Are Conservatives and Republicans holding back the U.S?

In the race to the edge of the cliff in the sports-car , sit a liberal at the wheel and a conservative republican in the passenger seat. Suddenly the car stops at the edge of the cliff. The tires are smoking as the engine roars. looking down, the conservative republican has his foot on the brake, even as the liberal democrat is still stepping on the gas.

If you give people anything free, they will not work for it. They will suck the economy dry. and then complain for what you have, and then riot in the streets if you don't hand it over.

If people want something, go earn it. If they have it, remember to be compassionate to those who don't and help them out, but also teach them to make it on their own. Own a gun, stop a criminal who has a gun aimed at you. Unemployed ? Be willing to work for less till you can earn more.

Who would you rather be ? As for me, I'll be a conservative.

Originally posted by lordtyp0
reply to post by GAOTU789

 

There are actually some key items to fix the health care system-but the insurance lobby is very powerful and got the laws placed to begin with...

1: remove the requirement that medical services be forced to charge the same thing to those without insurance as they do the insurance companies.

Eh?

I am uninsured. Have been for years. Whenever I go to a Doctor or hospital or whatever, I have consistently been given a 40-50% discount when I tell them I'm paying "out of pocket." Half-priced medical.
If that's against the law, as you are claiming...no one seems to know about it.

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors
And YES, Obama has us involved in quite a handful of wars

I love how you just sweep aside this major flaw in your ridiculous generalizations.

but if a CONservative republican was in office right now, we would STILL be in Iraq,

You do know we left Iraq based on George Bush's time table, right?

I think it's big businesses that are holding back. At my old job, my General Manager was friends with some BIg players in the oil business. I got to tag along to a couple lunches and meetings with these guys. From hearing those conversations, it's the business guys that hate Obama that are holding back.

GOP politcians play along to get campaign money but the root of it is the business owners that have a lot of power over hiring and increasing production and spending.

Sweden, Norway, Switzerland, and Finland all actively support gun ownership. In Sweden you need to pass a test (basic instruction) to own a rifle / shotgun but for handguns you need to complete a training course and a pay for a license. In Finland you're allowed to own the same weapons as you would be in the U.S. with little to no restriction. They even promote the use of suppressors to lower noise pollution. In Norway you need to get a license but any person over the age of 18 can own a firearm as long as it has a documented purpose, such as hunting or self protection. In Switzerland you're required to serve in the military and you're given a Sig rifle and Sig pistol to keep in your home. Switzerland has one of the highest militia gun ownership rates in the world. They tend to emphasize rifles / shotguns over handguns but in most circumstances anyone over the age of 18 can own a firearm with little to no hassle. Tighter gun restrictions are a terrible idea. You'll only create a black market, more crime, and you'll leave law abiding citizens without protection. If you don't like guns, fine don't own one; but don't put your ideals and values on me, especially when it infringes on not only my constitutional right but my right to protect myself.

If you get rid of guns crime only goes up.

BBC: Handgun crime 'up' despite ban
Daily Mail: Culture of violence: Gun crime goes up by 89% in a decade
WND: Crime up Down Under
ABC: Gun Control Isn't Crime Control

There are some links.

The happiest countries in the world don't care about banning firearms or tighter restrictions, in 2011 Switzerland voted down a proposal for tighter gun control.

If we had another civil war it wouldn't be focused on killing our leaders. It would just be crazy all out war where anyone with needed goods would become a target. I believe we have let too many stupid people procreate so we need to thin out the population. The poor and uneducated are having more children than the wealthier. This used to happen because some of the children would die. Now its just carelessness or for want of a bigger welfare check.

Originally posted by eleven44
In response to your title:

NO.

People who think there is still a difference between the establishment Left and establishment Right are the ones holding, not only this country, but our world back.

I agree 100%. I was going to voice my opinion, but you summed it up rather well I should say...


Deluded leftists are just as bad as the deluded right.

You'll be my target in the coming apocalypse is what you'll be. How can you look at the fact of rich getting richer and poor getting poorer and place the blame on people you say are being lazy? A man can work his whole life as a laborer and never have an opportunity to make more than minimum wage. I'm sick of you people that want to protect the wealthy by projecting the poor as being lazy and stupid. If the poor quit roofing, plumbing, building, and farming you wouldn't know what to do. These jobs are so underpaid and most labor jobs don't offer benefits. You don't know what you are talking about. We have 300,000,000 people in America. There isn't enough room for people to move up. People stuck at minimum wage can't afford to live anymore. Its hard to make a living if you are making double minimum wage. How can you afford a doctors visit if you make minimum wage? You can't. The gap between the wealthy and poor is greater now than ever before and all you want to do is protect the wealthy from having to pay the same rate of taxes as the rest of us who are actually struggling to survive. I had cauda equina syndrome and was going to be paralyzed and couldn't get help for a year. Now my back still hurts real bad and I can't work. I need disability but the steps you have to go through and time it takes I might as well blow my own head off now. That's why I'm saving it for people like you.

Originally posted by muse7
I didn't say to make gun ownership illegal, I simply proposed to make gun ownership a privilege and not a right.

It wouldn't mean that you would not be able to own one, but you would have to go through more background checks, file more paperwork etc.

Reducing the number of people who own guns, reduces the number of guns that go "lost" and end up in the wrong hands.

I agree. An ex-friend of mine bought a gun for one of his friends who is a known dealer because he got him one too... the dealers house was broken into less then 2 weeks after and the gun was stolen...

Something needs to be done to prevent things like this from happening. I'm not a fan of guns, but if TSHTF you bet I'll find me one for protection...

Originally posted by Gorsebeacon
A man can work his whole life as a laborer and never have an opportunity to make more than minimum wage. I'm sick of you people that want to protect the wealthy by projecting the poor as being lazy and stupid. If the poor quit roofing, plumbing, building, and farming you wouldn't know what to do. These jobs are so underpaid and most labor jobs don't offer benefits. You don't know what you are talking about.

Ok, stop right there. Blue collar workers were the middle class. They are being squeezed our of the middle class and into the poor class due to exactly what I've been trying to say in my other posts. There is a limit to how much in taxes you can take from the middle class before you drive them into welfare too. The Liberal agenda the "entitlement mentality" are killing the middle class.

Instead of trying to carry half the population, we need to fix our economy and get them to work so they don't need assistance. We can do that by lowering taxes which will jump start our economy and get businesses hiring again and willing to pay more in wages because they pay less in taxes. This will create jobs and that means less people on wellfare, and more people paying taxes. The more people paying taxes, the lower the rates need to be, and the happier we all are.

BTW, my husband works in construction and the better you are the better you get paid. People need to stop making excuses and go out there and be competitive if you want to make more, not demand to be compensated. This is such bulls#!t, and it's destroying our great country.

reply to post by muse7


I get what you're trying to say, but protecting yourself and your family from some criminal WITH a gun, is a right and can never be a privelege. A privilege is something an entity ALLOWS you to do, and I'll never need permission to protect me and mine, regardless of ANY man-made law.

reply to post by Gorsebeacon


I get what you're saying, but I think the blame is being misplaced. To the elite, you're one of those stupid people. I'm not saying that, but that's how the elite feels about most of the population. Poor people are not the problem, and most of them don't choose or want to be poor. Greedy politicians and corporations are the problem, my friend. And the term 'civil war' should be an oxymoron, because there isn't a damn thing civil about war.

reply to post by muse7


Working people are tired of the burden of supporting people who have been led to believe they're entitled to a handout. What happened to "Don't work; Don't eat"? This takes assistance away from those who are truly in need.

The two party system is a fairly recent phenomena historically. Most individual beliefs to not fit neatly into any box.

When I hear "Religious" I recognize it as meaning PROGRAMMED.

An armed society IS a polite society.

reply to post by eleven44


Exactly! They are two wings of the same bird and they are not each other's enemy contrary to popular belief. They use the republican, democrat, liberal, conservative crap to divide us, the people. And lo and behold! It's working.

op is out of his mind.

your opinions are not facts, and they are not based off of any shred of truth.

pure liberal BS at its best.

i actually think OP is a troll. no way anybody can be that dumb.

When you have more people consuming tax revenue than generating tax revenue the current state of the union exists and has but only one outcome complete and total failure.

Within 50 short years this nation went from the largest lender to the largest debtor in the world that ain't on the right that is bad government bad social programs.

the $15 trillion dollar deficit while people like to place blame on War the simple fact the majority of that debt is owed to Government workers,pensions, and social programs. Just like the over 120 trillion owed to the people via Social Security,Medicare,Medicaid.

The largest expansion of Government control and spending has been on the hands of those freedom loving flower children(oops nevermind the murder and war and spending of them for the past 3 years ) liberals aka Democrats.

Without the Right in this country well this place would be a hell of a lot worse.

reply to post by muse7


I take care of my own family and don't need public assistance.
I know how to grow a garden and can my own food.I also know
how to shoot but I have never been hunting.

I will not tolerate anyone who is trying to turn the U.S. into a communist
country!

reply to post by Tsurugi


Thats called a "Cash at time of service discount". It's the one loophole in the scheme really. Other hospitals will work out payment plans and write off but it is entirely dependent on the hospital/clinic/office.

Of course -- this is a topic for another discussion, but what is so blatantly so? What of the Democratic side has produced the desired effects of "personal freedom, the right of adults to do whatever they want so long as no harm comes"? Point being, we both could produce legislation from both sides that counter such desire. One side legislates morality, the other conduct. Both seek to produce the desired effect of control.

Blatantly so on Republican bills... The Patriot Act for one, the "House transportation bill"-just a couple off the top of my head. Im sure I can find a LOT of them if I googled-but currently at work. The NDAA was basically a re-write of the patriot act which contrary to a lot of claims gave more protections to citizens. The "Indefinite detention" clause was LIV by Obama.
I sort of agree and sort of disagree with the assessment of method of control. The purpose of laws is, in itself for the express purpose of controlling "bad" behavior. Between "Morality" and Conduct(Ethics?) I would side with conduct every time. An extreme example of this conduct: Ethically it is bad to kill regardless of reason-mitigating circumstances excuse it-such as self defense or defense of another. "Morality" in itself has a religious overtone-at least in common current usage. In this form it could and in many countries-does allow to murder people for Moral reasons-re: Sharia law and similar. Essentially-conduct is not subjective, morality is.

As for the body scanner.

(snipped for space)

I am having a hard time finding information backing this claim. Can you help me?

Checking, Ill post the info in another post.

You state that "most of the military...boards...are republican controlled". What boards? Corporate board room? Congressional Committees? Senate Committees?

I should have said committees in that case. Generally the majority assigns seats on the committees as they see fit. Commonly they do it to curry favors. One correction-I noticed that Levin (D or Michigan and original sponsor of the NDAA) Is the chairman for a few powerful committees. It is common though for committees to be stripped of opposing members and basically stacked with cronies (both sides).

Both parties present pet-projects and both parties fight tooth and nail. Democrats and Republicans alike. There are those who fight diligently within each faction; who stand for the ideals of the party and they are to be commended.

IMO the "Pork Barrel Spending" in the form of pet projects are actually-commonly a good thing. They funnel money back into a local level at least partly. They do tend to be inflated but a noticeable portion trickles down to the city/state. There is a difference in this though and a contract being awarded to someones buddy where they pay them 1000% of market value for a product. A common company that gets those is Haliburton-HB has a lot of ties with the republican party.

...have you ever heard of the concept of black swan theory?...(snipped for space)

I am unfamiliar with "black swan theory", but in context it sounds like confirmation bias. I am very objective in political items. In no way am I meaning to say or claim Dems are somehow faultless or blameless on things. I am saying they are the lesser of the evils. On my local experiences-the people drawn tend to try and do sweeping and grandiose updates, the republican side tries to sneak in extra profits. For a simple scenario to illustrate:

A need to rezone an area to allow some extra businesses to setup shop and try to revitalize an area-simple and straightforward. When working with the republican members-the republican: We also should remove the beautification ordinance in the area to save startings money (the guy in question had holdings or interests in 3 stores in the area, all required to do some remodeling to paint, repair facades etc.). The Democrat: we should also reduce the height levels, move smoking boundaries, add sound ordinances, facade color requirement addon to the beautification ordinance, etc. etc.

Sometimes it feels like the Dem side wants a weird romanesque distopia where people lay around eating grapes and thought crimes occur when insensitive. The Reps would ultimately create a dystopian world covered in factories where religious inquisitions run rampant and Ayne Rand is preached.

That's the job of conservatives...to hold back the liberals. It's pretty much the definition of their name.

And it's a good thing they are there, because liberals turn into dictators when they aren't held back...

Don't take my word for these facts, they come from Dostoevsky, not a direct quote mind you.