Bigotry? Im just stating the facts. It was the same bitch and moaning 150 years ago with taxes on cotton and representation not slavery like most of you sheep think. Then the south had a legitimate beef... today they have been built up BECAUSE of the federal government (ie Yankee old money) and then some of these people want to bitch now? Get out of here clown.
...................screw you yank!!! things are a bit different now ... the south would destroy the north these days!! .... and to talk about your federal government like they are saviors ...... look at the situation now .. you greedy f_cking yanks!!! :finger::finger::finger::finger::finger::finger::finger:
Im a fiscal conservative... unlike you social conservatives down there who keep sending these bible thumping cocksuckers and bootlicking oil whores to the party. Republicanism is dead. Thank you southerners for driving the stake it its heart.
PS: elaborate please would you on how "the south would destroy the north nowadays" this should be fascinating. Fucking noob.
PSS: also your seven finger emoticons seems to have suggested i have struck a nerve?? Does this make you mad? Truth can be painful to hear. Especially from some cracker redneck who dropped out of 9th grade. Keep the continue.
.......the all knowing fletch... you are such a f_cking kook you have no idea.. didnt strike a nerve .. i dont even live in the states... just sick of you kookin up the place thats all!!! .. keep up your " Im a fiscal conservative " ....... douchebag..
Wow, you almost said FUCK. WHOA!
And now i get 8 emoticons???
Wow....you ....really.... know.... how.... to... get ....your.... point.... across.
bring on civil war part duex...er...deux...
northerners big pussies today....south got lotso guns....hunt fish....people that don't depend on nanny state like the north does.....etc....
granted i think the northerners have government and the military and nukes on their side
but in a person to person battle with no government intervention south wins hands down.....
just like the south woulda won last go round if government wasn't on the north's side....i'm honestly surprised the south put up that good of a fight....
:grandmais
The southern soldier has been most responsible for victory in most all American wars. The south is not as easily defined these days with all the northern transplants. However the rural south still stands as the segment of society that most resembles the America of our hey-day when America produced everything and became the worlds most prosperous & militarily dominant nation. The first 10 years after WWII when cities like Detroit, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Cleveland & Birmingham were glittering!
I don't get it. Why does the Republican party so often water down their conservatism to please "middle of the road" dems when history tells us that never works out the way they claimed it would. McCain and most of the Republican field sounded more like the Democrats than some of the Democrats. Whenever the Republicans try that tactic, they lose because most dems are married to the party irrespective of where a Republican candidate stands on any issue. If he's the least bit liberal, 1/2 his party throws him under the bus. On the other side, if a Democrat shows any conservative leanings, such as Lieberman (or Hillary,) he/she gets thrown under the next bus.
Only when a Republican runs on a conservative platform, he wins. There hasn't been a true conservative running the Republican party since Ronald Regan. Fred Thompson was the closest thing to a true conservative in the last election but his party chickened out in favor of trying to sway "middle of the road" democrats and win the election that way. BUT IT DIDN'T WORK. It has never worked. Now they are paying for compromising their principles and they've all but vanished from politics, surely politics with any power or influence. There is no prominent politician today that voices conservative ideals. Where is that guy?
We all know down in our deepest recesses that liberal spending cannot fix a system that's fiscally broke. Obama's stimulus package will not save this economy. The government has NEVER been able to save the economy by expanding spending and the size of government, NEVER. If anything, it robs the producers of jobs and companies that create the wealth. Until enough money is freed up for the private sector to do what it does best, which is invest and build industry, we will stay broke.
History tells us that a centralized government in charge of the industrial machine or many critical segments of it has never worked. China was still living in the dark ages with that "centralized government" mindset until they loosened up and let private industry take over. Now look at what they've become.... and we are going in what direction in spite of what we've seen fail all over the world? Obama's stimulus package is nothing but a pork barrel full of delectable snacks that will do nothing but feed the cravings of the few and it will fail because there is nothing in it to help this country create more wealth so it can feed itself and grow.
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 10"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 10"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CRHSM%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com
ffice:smarttags" name="stockticker"></o:smarttagtype><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]--> I will take it from the top. SPENDING IS THE PROBLEM.
Fiscal conservatism is dead because the Republican Party does not care about fiscal economic policies when in office, only when the liberals are in office. Also, you quip about Ronald Regan being the last fiscal conservative is a complete and utter brainwashed fallacy.
A true conservative doesn’t ramp up public held debt from 26 percent of the <st1:stockticker>GDP</st1:stockticker> in 1980 to 41 percent in 1989. A true conservative doesn’t end up piling up $2.6 trillion in debt in 8 years while it took over 200+ years collectively to approach 1 trillion. A true conservative doesn’t allow the country to owe more to foreigners than it was owed. And a true conservative wouldn’t have allowed the United States to become the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation.
Nobody is talking about watering down anything. All im saying is to reduce the scope and size of government means more freedom for all. Its a law and motion thing. For a force there is always an equal and opposite reaction. The force here is legislation or time put in as a legislator. That means less interest about what goes on in your household and in your bedroom. Thus in return more interest about what goes on in your pocketbook and the nations pocketbook. Social conservatism is a waste of time because you take you eye off the ball when it comes to economics. Let society vet out it social issues, not the government. The key and the root of all out problems have been and will always be... economics. Fiscal conservatism is the only way we can keep this country moving in the right direction. All other attempts are futile.
<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CRHSM%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com
SPENDING IS THE PROBLEM.
Fiscal conservatism is dead because the Republican Party does not care about fiscal economic policies when in office, only when the liberals are in office. Also, you quip about Ronald Regan being the last fiscal conservative is a complete and utter brainwashed fallacy.
A true conservative doesn’t ramp up public held debt from 26 percent of the <st1:stockticker>GDP</st1:stockticker> in 1980 to 41 percent in 1989. A true conservative doesn’t end up piling up $2.6 trillion in debt in 8 years while it took over 200+ years collectively to approach 1 trillion. A true conservative doesn’t allow the country to owe more to foreigners than it was owed. And a true conservative wouldn’t have allowed the United States to become the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation.
Nobody is talking about watering down anything. All im saying is to reduce the scope and size of government means more freedom for all. Its a law and motion thing. For a force there is always an equal and opposite reaction. The force here is legislation or time put in as a legislator. That means less interest about what goes on in your household and in your bedroom. Thus in return more interest about what goes on in your pocketbook and the nations pocketbook. Social conservatism is a waste of time because you take you eye off the ball when it comes to economics. Let society vet out it social issues, not the government. The key and the root of all out problems have been and will always be... economics. Fiscal conservatism is the only way we can keep this country moving in the right direction. All other attempts are futile.
In essence I agree. Spending is the problem. However I should point out that the spending increases during the Regan administration were largely defense spending and most of that was aimed at modernizing our fleet of boats and planes that had been grossly neglected during previous administrations. Remember there was a cold war happening and Eastern Europe was still a threat. The objective was to defeat communism and that was an expensive task. The results speak for themselves.
I should also point out that Regan's tax policies left more money in the economy for businesses to grow and create more wealth. So growth is a sure fire way to make up any deficits left over from earlier administrations and to put us in a position to more easily handle any new debt. The only problem with that is when there is no growth, the coffers run dry in a hurry.
Now on to the next problem... how to cut back spending programs after the job is done, or if they have proven in a reasonable amount of time to be an ineffective and hopeless waste of money. Cutting back ANY government program is like amputating a limb to those on "Capital Hill." I agree that the problem has been going on for years.
I'd like to see a powerful non-elected citizens oversight committee with budgetary authority, created to axe government programs at an appropriate time or to give them the thumbs up. I think the politicians on "Capital Hill" can't do this by themselves. No elected official can. They CAN'T because of political pressure and fear of losing their seat.
The question is HOW to reduce spending. It can't be done without closely scrutinizing all government spending from top to bottom but it must be done or that big parasite in Washington will continue to tap our economy until there just ain't no more.
