Is compassion returning to conservatism?

[TexasTiger 13,020]

Ok...NOW its my turn. Titan, Im gonna have to go ahead and disagree with you again.

Since WHEN did taking MORE money away from people who earn it and giving it over to mishandled social welfare programs...equate COMPASSION?

I am sick and tired of libs throwing this guilt trip at conservatives. "oh you dont want this poor sick mother to be able to care for her child?...youd rather give another dollar to a rich fat cat who wants to buy another Ferrari?"

That is not the point. Bottom line...its not YOUR place to tell me that I have "too much money" and that i should GIVE some more of it away. I dont care if i have platinum plated window blinds, or own 19 Aston Martin DB7s. Its just not your place. Im not materialistic, and Im all for helping people out. But at what point does helping them out become ENABLING them?

When my parents first had me, they were on government social programs like WIC to help them with food and things that you ABSOLUTELY needed to support a family. But they got past using that stuff and built a better life for themselves.

But now we have SO MANY social welfare programs, that there is no need for them to push harder to make something of themselves.

I am self employed and have to pay taxes out the ass. Its really REALLY sad. The government takes so much of what I make already. It almost makes you not want to work at all. I work my ASS off just so they can take my money and give it to someone who DOESNT want a job.

And now to top it all off...they want the food stamps to look like a NORMAL credit card so people arent "embarassed" when they go to buy a buggy full of filet mignon and sodas...and pile it their caddy outside. You know what...you are taking MY money and not working. You SHOULD be embarassed!

You say i have no compassion? Why? There isnt a child in this country that would go uncared for as it stands. There are food stamp, welfare, and WIC programs EVERYWHERE for a mother to use to take care of her child. And if she STILL cant take care of it, then i dont want to give her ANY MORE OF MY MONEY to be obviously mishandled. That child would be in better hands if it were turned over to the state/foster family.

Does that make me cold? No. You cant make a better life for yourself if you can live off of others. I give to charities. But i do so at my own discretion. I dont want the government taking ANY MORE OF MY MONEY.

And those tax breaks for the "rich"? I dont know where id be if I didnt have those tax breaks. They help me out in a GREAT way. And Im far from rich. But you want to GIVE more money to people who ALREADY dont pay income taxes?

Which is less compassionante? An enabler who keeps someone down? Or someone who would rather limit your free money buffet to a point where you are motivated to work for a better life?

The government already says "youve got 5 he's got none...give him 2". Now you're telling me that it should be "youve got 5 he's got none...give him 3"?

No way.

Put down the spiked eggnog, and read Titan's post again when your sober.

BTW, I'm glad there was a social welfare program in place paid for by tax dollars to make sure you were fed as a child.

And, yes, you sound pretty cold. And clueless. Mostly clueless.

[Tiger Al 0]

Ok...NOW its my turn. Titan, Im gonna have to go ahead and disagree with you again.

Since WHEN did taking MORE money away from people who earn it and giving it over to mishandled social welfare programs...equate COMPASSION?

I am sick and tired of libs throwing this guilt trip at conservatives. "oh you dont want this poor sick mother to be able to care for her child?...youd rather give another dollar to a rich fat cat who wants to buy another Ferrari?"

That is not the point. Bottom line...its not YOUR place to tell me that I have "too much money" and that i should GIVE some more of it away. I dont care if i have platinum plated window blinds, or own 19 Aston Martin DB7s. Its just not your place. Im not materialistic, and Im all for helping people out. But at what point does helping them out become ENABLING them?

When my parents first had me, they were on government social programs like WIC to help them with food and things that you ABSOLUTELY needed to support a family. But they got past using that stuff and built a better life for themselves.

But now we have SO MANY social welfare programs, that there is no need for them to push harder to make something of themselves.

I am self employed and have to pay taxes out the ass. Its really REALLY sad. The government takes so much of what I make already. It almost makes you not want to work at all. I work my ASS off just so they can take my money and give it to someone who DOESNT want a job.

And now to top it all off...they want the food stamps to look like a NORMAL credit card so people arent "embarassed" when they go to buy a buggy full of filet mignon and sodas...and pile it their caddy outside. You know what...you are taking MY money and not working. You SHOULD be embarassed!

You say i have no compassion? Why? There isnt a child in this country that would go uncared for as it stands. There are food stamp, welfare, and WIC programs EVERYWHERE for a mother to use to take care of her child. And if she STILL cant take care of it, then i dont want to give her ANY MORE OF MY MONEY to be obviously mishandled. That child would be in better hands if it were turned over to the state/foster family.

