Bush turkey for troops only a decoration.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: SuperTool
It's the government we the people created, it's the government we have to pay for or change with our votes, not come up with excuses. That is all there is.
I would not put entitlements and wasteful spending in the same category.
Sure we created it...but can't we also "fix" it? There were no "excuses" - I was saying what needs to be done. We need to go over EVERY gov't expenditure with a fine tooth comb and be able to Constitutionally justify the spending.:) It just seem that there are NO politician willing to do such a thing because every one has their pet issue and screams bloody murder if it is touched - regardless of wether it is actually doing anything positive.

Oh, and I didn't say they had to be in the same category, but were you not against the Drug bill entitlement? I know I sure was.

CkG
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
I am against the drug bill because it doesn't allow the federal government to negotiate lower prices. I think it puts no downward pressure on drug prices as the government has to pay whatever the drug companies charge.
 

mastertech01

Moderator Emeritus Elite Member
Nov 13, 1999
11,849
234
106
Some of the greatest displays of Culinary Art can be found in the dining facilities of the Armed Forces. These static displays can be found at every dining facility in the world on each and every holiday. The military takes great pride in its "food artwork" and some of the best Culinary artists in the world got their training directly from service in our Armed Forces. The competition is fierce amoung the finest the miltary has to offer.

Rarely would you find a dining facility actually SERVING up thier artistic talent to those participating in the meal. The displays serve to bring a little bit of HOME to the soldiers serving often thousands of miles from the nearest loved one.
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Gee, and the Army jacket he was wearing was for show too. Whats the point? Thier is a serious battle between two very different visions of America here, and people post this sort of stuff? Come on.
 

smashp

Platinum Member
Aug 30, 2003
2,443
0
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Whitling
Enjoy the extra income while you can, CagGuy. It's all borrowed money and has to be paid back with interest.
Actually it's not "extra income" - it's a lowered income tax liability.;)
*********
"Bridge to a future of a bankrupt USA, high interest rates, and inflation? Where do I sign up?" -ST

Exactly the reason we need to reform and audit ALL gov't spending. It's too bad that no one seems to be willing to enact such legislation...just more entitlements and wasteful spending.

CkG


And even thought you preach this Fundamental Belief, You will get and line and say Baa, baa,baa for your republican masters, even thought they spend money like a drunk navy sailer at a whore house after being out to sea for 9 months.



But I agree, We need to cut government Pork spending and audit everthing.

Lets Begin the Audit at the Federal Reserve.
 

Ldir

Platinum Member
Jul 23, 2003
2,184
0
0
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
"... they fake it all the way down to the turkey..."

You, Sir, have a complete understanding of the Bush Administration and their methods.
:D

Reagan was a better actor than Dubya. Reagan seemed sincere while he faked it.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,677
136
The point, tnitsuj, is that the Bush Admin is all show and no substance, pure smoke and mirrors with voodoo chants and human sacrifice, too. They say one thing, do another, and somehow get over. Here's an example-

What? Did you not understand what I said? I didn't say I didn't like the gov't - I just don't like it's spending habits, which from your posts, I gather you don't like also. So there is no need to get all defensive...unless you like more entitlements and wasteful spending.;)
From an obviously ardent Bush Fan. Nevermind that expenditures/entitlements have grown under this admin, particularly in support of the wealthy, or that 32% of the current budget is borrowed money. Percentage-wise, that's the largest deficit in history, excluding WW2.

The list goes on from there, up to and including spouting a lot of malarkey about freedom while holding American citizens without benefit of charge, bail or access to legal counsel, and maintaining extra-legal detention facilities in Guantanamo for detainees as young as thirteen...
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
The point, tnitsuj, is that the Bush Admin is all show and no substance, pure smoke and mirrors with voodoo chants and human sacrifice, too. They say one thing, do another, and somehow get over. Here's an example-

What? Did you not understand what I said? I didn't say I didn't like the gov't - I just don't like it's spending habits, which from your posts, I gather you don't like also. So there is no need to get all defensive...unless you like more entitlements and wasteful spending.;)
From an obviously ardent Bush Fan. Nevermind that expenditures/entitlements have grown under this admin, particularly in support of the wealthy, or that 32% of the current budget is borrowed money. Percentage-wise, that's the largest deficit in history, excluding WW2.

