.....be defined by the Left/Liberals/Democrats/Progressives/Socialists/Communists as a "War on Women" or a "War on Minorities" or that would not be deemed to "have a greater impact on women and minorities"?
The only one I can think of is "the Millitary". So other than that?
By the way, what happened to the (D) led request for civility and an end to "millitaristic" langauge in politics? Describing their opponenst as "Generals in a War"? Is that supposed to be less aggressive that designative a political opponent as "targeted for defeat"?California Senator Barbara Boxer claimed yesterday that Republicans have a "sickness" when it comes to women, and decried the party's efforts to defund women's healthcare.
In a speech to Planned Parenthood in San Jose, Boxer told those in attendance that the mainstream of the GOP is "extreme on women's health." She suggested that Missouri Senator Todd Akin's recent comments reflect views that are well represented in the party at large, and are distressingly in evidence on the Romney-Ryan ticket.
"There is a war against women, and Romney and Ryan – if they are elected – would become its top generals," said Boxer, "and it's not going to end until we all say at the polls, 'That's not the country we want.'"
So really, what can we cut in Govt. that we could guarantee wouldn't be described as part of a War of Women and Minorities (and Kids)? What could we reduce the rate of increae from +7% to only +6.8% and not be described as hateful, racist, homophobic, sexists for?
And the reverse, at what point does adding new women and minorities to public aid programs become inappropriate and hence denail not a "war on Women and Minroities"? Is it 50% of them? 75%? 100%?
If so, it would be nice to have that honest conevrsatiom about it.
Roll back spending to 2008 levels in ALL departments.
Eliminate ALL education loan subsidies and loans.
If a person wants to go to college, let daddy put up his house as collateral. Or perhaps people could consider saving. Or go into the military and get assistance for school. I hear that the bonuses for infantrymen are pretty good.
As for everything else - accross the board reductions. salary freezes in government for everybody. No more GSA boondoggles. No fancy meetings - teleconferences.
More recently the law was expanded to cover cell phone service because of course every person in America had the RIGHT to a free cell phone. Well if the programs mere existince isn't absurd enough a recent report showed that the cost of the law had grown from around 1/2 billion per year to 4 billion since adding the cell phone component. Further investigation showed that people were using the credit to purchase prepaid cell phones and resell them. Apparently the law allows for the purchase of a new prepaid phone each month. Basically wellfare recipients are abusing the system to profit for themselves. A bill was brought up in the senate to elliminate the cell phone portion of the entitlement and it was shelved by the Democrats. Even the most blatant of wasteful and fraudulent programs could not be adjusted when the Democrats run the show.
As an interesting side note the yearly savings from cutting off the free cell phones is equal to the yearly revenue of Obamas revolutionary Buffet rule.
Just imagine Boxer's mother didn't want children? What a wonderful world!
Increase the SS collection age.
Replace welfare, except for single mothers, with a public works program.
Lengthen the school day and year without giving teacher's raises.
Department of Homeland Security - redundant with FBI/NSA/Law Enforcement
US postal service
This is just off the top of my head. And of course, I would love to cut that military budget...
Top of my head I would say get rid of the post office.What is it an 8 billion dollar a year loss?You can get your bills by e-mail.The only mail I get anymore is junk mail.
Are there any deductions in the tax code that Republicans can actually name to get rid of in order to reduce rates? Complaining about politicians building their majorities around different constituencies that they in turn take care of seems to ignore our actually Constitutional system.
Last edited by Winstonbiggs; 08-24-2012 at 07:48 AM.
They already do some of this stuff now. Child credits and such in the tax code phase out with families making over a certain amount. Expand it to all the deductions. The system is cleaner when the code is simplified.
How about eliminating the tax exempt status for religious institutions as well?
EPA? Lol, no chance that isn;t described as hurting women , children and minorities more.
Interior? If it's only parks, maybe, depends on what parks. If any women, child or minority lives within 50 mins, sorry, no, the usual argument will in fact be used.
I'll go one further, all institutions, including so-called advocacy groups and the like.