Our Kennedy.

[Mertex]

Really? You're trying to tell me there is some other excuse other than not giving a damn, to cut programs that provide food for children? And, it's not my fault that the Republican party wants to hurt seniors, minorities, women and children, so, if you don't want those cards thrown at you, don't support such nonsense.

How many children have died of starvation due to Republican cuts? There are tons of resources for everyone to get food.

I am afraid you have not grasped to Marxist-Leninist concept of 'objective reality'. Don't let your mind be clouded by those silly 'fact' things.

It goes like this. Republicans are evil: check. Evil people starve children: check.
Therefore: Thousands of children have died because of Republican cuts!

It's quite easy. I'm sure you will soon get the hang of it.

Pretty darn close, I must say. At least you're not looking for other excuses, you realize what is.

 

[Sallow]

You are such an idiot.....moving on..

And you are a poopy pants Diaper head.

Wait a minute!

Ted Nugent are you Lumpy 1??????

Try to think for a change ..The rich and the corporations end up passing their higher costs onto the price of their products and services, your question , who ends up paying?

There was a point when conservatives wanted to pay pirates, tribute, because they didn't want to anger them..or pay for warships to combat them. Jefferson, when he became President, got a better view about how a state functions.

You don't let anyone hold up progress for ransom. Jefferson bought the ships despite the cries from Conservatives not too.

 

[Mertex]

Really? You're playing the You-must-hate-children card? What happened? Run out of race cards or did you misplace your you-must-hate-the-elderly cards? Perhaps you have some you-hate-clean-water cards under the sofa cushions that you can play every time your argument is too vacuous to stand on its own. Personally, if I were you I would stick some war-on-women cards up my sleeve just in case you get boxed in by facts and reality.

Really? You're trying to tell me there is some other excuse other than not giving a damn, to cut programs that provide food for children? And, it's not my fault that the Republican party wants to hurt seniors, minorities, women and children, so, if you don't want those cards thrown at you, don't support such nonsense.

Where did Democrats get this feeling that it's up to Government to provide by stealing from those who take responsibility for their lives. Sure Democrats win elections and they get the chickenshit entitlement votes but people should Man-up or Lady-up to responsibility,

Yep, well said, just like a true Republican/conservative, those 17 million children that are being fed by government programs need to man-up.

According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 15.9 million children under 18 in the United States live in households where they are unable to consistently access enough nutritious food necessary for a healthy life. Although food insecurity is harmful to any individual, it can be particularly devastating among children due to their increased vulnerability and the potential for long-term consequences.

Some people do deserve or have earned the right to help so they can get back on track and they should be helped but making a life of dependance is no better than freeloading and civil slavery to the government.

Well..just sayin...

And, you are of course willing to provide links to prove that the majority of people on welfare are dependent on it, have stayed on it longer than the time allowed, and are able to work but won't., or are you basing your comments on something you heard on Faux News?

I'll be waiting for the links!

According to most state welfare systems, a person can only receive welfare benefits for two years with a five year lifetime maximum. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule for families with children, disable individuals, the elderly and poor working families. Child care, vouchers for housing plus utilities, food stamps and medical care may continue after the cash benefits have stopped or employment has been obtained. However, there are no guarantees for continuing to receive any benefits. Most states are now focused on getting people back to work, doing any type of job for any amount of pay, instead of giving welfare benefits.
How Long should a Person Stay on Welfare by Rene Michael Browne | World Issues 360

 

[Harry Dresden]

It's liberals like rdean, and sallow that keep lying and are not honest.

Yeah that's why those who use Fox as their news source know less about current events than people who don't watch TV at all. Because Fox news is so full of misstatements, and outright lies that their viewers have no clue what's really going on in the world. Of course, if they told the truth, more people would be voting for the Democratic party, because the facts are that the Republicans don't have the best interests of the people of the United States as their over-riding concern. Their hearts and souls have been sold to the highest bidder.

Because Fox news is so full of misstatements,

so you are another that cant stand the station.....but yet watch it all the time?.....

Republicans don't have the best interests of the people of the United States as their over-riding concern

i dont believe Democrats do either.....they tell you they do.....30 years ago i would have agreed with you....not today...

Their hearts and souls have been sold to the highest bidder.

like the Democrats are not?.....you have me fooled....

 

[Harry Dresden]

The misinformation essentially comes from FOX, which isn't new..and it's Saudi propaganda.

You conservatives have had nothing to do with forming this country and have been trying to destroy it ever since. Whether that be through the loyalists, torries, whigs, confederates, dixiecrats, john birchers, neocons, pnac or tea party..the name changes but the goal doesn't.

Keep watching FOXNews, I never watch it.

The rest of your post is more opinion based on your limited views.

Do you think dragon lady will address her lies, probably not huh?

Truth always hurts.

Conservatives have never been involved in anything positive.

It's always about tearing something down.

really?.....even Dean says they built the Inter-State Highway system....were behind NASA....the EPA...

 

[Lumpy 1]

And you are a poopy pants Diaper head.

Wait a minute!

Ted Nugent are you Lumpy 1??????

Try to think for a change ..The rich and the corporations end up passing their higher costs onto the price of their products and services, your question , who ends up paying?

There was a point when conservatives wanted to pay pirates, tribute, because they didn't want to anger them..or pay for warships to combat them. Jefferson, when he became President, got a better view about how a state functions.

You don't let anyone hold up progress for ransom. Jefferson bought the ships despite the cries from Conservatives not too.

I get it, you would rather distract than answering the question..no problem

 

[Harry Dresden]

Yeah that's why those who use Fox as their news source know less about current events than people who don't watch TV at all. Because Fox news is so full of misstatements, and outright lies that their viewers have no clue what's really going on in the world. Of course, if they told the truth, more people would be voting for the Democratic party, because the facts are that the Republicans don't have the best interests of the people of the United States as their over-riding concern. Their hearts and souls have been sold to the highest bidder.

I don't know anything about FOXNews. I wonder why you watch it if you find it so bad?

So high unemployment, hurting the middle class with increased health insurance rates, hold off another year of Obamacare from business, so it hurts the working middle class more.

The democrats table every budget put forth, further hurting the recovery. The Democratic Party and Obama have lied to the American people about being able to keep their insurance, they have done nothing to create jobs, they increase taxes during a bad economy. It looks like Obama, who bought GMC, lowered GE's taxes to nothing, that helped insurance companies to great profits, is more for the rich than anyone else. Looks like Democrats have sold their soul to the highest bidder.

Again, the Demmies have who's interests at heart, it doesn't seem that they like the hard working middle class at all.

Care to address the misinformation about Reagan, EIC that you try to spread?

The misinformation essentially comes from FOX, which isn't new..and it's Saudi propaganda.

You conservatives have had nothing to do with forming this country and have been trying to destroy it ever since. Whether that be through the loyalists, torries, whigs, confederates, dixiecrats, john birchers, neocons, pnac or tea party..the name changes but the goal doesn't.

Sallow ...if the Liberals and Conservatives of today were suddenly transported back to the 1770's.....we would never have had a Revolution....both sides today only think of one thing.....what is in it for ME.....who cares about the Country.....the people of that time would have shot the people of today.....the British would have probably helped them....

 

[Mertex]

I get it, you would rather distract than answering the question..no problem

You haven't answered my question.......either...

And, you are of course willing to provide links to prove that the majority of people on welfare are dependent on it, have stayed on it longer than the time allowed, and are able to work but won't., or are you basing your comments on something you heard on Faux News?

 

[Harry Dresden]

JFK was a liberal. If you hated Teddy's politics, you would have hated Jack and Bobby's too. Ted dedicated his public life to carrying out his two brother's unfinished agenda.

The Great Society was based on our slain President's New Frontier. The following were President Kennedy's agenda and proposals:

Civil Rights Bill
Medicare
War on Poverty

And JFK did not believe in trickle down economics.

JFK, The Demand-Side Tax Cutter

JFK lowered taxes, but supply-siders wrongly claim he's their patron saint.

"The Revenue Act of 1964 was aimed at the demand, rather than the supply, side of the economy," said Arthur Okun, one of Kennedy's economic advisers.

This distinction, taught in Economics 101, seldom makes it into the Washington sound-bite wars. A demand-side cut rests on the Keynesian theory that public consumption spurs economic activity. Government puts money in people's hands, as a temporary measure, so that they'll spend it. A supply-side cut sees business investment as the key to growth. Government gives money to businesses and wealthy individuals to invest, ultimately benefiting all Americans. Back in the early 1960s, tax cutting was as contentious as it is today, but it was liberal demand-siders who were calling for the cuts and generating the controversy.

When Kennedy ran for president in 1960 amid a sluggish economy, he vowed to "get the country moving again." After his election, his advisers, led by chief economist Walter Heller, urged a classically Keynesian solution: running a deficit to stimulate growth. (The $10 billion deficit Heller recommended, bold at the time, seems laughably small by today's standards.) In Keynesian theory, a tax cut aimed at consumers would have a "multiplier" effect, since each dollar that a taxpayer spent would go to another taxpayer, who would in effect spend it again—meaning the deficit would be short-lived.

At first Kennedy balked at Heller's Keynesianism. He even proposed a balanced budget in his first State of the Union address. But Heller and his team won over the president. By mid-1962 Kennedy had seen the Keynesian light, and in January 1963 he declared that "the enactment this year of tax reduction and tax reform overshadows all other domestic issues in this Congress."

The plan Kennedy's team drafted had many elements, including the closing of loopholes (the "tax reform" Kennedy spoke of).Ultimately, in the form that Lyndon Johnson signed into law, it reduced tax withholding rates, initiated a new standard deduction, and boosted the top deduction for child care expenses, among other provisions. It did lower the top tax bracket significantly, although from a vastly higher starting point than anything we've seen in recent years: 91 percent on marginal income greater than $400,000. And he cut it only to 70 percent, hardly the mark of a future Club for Growth member.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.
President John F. Kennedy

Comparing Teddy to John is like comparing apples to oranges......

Comparing Teddy to either of his Brothers is a stretch....

 

[starflight]

WOW!!!!!!!


No wonder everybody loves him.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Who on earth has ever claimed that Reagan is our Kennedy?

180+ posts and a few asking that.....no answers yet....not even from the guy who claimed it here.....

 

[Lumpy 1]

Really? You're trying to tell me there is some other excuse other than not giving a damn, to cut programs that provide food for children? And, it's not my fault that the Republican party wants to hurt seniors, minorities, women and children, so, if you don't want those cards thrown at you, don't support such nonsense.

Where did Democrats get this feeling that it's up to Government to provide by stealing from those who take responsibility for their lives. Sure Democrats win elections and they get the chickenshit entitlement votes but people should Man-up or Lady-up to responsibility,

Yep, well said, just like a true Republican/conservative, those 17 million children that are being fed by government programs need to man-up.

According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 15.9 million children under 18 in the United States live in households where they are unable to consistently access enough nutritious food necessary for a healthy life. Although food insecurity is harmful to any individual, it can be particularly devastating among children due to their increased vulnerability and the potential for long-term consequences.

Some people do deserve or have earned the right to help so they can get back on track and they should be helped but making a life of dependance is no better than freeloading and civil slavery to the government.

Well..just sayin...

And, you are of course willing to provide links to prove that the majority of people on welfare are dependent on it, have stayed on it longer than the time allowed, and are able to work but won't., or are you basing your comments on something you heard on Faux News?

I'll be waiting for the links!

According to most state welfare systems, a person can only receive welfare benefits for two years with a five year lifetime maximum. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule for families with children, disable individuals, the elderly and poor working families. Child care, vouchers for housing plus utilities, food stamps and medical care may continue after the cash benefits have stopped or employment has been obtained. However, there are no guarantees for continuing to receive any benefits. Most states are now focused on getting people back to work, doing any type of job for any amount of pay, instead of giving welfare benefits.
How Long should a Person Stay on Welfare by Rene Michael Browne | World Issues 360

Jobs jobs jobs and opportunity is the answer...

The country is bankrupt, the government borrows a third more than they take in, the federal unfunded liabilities are completely out of control..

When people finally realize that the US can't pay the bills, what happens then Mertex..?

 

[clevergirl]

I get it, you would rather distract than answering the question..no problem

You haven't answered my question.......either...

And, you are of course willing to provide links to prove that the majority of people on welfare are dependent on it, have stayed on it longer than the time allowed, and are able to work but won't., or are you basing your comments on something you heard on Faux News?

Just from one area in the US- Authorities: 16 Charged In NYC Food Stamp Fraud Scheme « CBS New York

These people are obviously not fucking starving- they trade their "food stamps" for cash! Your stupid "faux news" sniping shows your complete and utter inability to even fucking think. Try going outside of some parody from internet insipidness showcased as intellectual validity when in reality it's merely empty jargon!

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Bill Maher nails it.

Bill Maher on JFK vs Reagan: 'Our Kennedy Is Kennedy' | Video Cafe

Bill Maher had a few words for the Republicans who still "get a lump in their throat" for "their Kennedy" Ronald Reagan during his New Rules segment this Friday night.