The list goes on from there, up to and including spouting a lot of malarkey about freedom while holding American citizens without benefit of charge, bail or access to legal counsel, and maintaining extra-legal detention facilities in Guantanamo for detainees as young as thirteen...

You seem to be on this kick of trying to say that I am a sheep, but it looks like you are the one who is likely blinded. I do not support the increased spending - which I've repeatedly stated. There are NO candidates at this time who say they will change and totally reform our gov't spending - so it's really a dead issue as far as deciding one's vote, unless you look at what new proposals are out there....oh say like the UHC monster(and there are others).
You can continually try to make these little accusations about sheep, but it just shows how much you really don't know about me or how much you don't actually read what I post.:)

It is still quite funny that people are trying to make a bid deal about this Turkey decoration thing though:p Must be desperate for things to needle Bush with:D

CkG
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Bush is the one trying to make a big deal out of it. Big enough deal to pose with a decoration turkey instead of what the troops are eating. There is a pathological need to fake things when there is no reason to do so.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
But anyway - your point is? So it was for aesthetics...does that somehow diminishes something? Do you have fake fruit on your dining room table? I think it's perfectly fine that there was a real turkey - it might have helped the troops fell a little more at home...than just seeing a slop line.

CkG
I guess my point would be: If Bush lying into Iraq for a Thanksgiving back-smacking, high-fiving and huzzah-raising turkey slaughter WASN'T a fabricated photo opp, why did they bring props?
 

Wag

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
8,286
4
81
I guess my point would be: If Bush lying into Iraq for a Thanksgiving back-smacking, high-fiving and huzzah-raising turkey slaughter WASN'T a fabricated photo opp, why did they bring props?
My thoughts along these lines were why he brought the Press? Not many might have known, but someone made sure the cameras where there in time.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
But anyway - your point is? So it was for aesthetics...does that somehow diminishes something? Do you have fake fruit on your dining room table? I think it's perfectly fine that there was a real turkey - it might have helped the troops fell a little more at home...than just seeing a slop line.

CkG
I guess my point would be: If Bush lying into Iraq for a Thanksgiving back-smacking, high-fiving and huzzah-raising turkey slaughter WASN'T a fabricated photo opp, why did they bring props?
What the fvck are you talking about? Do you even know? Have you ever eaten in a military chow hall during the holidays? Onboard a ship or sub? Here's how it works. The cooks (or MS's) fix the turkeys. They take one of them and fix it up,trim it, put it on a nice platter, take pictures of it for the cruise book, patrol report or whatever. The rest of the turkeys get carved up and put on the steam line and when they're done with the photogenic bird it gets carved up and put on the steam line too.

You YACS are so desperate to find fault with Bush you will talk out yer asses about everything and anything no matter how friggin' ignorant you happen to be. Bush went to Iraq. The troops there appreciated it. Somebody took pictures of it. Get over it.

Try sticking to the real issues and maybe you'll have half a chance to vote him out of office next November.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Yes UQ . . .
. . . I know what a fake turkey is, but please, don't let me stop you from recounting the military history of fake turkeys and how they saved the lives of navy personnel during the war of 1812. ;)
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,489
0
0
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Bush is the one trying to make a big deal out of it. Big enough deal to pose with a decoration turkey instead of what the troops are eating. There is a pathological need to fake things when there is no reason to do so.
I would say the pathological need is to find fault when there is no reason to do so.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,677
136
From CKG-

I do not support the increased spending - which I've repeatedly stated. There are NO candidates at this time who say they will change and totally reform our gov't spending -
Yet you seem to support Bush wholeheartedly, and the particulars of the entire neocon agenda of breaking the government under a mountain of debt, their way of achieving fiscal discipline somewhere down the road. I'm not interested in their brand of fiscal discipline, you have only to look to Argentina and Brazil to understand where they're leading us. Argentines spend ~37% of the govt budget to maintain their debt, and their middle class is destroyed. Their financial elite got unbelievably rich selling out their countrymen, and ours are in the process of doing the same to us...

