Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 145

Thread: Help kids with cancer? Reid asks: 'Why would we want to do that?'[W:97]

  1. #121
    Educator
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Brookfield,Wisconsin
    Last Seen
    11-04-13 @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    628

    Re: Help kids with cancer? Reid asks: 'Why would we want to do that?'[W:97]

    I love that leftists will defend their own no matter what. Reid could be accused and found guilty of child molestation and the leftists and faux "centrists"would defend him.

  2. #122
    Educator

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Kingdom of Nigh
    Last Seen
    10-13-17 @ 11:25 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,152

    Re: Help kids with cancer? Reid asks: 'Why would we want to do that?'[W:97]

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Nah, we are just seeing once again the overt double standard of liberal progressives, using Alinsky as their template.
    Even when caught on video saying something, deny it...your faithful followers will defend you to the end...just look how many lies on video we all have caught Obama in.
    Know the truth and the truth will make you mad, because the truth has no agenda.

  3. #123
    Educator

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Kingdom of Nigh
    Last Seen
    10-13-17 @ 11:25 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,152

    Re: Help kids with cancer? Reid asks: 'Why would we want to do that?'[W:97]

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Yeah, given the option of admitting that what Reid said was stupid they choose the least sane option of trying to argue that what he said was perfectly normal and appropriate.
    perfectly normal and appropriate for a Liberal maybe...not a sane and reasonable adult. But then again, our politicians dont act like sane and reasonable adults.
    Know the truth and the truth will make you mad, because the truth has no agenda.

  4. #124
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Arlington, tx
    Last Seen
    10-08-13 @ 01:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    362

    Re: Help kids with cancer? Reid asks: 'Why would we want to do that?'[W:97]

    I love how the Teaterrorist and RepubliNazi's are crying about this didn't they demand in the sequester to cut funding for these children by 1.6 billion and get it. So who really wants to kill children now.

  5. #125
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    11-30-13 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,293

    Re: Help kids with cancer? Reid asks: 'Why would we want to do that?'[W:97]

    Quote Originally Posted by greengirl77 View Post
    I love how the Teaterrorist and RepubliNazi's are crying about this didn't they demand in the sequester to cut funding for these children by 1.6 billion and get it. So who really wants to kill children now.
    LOL..........................................

    Obama pushed for the sequester. Fact. For all the wrong reasons but he did it.

    Show me where the sequester cut funding for children. Fact is there was hardly any budgets that were cut so show me where funding to children was cut.
    "“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina; or Savannah, Georgia; or Jacksonville, Florida…” -Obama

  6. #126
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Arlington, tx
    Last Seen
    10-08-13 @ 01:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    362

    Re: Help kids with cancer? Reid asks: 'Why would we want to do that?'[W:97]

    NIH Director On Sequestration: 'God Help Us If We Get A Worldwide Pandemic'


    Here ya go I guess the right is gonna deny that pushed for NIH cuts. That's sad put on top of the veterans cuts as well.

  7. #127
    User Cats1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    07-02-15 @ 09:15 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    28

    Re: Help kids with cancer? Reid asks: 'Why would we want to do that?'[W:97]

    Quote Originally Posted by greengirl77 View Post
    So who really wants to kill children now.
    Abortionist maybe?
    Last edited by Cats1; 10-03-13 at 11:09 PM.

  8. #128
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,961
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Help kids with cancer? Reid asks: 'Why would we want to do that?'[W:97]

    Quote Originally Posted by greengirl77 View Post
    NIH Director On Sequestration: 'God Help Us If We Get A Worldwide Pandemic'


    Here ya go I guess the right is gonna deny that pushed for NIH cuts. That's sad put on top of the veterans cuts as well.
    BHO proposed the sequester and Repubs were happy to go along, happier than BHO had expected, actually. Nonetheless, the child-focused programs that are the topic of the current discussion continued to function despite the sequester. It was the current impasse that disrupted those programs, and introducing the sequester into that discussion is a deflection.
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

  9. #129
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    11-30-13 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,293

    Re: Help kids with cancer? Reid asks: 'Why would we want to do that?'[W:97]

    Quote Originally Posted by greengirl77 View Post
    NIH Director On Sequestration: 'God Help Us If We Get A Worldwide Pandemic'


    Here ya go I guess the right is gonna deny that pushed for NIH cuts. That's sad put on top of the veterans cuts as well.

