|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
The conservative viewpoint rapes and pollutes the land. It is short-sighted and fails to recognize the impact on future generations. It may have been acceptable for a nation of 50 million, but is inappropriate for a nation of 300 million.
No, that would be the strict capitalist viewpoint.. while most conservatives are decidedly capitalist in their leanings, being a conservative and being a "rape the land" capitalist are not the same thing...
Quote:
Right now the government owes SS a boatload of money.
The government owes everybody a boatload of money.. because nobody is acting like a conservative.. 
Quote:
The "social issues" (e.g. abortion, race, gender, religion) and "free market captialists" groups make conservatives look hypocritical, If you are not part of that "social issues" crowd than you should call yourself a libertarian.
Sorry, I'm not following either.. I have long since considered myself a conservative.. so what are my views on abortion, race, gender, and religion?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
I like you, J, so don't take this the wrong way, but this thread -- and not these dolts speaking -- is a perfect indicator as to why our gov't is so sorely inept.
As long as we continue to say that Democrats/Republicans are the problem ... the more the problem is going to be around.
The Democrats aren't liberal, and the Republicans aren't conservative. Neither side has any outreaching agenda that differs from the other. They work within the same bureaucracy and have the exact same goals. In the their fight to wrestle those goals away from the other, they use hollow rhetoric and propaganda --- nonsense like Obama is a communist or the Republicans hate people who aren't rich.
Both sides have the exact same goal in mind -- get re-elected, and expand the wealth and power of those who can ensure said re-election.
Democrat and Republican are divisive words used to trick idiots.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089 |
Random question..... Is it possible in the American system to have a recognized third party? I mean, is it legally possible or is there something written into federal law that there can only be two recognized parties?
I've heard of the Libertarians but my understanding is they are not recognized as a legitimate third party. Is this because they can't be or they simply don't meet certain qualifications to be a third party?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
There is nothing written into law about a third party. It is entirely possible. the problem is that the system has been set up to make it virtually impossible.
In any election, the overwhelming favorite is the incumbent, who is typically a republican or a democrat... the odds are stacked in that persons favor.. now to defeat an incumbent, one needs an organized campaign that is well funded and that usually means they are also associated with the R or the D party..
To sign up to run and say, "I'm an independent" or "I'm with the Green party or the constitution party" (there are a host of other parties out there, its just that none of them win much especially in national elections) it puts you at a huge disadvantage for a couple of reasons.
1. There is no organized structure to help you. If I run as a D or an R and gain some support, the D and R structures are already in place to help me. (and the funding)
2. People will have a general understanding of what I believe in.. if I say I'm a D or an R, then people will automatically assume that if they are a D or an R that we have XYZ things in common (this is a big downfall of the 2 party system)
3. It's easier to raise money both from inside the party and from outside if people know that I'm a D or an R.
4. And I hate to say this but its true, people are lazy. If I run as a D or an R, as I said, some will vote for me just because of that, but if I'm an independent, then people have to actually do some research and figure out what I stand for and people just aren't willing to do it.
That's my take on why 3rd parties have little success in this country.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089 |
Thx DC....good to know.
Strikes me that if a group, headlined by a notable political figure, looked to start something new, that it may be a worthy addition to the political system.
I watch the republican vs democrat debates on here and it seems relatively clear that the two parties more or less just fight for the middle ground, with the very slightest of leans to either direction. Having been on DT for both republican and democrat presidents, the rhetoric and complaints seem more or less identical.
If you could input a third party, do you think that it would merely follow the same trend or do you think you'd actually start to see differences in the parties?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
I know these documents well, less you forget about the 'promote the general welfare" included in the preamble.
How is turning people into dependants considered "Promoting the General Welfare"????
" Preamble to the Constitution:
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Article 1, Section 8:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."
Promoting the general welfare is in both the Preamble and in the Constitution itself. So what does it mean? More importantly, what was the intent of this phrase that was so important that it was both in the Preamble, and in an article of the Consitution itself?
Well, what was the meaning of welfare back then?
Was it a program that gave money to poor people? I don't remember many of those back in the late 1700s or even into the 1800s. If there were none then, how can it be that this was the Framers' intent?
More likely, the "General Welfare" was in reference to the general welfare of the United States itself, and consistent with the meaning of the word as defined at that time. (Which should be obvious, but is somehow a great mystery to others) To protect against, and recover the United States from calamity, disaster, evil and misfortune ... in other words, to protect the blessings of life, liberty, and freedom for ALL of the country's citizens. General welfare was not in reference to the individual .... but rather to the nation as a whole. The General Welfare clause was not intended to add to Federal powers, but rather to ensure that these powers were used only where the general welfare of the country as a whole was concerned.