Does that make me cold? No. You cant make a better life for yourself if you can live off of others. I give to charities. But i do so at my own discretion. I dont want the government taking ANY MORE OF MY MONEY.

And those tax breaks for the "rich"? I dont know where id be if I didnt have those tax breaks. They help me out in a GREAT way. And Im far from rich. But you want to GIVE more money to people who ALREADY dont pay income taxes?

Which is less compassionante? An enabler who keeps someone down? Or someone who would rather limit your free money buffet to a point where you are motivated to work for a better life?

The government already says "youve got 5 he's got none...give him 2". Now you're telling me that it should be "youve got 5 he's got none...give him 3"?

No way.

Yes, when I was a child we had to go on welfare, too. Thank God it was available.

[BamaGrad03 0]

Put down the spiked eggnog, and read Titan's post again when your sober.

BTW, I'm glad there was a social welfare program in place paid for by tax dollars to make sure you were fed as a child.

And, yes, you sound pretty cold. And clueless. Mostly clueless.

Sorry some of my "disagreement" with Titan was from previous private conversations we've had.

And if Im so clueless, please point out what was clueless in what I said.

I never said I was against social welfare programs. I said I was against INCREASING them. Or taking MORE money out of my check, as my taxes are astronomical where they stand.

[DKW 86 7,440]

Like Mike said, the "Idea" of theocracy is completely foreign to EVERY Conservative Christian I know.

Name one evangelical Christian who wants a theocracy. Just one.

Roy Moore, Jerry Falwell, James Dobson and Pat Robertson for starters.

Al, you are better than that...

[Tiger Al 0]

Like Mike said, the "Idea" of theocracy is completely foreign to EVERY Conservative Christian I know.

Name one evangelical Christian who wants a theocracy. Just one.

Roy Moore, Jerry Falwell, James Dobson and Pat Robertson for starters.

Al, you are better than that...

Question asked, question answered. I realize that you probably don't "know" those people personally so I apologize for my not meeting that particular part of your criteria.

[TexasTiger 13,020]

Put down the spiked eggnog, and read Titan's post again when your sober.

BTW, I'm glad there was a social welfare program in place paid for by tax dollars to make sure you were fed as a child.

And, yes, you sound pretty cold. And clueless. Mostly clueless.

Sorry some of my "disagreement" with Titan was from previous private conversations we've had.

And if Im so clueless, please point out what was clueless in what I said.

I never said I was against social welfare programs. I said I was against INCREASING them. Or taking MORE money out of my check, as my taxes are astronomical where they stand.

Exactly who is advocating increasing your taxes in this thread? Or increasing welfare programs like you suggest?

[BamaGrad03 0]

It has already been stated that the tax cuts "for the rich" are hurting the social welfare programs coffers.

So advocating the elimination of said tax cuts...would infact...increase my taxes.

Otherwise what are we talking about? If you dont want me to give more of my money to the programs that would help these children...why am I not "compassionate"?

[TexasTiger 13,020]

It has already been stated that the tax cuts "for the rich" are hurting the social welfare programs coffers.

So advocating the elimination of said tax cuts...would infact...increase my taxes.

Otherwise what are we talking about? If you dont want me to give more of my money to the programs that would help these children...why am I not "compassionate"?

Just how rich are you BG?

[Tiger Al 0]

It has already been stated that the tax cuts "for the rich" are hurting the social welfare programs coffers.

So advocating the elimination of said tax cuts...would infact...increase my taxes.

Otherwise what are we talking about? If you dont want me to give more of my money to the programs that would help these children...why am I not "compassionate"?

Just how rich are you BG?

That's not the point, TT. BG hates to see Tom Cruise have to pay more taxes.

[BamaGrad03 0]

That's not the point, TT. BG hates to see Tom Cruise have to pay more taxes.

Why do you guys CONSTANTLY ignore my point?

IM NOT RICH. But i benefit from the tax breaks. BECAUSE I PAY TAXES. Those breaks werent just for rich. They were for ANYONE who pays taxes. Especially self employed and small business owners like myself.

Bottom line, taking those away takes money out of my pocket.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

If I'm not mistaken, the proposals I've heard called for rolling back the tax cuts for those who made $200,000 or more. Unless I'm vastly underestimating things, I don't think your taxes would go up BG.

[TexasTiger 13,020]

If I'm not mistaken, the proposals I've heard called for rolling back the tax cuts for those who made $200,000 or more. Unless I'm vastly underestimating things, I don't think your taxes would go up BG.

That's my understanding, and I'm not sure they could pass even that. If they did, Bush would discover his veto power. I would support such a roll back to address the deficit-- which up until now has not even reflected the cost of the Iraq war that so many "conservatives" support, but don't wish to pay for.

[BamaGrad03 0]

I dont make 200k per year. But I dont think its fair to those guys (who are already paying a ton) to take more money out of their pocket.

Its easy to be less sympathetic for someone who makes 200k or even a million...because it doesnt affect you. But that is socialism. You are saying that 200k is enough money for someone to make and that its time to start taking away from them. Its not your place to decide.

Then again, lets just cap how much income you can have at 100k. If you make a million...we will just take 900k because afterall..nobody needs that much money. Yeah that sounds like america.

[Tiger Al 0]

BG's "I want MY money" rant seems to flow from this statement:

"Let's tell it as the prophets might have: The decision to drop tax credits for America's poorest families in favor of further tax cuts for the rich is morally offensive"

He's saying that further cutting the taxes of the wealthy instead of keeping tax credits for the poor is wrong.

Now, BG and others here may think the Tom Cruises', Bill Gates' and William Jefferson Clintons' should receive $200,000 more in income tax returns instead of giving the working poor an EITC, but I don't.

[TexasTiger 13,020]

I dont make 200k per year. But I dont think its fair to those guys (who are already paying a ton) to take more money out of their pocket.

Its easy to be less sympathetic for someone who makes 200k or even a million...because it doesnt affect you. But that is socialism. You are saying that 200k is enough money for someone to make and that its time to start taking away from them. Its not your place to decide.

Then again, lets just cap how much income you can have at 100k. If you make a million...we will just take 900k because afterall..nobody needs that much money. Yeah that sounds like america.

That sounds like the lunatic exaggeration to make a point because the actual facts don't make it for you.

If you don't think the wealthiest among us don't reap the biggest benefits from being in this country, you need to look into that. Even with Clinton's tax increase on the "wealthy" they still got wealthier. They didn't suffer. They didn't lose the incentive to make money or move away.

Wars are expensive. You support big ticket items, yet you are comfortable being a debtor nation while begrudging the poor the same hand up your parents got.

The key to America's success is a strong, expanding middle-class that can afford health-care and education. If we can do that without taxing Bill Gates, it's fine with me.

[Tiger Al 0]

I dont make 200k per year. But I dont think its fair to those guys (who are already paying a ton) to take more money out of their pocket.

Its easy to be less sympathetic for someone who makes 200k or even a million...because it doesnt affect you. But that is socialism. You are saying that 200k is enough money for someone to make and that its time to start taking away from them. Its not your place to decide.

Then again, lets just cap how much income you can have at 100k. If you make a million...we will just take 900k because afterall..nobody needs that much money. Yeah that sounds like america.

That sounds like the lunatic exaggeration to make a point because the actual facts don't make it for you.

If you don't think the wealthiest among us don't reap the biggest benefits from being in this country, you need to look into that. Even with Clinton's tax increase on the "wealthy" they still got wealthier. They didn't suffer. They didn't lose the incentive to make money or move away.

Wars are expensive. You support big ticket items, yet you are comfortable being a debtor nation while begrudging the poor the same hand up your parents got.

The key to America's success is a strong, expanding middle-class that can afford health-care and education. If we can do that without taxing Bill Gates, it's fine with me.

When TexasTiger fed the hungry, they called him a saint. When he asked, "Why are the poor hungry?," they called him a socialist.

Its easy to be less sympathetic for someone who makes 200k or even a million...because it doesnt affect you. But that is socialism.

[AURaptor 1,126]

When TexasTiger fed the hungry, they called him a saint. When he asked, "Why are the poor hungry?," they called him a socialist.

'Hard ' or 'Mean spirited' are called those who say that folks who are hungry need only to fend for themselves. Why are they hungry ? Because they have made poor life choices. Is giving them money which some one else earned the answer ? Nope.

[TexasTiger 13,020]

When TexasTiger fed the hungry, they called him a saint. When he asked, "Why are the poor hungry?," they called him a socialist.

'Hard ' or 'Mean spirited' are called those who say that folks who are hungry need only to fend for themselves. Why are they hungry ? Because they have made poor life choices. Is giving them money which some one else earned the answer ? Nope.

Raptors simple world. Paris Hilton has made poor life choices, but she can eat if she wants. She can even regurgitate it later if she wants. Lotta poor people in the world who never had a lot of choices.

[Tiger Al 0]

When TexasTiger fed the hungry, they called him a saint. When he asked, "Why are the poor hungry?," they called him a socialist.

