The Government Can

This is the forum frequently asked questions section and will always be a work in progress.

Why create such a forum?

Several reason's have lead me to create this forum but the biggest is the over moderation and censorship on previous forums that I have visited has inspired to to create a forum solely about today's politics. Today's politics are more controversial than they ever have been and …

The Rules here are very simple

-No Attacking a person's race and/or religion
-No Personal Threats (this includes the politicians)
-Stay on Topic
-No links to porn sites and nudity
-Swearing is allowed but it has to be appropriate and NO F-bombs and other grossly vulgar words

-Don't be a douchebag

Most offensives will get a warning, however you may not even get a warning and you may be banned, …

Subject: The Government Can Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:40 pm

Subject: Re: The Government Can Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:57 pm

Subject: Re: The Government Can Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:56 am

Something else the government can do...

https://i.imgur.com/XjZQj.jpg

Subject: Re: The Government Can Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:43 pm

fatbass wrote:: Something else the government can do...

https://i.imgur.com/XjZQj.jpg

It's getting kind of scary isn't it? Just one more reason why we - the people - need to support ANY candidate that can actually beat Obama in November!

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 11:05 am

dubob wrote:

fatbass wrote:: Something else the government can do...

https://i.imgur.com/XjZQj.jpg

It's getting kind of scary isn't it? Just one more reason why we - the people - need to support ANY candidate that can actually beat Obama in November!

You mean someone like Romney? Why/how is he any better than Obama? He says he supports NDAA, he supported TARP, he supports the concept that there are businesses "too big too fail", he passed an individual mandate for insurance in MA, he supports GITMO, and he supports continuing interventionist wars. So, why/how is he any better than Obama?

scratch

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 11:51 am

proutdoors wrote:: You mean someone like Romney? Why/how is he any better than Obama? He says he supports NDAA, he supported TARP, he supports the concept that there are businesses "too big too fail", he passed an individual mandate for insurance in MA, he supports GITMO, and he supports continuing interventionist wars. So, why/how is he any better than Obama?

I said it once and I'll say it again; you will not listen to anything I say and for me to have to listen to more of your imbecilic political philosophy is more pain than I can possibly stand. You and I have absolutely nothing in common politically and to believe otherwise is insane. Any further discussions between you and I will accomplish absolutely nothing. Bitch on if you care too. Somebody out there may actually give a shit - I don't.

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:47 pm

dubob wrote:: Somebody out there may actually give a shit - I don't.

Thai is clear by your willingness to remain in the dark! I am scared for my country because there are far too many people with their heads up their asses, just like YOU! Don't worry about the FACTS, don't worry about the TRUTH, just keep living as a slave. You are part of the PROBLEM, not part of the solution. Carry on with your grazing in the meadow with the rest of the sheep!

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:59 pm

DAMN IT BOOB!!!!! Thats one minute and eight seconds of my life that
you owe me back!!!!

I hope you and PROphylactic keep it up with your "Conservative" pissing match.

As an outsider keeping score I gotta tell ya PRO is way more out of his mind than you are!!! DAMN IT BOOB get to work.

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:07 pm

Thanks for the compliment! The further I am from thinking like vor, the closer I am to being aligned with the Constitution......

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:09 pm

I like this video better!!!

So will PROphylactic

http://crooksandliars.com/tina-dupuy/ironic-news-report-mark-bain

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:28 pm

voiceofreason wrote:: DAMN IT BOOB!!!!! Thats one minute and eight seconds of my life that
you owe me back!!!!

I hope you and PROphylactic keep it up with your "Conservative" pissing match.

As an outsider keeping score I gotta tell ya PRO is way more out of his mind than you are!!! DAMN IT BOOB get to work.

It ain't gonna happen Pinhead. I'm all done with the imbecile. He's as set in cement with his views as you are and cannot think outside the box. He's to be pitied actually. He’ll end up pissing away his vote on somebody who can’t win when the real showdown comes in November or he won’t vote at all which is just as bad.

And hey, welcome back Pinhead. You’ve been absent for a few weeks and it’s been kind of dull around here without you. Have you been ice fishing? Having any luck? I’m heading out on the hard deck two or three times this week in search of some more perch. Life is good.

cheers

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:51 pm

WOW! Bob is so mature he can't direct comments to a person, and he has lowered himself to the point of name calling. Bob, is that because you are far smarter than me? I am sorry no one else is as enlightened as you. How silly of me to actually take the Constitution seriously. I realize you are willing to compromise your principles, if you have any at all, but I am NOT. You say my views are set in cement, but that is being intellectually dishonest at best, intellectually void being more likely. I was once as blind/ignorant as you are hell bent on staying, then I woke up. I credit fatbass will assisting my 'progress' BACK to the Constitution and the Principles within it and admonished by the Founders. Sadly, I once supported wars of intervention, I once supported the Patriot Act, I once supported Gitmo, and I even once thought there were differences of substance between republicans and democrats at the national level. Then I educated myself, I studied the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, the writings of the Founders, I educated myself on economics, on human nature, and on history....yes it actually can teach us things....

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 3:07 pm

Looks like both sides of this coin needs to be patient with the other, instead of being so "stiff" on your views explain and tell us why. I get it, politics is a very passionate topic, but we still need to be compassionate and not hide behind a keyboard issuing back handed insults.

You two are both conservative, yet one see's things very differently then the other, respect it, teach why your view is different, let's get/keep the dialogue going even with differences of opinion.

Just my observations, carry on!

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 4:43 pm

Good points, yonni. Except I am not sure I consider myself a 'conservative', at least not under the current definition being lauded by the MSM and the mainstream GOP candidates.

In an attempt to reach out to dubob I will try and explain why I see no differences between Barry and Mitt/Newt/Rick: 1)All are for bigger government, IMHO. they just disagree on how to grow it. One prefers growing the government through regulations, another through interventionist wars.....oh wait that is what all four adhere to to, a couple of them support individual mandates to purchase health insurance, as far as I can tell all of them support NDAA (and there is NOTHING conservative about NDAA), one wants the government to tell adults what other adults they can marry.....again that seems to be all four of them's position, one wants to criminalize gay acts between ADULTS. I honestly am mystified at how someone can say they are for smaller government, and at the same time support policies such as NDAA, TARP, bailouts, the federal reserve, climate change mandates, interventionist wars (this is the single biggest oxymoron within the 'conservative' movement, IMHO), and so on.

So I ask dubob and other supporters of Barry/Newt/Mitt/Rick, in complete sincerity, how do you support policies/politicians that run contrary to the Constitution? And if you contend the above policies/politicians are aligned with the Constitution, can you explain how so? Thank you....and sorry for the abrasive posts I have made as of late...

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:31 pm

So gay marrige is OK but abortion is not???

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:33 pm

voiceofreason wrote:: So gay marrige is OK but abortion is not???

Nope. Marriage is NONE of the governments business. Consenting adults should be free to marry other consenting adults without any say from the government! Abortion should at the most be a state issue, the federal government, the Supreme Court specifically, should never have ruled one way or the other.

The federal government has very LIMITED and very SPECIFIC roles, and marriage and abortion are NOT among them, IMHO!

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:01 pm

Holy Shit!!!! And you call me a progressive???

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:12 pm

proutdoors wrote:: I honestly am mystified at how someone can say they are for smaller government, and at the same time support policies such as NDAA, TARP, bailouts, the federal reserve, climate change mandates, interventionist wars (this is the single biggest oxymoron within the 'conservative' movement, IMHO), and so on.

I’m frankly not inspired to put a lot of effort in to the research needed to answer all of the examples you cited above. However, I did randomly pick three that I thought would be somewhat easy to find data on. It took me about 2 hours to find some data having relevance to stands on NDAA, TARP, and Climate Change. Let me start with the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012.

First, let me explain that this legislation has been around for 49 years. It’s not new by any stretch of the imagination. What are new in the 2012 version are some provisions not previously considered regarding detention of American Citizens. All three candidates do, in fact, support the NDAA 2012. And I agree with the reasoning for their support as stated. Is there a possibility of abuse of powers with the provisions as written? That has not been determined yet and there are legal arguments available supporting both sides of that argument. There has not been a definitive case made for either side – yet. The jury is still out on this one and I happen to agree with Romney’s take on it at this point in time. I’m free to change my mind on that point as more data is collected and analyzed that proves one side or the other in the future.

Next, I’ll give you some research data I found that refutes your assertion that ALL the candidates support TARP. First is Romney’s stand on the issue. In March 2009, Romney told Reuters, "The TARP program, while not transparent and not having been used as wisely it should have been, was nevertheless necessary to keep banks from collapsing in a cascade of failures. You cannot have a free economy and free market if there is not a financial system. The TARP program was designed to keep the financial system going, to keep money circulating in the economy, without which the entire economy stops and you would really have an economic collapse." I agree with that assessment based on empirical data I have studied in the past and recently. You, of course, are free to disagree based on whatever your research or gut feeling tells you about the truth of the matter.

In December 2009, he said "And by the way, TARP has served its purpose. TARP ought to be ended. We've got hundreds of billions of dollars there that is being used as a slush fund by Secretary (Timothy) Geithner and the Obama administration. Stop the TARP recklessness at this point and get ourselves back to creating jobs by encouraging businesses to grow, expand their capital expenditures and hire." Again, I agree that it had served its intended purpose and the time was right (in 2009) to discontinue the program.

Now Gingrich had a different take on the issue. He informed a crowd in Davenport, Iowa that, “I was very biased against it [T.A.R.P.] and had opposed it all the previous week. I had a number of very, very successful businessmen who called me and said that you need to understand, this system is on the edge of total meltdown. These were people who weren’t politicians. They weren’t liberals. Some of them were very right wing. But they said this is a true crisis. This is like having a heart attack, this is a true crisis.” He ended up being convinced by business folks that the threat was real. I too believe it was real. You again can disagree, but the business community by and large will not be supporting your understanding of the issue.

When Santorum was asked how he would have handled the bailout of General Motors and Ford, he said he was greatly opposed to all of the bailouts over the last year including the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the bailout of Bear Stearns and coming to the aid of the two ailing motor vehicle companies. In fact, although Santorum said he respects President George W. Bush a great deal, he said Bush let the country down by listening to individuals like Ben Bernanke and Henry Paulson the head of the Treasury Department when they advised him to sign off on a $700 billion bailout of Wall Street toward the end of his presidential term.

Lastly, let’s take a look at Climate Change. Granted, you said Climate Change Mandates, but if one does or does not support Climate Change then it can be assumed that they will or will not support the mandates dictated by the alleged Climate Change. That said, Romney was clearly saying he is anti-climate change in my mind when he said “My view is that we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet. And the idea of spending trillions and trillions of dollars to try to reduce CO2 emissions is not the right course for us.”

Next, one of the issues Newt Gingrich is most vigorously defending on the campaign trail is his position on climate change, following the advertisement he filmed several years ago for Al Gore‘s nonprofit organization alongside Nancy Pelosi. Gingrich has said repeatedly over the course of this campaign that he considers the ad the biggest mistake of his political career, but his opponents are still using the video in their attack ads.

And finally, Santorum has made it quite clear he thinks global warming is "junk science" and "a beautifully concocted scheme" created by the left.

So there you have it. You claim that they all support NDAA, TARP, and Climate Change. You got one assertion correct. They do, in fact, support NDAA. And I stated earlier, I agree with their assessment and also support it for the time being. I can change my position on the issue if and when new data suggests that abuse of the powers contained in the act is imminent. On TARP, you got part of it correct. Romney was for it to start and saw the abuses under the Obama Administration and said enough is enough. Gingrich started against it, but was persuaded that it was needed and changed his position on the issue. Santorum was never for it. Finally, you missed the boat completely on Climate Change (and by default, mandates). None have ever been for it.

You’ll notice that I didn’t once stoop to calling you any names or insinuate which dark hole your head might be residing in. I did some research and countered some of the points you made earlier. In my world it’s called civil dialog. I really didn’t want to do it as its taken 3 and a half hours out of my life that could have better been spent doing something fun. But Lord Yonni (no disrespect intended Yonni) asked for a more tolerant approach with a little less passion.

How’d I do Yonni? jocolor

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:55 pm

FORD DIDN'T TAKE ONE PENNY OF BAILOUT BOOB!!!!

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:59 pm

Damn It BOOB!!! Ya should of at least called him a bow legged farmer!!!

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:11 pm

dubob wrote:: How’d I do Yonni?

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:18 pm

voiceofreason wrote:: Holy Shit!!!! And you call me a progressive???

You obviously have a different definition of what a progressive is. Rather than argue semantics, I will explain what I define a progressive to be: A progressive is someone who thinks we have progressed beyond the limits of the Constitution. In other words, someone who holds the Constitution in contempt......considers it a 'living' document. To me, it is very clear that the Constitution is a means of restraining the government, whereas progressives see no hindrance on their desire(s) to "DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THE MASSES". So, based on MY definition, you are a progressive, as is dubob. I am NOT, since I see the government as the means of lost liberty, not the granter of liberty.

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:21 pm

dubob, I appreciate your post. Although I find MANY points I disagree with, I LOVE seeing how well researched and thought out your reply was. I not only gained some respect for your point of view, you have giving me a few things to ponder. Rather than do my normally quick firebrand response, I am going to think/research a tad before responding directly to a view of your views. I hope to be able to respond as politely and as articulately as you have done, but I make no promises......

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:23 pm

So there has been no progress since the Constitution was signed??

Nothing needing any interpretation??

Subject: Re: The Government Can Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:36 pm

voiceofreason wrote:: So there has been no progress since the Constitution was signed??

Nothing needing any interpretation??

Oh, there has been plenty of progress. But, humans are still humans, and the Laws of Nature are the same today as they were in 1787.And, we have not progressed when we think the government is the solution to ANYTHING. That is what the world has believed since man built the first house and moved out of the cave. It was a new idea...the great experiment....where PEOPLE were allowed to govern themselves. So-called progressives are all about progressing in only one way, progressing away from the Laws of Nature and the Principles that made this nation the greatest and most prosperous nation mankind has ever seen. Sadly, the result of this 'progress' is the nation with the most debt in the history of mankind. Somehow, I do NOT see that as progress!

» Big Government
» The Government Can
» What the government does best (most).
» A 'Moral' Government
» Keep government out of the schools