Small is Beautiful

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: daniel49
not at all confusing.

Yes fdr had that, W had katrina, some administrations have nothing major.
I am simply saying all I hear from Obama is spend , spend, spend.
You don't vote the party out who claims to want small govt. you hold them accountable and help reform them to thier original principles.

In laymans terms, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I think it is pretty damned clear that it is no longer possible to hold the Republicans accountable to their professed small govt agenda. The more they voice it, the faster they increase spending. In fact, I would argue that it has become little more than an excuse FOR spending. As long as they get their followers to believe that they are the small govt party, then they don't actually have to be the small govt party.

I also think it's a touch dishonest to blame Katrina for W's spending habits (when the bulk went elsewhere by far).
And all I hear from McCain is spend, spend, spend as well. In fact, didn't an independent study show that McCain spending proposals would increase spending faster than Obama's? Link anyone? While McCain will also cut taxes and revenue, meaning more deficits, more debt, and more economic pain to the America people because of that. Hell, let's just move the capitol to Dubai, eh?

the bulk of reagans went elsewhere also. The result was the fall of the soviet union, the freedom of eastern Europe, the falling of the Berlin wall.
I know you won't want to hear this but the verdict on Iraq and afghanistan is still out. It may be 10-20 years before the total good or bad may be fully appreciated.


Must go to work now, but let me attempt to agree with you once more. Your premise is not without merit.
Gov't gets bigger under both parties however.
and this is one man who sticking with the republicans, if the Dems ever put out a conservative for a nominee, dial me up again.

They just might do that. Do you want a Liar or someone who really is a Conservative?

Sandorski: you been laying in the sun...jk
Alls I know is they choose farther to the left each election. Obama is worse then Kerry.
Bush I believe has been a social conservative but definately has not been a fiscal conservative.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: daniel49
not at all confusing.

Yes fdr had that, W had katrina, some administrations have nothing major.
I am simply saying all I hear from Obama is spend , spend, spend.
You don't vote the party out who claims to want small govt. you hold them accountable and help reform them to thier original principles.

In laymans terms, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I think it is pretty damned clear that it is no longer possible to hold the Republicans accountable to their professed small govt agenda. The more they voice it, the faster they increase spending. In fact, I would argue that it has become little more than an excuse FOR spending. As long as they get their followers to believe that they are the small govt party, then they don't actually have to be the small govt party.

I also think it's a touch dishonest to blame Katrina for W's spending habits (when the bulk went elsewhere by far).
And all I hear from McCain is spend, spend, spend as well. In fact, didn't an independent study show that McCain spending proposals would increase spending faster than Obama's? Link anyone? While McCain will also cut taxes and revenue, meaning more deficits, more debt, and more economic pain to the America people because of that. Hell, let's just move the capitol to Dubai, eh?

the bulk of reagans went elsewhere also. The result was the fall of the soviet union, the freedom of eastern Europe, the falling of the Berlin wall.
I know you won't want to hear this but the verdict on Iraq and afghanistan is still out. It may be 10-20 years before the total good or bad may be fully appreciated.


Must go to work now, but let me attempt to agree with you once more. Your premise is not without merit.
Gov't gets bigger under both parties however.
and this is one man who sticking with the republicans, if the Dems ever put out a conservative for a nominee, dial me up again.

They just might do that. Do you want a Liar or someone who really is a Conservative?

Sandorski: you been laying in the sun...jk
Alls I know is they choose farther to the left each election. Obama is worse then Kerry.
Bush I believe has been a social conservative but definately has not been a fiscal conservative.

Liar or Not. The Democrats need to know so they can choose one you'll be satisfied with.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: daniel49
not at all confusing.

Yes fdr had that, W had katrina, some administrations have nothing major.
I am simply saying all I hear from Obama is spend , spend, spend.
You don't vote the party out who claims to want small govt. you hold them accountable and help reform them to thier original principles.

In laymans terms, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I think it is pretty damned clear that it is no longer possible to hold the Republicans accountable to their professed small govt agenda. The more they voice it, the faster they increase spending. In fact, I would argue that it has become little more than an excuse FOR spending. As long as they get their followers to believe that they are the small govt party, then they don't actually have to be the small govt party.

I also think it's a touch dishonest to blame Katrina for W's spending habits (when the bulk went elsewhere by far).
And all I hear from McCain is spend, spend, spend as well. In fact, didn't an independent study show that McCain spending proposals would increase spending faster than Obama's? Link anyone? While McCain will also cut taxes and revenue, meaning more deficits, more debt, and more economic pain to the America people because of that. Hell, let's just move the capitol to Dubai, eh?

the bulk of reagans went elsewhere also. The result was the fall of the soviet union, the freedom of eastern Europe, the falling of the Berlin wall.
I know you won't want to hear this but the verdict on Iraq and afghanistan is still out. It may be 10-20 years before the total good or bad may be fully appreciated.


Must go to work now, but let me attempt to agree with you once more. Your premise is not without merit.
Gov't gets bigger under both parties however.
and this is one man who sticking with the republicans, if the Dems ever put out a conservative for a nominee, dial me up again.

They just might do that. Do you want a Liar or someone who really is a Conservative?

Sandorski: you been laying in the sun...jk
Alls I know is they choose farther to the left each election. Obama is worse then Kerry.
Bush I believe has been a social conservative but definately has not been a fiscal conservative.

Liar or Not. The Democrats need to know so they can choose one you'll be satisfied with.

I'm sure they are waiting with abated breath to see which one I choose.
Someone honest is always preferable to a liar.
however the Day the democratic nominee is a social and fiscal conservative who doesn't lie is a real long shot.
You would do better paying the lottery. your in BC. Just drop south a little and pick up some tickets for this weeks drawing.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: daniel49
not at all confusing.

Yes fdr had that, W had katrina, some administrations have nothing major.
I am simply saying all I hear from Obama is spend , spend, spend.
You don't vote the party out who claims to want small govt. you hold them accountable and help reform them to thier original principles.

In laymans terms, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I think it is pretty damned clear that it is no longer possible to hold the Republicans accountable to their professed small govt agenda. The more they voice it, the faster they increase spending. In fact, I would argue that it has become little more than an excuse FOR spending. As long as they get their followers to believe that they are the small govt party, then they don't actually have to be the small govt party.

I also think it's a touch dishonest to blame Katrina for W's spending habits (when the bulk went elsewhere by far).
And all I hear from McCain is spend, spend, spend as well. In fact, didn't an independent study show that McCain spending proposals would increase spending faster than Obama's? Link anyone? While McCain will also cut taxes and revenue, meaning more deficits, more debt, and more economic pain to the America people because of that. Hell, let's just move the capitol to Dubai, eh?

the bulk of reagans went elsewhere also. The result was the fall of the soviet union, the freedom of eastern Europe, the falling of the Berlin wall.
I know you won't want to hear this but the verdict on Iraq and afghanistan is still out. It may be 10-20 years before the total good or bad may be fully appreciated.


Must go to work now, but let me attempt to agree with you once more. Your premise is not without merit.
Gov't gets bigger under both parties however.
and this is one man who sticking with the republicans, if the Dems ever put out a conservative for a nominee, dial me up again.

They just might do that. Do you want a Liar or someone who really is a Conservative?

Sandorski: you been laying in the sun...jk
Alls I know is they choose farther to the left each election. Obama is worse then Kerry.
Bush I believe has been a social conservative but definately has not been a fiscal conservative.

Liar or Not. The Democrats need to know so they can choose one you'll be satisfied with.

I'm sure they are waiting with abated breath to see which one I choose.
Someone honest is always preferable to a liar.
however the Day the democratic nominee is a social and fiscal conservative who doesn't lie is a real long shot.
You would do better paying the lottery. your in BC. Just drop south a little and pick up some tickets for this weeks drawing.

Yes they are dude! 😛😀

Social Conservative? :thumbsdown: That's the Republicans biggest problem right there.

If I want to win a Lotto, I'll choose a Canadian Lotto. Tax Free winnings 4tw! 😉