goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: star seed 7 on June 22, 2015, 09:04:54 PM
-
i'm serious. this is a serious thread, the known pit wacko righters please stay out. also known pit wacko lefties please be respectful.
cf3 had a comment the other day that he's only ever voted republican in his life (but open to a d) and it really got me interested what about republicans was the draw?
it's hard for me to disassociate republicans as a whole from the hate and bigotry of their (the party) social views, so it's interesting to me when non-hateful people choose to support them, though i'm sure they are actually the majority. i'm sure there's a few other closet right leaners around here (slobbs?), i'd be interested in hearing from anyone.
-
I agree with about half of the Republican platform. I generally just watch mannerisms and try to weed out anyone who is hateful. The president is more of a figurehead than anything, so I try to vote for who I think the best human being is, regardless of where they stand on the issues.
-
I might be your huckleberry, lib. Although I don't want to associate much with either party, now.
-
I'd start a thread for sane libtards, but those concepts are incongruent :ROFL:
-
I like the idea of smaller govt, but hate the big biz side of the game and how policy is basically for sale to the best lobby.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
-
Lib, AMA
-
I like the theory/ idea of personal responsibility. I dislike the hypocrisy of less regulation but then them basically trying to legislate religion/ morality.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
-
Anyone who bases their politics on "social" policy is an unadulterated moron without a modicum of understanding as to what a government is or what it should do.
-
i've registered as a republican in most states where i've voted. the libertarian wing of the party appeals to me, at least when aren't being idiots about monetary policy or pandering to tea partiers that think they're libertarians.
-
Anyone who bases their politics on "social" policy is an unadulterated moron without a modicum of understanding as to what a government is or what it should do.
That is basically every candidate in our lifetime.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
-
Anyone who bases their politics on "social" policy is an unadulterated moron without a modicum of understanding as to what a government is or what it should do.
That is basically every candidate in our lifetime.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
To people who get their news from tmz
-
Anyone who bases their politics on "social" policy is an unadulterated moron without a modicum of understanding as to what a government is or what it should do.
Brownback is the worst about this.
-
Do you really think the Dems are any less bigoted? Or are they just less bigoted toward particular groups you favor? There's also different kinds of bigotry. Dems are masters of the soft bigotry of low expectations towards women and minorities.
Anyway, it's tough to answer your question because the national GOP is, frankly, a complete train wreck. I vote for GOP only because they are the slightly more paletable, but still somewhat electable, party. Why? Generally speaking, they favor smaller government (but see bloated farm subsidies) and lower taxes (but see failure to propose a budget or tax reform since taking control of Congress). Those issues are important to me as someone who pays a crap ton of taxes.
From a social issues standpoint, the GOP is reliably pro-life, and I'm strongly pro-life. The dismemberment of mid to late term babies is a gruesome practice.
From a foreign policy standpoint, the GOP actually believes in American Exceptionalism, and that's what I believe. We are the greatest nation and the greatest force for good this world has ever seen, and most pubs actually believe this. Most Dems don't, sadly.
I could go on, but that's just off the top of my head.
-
Anyone who bases their politics on "social" policy is an unadulterated moron without a modicum of understanding as to what a government is or what it should do.
Respectfully, FSD, the protection of life is a very appropriate function of government.
-
fsd, ksuw, you were both asked nicely to stay out of this thread
-
Anyone who bases their politics on "social" policy is an unadulterated moron without a modicum of understanding as to what a government is or what it should do.
Respectfully, FSD, the protection of life is a very appropriate function of government.
Just curious KSUW...how do you personally feel about the refusal of many GOP lawmakers to grant exceptions for rape/incest/health of the mother?
-
Do you really think the Dems are any less bigoted? Or are they just less bigoted toward particular groups you favor? There's also different kinds of bigotry. Dems are masters of the soft bigotry of low expectations towards women and minorities.
Anyway, it's tough to answer your question because the national GOP is, frankly, a complete train wreck. I vote for GOP only because they are the slightly more paletable, but still somewhat electable, party. Why? Generally speaking, they favor smaller government (but see bloated farm subsidies) and lower taxes (but see failure to propose a budget or tax reform since taking control of Congress). Those issues are important to me as someone who pays a crap ton of taxes.