    "In January 2002, President George W. Bush unveiled a five-year budget proposal that called for a doubling in NIH funding. It was an unprecedented show of commitment to the scientific community that promised 36,000 new projects and major breakthroughs in medical research.

    In many ways, it proved to be a high-water mark. By 2007, NIH funding had jumped to $29.2 billion, a massive increase from its $20.4 billion level at the start of Bush’s presidency. By the time President Barack Obama took office, it had gone up to $30.8 billion. The 2009 stimulus package known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act put a significant amount of money behind scientific research as well. But under sequestration, many of those gains were lost. This year, the agency’s budget has gone back down to $29.1 billion.

    Stein notes that the scientists concede: ”[T]he NIH’s budget remains large at $29 billion. But without more investment, the nation’s role as an international leader in scientific research is at risk.”

    Let’s view this in context: Sequestration will reduce the NIH’s budget to about one percent below where it was at the end of the Bush administration. That was after the budget had increased by $9.1 billion over the previous eight years, an expansion that increased it by nearly a half. That is your “dark ages?”

    Consider this: In 2000, the final full year of the Clinton presidency, the NIH budget was $17.8 billion, which translates into about $24 billion in 2013 dollars, according to the inflation calculator on the website of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But the post-sequestration budget for 2013 is more than 20 percent higher than that inflation-adjusted number. If America is entering a dark age of science, then the Clinton administration must have represented the Cro-Magnon Era.

    It should be noted that even in the Bush years when the NIH’s budget was skyrocketing, liberal pundits were claiming Bush Republicans were engaged in a “war on science.” One of the main arguments then was that the Republicans were not giving enough funding to research.

    In short, no matter what the budget situation, the recipients of federal grants never seem to say they are receiving a sufficient number of taxpayer dollars. Funny thing, that."
    Huffington Post: Sequestration cuts to NIH budget will usher in


    Where's those cuts to children that I asked you to show?
    Last edited by ItAin'tFree; 10-03-13 at 11:38 PM.
    "“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina; or Savannah, Georgia; or Jacksonville, Florida…” -Obama

  10. #130
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,961
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Help kids with cancer? Reid asks: 'Why would we want to do that?'[W:97]

    Quote Originally Posted by ItAin'tFree View Post
    "In January 2002, President George W. Bush unveiled a five-year budget proposal that called for a doubling in NIH funding. It was an unprecedented show of commitment to the scientific community that promised 36,000 new projects and major breakthroughs in medical research.

    In many ways, it proved to be a high-water mark. By 2007, NIH funding had jumped to $29.2 billion, a massive increase from its $20.4 billion level at the start of Bush’s presidency. By the time President Barack Obama took office, it had gone up to $30.8 billion. The 2009 stimulus package known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act put a significant amount of money behind scientific research as well. But under sequestration, many of those gains were lost. This year, the agency’s budget has gone back down to $29.1 billion.

    Stein notes that the scientists concede: ”[T]he NIH’s budget remains large at $29 billion. But without more investment, the nation’s role as an international leader in scientific research is at risk.”

    Let’s view this in context: Sequestration will reduce the NIH’s budget to about one percent below where it was at the end of the Bush administration. That was after the budget had increased by $9.1 billion over the previous eight years, an expansion that increased it by nearly a half. That is your “dark ages?”

    Consider this: In 2000, the final full year of the Clinton presidency, the NIH budget was $17.8 billion, which translates into about $24 billion in 2013 dollars, according to the inflation calculator on the website of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But the post-sequestration budget for 2013 is more than 20 percent higher than that inflation-adjusted number. If America is entering a dark age of science, then the Clinton administration must have represented the Cro-Magnon Era.

    It should be noted that even in the Bush years when the NIH’s budget was skyrocketing, liberal pundits were claiming Bush Republicans were engaged in a “war on science.” One of the main arguments then was that the Republicans were not giving enough funding to research.

    In short, no matter what the budget situation, the recipients of federal grants never seem to say they are receiving a sufficient number of taxpayer dollars. Funny thing, that."
    Huffington Post: Sequestration cuts to NIH budget will usher in
    Brilliant post. My compliments.
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •