Republicans no longer mainstream.......

[RealSchool]

In a party dominated by the mouth breathing likes of Palin and company, we welcome you Mr. Specter to the good side.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/28/specter.party.switch/index.html


"Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right," Specter said in a statement posted by his office on PoliticsPA.com.

"Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans."

[Medic]

The good side? You can't be serious.

Republicans bad, Democrats good! (/sarcasm off)

Specter has been voting democrat for decades might as well join the party he's been supporting.

His comments about the party moving to the right are hilarious, the party has never been more progressive, which has lead to its ultimate demise. You can't out democrat a democrat. The left would love nothing more than to see the likes of Megan McCain become a GOP rep.

[RealSchool]

The smart ones are thinking about moving the party to the left to get elected but make no mistake the Republican's are so far right now that they are only strong in redneck places like Alabama, Texas, South Carolina, and West Michigan.

[Medic]

I hear that "so far right" term a lot. What exactly has the republican party stated as goals that puts them radically to the right?

[RealSchool]

Stem cell, fight against evolution, crap like Terri Schavo, enviromental beliefs or lack of. Just to name a few.

[Medic]

Ok lets takes these one by one:

The fight is against embryonic stem cell research which has yielded absolutely no positive results since its inception. Beyond its moral misgivings, has been a loser project for over a decade. It's a waste of money. I could be wrong here but I am pretty sure the GOP is not against adult stem cell research, where many positive discoveries have been made. From a practical point of view, why is this a bad position?

Evolution is still a theory right? I mean from a pure logic perspective its just as likely we evolved from a pile of dirt as it is we were created out of thin air as science has been unable (to this point) recreate the initiating steps of life. To that end, I think the big stigma has been on education that has been only evolution based, and presenting its origins as fact instead of theory. Should we not respect the difference between theory and proven facts? And *please* lets not turn this into a chicken/egg conversation. That's not where I am going.

Please keep in mind that in the Terri Schiavo case (which the federal government had no jurisdiction and no business getting involved) was transferred to a federal case by a unanimous vote of the Senate. While I myself did not agree with what was going on in that case, the democrats were just as guilty as the GOP for overstepping their constitutional duty.

*soapbox*
I really think the whole right/left argument is really starting to distract from the bigger issues at hand. Ever since 2001 it seems issues and people have been more polarized than I ever can ever remember in politics. It's a shame because it prevents civil discourse on issues. All you see on most message boards issues dissolve into "You flamming liberal ****" and "You Neo-Con Nazi scum" (heck on TV too). I certainly don't think the GOP is right on all its platforms, nor do I think the democrats have all the answers. But more to your point about the GOP moving more to the right....I think the GOP is an absolute mess and frankly has no voice or platform right now and won't for some time. Who exactly is the voice for the GOP? Jindal? Palin? Steele? Limbaugh (lol)? Newt Gingrinch? Megan McCain? Someone else? With that in mind I think its presumptive to assume that the party has moved to the right.

[Mike Furley]

Polarizing right wing?

Name one pro-life person Barack Obama has appointed. Anytime I hear a liberal complain or comment about Republicans being partisan and/or polarizing I immediately chalk that person up as a dimwitted child. It cuts both ways.

As for Specter:

Specter switched parties because he knew he wouldn't win the Republican primary in 2010 and if by some chance he had, he was the Democrats #1 target to be knocked off. He switched for sheer political expediency. He is no different than other recent party switching political hacks of the governing class such as Jim Jeffords, Joe Lieberman, Ben Nighthorse Campbell and Richard Shelby.

Is it a good thing for the Dems? We'll see. There are no excuses now to not passing your agenda en masse and all of the credit/blame for the country is squarely on your shoulders. Good luck. It's a win/win for me. Either the country rebounds and our lives improve or it tanks and Dems are thrown out the next go round.

Enjoy it while you can

[Wolvrin704]

Polarizing right wing?

Name one pro-life person Barack Obama has appointed. Anytime I hear a liberal complain or comment about Republicans being partisan and/or polarizing I immediately chalk that person up as a dimwitted child. It cuts both ways.

As for Specter:

Specter switched parties because he knew he wouldn't win the Republican primary in 2010 and if by some chance he had, he was the Democrats #1 target to be knocked off. He switched for sheer political expediency. He is no different than other recent party switching political hacks of the governing class such as Jim Jeffords, Joe Lieberman, Ben Nighthorse Campbell and Richard Shelby.

Is it a good thing for the Dems? We'll see. There are no excuses now to not passing your agenda en masse and all of the credit/blame for the country is squarely on your shoulders. Good luck. It's a win/win for me. Either the country rebounds and our lives improve or it tanks and Dems are thrown out the next go round.

Enjoy it while you can

I couldn't have said it any better. This is just another example of politicians putting their career ahead of the interests of their constituents, their state and their country. He can spout all the hogwash he wants the fact is he switched to save his hide form an embarassing loss in the primaries. The funny thing will be if he still ends up losing.

Its things like this that lead me to believe maybe there should be term limits on Congress as well. When politicians do whatever is necessary to stay in office its time to do something about it. That would also enable fresh blood to regularly flow into Congress with fresh ideas. Say 2 terms for Senators and 4 terms for Reps.

At any rate in 4 years the Dems will be holding all the marbles. They'll still try to pin the blame on Bush and Republicans but the fact is they will at that point have controlled Congress for 6 years and had 4 years of total control. This country is very cylical and they typically don't like all power to reside in one party so enjoy the ride Dems while you can because it won't last long.

[RealSchool]

You guys make me laugh, Bush and the republicans had control for 6 years and already you are blaming Obama for everthing.

So don't give me this line of bull$hit:

"They'll still try to pin the blame on Bush and Republicans but the fact is they will at that point have controlled Congress for 6 years and had 4 years of total control."


Also Furley, on abortion what is your point? How was GWB record on being mainstream and appointing pro-choice people?

You all are walking and breathing hypocrites.

[The Michigan Man]

I couldn't have said it any better. This is just another example of politicians putting their career ahead of the interests of their constituents, their state and their country. He can spout all the hogwash he wants the fact is he switched to save his hide form an embarassing loss in the primaries. The funny thing will be if he still ends up losing.

Its things like this that lead me to believe maybe there should be term limits on Congress as well. When politicians do whatever is necessary to stay in office its time to do something about it. That would also enable fresh blood to regularly flow into Congress with fresh ideas. Say 2 terms for Senators and 4 terms for Reps.

At any rate in 4 years the Dems will be holding all the marbles. They'll still try to pin the blame on Bush and Republicans but the fact is they will at that point have controlled Congress for 6 years and had 4 years of total control. This country is very cylical and they typically don't like all power to reside in one party so enjoy the ride Dems while you can because it won't last long.

Yes, Politics 101 - who was in control of Congress when the financial collapse occurred? The President doesn't write legislation.

As far as being "mainstream", the Republican party has been moving to the left quite significantly over the past 20 years, but not nearly as far as the Democrat party.

If a modern politician ran for president and was a war veteran, believing in a strong national defense, tax cuts, immigration control, anti-abortion, and nation building, you would guess he was a Republican candidate. However, the above were some of the planks of JFK's platform - he wouldn't have a place in the modern Democrat Party, and would be more aligned with the Republicans.

Full blown socialism is on the horizon. Seizing control of private companies, firing CEOs, strong-arming companies into merging, is nationalizing healthcare, massive tax redistribution. The 1st 100 days have been the costliest in American history, and there is much, much more to come.

[Medic]

More to come? I doubt we'll know about it.

Just wait till they pass some version of the Internet Fairness Doctrine:
http://www.rantrave.com/Rant/Cass-Sunnstein-and-the-Fairness-Doctrine.aspx

memo: I made sure not to link this story from Foxnews as to be dismissed as conservative tripe.

The original fairness doctrine was to go after radio, but in seeing that was unpopular, the administration has changed it to the "Community and Minority Communications Fairness Act", which while sounding different, is the same thing. The death of free speech is upon us.

[RealSchool]

Yes, Politics 101 - who was in control of Congress when the financial collapse occurred? The President doesn't write legislation.

As far as being "mainstream", the Republican party has been moving to the left quite significantly over the past 20 years, but not nearly as far as the Democrat party.

If a modern politician ran for president and was a war veteran, believing in a strong national defense, tax cuts, immigration control, anti-abortion, and nation building, you would guess he was a Republican candidate. However, the above were some of the planks of JFK's platform - he wouldn't have a place in the modern Democrat Party, and would be more aligned with the Republicans.

Full blown socialism is on the horizon. Seizing control of private companies, firing CEOs, strong-arming companies into merging, is nationalizing healthcare, massive tax redistribution. The 1st 100 days have been the costliest in American history, and there is much, much more to come.

History 101, this collapse was years in the making and brought on by Wall Street getting a free pass from the republican run congress and Senate with Bush hapy to sign.

[Medic]

I'm sorry but you're delusional if you are cutting this meltdown into a "republicans bad, democrats good" blame game.

Both parties were complicit in its outcome. The facts of the last 14 years and policies implemented by both parties bears this out.

[chriswebber]

Parties come, parties go, that's American, but ideals stay. The republicans of today are 1960's democrats, the democrats today are 1920 communists, and the libertarian/conservative movement is still here. What part of the constitution gives the federal government the power to legislate over "Stem cell, fight against evolution, crap like Terri Schavo, enviromental beliefs or lack of. "

Stem cell research? It was never illegal. It just wasn't funded by the government. Why should the tax payers fund such an unrewarding program? Would you want the government to fund your neighbor's next research study in Christianity or missions trip?

Terri Schavo? The government has the power to protect innocent life and has an obligation to provide Schavo due process. Had Schavo had the proper will or trust, these things wouldn't have to be pursued in court. Further, Schavo's husband had a girlfriend whom he wished to marry. The evidence pointed to alternative motives to ending Terri's life. The government was solely protecting the interest of the citizen. In the same circumstances, wouldn't you want due process?

Environmental Beliefs & Evolution: Both of these ideals can be considered a form of religion. In fact, religions are normally based on pure speculation and theory.
Evolution, has its merits. Ideals such as natural selection have been proven. Survival of the fittest merits further study. However, forcing students to recite that the world evolved after a big bang has the same basis for teaching students that a god made the planet. Yet, why are either being taught? Does it matter where we are coming from biologically? We will only know theories, why spend so much time debating such a useless idea. Obviously, you wouldn't teach alien spawn theory, why teach evolution or creation?

Environmental Beliefs are mostly religion. Ideas such as people should contaminate drinking water are protected by the constitution by I believe the 10th amendment. The ideal of Global Warming or Climate Change caused and stoppable by man is a far out ideal. As anyone who has take a statistical class in college knows, the numbers do not work. Further, anyone that has s tudied advance math in college understands that there are too many variables to conclude with a legitimate response. Further, there is evidence that CO2 is a common place in the environment and we are most likely going through some phase. To base legislation on such beliefs would be comparable to banning ham intact because the Muslim religion deems it in pure. So be it that a political party does not want to forward unwarranted legislation that it does not deem necessary. Further, the power to do so is somewhat not defined by the constitution since "Environmentalism" is a form of religion, not law.


Republicans are on the verge of following the democratic party in to the oblivion of insanity or falling back onto their more conservative roots. A party is a party, it will change with the times, but most people will maintain their own ideals and either start a new party or reclaim an old one. The Republicans are far from gone. The republicans have won 3 out of the last 6 presidential elections 2 of the past 3. What part of that statistic relegates the republican party to 'long gone'?

[gator]

Medic and I couldn't be more on the same page here if we were reading from the same script. Democrats and Republicans are tanking this country; I don't even see a difference between them any more. Both are at fault. Check out this little video, realschool :http://video.google.com/videosearch?sourceid=navclient&rlz=1T4GGLR_enUS265US266&q=fannie+mae+freddie+mac&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=ggEESub_G8OrtgeyjPj8Bg&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&resnum=7&ct=title#
It's a nice little snippit of just who was trying to prevent the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac almost 5 years ago and who was turning a blind eye. Suprise, suprise, the Democrats didn't see any problems with these institutions, the primary cause for the collapse of the housing market in this country, while the Republicans were calling for tighter regulation. Yet, the Democrats have done a wonderful job of pinning the housing market crises on the Republicans.

Now hold on, the Republicans have their hands in things too. I do not agree, however, that they've moved right. In fact, I think the reason their numbers of support are falling is because they are moving left away from their base. GW #42 won becasue he ran on conservative values, but then left the base out to dry, running up spending like a left-wing nutcase. Now, you got Obama who's putting this country in more debt than all previous administrations combined. The analysis is easy, there is only one philosophy in town baby, and it's spend, spend, spend. Who's going to pay for that....the good ol' American taxpayer. I guess that's why RealSchool isn't really that worried about it. I mean, you really have to contribute to society before you can recognize the tyranny looming for the industrious taxpayer.

The real issue here isn't Democrat and Republican; it's liberal and conservative. My personal belief is that many on left accept the insane fiscal policies of the left simply becasue they HATE the religious philosophies shared by many on the right, and they believe anything the right supports can't be good. Leaving religion out of it, the fiscal beleifs of the left are indeed nothing short of insane. How can you honestly support what many think is an additional 10+ trillion in debt? And for what?...Creating a couple hundred thousand new "government jobs", bailing out Wall Street (which liberals hate anyway), nationalized healthcare, "clean energy kickbacks, i mean research"? It's been tried and true, after the Great Depression and during the Regan years, the best way to grow the economy is for the government to be hands off (for the most part) and lower taxes. FDR found out that all that spending didn't fix shit, and it took a WWII (not that I'm advocating war) to get us out of the depression. All this spending leads to higher taxes, which ultimately makes American businesses less competitive; hence they HAVE TO MOVE OVERSEAS to stay alive. Beyond that, I'm starting to see massive support for Labor Unions by the new administration. How did that turn out for Michigan and the auto industry? That's right, they're all f#cking bankrupt!

RealSchool, you have to get your head out of your ass and recognize the fiscal policies coming out of Washington (no matter who is pushing them) for what they are (damn near socialism). Even with your limited IQ, you have to admit that the USA has achieved an economic status unseen in this world ever before. You also have to admit that it was due to a system that bases reward on skill, risk, and effort. I hate to say it, but I almost hope your boy, Obama, succeeds in getting his crap passed, so Americans can finally see the clusterfuck these policies cause. Unfortunately, we'll be so far in debt by then, no one will be able to save us. We'll have a lost (economic) decade, if not worse, just like the Japan.

[RealSchool]

"I guess that's why RealSchool isn't really that worried about it. I mean, you really have to contribute to society before you can recognize the tyranny looming for the industrious taxpayer."


This coming from a guy hiding out in college year after year. I pay more in taxes then you earn, that I gurantee. Maybe some day if you get the guts you will join the workforce and leave the college blacket behind. Nothing more annoying than a professional student that lectures about the real world. Gator you are a joke.

[RealSchool]

History 101, this collapse was years in the making and brought on by Wall Street getting a free pass from the republican run congress and Senate with Bush hapy to sign.

Do any of you have the integrity to address this fact?

[chriswebber]

Do any of you have the integrity to address this fact?

It's not a fact. What cause the Wall Street collapse was ______ . No one will know. It's theory. If you can point fingers and name names, well you're the best economist I've ever heard.

[Medic]

Do any of you have the integrity to address this fact?

That's kinda loaded don't you think? Anyhow I didn't exactly see Clinton's SEC and Fed chairman's going after corporate cheaters with vigor. Enron was cooking the shit out of their books back in 1998 where were the democrats then? For that matter where was the SEC on Worldcomm, Tyco, and other .com era companies that exploded spectacularly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boo.com (Boo wasn't publicly traded like many other IPOs but you get the idea)

The only reason I bring this up is this RS. You seem like a pretty smart guy, but until you can look at the big picture of Wall Street and dig beyond the superficial musings of sites like dailykos and firedog (this is an assumption on my part, sometimes your rhetoric reaches this level) and understand that politicians in general, whether they are Republican or Democrat have not been acting like public servants for some time. You'll be stuck in that grind I keep hearing of "Republicans bad, Democrats good".

[amazinblue]

This coming from a guy hiding out in college year after year. I pay more in taxes then you earn, that I gurantee. Maybe some day if you get the guts you will join the workforce and leave the college blacket behind. Nothing more annoying than a professional student that lectures about the real world. Gator you are a joke.


RealSchool,

I think that you have demonstrated your intelligence and insight, or more specifically - your lack thereof, to a greater degree in this post than you ever have before.

Personally, I have great respect for Gator and the work he's done to gain his degrees. As one who put myself through college, I realize first hand the level of effort required and sacrifices necessary to attain degrees - and, regardless of his field of study, gaining a PhD in any field is a tremendous accomplishment.

And, though you boast of the taxes you pay - and your tremendous income - I hope you're investing wisely, because Mr. Obama, Ms. Pelosi, and the likes will be targeting your extraordinary income in the future to pay for their sophisticated recovery plans.

My guess is that you're some type of a sales rep, maybe with a technical degree (i.e. Computer Sciences from Michigan) - you may be an overlay rep for a technology company - who had a career year last year. I'm glad you did. Just do me a favor, why don't you wait until you actually enter the tax bracket that Obama and Democrats are targeting before you reply with another idiotic post. I'm in that bracket - and, I believe that I know how to invest my income better than the federal government does.

[The Michigan Man]

RealSchool,

I think that you have demonstrated your intelligence and insight, or more specifically - your lack thereof, to a greater degree in this post than you ever have before.

Personally, I have great respect for Gator and the work he's done to gain his degrees. As one who put myself through college, I realize first hand the level of effort required and sacrifices necessary to attain degrees - and, regardless of his field of study, gaining a PhD in any field is a tremendous accomplishment.

And, though you boast of the taxes you pay - and your tremendous income - I hope you're investing wisely, because Mr. Obama, Ms. Pelosi, and the likes will be targeting your extraordinary income in the future to pay for their sophisticated recovery plans.

My guess is that you're some type of a sales rep, maybe with a technical degree (i.e. Computer Sciences from Michigan) - you may be an overlay rep for a technology company - who had a career year last year. I'm glad you did. Just do me a favor, why don't you wait until you actually enter the tax bracket that Obama and Democrats are targeting before you reply with another idiotic post. I'm in that bracket - and, I believe that I know how to invest my income better than the federal government does.

I find the fact the Realschool makes so much money very disturbing. What would Marx have to say about that? As a show of his unyielding support of Barry Hussein and all that is socialist, I believe that Realschool should immediately transfer all income above the national average to the US Treasury. Also, all capital gains must be transferred as well, as it is unfair for the rich to shamefully earn all of that money on the backs of the poor.

[RealSchool]

Why do you get so worked up amazinblue? This is nothing but fun until the season begins and we can actually have something to talk/post about again. Crap, I am the osunut of this part of the website. :eek:

The other part? Scary how close you are to being correct.

[amazinblue]

Why do you get so worked up amazinblue? This is nothing but fun until the season begins and we can actually have something to talk/post about again. Crap, I am the osunut of this part of the website. :eek:

The other part? Scary how close you are to being correct.

RealSchool,

The tough thing about posting is you can never be sure when someone posts if they are being sarcastic, or have real intent.

You're posts certainly do one thing - and that is to draw attention. I'll be the first one to line up for a debate - since, I do believe our society has become one of soundbites, and most people aren't patient enough to listen to an opposing point of view, articulate their thoughts, and engage in a conversation / debate about their point of view.

So, if we get back to the point of the thread - the problem that our economy is facing didn't arise overnight - and, it was neither a Democratic nor Republican issue. Both parties have demonstrated fiscal irresponsibility when having Congressional majorities.

The biggest challenge I believe our country faces is a thirst for consumption based on credit. And, though credit serves a good purpose - such as a mortgage for a home - or student loans for an education - I believe that most credit is not consumed in this manner. Most credit is for "something bigger and newer" than what we have that already works. And, IMO, THAT is the problem. The one "good" thing that may result from this crisis is a cultural change that results in a greater savings rate for all Americans.

Regarding the Republican Party - all I can say is - it is in disarray. The Republicans have become, IMO, primarily a one issue party - and that issue begins with Choice / Abortion. I felt that Dick Cheney's comments on Face the Nation yesterday were indicative of how the Republicans have slowly become out of touch. I live in Illinois, and the Republican party really doesn't exist here - it's a tragedy.

What do the Republicans have to do? IMO, they have to answer a question - and, I'll borrow a quote from the third Indiana Jones movie - "What do you believe?" I believe in personal accountability, social responsibility, fiscal conservatism, and freedom.

[gator]

amazin,

Thanks for the support, bro. I agree with you on many of your thoughts here. We can't blame these things on just Reps or Dems; they're abusing us all the way around. I, like you, also point to credit/debt and the craving for such as a major cause of this economic catastrophy. I would have to say one of my proudest achievements has been putting myself through nearly a decade of college without ever taking out a student loan (and no financial support from my family). And the same goes for my wife, who is now in her sixth year. The only way we accomplished this was HARD work and living within our means - something so few Americans seem willing or capable of doing anymore. Sure, I drive a piece right now and we just have a double wide, but what we have is ours or we can at least afford the payments with our currently "meager" income (though it's well above the national average even though we are both students). By the way, I have to say I like your platform...why can't we just get enough representatives (from any party) to strongly assert such? Personal accountability is my credo, but I guess those type of ideas just aren't mainstream anymore.

RS,

Sorry, if I insulted you income-making ability. Though I may have deserved a shot from you, you're nuts if you think that I've been "hiding" at college. My college is all part of a plan that makes me a go-getter, and I assure you that I've done my fair share of "real-world" work getting to this point. "Hiding" is when someone flounders around for 8 years getting a Bachelor's on daddy's tab; it's not exactly the same when you're paying for it yourself. My wife and I have a real vision of our future, and it takes time to put something like that together. The type of careers we have chosen require real education and experience and, more importantly, afford opportunity. We both came from nothing, and the only way for us to even the playing field, we believe, was to educate ourselves. Our plan is simple: 1) Education; 2) Work, earn, and save, 3) Invest, own, and operate. As we both graduate in the next year, we should quickly get our annual income upwards of $150,000/year and continue to increase the remainder of our lifetime. Seeing how we are used to living within our means and know how to save, we will quickly build up our investment money that allows us to pursue our ultimate endevours (at least financially speaking) - business ownership, stock-market investments, and real estate. I firmly believe that our income will exceed 1/4 million a year at some point in the future. I don't know your personal situation, but I see myself entering that "targeted" tax bracket that amazinblue mentioned. I don't believe that I'm anything special; in fact, I've always argued the opposite. I'm simply the possibility of what any American can make of himself....that is if he is willing to pay the price. That price includes many sleepless nights, working and going to school at the same time, sometimes working two full-time jobs simultaneously, studying your ass off instead of spending time with family and friends, writing papers (which I hate) for nearly 2 straight years, driving shitty cars, living in shitty apartments, never going out on the town, eating rice and beans, putting off having children, etc, etc... wait, what am I saying, I've just been hiding.:D

Do you understand why I might feel entitled to the things that I have earned? I personally don't think $250,000/year is even rich, and those making that kind of money aren't necessarily evil and not all of them earn their money off the exploitation of others. Many of them are just folks who have suceeded in this great land and happen to find themsleves targeted by our government officials so they can secure the votes of the "less fortunate." The problem is that the higher tax brackets are nearing 50%, and I ask where is the incentive? Why have I and, more importantly, why will those in the future continue to put themselves through the kind of struggles I have faced if the end result is to have the governement take half of what you make and give it to those who haven't been so ambitious. Don't get me wrong, I don't fundamentally disagree with the concept of taxes. In fact, I think citizens have a duty to pay taxes, but the system should be fair and everyone should have to pay something. Personally, I feel that if you don't pay taxes you should be able to vote. I think it is ridiculous that over 50% of Americans don't pay any federal taxes. How can they understand the plight of the taxpayer? IMO, this country is the land of opportunity with the possibility of both success and failure, and not the land of guarantees for everyone. So yes, this is a specific problem I have with Democrats who have championed taxes for the "rich." I also dislike their general position on gun control, rights for illegal aliens, nationalized health care, and global warming; but I'm not looking to get into that here.

While I have my issues with Democrats, I also have my issues with the Republicans, especially this ridiculous spending with which many of them have been compliant over the past decade. What you have to realize is that there are some issues where you have to quit seeing party lines and start asking yourself if this is good for the country. For instance, the enormous budget, stimulus, and bailout packages are all increasing our debt. This new administration has us on the hook for +10 trillion dollars. This debt will ensure high taxes for years to come just to pay the interest. If we actually try to pay it off, taxes will have to go higher or be expanded to a wider base, i.e., the middle class and poor. With the FED printing "free money" and the government borrowing at unprecented rates to pay for these programs, we face almost certain inflation in the near future. The value of the dollar will drop vs other currencies, preventing other countries from lending to us or doing so at a higher interest rate. The value may drop to the point that the dollar is no longer the world standard, causing all kinds of hell. Most importantly, as the dollar devalues, the poor and middle class won't be able to purchase as many goods with the money they do have. Cap and trade is another beauty, passed under the guise of environmental safety and global warming, that will stick it to the poor and middle class. And while it may discourage the production of some CO2 (due to cost), it still doesn't provide a real solution - clean energy. I just got a notice last month that my power bill could go up $50-$100/ month; that's between 50%-100%. Now think of every company in this country facing those same kinds of increases; you think they're going to swallow those loses? Nope, passed on to you and me in every thing we buy everywhere. I don't even want to think of gasoline prices. I heard one estimate today that cap and trade legislation could have an average family cost of $1600/year. I'm sure the poor and middle class won't mind that, but then again they're probably so busy counting their federal "tax cut" (even though they don't actually pay taxes) from Obama that they won't even notice.

I haven't met too many liberals that could get two or three logical thoughts together, so I doubt this argument did anything for you. Yet, I remain hopeful that you will eventually see the light. What I can never understand is why anyone would support a party that preaches defeatism and negativity over optimism and opportunity, except that they are lazy and fearful of personal responsibility. The only ideology I ever hear from the Dems is: "It's not your fault. Someone cheated or exploited you. It's the banking system's fault or the credit card company's fault. You can't do it on your own. Let us pay for your healthcare, college, retirement, and if you're really lazy your food and housing as well." Damn, it must suck to believe everyone has a say in your life except you. When do they ever say, "You're in control of your life. You can do it; make something of yourself. Don't wait on us, get out there and start a business (and we won't tax you to death). You don't need us because you have the power to shape your own life." I honestly beleive that was the real problem in NO after Katrina. Those people had been depending on the government their whole lives; and when the government wasn't there to baby their ass, it was a catastrophy. Government is fallible and, honestly, they usually aren't looking out for your best interest. Obabma doesn't know you, he doesn't know what's good for you, and even if you met he probably wouldn't like you, so don't give Obabma, Bush, Dems, Reps, or anyone else more control of your life than absolutely necessary.