not even close to the entire transcription of what he said. nm
LoL! About as close to sanitized that she'll ever get. (NT)
:-)
Not even close Teddy/Taiga....
not EVEN close. lol.
Obama supporters are not only close, they
Several independents were in the crowds and with their own records got so many racial/vulgar/threatening comments on tape. They were standing next to those where news mics were right there and they turned them off so YOU wouldn't hear the nasty things being said.
So lets not make this just a McCain thing...... poor little Obama supporters :(
I too have close friends in Alaska and they
@@
Proobably came close to exile. LOL
x
Yes, that is close minded' and 'ignorant'..
Don't you see?
Good!!! They need to close Gitmo (sm)
You might want to also check out how many innocent people have been taken to Gitmo only to be tortured and killed. Nice example we're setting for the world huh? If any other country did that we would be screaming bloody murder. They not only need to bring the prisoners here and put them through a fair trial, but they also need to round up the ones responsible for Gitmo and add them to the list of criminals -- I say we start with Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush.
If that is what it takes to close Gitmo
I think you are the one that does not get it.
Oh, sure, but O can close Gitmo without a plan.
nm
MT on welfare.
I took my first MT job in 1974 when we were still respected hospital employees with benefits. In 1976 I had my first child and in 1980 I became a singe parent. Between 1974 and 1992, I worked between 40 and 50 hours every single week of my life, worked all holidays because I needed the extra pay and had an interval between 1986 and 1993 where I did not take one single vacation day because I bought a home to get my son away from the gang problems that became concentrated in apartment complexes. During those years, I developed hypertension at age 34 and progressive, unrelenting back pain in 1987. With the help of ibuprofen and regular exercise, I worked through it and never skipped a beat. For those who may not remember, 1986 was when outsourcing happened and in the years to follow, not one single start-up MTSO offered medical benefits.
In 1992 I began to develop significant insomnia due to the chronic pain. One morning, after tossing and turning through the night, I got out of bed and found myself unable to stand erect because of the pain. For the next week or so, I had to crawl around on my hands and knees and was unable to work. I got behind in my bills, depressed and was utterly exhausted. I had a physical and "nervous" breakdown that landed me in a psychiatric facility where I received much needed rest and treatment. I couldn't afford to pay that bill.
I lost my car, my job and my house. My son had to go to live with his father since I could not feed him and at age 40 I had to move back in with my aging mother. I tried to apply for social security disability just long enough to get job retraining and get back on my feet again. I was denied those benefits. I applied for unemployment and food stamps and entered the county medical health care system. I was not able to achieve rehabilitation and recovery sufficient to enable me to return to transcription. I ended up out of work for 7 years while I figured out my own rehabilitation and lived with my elderly mother who could not really afford to support the extra expense of feeding me on a fixed social security/retirement income. My unemployment benefits ran out, but I stayed on food stamps for 3 of those years for her sake until I returned to school on a student loan and later on scholarship. When mhy mother's health deteriorated, I became her terminal care attendant and had to leave school.
I am no slacker. It took me 7 years to recover from the disability I sustained from medical transcription and single parenthood. When I was able to return to work, I did. I still transcribe and at age 59, have developed the same back problems I had that disabled me in 1993. I am simply trying to scratch my way to retirement, which probable will commence for me one I drop dead in front of the computer. I would not wish this fate on anyone, but if any of you, your family or your friends ever do encounter such circumstances for whatever reason, (i.e., death of a spouse, for example) and need assistance, you will come to understand the importance of welfare and will never view it with the cold-blooded, icy, self-righteous indignation that some on this board have expressed.
Before you come back with "that's the exception, not the rule," don't bother. I saw plenty of others in my situation along the way, especially during the 6-8 hours I spent in the waiting rooms at the county hospital before MD appointments. I am no better and no worse than any of them. Same human beings, facing the same struggles, each with their own special needs going unaddressed for the most part. Poverty is a cycle that is destructive, not only to the welfare recipients and their families, but to the society at large. Outrage is not going to solve it. Insight will.
Pay close attention. The question was about pub/NeoCon
Do the conservatives have any clue about how to address these issues, other than run from them. This is a yes or no question.
Close...but no cigar. She did levy a windfall...
profits tax, which went into the state coffers. When she ended up with a big surplus in the state coffers, instead of keeping it, she distributed it in a rebate. She did not tax the oil company for the express purpose of funding rebates to the lower class in Alaska.
Obama wants to levy a tax for the express purpose of funding checks to the people who don't pay any taxes. BIG difference.
Obama's tax plan is a huge redistrubtion of wealth, along with the windfall profits tax and rebate to people who already don't pay any taxes. Socialism 101.
Don't close Guantanamo until terror war ends
We DO NOT want to give terrorists the same rights as American citizens......
Excerpt from this article:
"Once you go out and capture a bunch of terrorists, as we did in Afghanistan and elsewhere, then you've got to have some place to put them," he said. "If you bring them here to the U.S. and put them in our local court system, then they are entitled to all kinds of rights that we extend only to American citizens. Remember, these are unlawful combatants.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE4BE6T120081215
That's true - Bush did want to close Gitmo -
but all of the countries screaming about how unfair the detainees were being treated wouldn't take any of them. I just pray that wherever Obama decides to send them, they don't get out and take revenge on us. I don't really care how bad that would look on Obama - it would not be good for America to have another attack, that's all I care about.
|
