Does this surprise anyone

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
The Dems election campaighn blueprints--

See if you can find just one solution to any problem

Political offensive targets Bush
By Rowan Scarborough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published March 18, 2006

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advertisement

Senate Democrats have mapped a political battle plan for the March congressional recess that calls on lawmakers to stage press events with active duty military personnel, veterans and emergency responders to bash President Bush on virtually every one of his national security policies.
The game plan, devised by the office of Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, is contained in a six-page memo distributed to Democratic senators on Thursday at a closed-door meeting at the Capitol and provided to The Washington Times by a congressional staffer.
Titled "Real Security," the political document calls for staged town hall events at military bases, weapons factories, National Guard units, fire stations and veterans posts.
"Ensure that you have the proper U.S. and state flags at the event, and consider finding someone to sing the national anthem and lead the group in the Pledge of Allegiance at the start of the event," the battle plan states.
However, the Defense Department prohibits political events on military bases. The rule states, "commanders will not permit the use of installation facilities by any candidate for political campaign or election events, including public assemblies or town hall meetings. ..."
Jim Manley, Mr. Reid's spokesman, said yesterday the planned events are not part of a political campaign. They would involve only incumbent Democratic senators, some of whom are up for re-election, but not Democratic Senate challengers, he said. Democrats hope to capture Senate control in November's election.
"These are events to highlight the need for increased funding for the troops," Mr. Manley said. "It's an effort to paint the White House and the Republican Congress as having a failed effort on national security issues, which is a direct result of their misplaced priorities and mismanagement."
The Senate plan urges holding town hall events to "draw attention to the security vulnerabilities caused by the Bush budget and explain how Democrats fought to restore programs that keep America safe."
The plan is the latest attempt by Democrats to criticize Mr. Bush on national security issues in the aftermath of the Dubai ports deal dust-up, which Republicans conceded was mishandled by the administration. One of the few areas where Republicans continue to poll well versus Democrats is on fighting terrorists.
In almost every issue in the Reid memo, Democratic lawmakers are called upon to criticize the president for not spending enough federal dollars.
The plan urges the lawmakers to:
?"Hold a town hall meeting with state officials and a local National Guard unit at their armory to discuss the security impact of long deployments. ... Ask National Guard members to offer input on how security and disaster response at home is compromised by long deployments."
?"Hold a town hall meeting with troops at a local military installation. ... When selecting a location at the military installation for the event, make sure to select a space that allows easy press access and clearly conveys the message in the shot. Planes, vehicles, equipment and signage in the background enhance the pictures coming out of your event."
?"Work with [veterans] organizations ... to find recently returned Iraq and Afghanistan veterans willing to discuss the mental effects they or their fellow veterans have experienced."
?"Tour a factory in your state that manufactures military equipment like Humvees or body armor and hold a press availability afterwards with Iraq and Afghanistan veterans on the importance of protective equipment."
?"Visit the home of a military family that has purchased body armor on their own for a family member serving in Iraq or Afghanistan and hold an open press 'conversion' on the issue. ... Ask the family if they would be willing to hold the open press conversation/town hall meeting in their yard, on their front porch or in their home."
As commander in chief, Mr. Bush has made frequent visits to military bases in the United States and abroad. His remarks are generally limited to explaining his war policies and encouraging the troops.
The Democratic memo calls on senators to seek the help of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), which is critical of Mr. Bush.
The IAVA political action committee has raised for $100,000 for Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans running for the House. It has endorsed all seven Democrats in that category who are running against House Republicans. An IAVA PAC spokesman said Republican candidates chose not to seek the group's endorsement.
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
To be fair these would not be problems if the present administration had any solutions either. Plus in many cases the present administration is the cause.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
If i was the dem's right now say little. The other side is killing it self. Wait come with a plan if you have one starting about July. Never show your hand to soon. If I was the Reb's. I would as a group tell my leader to clean some house in D C. This at least looks like there looking for new ideas. Same story just nut ringing thru any more.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
StevieD said:
To be fair these would not be problems if the present administration had any solutions either. Plus in many cases the present administration is the cause.
Exactly. Not too many solutions coming from anyone, just jockeying for the big elections this Fall from both sides.

I gotta love the spin here, though. Classic DTB. When one side gets us in the hole, you quickly place blame on the other side because they don't offer a quick solution to get out of said hole. :shrug:
 

Master Capper

Emperior
Forum Member
Jan 12, 2002
9,104
11
0
Dunedin, Florida
I dont see anything wrong with what Reid proposes it's pretty much the same tactic used by the gOP to attack Clinton, but I guess it was acceptable then. The sad thing is that every complaint that you have listed is actually true and it's very unfortunate that the current administration has been so inept at addressing many of these pressing issues.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
Maybe I'm wrong but the way I see it there were 2 prime reasons for mass transfer of power to GOP during Clinton admin.
1st was Clintons personal character but more importantly was GOP plan of attack vs the Dems above--Seems their platform was not carping about opposition but rather about change and solutions--
Compare this to DEMS above--and see if you can see any difference.

REPUBLICAN CONTRACT WITH AMERICA
As Republican Members of the House of Representatives and as citizens seeking to join that body we propose not just to change its policies, but even more important, to restore the bonds of trust between the people and their elected representatives.
That is why, in this era of official evasion and posturing, we offer instead a detailed agenda for national renewal, a written commitment with no fine print.

This year's election offers the chance, after four decades of one-party control, to bring to the House a new majority that will transform the way Congress works. That historic change would be the end of government that is too big, too intrusive, and too easy with the public's money. It can be the beginning of a Congress that respects the values and shares the faith of the American family.

Like Lincoln, our first Republican president, we intend to act "with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right." To restore accountability to Congress. To end its cycle of scandal and disgrace. To make us all proud again of the way free people govern themselves.

On the first day of the 104th Congress, the new Republican majority will immediately pass the following major reforms, aimed at restoring the faith and trust of the American people in their government:


FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress;
SECOND, select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse;
THIRD, cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;
FOURTH, limit the terms of all committee chairs;
FIFTH, ban the casting of proxy votes in committee;
SIXTH, require committee meetings to be open to the public;
SEVENTH, require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;
EIGHTH, guarantee an honest accounting of our Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.
Thereafter, within the first 100 days of the 104th Congress, we shall bring to the House Floor the following bills, each to be given full and open debate, each to be given a clear and fair vote and each to be immediately available this day for public inspection and scrutiny.

1. THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT: A balanced budget/tax limitation amendment and a legislative line-item veto to restore fiscal responsibility to an out- of-control Congress, requiring them to live under the same budget constraints as families and businesses. (Bill Text) (Description)

2. THE TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACT: An anti-crime package including stronger truth-in- sentencing, "good faith" exclusionary rule exemptions, effective death penalty provisions, and cuts in social spending from this summer's "crime" bill to fund prison construction and additional law enforcement to keep people secure in their neighborhoods and kids safe in their schools. (Bill Text) (Description)

3. THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT: Discourage illegitimacy and teen pregnancy by prohibiting welfare to minor mothers and denying increased AFDC for additional children while on welfare, cut spending for welfare programs, and enact a tough two-years-and-out provision with work requirements to promote individual responsibility. (Bill Text) (Description)

4. THE FAMILY REINFORCEMENT ACT: Child support enforcement, tax incentives for adoption, strengthening rights of parents in their children's education, stronger child pornography laws, and an elderly dependent care tax credit to reinforce the central role of families in American society. (Bill Text) (Description)

5. THE AMERICAN DREAM RESTORATION ACT: A S500 per child tax credit, begin repeal of the marriage tax penalty, and creation of American Dream Savings Accounts to provide middle class tax relief. (Bill Text) (Description)

6. THE NATIONAL SECURITY RESTORATION ACT: No U.S. troops under U.N. command and restoration of the essential parts of our national security funding to strengthen our national defense and maintain our credibility around the world. (Bill Text) (Description)

7. THE SENIOR CITIZENS FAIRNESS ACT: Raise the Social Security earnings limit which currently forces seniors out of the work force, repeal the 1993 tax hikes on Social Security benefits and provide tax incentives for private long-term care insurance to let Older Americans keep more of what they have earned over the years. (Bill Text) (Description)

8. THE JOB CREATION AND WAGE ENHANCEMENT ACT: Small business incentives, capital gains cut and indexation, neutral cost recovery, risk assessment/cost-benefit analysis, strengthening the Regulatory Flexibility Act and unfunded mandate reform to create jobs and raise worker wages. (Bill Text) (Description)

9. THE COMMON SENSE LEGAL REFORM ACT: "Loser pays" laws, reasonable limits on punitive damages and reform of product liability laws to stem the endless tide of litigation. (Bill Text) (Description)

10. THE CITIZEN LEGISLATURE ACT: A first-ever vote on term limits to replace career politicians with citizen legislators. (Description)

Further, we will instruct the House Budget Committee to report to the floor and we will work to enact additional budget savings, beyond the budget cuts specifically included in the legislation described above, to ensure that the Federal budget deficit will be less than it would have been without the enactment of these bills.

Respecting the judgment of our fellow citizens as we seek their mandate for reform, we hereby pledge our names to this Contract with America.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
That historic change would be the end of government that is too big, too intrusive, and too easy with the public's money.

They were kidding, right?
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
This one's my favorite:

"1. THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT: A balanced budget/tax limitation amendment and a legislative line-item veto to restore fiscal responsibility to an out- of-control Congress, requiring them to live under the same budget constraints as families and businesses."
 

Master Capper

Emperior
Forum Member
Jan 12, 2002
9,104
11
0
Dunedin, Florida
This current administration has no clue as to what a balanced budget would encompass. It amazes me that anyone whom would consider themselves as a true Conservative would continue to support this administration as they spend money like a drunken sailor on leave in Bangkok
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
Didn't say they kept the promises just pointing out diff between party agenda's--
One had plan and possible solutions to problems
the other have nothing but sniping at problems

Which group you you want running your company?

On the spending issue if your referring to Medicare spending I'll climb on with you---but somehow believe 911-natuaral disasters and spending on 2 wars may have accounted for most the spending--of course its easy to snipe at the deficiet in general--if you don't look where brunt of it came from--and in some cases you get to snipe twice on same issue--on not doing enough to help 911 and hurricane people--but spending too much in general--Snipers have easy route they can snipe on each side--the ones that try and find solutions are either right or wrong.
----and such is life in general
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
DOGS THAT BARK said:
D
Which group you you want running your company?
I want the group that won't send my company into record deficit. I'd also like the group that won't cause onnecesary fist fights in the parking lot. Would like the group that doesn't sell the nearby open space to try and pay for part of their fiscal irresponsibility. I'd like the group who isn't trying get rid of pollution controls on the factory down the street. I'd like the group who realizes people in my company need reasonable healthcare. I'd like the group who values the quality of life of my team of $7.00 per hour employees as much as my asshole CEO who does perfectly well with or without his tax cuts and estate tax. I'd like the group who values the privacy of my employees. ....Oh yeah, I'd like the group who makes every attempt to capture the ACTUAL person who flew a plane into my building rather some other guy completely unrelated to the attack.

How about you, Dogs? Which group would you like running your company?
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
Ok you don't want record deficeit
The below is where 99% of deficeit come from--
Which would YOU have cut
911 rehabilitation
Natural disaster relief
War in afga
War in Iraq
Medicare expansion.
The only possible way you can avoid the debt is if 911 never happened or you did nothing after it happened in form of retaliation or rehabilitation.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
Some deficit was unavoidable - but not record deficits. Iraq is up to $300 billion and was totally unneccessary. Competent leadership would have sorted that out.

Tax cuts were totally unneccesary and costly. Attempts to end estate tax is totally unneccesary and will be costly.

Bridges to nowhere are totally unneccesary and costly.

The budget situation would not be anywhere near this bad in my company if the other group was in charge.

... ..Also, I forgot to add that I want the group running my company who doesn't put us at a scientific disadvantage by stifling the stem cell division.
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
smurphy said:
Tax cuts were totally unneccesary and costly. Attempts to end estate tax is totally unneccesary and will be costly.

Why should anyone be penalized for being successful and working hard?

The only people who are against tax cuts are you leftists who encourage mediocrity and discourage pursuit of the American dream. You leftists believe that the government spends our money with more discretion than those who can earn it.

Welcome to the real world. Your socialist/communist ideas have been tried and failed time and again.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
How is keeping pre-2002 tax levels for people making over $200,000 a year holding anyone back from pursuing their dreams and being successful. Those rates did not hold anyone back from enjoying incredible success.

As for mediocrity - what makes you think I or anyone encourages that? Just because I realize that no matter how smart and educated everyone is, there will always be a need for janitors and burger flippers, and they deserve to eek out a reasonable living - how do you deduce that?

I'm living the American dream. There's no agenda from me. It's just logical and fair.

You really twist this all around. It's not a matter of who knows how to spend money - at's a matter of what it costs to run the country and having those who have done incredibly well BECAUSE of the country helping to keep the budget in line.

Nobody is/was asking for taxes to be increased. There was nothing wrong with pre-2002 rates. All messing with that has done is contribute to the budget crisis.
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
yes there is STILL a lot wrong

Why should a guy making 200 K have to pay 50 G's while a guy making 40 K pays about 3 G's

Fairness is if everyone pays the same AMOUNT

Us Conservatives only want to pay the same RATE (high income people would still be getting screwed)

You leftists want high income folks to pay A HIGHER RATE making the American Dream much harder for anyone to achieve
 

pd1

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 24, 2001
1,288
57
48
67
missouri
dr. freeze said:
Fairness is if everyone pays the same AMOUNT


So you are saying that a 19 year old married couple, just out of high school with a new baby, working at wal mart, trying to make end meet should pay the same tax as billy gates?

Hope you have tall walls around your little gated community.
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
pd1 said:
So you are saying that a 19 year old married couple, just out of high school with a new baby, working at wal mart, trying to make end meet should pay the same tax as billy gates?

Hope you have tall walls around your little gated community.

isn't that "fair"?
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
Dr. Freeze - Wealthy people never get screwed. By definition - if you are wealthy, you are doing just fine. No tax that we have or ever had has made a rich person suddenly unable to afford a rich lifestyle.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top