What we think of today as welfare programs in the United States didn't start on a large, federal scale until the 1900s. This is when the Constitutional meaning of the word "welfare" was perverted and warped into its current meaning.
Frankly, I think that the framers of the Constitution would start another Revolution if they were alive today to see how, arguably, the single most important document in human history has been twisted and perverted in the name of "interpretation".
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
welfare : the state of doing well especially in respect to good fortune, happiness, well-being, or prosperity
Yes, to maintain a general well being within it's borders that allows it;s citizens to prosper and live in freedom.
How can anyone assume that it would mean we all sit on our lazy asses and let the government take care of us? Where would the money come from? It amazes me people think that it can be that easy.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,253
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,253 |
Quote:
I like you, J, so don't take this the wrong way, but this thread -- and not these dolts speaking -- is a perfect indicator as to why our gov't is so sorely inept.
No, it is the dolts speaking as well as the people who vote for them; not this thread that shows them for the idiots they are.
Quote:
As long as we continue to say that Democrats/Republicans are the problem ... the more the problem is going to be around.
I agree to a point, but I think that two parties concerning themselves with their ideals vs. expending all of their resources on elections would be a healthy system of checks and balances. One thing you do see here is that the conservatives will call out republicans when they see something amiss, while the liberals refuse to say anything negative about democrats. The democrats are a much bigger part of the problem.
Quote:
The Democrats aren't liberal, and the Republicans aren't conservative. Neither side has any outreaching agenda that differs from the other. They work within the same bureaucracy and have the exact same goals. In the their fight to wrestle those goals away from the other, they use hollow rhetoric and propaganda --- nonsense like Obama is a communist or the Republicans hate people who aren't rich.
Oh, the dumbocrats are extremely liberal. I question whether the average republican in congress is conservative. Their goals aren't exactly the same, but having McCain as their candidate sure looked like the republicans are leaning more to the left.
Quote:
Both sides have the exact same goal in mind -- get re-elected, and expand the wealth and power of those who can ensure said re-election.
Yep. They've painted themselves into that ugly corner. The only way out is for people to wake up and start calling out the idiots in office.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,561
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,561 |
Quote:
As long as we continue to say that Democrats/Republicans are the problem ... the more the problem is going to be around.
Along those same lines, a number of months ago it occurred to me that this is a conspiracy of major proportions.. it's being perpetrated against the american people.
Both parties want us at each others throats.. it's a distraction technique that causes us to fight among ourselves. And while we are doing that,, they are robbing us blind..
They employ the same Classic Misdirection techniques that the best magicians use to cause us to divert our attention while they make a plane or elephant disappear.... (does anyone actually believe that they can make plane or elephant disappear, if you do, then you won't get what I'm saying at all  )
Quote:
Both sides have the exact same goal in mind -- get re-elected, and expand the wealth and power of those who can ensure said re-election.
I'm not sure truer words were ever spoken on this subject...... 
Most elected officials pander to those that give them money.. Votes are bought and sold like pieces of candy..
How anyone can say one side is better than the other is beyond logic...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Just to be clear...my response was not about the "Welfare Program" but Liberal Policies in General that turn people into dependants.
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015 |
Yeah, I was replying more to the post you quoted.
I should have been clearer on that point.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
If you could input a third party, do you think that it would merely follow the same trend or do you think you'd actually start to see differences in the parties?
Some people are absolutely convinced that a 3rd party would bring some sense to the system.. but then most of them assume that a 3rd party would be some moderate conglomeration.. I'm not so sure either of those are true.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089 |
Quote:
Quote:
If you could input a third party, do you think that it would merely follow the same trend or do you think you'd actually start to see differences in the parties?
Some people are absolutely convinced that a 3rd party would bring some sense to the system.. but then most of them assume that a 3rd party would be some moderate conglomeration.. I'm not so sure either of those are true.
Well, say that either a true right wing or true left wing party emerged.... Wouldn't that force either the Republicans or the Democrats to shift more to the opposite side to counteract it and the other to become more centrist? Plus, if the third party began to accumulate seats in either Senate or Congress, you may see more concessions being made on bills to convince the third party members to vote in favour?
Granted, this is just me spitballing. I've had to study the American political system here and there through high school and university, but I wouldn't pretend to know the whole thing off by heart.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
All parties will eventually become corrupt or self-serving until the day they all must face that they can not make a lifelong career out of their position, or it isn't lucrative enough to desire to serve as a career.
our men and women in uniform that make careers out of fighting for our freedoms make barely a small percentage of what some of these politicians make.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089 |
Politics is a dirty game my friend....but someone has to play it. And unfortunately, the game requires alot of manuovering. I don't blame them for it.
Saying that all are corrupt, however, I think is too broad of a brush. They work within a system and that system has some very unique rules. However, they are still bound by law and subject to it. Are they less likely to get caught? More able to cover it up? Sure...but so are cops, military, CEOs, etc.
If you have any degree of power, you can manipulate things by using it.
But I digress and have started to deviate....
This is one of the things I have always been fascinated about with our southern neighbours....the complete and total mistrust of government. And, even more astounding, some of the very good and passionate arguments people have about why.
Keeps me coming back to tailgate!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
One thing you do see here is that the conservatives will call out republicans when they see something amiss, while the liberals refuse to say anything negative about democrats.
Aren't I constantly chastised around here for being a 'flaming liberal'?
When's the last time I've said anything good about the Democratic party?
Quote:
The democrats are a much bigger part of the problem.
I think you're wrong.
I'm not saying they are less of the problem, or that the GOP is the bigger part ... I'm saying the parties are essentially the same thing ... barely able to differentiate.
Quote:
Oh, the dumbocrats are extremely liberal.
No, they're not.
The Democratic party is beholden to corporate interests. None of what they do remotely resembles what anyone in their right mind could consider 'liberal'.
There are almost no liberals or conservatives in American gov't. 1%, maybe?
Quote:
I question whether the average republican in congress is conservative. Their goals aren't exactly the same, but having McCain as their candidate sure looked like the republicans are leaning more to the left.
McCain didn't move left in the election ... he merely said what his people thought the masses wanted to hear.
Had he been elected instead of Obama? No difference, really. Things would have happened almost exactly the same ... a few wedge issues may or may not have come to the surface ...
The GOP didn't abandon being conservative .... I mean, when were they?
Reagan is their poster boy -- AND HE WASN'T EVEN REMOTELY CONSERVATIVE!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,253
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,253 |
Quote:
Aren't I constantly chastised around here for being a 'flaming liberal'?
When's the last time I've said anything good about the Democratic party?
I think you misread, because I didn't direct anything at you. I know you're not fond of either party. The rest we'll just disagree on.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,952
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,952 |
Quote:
Aren't I constantly chastised around here for being a 'flaming liberal'?
Well, yeah. That, and an "anti everything the u.s. does" kind of person.
Other than that........... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,860
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,860 |
Quote:
How is turning people into dependants considered "Promoting the General Welfare"????
It is in the same place that gave the corporation the rights of personhood.
Quote:
Oh and I still question your understanding of the subject matter...you may have read the material...that does not mean you "understand" it.
Classic, and laughable, question the background of someone, then when confronted with evidence, state that I don't have the ability to understand it.
Welcome to "ignore this user" Pete.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!…. That did not age well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,253
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,253 |
 Oh no! Not the ignore button! 
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,952
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,952 |
Quote:
Classic, and laughable, question the background of someone, then when confronted with evidence, state that I don't have the ability to understand it.
Welcome to "ignore this user" Pete.
You know.......I've had issues with a few people on here. I got banned for my responses to some of them (and rightly so I might add - aside from the time I got banned for giving a steeler fan some smack in the smack shack),........I can't stand what some people post...................
Yet I've never felt the need to "ignore" anyone. Just saying.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,860
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,860 |
If I went with anything else I would be banned.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!…. That did not age well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
Politics is a dirty game my friend....but someone has to play it. And unfortunately, the game requires alot of manuovering. I don't blame them for it.
Saying that all are corrupt, however, I think is too broad of a brush.
I was talking about the parties as a whole when I said parties, not individuals. Overtime, the sneaky ones take control, and tear a parties beliefs down into whatever serves the majority leaders of the party best.
It goes to the old saying "Absolute power, corrupts absolutely"
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,860
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,860 |
Quote:
Yet I've never felt the need to "ignore" anyone. Just saying.
Rarely use it, only once before in the Pure Football forum. Non-conservatives are in the minority. I understand the disdain for the entitlements, but there are other issues than entitlements that challenge this country.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!…. That did not age well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015 |
What do you see as the biggest issues confronting this country right now?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,317
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,317 |
I know you didn't ask me but I think its extremist minorities drowning out the majority because they the majority is too apathetic to yell as loud as the crazies.
"All I know is, as long as I led the Southeastern Conference in scoring, my grades would be fine." - Charles Barkley
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015 |
That's a very reasonable choice.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,860
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,860 |
At a conceputal level.
Partisanship and ideology versus pragmatism in government.
At a practical level.
National Debt (we can put tax equity as a subset)
Corporate Over-Reach (subsidies, tax code, import taxes, personhood, financial policy, Military Industrial Complex)
Economy
The Wars
Immigration
Healthcare
Entitlements
Education
Environment
Social Policy
Infrastructure
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!…. That did not age well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,317
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,317 |
Quote:
That's a very reasonable choice.
Oh, sorry. I mean, MAN DO I HATE THOSE FREAKING LIBERALS
"All I know is, as long as I led the Southeastern Conference in scoring, my grades would be fine." - Charles Barkley
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015 |
Personally, I believe that the biggest problem with government is the belief that government can and should do everything.
I think that all other problems stem from this belief.
Government doing and spending too much leads to debt.
Government giving away goodies to corporate (and other) special interests.
Government trying to manage the economy, which really results in massive spending .... and more goodies given away to special interests.
Government trying to manage something as massive as healthcare, despite them screwing the pooch on every other single social program.
Government trying to control education, (and too much influence by the education unions) and not enough by parents/local authorities.
Government using social policy to try and "equalize" for results rather than leveling the playing field.
So .... I can see your points here. Would you agree that most of your points directly lead back to the government doing (and spending) more than it was ever intended to.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
That's a very reasonable choice.
Oh, sorry. I mean, MAN DO I HATE THOSE FREAKING LIBERALS
Part of the problem as I see it is that there are no conservatives in government today.
The Democrats and Republican differ only in how much more than the other they are willing to spend on their own priorities.
Democrats gain power .... spending goes up.
Republicans gain power ... spending goes up.
Both parties spend like crazy ..... and neither one cuts spending. So .... with each passing Congressional "generation" we add spending on top of spending on top of spending ..... and no one seems to care that the train is so badly out of control that when it crashes no one may survive. 
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Quote:
Personally, I believe that the biggest problem with government is the belief that government can and should do everything.
I think that all other problems stem from this belief.
Government doing and spending too much leads to debt.
Government giving away goodies to corporate (and other) special interests.
Government trying to manage the economy, which really results in massive spending .... and more goodies given away to special interests.
Government trying to manage something as massive as healthcare, despite them screwing the pooch on every other single social program.
Government trying to control education, (and too much influence by the education unions) and not enough by parents/local authorities.
Government using social policy to try and "equalize" for results rather than leveling the playing field.
So .... I can see your points here. Would you agree that most of your points directly lead back to the government doing (and spending) more than it was ever intended to.
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
I don't care if you can read this or not...But I am absolutely in my rights to question your understanding of the material if you have read everything you have said and still believe that todays America and the direction it is going in somehow represents what was intended by the drafters of those documents...
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,132
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,132 |
Quote:
jfan... with this post, you seem to be acting every bit the poster child for 'confirmation bias' that you accuse mac of being.
clem...jfan accusing me of "confirmation bias" is a complement to me.
I get talked about a lot by the hardcore RWers on this message board and that is fine too.
I will never apologize to anyone for supporting working class Americans who have been hurt most due to beliefs and policies supported by RWers and the GOP.
GM strong...
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089 |
Quote:
Personally, I believe that the biggest problem with government is the belief that government can and should do everything.
I think that all other problems stem from this belief.
Government doing and spending too much leads to debt.
Government giving away goodies to corporate (and other) special interests.
Government trying to manage the economy, which really results in massive spending .... and more goodies given away to special interests.
Government trying to manage something as massive as healthcare, despite them screwing the pooch on every other single social program.
Government trying to control education, (and too much influence by the education unions) and not enough by parents/local authorities.
Government using social policy to try and "equalize" for results rather than leveling the playing field.
So .... I can see your points here. Would you agree that most of your points directly lead back to the government doing (and spending) more than it was ever intended to.
This is interesting to me as, from what I've seen, Americans by in large want the government out of their business. But if the government doesn't do it, who does?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
Personally, I believe that the biggest problem with government is the belief that government can and should do everything.
I think that all other problems stem from this belief.
Government doing and spending too much leads to debt.
Government giving away goodies to corporate (and other) special interests.
Government trying to manage the economy, which really results in massive spending .... and more goodies given away to special interests.
Government trying to manage something as massive as healthcare, despite them screwing the pooch on every other single social program.
Government trying to control education, (and too much influence by the education unions) and not enough by parents/local authorities.
Government using social policy to try and "equalize" for results rather than leveling the playing field.
So .... I can see your points here. Would you agree that most of your points directly lead back to the government doing (and spending) more than it was ever intended to.
This is interesting to me as, from what I've seen, Americans by in large want the government out of their business. But if the government doesn't do it, who does?
I'm not advocating a complete withdrawal of government from everything.
Government should have a very minimal, streamlined, and carefully defined role in our country's life.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Quote:
Aren't I constantly chastised around here for being a 'flaming liberal'?
Well, yeah. That, and an "anti everything the u.s. does" kind of person.
Other than that...........
You guys have been moving in on my turf since the middle of January.  
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 51,015 |
You are so full of it that your eyes float mac.
Which specific beliefs hurt American workers, and in what ways?
Which specific policies hurt American workers, and which specific Congresses and Presidents approved those policies?
I really don't expect an answer ... or at best a non-specific rhetorical one ...... because I know that all you have is rhetorical BS.
Oh ... and going beyond 2 damned years of unemployment insurance is not really going out of one's way to hurt anyone. I wonder how many people have not held a job at all during the Obama administration?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,089 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Personally, I believe that the biggest problem with government is the belief that government can and should do everything.
I think that all other problems stem from this belief.
Government doing and spending too much leads to debt.
Government giving away goodies to corporate (and other) special interests.
Government trying to manage the economy, which really results in massive spending .... and more goodies given away to special interests.
Government trying to manage something as massive as healthcare, despite them screwing the pooch on every other single social program.
Government trying to control education, (and too much influence by the education unions) and not enough by parents/local authorities.
Government using social policy to try and "equalize" for results rather than leveling the playing field.
So .... I can see your points here. Would you agree that most of your points directly lead back to the government doing (and spending) more than it was ever intended to.
This is interesting to me as, from what I've seen, Americans by in large want the government out of their business. But if the government doesn't do it, who does?
I'm not advocating a complete withdrawal of government from everything.
Government should have a very minimal, streamlined, and carefully defined role in our country's life.
OK, fair enough...but how narrow do you go? I know there's some folks that say the government should be there to take care of trade, aid and defense. Leave the rest to the private corporations. But what makes us think that the private sector will do it any better? If anything, aren;t they more prone to get crooked as they are chasing the almighty buck as their prime directive?
I guess in my semi-socialist, frostbitten Canadian brain, I see the things that you have listed and those are things that I'm scared to let the private sector have complete control of because if those things go wrong, they immediately affect my life.
The economic crash was caused not by governments, but by private industry...namely the banks and other mortgage providers. They were working in the interests of profit and, at the end of the day, did ridiculous amounts of damage to the global economy as the momentum steamrolled to affect other industries, trading partners, etc etc.
The States has worked itself into a pretty bad place by following the hands off approach...and the situation has gotten worse and worse. Over the last few years, I've seen (once again from the outside, so excuse if I'm missing something) the government become more involved. And yeah, its causing some very negative blowback but, in my opinion, its because its changing a whole system to something that the American populace is not used to.
Although I keep an interest in American politics, I'm not there so I'm likely missing pieces of the puzzle (which is why I enjoy yapping about it here as there's some smart folks with good political opinions). But I guess I see the States at a real crossroads in its history. Their old approach just isn't working and isn't sustainable. Times have changed, the country has changed and I don't think the same rules can apply. I don't profess to be able to say with certainty that the current approach is the right one, but its going in some new directions- which I sincerely think the US needs to start doing if its going to maintain its world standing and be sustainable.
Although I'm niether an Obama supporter or detractor, I remember he said one thing that I respected. That he conceded that he may be a one term president as he was going to try to do things that the country needed that may not be popular with the American public. I admire that as it shows that he's more concerned with taking action on problems than he is on being re-elected.
Anyways, I rambled a bit here but I guess there's my three cents. Before anyone jumps down my throat, this isn't meant as a dig against America, just an outside perspective of what I find an increasingly fascinating subject...plus one that does affect my wee little country.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Why I use the term "dumbocrat"
|
|
