PDA

View Full Version : Can anyone explain....



JDogger
12-03-2012, 07:02 PM
...Grover Norquist?
I can google.
I can turn up pages upon pages. There are many opinions, and I have mine, but who is this unelected personna that seems to hold such great sway that he is invited to 'Meet the Press', where he threatens a 'Tea-Party Two?'
A Tea-Party One resulted in DC gridlock. Not the best way to go for the country.
A Tea-Party Two will move us forward?
The election is over.
I did not vote for Obama. I did not vote for Romney.
The Tea-party, if it is a party, did not field a candidate.
The Libertarian Party did field a candidate. He recieved
few votes.

Sooo. I'm curious? We had a democrat who won. We had a Republican who lost. We had a Libertarian who did not... We had a tea party candidate,...sorry what party....tea party...they're not a party.

So who won and who lost?

JD

huntinman
12-03-2012, 07:06 PM
...Grover Norquist?
I can google.
I can turn up pages upon pages. There are many opinions, and I have mine, but who is this unelected personna that seems to hold such great sway that he is invited to 'Meet the Press', where he threatens a 'Tea-Party Two?'
A Tea-Party One resulted in DC gridlock. Not the best way to go for the country.
A Tea-Party Two will move us forward?
The election is over.
I did not vote for Obama. I did not vote for Romney.
The Tea-party, if it is a party, did not field a candidate.
The Libertarian Party did field a candidate. He recieved
few votes.

Sooo. I'm curious? We had a democrat who won. We had a Republican who lost. We had a Libertarian who did not... We had a tea party candidate,...sorry what party....tea party...they're not a party.

So who won and who lost?

JD

The unelected Sandra Fluke... Won... Common sense lost.

JDogger
12-03-2012, 07:16 PM
The unelected Sandra Fluke... Won... Common sense lost.

Bummer, dude...get over it.

murral stark
12-03-2012, 07:25 PM
The unelected Sandra Fluke... Won... Common sense lost.

You must be a Chicago Cubs Fan. "We'll get 'em next time!!!";)

JDogger
12-03-2012, 07:28 PM
Bummer, dude...get over it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhRUe-gz690

Is Grover the Black Knight?

luvmylabs23139
12-03-2012, 07:30 PM
Here's the thing the house of reps controls the checkbook and republicans won the house. Obama can run his mouth all he wants but he still does not get to write the laws.
Hopefully the house holds strong and does not cave to him.

JDogger
12-03-2012, 07:37 PM
Here's the thing the house of reps controls the checkbook and republicans won the house. Obama can run his mouth all he wants but he still does not get to write the laws.
Hopefully the house holds strong and does not cave to him.

Cool Luvy. The house controls the checkbook...the repub's control the house...ipso facto regards. JD

JDogger
12-03-2012, 07:39 PM
Cool Luvy. The house controls the checkbook...the repub's control the house...ipso facto regards. JD

Only the house can spend...do you get it luvy? JD

Henry V
12-03-2012, 07:40 PM
Here's the thing the house of reps controls the checkbook and republicans won the house. Obama can run his mouth all he wants but he still does not get to write the laws.
Hopefully the house holds strong and does not cave to him.

"won" is a relative term. The republican representatives did not receive more votes than the democrats they just have gerrymandered districts so they can win more seats. 53,952,240 votes were cast for Democratic candidates, while Republican candidates received 53,402,643.

luvmylabs23139
12-03-2012, 07:42 PM
Only the house can spend...do you get it luvy? JD

Yeah I get it. It is very simple, the house just refuses to spend any more money and Obama will be out of luck and maybe we can get out of debt!

JDogger
12-03-2012, 07:44 PM
Yeah I get it. It is very simple, the house just refuses to spend any more money and Obama will be out of luck and maybe we can get out of debt!

But they don't refuse....Try.. JD

murral stark
12-03-2012, 08:00 PM
Yeah I get it. It is very simple, the house just refuses to spend any more money and Obama will be out of luck and maybe we can get out of debt!

They just refuse to spend it on what the President wants. They still spend on the things they want to spend it on.

caryalsobrook
12-04-2012, 07:04 AM
"won" is a relative term. The republican representatives did not receive more votes than the democrats they just have gerrymandered districts so they can win more seats. 53,952,240 votes were cast for Democratic candidates, while Republican candidates received 53,402,643.

Stop whining. The fact is that the state legislators redistrict congressional districts every 10 years based on the census. The VOTERS elected the legislators who did just that. Each district ELECTED their congressman. The nation elected Obama as President, so no reason to whine about that either. Even most idiots know that congressmen are elected by districts AND NOT BY THE NATION. I wonder if you think that only Republican Houses gerrymander districts and Democrat houses apportion them to your liking.

Ken Bora
12-04-2012, 07:24 AM
...The election is over.
I did not vote for Obama. I did not vote for Romney. ?

JD


not much for you to bitch about then?
or are you afeared of the rope climb to get into Franco's Tree Fort? :cool:

Ken Bora
12-04-2012, 07:29 AM
They just refuse to spend it on what the President wants. They still spend on the things they want to spend it on.


Mommy, Mommy I want a gooie cluster.
Shut up kid your getting broccoli.
Mommy, Mommy I want flashie sparkle shoes.
Shut up kid your getting barn boots.

huntinman
12-04-2012, 09:48 AM
Bummer, dude...get over it.

Don't ask the question if you can't handle the answer. (or don't really want an answer)

PamK
12-04-2012, 09:51 AM
No answers for the original question?

Ken Bora
12-04-2012, 10:09 AM
No answers for the original question?

seeing as it changed from it's first line, to it's last. You tell what you think the original question is and we will play on. normaly the second round will have 2 daily doubles.

PamK
12-04-2012, 10:11 AM
LOL, who is norquist? Why do people think he has so much power.

road kill
12-04-2012, 10:19 AM
LOL, who is norquist? Why do people think he has so much power.
I don't know who he is.
I don't know why he has power over JDogger.

Ken Bora
12-04-2012, 10:58 AM
I know I first knew of him during the Oliver North situation. I can recal thinking, "they traded arms with muppets?". Hey, how many guys you know named Grover? It's what I thought of alright? And because of that I remember him. He has a very long history of service to our Nation.

huntinman
12-04-2012, 10:59 AM
Pam is not that dim... she knows who he is and what he stands for... right Pam?

Franco
12-04-2012, 12:51 PM
not much for you to bitch about then?
or are you afeared of the rope climb to get into Franco's Tree Fort? :cool:

Tree Fort? I am not the one hiding behind the Satus Quo. I am on the front lines of the battle taking fire from both sides fighting for real and meaningful reform! The folks in the tree fort are the ones that think there is a real difference between today's Dems and Repubs or that one of those two parties better serves the tax payer!

BTW, I am with Grover on any additional taxes. The working man of this country is taxed enough no matter which tax bracket they are in. But, lets don't fool ourselves in thinking that the Dems created a bigger deficit than the Repubs.

Marvin S
12-04-2012, 01:19 PM
Tree Fort? I am not the one hiding behind the STatus Quo. I am on the front lines of the battle taking fire from both sides fighting for real and meaningful reform! The folks in the tree fort are the ones that think there is a real difference between today's Dems and Repubs or that one of those two parties better serves the tax payer!

:lol: There has got to be an icon to describe the great Franco - :snipersmile:, does that do it? Or is it :confused: :cry:, all I can say is poor Franco, no one understands him :-P.

coachmo
12-04-2012, 01:59 PM
Franco, I can only speak for myself but I have been overly impressed with your ascent into martyrdom. Stand strong Franco.

huntinman
12-04-2012, 02:17 PM
Franco, I can only speak for myself but I have been overly impressed with your ascent into martyrdom. Stand strong Franco.

Ascent or descent?

Pete
12-04-2012, 02:27 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=b2T-5Pd3oYY&feature=endscreen
I often agree with Franco's point of view on political matters. And I certainly know that ther really isn't much different between parties. In the end they seek advice from other entities rather than what the american people want. Its just the way it is.
Pete

coachmo
12-04-2012, 02:42 PM
Oh no huntinman, Franco has definitely ascended to the level of martyrdom just ask him! He's on the front line taking near-death shots from both political sides. I glad he's wearing his body armour.

Franco
12-04-2012, 04:02 PM
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper. (http://www.retrievertraining.net/quote/38438.html)
Edmund Burke

Franco
12-04-2012, 04:04 PM
I often agree with Franco's point of view on political matters. And I certainly know that ther really isn't much different between parties. In the end they seek advice from other entities rather than what the american people want. Its just the way it is.
Pete

What is really depressing to read on POTUS is that many think that the Repubs are morally superior to the Dems and that the Repubs offers some kind of political salvation.

