Bush to spend $1.5 Billion to promote Marriage....

[headscratcher4]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040114/us_nm/bush_marriage_dc

Ah, this sounds like a good use of my money when the deficiet is $450 Billion+ ....:rolleyes:

.if this were a Clinton thing, all the Bush lovers would be screaming bloody murder about Govt. interference and big spending.

[Nasarius]

Originally posted by headscratcher4
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040114/us_nm/bush_marriage_dc

Ah, this sounds like a good use of my money when the deficiet is $450 Billion+ ....:rolleyes:

.if this were a Clinton thing, all the Bush lovers would be screaming bloody murder about Govt. interference and big spending.

I was thinking "oh, more tax breaks" at first, but it's:

The plan would provide at least $1.5 billion for training to help couples develop interpersonal skills that sustain "healthy marriages," the paper said.

Who wants to bet that a significant portion of this "training" will be provided by church groups?

[Darat]

The plan would provide at least $1.5 billion for training to help couples develop interpersonal skills that sustain "healthy marriages," the paper said.


What the bloody hell does this mean?

How on earth did our parents, grandparents and so on manage without training to "develop interpersonal skills that sustain 'healthy marriages,'"?

Is it just me that finds this totally crazy?

[DavidJames]

"The plan would provide at least $1.5 billion for training to help couples develop interpersonal skills that sustain "healthy marriages," the paper said."

"Is it just me that finds this totally crazy?"

It's a $1.5 billion investment in his re-election effort.

[headscratcher4]

Originally posted by Nasarius


I was thinking "oh, more tax breaks" at first, but it's:



Who wants to bet that a significant portion of this "training" will be provided by church groups?

Indeed, "training" sounds like one of those "lefty" creeping socialist solutions...like "re-education" and "indoctrination"...

Of course, this is political...it is a sop being thrown to the Pat Robertsons of the world. It is a completely fake issue...but it sounds good on the right-wing stump..."I am for marraige..." -- and by implication, his opponents are against marraige.

I hope his brother -- is it Marvin? -- gets some o' that training. He, along with his abandoned wife, and pregnent girlfriend (I think she's pregnent, this may only be "Bush-Hating" wishful thinking on my part) could probably use a little training on the sanctitiy and value of marraige. Also, his sister, who is into her second (though seemingly more successful) marraige -- as they've been married a while.

Of course, Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter must be prevented from marrying (if she wants that), as that will undermine the family...(how, I am not quite sure...).

[Charles Livingston]

Originally posted by headscratcher4
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040114/us_nm/bush_marriage_dc

Ah, this sounds like a good use of my money when the deficiet is $450 Billion+ ....:rolleyes:

.if this were a Clinton thing, all the Bush lovers would be screaming bloody murder about Govt. interference and big spending.

I dont know much about this but it sounds like it could be a big waste of money. If its tied into the church it will be even more repulsive to me. However, did you have to bring up the whole 'bush lovers screaming bloody murder about Clinton?'. I mean, cant we critisize somebody without qualifications such as this? I mean, a critical thinking person who hates 'big government' could evenly criticize the left and the right for promoting big government. The trend in PC and E seems to be sticking to partisan viewpoints, rather than criticizing/applauding each issue on its own. Dont get me wrong Headscratcher, I dont respect any poster on this board more than you and always look forward to your posts, but lately you have seemed a bit partisan (specifically I am referring to the Hilary thread and this one only).

[headscratcher4]

Originally posted by Charles Livingston


I dont know much about this but it sounds like it could be a big waste of money. If its tied into the church it will be even more repulsive to me. However, did you have to bring up the whole 'bush lovers screaming bloody murder about Clinton?'. I mean, cant we critisize somebody without qualifications such as this? I mean, a critical thinking person who hates 'big government' could evenly criticize the left and the right for promoting good government. The trend in PC and E seems to be sticking to partisan viewpoints, rather than criticizing/applauding each issue on its own. Dont get me wrong Headscratcher, I dont respect any poster on this board more than you and always look forward to your posts, but lately you have seemed a bit partisan (specifically I am referring to the Hilary thread and this one only).

A number of good points, and thank you for your kind thoughts.

Alas, in this (and some other instances) I am a "critical" thinker and less a critical thinker -- if you get my drift. I have many weaknesses in the logic/reason department, and politics is one of them.

In addition, I feel that these boards in general, have taken a right-ward slant...but like conservatives who claim the media is left-biased, that may be more in the "feeling" than fact.

Anyway, thanks for giving me some things to think about....forget the Clinton comparison, just focus on the use of this money for this purpose. Regardless of how you posit it, it annoys me and I feel it is a waste.

