11:59 am, May 27, 2015

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 3

  • Senator Reid proposal to devote mythical war-related "funds"
    "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid proposed immediate passage of legislation to scrap the [sequestratio-related] spending cuts and make up the money by cancelling funds ticketed for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan." Regarding this excerpt, we all know that the pols of both parties are predominantly lawyers and have little training in or competence in matters of fiscal policy as a group characteristic, but Senator Reid displays a level of ignorance (or possibly just cynical insouciance) that is breathtaking. What "funds" is he referring to? The Iraq and Afghanistan wars were entirely funded by borrowing. Does he think that perceptive readers won't see that he is proposing to just continue our out-of-control borrowing as a way to avoid the pains of sequestration - which themselves were due to Congress' reluctant passage of the said sequestration to deal with the said out-of-control borrowing - and its signing into law by the President, who in any event first propsoed the sequestration approach? Senator Reid would have done well as a seller of patent quack medicinal nostrums or as a carnie seeking to trick the rubes in the old shell game tricks, but such tactics are arguably out of place in the U.S. Senate (or maybe not, given its composition).
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Savings from ending the wars
    The money saved from withdrawing from both Iraq and soon Afganistan is not really money we can spend. The federal government has either been printing money w/o any colateral or borrowing money from overseas to pay for this war. By ending the conflict, we will reduce our borrowing or the excess printing of money w/o colateral. In other words, unless the federal government wishes to continue to borrow money and spend it on programs that we can not afford, they it should do so. The same goes for the the department of defense. Before it claims it needs more money to run operations, it should first do a complete audit of all it's finances. This hasn't been done in over 20 years. Until that time we (the American people) need to require all branches of government to prove they need the funds by showing where the shortfalls are by having a full/complete audit of all spending. Without that, not one penny should be given to any agency since they can not prove they are being hurt financially.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Let Americans vote on programs instead of Capitol Hill
    Honest Broker
    Why don't they make Americans vote on each project since they apparently cannot make a decision? Oh yeah, you don't get your kickbacks that way. I wonder how much we do owe China, Saudi Arabia, etc? I bet our loan holders are getting nervous.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }