On Wed, 08 Dec 2004 08:50:55 PST, shadow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 04-Dec-04, Travis Pahl wrote: > > TP> I am opposed to govt deficit spending, govt excessive spending, govt > TP> wasteful spending, and govt spending in general. But that is really not > TP> at issue here is it? What we all agree on is that we want spending > TP> reduced.... > > To what end? Would you rather have less spending AND less freedom, or more > spending AND more freedom? Isn't our goal more freedom?
Unless the government finds money to spend, it is spending our moeny. Increased govt spending = decreased freedom. Yes freedom is our goal, but that can not be achieved by more government specnding. > TP> ... Bush/Republican supporters claim that voting Republican will achieve > TP> that. Facts are they do not reduce spending, nor do the stop deficit > TP> spending. > > I think what we've all lost sight of, in this pissing contest, is Rob's claim > that the GOP would be easier to subvert/convert than the Democratic party. I disagree. Look at what they do when they are in power? obviously Roberts view is wrong. > If > libertarians had spent the last 30 years attending GOP precinct meetings and > getting their people selected rather than trying to form a third party, > freedom would have been better served. Maybe thirty years ago. Not now. Is it 2004 or 1974? > s>> Reality check again, Travis: you are not going to make the federal budget > s>> smaller. The best we can hope for is to freeze govt spending and let > growth > s>> and inflation do the rest. > > TP> I will not settle for that. > > Perfection is the enemy of the obtainable. I am not asking for perfection. I have made that quite clear. I am only asking that the candidate be headed in the same direction as me for me to consider supporting them. Travis _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