And you regularly attack and ridicule the one candidate whose stated goal is to balance the budget, and who has a proven track record of doing just that as a governor- Howard Dean. We don't have to allow privileged class looting of the treasury to achieve fiscal integrity, quite the contrary. We do have some tough choices, none of which will get any easier under the pressure of mounting debt. If we want lower taxes, we'll have to accept lower expenditures and less in the way of services. If we want a huge military, wars of adventure, corporate pork, NMD, and a lot of the other stuff advanced by the Bush agenda, we'll have to pay for it eventually- better now than somewhere down the road, with interest, of course...

I'll issue the same challenge to you as to all the budget-cutting idealists- lay it out. Explain to me just how you'll eliminate 1/3 of federal spending w/o raising taxes. Ignore SS, since it currently pays for itself and more. Have at it.

Might want to avoid obvious pie in the sky financial projections while you're at it....
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
From CKG-

I do not support the increased spending - which I've repeatedly stated. There are NO candidates at this time who say they will change and totally reform our gov't spending -
Yet you seem to support Bush wholeheartedly, and the particulars of the entire neocon agenda of breaking the government under a mountain of debt, their way of achieving fiscal discipline somewhere down the road. I'm not interested in their brand of fiscal discipline, you have only to look to Argentina and Brazil to understand where they're leading us. Argentines spend ~37% of the govt budget to maintain their debt, and their middle class is destroyed. Their financial elite got unbelievably rich selling out their countrymen, and ours are in the process of doing the same to us...

And you regularly attack and ridicule the one candidate whose stated goal is to balance the budget, and who has a proven track record of doing just that as a governor- Howard Dean. We don't have to allow privileged class looting of the treasury to achieve fiscal integrity, quite the contrary. We do have some tough choices, none of which will get any easier under the pressure of mounting debt. If we want lower taxes, we'll have to accept lower expenditures and less in the way of services. If we want a huge military, wars of adventure, corporate pork, NMD, and a lot of the other stuff advanced by the Bush agenda, we'll have to pay for it eventually- better now than somewhere down the road, with interest, of course...

I'll issue the same challenge to you as to all the budget-cutting idealists- lay it out. Explain to me just how you'll eliminate 1/3 of federal spending w/o raising taxes. Ignore SS, since it currently pays for itself and more. Have at it.

Might want to avoid obvious pie in the sky financial projections while you're at it....
I support Bush for many reasons, but he doesn't get high marks from me on his Spending. It really isn't that hard of concept to understand:p...or maybe it is?

Dean isn't any different - he has pledged to spend Billions on gov't increases, so yes he gets low marks from me on that. Increasing taxes isn't a "tough choice" like I just got done telling ST in a different thread. It only servers to cover up overspending.

Cutting the Budget would be easy if we had people supposedly represent us that realized that more and bigger gov't are not the answer for what ills America. If we could get a group of Congress-people;) to take it upon themselves to put their political careers on the line and actually propose legislation that ties spending to revenue and also force an audit of ALL gov't expenditures to check for efficiency and effect - NO spending is exempt - especially entitlements.

Oh and btw - SS isn't going to be able to pay for itself forever - it needs reform.

So as far as your supposed "challenge" - it is impossible to do without an entire audit of current spending which breaks down efficiency, productivity, and overall usefulness. Get me that report and I'll tell you where to place the knife:) But like I said - we don't have elected officials that seem to want to risk their careers for the long-term viability of out gov't.

CkG

PS- I attack all of the "candidates" - it's just that they seem to get ignored more than other threads do. I guess people really don't wish to have discussions on potential candidates - they just want to focus on Bush and the supposed "bad" he is doing...while ignoring what the people vying to replace him want to do(if they actually say what they are for - instead of just what they are against)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY