Question, why am I, and all other taxpayers, paying for medication for those in Africa and other places when there are thousands upon thousands of people here who cannot get medication, myself included? It really pisses me off when people around the globe reap the benefits that should help the American taxpayer when they need the help.
Quote
and now thanks to obama who just volunteered all of us tax payers to pay an additional 845 billion beyond what we already give those in other countries, we will have even less to spend at home on healthcare.
light travels faster than sound, that's why some people appear to be bright until you hear them speak
and now thanks to obama who just volunteered all of us tax payers to pay an additional 845 billion beyond what we already give those in other countries, we will have even less to spend at home on healthcare.
Are you referring to the bipartisan Global Povery Act of 2007?
Do you know the status of that bill, i.e., has it passed out of committee, *and* do you know if it has any appropriations connected to it?
yes i was refering to that bill. didnt know there was already a thread on it. it did pass the committee and the dems tried to pass it in a midnight vote but rep were able to block it for now.
light travels faster than sound, that's why some people appear to be bright until you hear them speak
But today he just heard that gas is getting really expensive - so he may be revising his opinion. When asked about gas getting close to $4 a gallon in some places, he replied "that's interesting. I hadn't heard that."
Hmmm, interesting over it's increasing price, having not heard of the situation, or the pretence of intellect of understanding what might be interesting?
'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'
But today he just heard that gas is getting really expensive - so he may be revising his opinion. When asked about gas getting close to $4 a gallon in some places, he replied "that's interesting. I hadn't heard that."
Yeah right as if his and Cheneys accountants have kept them informed of how much their OIL STOCKS are worth based on their actions in destabilizing the world oil markets....
What was the price of a barrel of oil when they entered office????
what was each old well in TExas and Wyoming puming in barrels per day and what was it worth as opposed to what it is worth now....
Just more lies.. they know EXACTLY what they have done for thier family coffers.. and personal wealth.
But today he just heard that gas is getting really expensive - so he may be revising his opinion. When asked about gas getting close to $4 a gallon in some places, he replied "that's interesting. I hadn't heard that."
Yeah right as if his and Cheneys accountants have kept them informed of how much their OIL STOCKS are worth based on their actions in destabilizing the world oil markets....
What was the price of a barrel of oil when they entered office????
Brent crude was approx $27 per barrel when Bush was sworn in as Prez.
Quote
what was each old well in TExas and Wyoming puming in barrels per day and what was it worth as opposed to what it is worth now....
Just more lies.. they know EXACTLY what they have done for thier family coffers.. and personal wealth.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
> I love how the government's idea of a stimulus package is to give
> people back their own money. Perhaps they shouldn't have
> taxed it away spent it in the first place?
Fixed that. The problem isn't that politicians are taxing people more or less than they should. The problem is that they are spending too much. Until they fix that problem, reducing taxes makes as much sense as getting another credit card to fix your debt problem. (And sending people their own money back as a 'stimulus' is even dumber.)
Bill, it's the same old Bush bribe. When the going gets tough, Bush bribes the voters with another paltry giveaway. Well, paltry to us anyway, I don't know about your income level, but mine's not in the league W inhabits. His crowd gets an even bigger bribe.
Either way, it's worked before - he got re-elected, din't he ?? So one more bribe to shut the voters the fuck up until he has a chance to skip town in January.........
yes i was refering to that bill. didnt know there was already a thread on it. it did pass the committee and the dems tried to pass it in a midnight vote but rep were able to block it for now.
Based on what you wrote above (as there are no other references), I’m speculating that you’re confusing the House version and the Senate version and some of what is circulating in the 'blog-o-sphere.'
The House version, HR 1302, was passed on 25 September 2007. It’s a bipartisan bill with almost 1/5 of the House (Republicans & Democrats) signing onto it. (Obviously, more than the original 82 bill signers supported it when it came up to the House floor for a vote). It was passed by voice vote so voting records were not kept, but it appears that it passed unanimously.
A couple points to note:
A previous version also bipartisan and also introduced in the House, HR 3605, never passed out of the House Committee.
Bills introduced in the House have only 2 years to become law. Because this bill is so tightly linked to President Bush and his anti-poverty goals and his desired legacy, I speculate that it has mixed chances of making it forward. That’s my speculation w/r/t why it was a voice vote.
The Senate version, S. 2433, was introduced on 7 December 2007. The bill has been referred to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations (SFRC). The bill was on the schedule for discussion in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on 13 February 2008. It was reported favorably out of committee. There was no “midnight vote” and its co-sponsors on the in the SFRC include Sen Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska & ranking minority member on the SFRC), Sen Dick Lugar (R-Indiana) & Sen Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), so the statement “rep were able block it for now,” is also inaccurate. It has not been scheduled for full vote by the Senate nor has it been added as an amendment at this point. (The Senate is dealing with the FY09 Budget, among other legislation.)
It seems that the Global Poverty Act does nothing more than support what President Bush indicated he wanted the U.S. to do back in 2000 and 'requesting' (in the way that Congress does) that the Executive Branch provide progress reports to Congress on progress, i.e., oversight, which no one likes. This Bill seems to single out just one of the Millennium Development Goals that President Bush supports.
Again, all the Bill does *really* is require the State Dept, as lead, to develop a “comprehensive strategy” for inter-agency coordination (which some would argue a Bill should not be required(!)) on programs that are currently in place and to report back to Congress on the status of those efforts NLT 1 year after the bill passes.
It’s fascinating from a civics perspective w/r/t legislative process and from a sociological perspective w/r/t what emerge as ‘touch stone’ issues (or one might argue “counter knowledge (sic)”).
Also from SFRC on 13 February 2008, you may find interesting Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s testimony w/r/t the FY09 Foreign Affairs PBR. [Edit to add: "PBR" ='s President's Budget Request.]
