This is an issues piece from a moderate conservative perspective. We have a structurally imbalanced deficit, and spending restraint alone will not cut it. We’re in the worst economy since the Great Depression. Because of this, on social issues, I agree with Mitch Daniels: We have more serious priorities. I may very well be wrong, but I’m pessimistic that the GOP will regain the majority in either house, mostly because we’re moving so far to the right that we’ll lose the independent vote. In order to win, I think a more moderate approach will help the GOP into majority status.
Economy. At this stage, if anything, the economy needs stimulus, not austerity. A combination of federal spending and temporary tax relief would fit the bill. Spending would be allocated to state governments and real infrastructure projects. The guiding principle is timely, targeted and temporary.
Jobs. David Frum has a piece on jobs that I half agree with. The disagree part is that we need to induce “moderate inflation”. I do agree with his take on regulations. More regulation is fine for the financial sector but counterproductive in other industries. Bottom line, I don’t see any real silver bullets for growing jobs. Appropriate federal spending could help, and so could a more healed lending environment. From the Puget Sound Economic Forecaster: ”It will take 14 quarters–until mid-2013–before the region has recouped the 133,800 jobs lost during the recession. Even then the unemployment rate will still register 7.2 percent.” Courtesy of Davinci, adding a $1 billion to the U.S. Patent Office could generate as many as 2.25 million new jobs over the next three years. That would be real stimulus.
Trade. (1) Continue to lower tariffs and other trade barriers. For example, the Brazilian tariff on ethanol has no reason for being except to protect already-subsidized cornbelt farmers. (2) Work to establish more free trade agreements. (3) Phase out corporate subsidies. Farm subsidies were originally intended for family farmers, but no longer. The camel is in the tent, or some metaphor like that.
Taxes. We have a structural imbalance. The way to work closer to “balanced” is a combination of tax increases and spending restraint, to begin when economic conditions are more robust. On taxes, the Bush tax cuts should lapse for incomes over $200,000. The alternative minimum tax needs to be indexed, which will lower overall tax revenues, but the AMT was never intended to work its way down to the lower tax brackets.
Social Security. Raise the retirement age to 70. Allow some percentage to go to personally directed accounts. This will sound completely non-Republican, but we should increase the wage base (currently at $107,000) by an order of magnitude (it’ll have to be phased in), using some of that increase for the less-advantaged.
Immigration. We could use comprehensive reform. This would entail a combination of enhanced border security and a process for illegals to become legal, such as the Z card. The applicant pays a fee upon application and renewal. Employers are financially hit if the immigrant does not have any sort of legal residency. If law enforcement catches someone who is an illegal immigrant, the person is immediately deported. Discussions about the changing the 14th Amendment are counterproductive and don’t address the root cause.
Health care. It’s a waste of time to try and repeal Obamacare. The GOP should focus on taking steps to reduce the cost of health care. After all, it was primarily health care inflation that helped create this mess.
Afghanistan. Let the Petraeus Plan go forward. Reevaluate in mid-2011.
Iraq. The withdrawals should be conditions-based as much as possible, but there is a Strategic Framework Agreement in place, so there isn’t much wiggle room. Our only remaining serious options are to assist with security and to use diplomacy to help the Iraqi government move in a positive direction.
Detainees. I don’t care if they stay at Guantanamo or are transferred to a county jail, so long as the facility is secure. If there is uncertainty as to their status, they should appear before a competent military tribunal for a determination. The tryable ones should be tried in military courts under the UCMJ. The untryables should rot, but periodic reevaluations are okay. They should all be treated humanely while under lock and key. Interrogations per the Army Field Manual are fine.
Iran. There’s little we can do. Strikes on their nuclear facilities would be counterproductive. The only real options are sanctions and giving the Iranian people moral support.
Pakistan. Assist them in ridding the Taliban cancer, if they want the help. Assist with political and economic reforms. Good information ops are needed. They have a virulent news media.
War Against Militant Islamism. Continue to marginalize al Qaeda and spin-off groups. I disagree with death warrants on American citizens, even al Awlaki.
Israel-Palestine. Encourage an agreement with Israel and the West Bank. Discourage the expansion of Israeli settlements. For Gaza, wait until Hamas loses Gaza or until Hamas recognizes Israel, which could be a long time.
Cuba. It’s time to lift travel and trade restrictions. We’re already Cuba’s biggest food importer, and the Fidel reign is petering out.
North Korea. Wait until the current Kim dies, and hope for better luck with the next Kim. Encourage six-party talks on nuclear weapons.
Don’t ask, don’t tell. Other militaries in other nations have more open policies, and their situations have worked out.
Redefining marriage. A matter for the states, which is basically the Cheney-Obama position.
Abortion. The McCain position is fine. No federal funding. Reasonable regulation.
Energy. The long-term goal should be replacement of coal-fired electricity with nuclear, wind and solar. Also, we need to expand our energy base but fossil fuels have to make up a decreasing percentage of the total. We should make a serious effort at thorium reactors. A McCain-approved cap-and-trade bill would be okay. In the shorter term, we should adopt policies that focus on conservation and efficiencies because that’s where the real progress will be made.
Race. Progress has been made over the past few decades, but we should recognize that the descendants of American slaves are still experiencing adverse impacts. Poverty–and the culture of poverty–remain problems. Generally, the best path is education advancement and helping to strengthen families. For all races, we should encourage fathers to marry the mothers of their kids, so long as no bigamy or polygamy laws are broken.
Education. (1) Mend but don’t end No Child Left Behind. Testing and accountability are okay, but there needs to be some flexibility. In Washington State, the process was too formulaic, which put undue pressure on teachers. (2) Make it easier to fire those teachers who truly have no business teaching.
The Tea Party. Their principles of individual liberty, limited government and economic freedom are attractive, but most of their policy prescriptions are either ill-conceived, contradictory or ineffectual, as discussed here. A onetime Journolista has a good perspective on the movement here.
Moe Lane
PG DeFreese
Victoria Coates
Daniel Horowitz
Dan Spencer
So the "moderate" Republican plan is to concede defeat on taxes and Obamacare.
Martin Knight (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 7:17AM EST (link)And you wonder why the GOP was in the minority for forty years under “moderate” Republican leadership?
In the minority
Bird_Dog (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:55AM EST (link)We’ve been in the minority for the last four years because Bush screwed up a war and didn’t govern as a conservative. Fiscally, the Gingrich years were a high-water mark for the party, and that was a while ago.
We're in the minority because nice moderate Republicans couldn't say s%^t if they had a mouthful
Achance (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 10:09AM EST (link)and let the Democrat lies go unrebutted for six years and constantly compromised with them, usually a priori. And, your policy prescriptions show that you’re just another meally mouth who is afraid that some Democrat will call you an extremist or say that you’re partisan and mean-spirited.
You accomplish nothing negotiating with yourself when you’re dealing with Democrats. If you move towards them, they interpret it as weakness and want more. If they ask you to reach out to them, it is because your hand is still too far away for them to bite.
