Free Republic 2nd Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $77,124
87%  
Woo hoo!! And now less than $10.9k to go!! Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Posts by BuddhaBrown

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • The House and the Trump Factor

    05/09/2016 12:26:15 PM PDT · 13 of 14
    BuddhaBrown to WENDLE
    "...“conservatism” seems yet undefined ...nebulous..."

    The term conservative itself is somewhat meaningless if not juxtaposed with progressive.

    It has been my experience that people who identify as conservative are really stating that they are principle-driven in their political reasoning.

    They would more accurately be called libertarian or constitutionalist in many cases, essentially lovers of what America was founded upon - individual-based freedom and strictly limited central government.

    Trump is neither of the latter two things. To the extent he demonstrates any solid conviction to principle it is in old fashioned nationalism.

    Nothing inherently bad about loving your country in general. It's certainly better than border-less one-worldism of the Left. But nationalist principle does not define the relationship between individuals and the government.

    Socialists sometimes do the nationalism thing too - as we all recall WWII. Not that I'm making the dreaded N-word comparisons here. Just pointing out that being a nationalist might be fine, but it says nothing about a candidate's respect for my God-given Freedoms. Nor for our nation's other founding principles and documents.

    On the other hand, proclaiming that health care and education are primary functions of the central government does show a profound disrespect for those founding principles.

    I don't think Trump is a liberal socialist in the same sense as Hillary or Bernie. But in the sense that he does not possess or profess the Freedom-oriented libertarian / constitutionalist principles which would prevent him from considering some of their big-government ideas as somehow good.

    Trump believes in the rule of men. As opposed to the rule of law. For example, he doesn't oppose Obamacare as he should on the principles of individual liberty, limited central government, etc. He just thinks it's designed / implemented by the wrong men.

    Again, even with all his flaws and his often nebulous basis for his positions, I am voting for him. The fact that he is not today grounded in original American principles is worrisome to those of us who still value them. However, the fact that he clearly does seem to wish well for America is a great step forward from Obama.

  • The House and the Trump Factor

    05/08/2016 8:14:57 PM PDT · 10 of 14
    BuddhaBrown to WENDLE
    "Who do these nothings think they are?"

    I can tell you who Paul Ryan is.

    And who he was.

    He rode into DC as the Donald Trump of entitlement reform - an issue at least as important as immigration. Taking on the establishment and embarrassing Obama on national TV during the health care summit and on economics. He was a young conservative star looking to finally address major problems.

    That is who Paul Ryan was.

    Today is a soft-charging advocate for those type of issue and become a hard-charging advocate for other less-than-helpful things - like more immigration. Paul Ryan was just as passionate about shifting the unconstitutional entitlements away from the federal government as Trump is about keeping invading immigrants on the other side of the border.

    Both guys are right about the main issues which brought them to political power and fame. It's a crying shame that time and space did not align such that they could cooperate to accomplish BOTH: Ryan's prior top priority and Trump's top priority. They are very related topics. Kill the entitlements and most the illegal immigrant flow will stop.

    I'm not sure why this is so hard for some to understand, but as awful of a Speaker has he's been and wrong about immigration and such... I still believe it is Ryan's great hope to radiate entitlement out to the states, privatize SS, etc type of great things.

    Paul Ryan did not forget about his primary stuff, he just fell into the Boehner/Mcconnell plan of not fighting Obama and waiting for an R over the White House.

    Then, BOOM, that plan blew up when The Donald became the presumptive nominee. I assume I'll be promoted to establishment myself for pointing this out, but...

    ...from Paul Ryan's perspective, Trump represents Obama's third term!

    And he is correct about that, at least regarding entitlements. The Don, who on most issues has tended to start as far right as he can bend and then slide left from there, actually started on the left hand side of entitlements. He loves them and promises NOT to change them.

    What is Ryan today? He is Trump tomorrow. Potentially, anyway.

    At least Ryan did not turn left until after a couple/few elections.

    Trump made enough left turns just this past week that he is still heading in the same direction.

    Which is to say he is well on his way to being The New Establishment.

    My part of this Trumpian bargain is that I'll agree to dance into the general election with him. All I ask in return is for some of his more avid supporters ease off on his lipstick for a while. I already know what he is. And what he isn't. And I'm still voting for him. That's how bad Hillary is.

  • Republicans jittery over Trump's takeover

    05/08/2016 6:08:24 PM PDT · 48 of 51
    BuddhaBrown to JohnBrowdie
    "I was a walker guy, but... if we could pull the lever for mittens...."

    Agreed. Walker was not a great prez candidate debate performance-wise, but he is much more conservative, remarkably accomplished and demonstrably more reliable than DT.

    I've been holding my nose and voting against the Democrats since '88.

    I'm not sure why this seemingly self defining aspect has become so utterly unimportant at Free Republic in modern times, but we've not had a Freedom advocate as a general election candidate since that time... and STILL don't today. In fact, the likely to win faction of the party is now officially moving in the opposite direction!

    So this year might seem more exciting in some respects. But for the conservative/ libertarian/ constitutionalist portions of the party, nothing has changed -- hold nose, vote.

  • Rep. Pete King: ‘I think I’ll take cyanide’ if Ted Cruz is the nominee

    04/19/2016 12:11:24 PM PDT · 28 of 36
    BuddhaBrown to gbscott1954

    “Another great reason to support Ted!”

    I agree.

    This endorsement almost makes up for Glen Beck’s.

  • Paladino: Republicans Not Backing Trump 'Cowards'

    04/17/2016 7:36:32 PM PDT · 10 of 29
    BuddhaBrown to markomalley

    “They’re cowards,...”

    Can’t we end all the race-baiting?

    Apparently, now I’m yellow if I don’t allow myself to be intimidated into voting for the orange guy.

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/17/2016 6:12:44 PM PDT · 247 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to MaxFlint

    First off, sales tax is not ‘regressive’ unless you expect that the owner of the hardware store is going to enquire about your income before you buy a hammer. And then charge you more if you earn less.

    Beyond that, I’ll just put your hopeless self on the don’t-call-me-if-it’s-difficult list whenever it’s time right some more wrongs.

    Ending slavery, allowing women to vote, etc.

    Even the right to carry in many states was considered ‘hopeless’ no long ago. Thankfully here in WI it was accomplished through such hard work.

    Governor Walker proved you don’t have to be a billionaire or an Ivy League muckity muck (or even have a degree) to make hard things happen. He has done the downright impossible multiple times: slew the public union Goliath, balanced the budget, won an unprecedented recall fight, embarrassed the slash-n-burn Trump machine at our state level, etc.

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/17/2016 1:51:13 PM PDT · 244 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to Hanna548; Sir Napsalot; Kent C; Dstorm; nopardons
    "In this VAT scenario a guy earning 30k a year spends... "

    With all due respect, I don't believe those numbers are realistic. Unless you seriously think the typical person making 100k/yr is only going to spend 27k.

    I mean, more power to him if he does - this country needs more personal saving. But I have never known anybody in any income bracket who manages to save anywhere near that rate.

    You seem to be hung up on the notion that a more productive guy might possibly pay a lesser percentage of his income for taxes. It kinda sounds like you think he should be punished for being both productive and frugal.

    After all, he just paid the same taxes as the other guy. Plus the productive guy is almost certainly going to require less government help. There is zero moral authority to making him pay more. The Father of the Constitution, Madison, saw nothing in it to authorize charity at the central level.

    And there is zero charity, in the biblical sense, to stealing money from Peter and distributing it to Paul. In the bible 'charity' generally means 'love' which necessarily requires the giving to be voluntary. The opposite of what gov't does.

    Certainly I could be wrong, but I sense that your personal stance is dangerously close to the basis for the whole Dem economic platform - which is the sin of envy.

    I'm not trying to convince you to be a Cruz voter or to like his specific tax blend. I'm just trying to argue for the objective fairness of consumption taxes -vs- the evil of income taxes which from the beginning were based on inherently subjective envy and wrong-headed, un-American thinking.

    Yes, I said un-American.

    The primary value of America was always Freedom, not equality of outcomes. The Constitution is designed to protect Freedom FROM democracy which, in essence, is just mob rule where the whim of the 50% + 1 voters can take everything from you.

    The Founders did not give us the blight of envy. They studiously constituted our central gov't to avoid it. And avoid it we did for more than half our history. Then the Devil got his nose under the tent a century ago and the size of government, the level of Paul's dependency on Peter's wallet, and national debt have ALL exploded while we forever now argue about fairness - which can NEVER be agreed upon when it is subjective.

    If I'm not making any headway on the point of true fairness -vs- vague and impossible to quench envy, then at least consider what the Founders thought in the straight practical sense. Particularly Hamilton in The Federalist Papers. And Adam Smith before that.

    Old Alexander famously made the point that consumption based taxation would be a 'barrier' to unsustainable government growth. For the very logical reason that as the consumption tax rate goes up consumption is discouraged. When consumption is discouraged then less revenue comes in for them to spend.

    Or... think of it this way using your own example: say that guy making 30k/yr works his way up to making 40k/yr. With an emphasis on consumption based taxes instead of income stealing taxes, this guy is now in more control of his own financial destiny. He could decide to continue consuming at his prior rate and pay zero addition sales tax allowing him to save his way into financial security much, much easier than with the punishing and productivity-discouraging progressive income taxes.

    Income taxes are inherently bad.

    Progressive income taxes are immoral and impractical.

    Love him or hate him, Cruz has the only plan which starts us back on the road to America's primary value: Freedom!

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/16/2016 11:39:23 PM PDT · 238 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to Hanna548

    That is the point of consumption-based taxation: it should hurt everybody when the feds spend money!

    Your misguided tendency to subjectively favor one group (lower income earner in this case) over any other group is what has gotten us into this horrible mess of debt.

    The efforts of otherwise decent folk such as yourself to shelter millions of voters from the pain of spending is why we have so fricking much spending.

    What makes matters worse is that increasing amounts of money are stolen from Peter in order to pay Paul for doing nothing. Which means those voters not only don’t have a reason to care about cutting spending, they now have a great interest in keeping it high and growing.

  • 'He Can Change': The New York Post Endorses Carol's Boyfriend (satire)

    04/16/2016 9:29:08 PM PDT · 35 of 47
    BuddhaBrown to I-ambush
    "I’m sorry friend, but you see something in Trump that those of us not in his camp do not..."

    So it's not just me?

    I thought maybe I forgot to pick up the 3-D glasses on my way in or something.

    Because, for one example, I just can't fathom the dimension of Trump which is going to be somehow better on spending. He already repeatedly promised not to touch entitlements. And spend more on Defense.

    Unless he plans to somehow magically/tragically stop making the huge and growing interest payments on the monstrous debt, then we are about out of significant things options for less spending.

    I'm just not seeing it. I'm going to the lobby to find those glasses. Need popcorn or anything?

  • 'He Can Change': The New York Post Endorses Carol's Boyfriend (satire)

    04/16/2016 8:18:50 PM PDT · 33 of 47
    BuddhaBrown to lonestar67

    “All that is left to do is to bully people like me into silence”

    You are 100% correct. Keep up the good fight.

    Both still viable Republican candidates are human and have good qualities and bad.

    People like Cruz, Walker, etc were/are rock stars in the conservative wing for their fights against the establishment and against union thugs.

    It’s a bloody shame that Trump feels a need to destroy good people to advance himself. He has some good points regarding the border and such.

    But he is horrendously wrong on other things like entitlements which are at least as important to reform as is the border bits. In fact, if the current law was simply enforced we would be half way there to fixing the immigration problems.

    But the unconstitutional entitlements are sinking America fast and it is not simply a matter of enforcement. It will require a big fight with lots of people on our side.

    Based on his very strong statements of support for them, Trump IS the establishment when it comes to entitlements and he is trying to destroy those who wish to fix that most urgent problem.

    I will hold my nose and vote for Trump if he wins the nomination. Same as I did for the other establishment types. Because he will be like another Bush in November, the lesser of two evils.

    It is wrong for the other establishment types to say ‘never Trump’ just as it is wrong for Trump supporters to say ‘only Trump’.

    Our party will be facing either Hillary Capone or Che Sanders. If we were not so immature ourselves, this cycle would be a cake walk.

  • Ted Cruz wins Wyoming Republican presidential nominating contest

    04/16/2016 6:15:22 PM PDT · 30 of 60
    BuddhaBrown to Eaglefixer

    “The USA is NOT a democracy by deliberate choice of the founders.”

    Good to see a reasoned post here.

    The Constitution is Freedom’s protection FROM democracy.

    Trump continues to prove why the Founders were right to bless us with it.

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/16/2016 5:35:24 PM PDT · 230 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to Hanna548

    “They don’t count their income as income ....”

    Sounds like you are only making an argument in favor of ALL federal taxation being consumption based. If so, then I agree.

    The income tax was invented to tax the rich. A bad and immoral plan from the beginning. Then eventually congress spent enough that you and me necessarily now are considered “the rich.”

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/16/2016 12:14:00 PM PDT · 222 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to Hanna548

    Sorry if I implied you yourself are a liberal in general.

    The concept of progressive tax rates is purely liberal/progressive thinking. If you believe people earning more should pay a higher rate, then that actually is a liberal notion.

    I don’t really understand why you think hedge fund guys are exempt from the Cruz tax plan.

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/16/2016 9:11:07 AM PDT · 210 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to MaxFlint
    About that "FairTax"...

    The FairTax was not fair in the objective sense. I was/is a progressive tax because of the godawful pre-bates concept.

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/16/2016 3:07:34 AM PDT · 131 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to Hanna548
    "...they just raise the VAT up up up until th public can’t afford a loaf of bread... add a VAT to a television set, be my guest, but not to the things people must have... "

    Which type of taxes won't they raise up, up, up? For crying out loud, we have the highest corporate tax rate in the civilized world. And, of course, me and you pay that in the price of our products today.

    The point of consumption based taxes is that EVERYBODY pays. Everybody gets hurt. Objective fairness.

    We will never curtail spending as long as liberals and misguided conservatives keep trying to shelter their favored folks or favored products from the pain from out-of-control spending.

    It drives me nuts when people like GWB brag that they took more people off the federal income tax. About half now pay net zero federal income tax. That is the opposite of fairness.

    What you describe regarding the TV tax above is essentially using your personal subjectivity to institute a 'sin' tax. Those are always morally wrong and unfair objectively speaking.

    Subjectivity is a corruption of true fairness. By definition.

    There is a reason Lady Justice wears a blind fold. To thwart the evils of subjectivity.

    What I always tell liberals is that if you just can't stop from wrongly thinking it is the governments' job to pick winners and losers, then for God's sake at least do that on the spending side. Let us have an objective tax system for once. Fair, clean and simple. And, more importantly to a strong economy - it's predictable.

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/16/2016 2:46:05 AM PDT · 122 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to Hanna548
    "I see nothing fair... the less someone makes the more this hurts them... business pays no tax at all... just doesn’t seem right."

    Yes, I understand you want a subjectively fair model.

    I don't. I want objective fairness. Progressive feelings are always in my wallet.

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/16/2016 2:37:29 AM PDT · 121 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to Kent C

    I agree with your assessment entirely.

    Revenue projections like those are nearly meaningless anyway. Too many unknown factors at this point.

    Personally, I’d favor an amendment which says Congress can’t spend more than what was taken in last year.

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/16/2016 2:27:10 AM PDT · 120 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to nopardons
    " Cruz's 10% "FLAT TAX", sans the VAT TAX.... VAT TAX turns the nation into a FASCIST society... a fiscal conservative at the helm, which Cruz is NOT one of! "

    I see we agree on smaller government in general.

    Other than that I can't make much sense of your arguments above. How is consumption-based taxation Fascist?

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/16/2016 1:35:12 AM PDT · 99 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to nopardons
    The Cruz VAT is much fairer than the so-called Fair Tax plan which thankfully died before going anywhere.

    Assuming you judge fairness objectively and not subjectively like liberal progressive tax proponents.

    Despite the false advertising, the Fair Tax was progressive. Because of the horribly misguided concept of pre-bates!

  • Why Ted Cruz’s VAT really is a VAT

    04/16/2016 1:30:09 AM PDT · 96 of 254
    BuddhaBrown to Kent C
    Hey Kent C,

    It's refreshing to see intellect in action. That is certain more rare here today than in the past.

    I'm not sure why so many so-called conservatives oppose the shift from emphasis upon income taxes to an emphasis upon consumption taxes.

    I think people are just conditioned to think VAT means evil or something. Which, of course, is utter nonsense.

    It is a silly myth that VAT killed Europe. That's like saying a gun itself kills somebody. It is the LEVEL of taxation and spending which kills once-free governments.

    Call it a business tax, VAT, whatever. It is consumption-based taxation. Which is a good, fair and moral thing.

    Progressive income taxes are the bitter enemy of Freedom - which used to matter around here.

    And, love him or hate him for other reasons, Cruz is the only guy left running who is correct about this aspect.

  • Colorado delegates should be excluded from the RNC. Agreed? [VOTE]

    04/14/2016 9:56:23 PM PDT · 8 of 91
    BuddhaBrown to BlackFemaleArmyCaptain

    Good Lord, NO!

  • The Omission that Haunts the Church - 1 Corinthians 11:27-29

    04/14/2016 9:36:46 PM PDT · 5 of 6
    BuddhaBrown to marshmallow

    Who is worthy of grace?

  • The Pope Has Picked A Side In America’s Election

    04/09/2016 9:35:15 AM PDT · 24 of 40
    BuddhaBrown to BlatherNaut; ebb tide

    “... a formidable team”

    Pope and Chains, 2016

  • Trump names health care and education, security, as the top functions of the federal government

    03/30/2016 9:41:02 AM PDT · 88 of 145
    BuddhaBrown to Argus
    "The Republican he most closely resembles in terms..."

    Perhaps. In policy terms.

    But to me, in political terms, Cooper was looking awful Couric and Donald was channeling early Sarah.

    And Joe the Plumber got his answer, this time without even showing up.

  • Wisconsin-based 'Cheesehead Revolution' challenged by Trump

    03/28/2016 10:06:59 AM PDT · 29 of 29
    BuddhaBrown to Dr. Sivana

    I sure can’t blame anyone for living in Georgia either. I spent time there in the Army during the Reagan years.

    Communications schooling at Ft Gordon. Jump school at Benning.

    Of all the states to jump out of a plane onto, Georgia is perhaps the most comfortable and friendly to land upon.

    Awesome state with good people!

  • Wisconsin-based 'Cheesehead Revolution' challenged by Trump

    03/27/2016 10:53:58 PM PDT · 27 of 29
    BuddhaBrown to Dr. Sivana; ADSUM; ozaukeemom
    "Dr. Sivana: If you lived in Wisconsin as I have, you'd know that Walker himself accomplished a great deal...."

    I do live in WI. And you are absolutely correct that Walker has been a spectacular guv! Your list of his accomplishments is true and staggering. Plus, numerous improvements in hunting rules, historic innovation in civic duty such as beating the Dems' ass and their imported astro-turf three times in two terms, etc. He is farther from the beltway and more out of range from the Ivy / Industrial complex than anybody in this race or in the rear view as is he. By far.

    I mean, the guy doesn't even have a degree. Nor his own Monopoly Board of holdings. Not having those is not accomplishment. But it is indictment. Of those who insist we all must spend the budget of South Dakota on diplomas or must be rich enough to buy North Dakota too and move 4 hotels onto each... just in order to make a difference. Walker is a freakishly accomplished common man.

    What Lincoln did with the Union Army is what Walker did to the union horde.

    If we had a real dang mountain in WI, his sometimes goofy looking mug would be on it. Even if I had to carve it myself. If necessary, using nothing but a stiletto - which is finally legal now thanks to his signature last month, as I learned at a gun show this weekend.

    ------
    "ADSUM: We need a leader like Walker, Cruz is the best bet. If Trump is the Republican nominee, I will vote for him..."

    I'll be voting Cruz in WI as well. And I too will gladly support Trump in the general if he wins. There is no mature alternative to the Republican nominee if the goal is to beat the Clinton/Sanders ticket and their 'buy one, get socialism for free' twist on the very first national Clinton family campaign theme.

    ------
    "ozaukeemom: ...one Wisconsinite I would like to see in the new administration, would be Sheriff Clarke."

    Sheriff Clarke is a great man. I'm not smart enough to suggest I know the best spot for him. But I'd trust him anywhere he can have a national impact in the admin: AG, Super Sheriff over border matters, Big Hoss of the Alien Posse, whatever. Raise his national profile a bit and he'd probably be a viable, like-able, inspiring, tent-enlarging US Senate or Prez candidate down the road.

    ------
    Thank you fine folks for restoring my faith in this site and cementing it in our home state. Have a New Glarus on me!

    For crying out loud the Dems are deciding between Hillary Capone and Che Sanders... and STILL I'm more embarrassed for our side regarding not policy but behavior.

    It's like we are in preparation to face a potential Hitler / Stalin tag team in few a short months and all of a sudden there is not room enough in our once Grand Ole Planet for both Navy and Army...

    '...nope, never Army! Your top general once called our ship a boat, get your own ride to the beaches.'

    While Army replies...

    'pffft... who needs you? Your admiral acts like part of the Pentagon establishment, we'll swim from here regardless the losses.'

    Leaving us peons to pray for such salvations as an FBI-led air war or for college kids not deciding free degrees are nearly as cool as discovering the next new gender and getting to name it, or similarly false hopes to keep us free.

    This world has not seen a perfect Man since about 2000 years Before Clinton. Those believing a modern political equivalent is possible are busy trying to teach elephants to lay sweet tasting Cadbury Keggs.

    Take it from the partial prophet who is a total loss...

    ...don't bet the dairy farm.

  • The Impact of the Empty Tomb

    03/26/2016 7:17:47 PM PDT · 10 of 13
    BuddhaBrown to onedoug
    "Our 4yo granddaughter in SC knows..."

    Through all today's darkness, she still can see.

    For as we know, seeds fall not far from the tree.

    Bless you both.

  • The Impact of the Empty Tomb

    03/26/2016 2:34:23 PM PDT · 8 of 13
    BuddhaBrown to DWW1990
    "...Easter, or as I prefer, Resurrection Sunday..."

    That's a good point.

    The word 'Easter' and it's modern celebrations are more pagan than ever. You are at least reminding folks of the physical events offered as proof of Christ's point about the actual meaning of the day:

    Passover!

    For all who believe the Lamb.

  • What Would Jefferson Advise Today’s Supreme Court About the Little Sisters of the Poor?

    03/26/2016 2:06:08 PM PDT · 16 of 19
    BuddhaBrown to Pollster1; Twotone
    "Jefferson ... he would start writing again. He would not even change many words: "

    Not 'many words' perhaps.

    But I bet TJeff might be re-re-thinking that 'happiness' bit as opposed to the more Lockean property-oriented version of the concept Tom was attempting to embody in the DOI.

    Property is, after all, the point of the article.

    It is mentioned by the great one, TJ, in the first sentence of his response to the holy sisters above.

  • FReeper Canteen ~ Road Trip: Fort Benning, Georgia ~ 22 MAR 2016

    03/21/2016 6:36:23 PM PDT · 26 of 114
    BuddhaBrown to sauropod

    “Going there TDY next week.”

    Jump school, 1983.

    Lots of fun. Too much a couple times. Arrested one weekend for being drunk on the roof of the bar.

    Ah.. good times!

  • Do Hogs eat Deer?

    03/19/2016 11:44:59 PM PDT · 117 of 167
    BuddhaBrown to w1n1

    God’s rules are not without reason.

    Pigs are (still) unclean.

  • Some Things Are Non-Negotiable—Like True Pro-Life Convictions

    03/13/2016 7:13:22 PM PDT · 8 of 39
    BuddhaBrown to Psalm 73

    Sac Lives Matter!

  • Free Republic Caucus 2016 03/06

    03/06/2016 4:59:57 PM PST · 211 of 234
    BuddhaBrown to DoughtyOne

    Vote Cruz

  • Analysis: Cruz's tax plan is better than Trump's

    03/05/2016 7:20:57 AM PST · 49 of 61
    BuddhaBrown to AndyJackson
    "you are pushing an f'in insane oxymoronic logical swindleby exhalting production while deriding consumption. "

    I can't imagine how my prior comment inspired such an odd reply.

    I only pointed out what the article said, that Cruz's plan is more of a push toward consumption-based taxation. The fairest type - assuming you define fairness objectively.

    If fairness is simply a subjective feeling, then you get what we have today - extremely progressive taxation. The least fair option. Objectively speaking.

    Progressive taxation is, by very definition, objectively unfair.

    Consumption-based taxation is certainly NOT "regressive." Unless you imagine that the hardware store owner is, at the time you buy a hammer, going to enquire about your overall economic status before setting the price.

    You can argue that the move from highly progressive income taxes toward consumption taxation results in people who pay less or zero today paying something tomorrow. That is true. And good. And fair.

    A truly regressive tax would be the opposite of what we have today - where you would pay less of a rate as you earned more money.

    I don't see anybody on any side arguing for that.

    I'm choosing to vote for Ted because I favor Freedom, which is why I clicked on FreeRepublic in the first place years ago.

    Freedom was the defining quality of America, originally. Not subjective fairness. The Founders understood that charity has no place in the general (central) government.

    The US Constitution is the rule book which is supposed to protect Freedom from Democracy. Ted is not perfect. But by my calculation he is the best bet to keep his oath to protect the rule book in the face of the subjective nature of Democracy.

    Feel free to choose otherwise.

  • Analysis: Cruz's tax plan is better than Trump's

    03/05/2016 5:36:24 AM PST · 24 of 61
    BuddhaBrown to LurkLongley
    " Ted’s is better."

    I agree.

    The acronym VAT has achieved boogeyman status. Mostly because no sensible right winger wants to add a VAT on top of current high personal rates.

    However, that is not what Cruz proposes.

    He is being criticized both for having a too-low flat income tax AND for having a VAT. Where are all the people who rightly favor consumption-based taxation? It is the best type for Freedom lovers and IRS haters alike.

    A movement toward consumption-based taxation is what Ted's plan represents. The article makes that clear. But I don't see the word consumption even mentioned in comments.

  • Which candidate would do the best at handling the economy & jobs?

    02/14/2016 10:42:42 PM PST · 14 of 26
    BuddhaBrown to 2ndDivisionVet
    "I remember when we didn't use that word here."

    Me too.

    I also recall that 'free republics' were a thing which did not seek 'handling' of economies. Certainly not at the federal/central level anyway.

    Freedom is not a business to be handled. It is a principle to be defended.

    He is not my first choice overall and he is not at the very bottom of the above list because of this aspect, I assume. But it seems ironic that so many here favor the guy at the top when Dr bottom-of-the-list Ben has promoted by far the most appropriate tax system for a free republic which at least allows a healthy economy the freedom to exist - a true flat tax.

  • Has FreeRepublic Jumped The Shark With Trump?

    02/14/2016 10:15:51 PM PST · 64 of 622
    BuddhaBrown to xjcsa
    "Yeah. I don’t get it. FR used to be conservative, used to care about policy."

    I agree.

    To go a bit further... I was attracted to this site years ago based on the "Free" and "republic" parts of the name which seem not to fit anymore.

    I'm not sure I've heard the popular populist front runner mention either word.

    Freedom is(was) America's founding principle. Conservatives don't always believe in freedom but they do more often than the never of the Left.

    The wall is certainly The Don's big selling point. And I'm with him on that. We aren't even a nation if we can't point to where it starts physically.

    But Freedom is not a something achieved by business-like compromise. You are either for it or against it.

    Federal level involvement in health care is not Freedom.

    Funding for death care is not Freedom.

    "Getting things done" at the federal level is almost always not Freedom.

    I'll vote for The Don if he captures the nom. It's the only mature option.

    I'm probably not missing anything, but I have no idea anymore what a voting booth smells like. I've been holding my nose while voting for several presidential general elections now. I'm starting to sound like Andy Rooney.

  • The Secret Army Stumping for Ted Cruz

    02/14/2016 9:35:21 PM PST · 70 of 184
    BuddhaBrown to Let's Roll
    "Secret army"? It’s called a "ground game."

    I too find it humorous that a story about an army of folks going door to door on a mission of exposure can somehow be summarized in a headline as 'Secret'.

    That same site would de-classify the entire army had Hillary emailed them across the state.

  • The Secret Army Stumping for Ted Cruz

    02/14/2016 9:09:59 PM PST · 28 of 184
    BuddhaBrown to catnipman

    “Trump doesn’t have any PACs, much less super PACs;”

    I assume you do not think being a self-funded billionaire is a requirement to run.

  • CBS Poll: Trump Poised for Landslide Win Over Establishment in South Carolina

    02/14/2016 8:46:13 PM PST · 82 of 392
    BuddhaBrown to dschapin
    "...Trump outed himself as a Cindy Sheehan type leftist..."

    I would not go that far myself, but certainly Trump's accusations went over a line.

    The line of irony. Trump claims to know things nobody knew then. And is willing to attack based on that hunch. This is worse than Bush's action because Bush had clearly stated that post-911 our previously failing strategy had to change.

    We played 'prevent' defense for 8 years prior to Bush's first and it worked about as well as it doesn't in the NFL. Now, we were going on offense- something I would expect The Don should appreciate. And we as a nation were not willing to find out during America's autopsy that "hey, those intel guys actually were correct! Ok, you three remaining Americans can now attack with a clear conscience."

    I can only assume that if GW Bush accused Trump of similarly deadly fraud with zero proof, then Trump would be suing today.

    We only know what we know about Iraq today because we did what we did. And America was on Bush's side at the time we did it.

    Lots of people, Bush included, now via the magical gravity of hindsight regret what we did. Or at least the way we did it.

    Bush was not my guy, but I voted for him in the general. Who knew he'd turn out to be human?

    At any rate, his later admissions do not make him any more conservative. But they do make him a bigger man than anyone on that stage.

    Bush was not my guy. Trump is not my guy. But all three of us love America and are on the same team. I will vote for The Don if he takes the nomination. I'm guessing W will too. What other mature option would there be?

  • Trump walks back attack on George Bush

    02/14/2016 3:39:38 PM PST · 74 of 164
    BuddhaBrown to patq

    “... take out Osama one year before 9/11.”

    Yes, I agree, that certainly was a great failure on Clinton’s part.

    Bush spent money like a drunken Dem, but at least - much like The Don - he was not afraid to call the enemy by his Islamic name.

    Bush is not running and is NOT the enemy of America. Just too liberal for me.

  • Trump walks back attack on George Bush

    02/14/2016 3:15:02 PM PST · 33 of 164
    BuddhaBrown to dynoman

    Just out of curiosity and even given the generous 15yrs hindsight already being employed...

    ...who exactly would The Don have “bombed the shit out of” back when the nation supported Bush doing the same?

  • Trump walks back attack on George Bush

    02/14/2016 3:06:11 PM PST · 18 of 164
    BuddhaBrown to dynoman

    Is it just me or do those crazy cats all look like unshaven Bernies?

    Although the analogy to lions is probably accurate. Lie around proud of yourself all day, then attack and kill someone. Even your own.

  • Why Donald Trump's vicious attack on George W. Bush was so brutally effective — and brilliant

    02/14/2016 2:35:06 PM PST · 121 of 147
    BuddhaBrown to LurkLongley
    "What the H is going on around here."

    What is going on around here is pretty simple to explain.

    Some have committed to siding with a more successful campaign tactician.

    Some have committed to a more reliably conservative governing philosophy.

    Both sides are correct in their respective perspectives.

    It's just a shame we don't have one candidate that is best at both. But that is a quite rare and unnatural occurrence.

    There is nothing that I or anyone can say that will cause both sides to be more mature and deliberative rather than juvenile and repetitive.

    Scalia's not even in his grave and is already rolling.

  • Why Can Americans No Longer Agree to Disagree?(CDB)

    12/29/2015 12:29:11 PM PST · 58 of 63
    BuddhaBrown to chrisser
    Thanks.

    I think people just sometimes forget that agreement at the central level was easier in the past because it was a given that very few of those decisions would affect individual lives.

    The central level is for deciding what the country should do as a country - wars, etc.

    States, counties, cities, churches, families and (ultimately and most significantly) selves are for deciding how to run individual lives.

    Whereas today the feds not only control every aspect of your daily actions, they are now moving into controlling what you are allowed to believe.

    So we are now condemned to campaigns which continually promise to reverse everything each four year cycle.

    God created diversity. Man is mucking it up - as usual.

  • Why Can Americans No Longer Agree to Disagree?(CDB)

    12/29/2015 11:52:19 AM PST · 56 of 63
    BuddhaBrown to rktman
    Charlie is great, but he is totally wrong!

    It does not bother me that liberals/leftists don't understand or agree with this, but I always feel like conservative folk like Freepers should easily understand the real problem here...

    ...we abandoned true diversity - federalism. It is really that simple.

    We do NOT disagree any more today than in the past.

    We are NOT any less civil than in the past.

    We are NOT supposed to agree, for crying out loud.

    We just need to go back to deciding things at lower levels so that we can live where people who agree with us live. And the most important decisions are made closer to the voters. Try getting an appointment with your US Senator - you can't. Whereas your state house rep will probably mow your dang lawn for you while you discuss legislation over a couple beers.

    Don't compromise, DECENTRALIZE!

  • As Hillary! Craters, Democrats Search for Panic Button

    07/25/2015 4:45:49 PM PDT · 21 of 90
    BuddhaBrown to Kaslin

    Hillary, the human RESET button.

  • Would you vote for Donald Trump if he wins the Republican nomination? ( Poll )

    07/23/2015 9:27:33 PM PDT · 137 of 218
    BuddhaBrown to sushiman

    I assume the self-righteous half here have not voted the general in 32 years.

    In that regard, I hope for change.

  • Be Clear About The Mark!…Rev 14 [Church Leaders encouraging the Mark of the Beast!?!]

    06/10/2015 1:14:40 PM PDT · 41 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to HerrBlucher
    I was born and raised Catholic. Catholic school, alter-boy, the works. I jumped that ship when old enough to realize the silliest parts of their club are not scriptural.

    Anyway, I know nothing of Mormon beliefs really.

    I won't try to convince you of anything and doubt you'd have any luck changing my opinion regarding pre-flesh doctrines.

    I'm just glad you don't believe unbaptized babies (or people in general) are doomed or anything goofy like that - I assume based on what you said about the miscarried girl.

    Good luck and God bless.

  • Be Clear About The Mark!…Rev 14 [Church Leaders encouraging the Mark of the Beast!?!]

    06/10/2015 9:23:02 AM PDT · 39 of 46
    BuddhaBrown to HerrBlucher
    "This implies pre-mortal existence or reincarnation."

    Pre-human spiritual existence - yes.

    Reincarnation - no.

    Each soul is required to go thru the flesh but once. The fallen angels broke that rule and are already condemned to death of the soul at judgment day.

    What do you make of God knowing Jeremiah before He placed him in the womb?