'Hard ' or 'Mean spirited' are called those who say that folks who are hungry need only to fend for themselves. Why are they hungry ? Because they have made poor life choices. Is giving them money which some one else earned the answer ? Nope.

People are poor because they made 'poor life decisions?'

[TexasTiger 13,020]

When TexasTiger fed the hungry, they called him a saint. When he asked, "Why are the poor hungry?," they called him a socialist.

'Hard ' or 'Mean spirited' are called those who say that folks who are hungry need only to fend for themselves. Why are they hungry ? Because they have made poor life choices. Is giving them money which some one else earned the answer ? Nope.

People are poor because they made 'poor life decisions?'

He's just channeling Dubya. Wonder where he would be, given all his poor life choices, without Daddy?

Thirty years after teaching the class, Tsurumi said the twenty-something Bush’s statements and behavior—“always very shallow”—still stand out in his mind.

“Whenever [bush] just bumped into me, he had some flippant statement to make,” said Tsurumi when reached at his home in Scarsdale, N.Y. “The comments he made were revealing of his prejudice.”

The White House did not reply to requests for comment on Bush’s time at HBS.

Tsurumi said he particularly recalls Bush’s right-wing extremism at the time, which he said was reflected in off-hand comments equating the New Deal of the 1930s with socialism and the corporation-regulating Securities and Exchange Commission with “an enemy of capitalism.”

“I vividly remember that he made a comment saying that people are poor because they’re lazy,” Tsurumi said.

Tsurumi also said Bush displayed a sense of arrogance about his prominent family, including his father, former U.S. President George H.W. Bush.

“[George W. Bush] didn’t stand out as the most promising student, but...he made it sure we understood how well he was connected,” Tsurumi said. “He wasn’t bashful about how he was being pushed upward by Dad’s connections.”

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=503181

[Tiger Al 0]

When TexasTiger fed the hungry, they called him a saint. When he asked, "Why are the poor hungry?," they called him a socialist.

'Hard ' or 'Mean spirited' are called those who say that folks who are hungry need only to fend for themselves. Why are they hungry ? Because they have made poor life choices. Is giving them money which some one else earned the answer ? Nope.

People are poor because they made 'poor life decisions?'

He's just channeling Dubya. Wonder where he would be, given all his poor life choices, without Daddy?

Thirty years after teaching the class, Tsurumi said the twenty-something Bush’s statements and behavior—“always very shallow”—still stand out in his mind.

“Whenever [bush] just bumped into me, he had some flippant statement to make,” said Tsurumi when reached at his home in Scarsdale, N.Y. “The comments he made were revealing of his prejudice.”

The White House did not reply to requests for comment on Bush’s time at HBS.

Tsurumi said he particularly recalls Bush’s right-wing extremism at the time, which he said was reflected in off-hand comments equating the New Deal of the 1930s with socialism and the corporation-regulating Securities and Exchange Commission with “an enemy of capitalism.”

“I vividly remember that he made a comment saying that people are poor because they’re lazy,” Tsurumi said.

Tsurumi also said Bush displayed a sense of arrogance about his prominent family, including his father, former U.S. President George H.W. Bush.

“[George W. Bush] didn’t stand out as the most promising student, but...he made it sure we understood how well he was connected,” Tsurumi said. “He wasn’t bashful about how he was being pushed upward by Dad’s connections.”

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=503181

Speaking of Bush, how many 'life choices' did he start that were successful? Answer: none.

Profession: In the West Texas energy business, George W. Bush started out researching who owned mineral rights. He later traded mineral and royalty interests and invested in drilling prospects. He had started his own oil and gas company by 1978, taking $17,000 from his education trust fund to set up Arbusto Energy (arbusto means Bush in Spanish). The company fell on hard times when oil prices fell. He made several attempts to revive the business, first by changing the company's name and later by merging with other companies. In 1983, Bush’s company was rescued from failure when Spectrum 7 Energy Corporation, a small oil firm owned by William DeWitt and Mercer Reynolds, bought it. Bush became chief executive officer. Harken Energy Corporation acquired Spectrum 7 in 1986, after Spectrum had lost $400,000. In the buyout deal, Bush and his partners were given more than $2 million worth of Harken stock for the 180-well operation. Bush became a director and was hired as a "consultant" to Harken. He received another $600,000 of Harken stock, and has been paid between $42,000 and $120,000 a year. By the spring of 1987, Harken was in need of cash. So Bush and his fellow Harken officials met with Jackson Stephens, head of Stephens, Inc., an investment bank in Little Rock, Arkansas (Stephens contributed $100,000 to the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980 and gave another $100,000 to the Bush dinner committee in 1990.) Stephens arranged for Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) to provide $25 million to Bush’s company in return for a stock interest in Harken. As part of the deal, Sheikh Abdullah Bakhsh, a Saudi real estate tycoon and financier, joined Harken's board as a major investor. Stephens, UBS, and Bakhsh each had ties to the infamous, scandal-ridden Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI). In 1990, Bush sold his remaining stock options and left the oil business. Writer Jack Colhoun revealed some details of that stock sale, referring to Bush by his childhood nickname “Junior”:

