Was a reason even given as to why they just cut college financial aid?

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

Congress just passed sweeping bills to cut funding for college students looking for financial help.

I understand they are evil and really don't give a shit, plus, um, boot camp is FREE so maybe more would be encouraged to sign up, but was ANY kind of "regular" reason given for why they did this????

It's just SO fucking cruel. Who would cut aid to college students? And wasn't bush JUST saying if someone is out of work they should go to college???

Just read an article about it on http://www.politrix.org/modules.php?name=News&file=categories&op=newindex&catid=6

[Selatius]

1. The machine needs more fuel

Cutting financial aid should drive them into the military in bigger numbers. Therefore, we have more fresh meat for the meat grinder known as Iraq. Otherwise, they go deeper into debt by going to the bankers for loans or drop out altogether.

(End cynical statement)

[sarahlee]

20. By George he got it!

Exactly right, Selatius. Send those recruiters to the poorer schools where the pool of those needing help for college just got a bit larger.

And the Cheap Labor conservatives don't want a bunch more folks believing they deserve more than minimum wage.

[Erika]

2. Let your Republican friends know

what their vote is doing to this country.

[pbartch]

11. My sister and bother in law are payinb BIG BUCKS for nieces college

and they are RePIGlicans. I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND.

[knowbody0]

3. if you ask why you are an insurgent

[demobabe]

4. uneducated people

...are much easier to control and are more likely not to question anything when they have to work 80 hours per week in the service industry to survive! Suits the Neocons just fine.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

5. I was wondering

if any "bullshit, sounds pretty but is bullshit" reason was given.

The reason I'm asking is I am noticing something ELSE disturbing: used to, when the government did something like this, that could easily be seen as an assholish thing to do, they would AT LEAST give a "sounds good, but is basically bullshit" reason for it.

If they aren't even BOTHERING to do that anymore, it makes me really start to wonder. I know the REAL reasons for this....anyone who has been paying much attention the last few years pretty much expected it. But if they aren't even bothering to make it SOUND good anymore, yikes.

[AndyTiedye]

6. THEY DON'T CARE, THEY DON'T HAVE TO

It's not as though we can vote them out of office or anything.

[sallyseven]

7. The rich need another tax cut. What is

the matter with you. Goodness sakes.

[meganmonkey]

8. To punish the students for registering and voting Dem n/t

[gaia_gardener]

9. I'd guess they did it

because they feel safe doing so. The media is not going to question them and they're not going to report about the people that are questioning them. Look at how little the media has reported about the underfunding (and uselessness) of NCLB.

[Dan]

10. No, the honest truth is

the nation is running out of money.

Some people have to be aware that the Bush economic policies on taxes has effected the nation's structural tax base.

Bad days are a-comming.

[newyawker99]

16. Hi gaia_gardener!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[TayTay]

12. Take them at their word

The Repugs do not believe that government should be funding higher education. The extreme conservatives who won leadership roles in the last election have publicly stated that they do not believe that this is a proper function of government. This is a fundamental difference between the extreme brand of conservatism that is ensconsed in Congress today and liberal philosophy of the prior 50 years (or so.)

These folks mean what they say. Grover Norquist famously said that he wanted to reduce government to the size where he could drown it in the bathtub. What part of that is coded or difficult to understand? Drowning government means drowning out every part of what could be called 'the welfare state.' To these folks, this is a part of the evil welfare state and needs to go away. They have systematically begun to dismantle everything they do not believe in and have publicly stated that they will not stop until government works only for absolute necessities and does nothing to impede business.

At what point do we begin to take them at their word? The only way to frame a proper response is to know what you are fighting in the first place. They don't believe in this, they don't believe in helping out people who are in the bottom half of the economy, they don't believe in social programs. At all. Ever. That is what we are up against. Again, take them at their stated word.

[Erika]

14. Two Thirds of Americans are headed for the "bottom" half.

Bush treats business as God and depends on them to take care of the needy, environment, etc., through business economic policies.

If businesses had ever had social problems as a concern there wouldn't be the labor laws, environmental laws, and need for social policies that there is now.

Since when did business replace Christ's policies of helping the needy, paying a fair wage for a day's work, and sharing to help raise all. I can't even stand talking to Republicans anymore.

[Buns_of_Fire]

18. Welcome, TayTay!

:hi:

I think you're right. Sometimes the most obvious answer is the correct one. Occam's Razor, and all that.

[Robeson]

22. Yep. You are right.

I've grown up in the conservative South, and when people down here say they "don't like big government", what they mean is, they "don't like big government". You can look at them with horror and say, "you just want to see the government reduced to nothing", and they'll look back with all seriousness and say, "thats right, we do". They're not ashamed about it, thats their goal. It doesn't matter if its against their best interest or not. They don't really examine the issues in depth, and aren't interested in examining the issues in depth.

You are correct. If we don't realize what their goals are, and what their intent is, then we're just chasing dragons and windmills.

[Telly Savalas]

24. Tell my fellow rugged individualists

That if they really hate big government they should start by getting rid of the most entrenched socialist big government programs: fire departments, public schools, and public roads and highways. There's nothing I hate more than one of those pencil-neck big government bureaucrats telling me I can't send my 2.5 year old daughter to work in a factory, because of intrusive labor regulations. I should be free to choose. Furthermore, I'm a tough guy and can protect myself and my family, why should my tax dollars go to subsidize some hippie socialist police department. Do they really think that the cops know how to spend my money better than I do?

</norquist>

[fortyfeetunder]

26. While we are on big government, don't forget

The military and homeland security!!!

[LiberalFighter]

32. Let's blow up all their roads, fire depts and schools...

especially their basketball and football colleges.

[calimary]

27. kkkarl rove once said too much education isn't a good thing.

I think we know why. The better educated one is, the more likely one is - to vote like a liberal.

[LiberalFighter]

31. Someone needs to drown and electrocute this Grover Norquist....

what a stupid name

[TayTay]

33. Couldn't agree more.

I hate these guys as well, but that hasn't gotten me far enough. I truly believe that this philosophy can be fought, but we have to stare it in the face first and figure out what the hell it is we are fighting and how they think. (Yeah, showers all around after that one. This is not for the weak of stomach, but it must be done.)

Part of my problem is geography. Everybody in my home state congressional delegation is a Dem, so I have to go north to NH to get a first hand look at Repugs. (And the NH guys are not the worst of the lot.) Maybe there are folks out there in DU who come from Red States and can help me out. My Congressional folk have come out in favor of Pell grants and sensible higher ed funding. What are the arguments in Repug Congressional districts or states with Repug Senators in favor of decreasing ed funding? From their own lips. What do they say to their constituents? We need to build a database that contains these folks words so that we can use them against them. Do they ever talk about it? Does this ever come up? How does this play to voters?

Thanks! I am completely not interested in putting down anyone from a Repug district or state. This is useless. (And I kind of didn't like it when Bush constantly put down MA in the election. I probably shouldn't do what I despise in others.)

[LiberalFighter]

34. We have got to educate the voters the truth about Democratic positions

And not let them continue to lie about Democrats.

We should have the differences between Democrats and Republicans.

We need to frame issues and positions so that voters start to think.

[Davis_X_Machina]

13. If you're already in the treehouse...

...the first thing you do is pull up the ladder.

[proudbluestater]

15. Needed the money to beef up the number of CIA agents and

to build more of our own weapons of mass destruction. Did you know we have 8,000 nukes? And we wonder why Iran might want to have one of their own? GET A CLUE, AMERICA! Self-defense!

[okieinpain]

17. if dems had a spine the commercials would already be running

letter with a rejection notice, then sarcastically bring up the fact that the president needs new soldiers. see this is what the dems are going to have to do to bring some order to this shit.

[leesa]

19. Their usual reference to government funded programs is that they intend

to drown it in the bathtub. That baby has been drowned

[The Flaming Red Head]

21. No vote equals no more entitlements

what are we going to do vote them out of office? Yeah right.

[Hello_Kitty]

23. Wasn't this one of *'s "accomplishments" in the 3rd debate?

Remember when he said that more people got Pell grants during his administration? He was trying to insist that he was helping the underpriveleged. Of course, Kerry came back with the zinger that it was because more people qualified for Pell grants in his term. * went on to describe the crucial role of 'ejucayshun' to economic recovery and countering unemployment. But I guess college aid has outlived, or not proven, its political usefulness to him so he'll just jettison it.

[corker]

25. more troops n/t

[welshTerrier2]

28. it's part of bush's new "Forgotten Kids Mandate" (FKM)

it's a post-election spin-off of No Child Left Behind ...

[tandot]

29. Why should they keep something that doesn't benefit the rich?

Financial aid helps the poor and middle class. Bush gives a shit about them.

He cuts financial aid but make the tax cuts for the rich permanent. Poor people who voted for Bush are just stupid suckers. I guess they wouldn't be smart enough for college anyway.

[robbedvoter]

30. We need more soopid people - some see the truth