Democrats versus Republicans

[sck5]

PB said
"do you have any association with reality or logic?"
I said
"PB thinks I have no relation to reality." and then mentioned a few things that might indicate his own estrangement from reality
then PB said
"Your statement above, bears no resemblance, whatsoever, to anything I've posted"
Then he confirmed my contention he probably had a positive view of how the war in Iraq is going by saying "I can say, and do, that it appears to be going better."

Come now, PB, just because you disagree with me doesnt mean I am not responding to what you say. My quotes above sure look like we are participating in the same conversation - But since you said "it is pointless to have any type of discussion with you" I guess you wont be conversing with me any more. So happy sailing!!

[chucklesR]

Here's a change in subject:
Why is it Barak 'I'll spend your money faster' Obama never talks about one of the few pieces of legislation he's actually a lead sponsor on? I mean you would think he'd want recognition as a leader in congress wouldn't you?

I refer to Senate bill S.2433 - you know, the one that wants the U.S. to send .7 percent of GDP to Africa as foriegn aid (inflamatory statement, but basically true). The UN has, for the uniformed, been trying to get a global tax of .7 percent of GDP from all 'developed' nations in order to support the rest of the world via U.N. Programs. Because you know, the U.N. is so efficient and non-corrupt and all.

(the .7 percent is variably .7 and .07 depending on who you read, go figure which side says .07).


In the interest of balanced thinking and link(ing). The bill itself >
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
I suggest you read both versions, note how anything the republicans have done to fix 'global poverty' has been struck out of the 'new improved' version.

And now, as Paul Harvey would have said, "the rest of the story":
Conservatives Place Hold on Obama's Global Poverty Bill -- 02/25/2008

I've got to admit, he spends my money good. Some Bloggers call this the Ob's Global tax bill,
He'll give every voting worker a 1000 bucks to help buy food and gas; and corrupt goverments in africa 855 billion to waste. I say corrupt because you will note our liberal dem's have struck wording requireing that the governments getting the money are actually not dictatorships and such.
How progressive of them.

[sck5]

I think .7 is the right number. But note that it is a goal for foreign aid but not necessarily through the UN (though they wouldnt turn it down I am sure). We would give it away as we see fit. Some countries are already at that level (Scandinavians mostly) and they give a large part of it bilaterally and not through the UN.

If doing it would create more and better trade partners for us it is a win-win thing to do. That is a big "if" though.

[sck5]

And on spending money - I would much rather voting workers get some money for food and gas than that Halliburton get multibillion dollar no bid contracts to pretend to rebuild Iraq.

[chucklesR]

Originally Posted by sck5

I think .7 is the right number. But note that it is a goal for foreign aid but not necessarily through the UN (though they wouldnt turn it down I am sure). We would give it away as we see fit. Some countries are already at that level (Scandinavians mostly) and they give a large part of it bilaterally and not through the UN.

If doing it would create more and better trade partners for us it is a win-win thing to do. That is a big "if" though.

No SCK, read the whole thing, it is .7 sent specifically to the UN program. That is why they cite the US as only putting .16 percent into foreign aid, they only count what comes to them.

As to spreading money around - FINE, send yours. Uncle Obama goes to send mine overseas I'm making damn sure I just make less, in so far as he can tell. I don't work for others anymore than they work for me. Bad enough I'm paying rent for ne'er do well's in the inner city Baltimore, damned if I'm doing it on a global scale.
I learned a long time ago the best way to get money was to EARN it.

[chucklesR]

Originally Posted by sck5

And on spending money - I would much rather voting workers get some money for food and gas than that Halliburton get multibillion dollar no bid contracts to pretend to rebuild Iraq.

You don't reckon that Halliburton actually employs working American folks, you know the blue collar worker - and maybe that blue collar american worker (or spouse) was in fact buying gas next to you at the Exxon this morning?

Me? I rather spend money earned. Not taken.

How much you reckon Ob's mandatory 25% ethanol is going to raise the cost of corn (i.e., food and gas) next year?

[sck5]

Ethanol is a bad idea. I think the only reason it is as big as it is is because Iowa comes first in the Prez sweepstakes. I think by next year nobody will want to continue as we have for exactly the reason you cite. Other biofuels maybe but not ones that compete with food.

And I generally agree with you about earning vs. taking. Its just that I think Halliburton stockholders (e.g. Cheney) are doing one hell of a lot of taking and not very much earning. Must be nice to be able to get such huge no bid contracts but most companies dont have the friends in high places that Halliburton does.

[sck5]

chuck i still cant get over that avatar. it is hard to have a conversation with that creature. And to think it even speaks English!

[chucklesR]

That's government contracting, got nothing to do with politics except that the companies fortunes wax and wane depending on which party is in charge... been that way since the first George was president, Washington that is...

So, knowing that, and surely you must; your objection to system is it's not going to Dem party political pansie's and hacks?

My objection is the waste, pure and simple. No government organization is ever efficient.

[chucklesR]

Originally Posted by sck5

chuck i still cant get over that avatar. it is hard to have a conversation with that creature. And to think it even speaks English!

Think of it as shock radio without sound