Reply With Quote
LOL dumb
LOL dumb
Darrin probably loves the fact that she's a black woman too. That just makes it sweeter for you, doesn't it, Darrin?
DAMN! I could lose my job and then preemptively lose my next job. FUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!
Nope. Stupidity comes in all colors. Could've easily been Pelosi.
They're in a dead heat IMO
At least she didn't ask a paralyzed person to stand up.
Almost as dumb as Fuzzy.
Loco cali liberals
lol DMX 7 w/his race card in his shirt pocket.
.
Democrats, the champion of the poor
WWMLKD
12 Ways the Sequester Will Screw the Poor
—By Erika Eichelberger
Men waiting in a bread line, New York City, 1910 Library of Congress
When Congress agreed on automatic slash-and-burn spending cuts in 2011—if no big bipartisan deficit reduction package could be achieved—the cuts were designed to be so unpalatable that Republicans and Democrats would feel compelled to concoct a better deal to replace them. President Barack Obama says avoiding the deep cuts, called sequestration in DC-speak, should be a "no-brainer." But Republicans are increasingly saying the sequester won't be so bad. Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) said Thursday that the $85 billion in cuts "would really help a long way and get us on a sustainable fiscal path."
One problem is that many poor Americans rely on services the government provides. The White House released a report Sunday emphasizing the ways in which the cuts will hurt the middle class, but although important en lement programs such as Medicaid, Social Security, and food stamps are exempt from sequestration, many programs for low-income families are on the chopping block. Here are 12 of them:
Public housing subsidies: $1.9 billion in cuts would affect 125,000 low-income people who would lose access to vouchers to help them with their rent.
Foreclosure prevention: 75,000 fewer people would receive foreclosure prevention, rental, and homeless counseling services.
Emergency housing: 100,000 formerly homeless people could be removed from their current emergency shelters.
Educational programs: Learning programs for poor kids would see a total of $2.7 billion in cuts. The $400 million slashed from Head Start, the preschool program for poor children, would result in reduced services for some 70,000 kids.
le I Funding: The Department of Education's le I program, the biggest federal education program in the country, subsidizes schools that serve more than a million disadvantaged students. It would see $725 million in cuts.
Rural rental assistance: Cuts to the Department of Agriculture would result in the elimination of rental assistance for 10,000 very low-income rural people, most of whom are single women, elderly, or disabled.
Social Security: Although Social Security payments themselves won't be scaled back, cuts to the program would result in a massive backlogging of disability claims.
Unemployment benefits: More than 3.8 million people getting long-term unemployment benefits would see their monthly payments reduced by as much as 9.4 percent, and would lose an average of $400 in benefits over their period of joblessness.
Veterans services: The Transition Assistance Program would be forced to cut back some of the job search and career transition services it provides to 150,000 vets a year.
Nutritional Assistance for Women & Children: The government's main food stamp program is exempt from cuts, but other food programs would take a hit. Some 600,000 women and children would be cut from the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, which provides nutrition assistance and education.
Special education: $978 million* in cuts would affect 30.7 million children.For example, the scaling back of federal grants to states for students with disabilities would mean that cash-strapped states and districts would have to come up with the salaries for thousands of teachers, aides, and staff that serve special needs kids.
Job training programs: $37 million would be slashed from a job retraining and placement program called Employment Services, and $83 million would be cut from Job Corps, which provides low-income kids with jobs and education.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013...ow-income-poor
And House Repugs CHEERED Friday when they heard Boner say he quit negotiating to stop sequestration..
Democrats, the champion of the poor
WWMLKD
12 Ways the Sequester Will Screw the Poor
—By Erika Eichelberger
Men waiting in a bread line, New York City, 1910 Library of Congress
When Congress agreed on automatic slash-and-burn spending cuts in 2011—if no big bipartisan deficit reduction package could be achieved—the cuts were designed to be so unpalatable that Republicans and Democrats would feel compelled to concoct a better deal to replace them. President Barack Obama says avoiding the deep cuts, called sequestration in DC-speak, should be a "no-brainer." But Republicans are increasingly saying the sequester won't be so bad. Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) said Thursday that the $85 billion in cuts "would really help a long way and get us on a sustainable fiscal path."
One problem is that many poor Americans rely on services the government provides. The White House released a report Sunday emphasizing the ways in which the cuts will hurt the middle class, but although important en lement programs such as Medicaid, Social Security, and food stamps are exempt from sequestration, many programs for low-income families are on the chopping block. Here are 12 of them:
Public housing subsidies: $1.9 billion in cuts would affect 125,000 low-income people who would lose access to vouchers to help them with their rent.
Foreclosure prevention: 75,000 fewer people would receive foreclosure prevention, rental, and homeless counseling services.
Emergency housing: 100,000 formerly homeless people could be removed from their current emergency shelters.
Educational programs: Learning programs for poor kids would see a total of $2.7 billion in cuts. The $400 million slashed from Head Start, the preschool program for poor children, would result in reduced services for some 70,000 kids.
le I Funding: The Department of Education's le I program, the biggest federal education program in the country, subsidizes schools that serve more than a million disadvantaged students. It would see $725 million in cuts.
Rural rental assistance: Cuts to the Department of Agriculture would result in the elimination of rental assistance for 10,000 very low-income rural people, most of whom are single women, elderly, or disabled.
Social Security: Although Social Security payments themselves won't be scaled back, cuts to the program would result in a massive backlogging of disability claims.
Unemployment benefits: More than 3.8 million people getting long-term unemployment benefits would see their monthly payments reduced by as much as 9.4 percent, and would lose an average of $400 in benefits over their period of joblessness.
Veterans services: The Transition Assistance Program would be forced to cut back some of the job search and career transition services it provides to 150,000 vets a year.
Nutritional Assistance for Women & Children: The government's main food stamp program is exempt from cuts, but other food programs would take a hit. Some 600,000 women and children would be cut from the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, which provides nutrition assistance and education.
Special education: $978 million* in cuts would affect 30.7 million children.For example, the scaling back of federal grants to states for students with disabilities would mean that cash-strapped states and districts would have to come up with the salaries for thousands of teachers, aides, and staff that serve special needs kids.
Job training programs: $37 million would be slashed from a job retraining and placement program called Employment Services, and $83 million would be cut from Job Corps, which provides low-income kids with jobs and education.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013...ow-income-poor
Obama never started to negotiate. He knew more tax increases was moving the goal posts he had already agreed to.
Both sides have been brushing their hair in the mirror the whole way. There's no hair-brushing in football, but apparently there is in politics.
lol the contest of who's drowning closer to the surface, were it not so momentous for us.
He agreed to no new taxes? Let's not forget that the tax "increases" earlier this year weren't even really increases -- they were restorations of temporarily reduced rates.
Obama let the GOP get away with not bringing in the revenue he was elected to get from tax increases on the "rich" and then the GOP comes out and say that Obama's agreement wasn't a compromise for anything down the road...that Obama was just cool with those fake ass tax hikes that don't really do anything. And now, we have this situation...how does no one realize the GOP only care about wrecking Obama's legacy? I hope Hillary runs in 2016 and 2020, that's 16 years of Democrats in the White House...a just punishment for those GOP s.
And I'm a Republican!!!
i dunno why there isnt cut in defence/military spending, at the end of the day isnt it depend on the buyers demand/supply?
Every tax increase he's talked about since he was president wouldn't even pay for his spending, let alone bringing down the deficit (which he also campaigned on)
They already cut the military to pre 9-11. Increased our health insurance by 300%. Not given a pay raise past 1% for five years. How much more do you want?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
