Worth Voting For?

[Whoo]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39314078/ns/politics-capitol_hill

I know everything we've been reading in the news points to Republicans taking over Congress, but if this is their platform, I just don't see how they are gonna get the job done.  It's the same old, same old.  It is a return to things that screwed up the economy, it is a return to disastrous tax policies, it's still inserting divisive viewpoints in terms of society - how is this gonna help us?

I can see overturning the mandatory tax filing for small businesses on vendor purchases over $600 - that just sounds like a nightmare.  In terms of Health Savings Accounts, there's just not a whole lot of advantage there... I watched my boss purchase mid-range health insurance (at a professional rate of $300 per month) and stock his HSA to the max $4500-5K.  Two problems with that:  most working-class people don't have the money to fund an HSA, and second, he has already depleted almost half of the funds in the HSA just through normal, preventive healthcare (colonoscopy, eye exam and eyewear, a trip or two to the dentist).  The "tax savings" just isn't gonna be that drastic.

[Whoo]

I certainly plan on reading through their whole proposal, but from what I see, there's just not a whole lot going for them.  Building up more missle defense systems?  Halloo, the last attack on our country was done via AIRPLANE, freakin' DUH!  There are a whole lot of other ways this country can undergo an attack, and IMO, missles are pretty far down the list.

Then they want to keep dragging along the abortion issue - gee, I wonder who is hammering at the Republican leaders to push forth their agenda? ::)  Then there's the "traditional marriage"/"family values" statement:  that's right, Repubs, keep dividing the country, keep on trying your damndest to maintain a balance of second class citizenry in what is supposed to be the icon of freedom to the rest of the world.  The only thing I see happening in their favor is once again using fear to motivate.

[Mr T]

We're so screwed! ::D:

At times like this my mother used to say "Get down and hang on to what you love the most, because it's all you'll have when this is over."

The Giant Crash is coming.  After it is over we can get to work building a decent country.

[Whoo]

Well, here is a very interesting article I ran across this morning...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39339231/ns/politics-the_new_york_times

Oh, don't get me wrong - I'm sure there are plenty of folks on the Dem side who are just as dirty.  My whole point is the need for campaign finance reform, period.  NO corporate donations, STRICT donation limits with none of those "on behalf of" or "from the family of", put some verification/tracking rules in there that actually have teeth, and some jail time instead of soley monetary penalties for those skirting or outright violating the rules!!!!  Rich people don't care if they have to pay a 20 grand fine; they can spend that on lunch if they want.  However, put their asses in jail to hang out with the regular joes, and they might see the light. >:(

[Mr T]

Ha ha ha!  You're so cute. :smile:

[hammondjam]

What gets me about the average GOP and Tea Party rant is tax money worries. We hear all the hoopla about liberal spending to give free rides to lazy people but we never hear anything about the amount of money that Bush's holy war has cost so far. That's right...BUSH'S holy war. Before Obama even sat down in the big leather chair, I knew that the wasps nest was stirred and there was no easy way out.

People in office are our American Kings and Queens. It's just plain sickening to hear how much these bluebloods spend to get elected while at the same time throwing jabs at social programs that help the elderly and infirmed. I'm ready for a revolution. Make Boehner live on what I make for a month and he'd be crying. Tell Pelosi to give what she spends on facelifts and Botox to a local shelter!

[mr.willy]

   
President Obama made clear Wednesday that the U.S. presence in Afghanistan would remain long after troops are withdrawn, a process he hopes to begin in July 2011.

   
WAR EXPENDITURe
By Richard Wolf, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — The monthly cost of the war in Afghanistan, driven by troop increases and fighting on difficult terrain, has topped Iraq costs for the first time since 2003 and shows no sign of letting up.
Pentagon spending in February, the most recent month available, was $6.7 billion in Afghanistan compared with $5.5 billion in Iraq. As recently as fiscal year 2008, Iraq was three times as expensive; in 2009, it was twice as costly.

The shift is occurring because the Pentagon is adding troops in Afghanistan and withdrawing them from Iraq. And it's happening as the cumulative cost of the two wars surpasses $1 trillion, including spending for veterans and foreign aid. Those costs could put increased pressure on President Obama and Congress, given the nation's $12.9 trillion debt.

"The overall costs are a function, in part, of the number of troops," says Linda Bilmes, an expert on wartime spending at Harvard University. "The costs are also a result of the intensity of operations, and the number of different places that we have our troops deployed."

MORE: U.S. reviews Afghan watchdog authority
DATABASE: A look at lives lost in Iraq, Afghanistan
THE OVAL: Play-by-play of Obama, Karzai meeting
Obama made clear Wednesday that the U.S. role in Afghanistan would remain long after troops are withdrawn, a process planned to begin in July 2011. "This is a long-term partnership," he said during a news conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

Continued American support will be crucial as U.S. troop levels and costs in Afghanistan escalate:

•The number of U.S. servicemembers in Afghanistan has risen to 87,000, on top of 47,000 from 44 other countries. At the same time, the number of U.S. servicemembers in Iraq has dropped to 94,000. By next year, Afghanistan is to have 102,000 U.S. servicemembers, Iraq 43,000.

•Afghanistan will cost nearly $105 billion in the 2010 fiscal year that ends Sept. 30, including most of $33 billion in additional spending requested by Obama and pending before Congress. Iraq will cost about $66 billion. In fiscal 2011, Afghanistan is projected to cost $117 billion, Iraq $46 billion. To date, Pentagon spending in Iraq has reached $620 billion, compared with $190 billion in Afghanistan.

•Costs per servicemember in Afghanistan have been roughly double what they are in Iraq since 2005. That is due to lower troop levels, Afghanistan's landlocked location, lack of infrastructure, high cost of fuel and less reliable security. "The cost just cascades," says Todd Harrison of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. "That's always been an issue in Afghanistan."

"Iraq, logistically, is much easier," says Lawrence Korb of the Center for American Progress. "You get the stuff to Kuwait and just drive it up the road."

[Whoo]

Mr. willy, right justify much?! ;D ;)  I appreciate your information, but is there something contained in it you are pointing out?  I may not have had enough coffee yet. :confused:

One thing I'll say about the numbers you posted:  look at how much money was spent in Iraq fighting a war that wasn't the reason we went to war (well, according to Bush it was WMD, but we all know how that panned out).  I'd like to see the estimated numbers for when the troop shift is complete with the exception of those being left to make the transition to full Iraq control, aka setting up another strategic base in another country.  As with the other strategic bases in Germany, Japan, the Phillipines, etc., it will be another unending cash cow.  Hell; if we'd spent that money in the form of bribe money for info to the farmers, etc. in Afghanistan, bin Laden would already be caught and dead. >:(

[Whoo]

Ha ha ha!  You're so cute. :smile:

Funny, aren't I?! ;D  Do you have some land to sell me, too? ;D