Posted on 09/25/2005 10:56:29 AM PDT by Uncle Joe Cannon
or pick more conservative ones in the primaries...sorry to say, we have a congress that reflects the attitude of the people....they see the US Gov't as the national Lotto...
Aren't you so glad you spent time back in '02 'winning back the Senate'? How'd that go?
It went well...two words...Justice Roberts...
Socially conservative and fiscally liberal. Years ago, that would describe...a Democrat.
Yeah, true, there's a point of no return on the tax rate/revenue collected ratio, for sure. Higher taxes can very easily decrease revenue. But at least they screw the rich, which is more important.
The thing that gets me is that to believe, as many do, apparently even freepers, that taxes should be set as high as will gain the max revenue, you also have to believe that government deserves and is better able to spend your money than you are.
I think it's crazy, but America's mindset seems to be moving steadily leftwards.
How'd your place do on Tuesday? OK, I hope.
Boy, is that good to see. I think about Barry almost every day--glad he didn't live to see what's going on now.
A moderate that may lean conservative from time to time but at no time stand for conservative values even when that requires disagreeing with standard RNC talking points. That's just great. He may be right of O'Connor (which we don't know yet) but he's not Scalia or Thomas
It’s impossible to increase the fiscal size of government long term without raising taxes.
I wouldn't label Bush a socialist. I'm just calling him a spendthrift. And I don't think there's anything conservative about passing the costs of present spending to future generations, ESPECIALLY when that means going into hock to a Communist nation (yes, they are still Communists). This is arithemetic, not hyperbole.
Also, one could point out that Reagan cut taxes and Bush cut taxes, so your point that taxes never go away is incorrect on its face.
Socialism is a whole lot more than spending. Bush is NOT a socialist.
Why not have a new GOP majority leader? Tom Delay does not care about balancing anything. There has to be a better Republican in Congress. Plus then we wouldn't have to listen to all the libs whine about his scandals.
exactly right.
Borrowing doesn’t replace, it just delays. But you know the phrase, “When you owe the bank a million, they own you. When you own the bank a billion, you own the bank.” China is much more dependent on trade with us as a percentage of GDP than visa versa, especially if Japan and Australia are thrown in. And that doesn't begin to address their other vulnerabilities.
I agree that just promoting how tax hikes don’t increase revenue is a kind of final defense. If that’s all we were using to argue against them, I think we’d be on defense rather than just flexing our defense,.
With the way IT diversifies media, cultures and economies, I think social trends are harder to measure. For every 10 reasons I could list that we’re moving leftwards, I could list 10 to counter them.
No house flooding here, just a half block closer to the Ocean. I guess Rita missed you, how about Katrina? She at least blew a bunch of limbs around here.
I happen to agree with your point that increasing taxes decreases revenue, at least it does at the levels used today.
But I've pretty much come to the opinion that the income tax is the means by which the federal goverment became so powerful and broke the bonds by which the Constitution formerly bound it, so I'd almost like to see the tax abolished.
I do think we're moving steadily leftwards, with pockets of resestance like FR. I'm not optomistic that it can be reversed, but who knows?
Katrina came almost over us, but as a minimal cat 1, she wasn't much problem. Lots of branches down, lots of trees in the neighborhood down, a few roads blocked. Neighborhood was out of electricity for the better part of a week. Still, no big deal.
Rita scared us more, I actually put up some shutters, but she turned out to be a non event for us, thankfully. I heard that Key Largo got more breeze from Katrina than Rita, but had some flooding on the ocean side from Rita, since she passed south.
I think that conclusion would be inevitable depending on how much time someone spends in right leaning media. When I tune into he left, they’re generally under a shared belief that we’re increasingly manipulated by neocon and corporate lies with Bush rapidly eroding the last 40 years of social “advances”.
My head hurts…
Well, we're definitely under Republican govnerment, which should mean a decrease in social engineering. IMO, though, the Republicans themselves are moving leftwards. For instance, I think that W's operating premise is similar to that of the Dems, that the state should play a major role in shaping society...
I am very aware of the differences, I don't need a lecture on economics That said, whether one is on the supply side or demand side, Bush is spending money like LBJ, who was a Keynesian. "A rose, by any other name, is still a rose".
But you know the phrase, “When you owe the bank a million, they own you. When you own the bank a billion, you own the bank.” China is much more dependent on trade with us as a percentage of GDP than visa versa, especially if Japan and Australia are thrown in.
"Reagan had faults. He was lazy; silent on Aids for four years; he let the savings and loan crisis fester into a calamity; he allowed goons to run an illegal foreign policy in Iran; his Middle Eastern policy was catastrophic. Withdrawing from Beirut was perhaps the green light for the kind of terror that we now have to face there."
Sullivan is a queer Brit whom sees what he wants to see... as all democrats and RINOs do.. Strangeness is not queer to Andrew.. Andy is for a democracy(Britain, France, Germany, Cauckistan) and therefore thinks america is a democracy.. as do all three Bush's... I've heard all three Bush's say America is a democracy with my own ears. Andrew Sullivan is a strange brew of contradictions and quite queer.. as are the three Bush's.. with the word queer being used in all available alternative uses..
No, I didn't miss it. Andrew is not a loyal Republican. He doesn't claim to be one. And I didn't say he was one. What I said was that he's not a Democrat. And he's not: He's a Libertarian. Which is not to say that all Libertarians would agree with any or all of the points Sullivan makes in the quote you provided. Libertarians disagree among themselves to at least the same extent as Republicans do. And this thread is a great example of Republicans not agreeing with each other. Democrats would be no different in this regard.
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.