View Full Version : Economic long-term differences between R’s and D’s
As it stands now -- not much. And I mean differences between R’s and D’s – not conservatives. The problem in my opinion is only about 20% of R’s in office actually believe in (limited government, protecting American personal Liberties, and Constitution above other ruling international elites.) I think at least 80% would instantly go back to destroying the economy through over-spending if given power this second.
Well, maybe there are some differences:
1. Under D's we will have gay marriage and complete poverty and worthless money within 4 years.
2. Under R's we will have slightly better weapon systems and complete poverty and worthless money within 6 years.
So what real difference is there – the timing in which we ALL eventually arrive and jump off the economic cliff? Until there is a polar opposite distinction between the two systems, they both represent collectivist suicide (in my opinion.)
I don’t know what litmus test to use, to really gage what R’s will standup for in a crisis – except what they did in the past. Do they really believe in limited government powers and the Constitution? Or are they fighting hard for lost power? Yup, pretty much. I think 80% are not grounded in anything but acquisition of raw power, stolen from us. When the dollar bubble pops – and it will. Will the R’s go along with what the D’s will do (to make the situation worse) I am assuming that the D group will insist the solution will include two things:
1. Government is the only thing big enough to fix the crisis, and we need to grant more power to Big Brother (but don’t worry it will “only be temporary,” they will lie.)
2. And that capitalism itself has failed us – and we need to “fundamentally transform” our country into something our parents would have seen correctly as an oligarchy, or Communist-like.
Any Dems here like to go on record, and say that these two solutions will not be central to the grand solution?
peacepipe
12-15-2009, 05:06 PM
R’s and D’s – not conservatives
This statement is BS, The R's & conservatives are one & the same. Your conservative wonder boy GWB just screrwed it up so badly that you can't win saying that you are a rep. You say conservative as if it is some seperate party/faction when conservatives are to the republican base as liberals are to the Dems.
This statement is BS, The R's & conservatives are one & the same. Your conservative wonder boy GWB just screrwed it up so badly that you can't win saying that you are a rep. You say conservative as if it is some seperate party/faction when conservatives are to the republican base as liberals are to the Dems.
I don’t think that polls or common sense would support your assertion -- if you want to have an honest conversation about it, we can.
Is George Bush popular among Conservatives? Yes, more than those who define themselves as D's -- but R's like D's are about getting and keeping power -- most average folks are about principles. Thinking in terms of R’s and D’s above principles is the fastest way for its citizenry to get tyranny. Washington warned us against it.
How many folks think of themselves as R's right now? What is it-- something like 20% Why is there so much talk about a third party in the mold of a Ron Paul like person (again rooted in ideas before party affiliation.)
How many see themselves as conservative? I believe, the last poll put this group above both the D's, R's and I's.
I agree for some it is one in the same -- but Bush (and those like him) caused a large swath of folks to drop the R label, with the hopes they would listen, and until folks stop prostituting values, we will continue to loose our nation, AND THE NEED FOR THOSE IN POWER TO EVER LISTEN. If they know they “have us” and our vote, we will increasingly be taken for granted, and they will do what they want – and will continue the shift of power away from Congress and the states, to unelected, unaccountable groups. The goal for both parties is to make our ability to control them as limited as possible --
peacepipe
12-15-2009, 06:31 PM
The problem with government is the influence corporations have over it. We've had a semi-fascist Government probably for the last 30-40 yrs if not longer hidden under the guise of "free market capitolism". Take away there influence & you'll probably start seeing our gov. work the way it's suppose to.
I don't believe Ron Paul is the answer, he's a purists when it comes to conservatives. His belief that being a part of the U.N. undermines our soveirgnty is bit extreme. Although his belief in not meddling in foreign affairs... ie. Iraq, I can totally agree with. His push to dismantle the federal reserve is admirable but too far fetched. If he had pushed to say heavily regulate/audit it, I would support it.
The problem with government is the influence corporations have over it. We've had a semi-fascist Government probably for the last 30-40 yrs if not longer hidden under the guise of "free market capitolism". Take away there influence & you'll probably start seeing our gov. work the way it's suppose to.
I don't believe Ron Paul is the answer, he's a purists when it comes to conservatives. His belief that being a part of the U.N. undermines our soveirgnty is bit extreme. Although his belief in not meddling in foreign affairs... ie. Iraq, I can totally agree with. His push to dismantle the federal reserve is admirable but too far fetched. If he had pushed to say heavily regulate/audit it, I would support it.
I wonder about the influence of business over government -- as that assumes they are not one in the same...but agreed about the general concern there. I for one dont have a problem with some influence, but as they have merged they now seem to work against the average guy.
Not sure how to deal with it, without again using government in ways the Founders and the founding documents may have had issue with...
Regarding Ron Paul -- his ideas are sexy, but he is not -- and sadly that is just one reason why he is not “the guy” to lead the new movement. When fighting against tyranny one needs brains and beauty ... and integrity -- so far, I haven’t seen these three things fashioned into a politician. Oh, and one other qualification: (one who actually loves the Constitution and its “negative Liberties”)
peacepipe
12-15-2009, 11:20 PM
I wonder about the influence of business over government -- as that assumes they are not one in the same...but agreed about the general concern there. I for one dont have a problem with some influence, but as they have merged they now seem to work against the average guy.
Not sure how to deal with it, without again using government in ways the Founders and the founding documents may have had issue with...
Regarding Ron Paul -- his ideas are sexy, but he is not -- and sadly that is just one reason why he is not “the guy” to lead the new movement. When fighting against tyranny one needs brains and beauty ... and integrity -- so far, I haven’t seen these three things fashioned into a politician. Oh, and one other qualification: (one who actually loves the Constitution and its “negative Liberties”)
They merged quite some time ago,probably before I was born,but came to be more pronounced and out in the open the last 8 yrs,when oil companies were writing our countrys' energy policies. It's alright for there ideas to be heard, it's another thing when they're dictating it. for one example.
They merged quite some time ago,probably before I was born,but came to be more pronounced and out in the open the last 8 yrs,when oil companies were writing our countrys' energy policies. It's alright for there ideas to be heard, it's another thing when they're dictating it. for one example.
Cant say I disagree -- I think we are seeing the smae thing now though ... and some companies are "Fat Cats" while others who do the same types of things like folks from Goldman Sacs are brought into this admin, or are ignored if they shut up about healthcare for example.
Good god I almost have to give Bob props for this post. Even though I may not agree with all of it the basic idea makes sense. Did hell freeze over??
Good god I almost have to give Bob props for this post. Even though I may not agree with all of it the basic idea makes sense. Did hell freeze over??
No, everyone knows Neptunes Bones are about to melt...but seriously.
Maybe the great percentage of Americans -- R's and D's actually believe in ideas above party, while those in power, rarely do, and stay in power (and retain other benefits) from convincing Americans that the R's are evil, or the D's are evil, when the division is not irreconcilable or substantive, but needed and fostered in order to keep the masses:
1. Distracted, swatting at the gnat issues
2. Pissed off at each other, while they rape us of Liberty and our money (metaphorically speaking of course.)
3. Unaware until it is too late that government (for decades) has been doing what it can to eventually make it impossible for average folks to ever take back our inalienable rights.
The further the super-rich and powerful can kick important decision making up the ladder from local - to state - to federal - to international levels, the less it will matter if the left protests a war, or the right protests a tax – they wont care, because we at some point will have no leverage, and cant take their job or power away, we can only vote for figure heads. This transformation is not done, but every year we I think are loosing ground.