Whoo Baby ... Look at how the Republicans are ...

[Duncan]

.... taking the bull by the horns . Grabbing the reins , standing tall and moving forward on the trimming of the spending ... yes sir . I feel so good that they are going to get it under control by the time I'm dead .
Of course they are assuming that the country can survive 20 years economically with increasing debt .
Notice he said " Balanced Budget " .. hey boys and girls that does not address the National Debt .

The bulk of them are just trash .. trailer trash from southern Indiana .

You put me in there ... I 'll make Ron Paul look like a spend thrift .

Thanks
Duncan

Hoyer Says Federal Budget May Not Be Balanced for 20 Years | CNSnews.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJP2PH8WKaI

Second time around
I'm still believing
Words that you said
You said you'd always be here
In love forever
Still repeats in my head
You can't finish what you start
If this is love it breaks my heart

You made me promises, promises
You knew you'd never keep
Promises, promises
Why do I believe​

 

[signut49]

WHO ARE YOU CALLING "TRAILER TRASH" ?????? I'm from southern Indiana!!!

 

[Duncan]

WHO ARE YOU CALLING "TRAILER TRASH" ?????? I'm from southern Indiana!!!

Me too

 

[moea222]

Ron Paul should be the go to guy for the republicans

 

[Fletch]

Ron Paul should be the go to guy for the republicans

You're assuming the Republicans actually give a damn about the country as opposed to their own power.

 

[dross]

Gosh and golly Beav'!

If only we could find some people to elect who were pure! Then there'd be more unicorn-tending services!

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

WHO ARE YOU CALLING "TRAILER TRASH" ?????? I'm from southern Indiana!!!

Me too!.... Actually it's ok... Duncan's the "Dr. Feelgood" of INGO.

All the positive and uplifting news you can stand...


On a serious note - and all ribbing of Duncan aside: We have to KEEP throwing them out on their arse until they get the message. From a fiscal perspective, I think it's fair to say that the R's will guard the budget better than the D's. So we go that route - and get rid of RINO's like Lugar, replace them with folks like Mourdock and slowly we drain the swamp. In my opinion we have to solve the FISCAL issues FIRST. If we don't, we won't have the strength left to deal with the Social issues.

dross is right - we have to play with the cards we're dealt (not what we WISH FOR), and gradually improve them as we go. The world isn't on the right track, I agree. Strapping on the tinfoil and running around thinking that everything's going to hell in a bucket isn't going to help, however. I'd prefer to work with what we have, and prepare in case that doesn't work.

 

[Colt556]

Pretty heard to do anything when the Dems go AWOL or threaten to do so and the so called President threatens to veto anything he doesn't like. They should have their pay docked and fined for every day they are absent. It would be even better if we could just can em and post someone who wants to help the country in their place.

 

[dross]

Before you can make Ron Paul look like a spendthrift you'd first have to get elected. Then, due to your political naivete, you'd immediately be marginalized with no voice other than your vote. Then your pure vote would be swallowed up by all the other people who understand the game better than you. Finally, you'd be tossed out of office after your first term, having accomplished nothing more than having been a symbol, and probably ironically causing a significant portion of the people who voted you into office to vote much more cynically in the future.

But gosh, if the World only worked in the way you imagined it, you'd be a great and amazing leader.

 

[Duncan]

Me too!.... Actually it's ok... Duncan's the "Dr. Feelgood" of INGO.

All the positive and uplifting news you can stand...


On a serious note - and all ribbing of Duncan aside: We have to KEEP throwing them out on their arse until they get the message. From a fiscal perspective, I think it's fair to say that the R's will guard the budget better than the D's. So we go that route - and get rid of RINO's like Lugar, replace them with folks like Mourdock and slowly we drain the swamp. In my opinion we have to solve the FISCAL issues FIRST. If we don't, we won't have the strength left to deal with the Social issues.

dross is right - we have to play with the cards we're dealt (not what we WISH FOR), and gradually improve them as we go. The world isn't on the right track, I agree. Strapping on the tinfoil and running around thinking that everything's going to hell in a bucket isn't going to help, however. I'd prefer to work with what we have, and prepare in case that doesn't work.

Hey thanks for the light ribbing ..
But to respectfully disagree on some of it .

We have to KEEP throwing them out on their arse until they get the message.
Yes .

From a fiscal perspective, I think it's fair to say that the R's will guard the budget better than the D's.
Yes .
But this is of little consequence .
Half wrong is still wrong and will still acquire failure ... just at a slower pace .

So we go that route -
No .

You hire more principled people that will fall on their political sword .
IE Libertarians , constitutionalists - Ran Paul's

and get rid of RINO's like Lugar
I'll buy you a beer for that one .

In my opinion we have to solve the FISCAL issues FIRST.
Yes

If we don't, we won't have the strength left to deal with the Social issues.
That is not governments job ... I did not see that requirement in the Constitution .

dross is right - we have to play with the cards we're dealt (not what we WISH FOR), and gradually improve them as we go

That's if you want to continue to play at a crooked table .
We own the house ... the dealers work for us .
They are dealing a crooked hand to the people .
In time they will go to another saloon / quit playing or ... burn down your business for being a cheat .
No good for business .

The world isn't on the right track,
I don't care about the world ... I care about this country .

Strapping on the tinfoil and running around thinking that everything's going to hell in a bucket isn't going to help

I agree inaction will accomplish nothing .
I would submit that there is overwhelming evidence that we are going to hell in a bucket is happening and on our present course we will not survive as a Constitutional republic .

Thanks
Duncan

 

[Duncan]

Before you can make Ron Paul look like a spendthrift you'd first have to get elected. Then, due to your political naivete, you'd immediately be marginalized with no voice other than your vote. Then your pure vote would be swallowed up by all the other people who understand the game better than you. Finally, you'd be tossed out of office after your first term, having accomplished nothing more than having been a symbol, and probably ironically causing a significant portion of the people who voted you into office to vote much more cynically in the future.

But gosh, if the World only worked in the way you imagined it, you'd be a great and amazing leader.

You're right about all of it but 2 things .
One .
I would not be kicked out of office .
I could see no reason that I would perform in such a way that I would be expelled .. besides from the view point of how the system current works and you could have sex with a goat on MTV and not get expelled .
Now I might get assassinated .. but that is a different matter .

Two .
.. and here is some of the philosophical difference between us .. I would not nor could I be or would I want to be an " amazing leader "
You see we elect followers .
Followers of the people under the work order of the Constitution .
That I would be .. and as good of one as I could .

You are right ... I could not get elected .
People don't want some one like me ... don't want to hear the harsh side of reality ... They don't want more Ron Paul's .
They're to pragmatic ... too centralist .. they want to be made to feel good .

You see the world does or I believe what we are taking about is THIS country does not work the way that I would like ... fair statement .

It is not working the way it is suppose to .
Constitutionally

I would like it to work the way it should .

It appears to me that you and I have different view points .
I would have joined Washington's army .. you I think would have ... continued to seek remedy at the foot of the Throne .

Thanks
Duncan

 

[PistolBob]

Handouts

Government handouts make up ONE THIRD of America's salaries and wages

Read more: Welfare nation: Government handouts make up ONE THIRD of America's salaries and wages | Mail Online

I found this article to be interesting...although I am not sure how true it is. The liberals will stay in favor as long as they are writing checks. We need to get these folks off the teat, and on the job site whenever possible. That means buying American whenever possible.


​

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Hey thanks for the light ribbing ..
But to respectfully disagree on some of it .

We have to KEEP throwing them out on their arse until they get the message.
Yes .

From a fiscal perspective, I think it's fair to say that the R's will guard the budget better than the D's.
Yes .
But this is of little consequence .
Half wrong is still wrong and will still acquire failure ... just at a slower pace .

So we go that route -
No .

You hire more principled people that will fall on their political sword .
IE Libertarians , constitutionalists - Ran Paul's

and get rid of RINO's like Lugar
I'll buy you a beer for that one .

In my opinion we have to solve the FISCAL issues FIRST.
Yes

If we don't, we won't have the strength left to deal with the Social issues.
That is not governments job ... I did not see that requirement in the Constitution .

dross is right - we have to play with the cards we're dealt (not what we WISH FOR), and gradually improve them as we go

That's if you want to continue to play at a crooked table .
We own the house ... the dealers work for us .
They are dealing a crooked hand to the people .
In time they will go to another saloon / quit playing or ... burn down your business for being a cheat .
No good for business .

The world isn't on the right track,
I don't care about the world ... I care about this country .

Strapping on the tinfoil and running around thinking that everything's going to hell in a bucket isn't going to help

I agree inaction will accomplish nothing .
I would submit that there is overwhelming evidence that we are going to hell in a bucket is happening and on our present course we will not survive as a Constitutional republic .

Thanks
Duncan

Actually Duncan I think we agree more than we disagree. It's just a question of degree in some key areas. Here's some thoughts:

1) No argument that things are going the absolute wrong direction and that the current path is unsustainable. Whether we're talking world OR this country is not an issue. Both are in deep kim chee right now. Agree that the _country_ is the right focus. I was sloppy in my writing and thinking. Absent a severe course correction back toward the Constitution, we cannot long survive as a Constitution Republic. I think we agree there.

2) I agree that "we hire more principled people". And I agree with your examples of Rand Paul, et al. I don't drink - but both of us would agree that a Lugar for Mourdock swap is a good thing, right? You just seem to doubt that it can happen?? It starts with one voice - talk to folks. That's how these things happen.

3) I do NOT agree with the "that will fall on their political sword" part. To die (even politically?) for one's cause is the vainest of solutions. Is their cause not truly served better with them alive than dead (again, even politically speaking)? Again to be clear, I want people ABSOLUTELY committed to the task - I think we agree there. I just don't want a self inflicted martyr. So long as their focus is on what's right for the Republic and not what's right for themselves, I think they are an asset, and we're going to need all that we can get.

4) Perhaps I was not clear in what I meant with the "social issues". I would agree that the government (as part of move back to a more Constitutionally based direction) needs to get the heck out of a LARGE array of social issues. It is NOT their place. My point was that of the VAST array of things that they need to get out of, the fiscal ones are the MOST pressing. Everything cannot possibly be changed overnight, as much as we may think it necessary and even try for it. If we don't change the fiscal direction, and get the country back on a firm financial footing, debating whether I should be able to smoke what I please isn't going to matter much.

I think that freedom and liberty in both areas is the right thing - and if we can get both IMMEDIATELY then GREAT. That said, if we have to choose between the two (and at times we may have to), get the fiscal stuff right and it eliminates the flow of $, then get the other right as well. Otherwise we have the freedom to ingest what we please while the Socialists scuttle our ship with financial depth charges. That more of a tactical thought. Strategically speaking getting BOTH is the obvious answer.

To sum up, I think that our disagreement is more tactical than strategic in nature. Even Rand Paul ran as a Republican, as did his father. If he were a PURE idealist, he would have run as an independent or a Libertarian, right? But he knew that he couldn't get elected that way. We have to find the BEST that we can elect - ESPECIALLY given the current state of the Republic. I think that's where dross is going with the "unicorn tender" comments. If we can get someone that's as pure as the driven snow - then great. Until then we take the best that we have any hope of electing and back them to the hilt. And don't let our votes get divided. That's how idiots like Coats get in there.

Thanks for taking the joking in the light it was intended, Duncan. At the end of the day, I'm sure that I will be looked at as overly optimistic - I think you and I see the same dangers and just respond to them differently. That does NOT make the analysis wrong...

 

[dross]

You're right about all of it but 2 things .
One .
I would not be kicked out of office .
I could see no reason that I would perform in such a way that I would be expelled .. besides from the view point of how the system current works and you could have sex with a goat on MTV and not get expelled .
Now I might get assassinated .. but that is a different matter .

Two .
.. and here is some of the philosophical difference between us .. I would not nor could I be or would I want to be an " amazing leader "
You see we elect followers .
Followers of the people under the work order of the Constitution .
That I would be .. and as good of one as I could .

You are right ... I could not get elected .
People don't want some one like me ... don't want to hear the harsh side of reality ... They don't want more Ron Paul's .
They're to pragmatic ... too centralist .. they want to be made to feel good .

You see the world does or I believe what we are taking about is THIS country does not work the way that I would like ... fair statement .

It is not working the way it is suppose to .
Constitutionally

I would like it to work the way it should .

It appears to me that you and I have different view points .
I would have joined Washington's army .. you I think would have ... continued to seek remedy at the foot of the Throne .

Thanks
Duncan

By "thrown out" I didn't mean you'd be expelled from office early, I meant that you'd get voted out.

As to your last comment, if this doesn't illustrate why freedom loving folks like yourself are forever on the margin, I don't know what does.

My beliefs are as libertarian as anyone I read on here, yet somehow I'd be a loyalist in the revolution. That's why from your seat (and it's a collective "your" as many I read here share your view) everyone who doesn't agree with you is just part of the "Republocrats" or whatever you guys call them. If you can't make alliance with me, your views will never reach enough people for you to have political influence.

Look at what you're really asking for. A revolution, period. That's the only solution left, according to what you're saying. You can't work within the system - and newsflash for you, it ain't the "system" thats the problem, it ain't the corrupt politicians either, it's that YOUR FELLOW CITIZENS DON'T AGREE WITH YOU. And they get to vote, too.

Our founders had a great vision, then they immediately began to chip at it as soon as they were elected. Why? Because the necessity of governing will ALWAYS lead you from your ideology.

Let's say there were a Libertarian sweep in the next election. Do you think the system would change? Sure, they'd make some great changes, but then the folks who care more about using the system to help themselves would use their vote and their influence. Many of those pure non politicians would become politicians. Because they're corrupt? No, because they see that the political game is played differently, just as Adams and Jefferson discovered and acted accordingly as soon as they took office.

It's not about who would be a loyalist and who would be a revolutionary. It's about you and folks like you living in a world on the margins with little to no influence and ironically often using your vote to help elect the people who stand most against you.

Existence exists - Ayn Rand. That means embrace reality. See the world as is and react accordingly. Seeing the world the way you want it to be doesn't work, or God forbid, when it does it leads to concentration camps and people in blindfolds against the wall.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

dross -

Agree with your point. I've said this before here. Everyone reaches their boiling point at different times. Each of us has a degree to which we will go at any given time. Sometimes the "no compromise" folks actually do "cut their nose off to spite their face"....

On the topic of revolution - a wise man once said (and I'm butchering the quote) "beware of those who want violent change, for it is more often the violence that they seek and less often the change..." Not saying that that is the case with you, Duncan. Just saying that it's one of the dangers.

While getting the R's to take a hard shift to the Libertarian position may be compromise, and compromise might be a dirty word... it may be the best that can be done.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Notice he said " Balanced Budget " .. hey boys and girls that does not address the National Debt

He? He being Steny Hoyer (D-MD)? Steny Hoyer the Democrat?

You are blaming Republicans for something a Democrat said? A Democrat comments on a Democratic President's budget and the INGO blames the Republicans for not waving their magic wands and fixing everything?

Daddy's not fixing the car fast enough while we sit in it and whine. And, I want a pony and I want it now!

 

[dross]

He? He being Steny Hoyer (D-MD)? Steny Hoyer the Democrat?

You are blaming Republicans for something a Democrat said? A Democrat comments on a Democratic President's budget and the INGO blames the Republicans for not waving their magic wands and fixing everything?

Daddy's not fixing the car fast enough while we sit in it and whine. And, I want a pony and I want it now!

Hell, Kirk, they could GET a pony. They want a unicorn.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Would L. Neil Smith be riding the unicorn?

I know they want everything now but blaming Republicans for comments of a Democrat about a Democrat President's proposed budget is just too much, even for the wookies.

Apparently daddy has mind control powers and someone Republicans can use their Jedi powers to impact things Democrats say. Maybe L. Neil Smith wrote about this? I'll have to re-read the Probability Broach to re-fresh my understanding of the political theory.

 

[Pocketman]

Democrat or Republican, Hoyer's right about this taking time to turn around. Our economic situation has been in the works for years. It will not be fixed overnight. Sustained spending constraints, and intelligent taxing, over a period of years will be necesssary.

Something else to consider would be to put some of this "stimulus" money toward animal genetics. Surely someone can generate a unicorn through crossbreeding.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Democrat or Republican, Hoyer's right about this taking time to turn around.
....
. Surely someone can generate a unicorn through crossbreeding.

Surely you are not talking about something like the Mary Matalin, James Carville marriage??? That would be one ugly unicorn...