"Social Security is in good shape and will meet its promises" quothe George W. Bush on 2/5/05.

As Social Security is not directly endangered by this budget,I think ALL the Democrats in Congress
should abstain and let the GOP pass or fail der leeder's budget without any 'bipartisan' cover.
IMHO, such a vote would amend most of this budget to save congressional GOP 'pork' hides. They don't want another 1995 government shutdown.

rlprather, exactly right. The only saving grace of last November's debacle is that the GOP has to fix its own mess. Democrats should not offer any assistance - just let the GOP choose between the Scylla and Charybdis of cutting popular spending or cancelling their own tax cuts. As GOP pays the price for four years of irresponsibility, Democrats can watch the spectacle safely from the shore and then pounce in 2006.

All Bush has to do is blow up the Golden Gate Bridge and knock a couple airliners out of the sky on the same day. That'll give him another 2-3 years of free pass to fearmonger and distract the idiots that comprise America. I can hear it now; "Oh, so you think your tax dollars should be spent on housing subsidies for welfare cheats instead of fighting the marauding Godless Muslim horde?! You are a terrorist sympathizer!!"

".....while handing out lavish tax breaks for multimillionaires,"

Someone hit the cd player, it seems to be skipping.

Steve,

Did you pick that idea up on Coast to Coast?

Someone hit the cd player, it seems to be skipping

sad but true. When we were had peace and surplus, the plan was tax cuts, during war and recession, same tune. Now the long-term prospects of the economy will be enhanced by extending the life of - that's right. What a stupid fucking song.

I have beeen saying for a couple of years that we are nearing the endgame of the conservative revolution. They have so far managed to carry out their tax cutting and reduction in government programs without starting to hit the programs that their base cares about. We are now starting to see the point where people will have to confront the reality that lower taxes and less government means that things they take for granted will be vanishing.
At that point people will either actually decide that they prefer life without government services and protection, or they will start demanding that these services be reinstated even if it means higher taxes. Since most polls show that people would rather have education spending and environmental protection than lower taxes, we might be nearing the end of the anti-tax crusade.
On the other hand, it may be the case that things will have to get far worse before people are willing to accept that the vision they have been sold for the future of America is only good for those of us who are well off.

Speaking of fearmongering;

I'm just finishing reading a book by Geoffrey R. Stone called Perilous Times, Free Speech in Wartime.

It's a great synopsis of the history of the First Amendment and it's interpretation by the courts during times of war. It is a great summary of the effect of fear and war hysteria on the public, and all three branches of the government. From the Sedition Act of 1798 thru Vietnam, the Pentagon Papers and into the War on Terror it ties together all the episodes of wartime in our history and the evolving interpretation of what does and does not constitute protected speech.

It's very enlighting. Puts the current mob of rightwing blowhards shouting "the traitor Lefties hate America" in proper perspective.

A good read for anyone interested in a quick rundown of how the interpretation of the First Amendment has evolved.

mrs bush seeems like a very nice woman.why would you take pleasure in demeaning her with the appellation"stepford"? regarding the message that mr bush heard in church and the lack of connection to that message,i am wondering how the hell you would know what he heard in church.mr bush can be criticized ,castigated and condemned on many counts,for sure. but the criticism in this instance makes you look small minded and snivelling. attack him on the substance and the facts;not your preconceived notions and prejudices.thanks.jjj

I'm still astounded that they cut funding from the heating assistance programs for the poor.

Oppose and Propose

It seems to me that we are continuing to have a disagreement between the Oppose and Propose wing of the Democrats.

What I read above seems to be based on the idea that the Democrats should oppose the budget.

Personally, I am in the "Propose" camp and suggest that the Democrats should set up a fully functional poll and discussion group to develop two alternative budgets:

. 1) An minimum budget that cuts, say Corporate Welfare, Stupid Defense programs, etc. and increases, say Infrastructure Investment, Education, etc. -- This lean budget would come in with the same bottom like, but allocate the money differently.

. 2) A proper budget that would increase taxes and cut and increase expenses, all within a limit that its debt would be no more than the President's budget, so that the citizens can see what programs could be funded if we rolled back some of the tax breaks, etc.

Okay kids, here is your laugh for the day:

February 2, 2005 was Ground-hog Day and the State of the Union Address.

As Air America Radio pointed out, it is an ironic juxtaposition: one involves a meaningless ritual in which we look to a creature of little intelligence for prognostication -- and the other involves a ground-hog."

Thanks for the laugh Judith...sent it along to several who will also appreciate it, including a brother with Groundhog Day B-day who can't stand Dubya.

Well, on NPR today the farmers are already screaming about the cut in their subsidies.

Emal, my pleasure.

Bush hasn't cut any spending, though. Just slowing the growth of spending. Besides, you know by the time Congress is done with it, there will be no cuts in anything.

John Jansen, it is quite easy to attack Bush on every front, because many of us here believe that he is mentally sick or evil. Going to church is a perfect photo-op for him, and nothing more. If I am to judge a man by his deeds, then Bush is going to hell. It is not what Bush says, but what he does that is the light into his soul. "You shall know them by their fruits". Well the fruits of GWB are: deception, lying, cheating, manipulating, killing, manufacturing, preying on people's fears, taking rights away, stealing, etc. That is how we can disrespect this president.

Mike Liveright-

Sorry, I begs to differ. All the Democrats and possibly Loserman should abstain.

Let the facist dipshits stew in their own juices.

We can start offer up our own suggestions when it becomes clear that the whole little conservitave dreamworld is a house of paper.

Say leading into 2006.

Till then....just throw gas. Its cosmic justice.

muck.... in case you forgot the Republicans control Congress, both branches.... so any complaints from you should be directed back at your own kind. Plus, a cut is a cut is a cut...Funny how I hear that a rollback of taxes to the level they were previously is called a tax hike, yet a spending freeze, cut in spending or allocation of an amount of spending that fails to keep up with inflation or population growth is miraculoulsy called slowing of spending...it's a cut dammit.

What personal sacrifice have you made in this Budget or in your 4 years here Mr. Bush? Have you paid more for your healthcare? Have your kid's schools suffered because of lost teachers and supplies due to federal cuts? Have you had a hard time paying for fuel to heat your home this winter because the price of it has risen 25% yet your own salary remains unchanged and your kid has been sick and hospitalized and you have had to miss work? Have you had a hard time paying for prescription drugs because the Doctor doubled your dose last month so it cost you twice as much yet your income did not change?

Why are you and Mr. Bush always asking those who are the least among us to sacrifice so that the wealthiest and those most able to don't have to, the moral hypocrisy is astounding? It's about our societies priorities muck. It's about 40 million dollar inaugurations versus toning it down a bit during such a time when 150,000 troops are risking their lives...

And as Judith, Steve and others such as myself continue to point out, the fact that the Preznit uses his photo-op attendance at church as a shield and weapon against accusations that his actions are not hurting the poor is despicable.

If a 5% hike in spending is now a 3% hike in spending, that's not a cut.

Well, since his budget doesn't include the costs of being in Iraq, it's probably a huge net increase in spending. Oh, and his spending cuts amount to about 6%. He's not serious about doing anything to make the goverment solvent.

judith......thanks for the most civil reply.......i find it very hard to prononce judgement on someonebecause i am so uncertain about the destination of my own soul........and simplistically. i would offer the founder's own words,"let he(i guess jesus was not an inclusive fellow.......but for the 21st century ear.......or she)who is without sin cast the first stone....be well jjj

muck, What part of this don't you understand

Overall, he would cut non-security domestic spending excluding automatically paid benefits like Medicare by nearly 1 percent next year.

....and this....

Forty-eight education programs would be eliminated, including one for ridding drugs from schools. In all, more than 150 government-wide programs would be eliminated or slashed deeply, including Amtrak subsidies, oil and gas research, and grants to communities hiring police officers.

What part of the words I bolded....like cut, eliminate, and slashed deeply don't you comprehend?

muck, whine your little "it's not a cut" to the additional people who will be joining the 4 million already added to the poverty rolls under this administration. Tell that to the veteran's who will be paying more for healthcare... or have to pay for wheelchairs they now need that may cost as much as much as a new Lexus. You know the cost of at least the average tax cut the wealthy received. You selfish greedy pig, cry me a river and play your little violin why you need more tax cuts in front a group of middle class disabled elderly or veterans on fixed incomes who get fuel assistance and housing assistance money.

Why won't the President ask Himself and the wealthy to sacrifice when the least among us have been doing so for the past 4 long years. Why won't you give up your tax cut for a veteran's healthcare or Wheelchair now required because they were paralyzed fighting in Mr. Bush's War?

It's about priorities muck, and Dear Leaders and yours are f--ked!

Why won't you give up your tax cut for a veteran's healthcare or Wheelchair now required because they were paralyzed fighting in Mr. Bush's War?

Because they really aren't that patriotic, emal. As long as patriotism is defined as putting a yellow magnetic sticker on the back of your car, then a lot of people won't really understand what is involved.

........and simplistically. i would offer the founder's own words,"let he(i guess jesus was not an inclusive fellow.......but for the 21st century ear.......or she)who is without sin cast the first stone....

JJ,

There wouldn't have been any females in the crowd of people looking the stone the prostitute in question to death. You're a bit flippant for a guy objecting to the mean-spiritedness of others. No?

JJ

I think that sometimes judging is not truly understood. Manytimes, Christians believe that we are never to judge. Quite the contrary is true. Does Matt 7:1 really mean that a Christian should never judge anything? Are people rightly quoting the Bible when they forbid people to judge? Should Christians accept all kinds of sin and evil because it is wrong to make any judgments about right and wrong? Should false teaching be allowed to go unchallenged because it is wrong to judge? Should Christians support wolves and false teachers because they are not supposed to be judgmental. Is judging evil and false teaching also being unloving, narrow-minded, legalistic, or a Pharisee?

The verse on judging is addressed to a hypocrite who went around judging people of doing evil when he was doing the same things. We are commanded to judge sin and evil. Evil should be rejected and avoided. Instead many misquote Matt 7:1 and then continue in their acceptance of evil. Sadly there are many today who refuse to judge. They misquote the verse as a way to avoid confronting evil.

I know there is a tendency of some Christians to not judge anything. However, if Hitler were alive today, would we judge him? I certainly hope so.

JJ

I think that sometimes judging is not truly understood. Manytimes, Christians believe that we are never to judge. Quite the contrary is true. Does Matt 7:1 really mean that a Christian should never judge anything? Are people rightly quoting the Bible when they forbid people to judge? Should Christians accept all kinds of sin and evil because it is wrong to make any judgments about right and wrong? Should false teaching be allowed to go unchallenged because it is wrong to judge? Should Christians support wolves and false teachers because they are not supposed to be judgmental. Is judging evil and false teaching also being unloving, narrow-minded, legalistic, or a Pharisee?

The verse on judging is addressed to a hypocrite who went around judging people of doing evil when he was doing the same things. We are commanded to judge sin and evil. Evil should be rejected and avoided. Instead many misquote Matt 7:1 and then continue in their acceptance of evil. Sadly there are many today who refuse to judge. They misquote the verse as a way to avoid confronting evil.

I know there is a tendency of some Christians to not judge anything. However, if Hitler were alive today, would we judge him? I certainly hope so.

The Dems complain on and on about the budget deficit, but now oppose Bush's budget plan. Time to face reality guys. The voting public does not favor raising income tax rates, even if it is only on the so-called rich ($200k income per year, which is not enough to buy a home in Manhattan or most desirable areas in New York City). You have lost that battle. If you really think the deficit is such a big problem, why are you opposing some budget cuts?

Stats, show me a recent poll that indicates voters would rather cut taxes than provide government services.

Come on stats.

Is that the best you can do?

The voting public does not favor raising income tax rates, even if it is only on the so-called rich ($200k income per year, which is not enough to buy a home in Manhattan or most desirable areas in New York City).

There is not a single person living in New York City earning $200,000 a year who can not afford to by an apartment.

If you really think the deficit is such a big problem, why are you opposing some budget cuts?

Let me think......oh I know. It's because we disagree with George Bush's priorities. Are we allowed to do that? We could solve the deficit problem real fast by cutting the budget in half couldn't we? Why not? That would solve your NYC housing problem too. NYC would become such a massive crime infested, filthy slum that no one making more than $200,000 a year would want to live there. Problem solved.

Dimwit.

show me a recent poll that indicates voters would rather cut taxes than provide government services.

The 2004 election. How's that for a poll? 51% Bush. 48% Kerry. Nuff said.

...and that was one crooked-ass election

According to Zogby and other pollsters moral issues and national security were the top two Bush voter areas of concern, neither one of them are tax related.

In fact, what polling is available tends to support the idea that the average voter would rather see modest tax increases rather then budget cuts.

"while handing out lavish tax breaks to multi-millionaires..."
This comment underscores the REAL DIFFERENCE between the political parties. The Dems believe that if the government allows you to keep some of your hard-earned money, it is a tax break, a government handout! The unspoken assumption is that this money really belongs to the government, not the person who earned it. The Republicans, almost to a man (and woman) don't believe this. And no real Republican would ever vote for a Democrat if they thought the candidate subscribed to this basic tenet of the Democrat party. All the values stuff is interesting, but not the key issue dividing the Red and Blue states.

"You shall know them by their fruits". Well the fruits of GWB are: deception, lying, cheating, manipulating, killing, manufacturing, preying on people's fears, taking rights away, stealing, etc.
Prove it! Talk is cheap. List one instance where the President lied. Remember, a lie is saying something one knows to be false.
Also..
There seems to be some who think that if someone in America makes a lot of money (through hard work) that the government should be able to take some of that money and give it to others. Wrong! Taxing was never a role of the Federal Government. The less government programs in America the better. Just look to the public schools and what a failure they are if you need an example.
See what ya did, ya got me started...