| ||||||
| Branches of Government Debate topics of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of Government. |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
07-18-2008, 03:29 PM
| #71 (permalink) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Congressional Representative   Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: California Dreamin Posts: 3,389
 |  All you need to do is pledge unswerving allegiance to George W. Bush and back up every single policy decision made by any conservative action, and word and berate, smear, and vilify every single person who may be on your notorious shit list. The rage-based reverence for The President as Commander-in-Chief and republican party, and the creepy, blind faith vested in it's goodness -- is not a movement I recognize as being political, conservative or even American. http://www.defendingthetruth.com/cri...an-people.html (Dear American People,) Live the Light, Give the Light, Bring Heaven to Earth Every Day! I am not a human being having a spiritual experience, I am a spiritual being having a human experience. The ancient Greeks used to say, "You shall know a man by the friends that he keeps." Given the nature of their friends and advisers, what are we to conclude about the Republican party: Stop the madness before us it stops! Σταματήστε την τρέλα προτού να μας σταματήσεϊ Greek Last edited by intangible child; 07-18-2008 at 03:32 PM. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Sponsored Links |
|
07-19-2008, 06:14 AM
| #72 (permalink) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Community Leader   Join Date: May 2008 Location: Near the beach Gender:  Posts: 789 Country: 
| Let's debate the topic We are not talking about political parties on this thread but ideologies of liberal and conservative. The Bush administration was and is not a conservative administration. The Clinton administration was not a liberal administration but more of a centrist administration. Conservatives do not desire power as described in post #1. The only power true conservatives desire is the power to reduce the size of government and taxes. Liberals on the other hand, do desire power... the power to change the way American government functions to place government as an indispensable entity to allow citizens to function. Liberals desire to increase the size of government and increase the power the government has over the citizens. We cannot agree, liberals see the government the only hope for the little guy, they find themselves in the emotion police arena... The saving warrior of the downtrodden... Robin Hood for a country without a wicked king... conservatives see government as the only obstacle for the little guy. So let's say the conservative government idea prevailed at the federal level. The power of the president, senators and House representatives would be diminished. The power of State Government would be increased because those who follow emotion (liberals) would insist that emotional programs be established at state level. God, the state would have to administer schools and social programs all by their lonesome without the federal government's help. Imagine that? If state governments competed between conservative v. liberal with the federal government simply managing, let me repeat managing the minimal agencies the US constitution calls for then the states would have better control over social programs and be better able to manage those programs. States that vote conservative would pay less tax and have less social programs and states that vote liberal would have the opposite. The tax payers would decide how high their taxes would be and would regulate their positions based on emotions and their wallet. The social programs would be owned by the state so if you see fraud you know you fund it directly and would demand what, MANAGMENT! If state officials didn't manage well then you could reach out and touch them quickly. So which ideology desires power, is it liberal or conservative? LIBERALISM - Emotional thinking fueled by ignorance | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
07-19-2008, 01:43 PM
| #73 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Congressional Representative Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: California Dreamin Posts: 3,389
| Quote:
Trying to control woman's reproductive rights, stopping any social programs to help the children they try to, push women to have, so the children starve in the street or they can enlist in the military and be war fodder for deceptive enemies that are made up in the minds of conservative. Wasting our tax dollars as to destroy Our Great country, blowing up Iraq so WE the People can pay to rebuild it!. National Priorities Project | Bringing the Federal Budget Home U.S. National Debt Clock Nixon: The Watergate Story (washingtonpost.com) Reagan: </title> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000" link="#0000ff" alink="#800080" vlink="#ff0000"><script type="text/javascript" src="http://hb.lycos.com/hb.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://ratings.lycos.com/ratings/lycos And now the Bush mess we are in!   Clinton was no good either, that's why Hilary didn't stand a chance, and Mc Cain is a war monger and doesn't stand a chance either!! WE The People want change! Many people believe that David Koresh (or the Branch Davidians) were responsible for the deaths of the 74 men, women and children who died in the inferno at Waco on April 19, 1993. This is the story that the FBI put out. It is a lie. The guns they had were legal. The local sheriff investigated and found no basis for complaints against them. These were law-abiding American citizens, even if they thought differently to most other folks. They trusted the U.S. Constitution to ensure their political rights, but they were murdered by agents acting under the authority of the U.S. government. Waco occurred under the presidency of Bill Clinton, with Janet Reno and Wesley Clark in supporting roles. Already back in 1993 the US government demonstrated its contempt for the American people by carrying out a massacre in order to "demonstrate" (on prime time TV) its supposed "authority" (a tactic favored by fascist governments). Following the usurpation of the presidency in 2000 by the psychopath George W. Bush, and the subsequent installation of the insane John Ashcroft as Bush's Himmler, things became much worse. On 9/11 about forty times as many people were murdered as at Waco. In both cases the murderers have so far gone unpunished. The Waco Massacre Live the Light, Give the Light, Bring Heaven to Earth Every Day! I am not a human being having a spiritual experience, I am a spiritual being having a human experience. The ancient Greeks used to say, "You shall know a man by the friends that he keeps." Given the nature of their friends and advisers, what are we to conclude about the Republican party: Stop the madness before us it stops! Σταματήστε την τρέλα προτού να μας σταματήσεϊ Greek | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
07-19-2008, 02:31 PM
| #74 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Community Leader Join Date: May 2008 Location: Near the beach Gender: Posts: 789 Country:
| Quote:
I think the federal government should be very small and not have a compassion branch, period. There is nothing in the US Constitution that indicates the government will have compassion for citizens of the many states. The federal government should limit itself to its original concepts as established in the US Constitution. The three branches should limit themselves to their purpose described in the constitution. Judges should not make law or decide law in a manner that creates a change to the constitution. In the case of SCOUS rulings that change controversial rational thought within the population the congress with the consent of the executive should pass LAW. It should be congress passing laws regarding women's/fetus rights and not the court. It should be congress passing laws of POW's rights and not the SCOUS. In the case of war it should be congress that declares war. War is neither liberal or conservative since it requires a majority of congress to approve. Congress agrees with or opposes treaties and treaties are the highest law of the land. The power of the State should be strong and the power of the Federal limited. Congress proves more and more each year they are incapable of managing the agencies they are responsible for described in the constitution AND, especially the agencies they dreamed up under the Social Security Act and Interstate Commerce clause. The federal government is dysfunctional, unable to manage their responsibilities. Either the federal legislation (congress) need to expand or the government agencies need to shrink because none are properly managed. They insist on working on the farmer/legislator schedule established when the country was agriculture based... they work few days a year managing trillions of dollars as if it were a part time job and some always find reason to expand "responsibilities" even more knowing they can't manage what they have on their plates already. You seem to look towards the federal government to correct compassion issues, why do you insist it is a federal issue? Why not a state issue? If people are hungry or in need of health care why isn't it a community, church and state issue? How do you conclude the federal government is better qualified to manage any such issue? Can you show one thing that the federal government does efficiently or correctly? Why not work on social issues as close to the family or problem as possible at state level? So let's talk about conservative and liberal approaches to the specific issues you or other liberals find important. The conservative point is to do it with less... the liberal point is to do it with more... both see a problem but approach it differently. My entire point about this thread is that the foundation of the liberal argument is that conservatives want power and I repeat once again it is liberals that want power. Conservatives want less government, less government involvement in citizens life. If someone is hungry or sick the issue should be addressed as close to home as possible... home, church and community. The state is often considered a very large community but to include the federal government as a solution for a home, church and community problem is insanity. They can't manage anything well so why throw away good money after bad? LIBERALISM - Emotional thinking fueled by ignorance | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
07-19-2008, 03:29 PM
| #75 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Congressional Representative Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: California Dreamin Posts: 3,389
| Quote:
That is the differences between liberals and conservatives. Liberals can think for themselves, Conservatives need someone to tell them what, when and how to think. News Hounds: O'Reilly Factor right-wing love-fest Live the Light, Give the Light, Bring Heaven to Earth Every Day! I am not a human being having a spiritual experience, I am a spiritual being having a human experience. The ancient Greeks used to say, "You shall know a man by the friends that he keeps." Given the nature of their friends and advisers, what are we to conclude about the Republican party: Stop the madness before us it stops! Σταματήστε την τρέλα προτού να μας σταματήσεϊ Greek | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
07-19-2008, 05:38 PM
| #76 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Community Leader Join Date: May 2008 Location: Near the beach Gender: Posts: 789 Country:
| Quote:
Liberals can think for themselves (guess that makes them born smart... no need for information, it's already there implanted in the brain). Conservatives must be spoon fed propaganda... Don't you think that analogy is just a little like saying all tall people are smart and all short people are dumb? Facts are there are liberal Republicans and there are conservative Democrats, I know that is a shock but it's true. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is a "liberal Democrat" but her liberal energy bill was shot down this last Thursday by "conservative Democrats and conservative Republicans"... if you go look at the vote record some "liberal Republicans" voted with Pelosi and a significant number of "conservative Democrats" voted with "conservative Republicans." Do a little Googling... try ... conservative Democrat ... try liberal Republican ... try ... Blue Dog Democrats ... try ... yellow Dog Democrats ... This thread is discussing liberal v. conservative and not Republican v. Democratic. The Democratic Party cheered that during the recent special elections three Democrats won out in Republican districts, but they don't point out that the Democrats that won out in those typically Republican districts were beat by "more conservative" Democrats... these are some of the conservative Democrats that shut down Nancy last Thursday. In 2005 conservatives made up about 36% and liberals made up 30% of the US population. The rest are somewhere in between, but due to the Republican (not conservatives) administration the nation middle is swinging towards the liberal stance. This is because of several factors but has little to do with their core values. My half brother and his wife are life long Democrats but they are not liberals, they are union members and also support many of the "little guy" agenda of the Party. They are very hard core pro life Southern Baptist religious and have a gay son, my cuz. In the Philly Five Gay Pride arrests of Southern Baptist they rooted for both sides because they are torn between the issues. Most Democrats and most Republicans cannot be wadded into two balls, so please try to be more logical in responding to the differences. LIBERALISM - Emotional thinking fueled by ignorance | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
07-19-2008, 05:43 PM
| #77 (permalink) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Congressional Representative Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: California Dreamin Posts: 3,389
| Under Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II the size of government has grown astronomically. Only under the Clinton Administration did the actual size of government decrease slightly. But the 'size' of government is only part of the story. The 'privatization' of the government is the real story. The excesses and overcharges in Iraq are well documented, particularly with regard to Halliburton's KBR subsidiary 'supplying' our troops or putting out oil well fires. Then there's the Custer Battles fiasco. All I know is that billions of dollars are missing. That's all I need to know to know that in many cases privatization of government is a farce. Privatization of government means that my tax dollars aren't just providing necessary governmental services. My tax dollars are also providing gads and gads of profit for the right-wing companies which secure these (sometimes no-bid) contracts with the government. Why? 'Cuz that's the American way! That's "Free Enterprise"! Live the Light, Give the Light, Bring Heaven to Earth Every Day! I am not a human being having a spiritual experience, I am a spiritual being having a human experience. The ancient Greeks used to say, "You shall know a man by the friends that he keeps." Given the nature of their friends and advisers, what are we to conclude about the Republican party: Stop the madness before us it stops! Σταματήστε την τρέλα προτού να μας σταματήσεϊ Greek | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
07-19-2008, 06:27 PM
| #78 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Community Leader Join Date: May 2008 Location: Near the beach Gender: Posts: 789 Country:
| Quote:
I think the current Bush administration is the least conservative administration ever. There were many good aspects of the Bush 1 and Regan administration including welfare reform... well some of it happened during the Clinton administration with a congressional Republican majority. The battle of Republicans outsourcing government work to private companies is a liberal - conservative battle. Here are the battle lines: Democratic Party is strongly supported by unions so the Democratic Party introduced unions into state and federal government civilian work forces. This federal civil union requirement increased the cost of government services by about 20% because the government pays for all the union supervision and litigation/mitigation. This pisses off conservatives that insist that government workers do not need unions but admit that once installed are nearly impossible to remove. The only alternative is to outsource when new requirements come around or otherwise increase the union force even more adding more expense and less flexibility. The Air Traffic Controllers and those folks that check the people going on flights are examples of some outsourcing. When I retired I worked as a training specialist fielding an army computer system world wide... the army civilian service section had a dozen folks (union members) and our company had about 250 people. The army civil service force were about as valuable as tits on a boar hog... computers were changing by the day and they moved by the year... we were forced to field an out of date system that was over priced because the civilian force couldn't keep up with technological changes. If the civil service section would have to be increased to do what we did it would take two or two and a half more people and most of them would be paid twice as much and would have pensions and so on quadrupling the cost to the taxpayer. In Iraq there are no bid contracts but if there were open bid contracts they would still go to only the very largest companies that would also be affiliated with the Republican Party. The contracts are necessary because the resource doesn't exist in the modern military or Department of State. The contracts that cost so much are the security forces for the State Department that the left like to call mercenaries. These forces are necessary because to fill the requirements for State Department security would draw from the existing combat brigades and special operations units. The shortage of these specialities are directly related to military downsizing following the end of the cold war. Yet, the These folks make a lot of money but the risk is high, they are former Navy Seals, Special Forces and USMC combat specialists. They are also in demand across the Mid East doing security for Saudi Arabia and so on. My former neighbor was a SF A Team leader and he had a former team member in Saudi Arabia working for one of the Saudi Princes'. Any large government function has tons of fraud form Medicare to civilian contracts... they are just to damned big to properly manage. What would you propose? The alternative is to have a very large standing army or army reserve to do such functions. Fuel handling for example to meet the daily needs could be replaced by an army unit. Food procurement and distribution to combat units could be done by an army unit but it would have to be maintained throughout decades of peacetime to function properly. What are the alternatives to what is used now regardless if a conservative or liberal administration is in power? The State Dept. needs security, do you initiate a draft so large standing forces can fill in or hire temps? LIBERALISM - Emotional thinking fueled by ignorance | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
07-19-2008, 06:30 PM
| #79 (permalink) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Congressional Representative Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: California Dreamin Posts: 3,389
| Drill, drill, drill -- that's the new Republican mantra. I've heard everything from it will reduce gasoline prices to $1.50 per gallon to the idea that it would solve Social Security insolvency, to the idea that it would end the Iraq War and everything in between. What a bunch of nonsense. The only reason the GOP is pushing the "drill" word is that they are attempting to divert attention from the real reason for our high fuel prices: This do-nothing administration and its coddling of the energy speculators. Right now the oil companies have almost 10,000 leases that they are not drilling on. This is over 30 million acres of public land -- our land. The refineries are running well below capacity. Why are they not drilling and refining? Could it be that they want to make sure that supplies stay artificially low to keep prices up? Remember President George W. Bush's buddies at Enron? It is a fact that if fuel prices were determined by demand rather than Republican speculators, the prices would be $2 per gallon, not $4. Even if we would drill offshore, possibly ruining the tourist industry in Chincoteague, Virginia Beach and Ocean City, Md., it would be 10 years before any of this oil would reach the market. Does anyone think it would really reduce the price of gasoline at that time, let alone now? Barack Obama has indicated that he would reign in the speculators. This would give immediate relief to consumers. John McCain and Thelma Drake want to drill offshore. Who do you want as president and representative? By the way, where is all that Iraq oil we were promised? Live the Light, Give the Light, Bring Heaven to Earth Every Day! I am not a human being having a spiritual experience, I am a spiritual being having a human experience. The ancient Greeks used to say, "You shall know a man by the friends that he keeps." Given the nature of their friends and advisers, what are we to conclude about the Republican party: Stop the madness before us it stops! Σταματήστε την τρέλα προτού να μας σταματήσεϊ Greek | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
07-20-2008, 06:47 AM
| #80 (permalink) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Community Leader Join Date: May 2008 Location: Near the beach Gender: Posts: 789 Country:
| Quote:
Conservative energy position:Peak oil is almost here, low supply of oil with increased foreign demand from developing nations will destroy the American economy. America must explore for all sources of domestic energy to include nuclear, we must at the same time rapidly develop sustainable alternatives to oil... The American economy cannot depend on hostile foreign oil supply and must move to domestic resources as quickly as possible. Democratic energy position:We must move away from oil with clean alternative energy. We will only accept clean-green alternative energy as the proper path because everything else harms the environment. Let's debate "Power" and who is seeking Power, the liberals or the conservatives. LIBERALISM - Emotional thinking fueled by ignorance | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| Bookmarks |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:22 PM.
