duane, you obviously don’t know what racism really means. Prejudice is prejudice and stereotypes are stereotypes. Racism is something completely different (and proof of true ignorance).

Brilliant Trash dude, maybe I do need therapy but only my therapist would know. I don’t really understand why you think I need therapy so badly though. Where have I lashed out with rage and blame? duane sure has but I don’t recall doing so myself. In fact, I merely feel that every person is responsible for their own actions and I don’t feel I’m *required* to help anyone out. That’s all.

Bush did cut taxes (good little monkey) but his fiscal policies have been otherwise atrocious (bad little monkey).

I’m ready for some new life in the Oval Office and am really looking forward to next year’s election. Both sides are expected to put up some outspoken candidates, and that also will be a big change over bush.

Rudy has his appeal but at the same time I get the feeling there’s something really weird about him, you know, like when an old man gropes you in a bar. Hillary needs to quit pandering to the extremists and move toward the center.

Last I heard Bush had not cut funding on a SINGLE gov’t program, raising the ire of diehard Repubs. He may have in the past year or so but for the longest time he did not, so I think your blame is misguided.

On a single program? No. Multiple programs? Yes. Basically, if it didn’t involve homeland security or defense, you can rest assured that it has been cut in some way with every budget proposal since 2001. And you needn’t believe me, as this trend was one of The President’s big happy bullet-points during the 2006 State of the Union …

Every year of my presidency, we’ve reduced the growth of non-security discretionary spending, and last year you passed bills that cut this spending. This year my budget will cut it again, and reduce or eliminate more than 140 programs that are performing poorly or not fulfilling essential priorities.*

And for that matter, just because a program’s funding wasn’t severely cut, recipients of said program will still suffer because of restraints that prevent further spending. Basically, we’re spending about 16 times as much on defense as we are on domestic discretionary. According to a 2006 study conducted by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities …

Between fiscal years 2001 and 2006, funding for domestic discretionary programs shrank relative to the economy, falling from 3.36 percent of Gross Domestic Product to 3.15 percent.*

What does this mean? Programs with frozen budgets are being left behind by the inevitable progress and swell of inflation.

This is a political win-win. Budgets can be proposed that appear to spare our most troubled programs from an outright cut. This looks like compassion. Win. But these programs, if left at their current budgetary state, will grow ever weaker and will appear less effective. This looks like mismanagement on the part of the program director. Win. The appearance mismanagement is often all that is needed to kill an otherwise decent program.

(Sorry, I’m late, Duane … fix your RSS feed, man.)

Yes, they are risky, and even more so because banks and other establishments have already refused to help these people. Furthermore, these loans are unsecured. So the worst that could possibly happen is a ding on their credit rating, which I doubt these people care about.

I feel that people are more responsible with the money given to them if they know they have to pay to it back. If you know you have to pay $10,000 back at some point, you will be far more careful with the use of that money than if it was free for your use. You will also make certain that you really need the money because borrowing it.

I also feel that if you are truly wanting a second a chance, and are truly interested in working hard to get back on your feet, you will have no qualms about paying the money back. Be aware that the people on Prosper are not looking for a second chance. This is third, fourth, fifth, or sixth opportunity to get their life in order. People who have bad luck once or twice is understandable. People who repeatedly have bad luck live outside their means.

I don’t know which comment you are referring to, but it looks like you are trying to dodge the issue of a liberal charity.

I personally haven’t liked W’s budgets (well, I’m calling them his, but all spending bills originate in the House, but you know how it is) as he hasn’t tried at all to balance them and has not done enough to cut gov’t spending.

I know recently there have been some cuts, but in the first term I thought he had huge deficits with nothing being cut.

If I can find a cite for this I will show it to you.