Her official statement is available here, and was, of course, prepared before the actual testimony.
The SecState also speaks to the criticality of foreign assistance and “fighting poverty” (47:50) for national security: “foreign assistance is our most valuable tool in doing so.”
Just before SecState Rice begins her testimony, Sen Lugar (R-Indiana) extols/chastises the Secretary on the need for action and execution from the State Department on reconstruction as the “R” part of SSTR, which is one of my ‘touchstone’ issues.
VR/Marg
Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying
You can post now and register later.
If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.
nerdgirl 0
Are you referring to the bipartisan Global Povery Act of 2007?
Do you know the status of that bill, i.e., has it passed out of committee, *and* do you know if it has any appropriations connected to it?
For background see: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3124253;search_string=845;#3124253.
VR/Marg
Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites
azdiver 0
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites
billvon 3,080
But today he just heard that gas is getting really expensive - so he may be revising his opinion. When asked about gas getting close to $4 a gallon in some places, he replied "that's interesting. I hadn't heard that."
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites
vortexring 0
Hmmm, interesting over it's increasing price, having not heard of the situation, or the pretence of intellect of understanding what might be interesting?
'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites
Amazon 7
Yeah right as if his and Cheneys accountants have kept them informed of how much their OIL STOCKS are worth based on their actions in destabilizing the world oil markets....
What was the price of a barrel of oil when they entered office????
what was each old well in TExas and Wyoming puming in barrels per day and what was it worth as opposed to what it is worth now....
Just more lies.. they know EXACTLY what they have done for thier family coffers.. and personal wealth.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites
kallend 2,108
Brent crude was approx $27 per barrel when Bush was sworn in as Prez.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites
tbrown 26
Bill, it's the same old Bush bribe. When the going gets tough, Bush bribes the voters with another paltry giveaway. Well, paltry to us anyway, I don't know about your income level, but mine's not in the league W inhabits. His crowd gets an even bigger bribe.
Either way, it's worked before - he got re-elected, din't he ?? So one more bribe to shut the voters the fuck up until he has a chance to skip town in January.........
Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0
Based on what you wrote above (as there are no other references), I’m speculating that you’re confusing the House version and the Senate version and some of what is circulating in the 'blog-o-sphere.'
The House version, HR 1302, was passed on 25 September 2007. It’s a bipartisan bill with almost 1/5 of the House (Republicans & Democrats) signing onto it. (Obviously, more than the original 82 bill signers supported it when it came up to the House floor for a vote). It was passed by voice vote so voting records were not kept, but it appears that it passed unanimously.
A couple points to note:
The Senate version, S. 2433, was introduced on 7 December 2007. The bill has been referred to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations (SFRC). The bill was on the schedule for discussion in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on 13 February 2008. It was reported favorably out of committee. There was no “midnight vote” and its co-sponsors on the in the SFRC include Sen Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska & ranking minority member on the SFRC), Sen Dick Lugar (R-Indiana) & Sen Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), so the statement “rep were able block it for now,” is also inaccurate. It has not been scheduled for full vote by the Senate nor has it been added as an amendment at this point. (The Senate is dealing with the FY09 Budget, among other legislation.)
It seems that the Global Poverty Act does nothing more than support what President Bush indicated he wanted the U.S. to do back in 2000 and 'requesting' (in the way that Congress does) that the Executive Branch provide progress reports to Congress on progress, i.e., oversight, which no one likes. This Bill seems to single out just one of the Millennium Development Goals that President Bush supports.
Again, all the Bill does *really* is require the State Dept, as lead, to develop a “comprehensive strategy” for inter-agency coordination (which some would argue a Bill should not be required(!)) on programs that are currently in place and to report back to Congress on the status of those efforts NLT 1 year after the bill passes.
It’s fascinating from a civics perspective w/r/t legislative process and from a sociological perspective w/r/t what emerge as ‘touch stone’ issues (or one might argue “counter knowledge (sic)”).
One can speculate on why this Bill has gotten traction in the ‘blog-o-sphere’ ... curiously only when it got to the Senate ... but not
S. 1700: International Nuclear Fuel for Peace and Nonproliferation Act of 2007
or S. 2120: Social Investment and Economic Development for the Americas Act of 2007
or S. 2243: Saudi Arabia Accountability Act of 2007
or S. 328: Ensuring Implementation of the 9/11 Commission Report Act
or S. 492: Somalia Stabilization and Reconstruction Act of 2007.
This really isn’t my area of expertise ... but if I remember, I may query colleagues on SASC staff w/r/t what, if anything, they’ve heard.
VR/Marg
Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0
Also from SFRC on 13 February 2008, you may find interesting Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s testimony w/r/t the FY09 Foreign Affairs PBR. [Edit to add: "PBR" ='s President's Budget Request.]
Her official statement is available here, and was, of course, prepared before the actual testimony.
At 46:45 in the SecState’s testimony (available via Real Audio), she speaks to the President’s support of increased foreign assistance like the “Millennium Challenge Corporation,” (the US Federal Government organization *not* UN) and the State Dept’s Millennium Challenge Account, which is supported by the Heritage Foundation (& for those not familiar w/DC think-tank, it’s staunchly conservative) and supports the Millennium Development Goals, the UN-initiative that President Bush endorsed.
The SecState also speaks to the criticality of foreign assistance and “fighting poverty” (47:50) for national security: “foreign assistance is our most valuable tool in doing so.”
Just before SecState Rice begins her testimony, Sen Lugar (R-Indiana) extols/chastises the Secretary on the need for action and execution from the State Department on reconstruction as the “R” part of SSTR, which is one of my ‘touchstone’ issues.
VR/Marg
Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites