Posted on 10/20/2003 4:53:35 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Edited on 10/20/2003 8:39:45 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Didn't do what? Vote for McClintock, or help get Bustamecha in?
I'm a single issue voter. 2A.
Your fatal error here is confusing a True Conservative with a Liberal. Speaking for myself, I never worried about Reagan. I knew where his heart was even if he had to compromise with the other side of the aisle. Can't say the same about Bush.
But, hey, it's fun to take quotations out of context and attach it to your favorite Liberal masquerading as a Conservative. As IF there is anything remotely similar to a man that stood squarely for “limited” government and One that sees Unlimited possibilities for “unlimited” government.
I was so sorry to miss the Inaugural celebration and if we have a next one may I suggest Honolulu, Hawaii. We could have a wonderful time at the Hale Koa Ballroom.
Mahalo, Jim and may God's Peace Be With You.
Nope. It suits me just fine. How about you?
And I didn't say it ugly either, GEEZ! I didn't get the joke, sorry, I am a blonde okay? I thought I was testy lately!
My right to believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and Jesus in public.
What piece of legislation, which was promulgated by the Clinton administration, and passed by Congress, do you believe trashed the Constitution?
Anything infringing on gun ownership. Read the second ammendment then look around, and weep.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe President Bush had, as one plank of his 2000 election platform, a plan to "privatize" a (minute) part of Social Security. I still hope the GOP will eventually get this through, even though the results would be akin to plugging a crack in a dam with silly putty.
Regarding Medicare, there's no good reason for the Republicans to support expanding entitlements in the form of a new taxpayer-subsidized prescription drug plan. They seem intent on doing so, however, despite the fact that Medicare expenditures account for 19% of the federal budget and have increased $10 billion between 2001 and 2002 (Source, pp. 24 & 25)
According to Social Security: A Primer (2001):
"[Medicare and Medicaid], together with Social Security, already account for nearly half of all federal spending, excluding interest payments on federal debt. If the programs are not changed, by 2030 they could consume two-thirds of the federal budget."Federal spending on education is also ballooning. The House Education and the Workforce Committee has reported that:
"Despite the limited resources available, the FY 2003 Budget provides a larger increase for the Education Department (7 percent) than for any other domestic Cabinet agency. Federal education spending has increased by 132 percent from FY 1996 (the first fiscal year under a Republican majority in Congress) to FY 2003.And to what effect? States are now resorting to "adjusting test scores this year to give some schools a better chance of meeting formidable federal student achievement standards" (Source).
Given this data, and your astute observation that many people are on the receiving end of such benefits and will not gladly relinquish them, I tend to empathize with your assessment that "the only way for government to shrink under those realities is for the money to finally run out." I believe it will come down to that someday.
In the meantime, the GOP could be working at cutting taxes *and* trying to curtail the rate at which federal spending is growing. I don't think that's too much to expect from a political party that appears to pride itself on its conservatism.
If the voters of this nation agreed with all of your good points then Ron Paul would be president today. The simple reality isn't that the public doesn't understand the "conservative" rationale; they understand it they just are not buying it. That is why even Reagan raised taxes, never touched social security, never eliminated the Department of Education or any other agency and left the size of government larger than found it. The GOP does not just place people in office, WE elect them. WE elect “RINOS”. If the GOP purges the party of "RINOS" then the GOP is no longer a viable political party.
If we are to actually achieve what Jim laid out in this post the focus has to be how to turn the mushy middle of the voters, those that actually decide the elections, into conservatives. That will take care of the "RINO" problem. It is folly to think that any congressional candidate in any of the blue states will not be a "RINO" but without a sizable congressional delegation from some of those states a governing majority cannot be achieved. Once the voters in the blue states become right of center wala’ no more “RINOS”.
Well said, and I'm with you all the way, Jim.
I have only one concern...well, observation, really. I feel that you take far too much guff from certain posters.
Here's a partial laundry list of what the Democrat Party supports and promotes: abortion; homosexuality; feminaziism; environmentalism; government control over every aspect of our lives and society; socialized health care; disarmament of the American people; subjugation of the U.S. to the U.N.; the complete elimination of our national sovereignty; complete destruction of our basic traditional family unit; loss of personal freedoms and individual liberty. In other words, complete destruction of our Constitution and Bill of Rights and our American way of life
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.