Sorry, but I've more than had it with the people like David Brooks. People that have a full resume and, yet, have really accomplished nothing in their pathetic lives.
Posted on 10/13/2015 1:26:04 PM PDT by EveningStar
The House Republican caucus is close to ungovernable these days. How did this situation come about?
This was not just the work of the Freedom Caucus or Ted Cruz or one month’s activity. The Republican Party’s capacity for effective self-governance degraded slowly, over the course of a long chain of rhetorical excesses, mental corruptions and philosophical betrayals. Basically, the party abandoned traditional conservatism for right-wing radicalism. Republicans came to see themselves as insurgents and revolutionaries, and every revolution tends toward anarchy and ends up devouring its own.
By traditional definitions, conservatism stands for intellectual humility, a belief in steady, incremental change, a preference for reform rather than revolution, a respect for hierarchy, precedence, balance and order, and a tone of voice that is prudent, measured and responsible. Conservatives of this disposition can be dull, but they know how to nurture and run institutions. They also see the nation as one organic whole. Citizens may fall into different classes and political factions, but they are still joined by chains of affection that command ultimate loyalty and love.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Sorry, but I've more than had it with the people like David Brooks. People that have a full resume and, yet, have really accomplished nothing in their pathetic lives.
I’ll bet Brooks cashes his DNC check every month.
The House Republican caucus is close to ungovernable these days. How did this situation come about?
Answer-
Lying liberal republicans
Good point!
I’d like to see every Republican in a “live” interview ask if the Democrat party has been replaced by the SOCIALIST PARTY. You know: the party of no jobs! Why keep the collapse of the Democrat party a secret!
Yes, David, traditional conservatism stood for abortion, gay marriage, illegal immigration, massive federal deficits, socialized medicine, and military weakness. /sarc
It’s kind of funny how this works in the Democrat mind. The libs have whole websites talking about Cruz’s bad suits.
That’s an awesome picture of the nerd chameleon.
“Rush was trashing this column today.”
The thrice divorced, four times married, drug addict, draft dodger? That Rush?
Hat tip to Rush.
Should have said so in my post.
David Brooks is a hiding behind his desk at the NYT. A pathetic little kiss-up.
The “people who make things happen” can go on a fully peaceful spending strike until political reform happens.
If a new $300,000 house isn’t bought, governments lose about $100,000 in revenue.
If a new $35,000 car isn’t bought, governments lose about $15,000 in revenue.
Political reform means for me:
1. a flat “tax” of up to 10% to support the elderly and the sick with exemptions of earned income of $5,000/year and unearned income of $500/year (plus existing FICA tax on employers)
[Quotes are used for “tax” since taxes are meant to fund government operations, not people.]
2. another tax of up to 10% paid to support federal government operations, with exemptions on Congressionally set amounts of earned income (~$10,000/year) and unearned income (~$1,000/year)
3. a third tax of 20% levied on personal income above $50,000/year to pay off the national debt
4. repeal of Amendment XVII so federal senators are selected by state legislatures again
5. a new Fiscal Year Balance Amendment that terminates the terms of federal Constitutional officers (the President, the House of Representatives, Senators) at the end of the current term of the House of Representatives and bars the officers from getting federally related employment or payment if a federal fiscal year ends in the red
I know many of you won’t like 1, but 1 is basically the Ben Carson “tithe”. Ben Carson is right about the need to help people and to cap the funding and have just about everyone paying.
I agree, but so far they aren't taking the problem seriously. They are too preoccupied with all the latest diversions to recognize the growing threat directed at them.
Political reform means for me: 1. a flat “tax” of up to 10% to support the elderly and the sick with exemptions of earned income of $5,000/year and unearned income of $500/year (plus existing FICA tax on employers) [Quotes are used for “tax” since taxes are meant to fund government operations, not people.] 2. another tax of up to 10% paid to support federal government operations, with exemptions on Congressionally set amounts of earned income (~$10,000/year) and unearned income (~$1,000/year) 3. a third tax of 20% levied on personal income above $50,000/year to pay off the national debt 4. repeal of Amendment XVII so federal senators are selected by state legislatures again 5. a new Fiscal Year Balance Amendment that terminates the terms of federal Constitutional officers (the President, the House of Representatives, Senators) at the end of the current term of the House of Representatives and bars the officers from getting federally related employment or payment if a federal fiscal year ends in the red
Those are very good ideas, but I don't think we will ever get into a position where such ideas can be implemented. At least not until after some sort of social/financial cataclysm has occurred.
But it is a good target to shoot for.
I like Kevin McCarthy.
Being better than Boehner should be easy.
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.