Explain this one to me

[CJY]

W is once again on the anti same-sex marriage bandwagon while cutting homeland security to NY and DC by 40%. Where are the priorities?<br /><br /> http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/422633p-356751c.html

 

[kenimpzoom]

Re: Explain this one to me

Gay marriage only ticks off about 1% of the population. Its an easy target for politicians that costs no money, and gets people riles up so they will go vote.<br /><br />As for funding, NYC will still get 125 million down from 207 million.<br /><br />The other cities get between 8-9 million up from 5-7 million.<br /><br />I like how that article plays the % game, when the actual increase in those small cities payout is 2-3 million.<br /><br />Ken

 

[Kwas]

Re: Explain this one to me

Perhaps this can explain part of your question.<br /><br />NY Squandered Billions in 9/11 Aid <br /><br /><br />New York politicians allowed up to one-third of the $20 billion in federal aid awarded to the city in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks to be squandered right under their noses, an analysis by the New York Daily News found last December. <br /><br />But that hasn't stopped some of the same politicians from complaining all weekend about a mere $80 million cut in New York City's federal anti-terrorism budget. <br /><br />Senators Hillary Clinton, Charles Schumer and Rep. Peter King say they're outraged over the new cuts, with Clinton and King teaming up to launch a post-card writing campaign against the Department of Homeland Security. <br /><br />The bipartisan duo sounded a lot less angry six months ago, when the News uncovered evidence that billions in 9/11 cash had been misspent, gone unaccounted for and, in at least one case, was awarded to the Mafia. <br /><br />"I pledge to do whatever has to be done to find out what happened and why," an uncharacteristically meek-sounding King said at the time. <br /><br />Mrs. Clinton sounded similarly unruffled, offering only: "I think we need to pursue some of the leads . . . to make sure every penny is properly used." <br /><br />The News study found that: <br /><br />• Up to one-third of the $21.4 billion in 9/11 cash awarded to New York by the White House had been earmarked for major transportation projects that had no connection to the devastation caused on 9/11. <br /><br />• $150,000 was awarded to a securities firm that had gone out of business before the 9/11 attacks - plus millions more from the fund was earmarked for formerly self-supporting projects.

 

[KaGee]

Re: Explain this one to me

Ummmm, wait a second... first thing, I thought Bush lied and has misrepresented the terrorist threats??? Why then do we need to spend more money on homeland security or NYC?<br /><br />Second thing, of the existing funds, NYC is still getting a huge disproportionate allocation, even with the cuts.<br /><br />Third, did it ever occur that IF the terrorist threat is REAL, that they just might change their tactics try some other softer, yet equally effective target? Any attack on a major population center can have significant effects. Are we here in "fly over country" not deserving of protection?

 

[oddjob]

Re: Explain this one to me

Thanks Kagee, for a better version of what my response would have been...

 

[rolmops]

Re: Explain this one to me

Well,well,well.simple election math is what we witness.<br />NY and DC are both hopeless for the republicans,so why squander money on them.Let's give it to some places where republican candidates stand a fighting chance to win.That should give them a boost,it might get them over the hump.What is national security but another tool in the election campaign?

 

[txswinner]

Re: Explain this one to me

Kagee, no one said he lied about terroristic threats, it was the WMD that got our boy in trouble. Bottom line on ***** marriage, I am agin it. Maybe civil union for whatever they want but not in my church. I believe that marriage is and must remain between a man and woman.... but I think a federal law is a real stupid idea and waste of time with all we have on our plate.

 

[KaGee]

Re: Explain this one to me

Originally posted by txswinner:<br /> Kagee, no one said he lied about terroristic threats, it was the WMD that got our boy in trouble.

That falicy has evolved to include terrorism as a whole... read some of the wacko left wing blogs. AND they point to the absense of an attack since 9-11 as proof.

 

[Twidget]

Re: Explain this one to me

Well,well,well.simple election math is what we witness.<br />NY and DC are both hopeless for the republicans,so why squander money on them.

The state of Texas took a large hit on the funding also. Last time I checked, this isnt exactly a Liberal stronghold. <br /><br />KaGee is on the money. Not to mention, once the 'stuff' has been purchased and set up, it should just take maintenance. Which is much lower than purchase/installation.

 

[JB]

Re: Explain this one to me

Hey!! No dang fair!! <br /><br />The Hideout got zero bux for security. Same for Whitt.<br /><br />It's them danged pecalumers in Washington trying to bait terrorists into attacking undefended places. I'll bet Pelosi and Billary are behind it.

 

[PW2]

Re: Explain this one to me

Hey "flyover country" is like what Cheney said regarding Afghanistan:<br /><br />"There aren't any targets worth bombing"

 

[rolmops]

Re: Explain this one to me

Originally posted by Twidget:<br />

Well,well,well.simple election math is what we witness.<br />NY and DC are both hopeless for the republicans,so why squander money on them.

The state of Texas took a large hit on the funding also. Last time I checked, this isnt exactly a Liberal stronghold. <br />

You are in their pocket already,so why waste money on you??

 

[Kwas]

Re: Explain this one to me

You are in their pocket already,so why waste money on you??

Better then to give it to NY to waste.

 

[KaGee]

Re: Explain this one to me

I don't hear LA or Seattle whining... not exactly Republican strongholds.

 

[QC]

Re: Explain this one to me

I'm whining, but it's because I don't understand what the two issues CJY has brought up have to do with each other . . . Just because I spend money on running the boat doesn't mean I have forgot I have to send my kids to college . . . Just because I care about the preservation of an institution as old as civilization itself, doesn't mean that making tough decisions on money for our security doesn't matter.<br /><br />BTW, marriage between a man and a woman is the cornerstone of civilization. You don't even need a honkin' teepee if you're just a coupla guys hanging out on Brokeback Mountain. Yeah, poor attempt at a joke, but seriously this is the most ridiculous debate in the history of that same civilization. Birds and the bees, boy meets girl, get house, make family. What could be more clear? What possible benefit to society can gay unions provide? Growth in the wedding planner industry? Flower shops? Tux rentals? What? I simply do not get it. Oh yeah, someone has been denied his/her right to something, not sure what it is, but something. Not everything is equal, not every standard is the same, not every union needs legal standing. With the possible exception of health-care decisions for a domestic partner, I, again, don't get it.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Explain this one to me

Heck, I heard no less than 10 democrats try to use this in the past week.

 

[Kenneth Brown]

Re: Explain this one to me

Originally posted by JB:<br /> Hey!! No dang fair!! <br /><br />The Hideout got zero bux for security. Same for Whitt.<br /><br />

Whatcha wanna bet Parker county got a new "Mobile Command Post" out of it?

 

[SlowlySinking]

Re: Explain this one to me

Giving money to a politician is like giving alcohol to a alcoholic, the results are so predictable.

 

[BoatBuoy]

Re: Explain this one to me

I think every wide spot in the road got a "Mobile Command Post". Deputy Fife would have been in hog's heaven.

 

[KRS]

Re: Explain this one to me

There's more to this country than NY and DC, glad it's someone else's turn.