From a social issues standpoint, the GOP is reliably pro-life, and I'm strongly pro-life. The dismemberment of mid to late term babies is a gruesome practice.
From a foreign policy standpoint, the GOP actually believes in American Exceptionalism, and that's what I believe. We are the greatest nation and the greatest force for good this world has ever seen, and most pubs actually believe this. Most Dems don't, sadly.
I could go on, but that's just off the top of my head.
I don't understand how you can claim to want smaller government and also argue that there are too many counties in Kansas.
-
Anyone who bases their politics on "social" policy is an unadulterated moron without a modicum of understanding as to what a government is or what it should do.
Respectfully, FSD, the protection of life is a very appropriate function of government.
Just curious KSUW...how do you personally feel about the refusal of many GOP lawmakers to grant exceptions for rape/incest/health of the mother?
they are at least consistent
-
Anyone who bases their politics on "social" policy is an unadulterated moron without a modicum of understanding as to what a government is or what it should do.
Respectfully, FSD, the protection of life is a very appropriate function of government.
Prematurely delivering a baby for the sole purpose of severing its spine and discarding its carcass in the trash is a criminal matter, not social.
-
Do you really think the Dems are any less bigoted? Or are they just less bigoted toward particular groups you favor? There's also different kinds of bigotry. Dems are masters of the soft bigotry of low expectations towards women and minorities.
Anyway, it's tough to answer your question because the national GOP is, frankly, a complete train wreck. I vote for GOP only because they are the slightly more paletable, but still somewhat electable, party. Why? Generally speaking, they favor smaller government (but see bloated farm subsidies) and lower taxes (but see failure to propose a budget or tax reform since taking control of Congress). Those issues are important to me as someone who pays a crap ton of taxes.
From a social issues standpoint, the GOP is reliably pro-life, and I'm strongly pro-life. The dismemberment of mid to late term babies is a gruesome practice.
From a foreign policy standpoint, the GOP actually believes in American Exceptionalism, and that's what I believe. We are the greatest nation and the greatest force for good this world has ever seen, and most pubs actually believe this. Most Dems don't, sadly.
I could go on, but that's just off the top of my head.
I don't understand how you can claim to want smaller government and also argue that there are too many counties in Kansas.
Steve dave land will be the only place with a school, a hospital, or plumbing. There will also be a giant fence around it.
-
I was asked to stay out. I'll show myself the door.
-
I was asked to stay out. I'll show myself the door.
known pit wacko righter :sdeek:
-
Conservatives by definition are reluctant to change. They worry that change will negatively affect their types of lives. It's essentially self interested type behavior. Probably due to evolution.
-
i'm serious. this is a serious thread, the known pit wacko righters please stay out. also known pit wacko lefties please be respectful.
cf3 had a comment the other day that he's only ever voted republican in his life (but open to a d) and it really got me interested what about republicans was the draw?
it's hard for me to disassociate republicans as a whole from the hate and bigotry of their (the party) social views, so it's interesting to me when non-hateful people choose to support them, though i'm sure they are actually the majority. i'm sure there's a few other closet right leaners around here (slobbs?), i'd be interested in hearing from anyone.
Reasons I choose to support them:
1. Pro-Life. We can go round and round, and I can't pretend to understand a woman in thouse circumstances, but I believe all humans are precious. This is probabaly due to my religious beliefs, but I can't pretend to separate that from how I'd vote.
2. Small gov. I generally as a rule think that government is inept at fixing problems. It is ineffective.
Reasons I haven't actually voted for a republican since 2010:
1. I think the party manipulates Christians. The party has equated things like firearm liberty, added in a touch of irrational fear (OBAMA'S COMIN' FO YO GUNS!), to things of religious conviction. I don't remember where Jesus says "You can have my sword when you take it from my cold dead hands."
2. The party is hypocritical about how it values life. I think all lives are precious and should be worked to preserve. I am against the death penalty, and wars of aggression (although I wasn't in 2004, when I would constantly argue we should be in Iraq! It was dumb.). The fear of tyranny of government as a defense of there being guns everywere is irrational. I don't however, see gun control working at this point. We're too far down the path. Maybe it would but it would take 50 or 100 years IMO.
3. They aren't TRULY a party of small government, they just want to spend ineffectively differently than democrats do.
Every election since 2010 I've voted. I either vote Libertarian, independent, or left it blank. I remember the feeling of leaving the MO senate ballot blank in 2012 when it was Todd Aikan vs. Claire McKaskil. I didn't agree with McKaskil on much, but how on earth could I cast a vote for someone who was as foolish and backwards as Aikan? I believe in voting FOR people whom I think would be good leaders. If neither candidate has convinced me they can lead, I leave it blank.
Dunno lib7, hope that helps answer. My convictions about government are less firm than ever, and honestly its a personally freeing thing.
-
I guess lib7 in the simplest terms, I value government preserving liberty more than government creating equality. I think preserving liberty is a more attainable goal, and creating equality is pretty tough in the real world. That would be a reason why I'm more likely to vote republican
-
wow, very sane. thank you cf3 friend :cheers:
-
wow, very sane. thank you cf3 friend :cheers:
:cheers:
-
wow, very sane. thank you cf3 friend :cheers:
:cheers:
i just made a donation in your name to the human fund
-
I guess lib7 in the simplest terms, I value government preserving liberty more than government creating equality. I think preserving liberty is a more attainable goal, and creating equality is pretty tough in the real world. That would be a reason why I'm more likely to vote republican
I can agree w this, but also think:
1. A whole lot of liberty has been taken from us by conservatives after 9/11.
2. I think there has been a long history of insuring inequality and that something should be done to help level a playing field that has been out of level for so long and I think education is the answer/resolution.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
-
I guess lib7 in the simplest terms, I value government preserving liberty more than government creating equality. I think preserving liberty is a more attainable goal, and creating equality is pretty tough in the real world. That would be a reason why I'm more likely to vote republican
I can agree w this, but also think:
1. A whole lot of liberty has been taken from us by conservatives after 9/11.
2. I think there has been a long history of insuring inequality and that something should be done to help level a playing field that has been out of level for so long and I think education is the answer/resolution.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
1. No arguement
2. IMO education would be better with LESS governmental involvement, especially at the federal level. Like, has anything been worse than "no child left behind"?
-
Well, right now large cities have neighborhoods where minority populations were basically funneled to. Most of these neighborhoods have high crime, high unemployment, and bad schools. A good example of a good start would be early ed for everyone in that area.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
-
I guess lib7 in the simplest terms, I value government preserving liberty more than government creating equality. I think preserving liberty is a more attainable goal, and creating equality is pretty tough in the real world. That would be a reason why I'm more likely to vote republican
Good posts.
What about when the government creates the inequality because of restrictions on liberty they imposed on certain segments of the population? Does the government have a responsibility to right those wrongs?
Also, why can't you both preserve liberty and strive to create equality at the same time?
-
I guess lib7 in the simplest terms, I value government preserving liberty more than government creating equality. I think preserving liberty is a more attainable goal, and creating equality is pretty tough in the real world. That would be a reason why I'm more likely to vote republican
Good posts.
What about when the government creates the inequality because of restrictions on liberty they imposed on certain segments of the population? Does the government have a responsibility to right those wrongs?
Also, why can't you both preserve liberty and strive to create equality at the same time?
Yes, they should try and right the wrongs, but they do such as shitty job of it.
I think you inevitibly have to sacrifice some equality for liberty, or liberty for equality. You can value both, but IMO you can't value both equally.
-
I guess lib7 in the simplest terms, I value government preserving liberty more than government creating equality. I think preserving liberty is a more attainable goal, and creating equality is pretty tough in the real world. That would be a reason why I'm more likely to vote republican
Good posts.
What about when the government creates the inequality because of restrictions on liberty they imposed on certain segments of the population? Does the government have a responsibility to right those wrongs?
Also, why can't you both preserve liberty and strive to create equality at the same time?
Yes, they should try and right the wrongs, but they do such as shitty job of it.
I think you inevitibly have to sacrifice some equality for liberty, or liberty for equality. You can value both, but IMO you can't value both equally.
i guess i don't know what liberty and equality are because i think we should prob just shoot for booth. it's seriously one or the other? :confused:
-
I dunno man. Its 12:11 AM. I promise I'll think more about all this and blog some tomorrow.
-
I think it's kind of a bullshit answer because there are liberties that Democrats care about more than Republicans and eauality issues that Rupublicans care about more than Democrats..
-
I think it's kind of a bullshit answer because there are liberties that Democrats care about more than Republicans and eauality issues that Rupublicans care about more than Democrats..
can you list the main ones? i dead seriously have no idea.
-
smoking weed, gay stuff - democrats
tax equality - pubs
-
i guess an unrestricted market could be viewed as equality?
-
I think it's kind of a bullshit answer because there are liberties that Democrats care about more than Republicans and eauality issues that Rupublicans care about more than Democrats..
can you list the main ones? i dead seriously have no idea?
I mean, you can just come up with a bunch of stuff like Republicans think that fetuses should be treated equally and Democrats think that on blacks aren't as free to become wealthy as whites on average. It's all just about how you characterize things.
-
Seven's examples are better than mine.
-
smoking weed, gay stuff - democrats
tax equality - pubs
Guns for the right
-
i've registered as a republican in most states where i've voted. the libertarian wing of the party appeals to me, at least when aren't being idiots about monetary policy or pandering to tea partiers that think they're libertarians.
Same. I've been a registered republican since I was 18. I'm left socially and right fiscally though pretty moderate in each direction.
-
Hey guys, I love this thread. I have a busy week, but I'm gonna try to post something about me personally.
Appreciate the mainly civil discussion.
Just because you feel strongly about something doesn't mean you have to be mean to those that don't agree with you.
Gonna win 'em all!
-
A government's role is to ensure equity, not equality.
-
sd = best mod
-
Liberty is the removal of government impediments so that a person is free to prosper how they see fit, so long as they don't infringe upon others.
Equality is a misnomer and involves taking from one person and giving to another under the guise of righting a previous wrong.
-
Great modding sd
-
Liberty is the removal of government impediments so that a person is free to prosper how they see fit, so long as they don't infringe upon others.
Equality is a misnomer and involves taking from one person and giving to another under the guise of righting a previous wrong.
Thoughts on the barriers put in place by govt, in the past, to insure inequality in the not too distant past? I mean, it seems the govt is already in the biz of effecting the equality of it's constituents, and has been for some time. :dunno:
-
I'm a registered republican who mostly votes against incumbents, which only serves to contribute to government's ineffectiveness, but you know, I'm really tired of my neighbors electing morons.
-
KS loves its morons, though.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
-
KS loves its morons, though.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
it's quite a conundrum. how do you determine who is a moron and who is playing the political game? if politicians had time to work on important issues instead of pandering to idiots to win reelection would government be more effective? however, it's entirely possible that if politicians weren't worried about losing their office they wouldn't do jackshit anyway. wait, i think there might be peer-reviewed studies that examine all of this.
-
The ppl that are pandering most to morons are the ppl I don't want in office.
I mean, look at a mailer sometime. More often than not a mailer from a KS politician will have bullet points about some liberal/republican "agenda" at the federal level, will throw hate and shade at some recognizable federal level name(boehner, obama, pelosi, etc), and toss in their opponent's name beside them. Like, electing some dumbass to serve as house rep to the State house, and who will rep some stupid suburb of Wichita, has a rough ridin' thing to do with any of that. Yet, they run a campaign piggy backing on the hate and discontent spread by Fox News or MSNBC.
If someone goes that hard at distraction, they don't need to be in office.
-
the thing about elected officials (if you ignore gerrymandering and voter turnout impediments) is that they reflect the ideals of the majority.
-
Yes. Morons love morons. It keeps them feeling safe, comfy, and not threatened.
Ignorance is the absolute best thing that has every happened to politicians. The anti-intellectualism movement is a gold mine for the current far right pubs.
-
Tea party droolers have given conservatism a bad name. If one of apostles of one issue stupidity told them not to Crap for a month to protest the EPA, they would and blow up like a Ballon and explode. Rigidity is good in the bedroom with your sweets, but not in government when it comes to the business affairs of society, protecting us, and providing infrastructure. Sen. Moran is a good example. An example is Kansaa, if you are out of money, you have to raisw taxes. Also nothing is wrong with debating and being true to one's social convictions. When we become amoral then hell will flourish.
-
the religious right and tea party have turned me away from a lot of the republican candidates that make it through primaries. a lot of viable moderate right candidates cannot make it through a primary so I'm stuck with a Brownback'esque v. whoever the left/3rd party trots out there decision. I'll keep voting moderate right in primaries and then not voting at all or voting dem/some third party candidate probably.
-
I might reregister as a Dem so I can vote for Chaffee in the primary. #MetricSystem4Lyfe
-
A democrat candidate in kansas (maybe Nebraska too?) is basically a right leaning moderate, so at least there's that
-
A democrat candidate in kansas (maybe Nebraska too?) is basically a right leaning moderate, so at least there's that
The ones who can afford to put their name out there, so that you actually hear of them, are
-
Liberty is the removal of government impediments so that a person is free to prosper how they see fit, so long as they don't infringe upon others.
Equality is a misnomer and involves taking from one person and giving to another under the guise of righting a previous wrong.
Thoughts on the barriers put in place by govt, in the past, to insure inequality in the not too distant past? I mean, it seems the govt is already in the biz of effecting the equality of it's constituents, and has been for some time. :dunno:
Barrier is a synonym for impediment. It's obviously addressed in my post quoted above.
If you're asking whether two wrongs can make a right (attempting to correct one inequality with another), ask your mom.
-
The two wrongs note is individual perspective.
Being absolutely horrible to a certain portion of the population, for a very long period of time, then completely ignoring them and calling it liberty is pretty shitty.
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
-
I just don't live in states where they have shitty republicans running things. That goes for states with shitty democrats running things as well.
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
The smaller govt note leads right into the smaller taxes, smaller regulation, smaller daily interaction with out daily lives idea that most republicans believe in. Believing in that maybe doesn't equate to being a republican, but being conservative. I also think that the current republican party is almost anything but actually conservative in many ways.
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
i favor small government is code for i don't want any of my tax dollars to pay for food stamps, etc.
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
i favor small government is code for i don't want any of my tax dollars to pay for food stamps, etc.
For some, probably. For others it can mean that they don't want the government telling them what they can do with their own bodies, in their own bedroom, etc.
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
i favor small government is code for i don't want any of my tax dollars to pay for food stamps, etc.
For some, probably. For others it can mean that they don't want the government telling them what they can do with their own bodies, in their own bedroom, etc.
i mean it could mean that but it doesn't/won't/never has. but hypothetically sure. the small governemtn dorks are just worried about their pennies going to someone else that they don't feel deserves them. that's all this is about. wars, defense, etc they have no problem with. that big government is ok. they just don't want someone getting unemployment and then using that money to buy a lottery ticket. they are hyperconcerned with the lives that other people live.
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
i favor small government is code for i don't want any of my tax dollars to pay for food stamps, etc.
For some, probably. For others it can mean that they don't want the government telling them what they can do with their own bodies, in their own bedroom, etc.
i mean it could mean that but it doesn't/won't/never has. but hypothetically sure. the small governemtn dorks are just worried about their pennies going to someone else that they don't feel deserves them. that's all this is about. wars, defense, etc they have no problem with. that big government is ok. they just don't want someone getting unemployment and then using that money to buy a lottery ticket. they are hyperconcerned with the lives that other people live.
Current practice, yeah. In theory, it should be something else.
-
I support small government in the sense that I support the rights of states to set their own policies independent of Federal policies and cities/counties to set their own taxes and policies independent of state policies. Republicans are pretty good at protecting states' rights, but absolutely terrible at letting local governments have any control at all. At least the republicans in Kansas are this way.
-
I'm still a registered repub because:
-I would like to be taxed less. I'm taxed a lot
-I'm late term pro-life
-I still have some left over pro-farm and pro-farm-subsidy (despite me knowing they are the dumbest) feelings and for some reasons the repub party has been the pro-farm party
-I believe we need to reduce unemployment and welfare benefits (but raise the min wage)
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
First example I thought of of a dem advocating for more government:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/ (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/)
IMO its a great idea, heart's in the right place, but its completely impractical.
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
First example I thought of of a dem advocating for more government:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/ (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/)
IMO its a great idea, heart's in the right place, but its completely impractical.
You keep saying things like, "it won't work" or "it's completely impractical" without really explaining why. It's not very convincing.
And I suppose any push for more/better public education is "more government"
-
I'm still a registered repub because:
-I would like to be taxed less. I'm taxed a lot
-I'm late term pro-life
-I still have some left over pro-farm and pro-farm-subsidy (despite me knowing they are the dumbest) feelings and for some reasons the repub party has been the pro-farm party
-I believe we need to reduce unemployment and welfare benefits (but raise the min wage)
Reduced welfare and unemployment benefits AND raise minimum wage? Government subsidies might actually natrually go down with increased wages.
Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
First example I thought of of a dem advocating for more government:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/ (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/)
IMO its a great idea, heart's in the right place, but its completely impractical.
You keep saying things like, "it won't work" or "it's completely impractical" without really explaining why. It's not very convincing.
And I suppose any push for more/better public education is "more government"
I grew up in Hutch with HCC and pretty much anybody in the county that could tie their shoes would get some sort of scholarship if they wanted to go there.
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
First example I thought of of a dem advocating for more government:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/ (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/)
IMO its a great idea, heart's in the right place, but its completely impractical.
You keep saying things like, "it won't work" or "it's completely impractical" without really explaining why. It's not very convincing.
And I suppose any push for more/better public education is "more government"
Ed is somewhere govt should be big, imo. More ed, more effective ed, college, etc. More ed means less eventual govt financial assitance, less crime, and the ability to parent better while passing it forward. It's like knocking over the first domino.
It wouldn't even have to be a perpetual recurring expense. If we would just do something aggressive for 20 yrs or so, it would probably be enough.
Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
First example I thought of of a dem advocating for more government:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/ (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/)
IMO its a great idea, heart's in the right place, but its completely impractical.
You keep saying things like, "it won't work" or "it's completely impractical" without really explaining why. It's not very convincing.
And I suppose any push for more/better public education is "more government"
I do do that way too much. I'm way too cynical I guess. I'll try and be more specific about stuff moving forward.
-
I'm still a registered repub because:
-I would like to be taxed less. I'm taxed a lot
-I'm late term pro-life
-I still have some left over pro-farm and pro-farm-subsidy (despite me knowing they are the dumbest) feelings and for some reasons the repub party has been the pro-farm party
-I believe we need to reduce unemployment and welfare benefits (but raise the min wage)
Reduced welfare and unemployment benefits AND raise minimum wage? Government subsidies might actually natrually go down with increased wages.
Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
well, they're going to automatically go down under the STEVE DAVE SMALL BUT BOSSY GOV PLAN. the SDSBBG plan is big on utilizing the carrot and the stick at the same time.
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
First example I thought of of a dem advocating for more government:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/ (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/)
IMO its a great idea, heart's in the right place, but its completely impractical.
You keep saying things like, "it won't work" or "it's completely impractical" without really explaining why. It's not very convincing.
And I suppose any push for more/better public education is "more government"
I do do that way too much. I'm way too cynical I guess. I'll try and be more specific about stuff moving forward.
Rusty, your post is driving me nuts because it is so true.
-
I really don't understand people who say they are republican because they favor smaller government
1. Who the hell favors more government? I've been to democrat party events and I've never heard anyone advocate for more government.
2. The current iteration of republican party loves the eff out of using government intervention into the lives of Americans so what am I missing here?
First example I thought of of a dem advocating for more government:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/ (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/community-college-tuition-top-theme-state-union-speech/)
IMO its a great idea, heart's in the right place, but its completely impractical.
You keep saying things like, "it won't work" or "it's completely impractical" without really explaining why. It's not very convincing.
And I suppose any push for more/better public education is "more government"
I do do that way too much. I'm way too cynical I guess. I'll try and be more specific about stuff moving forward.
Rusty, your post is driving me nuts because it is so true.
I'd like to hear more of your perspective. It would be good for you, too.
-
Honestly, my dad had a impact on me. I've stated this before that he's super conservative and that pushed me away from his thoughts, but in the long run, I lean conservative. My shitty former roommate who's a psycho left wing nut that posts crap everyday, also had an influence too. Cause I know him too well.
-
One of my favorite things about WackyCat08 is that his entire political spectrum is determined by one guy being an bad person
-
he's very willing to extrapolate. "i met one of those once, so i know what they're all like."
must make life pretty simple unless you meet more than one member of a particular group and they happen to differ. then maybe you kill one i guess and boom, simple again.
-
One of my favorite things about WackyCat08 is that his entire political spectrum is determined by one guy being an bad person
Meh. There's been many more examples, but that guy really takes the cake.