neocon wall chart 1 and neocon wall chart 2, theocrat edition from http://oddlots.digitalspace.net/ARX/downloads/neoconned.html
For lots of info to elucidate the charts, check out the accompanying downloads.
Showing posts with label bipartisan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bipartisan. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Friday, March 09, 2007
Why the bad guys always will win
One thing the Reptilians in the GOP have that the Democrats will never have is what some call audacity, but which most of us call "balls".
Gingrich Had Affair During Clinton Probe
By BEN EVANS, Associated Press Writer
Thu Mar 8, 8:04 PM
WASHINGTON - Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich acknowledged he was having an extramarital affair even as he led the charge against President Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair, he acknowledged in an interview with a conservative Christian group.
"The honest answer is yes," Gingrich, a potential 2008 Republican presidential candidate, said in an interview with Focus on the Family founder James Dobson to be aired Friday, according to a transcript provided to The Associated Press. "There are times that I have fallen short of my own standards. There's certainly times when I've fallen short of God's standards."
Gingrich argued in the interview, however, that he should not be viewed as a hypocrite for pursuing Clinton's infidelity.
"The president of the United States got in trouble for committing a felony in front of a sitting federal judge," the former Georgia congressman said of Clinton's 1998 House impeachment on perjury and obstruction of justice charges. "I drew a line in my mind that said, 'Even though I run the risk of being deeply embarrassed, and even though at a purely personal level I am not rendering judgment on another human being, as a leader of the government trying to uphold the rule of law, I have no choice except to move forward and say that you cannot accept ... perjury in your highest officials."
Widely considered a mastermind of the Republican revolution that swept Congress in the 1994 elections, Gingrich remains wildly popular among many conservatives. He has repeatedly placed near the top of Republican presidential polls recently, even though he has not formed a campaign.
Gingrich has said he is waiting to see how the Republican field shapes up before deciding in the fall whether to run.
Reports of extramarital affairs have dogged him for years as a result of two messy divorces, but he has refused to discuss them publicly.
Gingrich, who frequently campaigned on family values issues, divorced his second wife, Marianne, in 2000 after his attorneys acknowledged Gingrich's relationship with his current wife, Callista Bisek, a former congressional aide more than 20 years younger than he is.
His first marriage, to his former high school geometry teacher, Jackie Battley, ended in divorce in 1981. Although Gingrich has said he doesn't remember it, Battley has said Gingrich discussed divorce terms with her while she was recuperating in the hospital from cancer surgery.
Gingrich married Marianne months after the divorce.
"There were times when I was praying and when I felt I was doing things that were wrong. But I was still doing them," he said in the interview. "I look back on those as periods of weakness and periods that I'm ... not proud of."
Gingrich's congressional career ended in 1998 when he abruptly resigned from Congress after poor showings from Republicans in elections and after being reprimanded by the House ethics panel over charges that he used tax-exempt funding to advance his political goals.
On the Net:
Focus on the Family interview (to be posted in full Friday): http://listen.family.org/daily/
Gingrich Had Affair During Clinton Probe
By BEN EVANS, Associated Press Writer
Thu Mar 8, 8:04 PM
WASHINGTON - Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich acknowledged he was having an extramarital affair even as he led the charge against President Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair, he acknowledged in an interview with a conservative Christian group.
"The honest answer is yes," Gingrich, a potential 2008 Republican presidential candidate, said in an interview with Focus on the Family founder James Dobson to be aired Friday, according to a transcript provided to The Associated Press. "There are times that I have fallen short of my own standards. There's certainly times when I've fallen short of God's standards."
Gingrich argued in the interview, however, that he should not be viewed as a hypocrite for pursuing Clinton's infidelity.
"The president of the United States got in trouble for committing a felony in front of a sitting federal judge," the former Georgia congressman said of Clinton's 1998 House impeachment on perjury and obstruction of justice charges. "I drew a line in my mind that said, 'Even though I run the risk of being deeply embarrassed, and even though at a purely personal level I am not rendering judgment on another human being, as a leader of the government trying to uphold the rule of law, I have no choice except to move forward and say that you cannot accept ... perjury in your highest officials."
Widely considered a mastermind of the Republican revolution that swept Congress in the 1994 elections, Gingrich remains wildly popular among many conservatives. He has repeatedly placed near the top of Republican presidential polls recently, even though he has not formed a campaign.
Gingrich has said he is waiting to see how the Republican field shapes up before deciding in the fall whether to run.
Reports of extramarital affairs have dogged him for years as a result of two messy divorces, but he has refused to discuss them publicly.
Gingrich, who frequently campaigned on family values issues, divorced his second wife, Marianne, in 2000 after his attorneys acknowledged Gingrich's relationship with his current wife, Callista Bisek, a former congressional aide more than 20 years younger than he is.
His first marriage, to his former high school geometry teacher, Jackie Battley, ended in divorce in 1981. Although Gingrich has said he doesn't remember it, Battley has said Gingrich discussed divorce terms with her while she was recuperating in the hospital from cancer surgery.
Gingrich married Marianne months after the divorce.
"There were times when I was praying and when I felt I was doing things that were wrong. But I was still doing them," he said in the interview. "I look back on those as periods of weakness and periods that I'm ... not proud of."
Gingrich's congressional career ended in 1998 when he abruptly resigned from Congress after poor showings from Republicans in elections and after being reprimanded by the House ethics panel over charges that he used tax-exempt funding to advance his political goals.
On the Net:
Focus on the Family interview (to be posted in full Friday): http://listen.family.org/daily/
Monday, February 26, 2007
President Bush Spits on American Children for the 6th year
And Congress, in a bipartisan gentlemen's agreement, comply.
Go look at the budget proposal.
Cut the inheritance tax for the Richie Rich heirs of wealthy capitalist families who haven't done pre-emptive tax planning.
Cut the budget for poor children's medical insurance and the supplemental food programs that supply hungry folk with groceries (dollars spent locally, eh? on produce from American farmers, eh?), and heating oil for low income Americans, and most things you expect would be worth supporting in a moral nation...
An already bloated, and yes, earmarked, budget that borrows from your children to pay for today's spending.
A tax redistribution, from the pockets of the middle class, who pay tax, to the military contractors and the top percent of the population, most of whom FRANKLY, aren't worth it, didn't earn it, and were just lucky.
"Hear this, you that trample on the needy, and bring to ruin the poor of the land, saying, "When will the new moon be over so that we may sell grain; and the sabbath, so that we may offer wheat for sale? We will make the ephah small and the shekel great, and practice deceit with false balances, buying the poor for silver and the needy for a pair of sandals, and selling the sweepings of the wheat." The Lord has sworn by the pride of Jacob: Surely I will never forget any of their deeds. ... I will turn your feasts into mourning, and all your songs into lamentation; I will bring sackcloth on all loins, and baldness on every head; I will make it like the mourning for an only son, and the end of it like a bitter day."- Amos 8:4-10
Go look at the budget proposal.
Cut the inheritance tax for the Richie Rich heirs of wealthy capitalist families who haven't done pre-emptive tax planning.
Cut the budget for poor children's medical insurance and the supplemental food programs that supply hungry folk with groceries (dollars spent locally, eh? on produce from American farmers, eh?), and heating oil for low income Americans, and most things you expect would be worth supporting in a moral nation...
An already bloated, and yes, earmarked, budget that borrows from your children to pay for today's spending.
A tax redistribution, from the pockets of the middle class, who pay tax, to the military contractors and the top percent of the population, most of whom FRANKLY, aren't worth it, didn't earn it, and were just lucky.
"Hear this, you that trample on the needy, and bring to ruin the poor of the land, saying, "When will the new moon be over so that we may sell grain; and the sabbath, so that we may offer wheat for sale? We will make the ephah small and the shekel great, and practice deceit with false balances, buying the poor for silver and the needy for a pair of sandals, and selling the sweepings of the wheat." The Lord has sworn by the pride of Jacob: Surely I will never forget any of their deeds. ... I will turn your feasts into mourning, and all your songs into lamentation; I will bring sackcloth on all loins, and baldness on every head; I will make it like the mourning for an only son, and the end of it like a bitter day."- Amos 8:4-10
Saturday, February 17, 2007
google: zbigniew pretext Iran
Zbigniew Brzezinski Says Bush Seeks Pretext to Attack Iran
Former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski arrives
to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Capitol Hill
in Washington February 1, 2007.
(REUTERS/Jim Young)
By Barry Grey
www.wsgs.org
February 3, 2007
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday, Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security adviser in the Carter administration, delivered a scathing critique of the war in Iraq and warned that the Bush administration’s policy was leading inevitably to a war with Iran, with incalculable consequences for US imperialism in the Middle East and internationally.
Brzezinski, who opposed the March 2003 invasion and has publicly denounced the war as a colossal foreign policy blunder, began his remarks on what he called the “war of choice” in Iraq by characterizing it as “a historic, strategic and moral calamity.”
“Undertaken under false assumptions,” he continued, “it is undermining America’s global legitimacy. Its collateral civilian casualties as well as some abuses are tarnishing America’s moral credentials. Driven by Manichean principles and imperial hubris, it is intensifying regional instability.”Brzezinski derided Bush’s talk of a “decisive ideological struggle” against radical Islam as “simplistic and demagogic,” and called it a “mythical historical narrative” employed to justify a “protracted and potentially expanding war.”
“To argue that America is already at war in the region with a wider Islamic threat, of which Iran is the epicenter, is to promote a self-fulfilling prophecy,” he said.
Most stunning and disturbing was his description of a “plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran.” It would, he suggested, involve “Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks, followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure, then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the US blamed on Iran, culminating in a ‘defensive’ US military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan.”
This was an unmistakable warning to the US Congress, replete with quotation marks to discount the “defensive” nature of such military action, that the Bush administration is seeking a pretext for an attack on Iran. Although he did not explicitly say so, Brzezinski came close to suggesting that the White House was capable of manufacturing a provocation—including a possible terrorist attack within the US—to provide the casus belli for war.
That a man such as Brzezinski, with decades of experience in the top echelons of the US foreign policy establishment, a man who has the closest links to the military and to intelligence agencies, should issue such a warning at an open hearing of the US Senate has immense and grave significance.
Brzezinski knows whereof he speaks, having authored provocations of his own while serving as Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser. In that capacity, as he has since acknowledged in published writings, he drew up the covert plan at the end of the 1970s to mobilize Islamic fundamentalist mujaheddin to topple the pro-Soviet regime in Afghanistan and draw the Soviet Union into a ruinous war in that country.
Following his opening remarks, in response to questions from the senators, Brzezinski reiterated his warning of a provocation.
He called the senators’ attention to a March 27, 2006 report in the New York Times on “a private meeting between the president and Prime Minister Blair, two months before the war, based on a memorandum prepared by the British official present at this meeting.” In the article, Brzezinski said, “the president is cited as saying he is concerned that there may not be weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq, and that there must be some consideration given to finding a different basis for undertaking the action.”
He continued: “I’ll just read you what this memo allegedly says, according to the New York Times: ‘The memo states that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation.’
“He described the several ways in which this could be done. I won’t go into that… the ways were quite sensational, at least one of them.
“If one is of the view that one is dealing with an implacable enemy that has to be removed, that course of action may under certain circumstances be appealing. I’m afraid that if this situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate, and if Iran is perceived as in some fashion involved or responsible, or a potential beneficiary, that temptation could arise.”
At another point Brzezinski remarked on the conspiratorial methods of the Bush administration and all but described it as a cabal. “I am perplexed,” he said, “by the fact that major strategic decisions seem to be made within a very narrow circle of individuals—just a few, probably a handful, perhaps not more than the fingers on my hand. And these are the individuals, all of whom but one, who made the original decision to go to war, and used the original justifications to go to war.”
None of the senators in attendance addressed themselves to the stark warning from Brzezinski. The Democrats in particular, flaccid, complacent and complicit in the war conspiracies of the Bush administration, said nothing about the danger of a provocation spelled out by the witness.
Following the hearing, this reporter asked Brzezinski directly if he was suggesting that the source of a possible provocation might be the US government itself. The former national security adviser was evasive.
The following exchange took place:
Q: Dr. Brzezinski, who do you think would be carrying out this possible provocation?
A: I have no idea. As I said, these things can never be predicted. It can be spontaneous.
Q: Are you suggesting there is a possibility it could originate within the US government itself?
A: I’m saying the whole situation can get out of hand and all sorts of calculations can produce a circumstance that would be very difficult to trace.
Former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski arrives
to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Capitol Hill
in Washington February 1, 2007.
(REUTERS/Jim Young)
By Barry Grey
www.wsgs.org
February 3, 2007
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday, Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security adviser in the Carter administration, delivered a scathing critique of the war in Iraq and warned that the Bush administration’s policy was leading inevitably to a war with Iran, with incalculable consequences for US imperialism in the Middle East and internationally.
Brzezinski, who opposed the March 2003 invasion and has publicly denounced the war as a colossal foreign policy blunder, began his remarks on what he called the “war of choice” in Iraq by characterizing it as “a historic, strategic and moral calamity.”
“Undertaken under false assumptions,” he continued, “it is undermining America’s global legitimacy. Its collateral civilian casualties as well as some abuses are tarnishing America’s moral credentials. Driven by Manichean principles and imperial hubris, it is intensifying regional instability.”Brzezinski derided Bush’s talk of a “decisive ideological struggle” against radical Islam as “simplistic and demagogic,” and called it a “mythical historical narrative” employed to justify a “protracted and potentially expanding war.”
“To argue that America is already at war in the region with a wider Islamic threat, of which Iran is the epicenter, is to promote a self-fulfilling prophecy,” he said.
Most stunning and disturbing was his description of a “plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran.” It would, he suggested, involve “Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks, followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure, then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the US blamed on Iran, culminating in a ‘defensive’ US military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan.”
This was an unmistakable warning to the US Congress, replete with quotation marks to discount the “defensive” nature of such military action, that the Bush administration is seeking a pretext for an attack on Iran. Although he did not explicitly say so, Brzezinski came close to suggesting that the White House was capable of manufacturing a provocation—including a possible terrorist attack within the US—to provide the casus belli for war.
That a man such as Brzezinski, with decades of experience in the top echelons of the US foreign policy establishment, a man who has the closest links to the military and to intelligence agencies, should issue such a warning at an open hearing of the US Senate has immense and grave significance.
Brzezinski knows whereof he speaks, having authored provocations of his own while serving as Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser. In that capacity, as he has since acknowledged in published writings, he drew up the covert plan at the end of the 1970s to mobilize Islamic fundamentalist mujaheddin to topple the pro-Soviet regime in Afghanistan and draw the Soviet Union into a ruinous war in that country.
Following his opening remarks, in response to questions from the senators, Brzezinski reiterated his warning of a provocation.
He called the senators’ attention to a March 27, 2006 report in the New York Times on “a private meeting between the president and Prime Minister Blair, two months before the war, based on a memorandum prepared by the British official present at this meeting.” In the article, Brzezinski said, “the president is cited as saying he is concerned that there may not be weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq, and that there must be some consideration given to finding a different basis for undertaking the action.”
He continued: “I’ll just read you what this memo allegedly says, according to the New York Times: ‘The memo states that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation.’
“He described the several ways in which this could be done. I won’t go into that… the ways were quite sensational, at least one of them.
“If one is of the view that one is dealing with an implacable enemy that has to be removed, that course of action may under certain circumstances be appealing. I’m afraid that if this situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate, and if Iran is perceived as in some fashion involved or responsible, or a potential beneficiary, that temptation could arise.”
At another point Brzezinski remarked on the conspiratorial methods of the Bush administration and all but described it as a cabal. “I am perplexed,” he said, “by the fact that major strategic decisions seem to be made within a very narrow circle of individuals—just a few, probably a handful, perhaps not more than the fingers on my hand. And these are the individuals, all of whom but one, who made the original decision to go to war, and used the original justifications to go to war.”
None of the senators in attendance addressed themselves to the stark warning from Brzezinski. The Democrats in particular, flaccid, complacent and complicit in the war conspiracies of the Bush administration, said nothing about the danger of a provocation spelled out by the witness.
Following the hearing, this reporter asked Brzezinski directly if he was suggesting that the source of a possible provocation might be the US government itself. The former national security adviser was evasive.
The following exchange took place:
Q: Dr. Brzezinski, who do you think would be carrying out this possible provocation?
A: I have no idea. As I said, these things can never be predicted. It can be spontaneous.
Q: Are you suggesting there is a possibility it could originate within the US government itself?
A: I’m saying the whole situation can get out of hand and all sorts of calculations can produce a circumstance that would be very difficult to trace.
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
Bush Punishes Frilly Michigan
State winces with Bush budget plan
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
By Sarah Kellogg
WASHINGTON -- Michigan's budget woes may be getting worse.
We Didn't elect DeVos!
President Bush's proposed 2008 federal budget, which was released Monday, would siphon hundreds of millions of dollars from key state-federal programs, ranging from Medicaid to the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP).
KILL the POOR!
That leaves Michigan officials scrambling, trying to figure out where to plug holes in the state budget and hoping that a Democratic Congress won't adopt the Republican president's $2.9 trillion spending plan for 2008 without major changes.
And the Flint Journal STILL publishes those damn Flushing rightwingnut opinions that this is all the fault of the Dems~
"Michigan's got a lot of critical issues we're facing, especially in the coming weeks," said Dan Beattie, a spokesman for Gov. Jennifer Granholm. "The federal budget is clearly not going to advance state citizens' interests in a whole variety of programs."
Gotta get us some LOCKHEED-MARTIN Factories!
Michigan faces a $1 billion state budget shortfall this year, and it could be looking at even more in 2008. The governor will release her 2008 budget on Thursday. The state and federal budget years start Oct. 1.
Why oh why would anyone want to govern Michigan?
Bush administration officials were quick to point out that efforts to balance the budget by 2012 while paying for the war in Iraq leave little room for frills.
Michigan = A Frill
"Getting balanced requires keeping the economy strong, and sensible and realistic spending restraint," said Rob Portman, director of the Office of Management and Budget. "The president's budget is able to achieve both of these goals while funding critical priorities."
Fact: Historically Michigan Is A DONOR State. We are not the Entitlement Pigs, the WELFARE QUEENS of these 50 states, Oh, no, we pay more to the Federal system and get less back.
Bush's budget would eliminate or reduce 141 government programs, saving about $12 billion over five years. It also would reduce farm subsidies by $18 billion over five years. The biggest savings -- $100 billion over five years -- would come in Medicare.
KILL The POOR!
Tell me, my Fundie Friends, what was it your Lord and Savior said about the sick and suffering?
"We owe it to the American taxpayer to balance our books," said Michigan U.S. Rep. Dave Camp, R-Midland. "The president's budget would provide surpluses in 2012 without raising taxes. Clearly Congress needs to closely examine the details of this budget and make our own policy, but Congress should balance the budget without raising taxes."
A Faith Based Budget. All the poor, homeless, and sick should be dead by then?
Keeping spending in check comes at a cost, though.
But not to Richie Rich guys. Thanks to Bush, The Middle Class Worker pays a higher rate of income tax than a Lazy Capitalist who lives off of investment income.
The president's budget would reduce Michigan funding in 2008 by $100 million for Medicaid, $40 million for Community Development Block Grants, $17 million for Social Services Block Grants and $27 million for LIHEAP.
