sikis
porno izle
sikis

how about you baggins??
June 5th, 2009 at 1:39 am

I’ll thank ElBruce for providing the link.

Now cd, what does the slight disparity between unemployed men and women have to do with an education program aimed toward women?

No one is happy about the unemployment rate in this country, cd. Maybe you could expand on your point? Or were you just stretching really hard to piss and moan about the plight of men — as if it’s the fault of women?

Get over it. We’re all in the same boat.

Look at the programs that were funded:
http://www.ed.gov/programs/equity/awards.html

On average it looks like about 3 million for this program per grant year. (In FY2008 it looks like 1.8 million)
http://www.ed.gov/programs/equity/funding.html

This is small beans compared to what is out there in the federal budget to cut.

Compare this to what it costs a single F-16 C/D: US$18.8 million (1998 dollars) (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-16_Fighting_Falcon)

Does that sound like the sort of thing you think people should be happy about?

America’s unemployment rate is at 10 percent

And yes, we’re perfectly happy. You?

And this comes from the The Chicago Tribune, are you happy now Zooey S?

how about you baggins??

ElBruce:

The Party of No are the defintion of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. I agree. They are useless yet still provides me pure entertainment.

Meanwhile, I am still waiting for real numbers from the budgetless budget that was presented in April from the GOP Starving for Recovery plan.

As they don’t know how to compromise, the only number they can come up with and still please “the base” is: $0. So they’re basically useless, and they know it.

The problem is systemic – if they don’t act all hard-line, then they’re looking at astroturf-funded primary challengers coming at them out of the blue.

Meanwhile, I am still waiting for real numbers from the budgetless budget that was presented in April from the GOP Starving for Recovery plan.

sorry for the triple post, tp can we have an edit button?

Alejandro Says:

Elimination of the Safe Routes to Schools program.

Why do roads to schools need to be Federally funded?

Local/county/state funding often can’t cover improvements to rural bus routes required by the weight class of a loaded school bus. Nor can everyone on a rural route afford to buy a car just to drive their kids to legally required school.

This is why we have a disconnect between parties. There are common things that should be handled by an accountable, arbitrary party. Look how much city chicago was overcharged and undercompensated when they sold the parking meters to a private company.

Ouch! No cheap oil and no fat arms contracts.

How F’d up is it that all of the contractors in Iraq just got our money, and none of Iraq’s? Any “fiscal conservatives” want to chime in on that one?

.

mary lacewing Says:

How nice for Sanford. Now he gets to say that he fought against it for ‘fiscal responsibility’ and yet his state still gets the money.

I could tell when they started crying about this that state governors have no legal avenue to block federal spending.