Posted on 12/03/2009 11:51:41 AM PST by yongin
Maybe I have no interest in answering it. Maybe I’m not the person who would HAVE the answers. You should ask someone who is supporting Mitt’s candidacy for , well, nothing since he isn’t running, but I’m sure if you poke around you can find someone who will be happy to try to tell you what Mitt has done.
I have no idea why you are so interested in knowing good things about Mitt, you strike me as a person who has no interest in him. Maybe you should post a thread about it, and see if you can scrounge up a Romney supporter.
I'm betting it's that 3rd one. No good limited-government conservative would EVER suggest that spending be limited to military equipment and essential infrastructure.
- Tell the unions that job-stifling "card check" legislation is off the table. Laying new burdens on small business will kill entrepreneurship and job creation.
- Don't allow a massive tax increase to go into effect in 2011 with the expiration of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. The specter of more tax-fueled government spending and the reduction of capital available for small business will hinder investment and business expansion.
- New spending should be strictly limited to items that are critically needed and that we would have acquired in the future, such as new military equipment to support our troops abroad and essential infrastructure at home.
Or maybe it's the part about not increasing taxes. What kind of conservative would be against increasing taxes.
Thank you for your sound reasoned response.
Well, I’m not a help desk, you aren’t paying me for my services, and it’s not like I tried to argue he did something as Governor, such that you have reason to ask me for links or something.
The topic of Romney was discussed extensively during the last election. If you do an archive search, you will find hundreds of posts here about what Romney did or didn’t do as Governor.
"1.5% less communist" won't save the USA from this coming collapse, and RINOs are only fooling themselves by pretending they can sell this garbage to the voters again.
I guess I was confused by how much that part of the list looks like the official FR mail-blast to the RNC to make the RNC conservative again.
This is a RINO solution.
A conservative would have said: Cancel the stimulus - its not the governments job to pick winners and losers by redirecting taxpayers money to any private sector entity.
This position alone tells where Romney is coming from and it's not good.
Again, a RINO position.
The correct conservative response would be. The tax system should be for collecting taxes and not for achieving other goals.
Just reduce the tax level for everyone including corporations which are already paying some of the highest corporate taxes in the world.
A small step in the right direction. He should have set a goal to eliminate the deficit by reducing government spending by at least 5% per year until foreign creditors are paid in full.
Correct solution. Even a stopped watch is correct twice a day. He could have added that the rationale for Cap and Trade isn't supported by the scientific evidence.
A half measure. The government needs to also stop the massive amount of subsidization it currently gives to unions.
Here is a good conservative position:
Presidents only are permitted to represent people for 4 years without a second vote of confidence. Why are current employees stuck with union representation that there grandfathers voted for in 1936. Every union should be required to have a new representation vote every four years.
Secondly, the private sector unions only make up about 7% of the labor force. Government unions represent a much larger contingent. Currently, the government is expanding its work force at record levels. This needs to be addressed since the current civil service system is corrupt with legislators providing all kinds of payoff to government unions, only to see money coming right back to them through campaign donations.
Until Romney addresses this scandal, he should not be taken seriously as a presidential candidate.
RINOS say don't increase taxes in 2011. Conservatives say cut taxes and spending, today.
Limiting spending is a half measure. Why can't he just say. "We need to cut government spending and I promise that I will not sign any budget that is not 5% smaller than the previous budget. He then needs to clearly delineate strict budget priorities, such as national defense and infrastructure always come before entitlements with no exceptions.
“RINOS say don’t increase taxes in 2011. Conservatives say cut taxes and spending, today.”
A serious response, that’s refreshing, a shame there couldn’t have been many more. Though I suspect, based on the posting of the person who originated it, that it was never intended to be serious.
In addition to cutting taxes we need to change the method of taxation, I support the sales tax (repeal the 16th Amendment) as it is the least intrusive and more likely to gain revenue from the underground economy (they have to buy stuff). Spending SHOULD be cut but regulations should also be cut and any additional regulations should undergo scrutiny similar to an “Environment Impact Study”.
You say limiting spending is a half measure, I like the way my grandfather said it when he saw I wasn’t committed to a task “boy you’re nibbling around the edges”... that’s what government has been doing most of my adult life (not a short time). President Reagan didn’t do much better on taxes and regulation and spending reduction was a bust (did he really expect Democrats to honor their commitment) but he did enough to show what would happen if there was a serious effort to cut taxes, reduce spending and cut regulation.
Hopefully the Tea Parties are the beginning of a political revival and they will bring the spiritual revival with them. If that happens (and we exhibit the work epic and resourceful that made us prosperous) we will surpass anything that has ever been done.
AND ANOTHER THING; I think the creed of government should be that the persons/organizations that provide the capital, take the risk and perform the function should reap the benefits, no one else is likely to have the commitment (they have nothing invested and will not be greatly impacted by failure) necessary for success nor are they as deserving. As I have said existing regulations, as well any future regulations, should be thoroughly reviewed and the need for it, how the author perceives that the regulation will meet that need as well as how it will impact those being regulated should be shown.... Oh yes, and show what authorizes it.
Government should conduct themselves in the same manner they expect of business (but not their socialist allies) and should try writing in clear and concise terms.... If they are intelligent and knowledgeable of their subject they can do this.
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.