BS: Compassionate Conservatives?

Subject: RE: BS: Compassionate Conservatives?
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 07:42 PM

The only thing that "Conservative" has in common with "Compassion" is the fact that both words start with a C.
Bet the Republicans find the money to finance slaughter.
Hence the cuts....deficite...like they give a rat's arse about that......plenty of money avalable for WAR!

Subject: RE: BS: Compassionate Conservatives?
From: Peace
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 05:01 PM

Few administration have ever cared for the poor. Administrations are not elected by the poor, they are elected by BIG BUSINESS, and make no mistake about that. It has never, ever been in the 'best interest' of business to give it's employees more than a subsistance wage. Hell, the Poor People's March showed the US that things weren't good. So much has changed, huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Compassionate Conservatives?
From: Azizi
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 04:56 PM

It's too much like right for Republicans to take back some of those tax breaks for the wealthy.

Who cares about poor people?

Not Bush's administration, that's for sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Compassionate Conservatives?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 04:33 PM

Too late. Too many people have defended this president and this republican congress for too long to ever admit they were duped. They are now in the position of vigorously defending positions that they spent their whole previous lives opposing - all so that they can avoid simply saying "oops, we were wrong".

Better to destroy the country and my (and your, and their) children's futures than to admit that they might have been wrong.

This is what conservative means today. Defend your dear leader regardless of principle, consistency, ethics, family, or future.

The compassion part is just a word that sounds good.

Subject: RE: BS: Compassionate Conservatives?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 03:44 PM

"Compassionate" conservatives my ass!!!

Rescinding all laws regulating business and the elimination of the social safety net has been the goal of conservative reactionaries all along, ever since FDR and LBJ. Reagan gave it it's biggest push, and the Bush administration is continuing with a vengeance. The method the Bush League seems to have adopted is to bankrupt the government to the point where it can't pay for social programs. Which rings a bit hollow when we seem to have a pretty healthy military budget.

It's been said that the measure of a society is how well it treats it's most vulnerable members.

How we doin', folks?

Mid-term election coming up next year and a chance for major regime-change in 2008. Not too early to start working on it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Compassionate Conservatives?
From: Peace
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 03:18 PM

Use yer head, Amos. If ya kill off enough people, then they won't NEED universal health care. Get with the program, will ya?

Subject: RE: BS: Compassionate Conservatives?
From: Amos
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 11:20 AM

Billions for death and violence but let's cut back on the health thing, ok?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Compassionate Conservatives?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 11:13 AM

Why are Bush's precious tax cuts, primarily benefiting the wealthy, never considered when he and his logic-challenged supporters are whining about deficits?

Subject: RE: BS: Compassionate Conservatives?
From: freda underhill
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 08:01 AM

Bush Budget Slashes Education, Veterans' Health Care, Law Enforcement, and Environmental Protections

The Bush administration's budget for the 2006 fiscal year will cut non-defense discretionary spending, including education, veteran's health care, law enforcement, and environmental protections. In all, President Bush's fiscal 2006 budget plan calls for elimination of or drastic cuts from 154 programs. Funding for the Iraq war, however, was recently increased. A House subcommittee approved an initial $45 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan next year, two weeks after Congress approved $82 billion for this year's costs of the conflicts. Although President Bush argues that it is too early to request money for the wars during the 2006 budget year, which starts Oct. 1, with no timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, war costs are certain and many lawmakers are reluctant to wait for his request.

Source: Washington Post, "Bush's '06 Budget Would Scrap or Reduce 154 Programs," Judy Sarasohn, February 22, 2005; Washington Post, "House Bill Would Provide $45B More for War," Liz Sidoti, May 24, 2005

Subject: RE: BS: Compassionate Conservatives?
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 07:53 AM

Well, that is one slant. Find the bill, read it, compare with past programs and see this is not an absolute cut in anything but a simple reduction in future increased spending. People complain about over spending by the Government but then gripe about any attempts to curtail it.

Subject: BS: Compassionate Conservatives?
From: Azizi
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 07:47 AM

See this excerpt from a Washingon Post.com article:

Senate Passes Plan to Cut $35 Billion From Deficit

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, November 4, 2005; Page A01

The Senate approved sweeping deficit-reduction legislation last night that would save about $35 billion over the next five years by cutting federal spending on prescription drugs, agriculture supports and student loans, while clamping down on fraud in the Medicaid program....

It would shave payments to some farmers by 2.5 percent, while eliminating a major cotton support program and trimming agriculture conservation spending. A proposal to limit payments to rich farmers failed yesterday. The measure passed largely along party lines, with only two Democrats voting for it and five Republicans voting against it....

Among the deepest cuts are those hitting Medicare and Medicaid. The House bill would cut the growth of Medicaid by $12 billion over five years and by nearly $48 billion over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The Senate would trim spending on Medicaid and the related Children's Health Insurance Program by $4.3 billion through 2010, and $14 billion through 2015. The Senate measure mitigates cuts to health care programs for the poor by shifting the bulk of cost savings to Medicare, which would be cut by $5.7 billion over five years. That savings would balloon to $40.6 billion through 2015.

..some health care experts say new premiums and co-payments that would be imposed on the working poor would drive millions of families out of the Medicaid system entirely....

"From a beneficiary's perspective, [the changes] are hugely significant," said Jocelyn Guyer, senior program director at Georgetown University's Center for Children and Families, who estimated that 6 million children will be affected by the changes.

Under the House plan, states could raise co-payments for Medicaid recipients below the poverty line from $3 to $5 per doctor's visit or prescription, then keep raising them with the medical inflation rate. For the working poor just above the poverty line, there would be no limit to higher co-payments, although out-of-pocket health costs are not supposed to exceed 5 percent of a family's income. Health policy analysts say that protection may not amount to much as poor families will have difficulty tracking health care expenses that closely.

For the first time, poor children and pregnant women -- currently shielded from any out-of-pocket payments -- could be billed for some medications or hospital visits for non-emergency care.

Senate Passes Plan to Cut $35 Billion From Deficit


-snip-

How compassionate are conservatives toward the poor and working class?

Surely there must be other ways to fight fraud in Medicare and raise money for Katrina victims without reducing school lunch programs,adding co-pays for doctors visits halting foster care payments for relatives of children who are removed from their biological parents? More childen will go hungry {or hungrier}. More children and families will put off going to the doctors until their conditions gets worse. More sick people will go to already overcrowded hospital emergency rooms for non-emergency medical conditions. And more children who are removed from their birth parents will be traumatized by going to live with strangers rather than to live with family members who can't afford to feed or cloth another child. {btw, foster care payments are usually 3 times the amount of money as welfare payments}.

What is our country coming to???

And who caused this deficit anyway??

This is shameful!!!