KILL the POOR!
"The budget should be a reflection of our national priorities, (KILL the POOR!) but once again President Bush has shown he is out of step with the majority of Americans," said Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat, in a written statement. "The president's budget sends billions of dollars in new reconstruction funds to Iraq while cutting vital domestic programs."
KILL the POOR, BLAME the WAR, but don't STOP the WAR, Debbie!
More than 78,000 of Michigan's poor seniors and some mothers and their children would lose access to the federal Commodity Supplemental Food Program, under the Bush budget. The program, which provides monthly food packets to eligible participants, would lose its entire $108 million national budget.
Bombs not food.
Advocates for the poor say proposals to freeze funding at 2007 levels can be just as devastating as cutting spending, since the cost of doing business continues to grow.
The middle class who run programs won't give up the annual raise.
The Bush administration has proposed flat funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which provides health care for poor children, along with Headstart and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF).
LET THEM EAT CAKE!
"The essential flat-funding of child health care and Medicaid is really a big concern," said Jane Zehnder-Merrell, a spokeswoman for the Michigan League for Human Services, a research and advocacy group based in Lansing. "We're already losing (health care) providers because we pay such low rates....These freezes are being absorbed financially by providers and parents, and in a real way by kids."
KILL THE POOR'S KIDS! Hey It's Their Fault they were born to poor parents! JEBSUS WILL LOVE 'EM.
A bright spot in the budget was funding for Great Lakes programs. The Great Lakes Legacy Act would receive $35 million to fund toxic sediment cleanups and another $7.65 million would be made available to construct a barrier across the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal to block Asian carp from coming into Lake Michigan.
OOOH a Bright Spot.
Who dumped the toxics?
Are they living la vida loca somewhere, sending their kid to Yale?
Why do taxpayers get the bill?
Why is sludge in landfill better than sludge in riverbottoms?
Who got the contract to dredge and store?
Who got the contract for the fish fence?
A program to keep ALIEN fish from invading EL NORTE Lake Michigan.
Scientists don't even agree it'll work!
And maybe we should have a program phamphleting Chinese restaurants to educate the folk that it really ain't lucky to dump any ole good luck fish into bodies of water.
But the president's budget would eliminate nearly $200 million for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, which helps finance improvements in city sewer systems. The 2008 budget recommendation is $687.5 million.
Faith Based Sanitation.
"The president's budget is a mixed bag (A flaming bag-o-shit on the front porch) for the Great Lakes," said Jordan Lubetkin, a spokesman for the Great Lakes office of the National Wildlife Federation, an environmental group. "Playing seesaw with Great Lakes programs, some going up and some going down, is not going to comprehensively restore the Great Lakes."
Hey Global Warming and Global Ballast and "Ice Mountain" Nestle and those aforementioned sewers and the soon to be re-proposed drilling are going to kill the the Great Lakes just fine. We got Armegeddon coming soon (the bible and George W.tells me so) and who cares anyway?
Several federal programs that have helped Michigan manufacturers and their employers are slated for cuts, although there are no exact numbers on how Michigan would be impacted. The Manufacturing Extension Partnership, which helps train small manufacturers, would lose almost $60 million, and the Advanced Technology Program, which helps manufacturers develop new technologies, would lose $67 million.
KILL the MIDDLE CLASS, TOO! After all, we got a WAR MACHINE in the Backyard that WANTS Feedin'!
Original unmarked-up copy from Booth Newspapers.
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
By Sarah Kellogg
WASHINGTON -- Michigan's budget woes may be getting worse.
We Didn't elect DeVos!
President Bush's proposed 2008 federal budget, which was released Monday, would siphon hundreds of millions of dollars from key state-federal programs, ranging from Medicaid to the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP).
KILL the POOR!
That leaves Michigan officials scrambling, trying to figure out where to plug holes in the state budget and hoping that a Democratic Congress won't adopt the Republican president's $2.9 trillion spending plan for 2008 without major changes.
And the Flint Journal STILL publishes those damn Flushing rightwingnut opinions that this is all the fault of the Dems~
"Michigan's got a lot of critical issues we're facing, especially in the coming weeks," said Dan Beattie, a spokesman for Gov. Jennifer Granholm. "The federal budget is clearly not going to advance state citizens' interests in a whole variety of programs."
Gotta get us some LOCKHEED-MARTIN Factories!
Michigan faces a $1 billion state budget shortfall this year, and it could be looking at even more in 2008. The governor will release her 2008 budget on Thursday. The state and federal budget years start Oct. 1.
Why oh why would anyone want to govern Michigan?
Bush administration officials were quick to point out that efforts to balance the budget by 2012 while paying for the war in Iraq leave little room for frills.
Michigan = A Frill
"Getting balanced requires keeping the economy strong, and sensible and realistic spending restraint," said Rob Portman, director of the Office of Management and Budget. "The president's budget is able to achieve both of these goals while funding critical priorities."
Fact: Historically Michigan Is A DONOR State. We are not the Entitlement Pigs, the WELFARE QUEENS of these 50 states, Oh, no, we pay more to the Federal system and get less back.
Bush's budget would eliminate or reduce 141 government programs, saving about $12 billion over five years. It also would reduce farm subsidies by $18 billion over five years. The biggest savings -- $100 billion over five years -- would come in Medicare.
KILL The POOR!
Tell me, my Fundie Friends, what was it your Lord and Savior said about the sick and suffering?
"We owe it to the American taxpayer to balance our books," said Michigan U.S. Rep. Dave Camp, R-Midland. "The president's budget would provide surpluses in 2012 without raising taxes. Clearly Congress needs to closely examine the details of this budget and make our own policy, but Congress should balance the budget without raising taxes."
A Faith Based Budget. All the poor, homeless, and sick should be dead by then?
Keeping spending in check comes at a cost, though.
But not to Richie Rich guys. Thanks to Bush, The Middle Class Worker pays a higher rate of income tax than a Lazy Capitalist who lives off of investment income.
The president's budget would reduce Michigan funding in 2008 by $100 million for Medicaid, $40 million for Community Development Block Grants, $17 million for Social Services Block Grants and $27 million for LIHEAP.
KILL the POOR!
"The budget should be a reflection of our national priorities, (KILL the POOR!) but once again President Bush has shown he is out of step with the majority of Americans," said Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat, in a written statement. "The president's budget sends billions of dollars in new reconstruction funds to Iraq while cutting vital domestic programs."
KILL the POOR, BLAME the WAR, but don't STOP the WAR, Debbie!
More than 78,000 of Michigan's poor seniors and some mothers and their children would lose access to the federal Commodity Supplemental Food Program, under the Bush budget. The program, which provides monthly food packets to eligible participants, would lose its entire $108 million national budget.
Bombs not food.
Advocates for the poor say proposals to freeze funding at 2007 levels can be just as devastating as cutting spending, since the cost of doing business continues to grow.
The middle class who run programs won't give up the annual raise.
The Bush administration has proposed flat funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which provides health care for poor children, along with Headstart and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF).
LET THEM EAT CAKE!
"The essential flat-funding of child health care and Medicaid is really a big concern," said Jane Zehnder-Merrell, a spokeswoman for the Michigan League for Human Services, a research and advocacy group based in Lansing. "We're already losing (health care) providers because we pay such low rates....These freezes are being absorbed financially by providers and parents, and in a real way by kids."
KILL THE POOR'S KIDS! Hey It's Their Fault they were born to poor parents! JEBSUS WILL LOVE 'EM.
A bright spot in the budget was funding for Great Lakes programs. The Great Lakes Legacy Act would receive $35 million to fund toxic sediment cleanups and another $7.65 million would be made available to construct a barrier across the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal to block Asian carp from coming into Lake Michigan.
OOOH a Bright Spot.
Who dumped the toxics?
Are they living la vida loca somewhere, sending their kid to Yale?
Why do taxpayers get the bill?
Why is sludge in landfill better than sludge in riverbottoms?
Who got the contract to dredge and store?
Who got the contract for the fish fence?
A program to keep ALIEN fish from invading EL NORTE Lake Michigan.
Scientists don't even agree it'll work!
And maybe we should have a program phamphleting Chinese restaurants to educate the folk that it really ain't lucky to dump any ole good luck fish into bodies of water.
But the president's budget would eliminate nearly $200 million for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, which helps finance improvements in city sewer systems. The 2008 budget recommendation is $687.5 million.
Faith Based Sanitation.
"The president's budget is a mixed bag (A flaming bag-o-shit on the front porch) for the Great Lakes," said Jordan Lubetkin, a spokesman for the Great Lakes office of the National Wildlife Federation, an environmental group. "Playing seesaw with Great Lakes programs, some going up and some going down, is not going to comprehensively restore the Great Lakes."
Hey Global Warming and Global Ballast and "Ice Mountain" Nestle and those aforementioned sewers and the soon to be re-proposed drilling are going to kill the the Great Lakes just fine. We got Armegeddon coming soon (the bible and George W.tells me so) and who cares anyway?
Several federal programs that have helped Michigan manufacturers and their employers are slated for cuts, although there are no exact numbers on how Michigan would be impacted. The Manufacturing Extension Partnership, which helps train small manufacturers, would lose almost $60 million, and the Advanced Technology Program, which helps manufacturers develop new technologies, would lose $67 million.
KILL the MIDDLE CLASS, TOO! After all, we got a WAR MACHINE in the Backyard that WANTS Feedin'!
Original unmarked-up copy from Booth Newspapers.
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
pretty transparent, National Propaganda Radio
I'm just a f*&ing average midwestern housewife but I was ironically laughing out loud this morning at the transparency of NPR's reportage this morning, detailing the past support for Bush's War by leading (but not all) Democrat__ contenders (did you wonder too why are they contending sooo soon when there is so much more important stuff to do?) who are positioning themselves against Bush's War.
Then they juxtapositioned a short sweet puff piece about the clown Guliani, never mentioning his stand on Iraq (? what is it, nukes, tasers all around?) or how much no bid or otherwise crony money his companies are making off post 9-11 security and war.
Keep warm.
Then they juxtapositioned a short sweet puff piece about the clown Guliani, never mentioning his stand on Iraq (? what is it, nukes, tasers all around?) or how much no bid or otherwise crony money his companies are making off post 9-11 security and war.
Keep warm.
Thursday, February 01, 2007
busy, busy, busy
...while you were busy holding signs and signing petitions and marching against the Bush war on Iraq, Iran and the already begun imperial storm trooper conquest of the world...
the Rovian chess-playing bean-counters were busy on their own project...
And how loudly are the DemocRats, or for that matter, the Reptiles who still believe in the Constitutional balance of powers, how loudly are they yelping?
{crickets chirping}
Executive Order 13422 was published in the Federal Register on January 23, 2007.
You can view it here:
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/07-293.htm
The King, or Dictator, has packed the Court and now has made an end run around the last line of defense. We are no longer a Republic.
the Rovian chess-playing bean-counters were busy on their own project...
And how loudly are the DemocRats, or for that matter, the Reptiles who still believe in the Constitutional balance of powers, how loudly are they yelping?
{crickets chirping}
Executive Order 13422 was published in the Federal Register on January 23, 2007.
You can view it here:
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/07-293.htm
The King, or Dictator, has packed the Court and now has made an end run around the last line of defense. We are no longer a Republic.
Friday, December 08, 2006
the 'Rats and the Rep(tile)s
Sick of the meme, the frame, the "catapulted" word ... "bipartisan" this week?
Two parties = two sides of the same coin.
Literally.
Flip a coin. Doesn't matter which side is up, the mythical little guy still loses.
Two parties = two sides of the same coin.
Literally.
Flip a coin. Doesn't matter which side is up, the mythical little guy still loses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
