Political Hippo Circle Jerk - America, farg YEAH!

[rjs246]

I can't tell if you're serious about the census worker, but that's neither here nor there.

As a staunch firearms fanatic who doesn't actually like guns that much (what?) I resent being called a republican, hippy.

[Seabiscuit36]

I'm two of those three, yay

[rjs246]

Jew hater.

[Sgt PSN]

Well that's a big portion of your gang, sure.  Then you got the family values set, doing meth with gay hookers after church, molesting little boys before mass, etc.  And of course you've got the white supremecist/militia set.

Finally, you've got a few hundred otherwise reasonable people who can't square themselves with liberal fiscal policy and live their political lives in the shadow of the rest of their party.

You might be right about the majority of the 28% of the population who call themselves 'Republicans'. They tend to be pretty far out there.

But of the 55% of the population that considers themselves 'conservatives', in my experiences, fall much more squarely into the second description. This country is still pretty conservative at its core. Socially it is getting measurably more progressive, which is why candidates like Obama and Clinton can get elected and succeed, but even that ebbs and flows. Fiscally, it is definitely still a conservative place. Add it all up and the majority of conservatives are reasonable people, but those aren't the people that get headlines or have talk radio shows or lynch census takers so we don't hear as much about them.

this is pretty much my euphoria.  be socially progressive/liberal and fiscally conservative.  but here's the thing, i don't think our gov't is fiscally conservative.  i think they're fiscally inept.  they spend millions, if not billions of tax payer dollars on the most worthless programs and services that there's absolutely no return on.  don't get me wrong, i know that not every dollar spent is going to be well spent.  money will be invested into things that will eventually get scrubbed  in favor of another idea but i'd like to see that wasteful spending reduced to the lowest possible amount.  maybe they should hire joe banner to do their books.   

[Seabiscuit36]

Jew hater.

Its my right as an american

[rjs246]

Sarge is largely right. The government definitely isn't fiscally conservative, Republicans and Democrats alike have proven themselves to be spend-aholics with different agendas. Democrats are comfortable admitting to being in favor of government spending, Republicans try to play both sides. They spend spend spend, but espouse the fiscally responsible rhetoric. Either way both sides spend wildly.

(BTW I disagree that there are a plethora of 'worthless' services that the government provides. But overlap and redundancy of departments, a general lack of efficiency, is a big problem. A BIG problem. One that could almost single-handedly balance the budget if it were addressed by economists rather than politicians but that's not the way things work.)

The bottom line for me, and the reason that I have grudgingly supported the recent spending spree by the government, is that there is no one philosophy that is appropriate all of the time. When the economy was in recovery and then booming in the mid-late 90s Clinton was able to balance the budget by cutting spending. This worked because there was plenty of consumer cash flying around the economy. When things in the economy are dire, it doesn't make sense to suddenly stop all spending. If things are slumping and people are spending less, that reduces the money available to businesses and the economy suffers. If the government suddenly stops spending on top of the population not spending there is a HUGE drop in available funds to keep the economy going. It makes sense to 'print money' and inject cash to help keep things going. It's a bitter pill to swallow when it happens, but it's the appropriate tool for the time. Just like balancing the budget is an appropriate tool for the times when things are good. Too bad no one told W about that concept...

[Sgt PSN]

(BTW I disagree that there are a plethora of 'worthless' services that the government provides. But overlap and redundancy of departments, a general lack of efficiency, is a big problem. A BIG problem. One that could almost single-handedly balance the budget if it were addressed by economists rather than politicians but that's not the way things work.)

to clarify, when i say "worthless" it's not necessarily an implication that whatever program/service money is being spent on isn't a good idea or have any return value to it, but it's amazing how much money the gov't spends on things that never come to fruition and are simply abandoned half way through.  i'm sure in some cases, it's determined that the "program" is no longer necessary but i believe in most cases that's due to a lack of vision on the govt's part during the planning process in the beginning.  they'll spend millions of dollars today on something that will take 10 years to complete.  today it seems like a really good idea.  but 5 years from now and billions of dollars later the idea is obsolete.  and there's also the wasteful spending on frivilous items as well.  i remember years ago newt gingrich spent $400k of taxpayer dollars to repair a giant gold leaf or some crazy ish like that that was a decoration on the ceiling in his office.  i don't mind if these guys want nice offices.  i guess they sort of deserve them.  but spending tax dollars on that type of crap is ridiculous.  use tax $ to buy a desk, a chair, a computer and some post it notes.  you want to put crazy expensive art crap on the walls, come out of your own farging pocket.  either that or allow me the opportunity to visit your office and have a cup of joe with you while i stare at the rare piece of art that i helped you buy and marvel in all of it's glory. 

The bottom line for me, and the reason that I have grudgingly supported the recent spending spree by the government, is that there is no one philosophy that is appropriate all of the time. When the economy was in recovery and then booming in the mid-late 90s Clinton was able to balance the budget by cutting spending. This worked because there was plenty of consumer cash flying around the economy. When things in the economy are dire, it doesn't make sense to suddenly stop all spending. If things are slumping and people are spending less, that reduces the money available to businesses and the economy suffers. If the government suddenly stops spending on top of the population not spending there is a HUGE drop in available funds to keep the economy going. It makes sense to 'print money' and inject cash to help keep things going. It's a bitter pill to swallow when it happens, but it's the appropriate tool for the time. Just like balancing the budget is an appropriate tool for the times when things are good. Too bad no one told W about that concept...

agree.  however, i also think that recessions will be less frequent or at least less severe if the gov't spends it's money more wisely.

[phillymic2000]

That census worker committed suicide.  But I think you probably already read that?

I'm goading phillymic a bit here.  There are of course other kinds of republicans.  I didn't mention the jew haters or firearm fanatics, or the bankers.  What a dirty word.  Banker.

I do love my guns!

[rjs246]

agree.  however, i also think that recessions will be less frequent or at least less severe if the gov't spends it's money more wisely.

You're probably right about that. Which is why in good time we should make every effort to balance budgets. In times like these, well, it just doesn't make a lot of sense.

[Rome]

That census worker committed suicide.  But I think you probably already read that?

I'm goading phillymic a bit here.  There are of course other kinds of republicans.  I didn't mention the jew haters or firearm fanatics, or the bankers.  What a dirty word.  Banker.

I do love my guns!

not enough to eat one, sadly.

[phillymic2000]

That census worker committed suicide.  But I think you probably already read that?

I'm goading phillymic a bit here.  There are of course other kinds of republicans.  I didn't mention the jew haters or firearm fanatics, or the bankers.  What a dirty word.  Banker.

I do love my guns!

not enough to eat one, sadly.

Yeah Im not a big enough coward to do that, sorry.

[General_Failure]

How about just the bullet then? They're smaller.

[phillymic2000]

Hey dont everybody get all pissy with me cause some right winger won and took a 40 year dem held seat.  Blame all the idiots up there.

[General_Failure]

I didn't even know there was an election.

[Diomedes]

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.obama0119,0,6895168.story

this "year of Obama" op ed is interesting.  Yay Baltimore Sun.