“White House advisers
By on Oct 27th, 2005 at 10:01 am
“White House advisers
say that the President will nominate a new replacement for O’Connor as early as late today or tomorrow, and by the middle of next week at the latest.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Hannity
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Maddow
McCain
Media
Military
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
What is the hurry, coming from this president(whose judgment I do not trust) no domination he makes will be suitable.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:04 amProof that the White House planned for the occasion: “The White House has begun making contingency plans for the withdrawal of Harriet Miers as President Bush’s choice to fill a seat on the Supreme Court, conservative sources said yesterday” October 21st. And why Scott denying she lacked votes is so darn funny today.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:05 amLike Harriet, I’m sure she’ll be the “most-qualified person.” I’m glad I’m learning who the most qualified are in case I ever become President. John Roberts got snapped up, but the most qualified (HM) is still out there. Do you think he’ll say this next nominee is the most qualified? If so, then he’s lying somewhere because how did HM lose any qualifications?
October 27th, 2005 at 10:07 amI think they’re going to try split the outrage from the left between the indictments and the next nominee. He’ll nominate someone clearly opposed to Roe (if he get’s over his spitefulness and doesn’t nominate Gonzales as a “f*** you” to his own party), forcing the left to choose between (a) using all their energy to defeat the nominee; and (b) making sure the indictments get the attention they deserve.
Can the press cover two major stories at once? I don’t think so, and most of the American people know “Roe v. Wade” much better than “Valerie Plame.” Gues which one gets more play (and perhaps deservedly so)?
October 27th, 2005 at 10:08 amI thought everyone deserved an up-or-down vote. I guess right-wing conservatives are full of it.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:09 amI predicted shortly after the Miers nomination that it would withdrawn by King George by Oct. 28.
I also predicted that the next nominees name would be the same as a color.
I also predicted that the nomination would come at a time that bushlandia hoped to drown out the noise of the rove indictment in the Plame affair and that is tomorrow.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:11 amI agree Andy I thought everyone deserved an up or down vote. I guess only what the RELIGIOUS RIGHT WING NUTS opinion counts.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:13 amNo sense in vetting this one either, George! Send us ALBERTO!!!!
Seriously, take your time. Think about it this time. No need to follow one huge mistake with another one. (HA! But that’s exactly what America did by electing this guy twice! IRONY!)
October 27th, 2005 at 10:15 am#7 – that’s pretty low. We want the conservative version of Ruth Bader. That’s a fair request when you have the Senate and the White House.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:15 am#3
Good point. Of course, if he said “One of the most qualified” then that would make it easier for non-supporters to say “ah, but there are others. Strike one…try again.”
October 27th, 2005 at 10:16 amMore. From CNN.com:
“The White House said that Miers had to witdraw over concerns that senators wanted documents of privileged discussions between the president and his top lawyer.”
“It is clear that senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal documents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House — disclosures that would undermine a president’s ability to receive candid counsel,” Bush said.
And…
“But Democratic and Republican senators told CNN’s Ed Henry that they hadn’t asked for privileged documents.”
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/27/miers.nominations/index.html
October 27th, 2005 at 10:22 amI’m glad the White House is stating privileged documents as cause for withdrawal. It’ll be harder for the line to stick next time.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:29 am#9 When WHO has the Senate and WH?
October 27th, 2005 at 10:35 amI see the right doesn’t do litmus tests, huh? LIARS The only reason they don’t like her is because they have no ASSURANCES that she will advance their agenda. They don’t care at all about the constitution, they have their own brand of fair play – and it ain’t so fair.
Up or down, yeah right. LIARS
October 27th, 2005 at 10:35 amWe don’t like her because she has no experience and can’t seem to pay her bar dues even. The right doesn’t like her for only one reason. Weirdos stuck on one single goal. How simple they are.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:37 amYep junior, try to play it as if it’s ‘business as usual’. I’m sure that ‘background noise’ is getting louder by the hour. You hearin’ voices yet junior? Is that your god talkin’ to ya again? Or is it just that fateful moment in the classroom that keeps playing over and over again in your schizophrenic dome?
I can’t describe how sick I am of hearing anyone refer to this bag of shit as ‘the president’. . choke, spit.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:37 amLike NED, I’m just an uninformed armchair asshole. But I think the calculation has to be based on what we hear from Fitgerald tomorrow and how the WH reads their base-response to that.
If the base is enraged by the actions of an “out-of-control” prosecutot, they may DEMAND that Bush appoint a brand-name Torquemada like Brown or Luttig. But then, the pushback from indignant Dems and “don’t-get-that-shit-on-me” Republicans could kill it in committee…and on to Plan C.
If the Grand Jury action is limited or anticlimactic, the wingnuts will feel vindicated and ALSO demand a name-brand Torquemada. This nomination will make it out of committee and trigger a filibuster/Nuclear Option combo. However, this too will pass when Wayne Madsen exposes the nominee as a lesbian/tax delinquent/baby eater.
If Fitzgerald drops a couple of indictments AND announces an extended Grand Jury investigation into the Italian Niger forgeries and the WHIG, I predict that Dubya will be forced to nominate Al Franken, withdraw from Iraq and appoint Al Haig as Acting Regent of the Land.
October 27th, 2005 at 10:44 amif Bush nominates an Owen or Brown, Dems will filibuster… who does the GOP have to press the button on the nuclear option? Frist? DeLay? anyone not under investigation or indictment?
October 27th, 2005 at 10:53 amRight, Pete. Not a lot of credit floating around, eh?
October 27th, 2005 at 10:59 amThe smartest thing dubya could do is nominate a combo Alabama AG Roy Moore/Judge Roy Bean the minute the indictments are announced.
We can only scream about one thing at a time, and it will rally his base behind him in his hour of need.
Rove is all over this.
New on EWM: White House Sets Job Fair
October 27th, 2005 at 11:05 amEverybody brace yourselves for the monkeyf*ck insane nominee coming up. Bush is pissed and he’s got nothing to lose now by f*cking us over bigtime. Just sayin’…
October 27th, 2005 at 11:15 amRove’s hand will be all over the next nomination. I almost hope he appoints a die hard conservative so all hell can brake loose and further weaken this president. On the other hand, with the Republicans continuing weakness, what with DeLay and Frist under pressure, I would imagine there will be a consensus candidate. That will still be fun, to watch the Right fight that one too. Either way, the next candidate should be a lose-lose proposition for the White House.
October 27th, 2005 at 11:20 amOh where, oh where have the “up-or-down vote” types gone?
October 27th, 2005 at 11:32 amOh where, oh where can they beeeeee?
With their ears cut short and their harriet cut long.
Oh where, oh where can they beeeeeeeeee?
Leave it to Mr. Coo Coo Bananas to pick a winner (Did they ever find Martin Borman?)
October 27th, 2005 at 11:39 amUgh
“forcing the left to choose between (a) using all their energy to defeat the nominee; and (b) making sure the indictments get the attention they deserve.”
The Muse
“We can only scream about one thing at a time,”
You guys speak for yourselves. I can scream about more than one thing and I do. I will continue to scream about these rat bastards and everything they do to fvck this country.
October 27th, 2005 at 11:39 amJanice Rogers Brown.
Can’t wait for the Dems to dredge up a former co-worker who was sexually harassed by her. Pubic hair anyone?
She’ll breeze through unless the Dems want to see further erosion of the black vote in 2006.
October 27th, 2005 at 11:41 amThis is a good news cycle hog, especially since progressives will be ‘up in arms’ about the new nominee.
Could we have some progressive web site do a poll on what news tricks the Bush crime family will put out to drive out time/space given to the indictments?
Here is my list in order of effectiveness.
1. Saddam Hussain. MSM loves to show his ugly face. Also it helps ’sell’ the war, by making all the deaths seem like they were about deposing him. Many recent pointless announcements have been made. They can gin up another pretty easily.
2. Terror Alert. Always works well.
3. International capture of some Al Queda or other criminal.
4. Military escalation, saber rattling. How about Korean or Russian nukes?
5. Culture war. Can’t beat gay marriage, abortion, etc. There are lots of ways to make a story on these. I have not seen any pictures of Gavin Newsome recently.
6. Some outrageous anti-liberal move. Eg drilling, relaxing health standards, FDA, etc.
7. The border issues. It’s not hard to fan the flames here. Chertoff has already started making noises about new initiatives. Mostly BS, but they can be linked to terror, and right-wing agendas.
Others? We can count on Murdoch, the Sulzberger family, Roger Ailes, and all the rest of the gang to pick up whatever the WH throws out.
October 27th, 2005 at 11:43 am#27
“She’ll breeze through unless the Dems want to see further erosion of the black vote in 2006.”
I don’t think the republicans can do any worse than 2%. I suppose they could, but they shouldn’t try.
October 27th, 2005 at 11:46 amBut Democratic and Republican senators told CNN’s Ed Henry that they hadn’t asked for privileged documents
October 27th, 2005 at 11:47 am————————————————–
That’s something none of us or the msm have actually caught onto. Was Harriett a red herring and Dobson was part of the plan? What is coming next? The other shoes is about to fall….Miers letter has code in it on this very subject…….who can decode? I think we may need to get some genius who knows how to that..
She’ll breeze through unless the Dems want to see further erosion of the black vote in 2006.
Comment by Concerned Conservative
Ha, coming from a person who supports a party whose leader has 2% support from the black population, that’s pretty laughable. Thanks for the chucle.
October 27th, 2005 at 11:47 am#27: Dream on. Bush has 2% of blacks, at best. Nominating a black judge who is virulently opposed to choice, citizen rights vs. corporate rights and egalitarian social programs isn’t going to be a big help here.
Darth Vader was a middle-aged white man, but he ain’t gettin’ MY vote just ’cause of that.
October 27th, 2005 at 11:48 amShe’ll breeze through unless the Dems want to see further erosion of the black vote in 2006.
Comment by Concerned Conservative — October 27, 2005 @ 11:41 am
—
Do you really think African Americans are so stupid that they would support anyone that was also African American, regardless of their political and social views? That’s terrible!
Did you know that the latest polling among African Americans has Bush’s approval rating at 2%?
October 27th, 2005 at 11:49 amThe funniest part is that Concerned Conservative actually believes the crap that they post.
Dude, go post at a right wing site. People there don’t have those pesky fact things. They will believe your garbage and maybe give you a medal for “Completely Full of Shit”
October 27th, 2005 at 11:53 amHey, I’m just going on what happened in the last election, when the black vote shifted slightly towards Bush. I know there was some poll recently that had the 2% number, but we all know how accurate polls are (if polls counted, Kerry would be pres) — esepcially this far away from an election.
#33 — yes, they must be stupid — otherwise why would they keep giving their vote to a party who just uses them and wants to keep them ‘on the plantation’. It’s the Repubs who want to give them opportunity.
October 27th, 2005 at 11:57 amIt’s the Repubs who want to give them opportunity.
Comment by Concerned Conservative
Man, you’re hilarious. Just keep ‘em rolling.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:04 pm#35
“Hey, I’m just going on what happened in the last election”
Things in this country have drastically changed since you fvck nuts stole the last election. That sh!t ain’t happenin’ again. Not without a revolt.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:05 pmTread, why are the Dems against school choice? Don’t they want to enable inner city blacks to have a chance to get out of bad schools?
October 27th, 2005 at 12:07 pmCC,
Because the reason those schools are bad is that republicans won’t fund their schools in order to have an argument to ‘privatize’ education. Fund the schools fully, and your argument is moot.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:09 pm#38
Nice way to change the subject, but I’ll bite. The reason is the we can see through your bullshit. The republicans only want it for their little rich kids. Tell the truth, would you mind if a bunch of kids from South Central Los Angeles came to your uppity Villa Park school? Republicans would flip out. That is why we are against it. Not to mention it takes money away from the public schools that have already been raped by the federal government and No Child Left Behind.
Get a fvcking clue you idiot.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:10 pm#38 –
No, if they allowed blacks the opportunity to advance, they might see finally how the democrats have used them over the years for a power base.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:10 pm#41
Good one Randy, moron. And soon, the Christian right will wake up and take notice that the NeoCons have highjacked their religon and have used them for years as their power base.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:12 pmRandy,
Wow, so because republicans underfund schools, it’s the democrats fault that black people don’t advance? Because democrats fought for and IMPLEMENTED affirmitive action, that ironically put Thomas on the supreme court, you say democrats don’t want blacks to advance? Despite the fact that a large percentage of african americans have been lifted into the middle class by DEMOCRATIC policies, you say democrats don’t want blacks to advance?
YOU’RE A LYING FOOL! But that was already clearly established!
October 27th, 2005 at 12:13 pmRandy, CC,
Serious question:
Do you guys actually believe the things you post here?
Because if you do, it would explain why this country is so screwed up.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:15 pmRyan, we’ve already had the school funding discussion. More money does not equal better schools.
Spudge, so you don’t want to help blacks because it might also help Republicans? Holy shit, that is warped. I hope that message gets through to the African American community loud and clear.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:16 pm#45 — and if you seriously believe what you post it would explain why the Dems are lost in the wilderness.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:18 pm#45
That is not what I said, you stupid fvck. I said that I could see through your bullsh!t. Don’t try to make me out to be a racist like you fvcktards.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:18 pm#46
“lost in the wilderness.”
Just you wait and see b!tch.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:19 pmLost in the wilderness beats the heck out of doing the doggy paddle in a full septic tank.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:22 pmThat’s pretty funny, Granny!
October 27th, 2005 at 12:29 pm“Ryan, we’ve already had the school funding discussion. More money does not equal better schools.”
Bahaha, you’re an idiot. Sure it does. You’ve been listening to too many reichwing non-think tanks.
More funding has a direct correlation to school performance. Heck, even that bastion of Conservatism North Carolina did a whole whitepaper on the topic. There’s LOTS more where this came from! Thanks for demonstrating the utter ignorance and nonsense that is conservatism yet again! YOU STUPID IDIOT!
http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/sociology/pub/qol/school_funding_and_the_quality_of_education_in_nc.pdf
October 27th, 2005 at 12:30 pmCC,
Bahaha, this administration couldn’t be any more lost if it tried! You’re a blind man following a blind party, how the hell would you know whether you’re in the wilderness or in the city. Your eyes, mind and heart are so closed, you don’t even seem like a human being! You’re just a fool!
October 27th, 2005 at 12:32 pmRight? Judge Thomas would not be on SCOTUS if not for affirmative action. Now, he’s against. Typical user. Yeah I used it, but THAT’S different. Yeah, yeah, two different standards.
Hey Spudge, they can spin words like nobody, eh? I knew someone who would always say, “so what you are saying is…” I would constantly repeat myself, “I said what I meant.” Reminds me of republicans, it’s not what someone says, it’s how can this be spun into gold for us.
Well, dance trolls dance, you are frightened of the present and we are excited about the future. No matter who ends up on the Court, Americans will not react well to having to go to doctor’s homes and offices after hours to get abortions. Doctors and nurses in hospitals that will see all of those cases of self inflicted wounds will be reminded. Some are too young and just don’t understand why Roe v. Wade came about.
History is doomed to repeat itself. But, alas, so will the revolution.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:32 pmSo Ryan, your evidence that more money for public schools means better education comes from a whitepaper from — drum roll please — A PUBLIC SCHOOL! Wow, glad you found an objective source. Nope, no self-serving agenda there.
Fool.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:36 pmCC why would they need a book for every student when sharing is just fine. Oh, but who takes the book home? Damn, didn’t think of that.
And air conditioning is just making pusses out of them.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:38 pmCC,
See the difference between me and you, is I can do this all day. How many more references do you want – because I have a substantial list I can throw out. See the problem is you’re a fool, so no matter how much material I present that undermines your whacko theory, you’ll continue to have ‘religious’ faith that you’re right. That’s what fools do.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:43 pmYou ever wonder why public school teachers do what they do for almost no money at all? I went to public school and private school and the better teachers, the ones that you KNEW did what they did for us because they CARED and not for the money are the public school teachers.
Early on it was obvious to us as kids why they wanted to be there. Kids aren’t stupid and they can see who drives the Toyota and who drives the Jag. I knew who I trusted more. Kudos to public school teachers who work their ass off for not so magic beans. THANKS.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:44 pmBush has african american sycophant lapdogs like Condi-medusa Rice and sexual harasser Clarence Thomas and his approval rating came down to 2%. Now let him add one other poodle like Janice Brown and his approval rating will go to 0%.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:47 pm#54
The comments you have made in this post are exactly why we are against your school choice. Your school choice means choosing that your rich white kids will go to a good school and the poor will have whats left.
You need to only post once a day, that way you don’t show yourself for who you really are. Racist, bigotted, elitist, scumbag.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:47 pmWhere did Chelsea go to school?
October 27th, 2005 at 12:49 pmPrivate ’secular’ schools need to make a profit, that inherently makes them more expensive and unaffordable to ‘poor students’ – be they black, white or other. The religious schools I don’t even want to get into. And the non-profits ironically undermine the argument that for profit capitalism is what makes the schools better.
The reality is that if you want a decent education for your kids you have to be in a ’special’ district with ’special funding’ (eg. white), or you need to spend a fortune on a private school. Almost everything else is substandard in one way or another.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:51 pmhey Ryan, just forget these “ignorants”, do you think they have IQ to read references and make their own decisions? They are just Bush sycophants or bonded laborers of King Gerorge.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:51 pmMike D.,
Actually you get no argument. That’s part of why Bill tried to push for more education money. The public schools in DC are the pits!
October 27th, 2005 at 12:52 pmMelanie,
I agree. They’ve repeatedly proven incapable of rational and self aware thought.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:53 pmLike Concerned Citizen, I’m more interested in Aryan White Supremacy than I am in preserving a non-negotiable, baseline level of human dignity and social opportunity in America. Only weak or Jew-blood-diluted non-Aryans have any serious interest in uplifting all levels of society, in order to prevent an unbalanced system from tearing itself apart.
And, like Concerned Citizen, I was pleased to see how vibrant and healthy the Fuhrer looks after his retreat at the Eagle’s Nest, and encouraged by the vigor and passion of his latest speech at the Sports Garden.
Concerned Citizen, NED and I collectively invite you all to a birthday celebration/nuptials ceremony to be held, shortly, in the Bush bunker.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:53 pm#56 — Since you are so “proud” of the job our federal gov. has done on education, please explain why getting books for our students is still a problem when annual federal spending increased from $25 billion to $108 billion since 1965 (adjusted for inflation).
I guess we should have quintupled it instead of quadrupling it.
October 27th, 2005 at 12:56 pmShit. I’m sorry. He’s “Concerned Conservative”…not “Concerned Citizen.”
My bad.
I, NED and “Concerned Conservative” send greetings to you all from the Wold’s Lair!
October 27th, 2005 at 1:05 pmI’d like to know where that $108 Billion you quoted went, because it sure as hell ain’t being spent here in California. Our schools are being raped by Arnie. Next year, our school won’t have a music class. Not to mention the fact that my kids share books too.
Here is the best part. I don’t live in a bad neighborhood. I live in a middle class neighborhood.
I’ll bet you don’t even have kids do you CC?
October 27th, 2005 at 1:06 pmActually SpudgeBoy I have two kids. Both attended public schools (one still in high school, one at our state univ.). I am not against public schools at all — I just want to know why they aren’t better given all the money we throw at them. Sounds like you do to!
October 27th, 2005 at 1:17 pmSpudge and Proud and Ryan, if you’re really interested in where the federal money has been spent, this piece has a breakdown at the back of it: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa518.pdf
I realize it is a libertarian organization so it has a definite bias, but the facts are there if you just want to look at those and ignore the text.
October 27th, 2005 at 1:21 pmAKKK. That’s “Wolf’s Lair.”
I apologize — but CC and NED are SO full of shit on these threads that I’m reduced to mocking them. They seem to be refractory to factual argument, and generally non-conducive to any sort of productive discussion.
…sort of like Rush, who just referred to Patrick Fitgerald as “the son of a doorman.” Wow. Weakness is ugly.
October 27th, 2005 at 1:23 pmAh ha, now we are getting somewhere. WHat you are not seeing is that corruption is all the way down to the small part of our society. We just had to get a lawyer to remove a lady as president from the PTA at our school. This chick didn’t even have kids in our school. She changed the by-laws to make it almost impossible to get rid of her. This goes for the school boards, city governing bodies, state government and the current administration.
Everybody takes their cut out of the money, until there is none left for the people that matter: the kids.
In California, we were told that if we voted for a lottery, 1/3 of the money would go to the schools. Hundreds of millions of dollars later and the schools are not the same. But, we have a lot of poor people spending a lot of money on the lottery. That was/is a scam. Until folks like you wake up to the fact that there is corruption everywhere and at all levels, the country will continue to rot.
October 27th, 2005 at 1:24 pm“Since you are so “proud†of the job our federal gov. has done on education, please explain why getting books for our students is still a problem when annual federal spending increased from $25 billion to $108 billion since 1965 (adjusted for inflation).
I guess we should have quintupled it instead of quadrupling it. ”
Here’s part of the explanation. It’s called rise in wage earner, inflation and general expenditures.
GDP per capita 1960 : 14,407
GDP per capita 2004 : 38,392
You’re like those old farts who complain soda isn’t a nickel anymore. The problem is that real estate, materials, personnel and every other thing imaginable are MORE EXPENSIVE now.
You’re such a nitwit. Are you sure you’re even literate?
October 27th, 2005 at 1:36 pmPoor quality public schools are poor in quality because they are used as dumping grounds for criminals. In addition, a revenue based system is inherently and fatally flawed and compounds and mirrors the problem of criminals.
October 27th, 2005 at 1:43 pm#74
So, you are saying my 10 year old girl is a criminal?
That is the view of the right. “I don’t want my child to go to X school, because there are criminals there.”
The real reason they stink is lack of funding. There is a lot of money set aside for schools, but with so many corrupt people with their hands in the cookie jar, the money never reaches the schools.
October 27th, 2005 at 1:46 pmHere’s another part of the picture – more students. A ‘growing’ population or finally paying teachers a ‘living wage’ hadn’t occurred to you had it? This is taken directly from the US Government website – no Cato needed.
Total enrollment in elementary and secondary schools, in thousands
1960 36,087
2000 46,857
Average salary in ‘constant’ 2000 dollars adjusted for inflation:
1960 $29,810
2000 $43,768
There are a LOT of factors around education costs, another one is the cost of building construction and maintenance. Realestate has become increasingly expensive as it has become an ‘investment’ target.
October 27th, 2005 at 1:53 pmSpudge,
It isn’t just corruption, one of the real issues has to do with crumbling infrastructure, and the cost of new construction and new materials. We have a 1950s infrastructure for 21st century.
October 27th, 2005 at 1:54 pm“The real reason they stink is lack of funding. There is a lot of money set aside for schools, but with so many corrupt people with their hands in the cookie jar, the money never reaches the schools.”
We spend a lot, but the system is corrupt. Soooo…. we should spend more on the current system! Irrefutable logic!
October 27th, 2005 at 1:56 pmRyan, I completely missed your point on #77. What the hell does GDP have to do with education spending?
October 27th, 2005 at 1:57 pm#78
When did I ever say spend more money. I will type slowly, so you will understand.
We need to get rid over the corruption in all levels of government, so that the money intended for schools actually makes it to the school.
October 27th, 2005 at 2:05 pm#77
Ryan,
There would be plenty of money to upgrade the infrastructure if the money actually made it to the schools.
October 27th, 2005 at 2:06 pmYou’re right CC, let’s just do away with public education and not try to fix anything. I suppose the republican view is to make the money to pay for the school you can afford. If you wanted your kids to go to a good school than it is up to you to make the cash. If you can’t come up with it, then don’t have kids. I think that about sums up the compassion of the conservatives. Maybe some shouldn’t have kids, right?
Someone has to work the crappy jobs and they too deserve to have for their children as equally good an education as the private schools provide. Otherwise, the poor lunch lady’s children will not be able to afford a decent education and end up being, well, lunch ladies. That is tantamount to slavery.
Since Bush has plans to cut ACROSS THE BOARD financial assistance opportunities, we are again taking away from those that need. There continues an increase in the price a student has to pay for education but no one’s salary is going up and minimum wage is all but dead until someone with a heart comes into office.
It is a sham. Our kids are treated like dirt. And, mind you, I don’t have any and it’s obvious to me.
October 27th, 2005 at 2:12 pmP&P, see my post #70. My kids attend public schools — I am FOR funding them appropriately. I just want to know where all the federal money goes. No kid should have to share books or go to a crumbling school with all the wealth there is in this country.
I agree with you — it is a sham — or is that ’scam’?
October 27th, 2005 at 2:42 pm#83
“I just want to know where all the federal money goes.”
Stop wondering and start knowing. The money is going to corrupt leaders. That is where it is going.
Here in LA they are removing the Board of Supervisors, because of corruption. This sh!t is rampant everywhere. This is a country that preaches moral values, but has none.
October 27th, 2005 at 2:47 pmWell, I have to agree with you Spudge — the system is broken. Time to break it up. Less government CANNOT be worse than what we have now.
October 27th, 2005 at 2:57 pm#85
Agreed.
October 27th, 2005 at 3:07 pm#77
Ryan, you are absolutely right. The amount of money spent in this country on infrastructure today as a % of GNP is probably less than 25% of what it was in the 50’s and 60’s, if I remember my figures.
For instance, gas taxes that fund federal and state highways have risen at no where near the rate of inflation, and the Federal highway act still prefers new construction to maint. and 21st century transportation alternatives that Japan & China are building.
When property taxes rise at the rate of home price inflation, repugs. go into a spastic fit about homeowners’ annual tax bills, even though they’re deductable.
Hey, you wanna’ enjoy the benefits of real estate speculation? There is a responsibility that goes with it.
As for the new nominee, the announcement date doesn’t matter because Congress will adjourn before the hearings can be done, unless Bush forces them to stay over the holidays.
That would take away their fence fixin’ back home, not to mention thanksgiving turkeys with the lobbyists.
October 27th, 2005 at 3:36 pm#85 Sadly, agreed.
October 27th, 2005 at 4:39 pm“Well, I have to agree with you Spudge — the system is broken. Time to break it up. Less government CANNOT be worse than what we have now.
Comment by Concerned Conservative”
So you believe that an underfunded system should be dismantled to ’save’ everyone. Bahaha, of course you do. This has been the hope and desire of the retarded republicans for the last 30 years. Undermine the social safety net, and then say ‘well it’s broken, lets just throw it out’. The problem isn’t the system is broken, it’s that republicans are INEPT. And yes less government CAN make things worse – it’s called a banana republic. Go to latin america sometime, and ask some of the local about their ‘less government’. Chile for instance was an experiment in ‘libertarian’ and ‘less government’, and it nearly destroyed the country. The locals know better, you clearly don’t!
IDIOT!
October 27th, 2005 at 5:52 pmThe irony is that Bush had the perfect opportunity to bring and “KEEP” the American people together after 9/11. Had he done so, Republicans would have been much closer to keeping their grip on power at least through another couple of election cycles. It doesn’t matter if you’re on the right, the left or the center, because the events of this year, and this week, Katrina, Miers, 2000 Dead in Iraq, Libby Indictment will tilt the axis of political power back in favor of the Democrats. Psychologists and historians will surely create a cottage industry trying to figure out why Bush blew that one.
October 29th, 2005 at 1:17 pmLesbians Lesbian 69 Indian Lesbians
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 6:26 amVeronica
what about think with a different angle.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:12 amLesbians Lesbian Girls Lesbian Twins
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 26th, 2008 at 10:23 amdelinquent taxes
Very interesting post. A little bit confusing, but still ok.
March 29th, 2008 at 9:12 pmKds Bbs Pics Russian Child Models Ls Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 31st, 2008 at 10:12 amLesbian Sex Lesbian Anime Teenage Lesbian
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 1st, 2008 at 9:07 amLesbian Sex Free Lesbian Porn Blonde Lesbians
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:30 pmLesbians Girls Lesbians Teen Lesbians
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 5th, 2008 at 2:47 amnurses shoes
Interestingly, this was on CNN last week.
April 8th, 2008 at 3:13 pmSell House For Cash
Can it be that your server is infected with a virus – I get an Virus warning when I open your site with Firefox – Just for your Info.
April 9th, 2008 at 12:25 am