I wasn't pointing it out to be mean or anything like that and I can garuntee you that my political views in most cases do not match with MM, but I can respect his view and can appreciate him sticking up for my statement while I was not here. I would say I agree with your points far more than I would with MM. I was merely pointing out that saying Lincoln was a Republican without prefacing that with the accurate view point of history doesn't really help the argument. The fact that in in 1860, there is no way anyone would have considered Lincoln a conservative was the point. I'm not saying you didn't know this, I'm just saying throwing it out there does nothing but stir the pot. I find that when referenceing history it is better to use liberal and conservative but the problem is that those terms have so much bagage that go with them now that its hard to use them.
I agree with most of your post, but disagree here. It may not be able to be fixed quickly, but actions today can delay the paying off of the debt in the future. If we keep piling on right now, it will add decades to how long it will take to repay. Sure, the state of the economy right now DOES take precedence, but we can't do it without some consciousness of how much debt we are building up.
i was waiting for that response, and the violence was a result of poverty. You cant sit there and tell me that lawmakers sat down and said, man lets put a lock on crack because of the violence it causes. The main reason is they didnt want crack ending up in white neighborhoods, and sold to white children. Violence was used as an excuse, just like it was used in the 30's by harry j. anslinger. most of the violence involving drugs has nothing to do with drugs, its gang related, unless you are talking about the cartel business. How many african american cartels do you know of?
and ironically republicans claim to be a party of christians. christians who dont believe in helping out the less fortunate.
We are absolutely walking a fine line. We can't spend our way into a depression (short term anyway), only inaction our way into a great depression. We can however, spend our way into hyperinflation which is just as bad if not worse. The long term risk of spending is debatable as well but we can definitely put our entire system in peril by overspending. I honestly believe that if we had a concentrated infrastructure spending plan of about half a trillion aimed at every shovel ready project in the country no matter how good or bad the project was, we would have been okay. In my opinion, this was not a time for tax cuts. Not tax cuts that put 1,200 into people's pockets. What good is that gonna do? Perhaps innovative reagan era tax cuts that I've heard about but haven't researched enough but not checks to people who are only going to save the money (which is everyone). So the half a trillion could have staved off the depression and we could endure a deep recession and start paying off our debt. Instead, we got 800 billion with only 60 billion or so going to shovel ready infrastructure. What a joke. I'll one up you. There's not a single person on the face of the planet who can figure out exactly when enough is enough. Doesn't mean we should try though.
Aha, there it is. Republicans don't want to help others out. Democrats do. That's why they take money from the rich and give it to the poor right? Unfortunately your argument has failed as a way to govern since the beginning of time, but don't let that minor point deter your views. And before I get hit with a massive amount of posts flaming me, realize that I give a vastly oversimplified answer to a vastly oversimplified statement. I did that on purpose......:thumb:
That would be because most conservative Christians believe that they can be better stewards of their money than the government. I'd like to be able to decide which causes can best help people rather than a bloated inefficient government trying to do it. There are lots of charities that do a much better job of helping people than government programs do.
And conservatives give more to them than liberals. When it comes to giving your own $ to help people, conservatives lead the way. When it comes to taking $ from others in order to give it away, well....figure it out.
Hmm, that works out to about 5.4% annualized growth from 2000 (1.9T) to 2009 (3.1T)...and yes, there were a couple of wars and that oft sited first stimulus. From 2009 (3.1T) to 2010 (3.9T), its 15%. There have been a lot of posts here promoting one side or the other. We can blame each other for this tidbit or that tidbit till the cows come home. I really think there is plenty of blame for both sides. Wouldn't it be nice if those in Washington would figure out a way to shrink government? It will never happen though, too much power to be had at our expense. Each group will use their pet causes to stay in power and the inevitable outcome will be the same. Government will continue to grow; the incumbent power brokers will see to it. Hopefully there will soon come a day when the constituents will have had enough and rise up to do something about it before it's too late. .....Hey, wait a minute! Isn't that what this thread was originally about?
