<p>I didn’t know that, but it still seems like a huge copout. You can use that excuse–“well if I don’t spend it, someone else will!”–to justify any spending. It would be best for him to not request any earmarks, but I realize that he is a politician just like anybody else on the Hill.
[quote/]
</p>
<p>No, you can’t always make that excuse. Earmarks don’t increase the total net spending of a bill, they just realocate (a portion) of it. Earmarks increase the transparency of federal spending.</p>
<p>Mike, it seems you were dissatisfied with the housing bubble? That’s strange, kenynesian frontman Krugman called for it to replace the Nasdaq bubble (don’t deny it, I have many quotes at the tip of my finger). As for regulating credit, I agree. We need to have the regulation become the free market’s responsibility once again. The fed, by manipulating the supply of money (and therefore interest rates), has done an awful job, creating booms and busts al over the place. I’m sure you are familiar with Austrian Business Cycle theory, so I won’t waste my time. This recession happened to be an excellent illustration of it, but who cares, it’s just the deduction of unverifiable axioms anyway, so we’ll never really know :)</p>
<p>I’m totally fine avoiding all those things. I love reading transcendentalist and anti-transcendentalist literature from the 19th century, because it really reminds me of how the continental US used to be. If you’ve ever been to Yosemite, one thing they don’t tell you is that our whole country used to look that beautiful; in different ways, obviously, but I’d rather live there and die in a wildfire (no fire dept) than have to get my recreation out of cement-block inner city parks (public parks). The thing is, if people just went out of their way to take care of the world and each other, we wouldn’t need taxes and government. Obviously, it can’t be perfect, but what education is better than from those who live to teach, not teach to live? People have lived off the land cooperatively since the beginning of time: heck, KINGS and EMPERORS have as well. You don’t need taxation and representation to make a culture, you need people to make a culture.</p>
<p>I know exactly what quote you’re talking about Ron2012Paul, and I’m resisting the urge to link you to the article, lol. Surely we’ll disagree with Krugman’s intentions when writing that piece, so it’s probably best we just leave that one alone. </p>
<p>On the other hand, I have little faith in the free market to self-regulate, as you probably know by now. I place more of the responsibility of this recession with the SEC, the FTC, and parts of the repeal of Glass Steagall, roughly in that order. Fractional-reserve banking always gets the bad rap it seems, probably because it’s no one’s job, at least in the private sector, to defend it.</p>
<p>And I’m glad we agree that Austrian Business Cycle Theory is based on unverifiable axioms and deduction. Of course, if there’s a good empirical paper on it out there to convince me, I’d love to see it, but I think a guy named Milton tried that all ready, with less than spectacular results ;).</p>
<p>i’m a conservative who seemed to be the only one in the school. I got ripped on many times but I was always up for an good discussion, even if the person didn’t know what they were talking about. It was sometimes kind of cool being in a 1 vs. 8 argument and winning. What made it even better was the fact that my liberal history teacher said I understood politics more than anybody he ever taught.</p>
<p>The reason that people think Republicans are idiots is because they actually considered giving Sarah Palin a position in the second highest executive office, not to mention the fact that many in the Republican party are pushing for her to be the candidate in 2012. LMAO</p>
<p>Actually, the VP position is relatively meaningless. Just talk for the president when he’s sick or busy, basically.</p>
<p>Mike41691, I’m glad you can see my point, and it is saddening to see that the “can’t we all just get along” ideal will never work. So I’m going to do it the McCandless way and abandon my fellow man…:(</p>
<p>The only reason conservatives supported Sara Palin was because she was hardcore, and mccain was a RINO. </p>
<p>I agree with Sara Palin on many things like small government, and think she stands with the same ideology , but am quite against her when it comes to some things like her views on no abortion even in extreme cases.</p>
<p>I think she is still underqualified to be VP or President, but so is Obama ;)</p>
<p>I really hope she wins the primary. And Obama is definitely qualified so far as intelligence goes, moreso than McCain, Bush, or Kerry IMO. I can’t say the same about Palin.</p>
<p>I think our best bet would be a Romney-Palin ticket. Romney has the right economic policies, and Palin would keep him small government, especially concerning healthcare.</p>
<p>This question is very tricky and will be fun to answer. Being a right side republican i’m going to try to be as nice as I can while making these points.</p>
<h1>1 - How can Liberals think Republicans are stupid when it’s the liberals that are sucking up all the welfair the Republicans are paying for.</h1>
<pre><code> - Now lets think about this…If republicans are paying for most of the welfair, then we must infer that republicans have good jobs.
- In todays world to get a good job, a good post highschool education is a must.
- In order to graduate from one of these fine institutions of higher learnings, one one must be pretty smart. (The same goes to getting into one of these institutions.)
</code></pre>
<h1>2 - Because this website discusses institutes of higher education, most of the visitors to this site are going to be intelligent. Which makes this question very biased becuase its going to be full of smart (therefore Republican) posters.</h1>
<p>Most of the high intellectuals are liberal, and actually so are most socialists. haha.</p>
<p>If you are liberal you are most likely either the poorest or wealthiest people. Poorest because you get liberal government benefits. Wealthiest because what the government taxes you, doesn’t really affect you as much as it does the middle class- that’s why the middle class wants smaller government. </p>
<p>Lower- and middle- Middle class (which constitutes most of the south) are republicans.</p>