On June 22, 1990, George Jr. sold two-thirds of his Harken stock for $848,560-a cool 200 percent profit. The move was well timed. One week after Junior sold his stock, Harken announced a $23.2 million loss in quarterly earnings and Harken stock dropped sharply, losing 60 percent of its value over the next six months. On August 2, 1990, Iraqi troops moved into Kuwait and 541,000 U.S. forces were deployed to the Gulf.

"There is substantial evidence to suggest that Bush knew Harken was in dire straits in the weeks before he sold the $848,560 of Harken stock," asserted U.S. News & World Report. The magazine noted Harken appointed Junior to a 'fairness committee' to study possible economic restructuring of the company. Junior worked closely with financial advisers from Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Company, who concluded "only drastic action could save Harken."

A year earlier, in 1989, Bush prepared for his move from the oil business to the sports business when he helped assemble a group who purchased the Texas Rangers baseball team from Eddie Chiles. He and Rusty Rose served as managing general partners until Bush was elected Governor of Texas in 1994.

LINK

Maybe Raptor's right; if a poor child simply chose to be born to wealthy parents and had $17,000 lying around in an education trust fund to invest in a business that would be saved by his daddy's friends and would get a promotion despite running the next business into the ground and could cavort with rich, Arab sheikh's and buy baseball teams but instead chose to go home with his poor, biological parents then he deserves what he gets. "Poor life choices" work that way, you know.

[TexasTiger 13,020]

When TexasTiger fed the hungry, they called him a saint. When he asked, "Why are the poor hungry?," they called him a socialist.

'Hard ' or 'Mean spirited' are called those who say that folks who are hungry need only to fend for themselves. Why are they hungry ? Because they have made poor life choices. Is giving them money which some one else earned the answer ? Nope.

People are poor because they made 'poor life decisions?'

He's just channeling Dubya. Wonder where he would be, given all his poor life choices, without Daddy?

Thirty years after teaching the class, Tsurumi said the twenty-something Bush’s statements and behavior—“always very shallow”—still stand out in his mind.

“Whenever [bush] just bumped into me, he had some flippant statement to make,” said Tsurumi when reached at his home in Scarsdale, N.Y. “The comments he made were revealing of his prejudice.”

The White House did not reply to requests for comment on Bush’s time at HBS.

Tsurumi said he particularly recalls Bush’s right-wing extremism at the time, which he said was reflected in off-hand comments equating the New Deal of the 1930s with socialism and the corporation-regulating Securities and Exchange Commission with “an enemy of capitalism.”

“I vividly remember that he made a comment saying that people are poor because they’re lazy,” Tsurumi said.

Tsurumi also said Bush displayed a sense of arrogance about his prominent family, including his father, former U.S. President George H.W. Bush.

“[George W. Bush] didn’t stand out as the most promising student, but...he made it sure we understood how well he was connected,” Tsurumi said. “He wasn’t bashful about how he was being pushed upward by Dad’s connections.”

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=503181

Speaking of Bush, how many 'life choices' did he start that were successful? Answer: none.

Profession: In the West Texas energy business, George W. Bush started out researching who owned mineral rights. He later traded mineral and royalty interests and invested in drilling prospects. He had started his own oil and gas company by 1978, taking $17,000 from his education trust fund to set up Arbusto Energy (arbusto means Bush in Spanish). The company fell on hard times when oil prices fell. He made several attempts to revive the business, first by changing the company's name and later by merging with other companies. In 1983, Bush’s company was rescued from failure when Spectrum 7 Energy Corporation, a small oil firm owned by William DeWitt and Mercer Reynolds, bought it. Bush became chief executive officer. Harken Energy Corporation acquired Spectrum 7 in 1986, after Spectrum had lost $400,000. In the buyout deal, Bush and his partners were given more than $2 million worth of Harken stock for the 180-well operation. Bush became a director and was hired as a "consultant" to Harken. He received another $600,000 of Harken stock, and has been paid between $42,000 and $120,000 a year. By the spring of 1987, Harken was in need of cash. So Bush and his fellow Harken officials met with Jackson Stephens, head of Stephens, Inc., an investment bank in Little Rock, Arkansas (Stephens contributed $100,000 to the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980 and gave another $100,000 to the Bush dinner committee in 1990.) Stephens arranged for Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) to provide $25 million to Bush’s company in return for a stock interest in Harken. As part of the deal, Sheikh Abdullah Bakhsh, a Saudi real estate tycoon and financier, joined Harken's board as a major investor. Stephens, UBS, and Bakhsh each had ties to the infamous, scandal-ridden Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI). In 1990, Bush sold his remaining stock options and left the oil business. Writer Jack Colhoun revealed some details of that stock sale, referring to Bush by his childhood nickname “Junior”:

On June 22, 1990, George Jr. sold two-thirds of his Harken stock for $848,560-a cool 200 percent profit. The move was well timed. One week after Junior sold his stock, Harken announced a $23.2 million loss in quarterly earnings and Harken stock dropped sharply, losing 60 percent of its value over the next six months. On August 2, 1990, Iraqi troops moved into Kuwait and 541,000 U.S. forces were deployed to the Gulf.

"There is substantial evidence to suggest that Bush knew Harken was in dire straits in the weeks before he sold the $848,560 of Harken stock," asserted U.S. News & World Report. The magazine noted Harken appointed Junior to a 'fairness committee' to study possible economic restructuring of the company. Junior worked closely with financial advisers from Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Company, who concluded "only drastic action could save Harken."

A year earlier, in 1989, Bush prepared for his move from the oil business to the sports business when he helped assemble a group who purchased the Texas Rangers baseball team from Eddie Chiles. He and Rusty Rose served as managing general partners until Bush was elected Governor of Texas in 1994.

LINK

Maybe Raptor's right; if a poor child simply chose to be born to wealthy parents and had $17,000 lying around in an education trust fund to invest in a business that would be saved by his daddy's friends and would get a promotion despite running the next business into the ground and could cavort with rich, Arab sheikh's and buy baseball teams but instead chose to go home with his poor, biological parents then he deserves what he gets. "Poor life choices" work that way, you know.

All these poor folks should have chosen to be born Bush. Neil makes Dubya look smart:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer

[Tiger Al 0]

When TexasTiger fed the hungry, they called him a saint. When he asked, "Why are the poor hungry?," they called him a socialist.

'Hard ' or 'Mean spirited' are called those who say that folks who are hungry need only to fend for themselves. Why are they hungry ? Because they have made poor life choices. Is giving them money which some one else earned the answer ? Nope.

People are poor because they made 'poor life decisions?'

He's just channeling Dubya. Wonder where he would be, given all his poor life choices, without Daddy?

Thirty years after teaching the class, Tsurumi said the twenty-something Bush’s statements and behavior—“always very shallow”—still stand out in his mind.

“Whenever [bush] just bumped into me, he had some flippant statement to make,” said Tsurumi when reached at his home in Scarsdale, N.Y. “The comments he made were revealing of his prejudice.”

The White House did not reply to requests for comment on Bush’s time at HBS.

Tsurumi said he particularly recalls Bush’s right-wing extremism at the time, which he said was reflected in off-hand comments equating the New Deal of the 1930s with socialism and the corporation-regulating Securities and Exchange Commission with “an enemy of capitalism.”

“I vividly remember that he made a comment saying that people are poor because they’re lazy,” Tsurumi said.

Tsurumi also said Bush displayed a sense of arrogance about his prominent family, including his father, former U.S. President George H.W. Bush.

“[George W. Bush] didn’t stand out as the most promising student, but...he made it sure we understood how well he was connected,” Tsurumi said. “He wasn’t bashful about how he was being pushed upward by Dad’s connections.”

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=503181

Speaking of Bush, how many 'life choices' did he start that were successful? Answer: none.

