RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas

RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 11:50:17 AM)
OK, who wants to do the soundbites of the morons? Fade in................. Grama, in big straw hat working the flower bed, at a large grassy park, she lifts an azelea to the sun and as it withers and dies.... (voice over (lets see if we can get James Earl Jones) hell, Boener, crying.....) In America; this is the flower of our youth..... dirge......... Fade out....... voice over Vote Republican..... vote for a pretty world........ Cut! Wrap! Print!

SternSkipper -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 11:52:00 AM)
quote: – MAINTAINING NATIONAL AZALEA COLLECTION: “The Committee directs the National Arboretum to maintain its National Boxwood Collection and the Glenn Dale Hillside portion of the Azalea Collection. The Committee encourages the National Arboretum to work collaboratively with supporters of the National Arboretum to raise additional funds to ensure the long-term viability of these and other important collections.” [Pg. 13] You're not looking at this from the right perspective Lucy... Azaleas provide excellent cover for grown men doing Larry Craig-like interludes. They are sparing the nation more embarrassing moments in the wake of the Weiner controversy. They know that if they can't give up their fiscal hypocrisy, or their ethical hypocrisy, they certainly can't give up their sexual hypocrisy. It'll tie up government less and give them a sweet smelling place to cruise.

Aylee -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 11:55:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Evidently, the House GOP finds nutrition assistance for low-income women and their children to be a “lower priority program,” as the bill cuts the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) to such an extent that 325,000 to 475,000 currently eligible women and children will be denied help. From your link: food and nutrition programs within the Department of Agriculture – including SNAP (formerly Food Stamps) and child nutrition – are funded at nearly $90 billion, $2 billion less than the President’s request.This funding will allow all individuals and families who meet the programs’ criteria for aid to receive all the benefits available to them, and includes $3 billion in reserve funds in case of unanticipated increases in participation or food price increases. Child nutrition programs will receive $18.8 billion in mandatory funding, which is $1.5 billion over last year’s level. This funding will help provide low-income students with free or reduced price breakfasts and lunches at schools in every community in the nation. In addition, the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) nutrition program is funded at $6.05 billion. While this is a reduction of $685.7 million from last year, the bill allows the Secretary to utilize fiscal year 2011 carryover funds, $125 million in contingency funds, and other funding options currently authorized in law to allow participants to continue to receive the benefits for which they qualify. No one is being denied or kicked out of the program. quote: – MAINTAINING NATIONAL AZALEA COLLECTION: “The Committee directs the National Arboretum to maintain its National Boxwood Collection and the Glenn Dale Hillside portion of the Azalea Collection. The Committee encourages the National Arboretum to work collaboratively with supporters of the National Arboretum to raise additional funds to ensure the long-term viability of these and other important collections.” [Pg. 13] For more info, http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/13/243560/gop-nutrition-cuts-azaleas/ Its nice to see they have their priorities in order [:'(] I would guess that the money going for the flowers is FAR less than the 90 billion going for SNAP. They have also been directed to find other sources of funding. The pdf file did not reference the flowers.

Lucylastic -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 11:56:31 AM)
125 billion for the azaleas

Aylee -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:00:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl 125.5 Billion for the flowers. Bullshit. That is a damned lie. That is the amount for the entire agriculture appropriations bill.

tazzygirl -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:02:36 PM)
Why in the hell with our ecomony the way it is, with people out of work, with health care in the stages of death, are we spending 125 billion dollars on flowers?

Aylee -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:03:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic 125 billion for the azaleas From the pdf: Bill Highlights: The agencies and programs in this bill will receive a total of $125.5 billion in both discretionary and mandatory funding, a reduction of more than $7 billion from the President’s request. Discretionary funding is reduced by $2.7 billion from last year’s level – a cut of over $5 billion from the President’s request. However, mandatory (automatic) funding in the bill increases by $3 billion over last year to a total of $108 billion, and equals more than 86% of the total funding in the bill. That is the entire bill. Not just the cost of the flowers. Stop making shit up and spreading lies.

Lucylastic -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:05:35 PM)
From the other link and section House Republicans have been facing a backlash after voting for a plan authored by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) that would dismantle Medicare while cutting taxes for the rich. But that plan also included deep cuts in discretionary spending, the destructiveness of which is becoming more apparent as the budget process moves forward. For instance, the Republican budget would implement a 15 percent cut in the agency tasked with policing oil markets, even with energy speculation at an all-time high. That same portion of the budget — which is being marked up by the House Appropriations agricultural subcommittee — would also cut $832 million from the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), a program that provides low-income women and children with food, counseling, and health care. As the AP reported, Republicans claim that the cuts “are taken from excess dollars in those accounts, and participants won’t see a decrease in services.” However, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities ran the numbers and found that, with the expected increase in food prices over the coming months, hundreds of thousands of women and children would be bumped from WIC under the GOP’s plan: House Republicans are proposing a cut in the WIC nutrition program that would force WIC to turn away 325,000 to 475,000 eligible low-income women and young children next year…Economists have varying views on the size of the likely increase in food prices over the next 18 months. If the cost of WIC foods increases by 2 percent between fiscal years 2011 and 2012 — the smallest increase likely — the proposed funding cut would force WIC to serve roughly 325,000 fewer people in 2012 than in 2011. If, as some food price experts believe likely, the price increase is 5 percent, WIC would have to be cut by roughly 475,000 people. Both of these estimates reflect the use of all contingency funds, as well as the use of carryover funds from fiscal year 2011, to close funding shortfalls.

Sanity -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:06:14 PM)
Look at her source, "thinkprogress.org" quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic 125 billion for the azaleas From the pdf: Bill Highlights: The agencies and programs in this bill will receive a total of $125.5 billion in both discretionary and mandatory funding, a reduction of more than $7 billion from the President’s request. Discretionary funding is reduced by $2.7 billion from last year’s level – a cut of over $5 billion from the President’s request. However, mandatory (automatic) funding in the bill increases by $3 billion over last year to a total of $108 billion, and equals more than 86% of the total funding in the bill. That is the entire bill. Not just the cost of the flowers. Stop making shit up and spreading lies.

tazzygirl -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:06:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl 125.5 Billion for the flowers. Bullshit. That is a damned lie. That is the amount for the entire agriculture appropriations bill. Yep that is the total bill. Bill Highlights: The agencies and programs in this bill will receive a total of $125.5 billion in both discretionary and mandatory funding, a reduction of more than $7 billion from the President’s request. Discretionary funding is reduced by $2.7 billion from last year’s level – a cut of over $5 billion from the President’s request. However, mandatory (automatic) funding in the bill increases by $3 billion over last year to a total of $108 billion, and equals more than 86% of the total funding in the bill. Now, give me a fucking rational reason why they wanted to cut 747 million from WIC. There are your damn liars.

Aylee -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:07:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Why in the hell with our ecomony the way it is, with people out of work, with health care in the stages of death, are we spending 125 billion dollars on flowers? We aren't. You are making this stuff up and just spreading lies. Read the pdf file that I have quoted from that Lucy linked to. That is the amount for the ENTIRE agricultural appropriations bill. Which SNAP and WIC are a part of. And they get MANDATORY increases. Just not as much additional as Obama requested. That does not equal a cut. The sky is not falling.

tazzygirl -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:08:54 PM)
I will wait till you catch up.

Lucylastic -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:10:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic 125 billion for the azaleas From the pdf: Bill Highlights: The agencies and programs in this bill will receive a total of $125.5 billion in both discretionary and mandatory funding, a reduction of more than $7 billion from the President’s request. Discretionary funding is reduced by $2.7 billion from last year’s level – a cut of over $5 billion from the President’s request. However, mandatory (automatic) funding in the bill increases by $3 billion over last year to a total of $108 billion, and equals more than 86% of the total funding in the bill. That is the entire bill. Not just the cost of the flowers. Stop making shit up and spreading lies. FUCK YOU

Sanity -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:11:29 PM)
The "Center on Budget and Policy Priorities" source mentioned in the quote claims to be nonpartisan but the headlines on its home page all scream that theyre far left tax-and-spend liars

Sanity -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:12:37 PM)
Typical of the far left. quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic 125 billion for the azaleas From the pdf: Bill Highlights: The agencies and programs in this bill will receive a total of $125.5 billion in both discretionary and mandatory funding, a reduction of more than $7 billion from the President’s request. Discretionary funding is reduced by $2.7 billion from last year’s level – a cut of over $5 billion from the President’s request. However, mandatory (automatic) funding in the bill increases by $3 billion over last year to a total of $108 billion, and equals more than 86% of the total funding in the bill. That is the entire bill. Not just the cost of the flowers. Stop making shit up and spreading lies. FUCK YOU

Lucylastic -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:12:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Look at her source, "thinkprogress.org" Why dont you look for the link to the bill numbnuts I called in I think about post 6 quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic oh theyll be along when they have listened to rush, fox and malkin etc Or they will not bother to look at the actual bill and call think progresss a moonbat leftist link and deny it Congratulations you are the first. Spin it Spin it

Sanity -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:13:37 PM)
Notice how they just gloss over Obamas cuts in the same program... quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Why in the hell with our ecomony the way it is, with people out of work, with health care in the stages of death, are we spending 125 billion dollars on flowers? We aren't. You are making this stuff up and just spreading lies. Read the pdf file that I have quoted from that Lucy linked to. That is the amount for the ENTIRE agricultural appropriations bill. Which SNAP and WIC are a part of. And they get MANDATORY increases. Just not as much additional as Obama requested. That does not equal a cut. The sky is not falling.

Lucylastic -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:14:26 PM)
She was the one that used Fuck first dearie, called me a liar too,

Sanity -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:15:01 PM)
Love how you spread lies Lucy, then claim that its a Rush Limbaugh conspiracy to call you on your bullshit... [:D]

Aylee -> RE: Cutting assistance, but keeping up the azaleas (6/14/2011 12:20:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I will wait till you catch up. Cutting from a requested amount does NOT equal a cut in the program. Especially with a 3 billion mandatory increase. Let me put it in a simpler analogy: Your kid gets a $20 / week allowance. He requests you to up it to $50 / week. You tell him 'no' but that he can have $25 / week. You did NOT cut his allowence by $25 / week. You cut his REQUEST by $25 / week. Do you see the difference?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.699707E-02