Conservatives want SMALL government, not NO government…

Flopping Aces ^ | 08-23-11 | Vince

[familyop]

I had written:
"Eliminating all federal funding to local governments..."

cc2k replied:
"That has to be accomplished locally."

I disagree. The bills allowing for federal funding to local governments were passed in bipartisan Congress and signed by U.S. presidents. They'll be repealed at the federal level, or we'll starve your local government offices into closing.

Obviously, local government socialists haven't noticed, but we're not buying. We're going to buy less each year, until we see freedom. This country needs new competition and new families in business, politics and academia. We're going to get that.

[familyop]

Sorry...we'll starve our local government offices into closing. I'm in a majority Republican county, and it's officers and employees are quite dishonest, socialist and disrespectful against all that is good and old fashioned. ...came from another majority Republican county back east, and it was the same: anti-family, sadistic, scoffing, anti-production, anti-competition and sexually confused. Politicians are generally controlled by robber-constituents, rich from stolen debt.

The answer is not in politics but in rejecting politics. It's not in trying to produce for thieves but in becoming self-sufficient and cutting off their venues of thievery.

[Huck]

One of limited and enumerated powers. Expressly delegated only. No implied powers. No direct taxation. And quite possibly, no permanent executive branch.

In fact, I think the USA is ridiculously oversized for a real republic. One representative for every half-million citizens? The framers never would have accepted that.

We should be broken up into a confederacy of roughly 7 smaller republics. Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, Plains, Mountain, West Coast, and Texas.

The USA is going to crumble under its debt at some point. It's just a matter of time now.

[Lorianne]

This talking point annoys me too.

Conservatives believe in the Constitution.
What is the Constitution?
It’s a framework for small federal GOVERNMENT.

So, conservatives advocate for government, just a very specific kind of government.

[cc2k]

familyop wrote:

I disagree. The bills allowing for federal funding to local governments were passed in bipartisan Congress and signed by U.S. presidents. They'll be repealed at the federal level, or we'll starve your local government offices into closing.

Obviously, local government socialists haven't noticed, but we're not buying. We're going to buy less each year, until we see freedom. This country needs new competition and new families in business, politics and academia. We're going to get that.

Maybe the local socialists haven't noticed because haven’t told them. That was my point. Our local TEA Partiers and 9-12ers are not only focused on Washington. We are also focused on our local and state legislators and executives.

"10th Amendment Resolutions" are good talk, but we have a state Senator here who voted for one of those, then went begging Congress and the President to give us "our grant money" for the high-speed rail after our Governor told Obama and the Feds we weren't building their trains in our state.

Actually, I support Governor Scott in that decision, but I was disappointed that he didn't at least point out that nothing in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution gives the Congress the authority to spend money on transportation within a single state (for example, from Tampa to Orlando).

But we have a state senator, Mike Fasano, who voted for a "10th amendment resolution" here in Florida and then joined with the Ruling Class RINO's in begging for federal money. They wanted the funds to be diverted to other transportation projects if it wasn't used for the high speed rail.

Clearly, many in the “ruling class” don’t fully understand the 10th amendment. It will take some education from the grass roots to fully educate both the electorate and the ruling class at the lower, more local levels. That is my point.

[familyop]

"Maybe the local socialists haven't noticed because We the People haven’t told them. That was my point."

Yes, but told them what--the desires of the Republican socialist establishment under whatever names? Allow me to be a little more clear in speaking for many who would be more productive.

* We're going to abolish HOAs: despotic little de facto governments run by mouthy hags and their effeminate "significant others."

* We're going to abolish zoning laws against small manufacturing operations in rural areas.

* We're going to abolish anti-family efforts that were devised to stop uprisings of competition from unestablished families (efforts pursued against fatherhood and families for American peasants by both political parties). We'll probably abolish the doctrine of parens patriae.

* We're going to abolish regulations against property rights. If a rich witch potential buyer wants to know that a house is safe, she can hire a private inspector.

* We're going to abolish anti-American trade practices. Those are treasonous and unconstitutional.

* We're going to abolish the business-government links that made our nation an anti-American police state for local bosses.

And the default process is going to get us to the point in time for that. Neither Democrats nor Republicans nor Tea Party socialists can force us to buy, and we're going to buy less each year.

Who will survive the economic collapse and prosper a few years from now? I doubt that it will be those too ignorant, lazy and thieving for hands-on technology.

You continue Tea Parties. We'll go with nonpolitical politics and self-sufficiency.