May 04, 2004
Kerry's Magic Salve
Have you noticed that every time Kerry has a new idea -- that idea will be paid for by repealing Bush's tax cuts for people making more than $200,000 a year?
He's got a lot of proposals such as: fixing the economy, creating jobs, education, healthcare and much more. A large chunk of his ideas are going to be paid for by repealing the tax cuts for the rich.
That's rich.
I know. He just wants the tax rate to go back to the Clinton levels. That will solve many of our problems, right?
A few questions: If the higher tax rates, employed during the Clinton Administration, will now solve the education crisis and all our other crises -- why weren't they fixed in the 90's? If you feel compelled to blame the Republican Congress, you might want to think long and hard about Kerry's probable success. If Kerry wins, he will most certainly be dealing with a Republican Congress. After the crap the Dems have pulled over the last 3 years, you can be certain that payback will be a BITCH.
Now back to my point,
Why did the Clinton Administration fund education in such a nigardly fashion, if all that extra money was available from taxing the rich? WHY are Democrats NOW complaining about lack of funding for education? Bush raised education spending by a staggering 70% since he took office.
Why is it that 4, 5, or even 6 years ago, "the surplus" was more important than The Children™?
Where were the cries about failing schools and lack of funds from Ted Kennedy? Did he have laryngitis for 8 years?
Just wondering.
Posted by rosemary at May 4, 2004 10:20 AM | TrackBackEvil ...eeeeevvvviiiiiillllll ... oh .. my queen .. LOL
How dare you point out the obvious. You know that politicians have a hard time with that "obvious" thing.
Posted by: Tony Rosen at May 4, 2004 11:00 AMI am not sure that he wants taxes to the level of the Clinton years, that won't be enough to pay for all the "benefits" that he wants to sell the "American People, the down-trodden, those who are oppressed. Don't you know who I am? I served in Viet Nam." Sorry, slipped into Kerry speech mode. Think about it, he wants the tax level of the Carter years.
Posted by: Steve at May 4, 2004 11:35 AMSorry to post off topic, but this right now has me extremely angry (so what else is new, right?) But I figured that if anyone could bring justice to this fool it was the QOAE.
www.ucomics.com/tedrall
How someone could have the gall to put to paper (or website) such disrespect for a true hero I do not know.
James,
I was so stunned and angry I had no words. I posted yesterdy about it. I let Michele do the talking, since she is the Rall exterminator.
Posted by: Rosemary the Queen of All Evil at May 4, 2004 01:11 PMAppreciate the info. Glad to see that I am not the only one upset and distressed at this man's actions.
Posted by: James Doney at May 4, 2004 01:19 PMEducation hasn't been an issue under any administration since Lyndon Johnson. Bush is the first to fund education in a meaningful way. Reagan funded some programs, but mostly in the "teach kids about drugs" arena in setting up D.A.R.E.
States usually have to pass bond issues to fund their own educationally budgets beyond their per pupil stipend, outside of the current administration which is making changes not only in the funding of education but in the requirements of teacher licensure and credentialing across the board and accountabilty. We are building more schools and teaching more children with more money than we have done in decades.
There's a big difference in saying you believe in something and actually coughing up the greenbacks to fund it. Most presidents have said they believed in education but...
Posted by: Katherine at May 4, 2004 01:25 PMWay back before the Department of Education existed, schools were funded locally. Completely locally.
Despite many leftie's assertions that children have to take more standardized tests than ever (one test every 3 years through grade school), when I was in school, we had to take Iowa Basics every single year!
Teachers got fired if they did a rotten job with kids.
Politics was *not* part of the curriculum.
We had gym class every day, and we had music and art class. But golly gee, the federal government had absolutely NOTHING to do with funding education. Yet. We. Learned.
Posted by: Beth at May 5, 2004 09:17 PMArne,
My darling snarky little troll:
Firstly I am not a Republican. Secondly, I am a teacher. Thirdly, I am writing my master's thesis on an aspect of this topic and unless you are prepared to present current research other than material of a surface web nature from an economist from a Texas think tank (one person's opinion) and I mean facts, historical statistics, data, and deep web academic approved articles--then you'd better go play with someone else.
Because, my dear, you are way out of your league when you attempt to come at me with attitude like that.
I have been researching this topic for 5 years and anyone that has to resort to a snotty anatomical remark to attempt to get a point across is not worth my time.
But, since you mentioned my legs, darlin'--you should be so lucky. (In my best Texas accent.)
Beth: We keep funding our schools here in California locally too. I wish they'd let us make more than 300 copies a month. I think maybe we should have a "Bake Sale For Copies." Despite the lack of money, however, those of us who really want to teach our kids find a way. Those parents who volunteer are our biggest assets.
Posted by: Katherine at May 5, 2004 11:33 PMSince I'm a poor law student right now, rolling back taxes on the rich seems like a good idea. But once I become a lawyer, I'm going to have a bone to pick with Mr. Kerry.
--|PW|--
Posted by: pennywit at May 5, 2004 11:51 PMArne - you linked to an article bitching about how many tests kids have to take these days - did you forget?
Oops, I have to go work for a living. Later.