Skip to comments.
Obama to cut slain officers program almost in half
WTOP.com ^
| May 7, 2009
| DEVLIN BARRETT
Posted on 05/07/2009 3:04:40 PM PDT by KeyLargo
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21 next last
Gee how nice of Obama to do this for upcoming NATIONAL POLICE WEEK
http://www.nleomf.com/NPW2009/
1
posted on
05/07/2009 3:04:40 PM PDT
by
KeyLargo
To: KeyLargo
2
posted on
05/07/2009 3:06:29 PM PDT
by
al baby
(Hi Mom)
To: KeyLargo
Justice Department budget documents say the reduction is being made because "claims are anticipated to decrease" because the number of officers killed in the line of duty has been decreasing. If that's the case Obama wouldn't have to take any action at all. The outlays would reduce on their own.
This guy is one vile bastard, and his Justice Department is in lock step with him.
3
posted on
05/07/2009 3:07:21 PM PDT
by
DoughtyOne
(Pres__ent Obama's own grandmother says he was born in Kenya. She was there.)
To: KeyLargo
There are tons of things the government should not be involved in, and I am for huge reductions in government, but in making cuts this program should be among the absolute LAST to go.
4
posted on
05/07/2009 3:09:48 PM PDT
by
EyeGuy
To: KeyLargo
Umm . . You know . . I actually kind of agree with this. But only in the context that this is really a States Rights issue. I am for lowering the money the feds collect and disburse from and to us poor citizens, and the states to do their duty.
Look at it from the state view. Are the states saying they don't have to take care of their own because the feds are doing it? If the money has to be filtered throught the feds, you know some is grafted off to some porkbarrel things.
I say the closer the money stays to home, the more power the citizens can exercise over how it's used.
5
posted on
05/07/2009 3:12:09 PM PDT
by
jeffc
(They're coming to take me away! Ha-ha, hey-hey, ho-ho!)
To: KeyLargo
To: KeyLargo
So we can screw the ones who protect us yet give billions and trillions to the bankers, corporate lawyers, lobbyists, and the racists ACORN, LaRaza and the NAACP?
Seems fair doesnt it /s
7
posted on
05/07/2009 3:13:44 PM PDT
by
sasafras
(TIME FOR A RESURGENCE - FREEDOM IS NOT FREE - NO MORE COMPLAINING - LET'S GET BUSY!)
To: KeyLargo
Don’t fall for it. He’s cutting stuff like this so everyone cryes and complains and then he says see see i tried to do something but you can’t without hurting woman, children, cops.
8
posted on
05/07/2009 3:13:52 PM PDT
by
genxer
To: KeyLargo
This fits right in with the program to make injured military pay for their war injuries. This guy really hates the USA.
9
posted on
05/07/2009 3:14:25 PM PDT
by
anoldafvet
(Proud Member of the Radical Right-wing Extremist Movement)
To: EyeGuy
I disagree.
The very last place the federal government should be is in local law enforcement.
10
posted on
05/07/2009 3:14:27 PM PDT
by
mountainbunny
(Mitt Romney: Collect the whole set!)
To: jeffc
Are the states saying they don't have to take care of their own because the feds are doing it? Probably. It happens with lots of what should be local or state expenses.
11
posted on
05/07/2009 3:14:28 PM PDT
by
Tax-chick
("This is our duty: to zot their sorry arses into the next time zone." ~ Admin Mod)
To: KeyLargo
You know, in my humble opinion, instead of cutting the budget for the men and women who have died in the line of fire, why doesn't Obama, in all his brilliance, cut the benefits for politicians. As it stands right now, when someone, a politician, serves for only 4 years and gets voted out, that person gets a retirement for rest of his life. Let them start putting money out for their co-pays when receiving better medical care than those, us, who pay for it. Let Obama cut out all the fringe benefits politicians get while supposedly servicing for us. Let the politicians take a 60% cut in pay and do what most working Americans are now doing, cutting their budgets, in order to survive.
If I remember correctly, they are supposed to be working for us, not us for them.
12
posted on
05/07/2009 3:14:33 PM PDT
by
antiunion person
("Do as I say, not as I do" says Nazi Pelosi, head of the socialist party of America.)
To: KeyLargo
"There are terrorists, willing to kill Americans, who are more worthy."
13
posted on
05/07/2009 3:15:19 PM PDT
by
Diogenesis
(Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
To: KeyLargo
He is asking for trouble.
I’ll wait for all the police to boycott their local offices. (Not that they would really do it, but I’d sure like to see them speak out against Obama somehow.)
14
posted on
05/07/2009 3:15:21 PM PDT
by
Salvation
( †With God all things are possible.†)
To: EyeGuy
This is always the scheme used by the “authorities” that want to show that taxes may be cut - but it’s gonna HURT you. Cut the more visible programs, like the public contact sector, while preserving the back-door and institutional distributions that are NOT on visible display.
Transparency is not this regime’s greatest strength.
15
posted on
05/07/2009 3:15:47 PM PDT
by
alloysteel
(When the chips are down - the buffalo is empty.)
To: jeffc
I was kind of thinking that myself, but the federal government does NOT hand power back, it confiscates and centralizes. This sounds like a real cut in a worthy program, not a needed decentralization.
16
posted on
05/07/2009 3:15:52 PM PDT
by
Future Snake Eater
("Get out of the boat and walk on the water with us!”--Sen. Joe Biden)
To: KeyLargo
The proposal is being made just days before Attorney General Eric Holder is expected to attend ceremonies in Washington honoring slain officers. Obama has a tin ear (politically).
Eric Holder had to have been happy when this announcement was made knowing he was going to this ceremony. (I bet he had some really kind words for his ONE)
17
posted on
05/07/2009 3:17:24 PM PDT
by
Pontiac
(Your message here.)
To: genxer
I agree with your analysis. Local governments pull this all the time, too. “We can’t cut the budget without eliminating police! What, my brother-in-law and my latest baby-momma in six-figure makework jobs? How did that happen?!?”
18
posted on
05/07/2009 3:17:34 PM PDT
by
Tax-chick
("This is our duty: to zot their sorry arses into the next time zone." ~ Admin Mod)
To: Tax-chick
I would be all in favor of cutting fed grants to the states. But it should be accompanied by tax cuts, so there is more money for the states to pay for it themselves. Of course that ain’t gonna happen.
The best place to start would be to abolish the Department of Education. But that CERTAINLY is not going to happen.
19
posted on
05/07/2009 3:18:35 PM PDT
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: KeyLargo
Call me a strict constructionalist but can someone explain to me where in the US Constitution it is allowable for the US Government to pay benefits or provide money for benefits to be paid for a local law enforcement officer killed enforcing local laws?
Don't get me wrong, I am all for it and would donate money to such a fund in my state. But according to the Constitution such funds must be provided by the states. We need to stop allowing the Constitution to be hijacked in the name of feel good programs or "for the children's sake."
It's kind of funny that this may be the only thing The One has done that actually has some basis in the Constitution.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson