Patterico's Pontifications

1/26/2009

L.A. Times Has Yet Another Story Detailing the Horrors of Spending Cuts — But Where Are the Similar Scare Stories About Tax Increases?

Filed under: Dog Trainer,General — Patterico @ 7:16 am

As occurs every time spending cuts are proposed, the L.A. Times does another “Oh my God look how awful this is!” story about the proposed spending reductions:

Although lawmakers continue to argue over how to resolve the state’s fiscal crisis, they already have endorsed $6 billion in spending cuts that provide a painful preview of what is likely to be in store for Californians.

The proposed cuts would mean that money for the state’s university systems would decrease. Transportation and schools would take a hit. Funds for regional centers that help treat developmental disabilities in babies and toddlers would decline. Cash to help the elderly, blind and disabled keep up with rising food costs would be slashed.

Experts are quoted to tell us how awful this is:

“With 9.3% unemployment in our state, people are flowing into public benefit offices all over California,” said Michael Herald, legislative advocate for the Western Center on Law and Poverty, a Los Angeles-based legal services nonprofit. “This is when people need these programs, and yet our state seems to be headed in a direction of reducing them now.”

And personal stories are told, to put a face to the suffering the cuts will cause:

One of the provisions both parties have supported in the state Capitol would reduce the maximum monthly grant for low-income blind and disabled Californians. Individual grants would drop from $907 to $870, while couples would see their monthly checks drop from $1,579 to $1,524, according to the state Department of Finance. Those grants were supposed to increase this year and again next year to account for inflation.

Ismael Maldonado, a 20-year old from Pacoima who has glaucoma and asthma, said he may have to skimp on medications if lawmakers cut his grant.

The last time he did that, he said, “I ended up in the hospital emergency room” — an expense the state’s Medi-Cal program had to pick up.

The paper does not emphasize that the alternative to spending cuts is tax increases. And although it provides one example of a “cut” that is merely a failure to increase spending, it fails to tell readers that huge chunks of the scary $40 billion projected deficit result from automatic increases in spending — which are obviously insane in this climate.

What’s more, when is the last time you saw an article in the L.A. Times about the horrors of tax increases? When did you see a lede that summarized the negative economic consequences of tax increases (especially in a recession), which then fleshed out the summary with quotes from experts, and then gave a concrete example of a family who would be adversely impacted by the tax increases? Surely the paper could find a family that is barely making its mortgage payment — and who may lose the family home if forced by the state to cough up still more money.

I can’t remember ever seeing a story like that in the Los Angeles Times. But stories like this detailing the horrors of spending cuts come around every time cuts are proposed, like clockwork.

No bias here!

63 Responses to “L.A. Times Has Yet Another Story Detailing the Horrors of Spending Cuts — But Where Are the Similar Scare Stories About Tax Increases?”

  1. It’s also laziness. Anyone can find sob stories of the horrors of service cuts. Whole groups of lobbyists are there to guide the reporter.

    As a venerable editor of mine would say, “That’s not reporting, that’s stenography.”

    Bradley J. Fikes (0ea407)

  2. It’s simply taking money from people and businesses and putting it into the hands of our Betters, who in their vast economic and civil wisdom, will bestow on us commoners what They think we need.

    (there’s a Greek word that fits better and better each passing day: Aristos – the best. There’s a form of government by supposedly “The Best”, I’m sure one could put a name to it………)

    Techie (6b5d8d)

  3. Be nice to see former Teachers, Gov.t Workers, etc cutting my lawn for minimum wage.

    Again, schadenfreude forever.

    Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e)

  4. Women And Minorities Hit Hardest!

    Official Internet Data Office (4e5efd)

  5. California government spending has increased 40% in 5 years. California already has the highest tax rate in the country in several categories. And they don’t mention the horror of collecting an additional $40 billion from 40 million people, every year?

    Chris Reed at San Diego Union Tribune is the best at writing about this mess from a sane perspective: America’s Finest Blog

    Wesson (3ab0b8)

  6. Also cuts are made deliberately at citizen level first, in order to beat down the taxpayer. “See what you get when you resist tax increases? We have to lay off teachers and police and firefighters and poor children and seniors will starve, STARVE, we tell you! You meany!”

    Darleen (187edc)

  7. Well since everyone at the LA Times is being laid off, they don’t have to worry about tax increases do they!

    Joe (17aeff)

  8. Patrick,

    What grants? Sounds to me the author was referring to the Federal SSI program, which California provides part of the funds. In addition, Medical is California’s name for the Federal Medicaid program as administered by California.

    BTW, if Ismael Maldonado is receiving SSI he is on Medical automatically. And Medical covers medication automatically. I get free Flonase.

    Once again it looks like another example of the Dog Trainer’s pathological avoidance of basic research.

    Alan Kellogg (e4d258)

  9. Why, Pat, you know that tax increases aren’t scary at all — especially when they’re all on the other guy, and not you.

    Please make a note of it.

    The factual Dana (3e4784)

  10. Being employed by the government has become the ticket to financial security, guaranteed quality medical care and 75-95% of your salary paid when you retire (at a very young age – 50 for some classifications such as firemen). The difference in pay and benefits between working for the government and working in private enterprise has become shocking and therein lies a lot of the problem. But thanks to the strong union influence in this state, it’ll never change.

    jwarner (0a2a75)

  11. Here in Connecticut there was a story in the paper about how the state Labor Department is overwhelmed with unemployment applications and can not find any one to hire to fill the positions they need to add. The ripe, ripe irony in the situation seems to have gone right over the writers head.

    Have Blue (974cdf)

  12. “…when is the last time you saw an article in the L.A. Times about the horrors of tax increases?…”

    Not since Norman Chandler died!

    AD (cb5311)

  13. The pain of taking $1.00 from a each of a million people is very diffuse, while the pain of denying that $1,000,000 to a bureaucracy to distribute amongst its supplicants can be explicated by any one of those supplicants. When you’re not particularly interested in the facts, it’s even easier.

    That the million people have been forced to work for the benefit of others — the supplicants and the bureaucrats — is hidden by the small individual increment. Of course, it’s never just $1.00, and those small increments add up.

    Rob Crawford (04f50f)

  14. There was an article the past day or two about the growth of the Washington DC area. It appears to be immune from the economic distress that other, less favored, parts of the nation are suffering. I wonder why ?

    Mike K (ee3203)

  15. Mr Crawford wrote:

    The pain of taking $1.00 from a each of a million people is very diffuse,

    And no one would combitch about it, were they just taking $1.00 from everyone. We do complain about it because they want to take all of the money, in ever-greater amounts as you achieve greater success, to give to lazy scumbags who won’t work.

    Our government is now predicated on the unworkable concept of punishing those who produce, and rewarding those who do not.

    The Dana who truly hates welfare (3e4784)

  16. So why do we, the complaining people, reelect the same clowns to the state and federal legislatures election after election where there are competitive elections? Sometimes the opposition is brain-dead as are the Repubs in my area. The congressman representing my district (North Shore, Long Island, NY) ran virtually unopposed last Nov. because the Repubs didn’t even mount any semblance of a compaign until late October. Two years ago he was unopposed. Two years before that, the Repubs put up a sacrificial lamb–an eccentric unkown who had no chance…

    sam (1a8310)

  17. At the pace our Gov.t is going I see a world when these same workers will need to become cannibals to feed their every growing girth.

    All productive private sectors employees will eventually be sucked dry so not much left but to cannibalize their own.

    Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e)

  18. [T]he L.A. Times does another “Oh my [Lord's name taken in vain] look how awful this is!” story about the proposed spending reductions:
    [...]
    One of the provisions both parties have supported in the state Capitol would reduce the maximum monthly grant for low-income blind and disabled Californians.

    For disabled Californians, who are already just barely getting by, the certain hardship resulting from reduced grants will indeed be “awful.” It’s not something that Patterico should treat in mocking or dismissive tones, even as a means of knocking the very knock-worthy L.A. Times.

    clark smith (d8da01)

  19. Let’s double the State stipends received by all the California disabled. No, wait–let’s triple them. Immediately, there will be people asserting that disabled Californians are “barely just getting by” and that reducing grants is “awful.”

    Official Internet Data Office (4e5efd)

  20. Ismael Maldonado, a 20-year old from Pacoima who has glaucoma and asthma, said he may have to skimp on medications if lawmakers cut his grant.

    Sure, I’ll ask – is Ismael Maldonado a U.S. citizen?

    …and to those tender hearts offended by such an insensitive question, yes it does matter, it matters very much.

    Dana (137151)

  21. I am reminded of an NFL primadonna who had a family to feed and couldn’t do it on the paltry millions he was being paid so he needed more. It was for his children!

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  22. I will note that nowhere are they talking about the “horror of cuts in public employee benefits and pensions.”

    It’s all about the blind, schools, roads, police and libraries. Again. When all the money is really going to what Bill Bennett called “the blob.”

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  23. The California teachers union just decided to go ahead and collect signatures for their Proposition which increases sales tax by another 1%, for an additional ~$6 billion. All the money goes to “schools”, whatever that is. Of course, they will get the needed signatures.
    SacBee: CTA Moves Forward with Tax Measure

    Wesson (3ab0b8)

  24. Is the teachers union in favor of freedom of choice when it comes to parents selecting the school of their choice for their children? Or is the union only in favor of shoving the kids in schools that have a storied history of failure? If it’s for the kids, why not be in favor of a voucher system so parents can put their children in successful schools? It is about the children, is it not?

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  25. Teacher’s Union is interested in nice retirement benefits first and foremost.

    Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e)

  26. #23, the school district I work for is now in serious budget negotiations involving all stakeholders. Everyone is willing to put something on the table – except for the teachers union. Representatives came and flatly stated they are unwilling to make concessions on any issue and absolutely nothing is on the table. They also said their union will fight lock, stock and barrel any attempted hits… but have no problem with the Classified & Management unions getting hit hard.

    Also, we have 44 Probationary Temp. teachers in district. If the union opted for furloughs or at least a 3-5 day decrease in the school year, those 44 positions could have been saved. But because nothing is on the table, those teachers secure in the union opted rather to have 44 people lose their jobs. Those positions are eliminated for the 09-10 school year.

    Dana (137151)

  27. We need to go back to having 30 kids per class and fire the rest of the teachers.

    Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e)

  28. Obama uber alles!!!!, class reduction is indeed on the table but that’s a P.R. nightmare with parents. Districts may not have the nerve to take up that fight.

    Dana (137151)

  29. It’s gonna get ugly.

    Bit I’m not going for a recall or anything of the sort this time: I’m will to let the lights go out. End this madness!

    Patricia (89cb84)

  30. hitch, that was nba sweetie latrell sprewell that turned down 3 years $21 million because it was beneath him. he recently had his yacht repo’ed. i finally got hep to the lat when i realized that every time there was a threat to cut welfare that they always found some thug to quote, “well, if the gov’ment ain’t gonna give me what i need i guess i’ll just have to take it”. the implication being that crime would increase. these pansies would give their daughter’s virginity away to prevent someone from letting their dog poop on their lawn.

    cts22 (ab4d35)

  31. It’s not that complex. Off the top of my head, most state expenditures are either set by law, or are discretionary expenditures from within various specific or general funds. If they are set by law, they can be un-set by law. If they are discretionary, show some discretion. The only thing I can think of that has to continue on regardless of statutes or discretion are interest obligations on bonds. There might be others, but the gorilla is entitlements and bond creation to cover deficit spending.

    But here’s the simplest solution. Establish the shortfall in the budget. Then determine what percentage of spending needs to be cut to zero out the shortfall. Unceremoniously, announce that every person, every institution, every department, every whatever is cut that particular percentage for the coming year. That’s called spreading the damages equally. Suck it up, or get the hell to another state. And down in the fine print, you’ll see that there are no income tax increases, no sales taxes raised, no property tax increases, and nothing at all about fees raised. Zilch, nada. AND NO MORE BONDS!!!!

    Rinse and repeat annually.

    allan (602add)

  32. The California teachers union just decided to go ahead and collect signatures for their Proposition which increases sales tax by another 1%, for an additional ~$6 billion.

    Well, it’s so obvious that many public schools have been stumbling and fumbling around for the past few decades because of a lack of….MONEY!!!

    Yep, so adding lots of dollars is the answer to making America’s schools top heavy with primarily straight-A, A-grade students, brimming with valedictorians and honor-roll students.

    Uh, BTW, never mind the mindset, attitudes, politics and culture that dominate the public-education industry of America, and their influence on the typical campus. Yep, uh-huh. That’s because we know most school teachers and administrators, as a window into their mind and view of the world, voted for McCain instead of Obama — for Bush instead of Kerry (and Gore) — and believe that neurotic forms of political correctness and dumbed-down classroom policies (and politics) in general are unacceptable.

    Mark (411533)

  33. We need to go back to having 30 kids per class and fire the rest of the teachers.

    Comment by Obama über alles!!!!! — 1/26/2009 @ 7:45 pm

    In a lot of districts they would have to hire teachers to get a class size of 30.

    Ed from PA (836625)

  34. How do parochial school students compare to public school students in standardized tests?

    How do home-school students compare to public school students in standardized tests?

    What is the cost-per-student difference between these three groups?

    Why did Tennessee decide “we can’t control what non-public school students learn so they don’t qualify for state jobs”?

    I realize those are all rhetorical questions because the libs, like EFP, cannot truthfully answer them without proving my point, but I decided to ask them anyway to show my point.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  35. It is interesting you provide a non-scientific sampling of one group of students. It is also interesting you provide no comparative studies. It is also interesting you provide no per-student cost analysis.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  36. We need to go back to having 30 kids per class and fire the rest of the teachers.

    Given the political landscape (“We love Obama! We love Democrats!!!”), why stop at 30? We should proclaim that our government (at both the state and federal level) must pay to have classrooms with no more than 20 students!

    Oh, and while we’re at it, let’s make sure to proclaim that some of the sentences below have a whiff of…RACISM!!!

    From NCPA.org (National Center for Policy Analysis):

    Some claim that the number of students in a classroom is the most important factor affecting the quality of education. But the empirical evidence is not at all conclusive. In fact, students in countries like Japan produce higher test scores although classes are quite large.

    The key to solving the “class-size” puzzle is the public good nature of classroom education. As with other public goods, such as roads, classrooms can suffer congestion. Classroom congestion is caused by student misbehavior. Misbehaving students produce what economists call “a negative externality” borne by the rest of the class.

    For instance, if students misbehave just 2 percent of the time, that reduces the effectiveness of teaching in a class of 25 students to 60 percent.

    If the class has 40 students instead of 25, teaching effectiveness drops to 45 percent — thus classroom size amplifies the effect of individual misbehavior rates.

    One way to deal with the problem is to reduce classroom size if the misbehavior rate is high, and increase it if it is low.

    Private schools, however, don’t tolerate high rates of misbehavior, and many have higher teacher to student ratios than public schools.

    Some attribute public school student misbehavior to the quality of teachers — claiming that if schools can attract better teachers with higher salaries, for example, the increased cost can be more than offset by larger classroom size and higher educational output. However, private schools tend to pay teachers less than public schools.

    The real problem, say some analysts, is that public schools, unlike private ones, are required to educate any student, short of violent criminal misbehavior. Since many public schools do not allow teachers to use effective methods of controlling students – such as corporal punishment, isolation and ostracism — there are few ways teachers can maintain discipline.

    Mark (411533)

  37. I think this is an interesting read.

    That type of information should be forwarded to the following bunch of people:

    From http://www.mykidsdeservebetter.com

    A new study reported that more than 25 percent of Baltimore and Washington, D.C. public-school teachers send their kids to private schools. The study done by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute found that nationwide, public-school teachers are almost twice as likely as other parents to send their children to a private school. The study also found that more than one in five public-school teachers send their kids to private schools.

    In the biggest cities across America, the statistics get even more startling. In Washington, D.C., Baltimore, and 16 other big cities, more than 1 out of 4 public-school teacher’s kids attend private schools. In some cities, almost half the public-school teachers do this. For example, in Philadelphia, 44 percent, and in Cincinnati, 41 percent of public-school teachers sent their kids to private schools.

    Yet, across America, only about 12.2 percent of all parents who are not teachers send their children to private schools. Now, why is this? Public school authorities keep telling us that they give our kids a good education. Yet they send their kids to private schools?

    Well, teachers know best in this case. They actually work in the public schools every day. They see the kind of 3rd-rate, often mind-numbing education children get in these schools. Public-school teachers love their children like all other parents do. They want the best for their kids. So, is it any wonder that so many teachers send their children to private schools?


    Clarence Page:

    Black students disproportionately find themselves in under-performing schools. In fact, opinion polls by think tanks like the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies have found black parents favor vouchers by larger majorities than white parents do.

    Yet teachers unions lead opposition to such alternatives, even though studies like a 2004 Thomas B. Fordham Institute report find big city public school teachers to be more likely than the general population they serve to have their own children in private schools.

    In Obama’s hometown, Chicago, for example, 38.7 percent of public school teachers sent their children to private schools, the Fordham study found, compared to 22.6 percent of the general public.

    In Washington, D.C., 26.8 percent of public school teachers sent their children to private schools, versus 19.8 percent of the public.

    Mark (411533)

  38. Comment by John Hitchcock — 1/26/2009 @ 8:45 pm

    What claims did I make about the article? I just said it was interesting.

    The Columbus Dispatch is a conservative newspaper, so you can’t really claim your horesh*t ‘bias’ crap.

    What articles/links do you have to back up your stance? All you have are claims at this point. If you do come up with some info, please share. Also, upon linking the information tell us why that information suggests an improved school performance and is not at all reflective of a better support system in the home.

    Go!

    Ed from PA (836625)

  39. Also, I am not arguing class size. I totally agree with the (most) of the opinions that Mark provided. It should go without saying that classroom efficiency increases with decreased misbehavior, which is independent of class size.

    Ed from PA (836625)

  40. EFP, I did not say you made any claims about any article. And I clicked on your link, which started opening a Columbus article but switched over to a Cincinnati article. And for the record, the Columbus Dispatch is not a conservative newspaper. I know this from years of experience.

    But you might want to take a look at Mark’s research.

    Also, for the record, I home-schooled my daughter 4 grades in three years. When she entered public school in 5th grade, she was bored by all the class-work she was provided that she had already learned. I spent less than $800 per year for materials, and that includes the one year I drove her the 1000 miles down to Bob Jones University Press to pick up the books.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  41. EFP – Why are you so defensive? Why don’t you try to be positive for a change? Your side won!

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  42. Hitch: Yes, it is a conservative newspaper. Do you know when the last time they endorsed a democratic presidential candidate was? Woodrow Wilson. 1916. The election issue was sprinkled with plenty enough R’s. I know this from experience.

    Ah yes, the indestructable personal anecdote. Hard to argue with them numbers, eh?

    Bob Jones…. is that the school that was so far to the right that they only recently became accredited by Transnational Association of Christian Colleges? Wow, a more prestigious academic school would be hard to find.

    Ed from PA (836625)

  43. Thanks, Daley.

    I think this debate is deeper than class size, teacher salaries, school choice, and so forth. I think if we could get each student’s parents to actually take enough interest in their child’s education to worry about where they are going to school then the problems would be 95% solved. Does anybody disagree? I would love to hear your opinions on this (seriously, no ‘disagreeing for the sake of it-I seem to be accused of that lately).

    Ed from PA (836625)

  44. I think if we could get each student’s parents to actually take enough interest in their child’s education to worry about where they are going to school then the problems would be 95% solved.

    I will agree with the essence of this statement. I will also note that, upon election, the (D) governor of Ohio used his line-item veto to get rid of vouchers, contrary to the wishes of a great many parents who were very interested in their children’s education.

    And, being a life-long Ohio resident, I can say with certainty that the Columbus Dispatch, while not being far-left, is most definitely leftist. Ohio has this apparently common malady of electing left-center or centrist (R) to high office. Voinovich is a prime example.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  45. As far as Bob Jones University is concerned, they do have a few issues with which I disagree. A primary example is something noted in the press a few years ago. BJU refused to allow an interracial couple to date without their parents’ approval, according to the press.

    Bob Jones University Press, an offshoot of BJU, provides textbooks for K-12 for Christian schools and Christian home-school use. And, yes, my Pastor’s wife did caution me about their legalistic bias. Even given that, my daughter was still far ahead of the 5th graders in all her classes despite the fact she had only completed 4th grade work as provided by BJU. So, your “far right” attack does not hold up in regards to quality of education.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  46. “I think if we could get each student’s parents to actually take enough interest in their child’s education to worry about where they are going to school then the problems would be 95% solved.”

    EFP – I have no problem with the statement, except the percentage. I think if parents did take a much more active role the risk is that they would figure out how shitty many of our existing teachers are and how tough they are to get rid of and then there would be hell to pay. They would realize how much of a bill of goods they’d been sold year after year on why the schools needed more money when what they needed was to get rid of dead wood and reform.

    Other than that I’m in total agreement.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  47. There’s something wrong with a system where parents who homeschool using BJU products produce students who outperform their peers in the public school system getting $10k/yr in subsidies from the government.

    Think about it – a class of 30 kids at $10k/yr is $300,000 per class. A school with 7 classes (1 each of K-6) is $2.1M.

    Where does that money go to, and how much more could you get if you had just 10% of that to spend as you wish on your own kids and their education?

    We homeschooled our children. One’s now in a Big10 university on a full-ride academic scholarship. One’s getting ready to transfer to a university with a 3.99 college average (a A- in one class). I don’t think we did a disservice, and we edumacated them for far less than $130,000 ($10k/year * 13 years of schooling).

    You’ll never hear the media saying “we could save money by allowing parents to educate their own children for a percentage of what we pay public schools to warehouse kids.” No, even though that would work and would save money, that’s crazy talk. What we have to do is SPEND MORE MONEY on public education, because even though it’s failing, it’s failing ONLY because it doesn’t have enough money.

    How does it feel, Californians, to have the government vacuum cleaner permanently attached to your wallets?

    steve miller (3381bc)

  48. When my daughter was in high school, she was having difficulty in her sophomore soc class. I, being the concerned parent, had been having troubles getting her to actually study. She never seemed to have any homework and she never brought home textbooks to study.

    During the parent-teacher conference which the vice principle sat in on, the teacher said something that floored me. “Many of my students seem to be having problems. If they keep having problems, I may have to resort to using the textbook.” What!? I flipped out. The vice principle said “Many of my teachers don’t use textbooks in their classes. And I have full faith in my teachers. Since they’re teachers, they’re experts.” What on God’s green Earth is that nonsense?

    Can a 23-year old with 5 years of college education be deemed an expert in any field other than education? Is the field of education so watered down that someone with only 5 years of college education is automatically an expert? In a county of 50,000, can there truly be over 500 experts in a single field (We have several small-town school systems and two colleges.)? Or was this just another ivory-tower example of pure elitism and bullying tactics?

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  49. A better solution would be to fire one out every four state and local government employee and give the rest a 20% haircut on pay and benefits and in addition change the age to collect retirement to the social security age that apples to a privately employed person born in the same year. And finally ban government workers unions. Please don’t do us any favors with our money, not happy get a job outside of government.

    cubanbob (409ac2)

  50. #49 Comment by steve miller — 1/26/2009 @ 11:00 pm
    How does it feel, Californians, to have the government vacuum cleaner permanently attached to your wallets?

    It sucks ;-)

    Pons Asinorum (61628f)

  51. Hi there!

    I’m new to the forum so I just wanted to say hi to everyone!

    JennyPrincessX (264a87)

  52. I think if parents did take a much more active role the risk is that they would figure out how shitty many of our existing teachers are and how tough they are to get rid of and then there would be hell to pay.

    You say that like it would be a bad thing.

    LarryD (feb78b)

  53. OIDO, #19

    If the state of California tripled their share of the money I get every month I would be getting $951.00 a month. If that was instead of the Federal plus state payment, I would see a gain of minus $40 dollars. Which is still less than half the poverty rate.

    BTW, how many SSI recipients do you think there are in California?

    Alan Kellogg (e4d258)

  54. In San Francisco, SSI recipients are virtually everywhere, and their most common disability, in my view, is a severe allergic reaction to work.

    Official Internet Data Office (4e5efd)

  55. Comment by Ed from PA — 1/26/2009 @ 8:29 pm
    Could you please detail for me the school districts here in CA that have average class sizes in excess of 30?

    AD (db1953)

  56. AD – How dare you ask them to support their assertions?

    JD (a1ce2d)

  57. Comment by JD — 1/27/2009 @ 11:59 am

    I denounce myself, again!

    AD (db1953)

  58. Sounds like deporting Ismael Maldonado back to Mexico would be a money saver. So, just why did he cut back on his meds last time? Had to buy more crack? My grandfather had glaucoma and asthma but managed to work at the same time. What is that guy’s problem?

    Federale (11f720)

  59. OIDO,

    When you go swimming in the Sea of Cortez, the ocean is nothing but hammerheads.

    Federale,

    As a Medical recipient Maldonado pays nothing for his meds. Oh BTW, who said he was an illegal? Or is it your dyslexia again?

    Alan Kellogg (e4d258)

  60. [...] kelly trump __________________ [...]

    ! - 6 - (e5b00d)

  61. [...] The paper always details the horrors of spending cuts, but ignores the problems associated with tax increases. [...]

    Patterico's Pontifications » Patterico’s Los Angeles Dog Trainer Year in Review 2009 (e4ab32)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4365 secs.