Demonstrations of memory loss, hallucinations, etc...

It's interesting to note how just one article can expose so much at times. Take this one about Dubya's proposal for tax relief & opposition to it...


-"President Bush flew today to Ohio, an all-important state for his re-election hopes, to campaign for his package of tax cuts and to put pressure on a rebellious fellow Republican."

^^^^^ The writer of this article apparently forgets that it is not an uncommon thing for there to be disagreement within a party. Senator Voinovich is not being "rebellious", only disagreeing, and actually on grounds that make quite a bit of sense (wanting spending cuts to accompany the tax cuts). Now comes the problem...


"Mr. Voinovich and Senators Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine are the main Republicans resisting tax cuts of the scale envisioned by the president. The senators have said they are wary of cutting taxes too much during a time of soaring budget deficits."

Well, someone voted for the spending increases that resulted in defecits, didn't they? This should've been thought of earlier, by now it's too late to worry about the Federal Pocketbook versus ours: personally I'd prefer the budget to be balanced, but failing that it's better that they come up short than end up with an excess. Government is not a business, our elected officials are not where they're at to make a profit. If they don't have enough then it's on them to make do on what they have, not to just crawl back to the well. What someone should do is propose legislation (with no loopholes) making spending cuts mandatory if the budget is not balanced, then this mess wouldn't be an issue. But that takes balls, pity that no one in congress has them. Speaking of gutsy manuevers...


"The senator's aides said a scheduling conflict kept him from attending the Canton event. But a Republican senator up for re-election would normally want to be seen smiling broadly at the side of a Republican president visiting his state."

There goes Mr Stout editorializing again: "he didn't show up? There must be a grudge between these two!" Mayhaps, but also it may actually have been a scheduling conflict. Why does this sound like he's nudging people to not buy Voinovich's excuse? But wait, there's more...


"The president called again for an end to the "double taxation" on dividends, the situation in which some dividends are taxed both at the corporate and individual levels."

Why the quotes around "double taxation"? If you tax profits once and then tax them again, that is double taxation, no quotes are needed. But when it comes to scare tactics, David is a rookie up against allstars...


"Ohio has lost 167,800 jobs, or more than 3 percent of its total work force, since Bush was sworn in," said a statement by Democrats on the House Government Reform Committee. "More specifically, the Canton metropolitan area has lost 6,300 jobs (3.43 percent of its work force) and the Lima area has lost 2,500 jobs (3.18 percent of its workforce) since Bush took office."

Just how much does the president have to do with this? They say this as if the economic wellbeing of Ohio would've skyrocketed if only the words "President Gore" didn't sound funny. Typical politicians elevating their importance...

-Talks with North Korea end quicker than thought. Am I the only one now REALLY curious just what the hell was said?