Uncle Bill
12-04-2012, 04:16 PM
What is really depressing to read on POTUS is that many think that the Repubs are morally superior to the Dems and that the Repubs offers some kind of political salvation.


What a child you've become. If it weren't for the large contingency of Tea Party promoted Republicans in the Congress, there would be no fight to hold down taxes. Please explain to the posters here, just how many LIBERTARIANS are fighting off the socialists?

Thump your chest all you want, but in reality you haven't produced squat in an effort to hold back the SFN crowd.

UB

huntinman
12-04-2012, 04:37 PM
What a child you've become. If it weren't for the large contingency of Tea Party promoted Republicans in the Congress, there would be no fight to hold down taxes. Please explain to the posters here, just how many LIBERTARIANS are fighting off the socialists?

Thump your chest all you want, but in reality you haven't produced squat in an effort to hold back the SFN crowd.

UB

But he is doing a good job holding up that imaginary windmill...

Franco
12-04-2012, 05:01 PM
What a child you've become. If it weren't for the large contingency of Tea Party promoted Republicans in the Congress, there would be no fight to hold down taxes. Please explain to the posters here, just how many LIBERTARIANS are fighting off the socialists?

Thump your chest all you want, but in reality you haven't produced squat in an effort to hold back the SFN crowd.

UB

Tea Party is done as of this last election. Maybe you missed the 12 seats they lost and Dick Armey's departure. They lost all credibility when they backed a big spending, big government politicians for President. Besides, they really aren't a party but a small faction within a dying party. Whereas the Libertarian Party Presidential candidate received 1,2000,000 votes and won some state seats. Add that they Liobertarian Party is the fastest growing Political party and it is the future opposition to the Dems because it represents real ideals and not the far-right of the GOP.

Marvin S
12-04-2012, 05:25 PM
Dick Armey's departure.

Dick Armey ??????????????????????????????? This guy has less credibility than Newt !!!!!!!!

Franco
12-04-2012, 05:56 PM
Dick Armey ??????????????????????????????? This guy has less credibility than Newt !!!!!!!!

He was one of the Teas' Intellectual members heading up one of their more popular websites.

The Teas want to cut spending in some areas but Military spending is off limits to them. I think we are all for a strong Defense but our Military spending is out of control. They backed Santorum for President, that told me enough to know that Liberty is an empty slogan for them.

JDogger
12-04-2012, 06:54 PM
not much for you to bitch about then?
or are you afeared of the rope climb to get into Franco's Tree Fort? :cool:

Sure I can bitch, it's what we do here on PP. I voted for GJ not because I live in a tree house with Franco. I disagree with Franco on many of his Libertarian views, I'm probably more of a socialist, (if I dare admit that here.) I voted for GJ because he was an exceptional Republican Governor in a very blue state. His record speaks for itself.
I do not let myself be defined by others, nor the status quo.
JD

road kill
12-04-2012, 07:00 PM
Sure I can bitch, it's what we do here on PP. I voted for GJ not because I live in a tree house with Franco. I disagree with Franco on many of his Libertarian views, I'm probably more of a socialist, (if I dare admit that here.) I voted for GJ because he was an exceptional Republican Governor in a very blue state. His record speaks for itself.
I do not let myself be defined by others, nor the status quo.
JD

FWIW----I have more respect for someone who admits it than someone who bobs and weaves!
I am sure there are reasons that led you there.

coachmo
12-04-2012, 07:13 PM
RK, it's really more of a rope-a-dope style than bobbing and weaving.

JDogger
12-04-2012, 07:27 PM
FWIW----I have more respect for someone who admits it than someone who bobs and weaves!
I am sure there are reasons that led you there.

Of course there are Stan. I respect your not responding with an attack. Maybe some day we'll sit in a gallery together, and we'll talk dogs not politics. JD

2tall
12-04-2012, 08:32 PM
Sure I can bitch, it's what we do here on PP. I voted for GJ not because I live in a tree house with Franco. I disagree with Franco on many of his Libertarian views, I'm probably more of a socialist, (if I dare admit that here.) I voted for GJ because he was an exceptional Republican Governor in a very blue state. His record speaks for itself.
I do not let myself be defined by others, nor the status quo.

JD

Great comment Hugh! And this is why I sometimes "drop out" after getting involved with a thread. I will not allow someone to label or define me or my choices. Thanks!

BonMallari
12-04-2012, 08:40 PM
He was one of the Teas' Intellectual members heading up one of their more popular websites.

The Teas want to cut spending in some areas but Military spending is off limits to them. I think we are all for a strong Defense but our Military spending is out of control. They backed Santorum for President, that told me enough to know that Liberty is an empty slogan for them.

the religious far Right of the TEA Party backed Santorum....in order for the TEA Party to get the power they once had they need to not use SP as their front person and get back to what helped them sweep the House in 2010...they also need to take a look at some of the whack jobs that they allowed to wrap themselves in their banner..i.e. Angle and O'Donnell....even that idiot with the big mouth in Missouri let a slam dunk victory against McCaskill get away

road kill
12-05-2012, 05:20 AM
Of course there are Stan. I respect your not responding with an attack. Maybe some day we'll sit in a gallery together, and we'll talk dogs not politics. JD

Me and Elvis are making plans to be at the fall Grand!!!!!
Our goal is to make it thru 2 days................

caryalsobrook
12-05-2012, 07:20 AM
Sure I can bitch, it's what we do here on PP. I voted for GJ not because I live in a tree house with Franco. I disagree with Franco on many of his Libertarian views, I'm probably more of a socialist, (if I dare admit that here.) I voted for GJ because he was an exceptional Republican Governor in a very blue state. His record speaks for itself.
I do not let myself be defined by others, nor the status quo.
JD
Thanks for one of the most honest posts I have seen on this forum. Having a dedicated liberal(her words not mine) for a sister who I dearly love, I have tried to understand why, given the failure of nearly all socialist countries in raising the overall standard of living for its people, one would advocate such a system.
As for libertian views, don't take Franco or Ron, as the standard for a libertarian. John Stossel and Milton Friedman are much better examples. For me, individual freedom is the most cherished right of all. For time immemorial, minorities have pulled up stakes to achieve it.

I have always said that "show me a problem that the people disire the gov. to solve, and I will show you a problem that the gov. created". I look forward to your future posts hoping that you provide justification for socialist views.

Franco
12-05-2012, 08:03 AM
Thanks for one of the most honest posts I have seen on this forum. Having a dedicated liberal(her words not mine) for a sister who I dearly love, I have tried to understand why, given the failure of nearly all socialist countries in raising the overall standard of living for its people, one would advocate such a system.
As for libertian views, don't take Franco or Ron, as the standard for a libertarian. John Stossel and Milton Friedman are much better examples. For me, individual freedom is the most cherished right of all. For time immemorial, minorities have pulled up stakes to achieve it.

I have always said that "show me a problem that the people disire the gov. to solve, and I will show you a problem that the gov. created". I look forward to your future posts hoping that you provide justification for socialist views.

Ron is the reason for the resurgence of the Libertarian Party! Ron is the reason why today's Libertarian Party is dominated by the under 40 year olds, xRepubs and xDems, white, black, Hispanic, Asian and active Military! Had Ron broken his word and run as a Libertarian instead of Johnson, he would have received 12-15 million votes in the election! Ron is the reason why the Libertarian Party is organizing in all 50 states! Ron has defined the Libertarian Party and that is why they pay so much tribute to the man! You obviously have never read the paltform on issues at lp.org.

I love Stossel, Friedman, Yuron Brooks, Judge Napalitano and have quoted them often on RTF. All but Friedman are RP deciples. Though RP has retired from Congress he is busy speaking for Libertarian candidates all across the country. So, to say you don't care for RP's Libertarian views makes zero sense be cause the man defines Libertarian!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/11/20/the-gops-growing-libertarian-problem/

caryalsobrook
12-05-2012, 08:58 AM
Ron is the reason for the resurgence of the Libertarian Party! Ron is the reason why today's Libertarian Party is dominated by the under 40 year olds, xRepubs and xDems, white, black, Hispanic, Asian and active Military! Had Ron broken his word and run as a Libertarian instead of Johnson, he would have received 12-15 million votes in the election! Ron is the reason why the Libertarian Party is organizing in all 50 states! Ron has defined the Libertarian Party and that is why they pay so much tribute to the man! You obviously have never read the paltform on issues at lp.org.

I love Stossel, Friedman, Yuron Brooks, Judge Napalitano and have quoted them often on RTF. All but Friedman are RP deciples. Though RP has retired from Congress he is busy speaking for Libertarian candidates all across the country. So, to say you don't care for RP's Libertarian views makes zero sense be cause the man defines Libertarian!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/11/20/the-gops-growing-libertarian-problem/
Calm down Franco. I never said that RP or you did not hold many libertarian views. When I said not to hold you or RP as the standard, I meant that both of you hold views that are opposed to libertarian views, more so than Stossel and Friedman. Two examples concerning RP; Advocating the Gold standard, Fact is that Friedman never has argued such a policy. In fact he argued that the FED should grow the money supply at a rate reasonable with a growing economy and avoid using monetary policy in an attempt to affect recessions. His reasoning is that the FED invariably makes either the wrong decision or the right decision at the wrong time. A second example was RP criticizing herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan as being "regressive" because of the consumption tax portion. It would take an idiot for one to believe that an income tax has been a workable tax and is not a total failure. Progressive tax, Flat tax, any name or tweak to it and it still is a failure. How can anyone believe 70,000 pages of tax code with the IRS adding about 200 pages more just to accomodate Obamacare, is not a total failure.

Many times you have advocated more regulation of Wall Street when libertarians would argue less. As milton Friedman said many times, your freedoms go only as far as someone else's nose. Buyer beware. You don't like then stay away from Wall street. You don't like insider trading, then don't do business on Wall Street. Let the market take care of the problem. You cannot protect stupidity with regulation.

Both you and RP have many libetarian views which I respect. I would happily voe for either of you for president before I would even vote for the man that occupies the office as a dog catcher. I have more respect for the dogs. I will quote my favorite line. Gov. is not, has not ever been, nor will ever be in the business of charity. It is in the business of rules, regulation, taxes, dependence and control. Libertarians believe in the vey minimum of all these.

huntinman
12-05-2012, 09:05 AM
Ron is the reason for the resurgence of the Libertarian Party! Ron is the reason why today's Libertarian Party is dominated by the under 40 year olds, xRepubs and xDems, white, black, Hispanic, Asian and active Military! Had Ron broken his word and run as a Libertarian instead of Johnson, he would have received 12-15 million votes in the election! Ron is the reason why the Libertarian Party is organizing in all 50 states! Ron has defined the Libertarian Party and that is why they pay so much tribute to the man! You obviously have never read the paltform on issues at lp.org.

I love Stossel, Friedman, Yuron Brooks, Judge Napalitano and have quoted them often on RTF. All but Friedman are RP deciples. Though RP has retired from Congress he is busy speaking for Libertarian candidates all across the country. So, to say you don't care for RP's Libertarian views makes zero sense be cause the man defines Libertarian!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/11/20/the-gops-growing-libertarian-problem/


HaHaHa!!! Ron Paul is such a Staunch Libertarian that he spent how many years in congress in the libertarian party?

Franco
12-05-2012, 09:34 AM
Calm down Franco. I never said that RP or you did not hold many libertarian views. When I said not to hold you or RP as the standard, I meant that both of you hold views that are opposed to libertarian views, more so than Stossel and Friedman. Two examples concerning RP; Advocating the Gold standard, Fact is that Friedman never has argued such a policy. In fact he argued that the FED should grow the money supply at a rate reasonable with a growing economy and avoid using monetary policy in an attempt to affect recessions. His reasoning is that the FED invariably makes either the wrong decision or the right decision at the wrong time. A second example was RP criticizing herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan as being "regressive" because of the consumption tax portion. It would take an idiot for one to believe that an income tax has been a workable tax and is not a total failure. Progressive tax, Flat tax, any name or tweak to it and it still is a failure. How can anyone believe 70,000 pages of tax code with the IRS adding about 200 pages more just to accomodate Obamacare, is not a total failure.

Many times you have advocated more regulation of Wall Street when libertarians would argue less. As milton Friedman said many times, your freedoms go only as far as someone else's nose. Buyer beware. You don't like then stay away from Wall street. You don't like insider trading, then don't do business on Wall Street. Let the market take care of the problem. You cannot protect stupidity with regulation.

Both you and RP have many libetarian views which I respect. I would happily voe for either of you for president before I would even vote for the man that occupies the office as a dog catcher. I have more respect for the dogs. I will quote my favorite line. Gov. is not, has not ever been, nor will ever be in the business of charity. It is in the business of rules, regulation, taxes, dependence and control. Libertarians believe in the vey minimum of all these.

Well, RP is for zero Personal Federal Income Tax. That if we stuck with The Constituition we wouldn't need to pay for all these crazy programs and expenditures that Congress comes up with in their attemps to buy votes with the tax payers money.

When a system is based on Crony Capitalism then we have to have regulations. However, RP and I are for Free Markets/Trade and real Capitalism and not what we have now where Lobbyist buy support/influence on The Hill in circumventing Free Markets and real Capitalism.

Liberty, Free Markets & Peace regards,

P S

If we still had the Gold Standard, we wouldn't be 16 TRILLION in debt and growing. Congress wouldn't have the power for their wild spending of fiat money.

caryalsobrook
12-05-2012, 10:10 AM
Well, RP is for zero Personal Federal Income Tax. That if we stuck with The Constituition we wouldn't need to pay for all these crazy programs and expenditures that Congress comes up with in their attemps to buy votes with the tax payers money.

When a system is based on Crony Capitalism then we have to have regulations. However, RP and I are for Free Markets/Trade and real Capitalism and not what we have now where Lobbyist buy support/influence on The Hill in circumventing Free Markets and real Capitalism.

Liberty, Free Markets & Peace regards,

P S

If we still had the Gold Standard, we wouldn't be 16 TRILLION in debt and growing. Congress wouldn't have the power for their wild spending of fiat money.
Franco, rules and regulations CREATED Crony Capitalism. Making more rules and regulation only begets MORE CRONY CAPITALISM!!!!! That, I think you fail to see. On this issue, you fall into the same catagory as the liberal, created by the gov. with a solution by the gov. for the problem that they created. Bad logic and definitely not libertarian.

As for the Gold Standard, why do you think that it would limit deficit spending? Have you consideered that the gov. would just raise the price of gold and still print more money?? Furthermore, when we had the gold standard, US citizens were not allowed to own gold except for jewelry ect. Only the gov. was allowed to own gold. You call that a libertarian view.
Even Buzz sort agreed with a consupmtion tax as opposed to an income tax, probably because he recognizes that the income tax is a totally failed system.

Franco
12-05-2012, 10:55 AM
Franco, rules and regulations CREATED Crony Capitalism. Making more rules and regulation only begets MORE CRONY CAPITALISM!!!!! That, I think you fail to see. On this issue, you fall into the same catagory as the liberal, created by the gov. with a solution by the gov. for the problem that they created. Bad logic and definitely not libertarian.

As for the Gold Standard, why do you think that it would limit deficit spending? Have you consideered that the gov. would just raise the price of gold and still print more money?? Furthermore, when we had the gold standard, US citizens were not allowed to own gold except for jewelry ect. Only the gov. was allowed to own gold. You call that a libertarian view.
Even Buzz sort agreed with a consupmtion tax as opposed to an income tax, probably because he recognizes that the income tax is a totally failed system.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? ;-) How about we try Capitalism since we have never had it.

As I wrote earlier either on this thread or the one on the Fiscal Cliff, we need a Balanced Budget Amendment. That with the Gold Standard would be fiscal sanity because then our money would mean something. The big problem now is that the Fed Reserve is trying to determine the value of the dollar. Which it shouldn't.

I am all for individuals owning gold, never said otherwise. Price of gold is determined globally and not by Congress. Yes, a consumption tax would be better than what we currently have yet, no Personal Federal Taxes or at least rates below 5% would be more inline with the ideals this country was founded on.

road kill
12-05-2012, 11:19 AM
Which came first, the chicken or the egg? ;-) How about we try Capitalism since we have never had it.

As I wrote earlier either on this thread or the one on the Fiscal Cliff, we need a Balanced Budget Amendment. That with the Gold Standard would be fiscal sanity because then our money would mean something. The big problem now is that the Fed Reserve is trying to determine the value of the dollar. Which it shouldn't.

I am all for individuals owning gold, never said otherwise. Price of gold is determined globally and not by Congress. Yes, a consumption tax would be better than what we currently have yet, no Personal Federal Taxes or at least rates below 5% would be more inline with the ideals this country was founded on.
Franco, with all due respect, what you fail to understand along with a myriad of others, except the "incremental secular progressives," is that the war is won over time in "increments.":cool:

The progressives understand that and eventually they will win.
There is no way or no one that can step in and make the sweeping changes so many cry for.
Not gonna happen.
We had a chance to take an incremental step back in the right direction.

People on the nipple, taking hand outs they truly don't need are now addicted.

You know, "c'mon Franco, it's just food stamps, it's OK, everybody is doing it!!"

Now your hooked.
To get off this addiction, the addicted have to hit rock bottom.
I thought we were there, but evidently this is gonna get worse before we can address it.
You know, Rock Bottom!

If that ever happens.
People seem all to quick to give away their dignity, independence and freedoms today.

And they rationalize it by someone elses bad behavior!!

Later dude.........