[Charles Livingston]

Originally posted by headscratcher4


A number of good points, and thank you for your kind thoughts.

Alas, in this (and some other instances) I am a "critical" thinker and less a critical thinker -- if you get my drift. I have many weaknesses in the logic/reason department, and politics is one of them.

In addition, I feel that these boards in general, have taken a right-ward slant...but like conservatives who claim the media is left-biased, that may be more in the "feeling" than fact.

Anyway, thanks for giving me some things to think about....forget the Clinton comparison, just focus on the use of this money for this purpose. Regardless of how you posit it, it annoys me and I feel it is a waste.

My respect for you just grew even more Headscratcher. I must admit that I dont always practice what I preached above so it is a bit hypocritical of me to preach it. Certainly everyone has lapses in critical thinking on certain issues/topics, I know I do. But, I have just gotten a little fed up lately with all the partisan arguments lately and I guess that's why I brought it up. I really need to stop using "I mean,..." at the beginning of sentances as well.

Anyway, I agree that this looks like a waste of money. Although I certainly buy some of it, I dont really buy into all the crap spewed about Bush particularly regarding his intelligence. By no means do I support him however, and I'm afraid that things like this are going to get him reelected despite his foreign policy catastrophies (I think thats putting it kindly). I wish I knew more about the economy so I could reasonably evaluate the general left and right strategies and of course Bush's current strategy (which may work for the short term but how is it going to work long-term).

[Martin]

Originally posted by Nasarius
Who wants to bet that a significant portion of this "training" will be provided by church groups?To be fair, believers have significantly higher divorce rates :D

[Tony]

stupid idea.

[Chad Noles]

"A billion here, a billion
there. Pretty soon it starts to add up to some real money."

[Regnad Kcin]

Excellent! I look forward to Rush and Newt and Bob Dole and many others getting solidly behind such a worthy program!

[American]

You act like social engineering is something new.

[Mr Manifesto]

They tried this trick in Australia a few years back. The divorce rate, unless I am mistaken, hasn't changed. Bush would do better to spend the money on research to 'cure' people of homosexuality, if he really wants to secure the Lunar Pat Robbo vote.

[Ladewig]

Who wants to bet that a significant portion of this "training" will be provided by church groups?

I think that is just an example of cyncism. A more realistic prediction would be having Halliburton do the training.

[Demigorgon]

They could just not charge me more in taxes because I'm married. Or how about a tax break for actually raising my kid and not putting him in the free-range kid farm?

[hgc]

Originally posted by Demigorgon
... the free-range kid farm There's such a place? I hope to god you're talking about juvenile goats.:D

[Demigorgon]

Originally posted by hgc
There's such a place? I hope to god you're talking about juvenile goats.:D

It's PC for day-care.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Demigorgon


It's PC for day-care.

That has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. Why do you think people put their kids in daycare- because they just can't be bothered raising their own children? How on earth did you ever come to this conclusion?

[Troll]

I don't much care what the cause du jour is. I hate seeing my money go to anything that should be dealt with via personal responsibility.

If you have relationship issues, fix them yourself. If you're knocked up ,via consensual sex, and don't want the kid, fix it yourself. It's not my job to make sure everyone is happy together or can afford an abortion because they ain't ready for a kid. I don't want to be assigned the role of caregiver or babysitter to the freaking idiots that can't run their own damned lives, and if they ruin their lives and become homeless, suicidal or otherwise, then thank you Darwin.

[Demigorgon]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


That has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. Why do you think people put their kids in daycare- because they just can't be bothered raising their own children? How on earth did you ever come to this conclusion?

Since you asked - No, in most cases people who have their kids in daycare from 8 - 5 everyday are not raising their kids. Someone else is. Yes - a lot of people these days can't be bothered. Kids are like pets.

My original point was, before you got so defensive, is they give a tax break for child care expenses, they don't to those who raise their kids at home.

[peptoabysmal]

I don't agree with this, or several things that Bush has done.

I would prefer to keep as much separation of church and state as possible. Even though marriage is a legal contract, it has undisputed religious roots.

Another thing Bush has done to upset me is not use his veto power to block 162 billion $ worth of pork projects that were slipped through congress in 2003. You add this to the billions in social spending already going on and then the 87 billion spent on the Iraq war plus less than 1% of the US budget allocated to NASA research plus this marriage education nonsense become nothing compared to the rest of the budget.

[corplinx]

1.5 billion dollars spent on something you can't find any authorization for in the constitution

pardon me while i see how many signatures free state has so far