So I am pretty confused on why americans are so down

[kres24GT]

about how bad things are getting.

This is exactly what we voted for. I'd figure we would be happy. Surely no one was stupid enough to believe things would have worked out differently?

Big Government homers are looking dumber and dumber by the day and only the biggest of sheep remain loyal. We are looking at a revolution, most likely a bloody one, coming soon.

It is going to get bad, but just remember, you vote for this.

[Binky]

about how bad things are getting.

This is exactly what we voted for. I'd figure we would be happy. Surely no one was stupid enough to believe things would have worked out differently?

Big Government homers are looking dumber and dumber by the day and only the biggest of sheep remain loyal. We are looking at a revolution, most likely a bloody one, coming soon.

It is going to get bad, but just remember, you vote for this.

Unfortunately, I've suspected America was headed straight for a revolution and/or racial rioting for the last year now. People are gullible and believe change would take place overnight. But alas, change comes in small doses over a long period of time, for the most part. The American way of life to squander greedily, is gone, at least for now. There aren't any jobs to be had. Prices are up. Homes are being lost. Interest rates are sky high. And people are having to tighten up belts they had forgotten they had. With all that is going on, it should come as no surprise that civil unrest is in the offing. Those that haven't seen it coming have been existing with their heads pushed so far up their hindends that they can't tell the difference between daylight and darkness. The signs have been there, so they've been warned.

[Bill]

Things are going to get bad, but the roots are in choices we've made over the last 30 years, and the getting bad has nothing to do with this recent election.

We americans fucked up and got stupid long ago.

Nice attempt to spin things tho Kres. You will be joined by all your fellow republicans in this line of spin.

And none of you, reds and blues alike, will accept personal responsibility for the choices made over the last decades. You'll continue to spout the corporate party line, like good little puppets.

At least I've been opposed to the corporate consumer society from the beginning - and trying to fight it, and life my life in opposition to it, since the mid seventies.

Things are going to get way worse. There will be plenty of grief to go around.

And americans have be so dumbified that we will be effectively helpless.

[Dale escondido]

Things are going to get bad, but the roots are in choices we've made over the last 30 years, and the getting bad has nothing to do with this recent election.

We americans fucked up and got stupid long ago.

Nice attempt to spin things tho Kres. You will be joined by all your fellow republicans in this line of spin.

And none of you, reds and blues alike, will accept personal responsibility for the choices made over the last decades. You'll continue to spout the corporate party line, like good little puppets.

At least I've been opposed to the corporate consumer society from the beginning - and trying to fight it, and life my life in opposition to it, since the mid seventies.

Things are going to get way worse. There will be plenty of grief to go around.

And americans have be so dumbified that we will be effectively helpless.

Its true we seem comfortable with having targets to blame.
Dont quite understand that.
This is a thirty year disaster in the making for sure.
Bush globalized us so quickly as to shock a fragile sytstem that was slowly failing because of irresponsible leadership.
Only the crash of the economy will put an end to this insanity and bring us a new kind of insanity.
At first I felt sorry for Obama thinking what a mess he was left with, but hes comfortable with spending money so hes right at home for now.

[Mr. Blue]

Things are going to get bad, but the roots are in choices we've made over the last 30 years, and the getting bad has nothing to do with this recent election.

I'd actually put the time line that we started to fail as a country for the last 100 years. The last 30 years it escalated. The last 8 years...disastrous. Obama...right now he's a question mark, I don't want to judge what he'll do in the next 4 to 8 years just yet, but I have a feeling it'll be more of the same.

Now, I'm not exactly sure how things are going to pan out because there's many possible scenarios to be played. End of the day though, the America that we know will change greatly in the coming decades.

There's interesting possibilities on how we'll fail though. Do we go within ourselves and will there be domestic unrest? Do we set our military loose on our neighbors and expand to empire building? Do we end in complete world Anarchy of a Mad Max variety?

There's no easy end game here. You don't take a power like America, with the largest military in the world, and say...you're a second rate power now. I'm reminded of the Dennis Leary song Asshole...particularly the part where he goes, "...there's not a goddamn thing anyone can do about it because we got the bombs...two words...Nuclear Fucking Weapons"

YXTN3h-b9nU

[Dale escondido]

I'd actually put the time line that we started to fail as a country for the last 100 years. The last 30 years it escalated. The last 8 years...disastrous. Obama...right now he's a question mark, I don't want to judge what he'll do in the next 4 to 8 years just yet, but I have a feeling it'll be more of the same.

Now, I'm not exactly sure how things are going to pan out because there's many possible scenarios to be played. End of the day though, the America that we know will change greatly in the coming decades.

There's interesting possibilities on how we'll fail though. Do we go within ourselves and will there be domestic unrest? Do we set our military loose on our neighbors and expand to empire building? Do we end in complete world Anarchy of a Mad Max variety?

There's no easy end game here. You don't take a power like America, with the largest military in the world, and say...you're a second rate power now. I'm reminded of the Dennis Leary song Asshole...particularly the part where he goes, "...there's not a goddamn thing anyone can do about it because we got the bombs...two words...Nuclear Fucking Weapons"

YXTN3h-b9nU

I am curious, what change or event make you feel its a 100 year old cycle of decay.
Me I think Carter and Reagan really got the ball rolling.

[Mr. Blue]

I am curious, what change or event make you feel its a 100 year old cycle of decay.
Me I think Carter and Reagan really got the ball rolling.

Well, I've always held that the founding fathers were right on certain key elements and one of those cornerstones was to stay out of foreign entanglements.

Thomas Jefferson said this on the topic, "I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war. All their energies are expended in the destruction of the labor, property and lives of their people."

I would expand this outward to all countries of the world. Basically America should have stayed out of all foreign affairs and pursued a course of self-improvement.

To me WWI was the beginning of our problems...from it spawned this notion that America had to "Spread Democracy" even by means of war. We initially had the right idea when it came to spreading democracy by example. So when the first colonies set up and John Winthrop stated that it would be a "City on a hill" that was the right way to spread an ideology.

Later, Wilson, JFK, and even Reagan, had that partially correct...they did wanted America to be an example, but where they failed was instead of us being a "model" society, we had to start spreading the notion even if it meant getting into wars. That's where we begin to fail.

Now, why do I pick WWI? The aftermath of WWI basically set up the horrors of WWII and forever got America meddling in other countries foreign policy. Instead of just being an example to the world, where people would want to emulate us, we became the strict school master enforcing our ideals on others, even if they didn't want it.

Is it possible to put that genie back in the bottle? Not really. However, we can take certain first steps to make it a little better.

[Dale escondido]

Well, I've always held that the founding fathers were right on certain key elements and one of those cornerstones was to stay out of foreign entanglements.

Thomas Jefferson said this on the topic, "I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war. All their energies are expended in the destruction of the labor, property and lives of their people."

I would expand this outward to all countries of the world. Basically America should have stayed out of all foreign affairs and pursued a course of self-improvement
To me WWI was the beginning of our problems...from it spawned this notion that America had to "Spread Democracy" even by means of war. We initially had the right idea when it came to spreading democracy by example. So when the first colonies set up and John Winthrop stated that it would be a "City on a hill" that was the right way to spread an ideology.

Later, Wilson, JFK, and even Reagan, had that partially correct...they did wanted America to be an example, but where they failed was instead of us being a "model" society, we had to start spreading the notion even if it meant getting into wars. That's where we begin to fail.

Now, why do I pick WWI? The aftermath of WWI basically set up the horrors of WWII and forever got America meddling in other countries foreign policy. Instead of just being an example to the world, where people would want to emulate us, we became the strict school master enforcing our ideals on others, even if they didn't want it.

Is it possible to put that genie back in the bottle? Not really. However, we can take certain first steps to make it a little better.

Thanks for the response.
Modern times do make distaces shorter.
I have alway felt the more insure, the more the need to convert others.
But spreading democracy or nation building should be done by example. IMO

[Mr. Blue]

Thanks for the response.
Modern times do make distaces shorter.
I have alway felt the more insure, the more the need to convert others.
But spreading democracy or nation building should be done by example. IMO

I'm completely for spreading the idea of democracy through example...but that's really as far as we should go with the idea.

Why did so many immigrants want to come to America in the first place? This idea that the streets were paved with gold, that people could realize their dreams, and in many ways, they could pursue their dreams and succeed.

I think that America is being lost, that American dream is being replaced with some odd world vision that won't work...it's unfortunate, but extremely difficult to back out of it now.

[Dale escondido]

I'm completely for spreading the idea of democracy through example...but that's really as far as we should go with the idea.

Why did so many immigrants want to come to America in the first place? This idea that the streets were paved with gold, that people could realize their dreams, and in many ways, they could pursue their dreams and succeed.

I think that America is being lost, that American dream is being replaced with some odd world vision that won't work...it's unfortunate, but extremely difficult to back out of it now.

Its globalization IMO. The merging of economies and all that goes with it.
We have to become impoverished like alot of the world and rebuld from the bottom up.
Our ideologies and religions will keep us fighting each other.
Kind of a crazy plan I think.
America gets lost in the end and uprises a clone of the EU.

[ROdger Right]

George Washington was against parties all together go figure but he also didnt like the idea of an America being isolationist. Thomas Jefferson put the words in the declaration that gave us the right to rise up against tyranny and said a few words about how the tree of liberty has to be watered with the blood of patriots from time to time.
Weve already been through this. That the centralized banks have destroyed America. Andrew Jackson took down the first one for us so ill look past the trail of tears.
about 100 years ago the federal reserve was created and thats where the figure comes from. Money men,banks, corporations own the politicans so how do we destory it now?

[ROdger Right]

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure."
Thomas Jefferson

[Mr. Blue]

Its globalization IMO. The merging of economies and all that goes with it.
We have to become impoverished like alot of the world and rebuld from the bottom up.
Our ideologies and religions will keep us fighting each other.
Kind of a crazy plan I think.
America gets lost in the end and uprises a clone of the EU.

It's looking like that might be one of the possible outcomes. The thing is you can't predict how changes will happen. I see a number of possible outcomes happening and none of them really all that pretty. We might merge into a clone like EU. We might splinter as a country into different segments. We might very well turn to some form of imperialism. Or we can completely collapse into an anarchy.

There's a lot of possibilities, even thought that the 1984 vision of the future might happen, Huxley had the world divided into a handful of superpowers...I see that as a possibility as well.

[disrupter]

"The bullshit had such pretty wrappings!"

now they are finding out what they really bought, & yeah it stinks, . . . BAD!

lol

Quit buying the bullshit about being an intelligent species,
accept that you are at best only semi-intelligent
& work your ass off to make up that difference.

It would be richly ironically funny except since we all live on the same boat [planet],
& the idiots tend to drag everyone else down with them.

Life was a crap shoot anyway,
beyond a reasonable effort don't sweat it,
some things are beyond our redemption.

Maybe the real idiocy is expecting idiots not to be idiots.

Q: What's the difference between now & the days of the dinosaurs?
A: The dinosaurs are just as stupid & numerous, only they are smaller & look like human beings.

In either case you are still all alone.

[Moby]

Hi Kres,

Is this the issue that you wanted to openly discuss when you were bitching before the election or is this the same issue again, and again, and again?

[Moby]

George Washington was against parties all together
We should still be today but the sheep love the parties. Hog, a man that once demanded he was a free thinker, has already declared that we should oppose everything coming from Obama without thought, without knowledge, without any rational reasoning at all. The only thing left for him is to do exactly as the RNC masters tell him to do.

A few billionaires started to divide the country and now we will let the people that we support destroy the country as long as they keep hating the people that we don't support.

Maybe one day people will stop following like sheep and start looking at each issue and make choices for themselves.

[kres24GT]

Things are going to get bad, but the roots are in choices we've made over the last 30 years, and the getting bad has nothing to do with this recent election.

We americans fucked up and got stupid long ago.

Nice attempt to spin things tho Kres. You will be joined by all your fellow republicans in this line of spin.

And none of you, reds and blues alike, will accept personal responsibility for the choices made over the last decades. You'll continue to spout the corporate party line, like good little puppets.

At least I've been opposed to the corporate consumer society from the beginning - and trying to fight it, and life my life in opposition to it, since the mid seventies.

Things are going to get way worse. There will be plenty of grief to go around.

And americans have be so dumbified that we will be effectively helpless.


Sorry Bill, but we agree, i was not talking about this most recent election, I am talking about all of them. Bush, Carter, Regan, Clinton, Bush II, all of them, this is what we voted for. And Congress and Senate as well, this is what we voted for.

[kres24GT]

Hi Kres,

Is this the issue that you wanted to openly discuss when you were bitching before the election or is this the same issue again, and again, and again?


It's actually the #1 issue facing Americans.

[kres24GT]

We should still be today but the sheep love the parties. Hog, a man that once demanded he was a free thinker, has already declared that we should oppose everything coming from Obama without thought, without knowledge, without any rational reasoning at all. The only thing left for him is to do exactly as the RNC masters tell him to do.

A few billionaires started to divide the country and now we will let the people that we support destroy the country as long as they keep hating the people that we don't support.

Maybe one day people will stop following like sheep and start looking at each issue and make choices for themselves.
Described yourself to a T, but don't realize it, that is the power of parties.

[Dale escondido]

It's looking like that might be one of the possible outcomes. The thing is you can't predict how changes will happen. I see a number of possible outcomes happening and none of them really all that pretty. We might merge into a clone like EU. We might splinter as a country into different segments. We might very well turn to some form of imperialism. Or we can completely collapse into an anarchy.

There's a lot of possibilities, even thought that the 1984 vision of the future might happen, Huxley had the world divided into a handful of superpowers...I see that as a possibility as well.

I guess alot is determined by how far you can push a people?
What has to happen for us to decide its too much.
We are obviously going to try to spend our way out. Maybe some temporary relief, but the value of our currency will make us poorer for sure.
This game could work as long as we still believe in the dollar no matter what we hear.
We are getting in so deep that any nation with enough dollars could dump them and crash us.
We will become a much poorer nation and the debt laid on us will make us work to rebuild the wealth stolden from us.
If we are given enough stuff and we can lay blame somewhere other than were it belongs we might just take on this load and swallow it.

[Mr. Blue]

I guess alot is determined by how far you can push a people?
What has to happen for us to decide its too much.
We are obviously going to try to spend our way out. Maybe some temporary relief, but the value of our currency will make us poorer for sure.
This game could work as long as we still believe in the dollar no matter what we hear.
We are getting in so deep that any nation with enough dollars could dump them and crash us.
We will become a much poorer nation and the debt laid on us will make us work to rebuild the wealth stolden from us.
If we are given enough stuff and we can lay blame somewhere other than were it belongs we might just take on this load and swallow it.

Humans can take a lot of pushing. They may protest, they may even riot, but generally they accept what's happening to them until something that goes beyond human toleration happens.

You constantly see regimes, dictators, etc, suppressing populations for decades, and undoubtedly people wonder, "Why doesn't the population just rise up against them?"

Revolutions throughout history have always taken place in that "perfect storm" type scenario, where everything lined up just right. The problem becomes with more technology it becomes easier to suppress the masses. So, the American Revolution, French Revolution, things like that, would be much harder to pull off in this time.

It's hard to say what would happen though...I personally would rather be living in the year 2100 reading what happened in a history book (umm, computer tablet) than living through it though, lol.

[Dale escondido]

Humans can take a lot of pushing. They may protest, they may even riot, but generally they accept what's happening to them until something that goes beyond human toleration happens.

You constantly see regimes, dictators, etc, suppressing populations for decades, and undoubtedly people wonder, "Why doesn't the population just rise up against them?"

Revolutions throughout history have always taken place in that "perfect storm" type scenario, where everything lined up just right. The problem becomes with more technology it becomes easier to suppress the masses. So, the American Revolution, French Revolution, things like that, would be much harder to pull off in this time.

It's hard to say what would happen though...I personally would rather be living in the year 2100 reading what happened in a history book (umm, computer tablet) than living through it though, lol.

I am so against revolution in any violent form.
I wish we could just put aside politics enough to vote all politicians out once.
No more pros.
We usually pick a side and fight for the establishment of more power for our side while we blame the other side for all the problems.
We do it over and over. We are polarized by our division and attack each other over very small things.
The politicians are so proficient at keeping us divided we will never have any impact on their future.

[ROdger Right]

dont worry ill fight so you can still read about it.God forbid the freedom thats givin to ya be true

[Binky]

I'd actually put the time line that we started to fail as a country for the last 100 years. The last 30 years it escalated. The last 8 years...disastrous. Obama...right now he's a question mark, I don't want to judge what he'll do in the next 4 to 8 years just yet, but I have a feeling it'll be more of the same.

Now, I'm not exactly sure how things are going to pan out because there's many possible scenarios to be played. End of the day though, the America that we know will change greatly in the coming decades.

There's interesting possibilities on how we'll fail though. Do we go within ourselves and will there be domestic unrest? Do we set our military loose on our neighbors and expand to empire building? Do we end in complete world Anarchy of a Mad Max variety?

There's no easy end game here. You don't take a power like America, with the largest military in the world, and say...you're a second rate power now. I'm reminded of the Dennis Leary song Asshole...particularly the part where he goes, "...there's not a goddamn thing anyone can do about it because we got the bombs...two words...Nuclear Fucking Weapons"

YXTN3h-b9nU


Funny you should mention Mad Max. I've often thought over the last year that America is headed in that very direction. Imagine a reality such as that, as creepy as it may be.

And in a world filled with ego manical leaders, so to speak, it is only a matter of time before one of them decides to put his finger on the pulse of a nuclear weapon sending it into the wild blue yonder.

[bairdi]

It seems to me that the whole premise of this thread is that it is the size of government that has caused all the problems that we see today and that by electing officials who continued to grow government we have put ourselves into this situation. The solution would be to return to a small government which does not govern more than minimally. Is this a reasonable observation?

I have several problems with this, the least of which is the simplistic analysis of the situation. Does government have inefficiencies? Absolutely, and these should be corrected. Will reducing the size of government solve our problems? I don't think it will. Why would you want to replace our current government with a model that was ineffective when it was in place in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries? How can such a system effectively deal with 21st century problems? Our government has grown over the past 230 years as it addressed and dealt with the numerous problems and issues that arose since this country was founded. Sure our current government is not efficient, but that is no reason to scrap it for something which, in my opinion, would be so much worse. You wouldn't fight a modern day war with weapons from the First World War would you?

Today's problems are as a much a result of our economic system of capitalism as they are of government. For all the good that our economic system does, it also has a dark underbelly of greed.

For as much bitching that takes place on this board about the two party system, one that I would like to see disappear by the way, it all comes down to the two political philosophies of liberalism and conservatism and the various permutations of them along the political spectrum. I sure would like to hear how a small government that governs very little would be better for this country. I hear a lot of comment from the sidelines but as yet have heard anything of any substance to justify these comments.

[kres24GT]

It seems to me that the whole premise of this thread is that it is the size of government that has caused all the problems that we see today and that by electing officials who continued to grow government we have put ourselves into this situation. The solution would be to return to a small government which does not govern more than minimally. Is this a reasonable observation?

I have several problems with this, the least of which is the simplistic analysis of the situation. Does government have inefficiencies? Absolutely, and these should be corrected. Will reducing the size of government solve our problems? I don't think it will. Why would you want to replace our current government with a model that was ineffective when it was in place in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries? How can such a system effectively deal with 21st century problems? Our government has grown over the past 230 years as it addressed and dealt with the numerous problems and issues that arose since this country was founded. Sure our current government is not efficient, but that is no reason to scrap it for something which, in my opinion, would be so much worse. You wouldn't fight a modern day war with weapons from the First World War would you?

Today's problems are as a much a result of our economic system of capitalism as they are of government. For all the good that our economic system does, it also has a dark underbelly of greed.

For as much bitching that takes place on this board about the two party system, one that I would like to see disappear by the way, it all comes down to the two political philosophies of liberalism and conservatism and the various permutations of them along the political spectrum. I sure would like to hear how a small government that governs very little would be better for this country. I hear a lot of comment from the sidelines but as yet have heard anything of any substance to justify these comments.


Big Government ALWAYS benefits Big Business and the wealthy and screws the poor and middle class. We begged for Big Government, it is no surprise the middle class and poor are suffering and it is only going to get worse.

Limited government gives power to the people, not the wealthy who own the politicians.

[Hog Trash]

So I am pretty confused on why americans are so down about how bad things are getting.

This is exactly what we voted for. I'd figure we would be happy. Surely no one was stupid enough to believe things would have worked out differently?

Big Government homers are looking dumber and dumber by the day and only the biggest of sheep remain loyal. We are looking at a revolution, most likely a bloody one, coming soon.

It is going to get bad, but just remember, you vote for this.Different people are depressed about different things. All the powerful speeches filled with wonderful promises are over, and reality is slowly creeping back into their lives.

Many people, all through the election, thought Obama was going to magically solve all their problems and make a better life for all, but now realize that ain't gonna happen.

The liberals thought Obama was gonna do all the big time lefty stuff he promised like end the war and free health care and tax the rich, but now realize that ain't gonna happen.

All the young people who registered to vote for the first time because it was going to be cool having a black President. The age of cool has finally arrived. "Forties" for everybody!

He'll probably build a stage on the front lawn of the White House and throw big Rap Parties every night. Sadly they're realizing that, ain't nothing cool gonna happen...Shit-damn-fuck!

The black Americans are still happy, at least for now....They still believe Obama gonna givem reparations....Say, yes we can!........................Who knows, Obama might actually do it.

[bairdi]

Big Government ALWAYS benefits Big Business and the wealthy and screws the poor and middle class. We begged for Big Government, it is no surprise the middle class and poor are suffering and it is only going to get worse.

Limited government gives power to the people, not the wealthy who own the politicians.
Do you have any specific examples or can you show anything from past history which would elaborate on your generalizations? Can you explain how a limited government is better suited to deal with the problems we face here in the twenty first century?

[kres24GT]

Different people are depressed about different things. All the powerful speeches filled with wonderful promises are over, and reality is slowly creeping back into their lives.

Many people, all through the election, thought Obama was going to magically solve all their problems and make a better life for all, but now realize that ain't gonna happen.

The liberals thought Obama was gonna do all the big time lefty stuff he promised like end the war and free health care and tax the rich, but now realize that ain't gonna happen.

All the young people who registered to vote for the first time because it was going to be cool having a black President. The age of cool has finally arrived. "Forties" for everybody!

He'll probably build a stage on the front lawn of the White House and throw big Rap Parties every night. Sadly they're realizing that, ain't nothing cool gonna happen...Shit-damn-fuck!

The black Americans are still happy, at least for now....They still believe Obama gonna givem reparations....Say, yes we can!........................Who knows, Obama might actually do it.


McCain and Obama were the same man and promised the same thing, more government to solve all of our problems. Voting one was like voting for the other. Since almost 99% of voters voted for either of these men, it is clear, America wants Big Government, overwhelmingly they want it.

With Big Government comes consequences, consequences that are obvious and one of those is the poor get poorer and the middle class is eroded.

So we are getting what we almost unanimously agree we want, yet peopel are down on it. Makes no sense to me.

[bairdi]

Different people are depressed about different things. All the powerful speeches filled with wonderful promises are over, and reality is slowly creeping back into their lives.

Many people, all through the election, thought Obama was going to magically solve all their problems and make a better life for all, but now realize that ain't gonna happen.

The liberals thought Obama was gonna do all the big time lefty stuff he promised like end the war and free health care and tax the rich, but now realize that ain't gonna happen.

All the young people who registered to vote for the first time because it was going to be cool having a black President. The age of cool has finally arrived. "Forties" for everybody!

He'll probably build a stage on the front lawn of the White House and throw big Rap Parties every night. Sadly they're realizing that, ain't nothing cool gonna happen...Shit-damn-fuck!

The black Americans are still happy, at least for now....They still believe Obama gonna givem reparations....Say, yes we can!........................Who knows, Obama might actually do it.
Damn.....you mean everything is going to be as if McCain was elected? You must be very happy. When was Obama sworn in? I must have missed that one on the news.

[kres24GT]

Do you have any specific examples or can you show anything from past history which would elaborate on your generalizations? Can you explain how a limited government is better suited to deal with the problems we face here in the twenty first century?

Are you serious? Look around. Almost ever piece of legislation passed is designed to help the wealthy, someone who paid off a politician. Ever heard of the Iraq War, I can't imagine the delusion it must take to think that was not about helping Iraqi and not making some people rich. Regulation is designed to squash competition form small business by making the cost of compliance so high only the biggest players can afford it. Deregulation is used to set up the rules to screw over those not paying attention because they counted on government to protect them (check the housing market lately?).

I cannot imagine the amount of loyalty to Big Government it must take to be this delusional. The wealthy and Big Business own the politicians, and the laws and legislation the politicians enact are designed to help those who put them into power.

You want examples, if you cannot see them, then wow, that is all I can say... wow. It just goes to show how effective government brainwashing is, that is loyalty.

The financial bailout, free money to banks which they horde. The The auto-bailout, free money so that companies do not have to re-evaluate high paid salaries to management and officers.

Absolutely amazing.

[bairdi]

Are you serious? Look around. Almost ever piece of legislation passed is designed to help the wealthy, someone who paid off a politician. Ever heard of the Iraq War, I can't imagine the delusion it must take to think that was not about helping Iraqi and not making some people rich. Regulation is designed to squash competition form small business by making the cost of compliance so high only the biggest players can afford it. Deregulation is used to set up the rules to screw over those not paying attention because they counted on government to protect them (check the housing market lately?).

I cannot imagine the amount of loyalty to Big Government it must take to be this delusional. The wealthy and Big Business own the politicians, and the laws and legislation the politicians enact are designed to help those who put them into power.

You want examples, if you cannot see them, then wow, that is all I can say... wow. It just goes to show how effective government brainwashing is, that is loyalty.

The financial bailout, free money to banks which they horde. The The auto-bailout, free money so that companies do not have to re-evaluate high paid salaries to management and officers.

Absolutely amazing.
Yes I'm serious. From your response to my questions, you seem to be reading something into what I posted that is not really there. I want you to make your case for smaller government and show how it will improve our lives and how it would be better in dealing with the worlds problems here in 2009. I am not arguing a point with you, I am just trying to better understand your views.

[kres24GT]

Yes I'm serious. From your response to my questions, you seem to be reading something into what I posted that is not really there. I want you to make your case for smaller government and show how it will improve our lives and how it would be better in dealing with the worlds problems here in 2009. I am not arguing a point with you, I am just trying to better understand your views.

Big Government always benefits Big Business and the wealthy, it always hurts the middle class and poor people. Small government, we have options. We can work our way up or choose to stay where we are. With Big Business unable to stack the rules in their favor through Big Government we all have a shot.

The last time we had limited government was the 90's with a semi-conservative Bill Clinton Democrat President and a conservative Republican Congress. Remember the 90's? Good times. Freedom, competition, America.

With a Big Government Republican in Bush and a Big Government Republican Congress. Now we have a Big Government Democrat Congress and a Big Government Republican President, soon to be replaced with a Big Government Democrat President. They have fucked everything up trying to make sure they increase government to benefit their wealthy camping contributors, or the people who just own them outright.


With Big Government there is no question who wins and who loses, with limited Constitutional government there is a chance for us all to win and all to lose.

If you started your own business now, would you have politicians in Washington passing legislation to keep others from competing with you? Would you have politicians giving you free money when times are tough and you fear you may go out of business. No, because you don't own any politicians.

It's real simple stuff, under Big Government we lose. There i no doubt about it. It is guaranteed. Hence this thread, Big Government is what we voted for, why are we upset with the results?

[Moby]

Many people, all through the election, thought Obama was going to magically solve all their problems and make a better life for all, but now realize that ain't gonna happen.
Who?

I remember when I started a thread asking directly who these people were the only example that anyone could provide was one short clip of a women that was obviously not very intelligent. It seems with 56% of Americans voting for him you'd be able to find a lot of actual people that beleive what you're saying if it made up even a small portion of reality.

Remember, HAWG, just because the programmers tell you something exists doesn't meant that it actually does. Reality can't be found in a bottle, on TV or the radio.

[Hog Trash]

Damn.....you mean everything is going to be as if McCain was elected?I can only hope, that will be the extent of the damage.

You must be very happy.Allways...[pretty much]

When was Obama sworn in? I must have missed that one on the news.Sounds like you're still filled with hope and high expectations....An optimist.

Unlike liberals, my optimism comes from, not an outside force, but self-reliance.

[Hog Trash]

Who?

I remember when I started a thread asking directly who these people were the only example that anyone could provide was one short clip of a women that was obviously not very intelligent. It seems with 56% of Americans voting for him you'd be able to find a lot of actual people that beleive what you're saying if it made up even a small portion of reality.

Remember, HAWG, just because the programmers tell you something exists doesn't meant that it actually does. Reality can't be found in a bottle, on TV or the radio.I'll go door to door from coast to coast and get a list of names.

I'll be sure to get back to you in a few days with that. :thumbsup:

[Mr. Blue]

It seems to me that the whole premise of this thread is that it is the size of government that has caused all the problems that we see today and that by electing officials who continued to grow government we have put ourselves into this situation. The solution would be to return to a small government which does not govern more than minimally. Is this a reasonable observation?

May I take a crack at this? As I have some pretty clear notions on the reduction of the size of government and how it would generally benefit America.

This notion of big government does get thrown around a lot but people generally just mumble and grumble over it but doesn't really get into specifics on how the government size should be reduced. I've thought on the specifics and here's areas that we can shrink government, yet improve America's overall lot.


First and foremost America has to give up this ideology that we're the policeman of the world. Just look at our expenditures abroad, look at where and why we have troops spread so far and wide.

What if we just said enough is enough, let other countries deal with regional issues, let's stop the ideological imperialism, that doesn't benefit us, and just cut back. If we weren't in all these other countries, how much would we save per year? One only has to look at military spending and see exactly where we could can save a great deal.

America, more or less, outspends every one on military spending. We have how many troops in Germany? 60k? How many in Japan? 40k? And that's because? WWII...done...time to stop the occupation. Germany though doesn't want the troops to go away because we're more or less stimulating their economy by having so many bases there.

The War on (fill in the blank). It seems to me that we have this ridiculous idea that we must have a war on something. The War on Drugs is a perfect example of that...exactly how has that worked out for us? Has it really reduced drug use or has it bolstered up a criminal organization? It's time we stop trying to micro-manage people's vices. Instead, profit on it, legalize certain drugs, have authorized sellers, put a nice hefty tax on it.

The Tax code is a nightmare and needs to be rethought. Fair tax, flat tax, or maybe some flavor of that, but we're basically screwing ourselves with the current tax code.


Now, let's just look at just those three things. How much could we reduce the size of government if we say cut military spending in half because we no longer extend ourselves where we're not wanted anyway. How much we can save and earn by not doing wars on (fill in the blank). How much can we trim the government size down by reforming the tax code. There's more but that gives you an example of how I see reducing the size of government.

The main problem with America at the moment is too much government, it's too much corrupt government, it's too much of our politicians being bought and sold. When people complain about the two party system, what they're really complaining about is this disconnect our politicians have to the constituents...not the political philosophy.

If there were a true conservative, people would vote for him/her, if there were a true liberal, again, people would vote for them...what we get however is these cheap politicians doing a pantomime of a political philosophy to win elections.

So, I'll continue to say both parties suck, down with the two parties, because that has nothing to do with political ideology, and has everything to do with the fact that our politicians no longer serve us, the two parties are bought and sold, and we need third party candidates that truly represent the ideals of their party without pandering.

[Hog Trash]

May I take a crack at this? As I have some pretty clear notions on the reduction of the size of government and how it would generally benefit America.

This notion of big government does get thrown around a lot but people generally just mumble and grumble over it but doesn't really get into specifics on how the government size should be reduced. I've thought on the specifics and here's areas that we can shrink government, yet improve America's overall lot.


First and foremost America has to give up this ideology that we're the policeman of the world. Just look at our expenditures abroad, look at where and why we have troops spread so far and wide.

What if we just said enough is enough, let other countries deal with regional issues, let's stop the ideological imperialism, that doesn't benefit us, and just cut back. If we weren't in all these other countries, how much would we save per year? One only has to look at military spending and see exactly where we could can save a great deal.

America, more or less, outspends every one on military spending. We have how many troops in Germany? 60k? How many in Japan? 40k? And that's because? WWII...done...time to stop the occupation. Germany though doesn't want the troops to go away because we're more or less stimulating their economy by having so many bases there.

The War on (fill in the blank). It seems to me that we have this ridiculous idea that we must have a war on something. The War on Drugs is a perfect example of that...exactly how has that worked out for us? Has it really reduced drug use or has it bolstered up a criminal organization? It's time we stop trying to micro-manage people's vices. Instead, profit on it, legalize certain drugs, have authorized sellers, put a nice hefty tax on it.

The Tax code is a nightmare and needs to be rethought. Fair tax, flat tax, or maybe some flavor of that, but we're basically screwing ourselves with the current tax code.


Now, let's just look at just those three things. How much could we reduce the size of government if we say cut military spending in half because we no longer extend ourselves where we're not wanted anyway. How much we can save and earn by not doing wars on (fill in the blank). How much can we trim the government size down by reforming the tax code. There's more but that gives you an example of how I see reducing the size of government.

The main problem with America at the moment is too much government, it's too much corrupt government, it's too much of our politicians being bought and sold. When people complain about the two party system, what they're really complaining about is this disconnect our politicians have to the constituents...not the political philosophy.

If there were a true conservative, people would vote for him/her, if there were a true liberal, again, people would vote for them...what we get however is these cheap politicians doing a pantomime of a political philosophy to win elections.

So, I'll continue to say both parties suck, down with the two parties, because that has nothing to do with political ideology, and has everything to do with the fact that our politicians no longer serve us, the two parties are bought and sold, and we need third party candidates that truly represent the ideals of their party without pandering.Good post....Not much I can argue with there except maybe your thoughts on military spending and imperialism....I believe there's two kinds of militarists in America.

[1] There are those in America who want to use the military to create an international safe haven for capitalism to spread and flourish, creating a larger world market and expanding trade. This of course is the greed factor. The problems with this are obvious. The fact that it is already taking place tells us that our government is controled by and working for the corporations and not the people. Not only are working class Americans asked to fight and finance these wars, we are not permitted to share in the rewards. In fact America has been loosing jobs to this globalist venture and will lose many more, and the remaining jobs must be competed for with low-wage immigrants, foreign workers and illegals.

[2] Then there are those who feel that national security is best served by maintaining an international military presence. I believe these people are most likely high ranking military and intelligence personel and ex-military government officials. Whether this is justifiable is debatable among the average American taxpayer who must finance these expensive military ventures. My personel belief is, America should maintain a few military bases, stratigicaly located around the world for quick reaction and to create and maintain a state of the art international intelligence gathering system that watches the world in the interest of the United States. The primary responsibility of the military is national defense.

[bairdi]

May I take a crack at this? As I have some pretty clear notions on the reduction of the size of government and how it would generally benefit America.

This notion of big government does get thrown around a lot but people generally just mumble and grumble over it but doesn't really get into specifics on how the government size should be reduced. I've thought on the specifics and here's areas that we can shrink government, yet improve America's overall lot.


First and foremost America has to give up this ideology that we're the policeman of the world. Just look at our expenditures abroad, look at where and why we have troops spread so far and wide.

What if we just said enough is enough, let other countries deal with regional issues, let's stop the ideological imperialism, that doesn't benefit us, and just cut back. If we weren't in all these other countries, how much would we save per year? One only has to look at military spending and see exactly where we could can save a great deal.

America, more or less, outspends every one on military spending. We have how many troops in Germany? 60k? How many in Japan? 40k? And that's because? WWII...done...time to stop the occupation. Germany though doesn't want the troops to go away because we're more or less stimulating their economy by having so many bases there.

The War on (fill in the blank). It seems to me that we have this ridiculous idea that we must have a war on something. The War on Drugs is a perfect example of that...exactly how has that worked out for us? Has it really reduced drug use or has it bolstered up a criminal organization? It's time we stop trying to micro-manage people's vices. Instead, profit on it, legalize certain drugs, have authorized sellers, put a nice hefty tax on it.

The Tax code is a nightmare and needs to be rethought. Fair tax, flat tax, or maybe some flavor of that, but we're basically screwing ourselves with the current tax code.


Now, let's just look at just those three things. How much could we reduce the size of government if we say cut military spending in half because we no longer extend ourselves where we're not wanted anyway. How much we can save and earn by not doing wars on (fill in the blank). How much can we trim the government size down by reforming the tax code. There's more but that gives you an example of how I see reducing the size of government.

The main problem with America at the moment is too much government, it's too much corrupt government, it's too much of our politicians being bought and sold. When people complain about the two party system, what they're really complaining about is this disconnect our politicians have to the constituents...not the political philosophy.

If there were a true conservative, people would vote for him/her, if there were a true liberal, again, people would vote for them...what we get however is these cheap politicians doing a pantomime of a political philosophy to win elections.

So, I'll continue to say both parties suck, down with the two parties, because that has nothing to do with political ideology, and has everything to do with the fact that our politicians no longer serve us, the two parties are bought and sold, and we need third party candidates that truly represent the ideals of their party without pandering.
Well stated Mr. Blue. I don't see anything that I would disagree with you here.

[Dale escondido]

May I take a crack at this? As I have some pretty clear notions on the reduction of the size of government and how it would generally benefit America.

This notion of big government does get thrown around a lot but people generally just mumble and grumble over it but doesn't really get into specifics on how the government size should be reduced. I've thought on the specifics and here's areas that we can shrink government, yet improve America's overall lot.


First and foremost America has to give up this ideology that we're the policeman of the world. Just look at our expenditures abroad, look at where and why we have troops spread so far and wide.

What if we just said enough is enough, let other countries deal with regional issues, let's stop the ideological imperialism, that doesn't benefit us, and just cut back. If we weren't in all these other countries, how much would we save per year? One only has to look at military spending and see exactly where we could can save a great deal.

America, more or less, outspends every one on military spending. We have how many troops in Germany? 60k? How many in Japan? 40k? And that's because? WWII...done...time to stop the occupation. Germany though doesn't want the troops to go away because we're more or less stimulating their economy by having so many bases there.

The War on (fill in the blank). It seems to me that we have this ridiculous idea that we must have a war on something. The War on Drugs is a perfect example of that...exactly how has that worked out for us? Has it really reduced drug use or has it bolstered up a criminal organization? It's time we stop trying to micro-manage people's vices. Instead, profit on it, legalize certain drugs, have authorized sellers, put a nice hefty tax on it.

The Tax code is a nightmare and needs to be rethought. Fair tax, flat tax, or maybe some flavor of that, but we're basically screwing ourselves with the current tax code.


Now, let's just look at just those three things. How much could we reduce the size of government if we say cut military spending in half because we no longer extend ourselves where we're not wanted anyway. How much we can save and earn by not doing wars on (fill in the blank). How much can we trim the government size down by reforming the tax code. There's more but that gives you an example of how I see reducing the size of government.

The main problem with America at the moment is too much government, it's too much corrupt government, it's too much of our politicians being bought and sold. When people complain about the two party system, what they're really complaining about is this disconnect our politicians have to the constituents...not the political philosophy.

If there were a true conservative, people would vote for him/her, if there were a true liberal, again, people would vote for them...what we get however is these cheap politicians doing a pantomime of a political philosophy to win elections.

So, I'll continue to say both parties suck, down with the two parties, because that has nothing to do with political ideology, and has everything to do with the fact that our politicians no longer serve us, the two parties are bought and sold, and we need third party candidates that truly represent the ideals of their party without pandering.

And you didnt even touch on some of the silly areas we could cut.
I see one problem though. With the cost of running and getting elected how could a third party not be tainted by the time it was in power?
Grassroots dont get media play and without massive money will go no where.

[Mr. Blue]

Good post....Not much I can argue with there except maybe your thoughts on military spending and imperialism....I believe there's two kinds of militarists in America.

[1] There are those in America who want to use the military to create an international safe haven for capitalism to spread and flourish, creating a larger world market and expanding trade. This of course is the greed factor. The problems with this are obvious. The fact that it is already taking place tells us that our government is controled by and working for the corporations and not the people. Not only are working class Americans asked to fight and finance these wars, we are not permitted to share in the rewards. In fact America has been loosing jobs to this globalist venture and will lose many more, and the remaining jobs must be competed for with low-wage immigrants, foreign workers and illegals.

Good point and one that I agree with and feel strongly about. When I say ideological imperialism, it aggravates me to no ends that we do all the steps of empire building and then reap little or no reward from it. Waging wars to spread a philosophy is unacceptable to me. America can spread this idea of Democracy by succeeding, by being the envy of the world, and let people from other countries desire our system because it works.

If America does go to war there has to be this clear cut reason for it that directly benefits Americans. If it doesn't, we don't go to war, the end of discussion.

[2] Then there are those who feel that national security is best served by maintaining an international military presence. I believe these people are most likely high ranking military and intelligence personel and ex-military government officials. Whether this is justifiable is debatable among the average American taxpayer who must finance these expensive military ventures. My personel belief is, America should maintain a few military bases, stratigicaly located around the world for quick reaction and to create and maintain a state of the art international intelligence gathering system that watches the world in the interest of the United States. The primary responsibility of the military is national defense.

See, National Security is best served by securing America. I mean the people that say we need these information gathering agencies around the world, but we neglect our border with Mexico? That just doesn't make sense to me.

Yes, lets gather information about a possible attack in Crapistan, but, oh, don't mind this border to the south that allows pretty much anyone into the country. :disbelief:

Let's know about an attack before it happens in some sandbox, but no no, let's not protect our ports properly, because, umm...whatever.

So, while I believe that we should maintain the agencies, CIA, FBI, etc, we can support them and still scale back our military by half. I'd almost venture a guess we'd be more secure if we protected our borders and ports.

[Mr. Blue]

And you didnt even touch on some of the silly areas we could cut.
I see one problem though. With the cost of running and getting elected how could a third party not be tainted by the time it was in power?
Grassroots dont get media play and without massive money will go no where.

There's tons of just silly areas that spending should be cut. I just gave the three big easy ones. Cutting pork, which, don't even get me started on that. Also just general mismanagement of our funds...it's just insane how much we could reduce the size of government by tackling waste.

As for third party candidates, unfortunately the only way for us to ever see that candidate to succeed is by having a billionaire willing to spend his own money and then transform the system quickly once he gets in. It's a sad reality that our politicians have made it nearly impossible for other ideas to enter Washington.

Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, both got little or no coverage on the news. When they did get covered it was almost always in an extremely negative light. This is what bairdi was right about. There really is only Conservatism and Liberalism, and shades between the two extremes. Ron Paul is a true Conservative. Ralph Nader is a True Liberal. Both couldn't get any mainstream media coverage because the powers that be don't want real candidates, they want the fakes that get put up every 4 years.

[Dale escondido]

There's tons of just silly areas that spending should be cut. I just gave the three big easy ones. Cutting pork, which, don't even get me started on that. Also just general mismanagement of our funds...it's just insane how much we could reduce the size of government by tackling waste.

As for third party candidates, unfortunately the only way for us to ever see that candidate to succeed is by having a billionaire willing to spend his own money and then transform the system quickly once he gets in. It's a sad reality that our politicians have made it nearly impossible for other ideas to enter Washington.

Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, both got little or no coverage on the news. When they did get covered it was almost always in an extremely negative light. This is what bairdi was right about. There really is only Conservatism and Liberalism, and shades between the two extremes. Ron Paul is a true Conservative. Ralph Nader is a True Liberal. Both couldn't get any mainstream media coverage because the powers that be don't want real candidates, they want the fakes that get put up every 4 years.

You have to give credit to those who build a trap that is so perfect even awareness of its presence does not threaten its presence.

[Mr. Blue]

You have to give credit to those who build a trap that is so perfect even awareness of its presence does not threaten its presence.

The Republican Contract with America had one very valid point and that was to introduce term limits for legislators. Unfortunately once the Reps got nominated, much like most politicians, they suddenly went, "hey wait...we shouldn't do that one because we have power now"

So, I don't ever expect congress to act on term limits or any other reform that would give a chance to third party candidates.

[Dale escondido]

The Republican Contract with America had one very valid point and that was to introduce term limits for legislators. Unfortunately once the Reps got nominated, much like most politicians, they suddenly went, "hey wait...we shouldn't do that one because we have power now"

So, I don't ever expect congress to act on term limits or any other reform that would give a chance to third party candidates.


And because of our fear of dems or republicians we keep voting them in to protect ourselves.
If once we united and voted them all out, well we wouldnt be at their mercy then would we?
These guys go to three martini lunches together and then align themselves on different side of issues and we fall in line.

[Hog Trash]

And because of our fear of dems or republicians we keep voting them in to protect ourselves.
If once we united and voted them all out, well we wouldnt be at their mercy then would we?
These guys go to three martini lunches together and then align themselves on different side of issues and we fall in line.And we even pick up the tab for the martinis. :thumbsup: we are such willing suckers. :hi:

[Dale escondido]

And we even pick up the tab for the martinis. :thumbsup: we are such willing suckers. :hi:

Thats the only reason I am here. I hope someday thru all our debate about trivial stuff and some important stuff we will at least identify who the enemy is.

[ROdger Right]

shouldnt sm be entering pretty soon haha
Well you should know how their world operates by now or atleast know enough to get by. so remember paper leaves trails
money men squeal when poked and your payment for noncomplaiance is 10x6 or 6x3

[SeedyROM]

Well they voted for Obama and bigger government shall be the norm. 600,000jobs and no clue how they'll pay for it. Obama wanted more govt. than McCain, clearly free healthcare would require far more expansion than utilizing industry for a a tax deduction. Democrats always want more because they think they deserve whatever they ask for. Republicans want a lot but with less interference from the Fed. Reps want to make money as do dems who like to pretend money is not an issue, kind of conceited if you ask me. Neither party has the right solutions for the majority. But the majority vote voted for ther selfishness, arrogance and for thier narcissistic ways.

Obama has become Bush 2.0 aka Bush-lite. Forget about GDP and the short term, the history was written on Super Tuesday. Market gains are just a number till we see 2% gdp growth for at least 2 consecutive quarters. Perhaps its time for Wal-mart to change its name to China-mart since the dollar will be weak for the next $3 to 6 trillion of wasteful spending?