(1) I don't consider just raising taxes to cover every spending spree you go on to be "financial responsibility". Republicans regularly vote for smaller spending increases than Dems. And I can't think of the last time a departments budget was actually cut. ("cut" means CUT, not just reduce the increase).
Non-military discretionary spending has increased under Bush and his Republican congress by more than twice the rate that it did under the Clinton administration, so it seems that they're not serious about spending restraint. To make matters worse, even in the face of some of the largest deficits in our nation's history, they're still looking to push through more tax cuts ( primarily for those who least need anything of the sort, but I digress...). There's absolutely nothing "fiscally responsible" about it and those who permit it.
2) The reduction in the size of government that Clinton likes to take credit for consists almost entirely of military base closings that were voted into place during the previous Bush administration. How about we do the same thing for domestic departments that have long since outlived their function? I don't hear any of these responsible Democrats calling for such things. If they did, I'd vote for them.
Do you hear 'responsible' Republicans doing so? They have been running things for awhile now and I've not heard anything serious in this regard. Clinton did cut about 400k civilian government jobs over his term, though some were just outsourced to private contractors.
I'm curious, which departments are you thinking of in this regard?
(3) Most Republican voters as well as Democrats are "good" people. What confuses you is that you have been told that all Republicans are evil when in reality most Republicans have a distrust, that is well founded in history of governments that get too big and try to live people's lives for them. There is no instance of government "giving" money to individuals that does not come with strings attached. As "kind hearted" as many of those programs sound, they will, and have largely already, produce a population unable to think for themselves and such a society cannot sustain itself. Never has, never will.
I agree that most voters and citizens are good, well meaning people regardless of their political affiliation. I do think that there's a tremendous disconnect between what you view the Republican party as and what they actually are today. They seem have no problem in legislating personal behavior. It's the Democratic party which seems to be the one which allows individuals to choose for themselves what is right for them.
If there were a "Leave me the Hell Alone" party that had electable candidates I would vote for them. Until then, I will continue to vote for the party that comes closest to that philosophy, even if there is only a hairs breadth of difference between the two existing parties.
I think that while there are certainly a good number of shared views, there is a good bit more than a 'hairs breadth' between them.
Here is a quote from Jimmy Carter's new book "Our Endangered Values":
"Soon after arriving in Washington, I was surprised and disappointed when no Democratic member of Congress would sponsor my first series of legislative proposals -- to reorganize parts of the federal bureaucracy -- and I had to get Republicans to take the initiative. Thereafter, my shifting coalitions of support comprised the available members of both parties who agreed with me on specific issues, with my most intense and mounting opposition coming from the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. (One reason for this was the ambition of Senator Ted Kennedy to replace me as president.)"
I'm typing this through a VNC session. I'm stuck with a Windows desktop and just open a fullscreen VNC session to a Linux server to do actual work. Over a standard 100mbit Lan, it runs fine.
First of them is the increasing bloat; a standard RH install is now around 2 GB, while a standard MDK install with the same packages occupies much less space. I understand the need of disk space if it is justified, but I don't understand this useless bloat.
That's impressive. I guess that Mandrake must be using smaller bits.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Non-military discretionary spending has increased under Bush and his Republican congress by more than twice the rate that it did under the Clinton administration, so it seems that they're not serious about spending restraint. To make matters worse, even in the face of some of the largest deficits in our nation's history, they're still looking to push through more tax cuts ( primarily for those who least need anything of the sort, but I digress...). There's absolutely nothing "fiscally responsible" about it and those who permit it.
2) The reduction in the size of government that Clinton likes to take credit for consists almost entirely of military base closings that were voted into place during the previous Bush administration. How about we do the same thing for domestic departments that have long since outlived their function? I don't hear any of these responsible Democrats calling for such things. If they did, I'd vote for them.
Do you hear 'responsible' Republicans doing so? They have been running things for awhile now and I've not heard anything serious in this regard. Clinton did cut about 400k civilian government jobs over his term, though some were just outsourced to private contractors. I'm curious, which departments are you thinking of in this regard?
(3) Most Republican voters as well as Democrats are "good" people. What confuses you is that you have been told that all Republicans are evil when in reality most Republicans have a distrust, that is well founded in history of governments that get too big and try to live people's lives for them. There is no instance of government "giving" money to individuals that does not come with strings attached. As "kind hearted" as many of those programs sound, they will, and have largely already, produce a population unable to think for themselves and such a society cannot sustain itself. Never has, never will.
I agree that most voters and citizens are good, well meaning people regardless of their political affiliation. I do think that there's a tremendous disconnect between what you view the Republican party as and what they actually are today. They seem have no problem in legislating personal behavior. It's the Democratic party which seems to be the one which allows individuals to choose for themselves what is right for them.
If there were a "Leave me the Hell Alone" party that had electable candidates I would vote for them. Until then, I will continue to vote for the party that comes closest to that philosophy, even if there is only a hairs breadth of difference between the two existing parties.
I think that while there are certainly a good number of shared views, there is a good bit more than a 'hairs breadth' between them.
Here is a quote from Jimmy Carter's new book "Our Endangered Values":
"Soon after arriving in Washington, I was surprised and disappointed when no Democratic member of Congress would sponsor my first series of legislative proposals -- to reorganize parts of the federal bureaucracy -- and I had to get Republicans to take the initiative. Thereafter, my shifting coalitions of support comprised the available members of both parties who agreed with me on specific issues, with my most intense and mounting opposition coming from the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. (One reason for this was the ambition of Senator Ted Kennedy to replace me as president.)"
(http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?stor yId=4984885)
When Carter took office, even though I hadn't voted for him, I thought he was a nice guy, and his statements on ref
I'm typing this through a VNC session. I'm stuck with a Windows desktop and just open a fullscreen VNC session to a Linux server to do actual work. Over a standard 100mbit Lan, it runs fine.
Maybe your network has issues?
First of them is the increasing bloat; a standard RH install is now around 2 GB, while a standard MDK install with the same packages occupies much less space. I understand the need of disk space if it is justified, but I don't understand this useless bloat.
That's impressive. I guess that Mandrake must be using smaller bits.