His Mind Was Made Up, Don't Confuse Him With Facts

Discussion in 'The OT' started by AllieVi, Aug 3, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. HappyGoLucky

    HappyGoLucky Banned User

    5,124
    0
    Jan 11, 2004
    So you're saying that though Bush has created a disaster on nearly every front, it is important that he be re-elected. Why? Is there something he hasn't ruined yet that you're just dying to see trashed? Give him a bit, he still has until January.
    :grin:
     
  2. SAEMike

    SAEMike Banned User

    2,596
    0
    May 29, 2004
    Democratic members of the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence had exactly the same information and came to the same conclusion President Bush did and voted to authorize the war in Iraq.
     
  3. AllieVi

    AllieVi Hall Of Fame

    1,530
    0
    Apr 10, 2002
    I must remind everyone that this thread addresses what we know in August of 2004. If a similar authority vote was taken today, I doubt there would be any support for it. Bush, on the other hand, would still go to war if he could.
     
  4. HappyGoLucky

    HappyGoLucky Banned User

    5,124
    0
    Jan 11, 2004
    No, they did not have the same information.
     
  5. HappyGoLucky

    HappyGoLucky Banned User

    5,124
    0
    Jan 11, 2004
    Exactly. The Bushies can't justify that, so they attempt every misdirection they can possibly muster in order to draw the issue away from the ugly fact they don't want to face.
     
  6. pmichael

    pmichael Legend

    111
    0
    Mar 25, 2002
    It does appear there are quite a number of people involved in this thread whose minds are made up and don't want to be confused with facts.
     
  7. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    There were those of us, with our limited information, who questioned the need to invade Iraq before it happened. We questioned the strength of the Iraqi army, the existence of WMD, and the link between Iraq and 9-11/terrorists. The record is in the archives of this forum. We were ridiculed. Now that we have been proved correct we are still ridiculed. As one who felt that Bush was wrong before the invasion, I certainly have not changed my opinion as evidence has proved me correct. Bush, with today's evidence, still feels the invasion and war were the correct action to take.
     
  8. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    So we can easily balance the budget by removing HHS and HUD from the budget? Let's take a look at what the impact would really be. HHS has a budget of $539 billion.
    If we take out HHS you remove the FDA. You don't believe the food we eat and and the drugs we take need any oversight?
    You also remove Indian Health service, which is required by various treaties made by our government with native tribes.
    You also take away the Centers for Disease Control and the NIH. Not only do you remove programs designed to deal with major health issues and outbreaks of epidemics, but these organizations are an integral part of our Homeland Defense, working in the area of Bioterrorism and defense against it.
    Also gone is Retirement Pay and Medical Benefits for Commissioned Officers, but hey, what have these people done for us, right?
    Also gone is the 47.6% of the HHS budget that goes for Medicare. That is going to go over real big with a group of voters that has a high percentage of people who take the time to vote. And who cares that they have been paying into this fund for years with the understanding this benefit would be there for them when they retired, we can always break our promises to the old people.
    And then you also remove Medicaid, which will either raise your state taxes or your insurance costs.
    The HHS budget is made up of $61 billion of discretionary money, and $478 billion of mandatory spending. Not going to be easy to drop this from the budget.
    See http://www.hhs.gov/budget/docbudget.htm

    Then you want to drop the whopping $31.3 billion that constitutes the HUD budget. According to HUD's website, HUD is one of the primary elements of Bush's economic stimulus plan. Getting more families into their own homes is usually considered to be a good thing. Even Bush seems to think so. Even if this is cut, its not going to come close to balancing the budget. You will also have a lot of first time home buyers and older citizens (yes, once again they would be affected because HUD money goes for Senior Citizen housing) not to mention realtors and lending institutions that would be negatively affected. Try again.
    http://www.hud.gov/utilities/intercept.cfm?/about/budget/fy04/appendixb.pdf
     
  9. SimpleSimon

    SimpleSimon Hall Of Fame

    5,468
    0
    Jan 15, 2004
    Actually, the CDC, FDA, IHS, and even NIH are NOT the problem - they are very small in relation to Medicare/Medicaid which is $645B of spending. There is $450B in payments to so-called "trust funds" that are part of this is more than enough to balance the budget.

    It is this so-called "mandatory spending" that is the crux of the problem. Just fixing the mismanagement and fraud in Medicare/Medicaid would go a long way towards balancing the budget.
     
  10. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    Could you tell me where you are getting the figure of $645 billion being spent on Medicare/Medicaid? As I stated above, the entire HHS budget is $539 billion, and that includes M/M. 2004 budget for Medicare is $283 billion and Medicaid spending is $160 billion, for total M/M spending of $443 billion. Don't blame me for the accounting method congress has chosen in reporting Medicare. If you take out the amount of spending that goes for Medicare, you also need to take out the amount for medicare on the revenue side. That will make the deficit look even worse.
     
  11. SAEMike

    SAEMike Banned User

    2,596
    0
    May 29, 2004

    Yes, before any act of war is made, the SSIC recieves the EXACT same intelligence briefing that the President recieved.
     
  12. pmichael

    pmichael Legend

    111
    0
    Mar 25, 2002
    You have no way of knowing this is true, just as I do not.
    What is known is the shameful pursuit of war no matter the facts. Bush has shown a disdain for facts, and had to have known what his assertions before the war were not as ironclad as they were portrayed.

    Of course, Bush would have gone to war knowing what he knows now, because that is what he secretly knew then. The Bush regime knew their case for war was pitifully weak, as their justifications shifted endlessly. Which is by the way how these slimeballs govern. They pursue unwise policies and then explain them away by testing multiple reasons until they find something the people don't totally reject. First we need tax cuts because the government has surplus, then we need tax cuts because the economy needs stimulating. All to support a ideological and right wing agenda that the majority of Americans do not support.
     
  13. SimpleSimon

    SimpleSimon Hall Of Fame

    5,468
    0
    Jan 15, 2004
    http://www.kowaldesign.com/budget/
     
  14. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    I am using the 2004 figures from the HHS site. The HHS site says that the President's proposed spending figure for 2005 for Medicare/Medicaid is $483 billion.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

spam firewall