It was asked of me what about the Republican party is liberal or socialistic. Since you're thread was readily available I used it. I've no intention of labeling anyone but what you're advocating isn't conservative for the most part IMO only. My only interest was to show the difference between conservatism and the Republican party.[/B]
Education is still left up to the states. Federal funding in 2006 was $ 37.6B for K-12 education. Only about 8.3 % of overall funding. I stated the CONCEPT of No Child Left Behind is a good one. What's wrong with increasing student/school performance and holding schools accountable?
The execution and implementation hasn't been the best, but again the execution is left to each state. If a state doesn't want funds they don't have to participate. If you've got a problem with this "socialist" program on principle, take it up with the state legislature in VA and tell them to refuse the funds.
I know $37.6B isn't a lot for some people but it is to me. I've read the test that were given to high schoolers before the Federal government usurped the State's power. Most of the people (including myself) would have a hard time with them. What is socialist or progressive about the Department of education is its consolidation of power from the people. It has only grown and will only grow more so. You know as well as I do that if a state chooses to withdraw or not comply with a federal program then the Fed withholds funding. Just look at the alcohol age limit laws.
The Declaration of Independence states, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Without going too far down the whole abortion debate rathole, Partial Birth Abortion denies life. Since Roe v. Wade is currently "settled law" and the abortion genie isn't going back into the bottle at least scaling back on the most despicable of abortion practices is a good thing. But I do agree that abortion should be a matter left to the states in most cases. In this case the Bush Admin did "grab some" and pushed this law through.
Another stretch of the Constituition. Do you honestly believe that the Founding Fathers were thinking about abortions? Executives should be enforcing law, not making it. That's Congress' job.
There is no right other than Congress has the right to approve the President's budget and appropriate funds. However without risking U.S. military lives in combat it's estimated that this program saved over 1 million lives at a cost to the U.S. taxpayer of about $5B per year. Sometimes pure political philosphy is outweighed by the real cost of human lives, be they U.S. or not. We can't save the world, but if we can make this type of impact with a relatively small investment it's a cost/benefit that I'm sure the folks who are alive now appreciate. I'm pretty sure this blip in the federal budget most folks don't have a problem with.
What does this have to do with me paying for Africans with AIDs? You're putting your morals on me. What you're saying is this: it's alright to take money from me without my permission, send it to people in Africa with AIDS, and then tell me it's alright, because it is a small investment that will save money in the long run.
Let's define the alliance that kept Western Europe free from the USSR for four decades and protects against threats today by a two month incident. Of course there's no U.S. interest to democracies in Europe.
What threats do the Europeans keep us from? In case you haven't noticed they can't even put out all of the cars that the Muslims lit up. The last time I was in London it was like being in Tehran. Europeans are too busy becoming extinct to protect themselves or anyone else. Do you honestly believe that the French, Germans, or Italians would've gone to war with the Soviets? American nuclear arms kept Europe safe not some BS one sided alliance. They sure have helped us in Afghanistan huh?
Neither was on the SC for Kelo-New London. I'm not sure about the other cases you refer to, but I would be surprised if either voted for eminent domain to be used to increase a tax base.
From what I can remember the Supreme Court said that emminent domain allowed the city of Oakland to tear down "blighted" areas so that the city could bring in business. In other words, the ghetto doesn't bring in enough tax revenue.
keep in mind 9/11 happened in 2001, less than 1 year after Bush took office. Hard to undo years of institutional issues in less than a year. Although without 9/11 I doubt Bush would've tackled this. However, he did remove barriers between various intel agencies which is a good thing. To go farther to increase performance and efficiencies would be better but to use this to justify that Republicans are socialists is a real reach...even for you. Sometimes you don't read. If you know anything about Homeland Security there's a consolidation of about 13 agencies under the umbrella of DHS. What I said was these agencies should've been consolidated to reduce costs....but I guess you missed that part.
Sometimes I don't have the time or inclination to go through every thread you've posted. I'm sure you don't look over all of mine. Trimming fat from the government is conservative but adding another layer of beauracracy to do it isn't. If they want to consolidate why not put it all into the CIA? There would be only one agency to hold accountable then.
This is something my kid would say. I guess it makes sense to murder 32M people, a vast majority who had absolutely nothing to do with terrorists or 9/11. I'm sure there would've been no additional attacks then. What part of "long-term strategy not-so-much" did you not get. I'm a fan of the Lemay Doctrine.
I'm not familiar with the Lemay Doctrine. I'm more of a Sun Tzu kind of guy. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Curtis Lemay personally lead firebombing missions and advocate nuclear war with Japan? Didn't he predict we would lose in Vietnam because we weren't willing to do what it took to win, just like now? I'm sure not every Japanese raped Nanking and not every German gassed Slavs, but war is war. A long protracted war is the ruin of a nation.
We all know the President only has so much control over the economy, but the steps he did take were the correct ones IMO.
Your opinion.
Again you have your wires crossed. The Bush Economic Stimulus Act was "mostly tax rebates".
Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'm sorry, I thought he went on the television and said he was bailing out Wall Street? I guess I was hearing things? You heard tax cut and I heard bailout. In other words, certain institutions were too big to fail. That's what I heard.
When the corporations do what their told by the government it's called Gov't oversight or regulation. When government becomes part or takes over the corporation it's socialism
Hmmm, GE, General Motors, Bank Of America, Fannie Mae . . . . .
It was left up to the American people and they overwhelmingly let their representatives know they approved of this legislation or there would've been more debate over it. I don't really care what point of view it's from, I'm just glad I don't get those damn calls anymore and it's a minimal cost to the U.S. taxpayer.
You're arguing for the outcome. I argue about the principle
Since we're labeling, isolationists and anarchists mind their own business too.
08-28-2009, 11:47 AM
Threaded Mode