Profession: In the West Texas energy business, George W. Bush started out researching who owned mineral rights. He later traded mineral and royalty interests and invested in drilling prospects. He had started his own oil and gas company by 1978, taking $17,000 from his education trust fund to set up Arbusto Energy (arbusto means Bush in Spanish). The company fell on hard times when oil prices fell. He made several attempts to revive the business, first by changing the company's name and later by merging with other companies. In 1983, Bush’s company was rescued from failure when Spectrum 7 Energy Corporation, a small oil firm owned by William DeWitt and Mercer Reynolds, bought it. Bush became chief executive officer. Harken Energy Corporation acquired Spectrum 7 in 1986, after Spectrum had lost $400,000. In the buyout deal, Bush and his partners were given more than $2 million worth of Harken stock for the 180-well operation. Bush became a director and was hired as a "consultant" to Harken. He received another $600,000 of Harken stock, and has been paid between $42,000 and $120,000 a year. By the spring of 1987, Harken was in need of cash. So Bush and his fellow Harken officials met with Jackson Stephens, head of Stephens, Inc., an investment bank in Little Rock, Arkansas (Stephens contributed $100,000 to the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980 and gave another $100,000 to the Bush dinner committee in 1990.) Stephens arranged for Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) to provide $25 million to Bush’s company in return for a stock interest in Harken. As part of the deal, Sheikh Abdullah Bakhsh, a Saudi real estate tycoon and financier, joined Harken's board as a major investor. Stephens, UBS, and Bakhsh each had ties to the infamous, scandal-ridden Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI). In 1990, Bush sold his remaining stock options and left the oil business. Writer Jack Colhoun revealed some details of that stock sale, referring to Bush by his childhood nickname “Junior”:

On June 22, 1990, George Jr. sold two-thirds of his Harken stock for $848,560-a cool 200 percent profit. The move was well timed. One week after Junior sold his stock, Harken announced a $23.2 million loss in quarterly earnings and Harken stock dropped sharply, losing 60 percent of its value over the next six months. On August 2, 1990, Iraqi troops moved into Kuwait and 541,000 U.S. forces were deployed to the Gulf.

"There is substantial evidence to suggest that Bush knew Harken was in dire straits in the weeks before he sold the $848,560 of Harken stock," asserted U.S. News & World Report. The magazine noted Harken appointed Junior to a 'fairness committee' to study possible economic restructuring of the company. Junior worked closely with financial advisers from Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Company, who concluded "only drastic action could save Harken."

A year earlier, in 1989, Bush prepared for his move from the oil business to the sports business when he helped assemble a group who purchased the Texas Rangers baseball team from Eddie Chiles. He and Rusty Rose served as managing general partners until Bush was elected Governor of Texas in 1994.

LINK

Maybe Raptor's right; if a poor child simply chose to be born to wealthy parents and had $17,000 lying around in an education trust fund to invest in a business that would be saved by his daddy's friends and would get a promotion despite running the next business into the ground and could cavort with rich, Arab sheikh's and buy baseball teams but instead chose to go home with his poor, biological parents then he deserves what he gets. "Poor life choices" work that way, you know.

All these poor folks should have chosen to be born Bush. Neil makes Dubya look smart:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer

Exactly!!! They've never made 'poor life choices' and it shows. Plain old hard work and pulling themselves up by the bootstraps.

[TexasTiger 13,020]

When TexasTiger fed the hungry, they called him a saint. When he asked, "Why are the poor hungry?," they called him a socialist.

'Hard ' or 'Mean spirited' are called those who say that folks who are hungry need only to fend for themselves. Why are they hungry ? Because they have made poor life choices. Is giving them money which some one else earned the answer ? Nope.

People are poor because they made 'poor life decisions?'

He's just channeling Dubya. Wonder where he would be, given all his poor life choices, without Daddy?

Thirty years after teaching the class, Tsurumi said the twenty-something Bush’s statements and behavior—“always very shallow”—still stand out in his mind.

“Whenever [bush] just bumped into me, he had some flippant statement to make,” said Tsurumi when reached at his home in Scarsdale, N.Y. “The comments he made were revealing of his prejudice.”

The White House did not reply to requests for comment on Bush’s time at HBS.

Tsurumi said he particularly recalls Bush’s right-wing extremism at the time, which he said was reflected in off-hand comments equating the New Deal of the 1930s with socialism and the corporation-regulating Securities and Exchange Commission with “an enemy of capitalism.”

“I vividly remember that he made a comment saying that people are poor because they’re lazy,” Tsurumi said.

Tsurumi also said Bush displayed a sense of arrogance about his prominent family, including his father, former U.S. President George H.W. Bush.

“[George W. Bush] didn’t stand out as the most promising student, but...he made it sure we understood how well he was connected,” Tsurumi said. “He wasn’t bashful about how he was being pushed upward by Dad’s connections.”

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=503181

Speaking of Bush, how many 'life choices' did he start that were successful? Answer: none.

Profession: In the West Texas energy business, George W. Bush started out researching who owned mineral rights. He later traded mineral and royalty interests and invested in drilling prospects. He had started his own oil and gas company by 1978, taking $17,000 from his education trust fund to set up Arbusto Energy (arbusto means Bush in Spanish). The company fell on hard times when oil prices fell. He made several attempts to revive the business, first by changing the company's name and later by merging with other companies. In 1983, Bush’s company was rescued from failure when Spectrum 7 Energy Corporation, a small oil firm owned by William DeWitt and Mercer Reynolds, bought it. Bush became chief executive officer. Harken Energy Corporation acquired Spectrum 7 in 1986, after Spectrum had lost $400,000. In the buyout deal, Bush and his partners were given more than $2 million worth of Harken stock for the 180-well operation. Bush became a director and was hired as a "consultant" to Harken. He received another $600,000 of Harken stock, and has been paid between $42,000 and $120,000 a year. By the spring of 1987, Harken was in need of cash. So Bush and his fellow Harken officials met with Jackson Stephens, head of Stephens, Inc., an investment bank in Little Rock, Arkansas (Stephens contributed $100,000 to the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980 and gave another $100,000 to the Bush dinner committee in 1990.) Stephens arranged for Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) to provide $25 million to Bush’s company in return for a stock interest in Harken. As part of the deal, Sheikh Abdullah Bakhsh, a Saudi real estate tycoon and financier, joined Harken's board as a major investor. Stephens, UBS, and Bakhsh each had ties to the infamous, scandal-ridden Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI). In 1990, Bush sold his remaining stock options and left the oil business. Writer Jack Colhoun revealed some details of that stock sale, referring to Bush by his childhood nickname “Junior”:

On June 22, 1990, George Jr. sold two-thirds of his Harken stock for $848,560-a cool 200 percent profit. The move was well timed. One week after Junior sold his stock, Harken announced a $23.2 million loss in quarterly earnings and Harken stock dropped sharply, losing 60 percent of its value over the next six months. On August 2, 1990, Iraqi troops moved into Kuwait and 541,000 U.S. forces were deployed to the Gulf.

"There is substantial evidence to suggest that Bush knew Harken was in dire straits in the weeks before he sold the $848,560 of Harken stock," asserted U.S. News & World Report. The magazine noted Harken appointed Junior to a 'fairness committee' to study possible economic restructuring of the company. Junior worked closely with financial advisers from Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Company, who concluded "only drastic action could save Harken."

A year earlier, in 1989, Bush prepared for his move from the oil business to the sports business when he helped assemble a group who purchased the Texas Rangers baseball team from Eddie Chiles. He and Rusty Rose served as managing general partners until Bush was elected Governor of Texas in 1994.

LINK

Maybe Raptor's right; if a poor child simply chose to be born to wealthy parents and had $17,000 lying around in an education trust fund to invest in a business that would be saved by his daddy's friends and would get a promotion despite running the next business into the ground and could cavort with rich, Arab sheikh's and buy baseball teams but instead chose to go home with his poor, biological parents then he deserves what he gets. "Poor life choices" work that way, you know.

All these poor folks should have chosen to be born Bush. Neil makes Dubya look smart:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A...anguage=printer

Exactly!!! They've never made 'poor life choices' and it shows. Plain old hard work and pulling themselves up by the bootstraps.

This is the kind of "affirmative action" folks like the Bushes like.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

I dont make 200k per year. But I dont think its fair to those guys (who are already paying a ton) to take more money out of their pocket.

Its easy to be less sympathetic for someone who makes 200k or even a million...because it doesnt affect you. But that is socialism. You are saying that 200k is enough money for someone to make and that its time to start taking away from them. Its not your place to decide.

Then again, lets just cap how much income you can have at 100k. If you make a million...we will just take 900k because afterall..nobody needs that much money. Yeah that sounds like america.

No one's suggesting anything of the sort. The proposals I heard was reverting the marginal tax rates on income of $200k and above back to the Clinton era levels, which if I'm correct would be roughly raising the rate taxed on all income above that level from 36% to 39%. That's a far cry from saying $200k is "enough" for them to make or proposing that we cap their income. You're talking about a 3% increase just on the dollars above $200k. So for instance, someone who makes $250k, instead of paying $18k on that money in taxes, they'd pay $19,500. ($50,000 made above $200k times the tax rate). Or someone making $1 million would pay $312,000 in taxes on that money rather than $288,000.

I'm sorry, I don't see the burden or hardship there when we have to fund a war in two countries and get the deficit under control, especially if it helps those who make significantly less than that (middle class families for instance) keep the tax cuts they received.