News-Record.com

.. actually it comes from your child's piggy bank - they one you've been telling him to stuff with loose change. Imagine how he'll feel when he finally opens that then-empty coffer.

I don't know about anyone else, but the federal government has never raped my paycheck and deposited it in my child's piggy bank. And if I have a chance to recover a small portion of what they've stolen 'from my left pocket', I'll take it.

" ... it comes from your child's piggy bank - the one you've been telling him - your child - to stuff ... "

What is $600.00 really. It's not a house payment, won't cover insurance, it not child care but for a month or so? What is this money really going to do in our long term interests, not much . . .

$600.00 is just enough to piss us all off.

“ … Presidential and other candidates pandering for votes with promises of govt. goodies”

Here’s “The Way It Works”, by J.D. Rockefeller:

The role of a Politician is to give the people what they want (vs. the role of a Statesman, which is to give the people what they need). The Politician perceived as understanding best what people want will be elected. The Politician perceived as having provided what people want will get re-elected.

In very general terms, the Democrats perceive the people want health care and other "handouts" - including college scholarships - all paid for by taxing those perceived to have a surplus of cash.

In very general terms, the Republicans perceive the people want to be free of government. They tout a "free economy" that provides a surplus of cash for everyone’s pocket - allowing individual choice to purchase health care, college scholarships, etc.

The people, however, have experienced little fiscal difference or seen direct correlation between either party and economic goodness. Since there is little difference, Democrats would seem to have an advantage, except the people understand that Republicans have a better plan, it just never seems to pan out for the average Joe.

If Republicans were able to proof their plan actually worked, it would convince Democrats, but the World is rife with corruption and hypocrisy which is never addressed, and Republicans have simply been caught too many times (hypocrisy). Republicans are seen providing expenditures indirectly (directing resources through de-regulation, faux-labeled legislation) into special interests (Corporations). This never trickles down into the people's pockets, so the "freedom of choice" proffered by Republicans is empty rhetoric.

Voters who are already Republicans are blind to this rhetoric vs. reality.

The Democrats are pretty simple. They say they will tax and spend – and that's what they do – direct expenditures into the people pockets (defacto providing the "freedom of choice" proffered by Republicans), or less directly for the ostensive improvement of mankind ala health care and education. Regardless, there is rarely improvement. As for hypocrisy, contrast gay Democrats who run for national office and get re-elected, vs. “Loo Lover” Larry [Craig].

Voters who are already Democrats are blind to reality.

So it all comes down to secondary issues: For whom do your parents vote? How strong does your minister speak about the unborn? Do you listen more to Rush or Amy Goodman?

My favorite term used to describe this "stimulate" effect on the economy is that it is the same as taking a bucket of water from the deep end of and dumping into the shallow end.

JDR's right it's (once more) cracking into our kids piggy bank for no good purpose (except it is an election year).

Apparently you people don't understand, your "guvmint" wants to give you some of "their" money. It's free, just take some and spend it fast.
It's only by accident it comes in an election year.

The main thing to remember is, that it's their money that want to give you.

Gee, there are real swell people up in Washington!

"$600.00 is just enough to piss us all off."

If it pisses you off I take donations :)

This rebate is a bad idea but I'm not going to refuse my own money.

Checks should go out in May, just in time to spend while vacationing in Canada. Hey it beats buying a bunch of Chinese goods at Wal-Mart.

"Checks should go out in May, just in time to spend while vacationing in Canada."

Have you gotten your Canadian flags sewn on yet?

Nah you only need those when you travel to Europe Rufus. In Nova Scotia & PEI we will simply add "eh" to the end of each sentence and they will think we're one of them. In Quebec I'll just speak French.

JDR pretty much nails it on both sides. Certainly those of use who consider(ed) ourselves Republicans--I'm not sure I do anymore--have to admit that really, they've been no better than Democrats in the fiscal responsibility department. Although Bush tried with social security, his medicare drug program ended up with a huge net gain in entitlement spending, much of which is being kicked down the road. On discretionary spending, he was worse than Clinton (although the latter receives little credit, since a Republican congress held his feet to the fire--at least close enough to get them warm). It's depressing.

"they've been no better than Democrats in the fiscal responsibility department."

Amen Brian. Not only that you would think Congress would concern itself with our economy, Iraq, terrorism, Iran, illegals, etc. etc. etc. Yesterday Congress concerned itself for a good part of the day as to whether or not Roger Clemens got some steroid shots in his rump!!!

Can someone tell me what business Congress has with a baseball player? These people are pathetic, their approval rating reveals it.

"they've been no better than Democrats in the fiscal responsibility department."

You're giving too much credit. Eh?

We've got a bunch of Canadian techs where I work. We all them the Eh team. They don't think that's a bit funny.

The Eh Team -- I like that. I'm working with a bunch of Canadians myself; looks like they just earned a new nickname.

Maybe we work at the same place, Rufus T.

Amen, James

`

Dan,
You'll enjoy PEI and Nova Scotia. I like it better there in September when it is still hot as blazes here though. Halifax is a great town, but my favorite part of NS is up at Baddeck where Alexander Graham Bell's residence was. If you get up that way, you must take the Cabot Trail! Go all the way up to Meat Cove and you'll be able to see whales swimming and spouting from the top of the cliffs. The road to Meat Cove is a gravel road and only the locals can tell you about it, as its not on maps. But you will not regret the diversion as you will see a view that few will EVER see.
**************
"they've been no better than Democrats in the fiscal responsibility department."

NO BETTER??? THEY HAVE BEEN WORSE!
I'd call creating the largest bureaucracy in the HISTORY of the U.S. a tad concerning. Yep, this country can't stand much more of the "conservatives" running things--we'll REALLY be broke!

`

Thanks for the info Demon Deacon. We're doing a cruise so unfortunately we only have a day in each area. I've been to Halifax, Peggy's Cove & the Bay of Fundy area (serious tide drops). Never been to Sydney or PEI and always wanted to go.

If you really want something remote try Labrador. My dad, brother and I went there on a fishing trip many years ago, it was awesome.

THEY HAVE BEEN WORSE! You could have a point. Listened to Rush today and he reported that govt. spending on senior citizens has jumped up to over $27K PER senior citizen PER year, a substantial increase since 2000. I thought it was all for the children????

"Listened to Rush today and he reported that govt. spending on senior citizens has jumped up to over $27K PER senior citizen PER year, a substantial increase since 2000."

Let me guess, Dan ... since Congress is now "controlled" by Democrats, Rush places much of the blame on them - cause Limbaugh's sure been supportive of Bushy and Company .. don't ya just Loved his "YES SIR!" every time Cheney calls in to pump it up?

Let's see: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_021408/content/01125115.guest.html

"It was George W. Bush [who tried to do something about this back in 2005] ... he wanted to reform Social Security, and he wanted to do it in the private sector, private accounts and so forth. It was a great, courageous idea."

PLEASE tell me HOW privatization "back in 2005" would have done ANYTHING to relieve this "culturally destructive" - "unchecked, uncontrolled liberalism".

OK - it's not expressly this Congress "controlled" by Democrats .. but it is also expressly NOT GEORGE'S FAULT .. after all - Bushy "tried" this "courageous idea" - for what .. months? .. sort of .. as Iraq was decaying under his very nose.

MY POINT: Partisan Bull. I can't believe you listen to that Bozo.

One more thing - any retort MUST include a reasoned answer to HOW privatization ?back in 2005? would have done ANYTHING to change this: "The federal government spent $952 billion in 2007 on elderly benefits, up from $601 billion in 2000."

JDR, he mentioned 2000, that was long before D's took control of congress in '06. Rush has been critical of R excessive spending for years, so you should supportive of that being the "conservative" that you are.

James,
Rush Limbaugh is a hypocritical dope-addict comedian. He's been Bush's mouthpiece the entire time, and only decides NOW that maybe the GOP took us off course. It is quite curious that "conservatives" would listen to the doctor-shopping, pill popping broadcaster, when they profess such high morals. But, no one said the IQ of a Rush Limbaugh listener was very high anyway.

No Dan .. Rush clearly said "2007" .. " ...a substantial increase since 2000."

If Rush were maintaining this increase from "from $601 billion in 2000" to "$952 billion in 2007 on elderly benefits," were caused by LEIburals .. I'd agree LEIburals were certainly complicit .. but instead he focused on how Bush Courageously Tried ... in 2005.

What was Bush doing from Jan until Sep't 2001? Chopping wood? OK that was too easy, but afaik, he did SQUAT (that means Nothing). He had a Republican Congress for SIX YEARS .. and yea for much of that - he was somewhat engaged .. sort of .. in the "War On Terror" ... but clearly he was not totally absorbed, because in 2005 he finally tackled the issue .. for a few weeks.

No - you are, as TLC says, drinking the Kool-Aid. Apparently Rush has even said the only reason he sides with "conservative" arguments is because his income will be higher.

Seriously Dan .. that man is Dangerous to America.

Here's a true story:

I have a neighbor (retired) who spends his days building wooden birdhouses and platering his truck with homemade signs like "LIEBURALS have RUINED this COUNTRY!).

We went up to their home for a Christmas open house. At one point - discussing the ban on luminaries - he said "We're not allowed to have them because of the carbon footprint." He was serious; he believed that was why they were banned (fire hazard not withstanding).

The room went dumbstruck until I quipped, "That's what happens when you spend your day's listing to talk radio, you start to believe that crap."

With all respect, Dan - turn that dam thing off.