|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Feb 12, 2009 20:09:24 GMT -5
But it is not being ignorant to point out a Democrat sponsored addition to a federal spending bill that would have helped this veteran. Not to fight another man's battles but you are painting yourself broadly with the taint of ignorance. The man was perfectly capable of paying his own bill. He had the money. The linked articles make this point emminently clear. For what ever reason, could be Alzheimer's or simple forgetfulness or he misplaced the bill, he didn't pay. Rather than follow up, which any non-governmentally owned utility would have been required to do under state law, the governmentally owned utility cut his power off in the dead of winter without a second thought simply because they could and the old guy froze to death. Money, or the granting of it by the all mighty state, had NOTHING to do with this man's death. The foibles of hidebound and ulitmately absurd government bureaucracy had EVERYTHING to do with this man's death. For you to frame this as you have is ignorant of the facts, common sense and any shred of analytical process. The mere suggestion that some form of state sanctioned largesse would have been a prevantative in this situation is utterly assinine. I thought you were better than that. |
|
|
|
Post by The Avenger on Feb 12, 2009 20:39:06 GMT -5
Oh, this is lovely. So, by your logic, the local and state liberal governments couldn't do anything because the Federal Gov was in Republican hands (actually, democrats were in control of congress). And to top it off the Fed made the state/local governments go out to this man's home and cut off his heat. Wow. That's the goofiest GD scenario I ever heard. Just when we thought Santurelle couldn't make himself look any more like a fool he opens his mouth and proves us wrong.  |
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Feb 12, 2009 23:05:58 GMT -5
Ah ha. You have been outed you lying little Democrat. I have found out that Bush did offer a $2 billion Federal Heating Subsidy Bill in 2007. Bet you did not know that, did you? Guess what else, it was vetoed and not overridden in a Democrat Controlled House. Do you know why it was vetoed? Two reasons. One, the Democrats porked up the bill by a half billion more then needed. Two, they put in a federalization of health care that was too far reaching. Democrats and their pet projects are the reason this bill failed, not Bush. See, I was right. The greed of the Democrats, liberals and progressives killed this man. You have just proved the Republicans do not look out for the seniors, veterans or the weak. By only wanting to help a small percentage in that bill, is a sign that it wasn't an important issue for them. The Democrats added to the bill to enhance it and you called it 'pork". It was healthcare, not give-aways to the rich. I'm not sure why you keep forgetting the majority the Dems had in 2007 was a technical one, but not enough to win any bill unless the GOP agreed with them........therefore, the Republicans blew it and they don't stand for the seniors, veterans or the weak. |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Feb 13, 2009 1:29:19 GMT -5
You fail to realize that Bush was simply forced into doing the Democrats' bidding. Had he let the funds expire, people would have died (like the subject in Mink's story) and their blood would have been on his hands. From Moondog's article: |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Feb 13, 2009 11:46:40 GMT -5
Ah ha. You have been outed you lying little Democrat. I have found out that Bush did offer a $2 billion Federal Heating Subsidy Bill in 2007. Bet you did not know that, did you? Guess what else, it was vetoed and not overridden in a Democrat Controlled House. Do you know why it was vetoed? Two reasons. One, the Democrats porked up the bill by a half billion more then needed. Two, they put in a federalization of health care that was too far reaching. Democrats and their pet projects are the reason this bill failed, not Bush. See, I was right. The greed of the Democrats, liberals and progressives killed this man. You have just proved the Republicans do not look out for the seniors, veterans or the weak. By only wanting to help a small percentage in that bill, is a sign that it wasn't an important issue for them. The Democrats added to the bill to enhance it and you called it 'pork". It was healthcare, not give-aways to the rich. I'm not sure why you keep forgetting the majority the Dems had in 2007 was a technical one, but not enough to win any bill unless the GOP agreed with them........therefore, the Republicans blew it and they don't stand for the seniors, veterans or the weak. If the bill was so good then why did Democrats vote against it? Because SCHIP is a lousy bill. That is why. |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Feb 13, 2009 11:49:15 GMT -5
You fail to realize that Bush was simply forced into doing the Democrats' bidding. Had he let the funds expire, people would have died (like the subject in Mink's story) and their blood would have been on his hands. From Moondog's article: I thank you for finally admitting that Bush did release a Heating Subsidy you say he did not release. And, even with that subsidy the local Democrat government of Bay City, Michigan let this man die, even though the state requires all private carriers to maintain power in the winter months. Though the subsidy actually had nothing to do with this entire argument or this mans demise. This man would still be alive if the Democrats in Congress and the Senate had not been steamrolled by Republicans who specifically cut out the aid to people in his situation. If you want to blame someone for this man's death, blame your own party. It is nice to be able to throw your words back into your face and shame you with them. Especially when they prove you are wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Feb 13, 2009 11:49:50 GMT -5
TBD, thanks for framing that so nicely.
|
|
