So if the Dem's are accused of "Tax and Spend" the
Rebubs are in my opinion guilty of Abrigation of Responsibility.
That is to say, they are abandoning the people who got them
elected. Abandoning them by running, again, the National Debt
to 8 TRILLION bucks, STW thinks that no big deal but what about
the PAYMENTS we have to make, its a subsidy to a friendly bank
is what it amounts to, political payoff. We make what, 400 BILLION
dollars not to draw down the actual National Debt but for the
INTEREST on that debt. If we did not have this disgusting debt,
wouldn't it seem reasonable we would have 4 or 5 HUNDRED BILLION
each year to spend on stuff like social security, the environment, the
space program, medicare which is in deep doo doo, or maybe
a hundred billion dollar fusion reactor apollo style program to get us
off the incredibly stupid oil economy?
Is this about "Responsibility" or "Economic Policy"?
You don't seem able to focus on any particular subject. If you are insinuating that "republicans" cause the national debt, be specific and tell us how they do it. Which department of government causes the debt and who created that department... for example.
For example, show us a chart of HHS and point out which money can be slashed from the budget. Or... who can be taxed more to fix the problem. That seems fair.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyMy main focus is the national debt but don't you think the right
Is this about "Responsibility" or "Economic Policy"?
You don't seem able to focus on any particular subject. If you are insinuating that "republicans" cause the national debt, be specific and tell us how they do it. Which department of government causes the debt and who created that department... for example.
wing is getting out of hand here? Example, just the latest:
Supreme court ruling its ok for towns to claim "Eminent Domain"
condemn your property, give you about 1/3 the actual value
then GIVE it to a private developer who makes it into a
McDonalds?
How bout the one a couple months ago, now its ok for the cops
to bring out Narc sniffing dogs for no other reason than
you are not wearing your seatbelts.
Yes Sir, your honor, I thought, well he is already breaking the
law, not wearing his seatbelt, so now that he is a proven criminal,
I put my dogs on him and found that crushed up joint under his
spare tire. He is obvioulsy a deviate and needs to go to jail under
our beatiful Texas laws, throw the book at him, your Honor, give
him 40 years.
Which is just an example of the loss of the freedoms we used to
enjoy, right to what now? So now the government runs up an 8 tril
debt in front of our eyes and you think the Dems are responsible?
I think its the Rebs owning congress and Senate that pushed this
thing through.
Originally posted by sonhouseMy focus is WHY do we have this enormous debt?
My main focus is the national debt but don't you think the right
wing is getting out of hand here? Example, just the latest:
Supreme court ruling its ok for towns to claim "Eminent Domain"
condemn your property, give you about 1/3 the actual value
then GIVE it to a private developer who makes it into a
McDonalds?
How bout the one a couple months a ...[text shortened]... responsible?
I think its the Rebs owning congress and Senate that pushed this
thing through.
I think its because we are giving political payback through the
back door, subsidizing friendly countries that went along or were
just silent during the Iraq war. I get the sneaky feeling there were
no loans from french banks or german banks but plenty from
UK and Aussies banks.
Originally posted by sonhouseMy main focus is the national debt but don't you think the right
How bout the one a couple months ago, now its ok for the cops
to bring out Narc sniffing dogs for no other reason than
you are not wearing your seatbelts.
Yes Sir, your honor, I thought, well he is already breaking the
law, not wearing his seatbelt, so now that he is a proven criminal,
I put my dogs on him and found that crushed up joint under his
s ...[text shortened]... responsible?
I think its the Rebs owning congress and Senate that pushed this
thing through.
wing is getting out of hand here? Example, just the latest:
Supreme court ruling its ok for towns to claim "Eminent Domain"
condemn your property, give you about 1/3 the actual value
then GIVE it to a private developer who makes it into a
McDonalds?
This sums up why I can't take you seriously. Have you seen which political bent the five justices in the majority opinion belong to? I'll give you a hint.... it ain't the right wing side.
How bout the one a couple months ago, now its ok for the cops
to bring out Narc sniffing dogs for no other reason than
you are not wearing your seatbelts.
Yes Sir, your honor, I thought, well he is already breaking the
law, not wearing his seatbelt, so now that he is a proven criminal,
I put my dogs on him and found that crushed up joint under his
spare tire. He is obvioulsy a deviate and needs to go to jail under
our beatiful Texas laws, throw the book at him, your Honor, give
him 40 years.
How can I comment if you don't tell me what you are ranting on about? Which case, which judge, which attorneys? You just rant on without telling us where to read any facts. That ain't cool. Kind of silly. Give me the court case so I can read it. Ok? Most are available you know.
Originally posted by sonhouseWhy do we have this enormous debt....
My focus is WHY do we have this enormous debt?
I think its because we are giving political payback through the
back door, subsidizing friendly countries that went along or were
just silent during the Iraq war. I get the sneaky feeling there were
no loans from french banks or german banks but plenty from
UK and Aussies banks.
Well, now there is a good question. I guess. Have you ever examined the budget of the US?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/
As soon as you finish, come back on line so I can wish you a merry christmas.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyOk, I guess you didn't hear about that one. I had it printed out,
[b]My main focus is the national debt but don't you think the right
wing is getting out of hand here? Example, just the latest:
Supreme court ruling its ok for towns to claim "Eminent Domain"
condemn your property, give you about 1/3 the actual value
then GIVE it to a private developer who makes it into a
McDonalds?
This sums up why I ca ...[text shortened]... t cool. Kind of silly. Give me the court case so I can read it. Ok? Most are available you know.[/b]
a case in Iowa if I remember, guy got stopped for a traffic violation
and the cops ran up a couple of sniffer dogs on the sly and found
some kind of dope in his car, arrested him on dope, he appealed
and it ran all the way to the supreme court and they let it stand,
thus allowing police to use dogs anytime they want for ANY kind
of traffic violation, including seatbelts. It was in the news a few
weeks ago.
So you think the SC is leaning to the left? I thought most of
the appointments were from Rebs.
Didn't Clinton only get one or two?
Do you have any clue "who" on the supreme court ruled yesterday to help ruin the constitution? To take away property and give it to rich corporations?
I'll give you a hint...
"Stevens was joined in the majority by three other liberal justices, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, and by Anthony Kennedy...
Originally posted by sonhouseIowa.... not Texas? What the hell was the "texas" rant then? errrr...
Ok, I guess you didn't hear about that one. I had it printed out,
a case in Iowa if I remember, guy got stopped for a traffic violation
and the cops ran up a couple of sniffer dogs on the sly and found
some kind of dope in his car, arrested him on dope, he appealed
and it ran all the way to the supreme court and they let it stand,
thus allowing police ...[text shortened]... left? I thought most of
the appointments were from Rebs.
Didn't Clinton only get one or two?
very unsettling. What are you on about here?
Originally posted by sonhousewhats wrong with drug sniffing dogs?
Ok, I guess you didn't hear about that one. I had it printed out,
a case in Iowa if I remember, guy got stopped for a traffic violation
and the cops ran up a couple of sniffer dogs on the sly and found
some kind of dope in his car, arrested him on dope, he appealed
and it ran all the way to the supreme court and they let it stand,
thus allowing police ...[text shortened]... left? I thought most of
the appointments were from Rebs.
Didn't Clinton only get one or two?
if you are doing something illegal you deserve to get caught.
dont traffic in illegal substances and you have nothing to fear from drug sniffing dogs
Originally posted by scipio7777777That is not the point. The point is the constitution has rules
whats wrong with drug sniffing dogs?
if you are doing something illegal you deserve to get caught.
dont traffic in illegal substances and you have nothing to fear from drug sniffing dogs
about unreasonable search and siezure and this decision
takes that right away and may lead to even more draconian
freedoms on the part of the police. Do you want to live in a
stalinist type regime where you don't know if you are going to be
nabbed for whatever the criminalization of the day is?
Originally posted by StarValleyWyWell my point isn't so much the actual budget, its the so-called
Why do we have this enormous debt....
Well, now there is a good question. I guess. Have you ever examined the budget of the US?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/
As soon as you finish, come back on line so I can wish you a merry christmas.
reasoning behind the 'Cut and Borrow' agenda of the republican
party. By abrogation of responsibility I mean they are all to
willing to kill a childs lunch program or a music fesitval or
a school dance troupe if it means they can put more money into
a military purchase.