MAHER: Now, I don't know if all politics is local, but I do think all politics is tribal and just as some people are dog people and others are cat people, some have a chip in their brain to be Democrats and others to be Republicans. We have Kennedy, you have Reagan. We have marijuana, you have Metamucil.

We want gays in the military. You want them in the airport restroom. [...]

The one reason we looked uglier in the '80's, is because we were uglier. It was when the baby boomers, the generation that was supposed to be different, just gave up and sold out completely. Kennedy's time was the time of "Ask not what your country can do for you." Reagan's was the time of "Greed is good."

JFK was far from perfect, but he was a true wit and a sex machine and he knew how to wear a pair of shades. Reagan was an amiable square in a cowboy hat who had sex with a woman he called mommie.

Kennedy was James Bond. Reagan was Matlock. Love him or hate him, we win. Republicans can call Reagan their Kennedy all they want, but it's like calling Miller High Life 'the champagne of beer. It's why calling someone your Kennedy will never really cut it, because our Kennedy, is Kennedy.

Yup, "New Rules". Nobody does it better......Makes me feel sad for the reeesssttttt.....

 

[American Horse]

JFK was closer to today's libertarians than to either the liberals or the conservatives.

He was for smaller government, strong military, and he cut taxes.

Kennedy would not be a democrat today.

He was for business being capitalized with their own money by leaving it in the private economy and of course, yes a strong military; neither of those is high on the popularity list of libertarians, who are suspicious of the corporate entity and the ideal of security through military strength because they are convinced US politicians the ruling elite are subservient to or tools of the "Military-Industrial-Complex"

JFK was more of a conservative than was RMN.

 

[Lumpy 1]

I get it, you would rather distract than answering the question..no problem

You haven't answered my question.......either...

And, you are of course willing to provide links to prove that the majority of people on welfare are dependent on it, have stayed on it longer than the time allowed, and are able to work but won't., or are you basing your comments on something you heard on Faux News?

Just from one area in the US- Authorities: 16 Charged In NYC Food Stamp Fraud Scheme « CBS New York

These people are obviously not fucking starving- they trade their "food stamps" for cash! Your stupid "faux news" sniping shows your complete and utter inability to even fucking think. Try going outside of some parody from internet insipidness showcased as intellectual validity when in reality it's merely empty jargon!

Chubby poor people and a skinny middle-class...what's that all about?

 

[Papageorgio]

Really? You're trying to tell me there is some other excuse other than not giving a damn, to cut programs that provide food for children? And, it's not my fault that the Republican party wants to hurt seniors, minorities, women and children, so, if you don't want those cards thrown at you, don't support such nonsense.

How many children have died of starvation due to Republican cuts? There are tons of resources for everyone to get food.

If there were tons of resources for everyone to get "adequate, nutritious" food, we wouldn't have such a large number of people that are suffering from food insecurity. And the statistics below are from before Republicans decided to cut even more.

It is not okay for people to suffer from food insecurity just because they don't die, although it seems that some Republican/conservatives would prefer these people would just hurry up and die and release them of any further obligation to provide any kind of funding.

Feeding America's study, funded by ConAgra Foods, is based on 2009 statistics compiled by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which runs 15 food aid programs, including the nationwide free and subsidized school lunch program and WIC, a supplemental food program that provides tailored food supplements to pregnant women and families with children under age 5 whose household income is less than 185 percent of the gross federal poverty limit. That's an annual gross income of $41,348 for a family of four.

The study also breaks down child food insecurity rates by congressional district, which could send a powerful message to Washington. The proposed House budget for 2012 includes substantial cuts to food aid programs in the 2012 budget cycle. The cuts could affect up to 350,000 recipients of the WIC program alone. The Emergency Food Assistance Program, which provides agricultural products to food banks to pass on to the poor, is also facing a proposed $50 million cut, representing one fifth of the budget for this program.
HUNGER HURTS: Millions of American Kids Go Hungry - ABC News


The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the legislation proposed by House Republicans would reduce spending on the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program by $39 billion over the next 10 years.
It also would reduce the number of Americans receiving food stamps by 14 million - from 48 million to 34 million - by 2023, CBO estimates.
And it would cut funding for job training while imposing new work requirements, according to Stacy Dean, vice president for food assistance policy at the liberal-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
"This proposal is incredibly harsh,'' she said.
House Republicans Planning Cut to Food Aid - Bread for the World: Have Faith. End Hunger.

Please get off that republicans and Conservatives don't care. I believe their are tons of agencies that get food to you. I was poor and never worried about myself or my family getting food through a variety of sources. Back in the 80's we heard all the BS from Democrats about the GOP taking food out of school programs, all they did was give it back to the states no starving, no food insecurity.

We have record numbers on the SNAP program, and as the economy improves as the liberal democrats keep claiming, then we should have lower need for food stamps. We are also paying more of those on food stamps, their health care. The only ones getting hurt will be the middle class and they will shut up and take it like always.

There are lots of alternatives for food and a lot better way for the government to get food into the hands of those who need it.

 

[Jroc]

Bill Maher nails it.

Bill Maher on JFK vs Reagan: 'Our Kennedy Is Kennedy' | Video Cafe

Bill Maher had a few words for the Republicans who still "get a lump in their throat" for "their Kennedy" Ronald Reagan during his New Rules segment this Friday night.


MAHER: Now, I don't know if all politics is local, but I do think all politics is tribal and just as some people are dog people and others are cat people, some have a chip in their brain to be Democrats and others to be Republicans. We have Kennedy, you have Reagan. We have marijuana, you have Metamucil.

We want gays in the military. You want them in the airport restroom. [...]

The one reason we looked uglier in the '80's, is because we were uglier. It was when the baby boomers, the generation that was supposed to be different, just gave up and sold out completely. Kennedy's time was the time of "Ask not what your country can do for you." Reagan's was the time of "Greed is good."

JFK was far from perfect, but he was a true wit and a sex machine and he knew how to wear a pair of shades. Reagan was an amiable square in a cowboy hat who had sex with a woman he called mommie.

Kennedy was James Bond. Reagan was Matlock. Love him or hate him, we win. Republicans can call Reagan their Kennedy all they want, but it's like calling Miller High Life 'the champagne of beer. It's why calling someone your Kennedy will never really cut it, because our Kennedy, is Kennedy.

it's almost laughable to me how some of you people idealize JFK. He is adored because he was assassinated, and because of a good propaganda campaign by Jackie. As far as accomplishments? not much there really, as he was only president for less than 3 yrs but of course he was one of the greatest presidents of all time

"Our Kennedy" Jackie would be proud

How Jackie Kennedy Invented the Camelot Legend After JFK’s Death

While the nation was still grieving JFK’s assassination, she used an influential magazine profile to rewrite her husband’s legacy and spawn Camelot.


Few events in the postwar era have cast such a long shadow over our national life as the assassination of President John F. Kennedy fifty years ago this month. The murder of a handsome and vigorous president shocked the nation to its core and shook the faith of many Americans in their institutions and way of life.

Those who were living at the time would never forget the moving scenes associated with President Kennedy’s death: the Zapruder film depicting the assassination in a frame-by-frame sequence; the courageous widow arriving with the coffin at Andrews Air Force Base still wearing her bloodstained dress; the throng of mourners lined up for blocks outside the Capitol to pay respects to the fallen president; the accused assassin gunned down two days later while in police custody and in full view of a national television audience; the little boy saluting the coffin of his slain father; the somber march to Arlington National Cemetery; the eternal flame affixed to the gravesite. These scenes were repeated endlessly on television at the time and then reproduced in popular magazines and, still later, in documentary films. They came to be viewed as defining events of the era.

In their grief, Americans were inclined to take to heart the various myths and legends that grew up around President Kennedy within days of the assassination. Though the assassin was a communist and an admirer of Fidel Castro, many insisted that President Kennedy was a martyr to the cause of civil rights who deserved a place of honor next to Abraham Lincoln as a champion of racial justice. Others held him up as a great statesman who labored for international peace

.

How Jackie Kennedy Invented the Camelot Legend After JFK?s Death

 

[Plasmaball]

Sweet Nothings Plasma..

Oh good cancer lump decided to chime in and show how stupid he is.

So much hate.. I'm glad I don't have your life.

My life is fine..hating someone takes zero energy. Dont think so highly of yourself.

 

[Plasmaball]

I get it, you would rather distract than answering the question..no problem

You haven't answered my question.......either...

And, you are of course willing to provide links to prove that the majority of people on welfare are dependent on it, have stayed on it longer than the time allowed, and are able to work but won't., or are you basing your comments on something you heard on Faux News?

Just from one area in the US- Authorities: 16 Charged In NYC Food Stamp Fraud Scheme « CBS New York

These people are obviously not fucking starving- they trade their "food stamps" for cash! Your stupid "faux news" sniping shows your complete and utter inability to even fucking think. Try going outside of some parody from internet insipidness showcased as intellectual validity when in reality it's merely empty jargon!

All teatards are racist....