joeg Posted April 29 Report Share Posted April 29 http://www.punkvoter.com/reason.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassa Posted April 29 Report Share Posted April 29 nice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wideskies Posted April 29 Report Share Posted April 29 some of the reasons why i don't support Bush. *nods* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeg Posted April 29 Author Report Share Posted April 29 yeah, the whole site is pretty funny aswell as informative... checkout the politcal cartoons... hehe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted April 29 Report Share Posted April 29 The only problem I have with what he did was denying financial aid to peopel convicted of misdemenor charges. Im sure he would cut aid to prisoners too. The rest of the decisions on that list I agree with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normalnoises Posted April 30 Report Share Posted April 30 Originally posted by siceone The only problem I have with what he did was denying financial aid to peopel convicted of misdemenor charges. Im sure he would cut aid to prisoners too. The rest of the decisions on that list I agree with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wideskies Posted May 1 Report Share Posted May 1 Originally posted by siceone The only problem I have with what he did was denying financial aid to peopel convicted of misdemenor charges. Im sure he would cut aid to prisoners too. The rest of the decisions on that list I agree with. i take it you don't use condoms then? *shakes head* "3) He recently sent a delegation to the UN children’s summit to declare that the use of condoms is not a valid way to fight AIDS and that abstinence is the only solution. This is the view shared by some other countries such as Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Syria, and the Vatican. It seems that his policy of, "No child shall be left behind" has a whole new meaning. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted May 1 Report Share Posted May 1 Originally posted by wideskies i take it you don't use condoms then? *shakes head* "3) He recently sent a delegation to the UN children’s summit to declare that the use of condoms is not a valid way to fight AIDS and that abstinence is the only solution. This is the view shared by some other countries such as Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Syria, and the Vatican. It seems that his policy of, "No child shall be left behind" has a whole new meaning. " Um are you insane condoms aren't 100% effective and I would rather the message "don't have sex until you're older" being sent to children than "go ahead fuck your brains out just use a rubber." and what's wrong with abstinence. does anyone one on this board have family values any more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigpoppanils Posted May 1 Report Share Posted May 1 Originally posted by siceone Um are you insane condoms aren't 100% effective and I would rather the message "don't have sex until you're older" being sent to children than "go ahead fuck your brains out just use a rubber." and what's wrong with abstinence. does anyone one on this board have family values any more? no....we need a message that contains both. we cannot exclude teaching proper methods of safe sex, or else the problem of teen pregnancy and STD's will get worse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigpoppanils Posted May 1 Report Share Posted May 1 one more thing:that list excludes Bush's recent proposal to cut $18 BILLION from Veteran's Benefits.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted May 1 Report Share Posted May 1 Originally posted by bigpoppanils one more thing:that list excludes Bush's recent proposal to cut $18 BILLION from Veteran's Benefits.... I read that the budget cut was averted and that the VA received 30 billion in 2003 a 12% increase from last year.. This what i can find about the issue please clarify..http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85217,00.html***I don't want to sound like I support buget cuts for the VA because I would even support a surcharge from my paycheck if we needed more revenue.. ***I don't know the whole story but I would have to imagine that given the recent spike in patriotism and support for the troops you would have heard more about it in the news... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wideskies Posted May 1 Report Share Posted May 1 Originally posted by siceone Um are you insane condoms aren't 100% effective and I would rather the message "don't have sex until you're older" being sent to children than "go ahead fuck your brains out just use a rubber." and what's wrong with abstinence. does anyone one on this board have family values any more? err... did i advocate ONLY teaching about condom use? no. as bigpoppanils said, we need to do our ALL to promote safer sex...that includes education about abstinance AND contraceptive use as methods. and no, i am far from insane. thanks for inquiring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted May 1 Report Share Posted May 1 but you advocate against the teaching of abstinence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassa Posted May 2 Report Share Posted May 2 abstinence is fine and all, but first of all, who's business is it to tell a group of people they cannot have sex? we are all human and we all have desires and urges. maybe advocating something about not engaging in pre-marital sex would work..since hypothetically people get married and stay married with only each other...so that perhaps the couple could get checked and thus avert being exposed to any diseases...i think the condom thing would work...but it's not enough....people need to be educated about safe sex as well....maybe pamphlets in local languages and medical people talking about it all over africa would help....but where would the money come for that.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normalnoises Posted May 2 Report Share Posted May 2 Originally posted by siceone Um are you insane condoms aren't 100% effective and I would rather the message "don't have sex until you're older" being sent to children than "go ahead fuck your brains out just use a rubber." and what's wrong with abstinence. does anyone one on this board have family values any more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wideskies Posted May 2 Report Share Posted May 2 Originally posted by siceone but you advocate against the teaching of abstinence um, are you sure you are not the one hallucinating?point out where i advocate against the teaching of abstinence, will you?no, i'll make it easy on you, and repeat myself: i didn't. i advocate against the EXCLUSION of teaching methods of safer sex, and that includes abstinence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigpoppanils Posted May 2 Report Share Posted May 2 Originally posted by mr mahs I read that the budget cut was averted and that the VA received 30 billion in 2003 a 12% increase from last year.. This what i can find about the issue please clarify..http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85217,00.html***I don't want to sound like I support buget cuts for the VA because I would even support a surcharge from my paycheck if we needed more revenue.. ***I don't know the whole story but I would have to imagine that given the recent spike in patriotism and support for the troops you would have heard more about it in the news... the bush administration's cuts were reduced by Congress to $6.2 billion....there shouldnt be any...Cuts will hurt vets I agree with Rep. John Kline when he said in the April 17 Star Tribune that veterans' issues should not be used for political gain. However, I was disappointed that he did not explain the full story of the impact of cuts to veterans' programs in the 2004 budget resolution recently passed by Republicans in Congress.Already in Minnesota, the waiting list for veterans' medical centers is 12,000 people long, more than a year's wait for most. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicts veterans' programs will cost $316.7 billion over a 10-year period. This estimation is based on current-year levels, and does not account for any increases in veterans' services or the addition of new veterans such as those serving in Iraq or in the war on terrorism. The budget for fiscal year 2004 provides $310.6 billion for veterans' programs over a 10-year period. The budget resolution passed by Congress cuts veterans' benefits and health care by almost $6.2 billion over 10 years. Never mind the $128 billion in unidentified domestic spending cuts over 10 years, which could mean even more cuts. The Republican budget cuts veterans' health care. It also makes cuts in Montgomery GI Bill education benefits, vocational rehabilitation and independent living programs for service-disabled veterans. These cuts will exacerbate the stress and waiting lists veterans' services already suffer. As Republicans continue to pursue $1.2 trillion in tax cuts over the next 10 years, their choice to cut veterans' benefits and health care fails to honor America's commitment to the service and sacrifices of these brave men and women.U.S. Rep. Betty McCollum, St. Paul.http://www.startribune.com/stories/563/3834760.htmlApril 13, 2003 AT A TIME OF WAR, HOW DARE WE REDUCE VETERANS' BENEFITS? OP-ED BY SCHAKOWSKY IN CHICAGO SUN-TIMESCHICAGO, IL -- Late into the night of March 20, the U.S. House heard speech after passionate speech in favor of a resolution proclaiming support for U.S. troops in Iraq, but offering them nothing substantive. Minutes after passing that symbolic resolution, Republicans passed their budget calling for a $28 billion cut in veterans' benefits and health care, with Republicans providing all but one vote. This huge cut was reduced on Friday to $6.2 billion, the amount originally proposed for veterans' cuts by President Bush in his 2004 budget. Is this good news for Illinois veterans? Not unless they want their already eroded benefits cut even further. I find it incomprehensible that a plan to reduce benefits for veterans in Illinois and across the country would even be contemplated at a time when hundreds of thousands of active-duty soldiers are risking their lives in Iraq. A report produced by the Government Reform Committee Democratic staff concluded that the cuts proposed by the Bush administration would cause: ''. . . over 65,000 Illinois veterans, including an estimated 36,000 veterans enrolled at VA facilities in the Chicago area, to be denied VA health care or to drop out of the VA system, while increasing costs for thousands more.'' First, the Bush administration has already stopped enrolling Priority 8 veterans (those who have an income of $38,100 or more and no service-related disability), denying them access to any VA care. The report found that as a result of this proposed suspension, 173,000 veterans nationwide would be denied care, including 7,160 in Illinois, of whom 4,000 are in the Chicago area. Second, President Bush would require the VA to charge all Priority 7 and Priority 8 veterans now in the system a $250 annual enrollment fee in order to receive service. As a result of the fee, the VA estimates that 55 percent of enrolled Priority 7 and Priority 8 veterans would be forced to drop out of the VA system nationwide, including 32,000 veterans in the Chicago area. (Priority 7 veterans have incomes between $24,644 and $38,100 and have no service-related disability.) Finally, a third set of provisions would increase co-payments for Priority 7 and Priority 8 veterans who do stay enrolled in the VA program. The co-payments for primary care services would increase 33 percent, from $15 per visit to $20 per visit. The co-payments for prescription drugs would more than double, from $7 to $15 per 30-day prescription. On average, the report concluded, veterans would have to pay an additional $97 a year in co-payments plus the new enrollment fee of $250. However, many veterans could see an increase of almost $600 a year. I join the Disabled American Veterans in asking, ''Is there is no honor left in the hallowed halls of our government that you choose to dishonor the sacrifices of our nation's heroes and rob our programs--health care and disability compensation--to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy?'' Democrats in Congress are now fighting the president's proposal and are working to restore cuts in veterans' benefits and veterans' health care for the sake of our troops fighting in Iraq and the millions of veterans across the country. But this fight cannot be won unless veterans let the president and the Republican-controlled Congress know that they will not stand for these cuts. Despite all the enthusiastic and well-deserved praise of our troops coming from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, the Bush administration has failed to put its money where its mouth is. Rep. Jan Schakowsky is a Democrat from Illinois' 9th Congressional District. http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/il09_schakowsky/pr04_13_2003vets.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted May 2 Report Share Posted May 2 Originally posted by wideskies um, are you sure you are not the one hallucinating?point out where i advocate against the teaching of abstinence, will you?no, i'll make it easy on you, and repeat myself: i didn't. i advocate against the EXCLUSION of teaching methods of safer sex, and that includes abstinence. you also likened it to the gov't of Iran and other oppressive regimes what am I supposed to think? be careful with the way you compare things and maybe I won't jump down you throat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wideskies Posted May 3 Report Share Posted May 3 ... huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normalnoises Posted May 3 Report Share Posted May 3 Originally posted by siceone you also likened it to the gov't of Iran and other oppressive regimes what am I supposed to think? be careful with the way you compare things and maybe I won't jump down you throat. You like to put words in peoples mouths I take it "pussy" (remember, that is the name I am giving you and you will accept it until I deem you worthy of upgrading).Wideskies did not say that and you know it. DO NOT PUT WORDS IN WIDESKIES MOUTH OR I WILL PUT MY FIST IN YOURS! GOT IT PUSSY??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
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.