Posted on 06/13/2006 11:44:31 AM PDT by pissant
More.
For some reason you seem to think that I am opposed to government defending my rights from foreign thugs who would violate my rights. Government has the obligation to organize armed forces to repel enemies.
It all comes under the proper role of government in a free society. Defending our rights.
Unfortunately, my rights are in more danger from thugs and busy bodies domestically than towel headed Islamofacists. We need the same vigor against both.
Kill the terrorists and prevent my neighbor from violating my rights as well.
Shielding firearms manufacturers from frivolous lawsuits.
Allowing citizens to pack heat on the street (local)
Repealing the death tax (defeated by ONE vote in the Senate)
Removing the prohibitions against against calling Christmas Christmas (local)
Requiring any tax hikes to be approved by the voters (local)
Outlawing killing fully formed babies in the womb.
Wow! Good going! I'll have to see the details before I break open the champagne however. But I'm glad to see this earth shattering liberty affirming legislation.
Maybe now they can pass a law that would shield ME from Mayor Daley outlawing my right to keep and bear arms.
Allowing citizens to pack heat on the street (local)
Some places, but they retain the power to make you jump through hoops and get their permission to do so. Details , details, details. (There I go, whining again)
Repealing the death tax (defeated by ONE vote in the Senate)
Ummm, it was defeated. But if and when they do it, it will be a nice step in the right direction.
Removing the prohibitions against against calling Christmas Christmas (local)
You can't be serious. I'll ignore that "achievement".
Requiring any tax hikes to be approved by the voters (local)
Not anywhere I have seen. You must be living somewhere no one ever heard of. Anyway, it sure isn't on anyone else's radar screen.
Outlawing killing fully formed babies in the womb.
Good first step, now how about actually outlawing this murderous infanticide. Oh I know, I'm whining because it is so pitiful that anyone might think governance is going the right way because they outlawed a certain kind of murder in certain circumstances.
Excellent point. Note that the demand for (to take just one example) repairing the damage done by the outrageous Kelo decision (which the feds could easily do by simply withholding any and all grants to jurisdictions that use eminent domain for "economic development") was much louder than the background murmur about a few goldarn flag-burnin' hippies -- and yet the latter is what inspires Congress to put on a big dog-and-pony show.
If the campaign contributions from goldarn flag-burnin' hippies and politically connected developers were reversed, so would Congressional priorities.
Feminist are mad because they're so fugly that no man would want them...and then they blames their fugliness on men. :)
(sarchasm)
There were colonies/states that did not want to have the local militias to be supeseded by a federal military. So it would be necessary to spell out the fed's responsibility regarding the defense of the nation, as was done in the US constitution, which also put that military under civilian control. Hence, it is in my brief description of what a gov't purpose is.
The violating neighbor is most likely allowed to intrude on your space due to local regulations or lack thereof. The feds should generally have a hands off approach to local ordinances unless they violate the codified rights of the federal constitution. Dog ordinances, noise ordinances, business fees, etc etc should be left to the locals to fight about. Some states suffer because of that, others thrive.
The "stock chart" you refer to went into hyperdrive with the Roosevelt administration and continued its precipitous rise, with some ups and downs, through the Carter years. So Big, bloated gov't has been here for quite some time. Reagan started a new revolution, to devolve the beast. In theory, he was excellent, and in practice, he gets moderate marks, mainly due to having democrats running the show on capitol hill.
But Reagan inpired many people to become conservatives, which has saved this country from ruin and flipped the balance of power. Now the GOP is resting on its meager laurels, when it should be finishing what Reagan had started. They all claim to be Reaganites, but very few are. If they manage to close the southern border, continue trouncing the islamo-scum and put in a flat tax, I'll consider this a reasonably successful period, tempered by some of the more inane things that are occurring.
GWB will be known mainly for one thing in the history books. And that is if he is success or a failure with his Bush doctrine.
PING for flag day.
The comments on the Bush doctrine, the Reagan years, The Roosevelt years, the future Bush legacy and all the rest, are tangential.
The question is the direction of governance. The answer is, it's proper role is going the wrong way and the result is, we are less free and yes, things are worse.
All this wandering is obscuring the purpose of the discussion. I'll do my best to keep you on topic.
It's not wandering. It's pointing out that who we elect makes a difference. If Carter would have one reelection in 1980, the world would be a very different place, both on the domestic "rights" side of the ledger and the cold war and the economy. Another 4 years of "malaise" may have been a fatal blow to our republic.
But I'm in agreement. A govt or bureaucracy, regardless of all other factors, will attempt to consolidate power and grow. It happens every time. In this country, we have seen many states reign in the abuses of the past, while politcally stupid states like California and Massachusetts become more and more onerous.
In Washington, we have the initiative process. We have been able to repeal the onerous car tabs tax that was costing the average owner about $450/year. It's now $30. We passed an initiative so that all tax increasees are subject to the voters approval.
In many states and cities, the multi-decade trend towards gun control has been reversed and it is now a losing political issue accross America.
The point being that progress can and has been made in many areas that is reversing the 50 years of creeping socialism and thievery.
Amazing assessment.
A few taxes cut and we are making meaningful progress?
The first amendment essentially repealed.
The fourth amendment essentially repealed.
Private property found to be violable by government thugs.
The biggest NEW entitlement (drug giveaway to wealthy seniors) since LBJ in a move that would make Democrats blush.
Squandering the best chance to rid the country of SS since it started, making it almost impossible to do anything for a very long time.
Making tax cuts temporary as the default position.
Increasing government size exponentially every year for as far back as anyone can recall.
Exponential growth of local government spending and interference in personal liberty.
And you point to these sadly laughable rollbacks as proof that it's getting better? It's preposterous.
But there is is again, me whining. Scheesh
It's not wandering. It's pointing out that who we elect makes a difference.
It's wandering because that isn't the question. The question YOU asked was if things were getting better or worse. Stick to the question if you want to explore that. The rest is off topic unless you would really like to change the subject. Which of course would be a good strategy to employ if the point had already been made.
A few tax cuts?
Do you know what Reagan did to the top income tax brackets? He slashed them by more than 30%. that is one helluva lot of capital that citizens then invested. Same with GWB's capital gains tax cuts. The economy is smoking hot, despite Katrina, inflated fuel prices, and the Media pretending we are in a recession.
Anytime taxes are cut, it is a damn good thing.
The 1st Amendment is not essentially repealed. McCain Feingold, like most other crappy campaign regulations, is an unconstitutional piece of crap. But it did not stop the ads, it did not stop the Swift Boat vets or Moveon.org, and it did not stop you from campaigning til you were blue in the face. Do I want it repealed, you bet. Did it make one iota of difference in how much money was spent or how many ads we were barraged with. Nope.
The 4th amendment is in fine shape.
Private property is another story. And time for an Amendment to overturn the SCOTUS. Fortunately, many states are making laws to prevent Kelo type takings in the meantime.
An enlargement of Medicare is definitely in the negative column.
SS will get fixed, or go belly up. And Bush had the right idea, let people opt out. And his own party sabotaged him.
The bottom line is, we are where we are now, and the ball has to be pushed inthe right direction.
You can mock the small victories all you want, but they matter.
Defending the 2nd amendment matters - going in the right direction.
Tax code overhaul will matter.
Tax cuts matter...alot.
De-fanging the EPA matters - going in the right direction the last 5 years.
Defanging OSHA matters - Bush's executive order overturned Clinton's utterly absurd workplace rules - going inthe right direction.
Homeschooling and private schools are thriving - going in the right direction.
Regean deregulating the airline industry mattered.
Newts welfare Reform mattered - welfare roles continue to plummet in most states.
This beast was not built in a day or in a generation. And it will take conservatives another generation. So keep pushing.
Question #3: Name 4 politicians, either currently in power, or recently so, that you think have represented your views closest.
They would say you are undermining their will to fight and they would be right.
Soldiers do not swear to die to defend the flag. They swear to die to defend the Constitution.
Yep. It will be because of that little flag pin they put on their lapel. Altering their picture will be viewed as desecrating that flag pin. Remove it from the piture -desecrating it. Adding horns to the Senator's head -- desecrating it. Etc.
YOU cited the little tax cuts, not me. Now you reach back 5 administrations to talk about tax cuts that mattered. And conveniently forgot about the immense spending increases that accompanied them. The government you cite as going in the right direction borrowed the money to spend it.
Anytime taxes are cut, it is a damn good thing.
Right. And they go up and down as always. Has had nothing to do with the general direction of governance in this country. Think of the stock graph again.
The 1st Amendment is not essentially repealed
You are not allowed to talk about candidates right before the election, and you think it's OK? That's pathetic. The fact that people have so far figured out how to get around the law doesn't mean it OK.
The 4th amendment is in fine shape.
You are in denial.
Private property is another story.
Great, you concede the obvious. It's a start.
An enlargement of Medicare is definitely in the negative column.
LOL, ya think? BTW, nice try at naming it an "enlargement" when it is actually a brand new entitlement. A new wealth transfer scheme perpetrated by the party that some dreamers think is the one which would stand fast against the nanny-state.
SS will get fixed,
It can't be fixed. You can't "fix" a ponzi scheme.
or go belly up.
No, they will simply raise taxes and inflate the value out of the currency while cutting benefits by raising the "retirement age.
And Bush had the right idea, let people opt out.
That never happened. I thought we were finished insulting each other?
And his own party sabotaged him.
HIS own party? WOW, now it's HIS party, not yours.
Tax code overhaul will matter.
What tax code overhaul? WHERE? HUH?
Tax cuts matter...alot.
You mean the lilliputian ones Bush pushed which automatically give politicians the right to raise them without even voting for it? He made a political deal with the enemy.
Homeschooling and private schools are thriving - going in the right direction.
Let's see if you can spin this into something positive,,,,ummm, government totally fails and people flee their system which forces them to pay twice to educate their children and somehow governance is going the right direction? It's preposterous.
Regean deregulating the airline industry mattered.
LOL, he we go back 20 years looking for a victory. Pitiful.
This beast was not built in a day or in a generation. And it will take conservatives another generation. So keep pushing.
Pushing? Isn't that what you call whining?
Question #3: Name 4 politicians, either currently in power, or recently so, that you think have represented your views closest.
Ron Paul comes closest. Of course you call him a "moon bat". I don't agree with him on every issue, but you set the standard of closest.
And no one else is close. I want people in power who care about individual liberty and personal responsibility. I want SMALLER government, not "growing more slowly" government.
But the question is goofy in any case, I deal in concepts and ideas, not personalities and heroes. Why is it that you continually want to define people by other people? I find that useless except to play "gotcha" games.
I also cited GWBs tax cuts. I will educate you on the tax cuts, because I'm a nice guy.
{$ in 2003 dollars-billions, % of Nat. Income (NI)}
The Kennedy Tax Cut (Revenue Act of 1964): $54.90, -1.90%
The Reagan Tax Cut (Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981): $68.70, -1.40%
Bush Economic Growth and Tax Reform Reconciliation Act of 2001: $75.80, -0.80%
Bush Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002: $52.00, -0.60%
Bush Jobs and Growth Tax Relief and Reconciliation Act of 2003: $60.80, -0.60%
Combined Bush Tax cuts 2001-2003: $188.10, -2.00%
As demonstrated above, GWB has been perhaps the most aggressive tax cutting Prez in recent history. Here is the link to the Tax Foundation, for your reading enjoyment.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/323.html
And conveniently forgot about the immense spending increases that accompanied them.
Convenience or not, spending is a byproduct of both congress and the administration. And when you are fighting two wars, chances are you are going to be busting the budget. BTW, the deficit gap has been shrinking, faster than even Bush said it would. I will assume you KNOW that tax cuts spur increased revenues to the federal coffers.
Right. And they go up and down as always. Has had nothing to do with the general direction of governance in this country.
You cannot be serious. Lowering tax rates has NOTHING to do with the general direction of governance? It would then follow that the confiscatory rates that preceeded Reagan might as well have been left in place.
You are not allowed to talk about candidates right before the election, and you think it's OK?
I talked about the the candidates right before the election. I even doorbelled for GWB a few days prior. You talked about the candidates right before the election. I seem to recall you, and 10s of thousands of others on FR, Lucianne.com, LibertyPost, Dummocratic Underground, and every news outlet in the world talking about them, non-stop. McCain Feingold, like I said, needs to be shitcanned, but just like every other anti-constitutional legislative attempt at campaign control, it is an abject failure and did NOTHING to slow the money or speech or endorsements or rallies or editorializing or doorbelling or advertisements or campaign appearances or anything of substance. It is an unconstitutional exercise in futility.
You are in denial. (regarding the 4th Amendment)
My denial is only superseded by your paranoia. Give me a couple of concrete examples please for me to evaluate. And don't say "Patriot Act". I need a specific provision that tramples the 4th Amendment.
Private property is another story.
Great, you concede the obvious. It's a start.
The Kelo decision should be a clarion call to all Americans that the SCOTUS must be staffed by originalists, not believers in a living, breathing document. And therefore, it is imperative to put a President in power that will install such people on the court. The blowback from Kelo is just getting started.
LOL, ya think? BTW, nice try at naming it an "enlargement" when it is actually a brand new entitlement.
Seems to me if it's called the Medicare Prescription Drug Plan, then it is highly accurate to call that an enlargement of Medicare. http://www.medicare.gov/
Be that as it may, I did not support it and I don't now.
It can't be fixed. You can't "fix" a ponzi scheme (social security).
Hate to break it to you, but no President is going to be elected who wants to get rid of SS altogether. It is something that never should have been started. But the ONLY way for it to be gutted is to give the people an option for opting out. Gradually it will shrink under the weight of its own uselessness.
HIS own party? WOW, now it's HIS party, not yours.
One more time....slowly.....I am not a member of the GOP.
What tax code overhaul? WHERE? HUH?
There is more momentum to scrap the income tax now than any time that I can remember. But if conservatives sit on their hands, it will never get done.
You mean the lilliputian ones (tax cuts)Bush pushed which automatically give politicians the right to raise them without even voting for it? He made a political deal with the enemy.
See above for how "lilliputian" Bushes tax cuts were. As for making political deals with the enemy, the only place where that does not occur is in a Dictatorship. If the only way to get three large tax cuts through was to compromise, so be it. It spurred the economy and was vital in recovering from the 9-11 economic hit we took. And as you said, taxes can be raised or lowered, as proven throughout our entire history, so making that deal was a shrewd one for GW. And he has been making the case for making them permanent ever since. And he will succeed. the dems took the bait and will now pay for it.
President Bush Calls for Permanent Tax Cuts
By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 9, 2005; 7:42 PM
CRAWFORD, Texas -- President Bush on Tuesday called on Congress to make permanent tax cuts enacted over the past five years and restructure the U.S. tax code soon to keep the economy growing at healthy pace.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/09/AR2005080900123.html
Let's see if you can spin this into something positive,,,,ummm, government totally fails and people flee their system which forces them to pay twice to educate their children and somehow governance is going the right direction? It's preposterous.
This is an example of people voting with there feet and governing themselves. Here in my neck of the woods, the public schools in the large cities have shrinking enrollment. Homeschooling, despite the howls from the communist NEA and WEA, has taken off. More and more private schools are opening. In addition, the movement towards charter schools and vouchers has been gaining steam for a decade. In other words, conservatives are fighting back. I thought you might see that as beneficial, rather than to accept the status quo.
Regean deregulating the airline industry mattered.
LOL, he we go back 20 years looking for a victory. Pitiful.
I think Bush's taming of the EPA and OSHA equally important.
Former EPA chief Carol Browner accuses Bush Administration of gutting agency
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/03/19_browner.shtml
SPITZER TO SUE BUSH ADMINISTRATION FOR GUTTING CLEAN AIR ACT
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2002/nov/nov22b_02.html
Bush removes logging barrier
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-05-05-bush-forests_x.htm
It goes on and on....
Pushing? Isn't that what you call whining?
No, I call whining whining. For example, when the democrats complain that the bush tax cuts are damaging the economy and then offer no alternative, that's whining. When people jump on FR and say the sky is falling but fail to acknowledge the prosperity and success of America and Americans around them, that's whining (think Willie Green). And when people have political ideas that so few others share, that they can never reach their vision, so resort to utter pessimism, thats whining. When people engage in philosophical and political debates, that is NOT whining.
Ron Paul comes closest. Of course you call him a "moon bat". I don't agree with him on every issue, but you set the standard of closest.
How did I know that? LOL. Ron Paul has some fine ideas, but yes, he is a moonbat, IMO. If you want, I will gladly tell you why. The "modern" politicians that most closely resemble my thinking are Reagan & Churchill, but more recent vintage I'd say Jeff Sessions, John Bolton, GWB (foreign Policy) & Mike Pence (domestic)
But the question is goofy in any case, I deal in concepts and ideas, not personalities and heroes. Why is it that you continually want to define people by other people? I find that useless except to play "gotcha" games.
It is helpful in defining a philosophy without having to explain too much more. My reference to Churchill and Reagan says alot about what shade of conservative I am. Hawkish on defense, free marketeer, believer in liberty as the God given right of men, and optimistic about the future.
Ask your next question if you like.
Bookmark
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.