On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 07:32:46 PST, shadow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 03-Dec-04, Travis Pahl wrote: > > TP> Yes, and passed on larger spending bills than we had ever seen before. > TP> Balanced budgets mean nothing when spending keeps increasing. Tax > TP> cuts mean nothing when spending keeps increasing. They NEVER reduce > TP> spending. > > Are you opposed to govt deficit spending, or govt spending in general?
I am opposed to govt deficit spending, govt excessive spending, govt wasteful spending, and govt spending in general. But that is really not at issue here is it? What we all agree on is that we want spending reduced. Bush/Republican supporters claim that voting Republican will achieve that. Facts are they do not reduce spending, nor do the stop deficit spending. > s>> Do you think it would have been prudent to cut the budget in the wake of > s>> 9/11? > > TP> YES. Smaller government is not just some random goal i have. It is > TP> what I beleive makes a better government.... > > How small is small enough? Not at issue here. The point is the Republicans want bigger government and all of us here want something smaller than what we have. > TP> ... That does not change just because some jackasses attacked us. And > TP> Bush increased spending in things htat had nothing to do with 9/11. 60% > TP> increase in the federal dept of education? Care to defend that one? > > Hell no, the federal govt was never granted any authority to regulate > education. And I'll top ya with one even more onerous: ten years after the > Republican Revolution, the Natl Endowment for the Arts still exists! Yeah, that one is bad too, but the dept of education is more harmful to society both in its mission and its budget. > TP> They have had a chance nearly all my life. I was born in 1977 and > TP> during that time they have the presidency for all but 12 years. The > TP> republicans have had it for 16. How many spending bills have passed > TP> despite a republicans veto? ... > > Reality check again, Travis: you are not going to make the federal budget > smaller. The best we can hope for is to freeze govt spending and let growth > and inflation do the rest. I will not settle for that. > TP> ... They have also controlled part or all of congress for quiete a while > TP> now. You know a bill has to pass both houses right? Our system is set > TP> up to make things hard to pass unless a party has a super majority... > > That's not in the Constitution - it's part of the rules Congress has imposed > upon itself. I am not talking about those rules. i am talking about just having 51 members is not always enough if a few vote against thier party on any particular issue. > TP> ... and the white house. But that implies that the minority party have > TP> balls to stand up for whta they beleive in. The republicans do not. > > Hastert sure doesn't, and Frist isn't much better. > > s>> Why do you think most govt employees are militantly Democratic? > > TP> Team loyalty. > > Loyal to the team that pays them the most. > > TP>>> Call it what you want. But Fox news is the number on 24 hours news > TP>>> channel ... > > s>> ... on cable ... > > TP> No. Of any 24 hour news channel. > > Name a 24 hour news channel on broadcast TV. There is not one, so why did someone bring up that they are the number one ON CABLE? WE already know they are all only on cable. > TP>>> So republicans are just poll driven idiots? ... > > TP> Then they do not deserve your support. > > They get my support when they're the lesser of two evils presented. That is like standing on the edge of the grand canyon and deciding whether you will take a running leap off the edge to the left, or to the right. One might be a couple feet less of a fall, but that certainly does not make it the right decision. Travis _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
