• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Reid says Obamacare just a step toward eventual single-payer system[W:1539]

ttwtt78640 said:
It is not Obama (or presidents alone), but our congress critters, that allow more federal spending than federal taxation. Obama may completely agree that it is OK to spend more than he dare ask for in direct taxation, but he alone cannot make that decision. The republicants always talk of balancing the federal budget but refuse to actually do so. A majority of our congress critters clapped like trained seals when Reagan, Clinton, both Bushes and Obama asked them to spend more than federal taxation supported.
Click to expand...

Our politicians have learned that they can create a permanent job by buying votes and never really doing their job. That is why I love the state of TX with its part time legislature which is what our Founders envisioned. I am a strong believer in a Congress that lives and works out of its home state and is responsive to the people for their actions. I never supported term limits at the Federal Level but that has sure grown on me. It is time to clean house but that isn't going to happen. It really is too bad that our bureaucrats keep running for their next election vs. doing the job they were hired to do. I have no use for either party but realize that at least the Republican Party today is closer to my point of view than the Democrat Party
 
jonny5 said:
Neither of those are neccesarily a communal issue. Deciding what is a communal issue is a communal issue. It shouldnt be dictated by authority.
Click to expand...

Really, if your neighbor's house catches fire, and you live close, I bet it could spill over. As can crime and health.
 
Conservative said:
You also ignore and always will the role of the state and federal governments making it impossible for anyone to tell the difference. There was no requirement that Obama throw money at the states but he did and people like you applauded it. Some people simply cannot understand that we have a 17 trillion dollar debt paid for by about 250 billion a year in debt service that serves no one but that is ok, create another entitlement program and drive that up so we can have that utopia that you seem to think exists.
Click to expand...

I've ignored nothing. You made a statement that was false. I showed it to be false. It's just that simple.
 
Boo Radley said:
I've ignored nothing. You made a statement that was false. I showed it to be false. It's just that simple.
Click to expand...

What is very simple is the reality that you don't understand the basic role of the state and federal governments. Anything that you want that isn't funded by the state you fight for the Federal Govt. to mandate it. Too bad you don't have that same passion for fiscal and personal responsibilities.
 
Conservative said:
Our politicians have learned that they can create a permanent job by buying votes and never really doing their job. That is why I love the state of TX with its part time legislature which is what our Founders envisioned. I am a strong believer in a Congress that lives and works out of its home state and is responsive to the people for their actions. I never supported term limits at the Federal Level but that has sure grown on me. It is time to clean house but that isn't going to happen. It really is too bad that our bureaucrats keep running for their next election vs. doing the job they were hired to do. I have no use for either party but realize that at least the Republican Party today is closer to my point of view than the Democrat Party
Click to expand...

The repubicants say more what you want to hear, yet are they really any less guilty of perpetuating the borrow and spend policy that they claim to be against? Is it not republicants that still uphold the "right" of only NADA members to have exclusive rights to sell new cars in Texas? There is much going on that indicates that both parties are in favor of increased gov't control and less freedom for "the folks" - the Texas handgun laws are one huge clue that these "freedom loving", 2A supporters are simply greedy politicians that wish to drum up guaranteed business (via mandated CHL classes) for the NRA that funds their campaigns.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The repubicants say more what you want to hear, yet are they really any less guilty of perpetuating the borrow and spend policy that they claim to be against? Is it not republicants that still uphold the "right" of only NADA members to have exclusive rights to sell new cars in Texas? There is much going on that indicates that both parties are in favor of increased gov't control and less freedom for "the folks" - the Texas handgun laws are one huge clue that these "freedom loving", 2A supporters are simply greedy politicians that wish to drum up guaranteed business (via mandated CHL classes) for the NRA that funds their campaigns.
Click to expand...

You are probably right however there are no solutions to the problem other than trying to work from within to change the party. That is what I choose to do knowing that the Democrat Party is incapable of changing and the Republicans to a point may be as well but at least there is a better alternative with the Republicans. To make the changes necessary first we have to start with term limits forcing politicians to live under the laws they created. It works at the state level so why not the Federal level. Until we get rid of the career politicians nothing is ever going to change.
 
Conservative said:
You are probably right however there are no solutions to the problem other than trying to work from within to change the party. That is what I choose to do knowing that the Democrat Party is incapable of changing and the Republicans to a point may be as well but at least there is a better alternative with the Republicans. To make the changes necessary first we have to start with term limits forcing politicians to live under the laws they created. It works at the state level so why not the Federal level. Until we get rid of the career politicians nothing is ever going to change.
Click to expand...

Term limits exist now, they are simply called primary elections. If your party opposes this process, and only will back the incumbent, then that must be changed. I have no objection to returning a good representative to power, no matter how many times that they choose to run, but object to the assumption that simply because they won last time that they must be the best. Let the republicants be the first party to equally fund all comers in their primaries - that may be the ticket to gaining more party memebership and getting rid of the "deadwood" as well.

Change can come from the bottom up, not only from the top down.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Term limits exist now, they are simply called primary elections. If your party opposes this process, and only will back the incumbent, then that must be changed. I have no objection to returning a good representative to power, no matter how many times that they choose to run, but object to the assumption that simply because they won last time that they must be the best. Let the republicants be the first party to equally fund all comers in their primaries - that may be the ticket to gaining more party memebership and getting rid of the "deadwood" as well.

Change can come from the bottom up, not only from the top down.
Click to expand...

Normally you would be right but there is too much money in politics today and with the 24/7 media it is hard to unseat an incumbent especially one that has bought a lot of votes. Not enough people in this country with principles and pride. Elections are won today by very small turnout with a motivated dependent class. Don't know what it is going to take to wake people but term limits would be a good start.
 
Conservative said:
Normally you would be right but there is too much money in politics today and with the 24/7 media it is hard to unseat an incumbent especially one that has bought a lot of votes. Not enough people in this country with principles and pride. Elections are won today by very small turnout with a motivated dependent class. Don't know what it is going to take to wake people but term limits would be a good start.
Click to expand...

It seems that you wish to weaken the competition rather than concentrate on improving your team's play. It is high time that the non-dependent class get it together and take note of what is going on. In a red state like Teaxs this is easier to do than you might think. How many initially thought that Ted Cruz had a chance? The demorats are acting just like drug dealers - giving you an initial price break (or even free samples) to get you hooked and then they soon come to own your ass. ;)

The prime example is federal eduaction aid - at first the states see this as good, they get to keep full control and get "free help" but gradually the feds will demand ever more "compliance" (control) as a condition of getting this "free help". At some point the state decides that the compliance is OK (a necessary evil?) since the alternative is to replace the federal "free help", now up to 10% of their total educatonal spending, with added local taxation.
 
Conservative said:
What is very simple is the reality that you don't understand the basic role of the state and federal governments. Anything that you want that isn't funded by the state you fight for the Federal Govt. to mandate it. Too bad you don't have that same passion for fiscal and personal responsibilities.
Click to expand...

It's not about me. You said feds didn't spend money on those areas. I showed they do. It's simple. You were factually incorrect.
 
Boo Radley said:
It's not about me. You said feds didn't spend money on those areas. I showed they do. It's simple. You were factually incorrect.
Click to expand...

I said that the Feds don't fund police, fire fighters, and school teachers and that a grant or stimulus funding is a short term payment that has to be paid by the state taxpayers when the money runs out. I stand by that statement that school teachers, police, and fire fighters are state responsibilities. Nothing you have posted changes that reality. Why is it you are always looking for the Federal taxpayer to fund your personal responsibility expenses.
 
Conservative said:
I said that the Feds don't fund police, fire fighters, and school teachers and that a grant or stimulus funding is a short term payment that has to be paid by the state taxpayers when the money runs out. I stand by that statement that school teachers, police, and fire fighters are state responsibilities. Nothing you have posted changes that reality. Why is it you are always looking for the Federal taxpayer to fund your personal responsibility expenses.
Click to expand...

And I showed you more than a grant or stimulus. These are long term fundings. Focus. You're trying to hide your error.
 
Boo Radley said:
And I showed you more than a grant or stimulus. These are long term fundings. Focus. You're trying to hide your error.
Click to expand...

Nice diversion from reality, the only long term commitment from the Federal Govt. is on innovative programs and projects, not regular police, fire, and teachers. Site the long term expenses in your community paid for by the Federal Govt? Your normal police, fire fighters, and teachers are paid for out of your local taxes. That is reality that you want to ignore as you continue to divert from the thread topic. Why do you want the Federal taxpayers to fund your local police, fire, and teachers?
 
Boo Radley said:
Really, if your neighbor's house catches fire, and you live close, I bet it could spill over. As can crime and health.
Click to expand...

Thats be between me and my neighbor. How does my having a heart attack spill over into anyone elses responsiblity?
 
jonny5 said:
Thats be between me and my neighbor. How does my having a heart attack spill over into anyone elses responsiblity?
Click to expand...

Yeah if you're poor and can't afford medical care we should just let you die. And then since you can't afford burial fees we should just let you rot where you lay. The birds will clean up the mess.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Term limits exist now, they are simply called primary elections. If your party opposes this process, and only will back the incumbent, then that must be changed. I have no objection to returning a good representative to power, no matter how many times that they choose to run, but object to the assumption that simply because they won last time that they must be the best. Let the republicants be the first party to equally fund all comers in their primaries - that may be the ticket to gaining more party memebership and getting rid of the "deadwood" as well.

Change can come from the bottom up, not only from the top down.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Isn't change imposed from the top down the definition of tyranny? Whereas change coming from the bottom up is called "consent of the governed" - which is the foundation of our Constitution.
 
Boo Radley said:
And I showed you more than a grant or stimulus. These are long term fundings. Focus. You're trying to hide your error.
Click to expand...

If it is the case where the federal government has breached local responsibilities, then it is a breach of constitutional powers...In that case the federal government would be in the wrong.
 
Conservative said:
Nice diversion from reality, the only long term commitment from the Federal Govt. is on innovative programs and projects, not regular police, fire, and teachers. Site the long term expenses in your community paid for by the Federal Govt? Your normal police, fire fighters, and teachers are paid for out of your local taxes. That is reality that you want to ignore as you continue to divert from the thread topic. Why do you want the Federal taxpayers to fund your local police, fire, and teachers?
Click to expand...

No distraction. They get money on a regular basis and not just once and done. That's a fact.
 
jonny5 said:
Thats be between me and my neighbor. How does my having a heart attack spill over into anyone elses responsiblity?
Click to expand...

Hardly. It'll likely spread beyond the two of you as well. Remember O'Leary's cow?
 
Boo Radley said:
No distraction. They get money on a regular basis and not just once and done. That's a fact.
Click to expand...

That is your opinion but that isn't what your article states nor does it address the day to day operations of the police, fire departments, and teachers. You live in a liberal dream world that really is nothing more than a nightmare that is 17 trillion dollars in debt costing the taxpayers 250 billion a year in debt service.
 
j-mac said:
If it is the case where the federal government has breached local responsibilities, then it is a breach of constitutional powers...In that case the federal government would be in the wrong.
Click to expand...

Has it? Or does history play any role? They didn't just start one day. There's a clear history that leads us to where we are, and always supported by the majority of the populace. And there is good reason to believe that even the founding fathers, had they lived that history, would have followed the same path. They weren't incapable of thought or of adjusting to problems.

However, all that is noted here is that it is a fact that the federal government contributes funds to all three.
 
Boo Radley said:
Has it? Or does history play any role? They didn't just start one day. There's a clear history that leads us to where we are, and always supported by the majority of the populace. And there is good reason to believe that even the founding fathers, had they lived that history, would have followed the same path. They weren't incapable of thought or of adjusting to problems.

However, all that is noted here is that it is a fact that the federal government contributes funds to all three.
Click to expand...

Out of ever dollar spent on public education about 7 cents comes from the Federal Govt. Tell us where that 7 cents goes and what it funds?
 
Conservative said:
That is your opinion but that isn't what your article states nor does it address the day to day operations of the police, fire departments, and teachers. You live in a liberal dream world that really is nothing more than a nightmare that is 17 trillion dollars in debt costing the taxpayers 250 billion a year in debt service.
Click to expand...

Actually it is what it states, and I can link a lot more if you need them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom