By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Do You Think Obama is a Socialist... Do You Care?

akuma587 on 10 August 2009
Kasz216 said:
akuma587 said:

Everyone is a fiscal conservative until they actually have to give up something.  Hell, the Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R), has gotten a crazy amount of pork barrel spending for his state.  This is why I find very few people out there to be credible when they say they are fiscally conservative.  That and when they ignore the fact that tax cuts have lead to large deficits just like spending.  George W. Bush was in the red every year he was in office even when the economy was doing well.  Same for Reagan.

George Bush Sr. was the only recent Republican President one who I can legitimately call a fiscal conservative.  And his party hated him for it cause he raised taxes.  Many people who claim to be fiscally conservative are more anti-tax than pro-fiscal responsibility.  Where was all the fiscal restraint when Republicans were in office?  I mean at least the Democrats are honest about what they are doing.

I agree about that mostly.  Although there are fiscally conservative republicans and democrats out there.  They just get demonized by the press and their parties.  For example all the shit the Blue Dog Democrats got during this healthcare bill because there are no price controls, it's ridiculiously expensive, and the estimates of it's expense are well... underestimated even with the ridiculious numbers.

Or the Republicans who've called for pullout and tried to pass balanced budget ammendments.

I agree, it is complete bullshit.  The public has been pissing and moaning about Congress not being fiscally responsible.  Now when they (i.e. the Blue Dogs, Dems, and Republicans) start coming up with legitimate ways to reduce the long term yearly budget by controlling the growth of Medicare costs, people freak out.

The epitome of this hypocrisy is people telling Congress to "keep the goverment's hands off Medicare" even though the goverment runs Medicare.  People have no idea what they want, and then when they get it, they are unhappy.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
akuma587 on 10 August 2009
HappySqurriel said:

There is more to fiscal conservatism than simply not running a deficit, although that is one of the primary elements of fiscal conservatism ...

Another major element of being a fiscal conservative is the belief that the government should only be involved in things that they can deliver more efficiently than the private sector; or areas where the private sector has little or no interest in delivering a product.

 

Yeah...but isn't the not running a deficit thing the important part of fiscal conservatism?



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Sqrl on 10 August 2009
akuma587 said:

Seriously.  We earn every single bad thing that is said about us in this country.

To say we have made mistakes is one thing - but to go beyond that and actually assert that we have earned the demonization that is spewed is quite another. 

I will say that it is very "progressive" of you to be open about your disdain for the country.
To Each Man, Responsibility
Sqrl on 10 August 2009
akuma587 said:
Kasz216 said:

A lot could be cut in the defense budget.  It's just the stuff people never talk about.

 

Like the new Presidential choppers.... that the president doesn't want.  The new airplane engines  Piterus doesn't want.

 

Etc.  People keep getting shit they don't even want because Senators are looking for pork barrel jobs for their states.

 

I once saw  C-span where a senator tried to convince an unbudging VA director that he needed more money for the VA. 

Everyone is a fiscal conservative until they actually have to give up something.  Hell, the Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R), has gotten a crazy amount of pork barrel spending for his state.  This is why I find very few people out there to be credible when they say they are fiscally conservative.  That and when they ignore the fact that tax cuts have lead to large deficits just like spending.  George W. Bush was in the red every year he was in office even when the economy was doing well.  Same for Reagan.

George Bush Sr. was the only recent Republican President one who I can legitimately call a fiscal conservative.  And his party hated him for it cause he raised taxes.  Many people who claim to be fiscally conservative are more anti-tax than pro-fiscal responsibility.  Where was all the fiscal restraint when Republicans were in office?  I mean at least the Democrats are honest about what they are doing.

I do not think anyone is debating that there is a lack of political will to adhere to the fiscal conservatism that is desperately needed at the moment.  Republicans are absolutely guilty of failing to live up to those principles - but their failure to live up to those principles is not an indictment of them. 

What you say here I do not think anyone disagrees with in principle.  But if the Republicans were fiscally behaving like Democrats who are "honest" about their spending intentions why is Obama going to be any different?  He recently re-affirmed his "no new taxes" pledge and his spending is far beyond what Bush did.

So we should be able to agree that Obama and his currently stated policies are disastrous, right?

 

akuma587 said:

I agree, it is complete bullshit.  The public has been pissing and moaning about Congress not being fiscally responsible.  Now when they (i.e. the Blue Dogs, Dems, and Republicans) start coming up with legitimate ways to reduce the long term yearly budget by controlling the growth of Medicare costs, people freak out.

The epitome of this hypocrisy is people telling Congress to "keep the goverment's hands off Medicare" even though the goverment runs Medicare.  People have no idea what they want, and then when they get it, they are unhappy.

People are mostly freaking out about the prospect of government run healthcare - which is the end goal for Obama and Pelosi, I do not think anyone even doubts that do they?  I can't really be sure what you think though since you decided to ignore my attempt to clarify and understand your position.

As for those freaking out about changes to medicare:  First do we actually know if these people are objecting on the grounds of fiscal conservatism or simply that they only trust the government to screw it up?  Second, it is pretty disengenous to say the healthcare bill is just some reductions in medicare - the overall bill has been pegged at a fairly sizeable additional cost which means there is a legitimate fiscal conservative based objection to it.
To Each Man, Responsibility
Kasz216 on 10 August 2009
akuma587 said:
Kasz216 said:
akuma587 said:
 

Everyone is a fiscal conservative until they actually have to give up something.  Hell, the Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R), has gotten a crazy amount of pork barrel spending for his state.  This is why I find very few people out there to be credible when they say they are fiscally conservative.  That and when they ignore the fact that tax cuts have lead to large deficits just like spending.  George W. Bush was in the red every year he was in office even when the economy was doing well.  Same for Reagan.

George Bush Sr. was the only recent Republican President one who I can legitimately call a fiscal conservative.  And his party hated him for it cause he raised taxes.  Many people who claim to be fiscally conservative are more anti-tax than pro-fiscal responsibility.  Where was all the fiscal restraint when Republicans were in office?  I mean at least the Democrats are honest about what they are doing.

I agree about that mostly.  Although there are fiscally conservative republicans and democrats out there.  They just get demonized by the press and their parties.  For example all the shit the Blue Dog Democrats got during this healthcare bill because there are no price controls, it's ridiculiously expensive, and the estimates of it's expense are well... underestimated even with the ridiculious numbers.

Or the Republicans who've called for pullout and tried to pass balanced budget ammendments.

I agree, it is complete bullshit.  The public has been pissing and moaning about Congress not being fiscally responsible.  Now when they (i.e. the Blue Dogs, Dems, and Republicans) start coming up with legitimate ways to reduce the long term yearly budget by controlling the growth of Medicare costs, people freak out.

The epitome of this hypocrisy is people telling Congress to "keep the goverment's hands off Medicare" even though the goverment runs Medicare.  People have no idea what they want, and then when they get it, they are unhappy.

They're changing medicare?

As for the changes to the reast of the healthcare system... it seems very unlikely to curb costs... and more likely to explode them... and cause a raise in taxes...

and here is the absolute biggest problem with raising taxes.

It only raises taxes on the honest.  At the tax rates we tax we should bring in phenomonally more money.  But we don't because our system is full of deductions and loopholes for corporations and certain people put there both by republicans and democrats.

We would get far more tax money if we were to simply change the system by removing deductions.

You pay your tax bracket... and that's it.  No more weak attempts at social engineering and handouts to groups.

As it is already... tons of people are getting screwed on taxes already... this would just create more inequality.



Around the Network
Dgc1808 on 10 August 2009

I couldn't care less.



4 ≈ One

Sqrl on 10 August 2009
Kasz216 said:

They're changing medicare?

As for the changes to the reast of the healthcare system... it seems very unlikely to curb costs... and more likely to explode them... and cause a raise in taxes...

and here is the absolute biggest problem with raising taxes.

It only raises taxes on the honest.  At the tax rates we tax we should bring in phenomonally more money.  But we don't because our system is full of deductions and loopholes for corporations and certain people put there both by republicans and democrats.

We would get far more tax money if we were to simply change the system by removing deductions.

You pay your tax bracket... and that's it.  No more weak attempts at social engineering and handouts to groups.

As it is already... tons of people are getting screwed on taxes already... this would just create more inequality.

The bit about people being screwed reminds me of something:

I'm sure most know about how California has been giving out IOUs to businesses as refunds/payment - well a couple of interesting devolopements are that now they are asking them to pay taxes on the IOU money but won't accept their own IOUs as payment.  But to make matters worse there are a couple of banks that, as it was told to me, were "encouraged" to cash IOUs to try to alleviate some of the discontent. If all this is true it's pretty ridiculous, and as cliche as it is to say, a prime example of where we are headed with liberal economic policies.
To Each Man, Responsibility
haxxiy on 11 August 2009

Well I can't say for sure since I do not live on the USA but I get the feeling (and many people I know also) that Obama is a leftist social democrat, but I don't know, he could change his politics after the economic crisis is over.