Comments on: Obama Slashes HIV/AIDS Funding

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Fri, 08 May 2009 23:20:14 +0000

By: Steph C

Steph C — Fri, 08 May 2009 23:16:37 +0000

However, I don’t believe you can apply the same to this budget stuff.

By: mom2oneson

mom2oneson — Fri, 08 May 2009 22:50:56 +0000

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Fri, 08 May 2009 22:28:50 +0000

swine flu….and given the recent publicity on Bush’s success in Africa…

You know Steph, my greatest distinction is my success when going against conventional wisdom on the right and left.

see cockstradamus

By: E Pluribus Unum

E Pluribus Unum — Fri, 08 May 2009 21:46:41 +0000

But it *still* has a constitutionally defensible basis, in that our own minor AIDS epidemic came from Central Africa, and the place has become a rampant festering pool of disease that *does* leak out of there up to here. Taming the disease factory has utility. IMO, an actual, factual use of “general welfare” - as opposed to most that the government does spend under that rubric.

And it’s good to know you’re a Porkulus hater. Didn’t know that.

By: exitsfunnel

exitsfunnel — Fri, 08 May 2009 21:26:43 +0000

I’m sure that I do have the same objection to ever penny in porkulus.

And regarding getting AIDS in Africa under control: I think that that is quite a noble goal and a worthy pursuit and am heartened by the number of private philanthropic organizations who have dedicated themselves partly or wholly to the problem. What I don’t believe is that it is an appropriate use by the United States government of the dollars it collects from its citizenry.

If I want my money spent thusly, I will write a check and mail it off.

-exits

By: E Pluribus Unum

E Pluribus Unum — Fri, 08 May 2009 21:15:46 +0000

Yes, on one hand, the overall DOD budget is increased by 4% (about 2% in “real” increase). On the other hand, they are hatcheting a whole array of weapons systems and R&D on weapon systems..

So how does the budget go up when weapon systems go down? Would you like me to answer that or do you want to have a go at it?

By: E Pluribus Unum

E Pluribus Unum — Fri, 08 May 2009 21:10:52 +0000

to every single penny in Porkulus, I’d take this more seriously.

That’s a Mafia crime syndicate compared to what is at worst (and I say not at all) a pickpocket.

OK, you do not see the utility to the US in getting AIDS in Africa under control? Seriously? The payoff is not direct, but I would think it’s pretty easy to see.

By: exitsfunnel

exitsfunnel — Fri, 08 May 2009 20:58:54 +0000

Who decided that this was ‘legitimately good spending?’ Bono? How is it a conservative thing for the government to steal my money and send it to Africa? I have no objection to charity - I donate both time and money to several different causes. But this is an individual matter -it’s not the role of the government to decide how my money is spent on this stuff.

-exits

By: Steph C

Steph C — Fri, 08 May 2009 20:56:24 +0000

You know he’s going to do no such thing. Bush must remain the scapegoat.

Democrats never take blame for what they do. That’s why it has thrown them for a loop with the party of “no.” And now, with Specter’s defection to the Democrats they can’t even call anything they do bipartisan.

By: exitsfunnel

exitsfunnel — Fri, 08 May 2009 20:53:10 +0000

If only. Actually, he increased the defense budget though probably more modestly than McCain would have.

-exits

By: Karina

Karina — Fri, 08 May 2009 20:34:24 +0000

It’s just like what happens on the state and local level. When budgets need to be cut, the first thing trimmed are the police and emergency services departments. That way, when we scream no, they just shrug and say “Well, you told us to cut the budget.” Then these are replaced and nothing is done about cutting anything else off the budget. They get to keep their pet projects and we go back to sleep again. It’s been done over and over again.

This time it’s on an international level and the screaming will come overseas. They’ll be able to shrug and say they were told to make cuts. When we say no (or international pressure gets to a certain level), they’ll be able to put it back and hope we go back to sleep again.

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Fri, 08 May 2009 20:30:05 +0000

By: Steph C

Steph C — Fri, 08 May 2009 20:25:33 +0000

When I look at what’s coming out, in single items, most of those cuts are things most don’t have a problem supporting. There’s going to be a hue and cry over these cuts and after it builds to the crescendo Obama is looking for, he’ll say “nevermind” or something to that effect while also getting credit for having “tried” to cut the budget.

By: E Pluribus Unum

E Pluribus Unum — Fri, 08 May 2009 20:10:09 +0000

*conservatives* have in fact railed noisily and constantly against the spending by the Republican Congress in 2002-2006, and Bush for his entire term.

And in the same vein, *conservatives* have by and large been either in favor of or agnostic toward this particular form of spending, which both then and now represent the tiniest portion of overall spending.

Regarding your last sentence, NO. We will not support the cutting of legitimately *good* spending, while the Charlie Sierra has championed insane amounts of spending that seems specifically designed to (a) wreck the capitalist system, and (b) pay off political debts to unions, Big Green, and lawyers.

Have cake, will eat. You are fully, 100% wrong here.

By: E Pluribus Unum

E Pluribus Unum — Fri, 08 May 2009 19:55:49 +0000

They’re just fine with spending, when it’s spending to pay off their peeps (unions, ACORN, Big Green, etc). But they are slashing the military, slashing AIDS research, etc because military and drug companies don’t vote for them.

The double damning thing comes because (1) the little Charlie Sierra took an oath to protect and defend, and (2) he specifically campaigned on this sort of thing.

By: LibRick

LibRick — Fri, 08 May 2009 18:28:52 +0000

Mom,
You’ve got a way of getting to the bottom line. Now, I know it gets politically complicated and I’ve seen Aaron’s comment about exposing hypocrisy relating to the Brian’s article….all well and good.

But you speak a fundamental truth. If we help anyone, we should help our own people first. That is the foundation on which we should base everything. Too few people express it. It’s a joy to hear you speak out. You made my day!

By: Aaron Gardner

Aaron Gardner — Fri, 08 May 2009 18:15:14 +0000

I was just talkin…not really caring who was talking to who…and I agree that Brian didn’t really push that idea in the article…although I just assumed it was implied.

By: mom2oneson

mom2oneson — Fri, 08 May 2009 18:13:06 +0000

By: exitsfunnel

exitsfunnel — Fri, 08 May 2009 18:11:19 +0000

But I wasn’t responding to something you wrote, I was responding to what Brian wrote and both he and the piece at beliefnet he linked to were critical of the cuts.

It’s a valid position to support the cuts but also make the incidental, rhetorical point that Obama had promised more foreign aid than he is delivering. But that’s not what Brian did.

-exits