In Vino Veritas
Thought it was rejection
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 10:36AM EST (link)Art
I thought Republicans were in the minority because of rejection by the American people of the premise that Republicans sucked less than Democrats.
Consider that President Bush had almost no domestic focused agenda backed by the majority party Republicans in Congress who were fixated on “Spending Like Drunken Sailors”, along with a laser like focus on the only thing that mattered to them, getting re-elected.
The party that won the Mid Terms in 1995 under something called the “Contract with America” seems to have run out of ideas, well except we’re not the Democrats, which I guess is a return to the “we suck less” approach. Not much of a reason to vote for a party now is there, so we’ll just have to call it rejection of the Republican brand for not being very meaningful and being bereft of ideas, and maybe with a large dash of Eeyore styled “true conservatism” thrown into the offer today.
Guess we’ll have to wait on instructions and policy guidance to be beamed down via Twitter….eh?
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
I want to go back to the "rejection" in '06 and '08 issue, SteveLA:
Achance (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 5:11PM EST (link)The only people complaining loudly about spending and the various “big government” things the Republican majority did were those on the far right, some anyway, and the Democrats who were disingenuously using the issue. Their problem wasn’t the spending, it was that the spending wasn’t going to their buddies. We’ve seen how they like to spend.
The problem was we were simply “out-messaged” by the Ds and their running dogs in the MSM. Only a small minority of Americans get any news from the internet or listen to talk radio. The vast majority either know what they think they know from osmosis at the watercooler and such or they get their take on events from the MSM. The Ds and the MSM managed to turn Bush into a swear word. They convinced America that the wars in the Middle East were unjustified and that we were losing them both. They convinced America that the most vibrant economy we’ve ever had was the worst since the Great Depression and that unemployment rates under 5% were a tragedy for American working people. The convinced America that Republicans, actually too stupid about government to be very corrupt, were totally corrupt and somehow got them to ignore the fact that practically every Democrat politician is corrupt, a pervert, or both.
And this all happened because those refugees from the Rotary and the Toastmasters who run the Republican Party either thought they were above replying to the Ds, or thought that nobody would credit the Ds outlandish claims.
I once lost an arbitration that cost my State several million dollars. I was the FNG, so I had to be far more “accepting” of supervison that I became later in my career. The union Business Manager got on the stand and testified about the history of the contract language at issue. It was like something out of Mitchener; he practically started with the movement of tectonic plates, and he testified with seeming expertise and real authority. Problem was, I once worked for him and I knew exactly when he came to Alaska because I’m the one that picked him up at the airport. I could have smashed his whole story with about three questions on cross demonstrating that his whole story was just contrived and he had no first hand knowlege of the history of the language at issue. My boss, one of those “nice” types wouldn’t let me cross him saying, you two will just fight and he’ll cuss at you and you’ll cuss back and I don’t want the arbitrator to hear stuff like that; the arbitrator knows better than to credit that testimony.
A few weeks later the decision came back ruling for the union based on “the unrebutted testimony” of the Business Manager. And of course my boss had no idea why I hadn’t rebutted his testimony. That was when I stopped listening to people who whored or brown-nosed to get their job and I swore the words “the unrebutted testimony of” would never appear on my side of the issue in a case ever again – and they never did. If I couldn’t rebut determinitive testimony, the case got settled. That’s just what happend to the Republicans; they let the lies go unrebutted and the Ds made the stupid 52% believe them enough to put them back in power. Democrats should never be in a postion of authority anywhere in America ever again, but we just don’t recruit the kinds or people nor do we have the operatives who are willing to use the tools necessary to defeat them. I’ll guarantee you that a majority of the people in America believe the crap about spitting and the N-word at the Tea Party rally, don’t know that they have no eviidence and of Briebarts reward, and accept that the whole opposition in Tea Party form is a bunch of racist rednecks. As I said, Republican leadership couldn’t say s&*t if they had a mouthful of it – and they can’t stand to be around people who can.
In Vino Veritas
I don't think we need imigration "reform".
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 7:34AM EST (link)We need imigration “enforcement”.
Our imigration laws are quite addequate, just need to be enforced.
Why don’t we try that first.
And the “moderate conservative prospective ” is what got us here today.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
Where's your support of employer sanctions?
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 10:56AM EST (link)gekster
While I do agree with you that enforcement, securing the border and all the rest are probably the first steps in dealing with illegal immigration, where’s the call for going after businesses that hire illegal immigrants?
Dirty, not so secret, fact is that business interests which rely on cheap slave wages and working conditions for illegal immigrants want nothing to do with employer enforcement actions. The rest of the dirty secret is that businesses spend lots of money to support political candidates that support them. Could there be a connection between the dirty secret of illegal immigration and why main stream Republicans aren’t interested in employer sanctions and Tea Party types love the idea….maybe, possibly, perhaps there is a connection?
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
We get played on both sides on this one
leftylurker (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 10:59AM EST (link)You have the liberals, who dangle amnesty in front of their supporters but will *never* go for it, and the conservatives, who get the base all fired up with strong enforcement/close the border rhetoric but will never piss off the big/medium/small businesses who would be out of business in a second without the cheap labor illegal immigrants provide.
Employer enforcement with a tight border and guest worker programs is the way imo.
Lefty - you are conflating "big business" with 'conservatives'
eburke (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:50PM EST (link)(which I’ll excuse in your case ’cause you are, after all, still a lefty
As has been shown by the campaign contributions of big business and especially Wall Street for Obama and the Dems, big business is *anything* but ‘conservative’.
I guarantee you that this is one conservative who has had it with ‘Big’ everything on this issue – Big Labor…Big Government…and Big Business.
My prescription? Employer enforcement with a tight border and guest worker programs. (ummmm…so does this make me a liberal or you a conservative?
“All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”
Unified Patriots
We allready have laws in the books to deal with all of it.
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:07AM EST (link)We just need the will to enforce them.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
Take eMeg as a classic example
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:19AM EST (link)gekster
eMeg running for Governator out here in CA was all over the issue of using the state government’s collection of databases and other tools to go after businesses that hire illegals, she called it an electronic wall. Now that eMeg has the nomination, all the talk about going after businesses who hire illegals has disappeared, guess why?
Chamber of Commerce, big Agra Biz and others put the hard word to eMeg to knock it off is my guess.
You can be tough on the issue of illegal immigration by securing the borders, going after criminal illegal aliens, going after business that hire illegals without going off the JD Hayworth stupidity cliff of “round them up and send them home” rants and ordinary folks will get the difference.
But gee sense moderates can’t have a clue and only the “true conservatives” like JD and Tom Tancredo really know how to pander to the cheap seats and the baser nature of people who are fed up, scared and all the rest and who want something, anything to be done, screw the Constitution….Never Mind.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
Goes back to what I said.
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:22AM EST (link)Enforce the laws we have, and have the will to do it.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
Knock it off with the 'eMeg' junk, SteveLA.
Moe Lane (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 9:48AM EST (link)You clearly mean it to be dismissive, and I find that I disapprove of that when it comes to my party’s nominee for CA-GOV.
Thanks in advance.
The Kim Kardashian of blogging.
Check out my blog at http://moelane.com/.
http://moelane.com/filthy-lucre-filthy-lucre/
http://twitter.com/moelane
My (combined) wish list.
Must credit Fred Barnes
SteveLA (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 10:54AM EST (link)Moe,
I must credit Fred Barnes in the May 2009 edition of the Weekly Standard for the moniker, “eMeg”, I’m not smart enough to come up with it.
Ms. Whitman did indeed win the Republican primary and is running for Governor of the State of California where I live. She is also turning way left on issues I care about, like dealing with illegal immigration in the state, departing from stances she ran on during the primary. While I am not advocating for people to vote for her opponent, ex Governor Moon Beam, I am pointing out that she has turned her back on some policy positions that she touted and ran on in the primary. For those of us who live in the state, that turn is important for the future of our state.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
And if Fred ever comments here...
Moe Lane (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 5:31PM EST (link)…I’ll make sure to tell him the same thing I told you. Fair’s fair.
The Kim Kardashian of blogging.
Check out my blog at http://moelane.com/.
http://moelane.com/filthy-lucre-filthy-lucre/
http://twitter.com/moelane
My (combined) wish list.
here's a read for you, SteaveLA
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:51AM EST (link)http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&CH=8cfr
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
Lots of laws...but were's the beef?
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:55AM EST (link)gekster
Yep a lot of laws, which aren’t enforced or poorly enforced. But according to “true conservatives”, we need more laws it seems to deal with illegal immigration.
Build the wall, secure the border, go after businesses who hire illegal aliens. My claim that will fix the problem and you don’t need a constitutional amendment to “fix” the 14th Amendment.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
you said it right there.
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 12:07PM EST (link)“a lot of laws, which aren’t enforced or poorly enforced.”
Besides building a fence, I don’t kow of any true conservatives that want to add to the list, except a provision to actually enforce the laws we have.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
well argued 'LA, and while I consider the current interpretation of birthright citizenship
Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 12:13PM EST (link)to NOT be compelled by the intent of the framers nor the 19th Century precedents, I do think that a fence basically cures the main concern of significant numbers of illegal border-jumpers and so most of my concerns as well. I would favor very liberal treatment of those illegals already here, after a fence is built.
I would also favor employer sanctions so long as one can comply with federal law by pre-checking all employees through a government accepted service.
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
That's a court case then
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 12:20PM EST (link)Game
Well then, a court challenge to the citizenship claims for the children of someone who did not hold legal status to be in this country is in order. A case that can make it all the way to the Supreme Court for running on what the Constitution actually means, that’s their job.
By the way, there is no political movement for doing that very thing, and probably would be a destructive and negative move from a political point of view only supported by JD Hayworth, Tom Tancredo and those folks in the cheap seats who are beyond angry about the problem of illegal aliens.
Not going to happen.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
Actually, there is no standing for a court case since Congress is allowed to EXPAND citizenship
Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 7:00PM EST (link)They simply cannot restrict who can be a citizen in contravention of the 14th. The Constitution does grant Congress the power to expand citizenship.
However, the current policy started decades ago via executive branch policy not statute.
Still, there is no standing for a court case given the expansive definition being used. The only way a case could be brought that would force the court to revisit the 19th Century precedents (Wong et al) would be if Congress passed a statute and/or the executive branch changed policy. Then, a person born here could sue for citizenship.
The argument is that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” did not grant illegals the unilateral right to force the US to accept the citizens of those the US did not agree to be in its jurisdiction.
But I am with you on the fence as the answer because it is only massive anchor babies that are significant, not just the random ones that would result from fence-climbing ladies.
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
just for info: penalties for buissiness that hire illegles.
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 12:32PM EST (link)from:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&CH=8cfr
§ Sec. 274a.10 Penalties.
(a) Criminal penalties. Any person or entity which engages in a pattern or practice of violations of subsection (a)(1)(A) or (a)(2) of the Act shall be fined not more than $3,000 for each unauthorized alien, imprisoned for not more than six months for the entire pattern or practice, or both, notwithstanding the provisions of any other Federal law relating to fine levels.
(b) Civil penalties. A person or entity may face civil penalties for a violation of section 274A of the Act. Civil penalties may be imposed by the Service or an administrative law judge for violations under section 274A of the Act. In determining the level of the penalties that will be imposed, a finding of more than one violation in the course of a single proceeding or determination will be counted as a single offense. However, a single offense will include penalties for each unauthorized alien who is determ ined to have been knowingly hired or recruited or referred for a fee.
(1) A respondent found by the Service or an administrative law judge to have knowingly hired, or to have knowingly recruited or referred for a fee, an unauthorized alien for employment in the United States or to have knowingly continued to employ an unauthorized alien in the United States, shall be subject to the following order:
(i) To cease and desist from such behavior;
(ii) To pay a civil fine according to the following schedule:
(A) First offense–not less than $275 and not more than $2,200 for each unauthorized alien with respect to whom the offense occurred before March 27, 2008, and not less than $375 and not exceeding $3,200, for each unauthorized alien with respect to whom the offense occurred occurring on or after March 27, 2008; (Revised effective 3/27/08; 73 FR 10130 )(Revised effective 9/29/99; 64 FR 47009 )
(B) Second offense–not less than $2,200 and not more than $5,500 for each unauthorized alien with respect to whom the second offense occurred before March 27, 2008, and not less than $3,200 and not more than $6,500, for each unauthorized alien with respect to whom the second offense occurred on or after March 27, 2008; or (Revised effective 3/27/08; 73 FR 10130 ) (Revised effective 9/29/99; 64 FR 47009 )
(C) More than two offenses–not less than $3,300 and not more than $11,000 for each unauthorized alien with respect to whom the third or subsequent offense occurred before March 27, 2008 and not less than $4,300 and not exceeding $16,000, for each unauthorized alien with respect to whom the third or subsequent offense occurred on or after March 27, 2008; and (Revised effective 3/27/08; 73 FR 10130 ) (Revised effective 9/29/99; 64 FR 47009 )
(iii) To comply with the requirements of § 274a.2(b) of this part, and to take such other remedial action as is appropriate.
(2) A respondent determined by the Service (if a respondent fails to request a hearing) or by an administrative law judge, to have failed to comply with the employment verification requirements as set forth in § 274a.2(b) , shall be subject to a civil penalty in an amount of not less than $100 and not more than $1,000 for each individual with respect to whom such violation occurred before September 29, 1999, and not less than $110 and not more than $1,100 for each individual with respect to whom such violation occurred on or after September 29, 1999. In determining the amount of the penalty, consideration shall be given to: (Introductory text revised effective 9/29/99; 64 FR 47099 )
(i) The size of the business of the employer being charged;
(ii) The good faith of the employer;
(iii) The seriousness of the violation;
(iv) Whether or not the individual was an unauthorized alien; and
(v) The history of previous violations of the employer.
(3) Where an order is issued with respect to a respondent composed of distinct, physically separate subdivisions which do their own hiring, or their own recruiting or referring for a fee for employment (without reference to the practices of, and under the control of, or common control with another subdivision) the subdivision shall be considered a separate person or entity.
(c) Enjoining pattern or practice violations. If the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that a person or entity is engaged in a pattern or practice of employment, recruitment or referral in violation of section 274A(a)(1)(A) or (2) of the Act, the Attorney General may bring civil action in the appropriate United States District Court requesting relief, including a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or other order against the person or entity, as the Attorney General deems necessary.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
Do you speed?
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 12:41PM EST (link)gekster
Do you speed when you drive, I do sometimes and have at least one ticket to prove it. I don’t do much speeding lately because I don’t have the extra money laying around to pay the fines….LOL.
Businesses hire illegals, like speeding, because they can get away with it about 99.98 percent of the time.
Change the enforcement balance by more work place raids, more forensic examination of tax returns for under-reporting of employees, and there is more of chance of businesses getting caught speeding/hiring illegal aliens. By way, during those work place raids, I could care less about the illegals working at a business, outside of criminal checks and deportation order checks, let them go.
Show me one R running in this cycle that is making business enforcement a large part of their plan to deal with illegal aliens, you’ll have a hard time finding one.
Show me one R running this cycle that is making more funding for eVerify and more mandates for the use of eVerify by businesses part of their platform, you’ll have a hard time finding one.
It’s easy to play the JD Hayworth card and scream and yell about how Obama and the Donks are doing nothing about the issue, much harder to take a real stance on the issue by cracking down on businesses that fund your run for office.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
No I don't speed.
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 12:52PM EST (link)In younger days I got my fair share of tickets,
but by police “enforcing the law” on me changed my habits.
And I’m not screaming anything, I’m just saying enforce the laws we have.
And I’m not claiming anything about any politician of either party jumping on this band wagon.
and when you say:
“Change the enforcement balance by more work place raids, more forensic examination of tax returns for under-reporting of employees, and there is more of chance of businesses getting caught speeding/hiring illegal aliens.”
It seams you agree with me in saying to enforce the law..
Enforce the laws we have on the books.
If and when that doesn’t work, then think about new laws.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
Agree for sure
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:08PM EST (link)gekster
But I am pointing out the hypocrisy on the part of Republicans when it comes to business enforcement actions. Republicans are as bad as Democrats on the whole on this issue, for different reasons but just as bad. Demagogy on the issue, lots of that, but work to enforce the laws using tools that are available right now, not so much.
In my view, this is one of the reasons why the Tea Party and the Ron Paul idiots are gaining traction. At least the Tea Party folks and the RP RP RP types have not been bought and paid for by business interests….yet so they raise heck on this sort of issue.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
I can also agree with what you are saying.
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:13PM EST (link)We are supposed to be a nation of laws.
And non-enforcement is done by both sides, and not only on imigration.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
And that's where we disagree
Bird_Dog (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:12PM EST (link)If the existing laws were adequate, then enforcement of those laws wouldn’t have been a problem. Now we’re behind the eight-ball, given that there are with 12 million illegals on our soil.
Billions of reasons why enforcement has not happened
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:20PM EST (link)Bird_Dog
In CA alone, Agra Business is a multi billion dollar enterprise that runs on the back of farm workers who are mostly illegal aliens. Do you honestly think that any politician asking for money to run for office is going to take a get tough on businesses that hire illegal alien stance? Really?
It’s a form of hidden tax and economic support to businesses who rely on illegals that is paid for by those of us who have jobs, pay taxes and all the rest. No way no how politicians are going to bite the hand that feeds them, and doubly so where there are large Ag interests in the district a politician is running from.
Billions of reasons why work place enforcement scares the heck out of R’s and D’s.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
Then the pressure has to come from elsewhere in the Country.
Achance (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 7:06PM EST (link)Business and agriculture were the big backers of Jim Crow in The South. They could play white labor against black labor and abuse both of them. Funny thing; when the Civil Rights Act and the Great Society took away the peon labor, they very quickly found a way to mechanize and there is almost no unskilled or simi-skilled agricultural labor in The South.
When I was a farm kid in the ’50s, our cotton and tobacco fields looked like something right out of Gone With The Wind; all hand labor and all black. Twenty years later with the cheap labor gone to Atlanta and welfare, it was all mechanized. Take away the peon labor and the western agricultural interests will find an all new interest in techology. Might raise the price of foodstuffs and forage a bit, but not as much as ethanol has.
In Vino Veritas
But, don't we first have to take away the desire
Scope (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 7:39PM EST (link)for the cheap tomatoes with the illegals? The country has made great gains with their technology skills, particularly with mechanized farm operations that have replaced many many “jobs” that Americans just won’t do (I doubt that right now, but)? How many illegals are there that can support out technological advancements? If they were so brainy, wouldn’t they be here long ago? Aren’t they given front of the line status for legal immigration? As long as they are here, breaking the backs/budgets of every city, county and state, we are in deep trouble.
I hate to think of when the ethanol subsides started, it took months, if not days, for food prices to hit the roof, and when we went from farm subsides for the Archer Daniels first, before the small/mid sized farmers, who were paid to keep their fields empty, but, it is a reality. Gas prices were at $4 a gallon at the same time. Now the damn farmers, of any size, have to worry about freakin’ cow farts. I’ll tell you what, my husband can be honestly accused of air pollution, after a bowl of some kickass Chili, long before any cow, pig, horse, or goat, and, for some reason he is proud of that. I guess it’s a guy thing.
The existing laws are adequat.
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:21PM EST (link)Just because they are not enforced doesn’t make them bad laws.
And if we had enforced the laws all along,
I think there wouldn’t be the 12 mllion.
With that I’m going to the park to play whiffle ball with my grandkids.
ya’all have fun now.
See you later.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
They're pretty terrible laws, gekster
aesthete (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 4:54PM EST (link)Since the 60s, basically all immigration laws have been conceded to various business interests and labor unions. The Department of Labor has made immigration concerns its own little fiefdom, and businesses lobby for various rules and carve-outs concerning immigration, particularly in the case of skilled workers (read the stipulations behind, say, an H-1B visa, and ask yourself who it benefits). ICE, and INS before it, are incompetent and highly unionized to the point where it makes public education look efficiently-run, and the immigration process is lachrymose and rife with errors on the part of ICE itself. It is very easy to get away with blatant rent-seeking on the issue of immigration, precisely because no one who votes is particularly aware of the problem, or willing to base their vote and support on it. Conservatives really shouldn’t assume that laws passed were beneficent or wise, especially on an issue that has historically been the province of xenophobic, environmental, and labor interests.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
I can agree with the premise of your comment.
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 6:52PM EST (link)And our laws should be based with the wellfare of the American people in mind,
not on certain special interests.
And as far as Government unions go, there shouldn’t be any.
As soon as they unionise, then it’s thier own needs that come first,
and service to the American people come last.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
We are not behind the eight-ball.
mbecker908 (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 6:53PM EST (link)1. Make employment of illegals a felony with greatly enhanced fines – like $20,000 per head first offense. No ability to plead down to a misdemeanor and if the business goes under the fines follow the owner/board of directors.
2. Impose exactly the same rules/penalties for rental housing.
An E-Verify form in the employee’s jacket is an affirmative defense.
The fines/penalties are big enough to make enforcement a priority for officials. The felony provision for hiring will deny business licenses, liquor licenses and contractor licenses to the primary group of folks who hire illegals.
The only reason anyone could possible think that we’re helpless is because of people exactly like you who don’t have will or the courage to stand for what is right. Pat yourself on the back, John Kerry is proud of you. Americans however, aren’t.
To add another one
aesthete (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 7:52PM EST (link)Indictment of the same would be a black mark on the record of the employer, and would disbar them from being selected for work on a government contract as a general rule.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Moderacy is worse than Socialism...
fpete13527 (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 7:36AM EST (link)because it empowers Socialism.
Moderacy means that you don’t take a stand on anything, but rather coddle progressivism part way….which is what they want. At that point the progressives TAKE it the rest of the way.
Additionally, siting McCain, Frum, and Daniels immediately invalidate any basis for validity of your points IMO.
If there is one thing that the GOP must stay away from, it is moderacy.
I don't believe I've seen so many bad ideas
Scope (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 8:23AM EST (link)on anything I’ve read, unless it was written by a Progressive. This is a plan that even Nancy and Harry could vote for.
I'm with scope
reddog53 (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 8:46AM EST (link)Moderate republicans seem to have this ‘ we have to be more like democrats or we’ll lose independents’ mania.
These ideas are half-effective and represent nothing close to what we need to do.
Hey, scope...I've been waiting for one we could agree on wholeheartedly
mikerazar (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:12AM EST (link)Nancy and Harry could have written it.
It is the stupidest post I can recall seeing on RedState. Who is this guy?
We have a nation to save, people.
He's been around for six years, and still doesn't understand this site.
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:29AM EST (link)They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
Hay Mike R.- miracles do happen
Scope (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:38AM EST (link)Last Friday morning, my little 14 year old dog died. Monday morning my husband left to go away on business for the week. Tuesday night, my Golden escaped the fence, and ran away. I covered many miles looking for her.
Last night my husband returned home. This morning my Golden was standing at the door to come in. Now you and I finally got on the same page with something very big. It is a good day, and God has been very good to me.
Sorry- that was supposed to be Hey not Hay
Scope (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:39AM EST (link)n/t
Hay or hay, the real miracle is that smart dog of yours.
mikerazar (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 3:11PM EST (link)I think we do agree on a lot of things. Belief in God is the most important of those things but I think we have always been on the ame page for most issues. We wouldn’t want a conservative movement with no disagreements.
We have a nation to save, people.
Wholeheartedly agree nt
aesthete (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 4:55PM EST (link)The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
We could use a "Moderate GOP Plank"
6eorge Jetson (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 6:25PM EST (link)to the head of any Republican that advocates those policies…moderate in that it only knocks them out & doesn’t kill.
5... agree!
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 7:05PM EST (link)Although I’ve found that the smaller surface area of a clue-by-four reduces wind drag and gives a more solid thump.
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
Ummm...this is not going to help you
leftylurker (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:13AM EST (link)But I like this platform. I’d vote for anyone who was behind it.
=)
No, you'd be voting for the Dem in November.
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 10:35AM EST (link)(turns The Who’s classic “Won’t get fooled again” up loud)
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
Mebbe
leftylurker (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 10:47AM EST (link)I’m all but certain to vote for Rick Snyder here in Michigan though.
Gives your words a certain weight, Lefty.
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 2:12PM EST (link)Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
Moderates?
pirate55 (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:20AM EST (link)The so called “moderates” have gotten us into this predicament and now you strategize how to inject moderates into a current solution? You my friend are not a solution but like a “sore backside” to a “continuing problem”.
Take your ideas to the NRCC or maybe to the Senate team in Maine, but here you will find a rebirth of conservatism that will not shrink from you again, for if we do, we ultimately will fail for all of time.
The only thing in the middle of the road is a yellow line and dead skunks. nt
Achance (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:39AM EST (link)In Vino Veritas
And people who quote "Journolist" to advocate their positions. nt
janis (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:52AM EST (link)Art, I am so stealing that line!
Danielle Davis (ocleverone) (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 10:13AM EST (link)It is perfect.
To me, “consensus” seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects … There are still people in my party who believe in “consensus” politics. I regard them as Quislings, as traitors … I mean it. — Margaret Thatcher
Feel free; I stole it from somebody.
Achance (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 10:16AM EST (link)First I heard it years ago it was attributed to former Congressman Wayne Hayes.
In Vino Veritas
you can throw this vid in with it, ocleverone.
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 10:52AM EST (link)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adQqXJn9gsw&feature=related
old hippies are the best.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
Gekster, that video is a hoot.
Danielle Davis (ocleverone) (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:01AM EST (link)Thanks.
To me, “consensus” seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects … There are still people in my party who believe in “consensus” politics. I regard them as Quislings, as traitors … I mean it. — Margaret Thatcher
took a while to find it,
gekster (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:04AM EST (link)but I thought you’ld like it.
They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
If they need more voters,
then they have to make more of who they are for.
We are there in the various Tea Party groups, leaderless, but not rudderless.
We steer always toward the Constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.
Erick Brockway
Ok folks, 2012 is here. Get involved
If Moderates would back Conservatives in the general, Bird Dog, we might be able to talk.
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:08AM EST (link)I thought about taking this point by point, Bird Dog. I got about halfway through and realized that the sticking point has nothing to do with any of these points.
The sticking point is what’s happened over and over again in races where a conservative won the nomination over the moderate.
Conservatives have spent the last couple decades being told “Conservative in the primary, Republican in the general”. And we believe that’s the right approach.
The same rule needs to apply to moderates, but somehow, y’all don’t seem to have gotten the memo.
NY-23 is the most glaring example, where the “moderate” candidate endorsed the *DEM* after it became apparent she couldn’t win.
Please show me where moderate Repubs have agreed to play by the same rules Conservatives are using, i.e. “Moderate in the primary, Republican in the general”, and we can talk issues.
Cat is out.
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
Selected not elected
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:29AM EST (link)acat
DD was selected by the executive of the NY 23 district, and not nominated through a primary process. DD was a moderate to only the far Left by the way.
Back to NY 23, where are you going to stand if Doug Hoffman looses the primary in NY 23 and then decides to run as an independent? Hoffman will still be the “true conservative” in the race, but his positions on the issues might also be rejected by the NY 23 electorate in a primary.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
SteveLA - you are wrong.
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:29PM EST (link)Here’s the thing, Steve. Was it Conservatives that picked the candidate? Yeah, she sucked, but that’s not my point. My point is that she was a lousy candidate *PICKED BY MODERATES*.
(yes, Cat is aware that he’s shouting – cat has had it with people obfuscating what happened in NY-23 by looking *only* at the candidate – the problem isn’t *just* her, it’s that moderates thought they knew best)
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
So let's see what happens next
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:43PM EST (link)acat
Ok so your “claim” is that the folks in NY 23 really want to be represented by the sort of “true conservative” that Doug Hoffman is, fair enough.
But there is a primary going on in NY 23 right now, and there will be a winner and a looser and ideas and values and positions on the issues will be on the table for people who actually live in the district to make up their own minds on and cast a vote for the candidate who best represents them. Will it be Doug Hoffman or someone else who takes the nomination in a primary?
That’s the real question, not moderate or “true conservative” picked by anyone other than the people who cast a vote in a primary That’s a good thing….right?
Here’s the thing though, looks like Hoffman is going to loose, in short his views on the issues are going to be rejected by the voters in the district. How you going to spin that his version of “true conservatism” was not any better than DeeDee’s wacky liberal views? Could it possibly be that NY 23 is populated by moderates instead of “true conservatives” ?
Let’s see what the primary result is and see what the voters of the district say about who they want to represent them in Congress, without your labels.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
SteveLA - That's neither what I said, nor correct.
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:58PM EST (link)NY-23 is interesting for what happened. The Moderates picked a candidate and demanded support from the Conservatives. This is hardly a new thing.
The Conservatives took one look at the candidate and said “No”. That’s a relatively unusual thing.
The important thing is what happened next – when the Moderates threw their support behind the Dem instead of admitting that maybe the Conservatives had a point.
As you say, NY-23 is up for re-election. It was a short cycle, but even so the Moderates chose to be represented by a Dem instead of by a Conservative.
I’m happy that NY-23 is having a primary today and that they actually get to elect, the candidate who they believe will represent their district. It doesn’t matter to my statement, though.
When Moderates throw their support to the Dems, or when Moderates won’t support Conservative candidates, that tells me all I need to know.
Conservatives support Repubs in the general. Moderates seem to think a Dem is better than a Conservative. There’s something wrong here, and it’s not with the Conservative side of the party.
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
Labels and such
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 2:11PM EST (link)acat
Seems about the only two groups using labels in NY 23 are the liberal media, who labeled Dee Dee a moderate and “true conservatives” who labeled her one too to illustrate how conservatives are being ignored again by those mean old moderates.
Fact of the matter is she was not a moderate by any stretch of the term. Dee Dee positions on issues was to the far left of what most would consider moderate in the Republican party, and even to some centralist Democrats.
Fact of the matter is that the Republican executive made a major mistake by picking Dee Dee along with some world class stupidity by the institutional Republicans who got mixed up in the mess and handed the seat to the Democrats. We probably agree on that point.
But the real point is, that without the labels, there are two R’s running for the nomination in NY 23 right now. Doug Hoffman and Matt Doheny. One of them is going to win the Republican nomination in the primary. If Hoffman looses, will he run as a member of a third party and show that he’s not a real Republican who respects the will of the people of NY 23 as expressed in a primary? There’s probably a label in there somewhere, but I’ll leave the job of coming up with a new label to you.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
It's not about the election today, SteveLA.
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 2:32PM EST (link)And your continued attempts to dodge the issue are telling.
Your wording is too mild, Steve. The “institutional republicans” did not “hand” the seat to the Dems. The Republican Candidate *ENDORSED* the Dem once it became apparent she couldn’t win.
If this were an isolated incident, I might let it go. It’s not, though.
Dial your wayback machine to 2004 in Illinois and look at how the Senate race went.
The Republican machine produced a relatively good Moderate candidate, Jack Ryan. They didn’t dig into his past enough, though – Jack had a messy divorce from Jeri Ryan and although the documents were sealed, they were leaked and his campaign blew up after the primary but before the general.
The more conservative voters, who weren’t particularly thrilled with Ryan, demanded a more conservative candidate. The Republican machine gave them one, Alan Keyes, but then refused to provide support. He lost badly to a relative upstart you may have heard of.
The burden of proof is on you, SteveLA, not on Conservatives. It’s not about NY-23 today, it’s about the large number of shivs Moderates have stuck in Conservatives’ backs over the years. I hope you’ll understand that at the moment I’m more interested in watching my back than in listening to more of the same patter, eh?
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
Patter
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 2:45PM EST (link)acat
Alan Keys….really that’s the best you can do? Wowser.
The burden of proof as you call it is called a real primary in NY 23, which is where this particular example you started out with began. Let’s see how that one and the Nevada Senate race turns out. I’m sure you’ll be able to find some reason to blame moderates for losses in both.
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
Just as Moderates blamed Conservatives for McLame's loss, SteveLA?
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 2:53PM EST (link)Let me try this again, since apparently you’re not following me.
The NY-23 election this year *does not change* that Moderates were unwilling to support a Conservative, and instead voted for the Dem.
The Keyes – Obama Senate race is another example of Moderates who were unwilling to support a Conservative but instead voted for the Dem.
Moderates cannot, IMO, be trusted to reliably vote for the Repub nominee in the general election if they get their widdle feelings hurt in the Primary.
Show me where I’m wrong.
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
Only if they do what they usually do which is to
eburke (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 3:44PM EST (link)take their ball and go home because some wacist, wascally, conservative won the primary and embarassed the Party.
“All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”
Unified Patriots
Let me count
SteveLA (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 4:25PM EST (link)What’s a really big big big number, the number that is associated with the number of postings here on RS by social conservative SIVV telling everyone that they won’t vote for candidate X because he/she doesn’t support an absolutist position on abortion? What’s the number of threats by social conservative SIVV who claim they will sit home if candidate Y who is not a true believer on their single issue of abortion is nominated? That’s probably a really big big number.
Yea sure, moderates have a secret society to hose “uber true conservatives” who we disagree with….ya that’s the ticket, we lay awake at night trying to figure out how to hose and stab them in the back….(that was a snark by the way for those “true conservatives” over in Rio Linda).
______________________________________
Competency over ideological purity and litmus tests
Steve, if you could have just *one* discussion about
eburke (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 5:34PM EST (link)a topic without somewhere, somehow bashing social conservatives, even if no one else has even brought up the topic or it’s totally irrelevant to the topic, I think I’d keel over in a dead faint.
Try looking up in the archives the post that EE wrote listing all the times in the last 15 years in which moderate/liberal Republicans either sat on their fat asses and refused to lift a finger to help the conservative nominee, or actually ran a 3rd party candidate or endorsed the Dem against a conservative GOP candidate.
Your screed is beyond tiresome.
“All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”
Unified Patriots
SteveLA, please try to listen here.
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 5:51PM EST (link)Conservative in the primary, Repub in the general.
Yes, social conservatives make some noise but, at least at Red State, they seem to get the idea – Conservative in the primary, Repub in the general.
Of that “really big number” of yours, any of ‘em that come *after* the primary are often followed by a reminder of the above, followed by – as needed – G’bye.
I’d really like to believe, Steve, that you would vote for a conservative over a democrat, but so far all you’ve done is throw distractions and duck the issue. This does not give me hope for 2010…
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
Moderates enable the ruling class...
rbdwiggins (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:56PM EST (link)When they should be defending our Republic by restoring power to the people, protecting States’ rights and ensuring our sovereignty.
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.” – Ronald Reagan
I'm not sure what you mean
Bird_Dog (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:25PM EST (link)NY-23 was one big futz up. We could’ve at least had a RINO in Congress, but alas.
Moderate conservatives do well in elections. Just look at Scott Brown or the governors’ races in NJ and VA. By contrast, the purer conservatives in NV and KY Senate races are probably going to lose. For the GOP get back its majority, there has to be enough appeal to the moderate and independent elements. If we don’t do that, then agenda moves backward because the Dems stay in charge.
Bird_Dog, you are mistaken.
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 1:50PM EST (link)NY-23 was a pock-up, yes, but the real problem was with the *Moderates* who nominated one of their own. Yes, the candidate was an unmitigated disaster, but where is the Moderate outrage that the Moderate candidate selected by Moderates endorsed the Dem? Show me where *their* feet have been slow-roasted over coals, eh?
You are also mistaken about Brown, and Christie, and McDonnell. Yes, they agree with you on one or more issues, but they are also more conservative than you on one or more of your issues.
For Brown, he seems to be a fiscally conservative type. Christie has slugged the New Jersey unions in the nose. McDonnell is the one I know least about – but even in that case I’m sure he’s more conservative than Craig Deeds. (grin) His published views appear to the right of your views on a number of issues.
In short, Conservatives have put on our noseplugs and voted for some real losers (including Arlen “turncoat” Spector, Jumpin Jim Jeffords, Lindey “McCain’s wingman” Graham, and Bob “let’s make a deal” Bennett and, oh yeah, McCain and Dole) when they won the nomination.
Strangely, though, there’s an equally long litany of failed Conservative candidates who you Moderates failed to support.
It seems to me, Bird Dog, that until Moderates stop bashing Paul and Angle and join the coalition to elect “Republicans in the general”, that you haven’t got much room to talk, let alone set policy.
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
As a fellow moderate
captkirc Saturday, August 7th at 2:26PM EST (link)I have to disagree with your assessment of Kentucky. Recent polling has shown Paul widening his lead and it looks to me like he is going to cruise as the national picture for Dems continues to worsen. I personally think that he is an appealing candidate in part because of his fierce Libertarian streak and in part because I can see right through the intellectually dishonest attacks the MSM has thrown at him.
"By contrast, the purer conservatives in NV and KY Senate races are probably going to lose."
eburke (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 2:36PM EST (link)Please delineate the steps you are taking as a Republican to help ensure that our candidate in these races win.
Breath holding commencing…….now.
“All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”
Unified Patriots
that dog don't hunt
tngal (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:32AM EST (link)We will reach across the aisle as far as arms length. If there is common ground we will find it there. No need to stretch or bend, it weakens the platform. Unfortunately you have bent and stretched in everyone of your issue statements.
“encourage fathers to marry mothers”, encourage with what? a note from a teacher? Or perhaps a subsidy or two. Forcing someone to live with someone they only wanted to sleep with makes for a lot of unhappy campers. Maybe you meant encourage a more active role .
“other militaries in other nations..” allow gays in military. They do. Strangely enough a lot of countres don’t. DADT is that arms reach thing.
“A Matter for the states” – interesting. this one area is interesting. Oh wait, California tried that with Prop 8 . The state implmenting the will of the people.
“process for illegals to become legals”. We’ve got that! See how the arms length thing works? Hey if it isn’t working fast enough for some, Sorry. If millions more can’t take advantage every week. Sorry. We have an organized manageable level when enforcement is allowed to be utilized.
“encourage agreements” we’ve tried that., Oh, and Israel is our ally. Just a reminder.
“Hope for better luck” oh, that’s nice.
amen 'gal, and while I agree that the economy is PARAMOUNT, pro-life is
Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 12:18PM EST (link)not only right and increasingly popular, social conservatives are the part of the base that made the Reagan and Newt revolutions possible, and many are also Tea Partiers. The GOP does not win by intentionally downplaying social issues and acting like Democrats.
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
GC, is there something
tngal (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 12:29PM EST (link)about this diary that smells squi…um, fishy to you? Does to me.
yes, but I like fish and the opportunity to refute the the bad policy arguments of
Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 12:46PM EST (link)left and attempt to reach the ignorant followers of the Left that might hear the refutation and begin thinking. I like to plant seeds in the listeners to the leftists who don’t get to hear the facts very often. To me then, trolls are useful. But I don’t set policy at Redstate.
I am about the business of educating a super conservative majority in America. To do that we need to win over all we can, and I think that it is important to answer the usual charges that the listeners to the left hear all the time.
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
I don't know, Mike
aesthete (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 5:02PM EST (link)I’m not a social conservative in any way, shape, or form, but abortion is one of the most important moral issues of our time, along with prohibition. The only reason that it isn’t my primary concern when voting for candidates is tactical (elected officials can’t do much at all on the issue), not because it’s less important relative to the economy. Hopefully that’s what you meant there (and I think it is), and not that on a categorical basis, abortion is less important than the economy.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
yes, I agree with your context 'thete - nt
Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 7:02PM EST (link)Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson
When "moderates" are willing to...
rbdwiggins (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 12:11PM EST (link)– Slash taxes and federal regulations across the board. To the point it starves the beast and layoffs become commonplace among federal employees ( To exceed 40% of the federal bureaucracy).
– Establish baseline defense spending at 5% of GDP.
– Eliminate the Department of Education and at least half of the remaining cabinet level departments and agencies, including the EPA (Will count toward the minimum 40% reduction in the federal bureaucracy.
– Eliminate seniority and establish merit pay for all federal employees. Require a minimum employee contribution of 50% toward pensions and benefits and raise the federal retirement age.
– Remove the congressional exemptions from all congressional actions.
– Audit the Federal Reserve.
– Withdraw from the United Nations.
– Demand regime change in Iran, and assist Israel in eradicating Hamas and Hezbollah.
– Expose the Anthropogenic Climate Change Fraud and hold the perpetrators criminally and civilly liable for the fraud.
– Establish an energy policy that greatly expands the use of nuclear, coal, oil and natural gas in order to meet our growing energy requirements.
…They will have ceased aiding and abetting Liberalism’s
destructionfundamental transformation of our Republic.“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.” – Ronald Reagan
Why should 5% be the baseline, especially for moderate?
aesthete (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 5:10PM EST (link)Right now, while running two wars, we’re cruising at around 4%. Most conservatives are fine with that number. Why should we spend more than that during peacetime? Considering that the military is government-run, and that any money that goes into the pit ain’t coming out, no matter what the merits are, 2-3% is perfectly appropriate in peacetime, especially for moderates. It seems incredibly silly to me to even establish “baseline spending” on the military, but that’s just me.
Most of the other things that you’ve listed are things that conservatives, not moderates, would be doing fine to endorse. This list seems rather stringent for moderates.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Because the 45-year average is over 5%...
rbdwiggins (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 8:51PM EST (link)and there’s no way to offset massive deficit spending with cuts in defense spending. Runaway entitlement spending is the problem.
China is ramping up its defense spending Building a new fifth-generation fighter, a blue-water navy and long-range anti-ship missiles, and we’re stupid enough to cut the funding for our air superiority fighter, the F-22 Raptor. We’re on the wrong track, and the military has indicated that it could experience a shortfall of as many as 900 fighter aircraft by 2020.
Many, if not most, of the latest technological advances stem from the defense industry’s research and development. That’s a legitimate target for stimulus spending if there ever was one.
It’s not just moderates. Conservatives need to step up to the plate as well.
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.” – Ronald Reagan
1-3% additional spending
aesthete (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 10:05PM EST (link)on the military in peace time is a sizeable chunk of change, friend, and must be funded through general taxation. That was justifiable during the Cold War, when we faced a somewhat equivalent military power, and in fact accounts for the 5% average. In a unilateral world, it is extremely high (we already spend about as much on our military as the rest of the world combined). In candor, several of our newer planes have essentially been government welfare for white-collar workers, Exhibit A being the Osprey (an acquaintance of mine is actually trying to patent a new control scheme for the aircraft), and Exhibit B being the F-22. I absolutely believe in proactive defense, but 5% aims high relative to the threats faced by the US, and hits the US taxpayer in the pocketbook unjustifiably.
As an aside, China is too often seen as an ascendant power, or the equivalent of the US: truth of the matter is, China’s currently a regional power, and isn’t even close to challenging our hegemony. In fact, future trends favor us on economic, demographic, and several other fronts; guess being an authoritarian one-party state isn’t that great, after all. In the here and now, China’s doing a good job of creating a balancing coalition in the Far East against it due to its increasingly bellicose stance. (If I were a betting man, I would bet on a major war, or a series of protracted conflicts, in the Far East within 30 years, but I digress.)
Here’s a good article: http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2007/03/2545232
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
The Cold War just changed theaters...
rbdwiggins (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:10PM EST (link)imho, and we’re also neglecting our own hemisphere. I’m not convinced that we can outspend China, although it worked against the former Soviet Union. In fact, China appears to be using a comparable strategy against us.
Our hegemony goes unchallenged because China lacks the requisite blue-water navy. They’re developing a GPS-guided anti-ship missile with an operational range of about 900 miles. They’re likely to field that weapon before the end of the current decade, and they won’t stop there.
We can’t afford to fall behind, so I support widening the gap as much as possible, cementing our superiority for the foreseeable future. It may stave off one, or more, of those regional conflicts.
Good article. Although, I don’t agree with Hellman. Put me in the 6.2% camp.
Besides, military spending is one of the few government expenditures actually authorized by the constitution.
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.” – Ronald Reagan
We are outspending China
aesthete (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 12:29PM EST (link)by a ratio of over 7:1. China would have to spend 14% of its GDP to reach spending parity, much less exceed the technological and training gaps of the US. Our joint force, air power capabilities, special forces, communications networks, and navy are rivaled by none, and our army and general tech level is nothing to scoff at, either. None of this includes our NATO allies, many of whom would probably join us in a conflict of sufficiently high profile, or our regional allies, like Thailand, South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, and most of the countries in the Far and South-East. As I previously stated, future trends don’t favor them, either. China could make a lot of trouble in the region, but it certainly isn’t a competitor to the US. There’s no purpose in arbitrarily increasing the already yawning chasm between the US and China, when it doesn’t do much to help our regional interests, and when we could easily ratchet up our military spending in wartime.
But yes, at least it’s Constitutional.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Falling behind is a matter of aggregate military spending
JSobieski (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 3:56PM EST (link)Just like in sports, its all about the matchups.
China is trying very hard to bridge several technological gaps. The Russians are helping them to some degree in exchange for cash. Meanhwile, we have over the past 8 years refocused our spending prioritities on conflicts like Iraq/Afghanistan.
China doesn’t have a navy that it can use to effectively project force, but its missile technology only has to be “good enough” in order for it to be effective.
For example, what ratio of pilot fatalities would the US be able to stomach on an ongoing basis? One of the reasons why Israel is at least somewhat nervous about Iran is that Iran is getting anti-aircraft technology from the Russians.
All you need is make US mastery of airspace less dominant. You don’t think China has at least a passable plan for taking out our satellites?
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
is "NOT" a matter of aggregate spending
JSobieski (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 3:57PM EST (link)apologies for the typo
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
Not right now, no
aesthete (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 7:48PM EST (link)Not from what I’ve seen, anyhow. They don’t have nearly enough coverage, integration, or experience with the tech to make it a problem, and likely won’t get the chance to . If we were up against Israel or another country with advanced missile tech, with a small, urbanized country easily coverable by such tech, I’d be a bit more concerned. From what I’ve seen of China’s airtech, and from what my much more knowledgeable friends at Davis-Monthan tell me, it’s not all that impressive. More importantly, closing the gap probably wont be feasible for the ChiComs: their economy was hit even harder by the recession than ours was, and their economic, demographic, and societal vector is unstable and is going to land China in a spot of pain, and dishing out some pain to its allies. You mentioned its navy, and it’s worth mentioning again: even launching an attack against Taiwan would put a lot of pressure on their navy, and if we involve ourselves, it’s unwinnable for them. Their armies are plentiful, and comparably equipped, but their officer and non-com officers don’t come close to our own. Our joint force capabilities far exceed their own. Our special forces outmatch theirs any day of the week, and our supply lines would be much better than their own, even in regions close to their home theater of operations.
No matter: I agree with you that it’s not about aggregate military spending, which is why a baseline is an arbitrary and potentially counterproductive measure, particularly one as high as 5%. If we’re to have a baseline, it should be “low” (2-2.5%), and military spending should then increase based on potential adversaries and current conflicts. Considering our current status as being in two wars, our current expenditures (a bit higher than 4%) are justifiable. If ever we got into a war with China (or the feared tag team of Russia-China-Iran), our military budget would probably hover in the 10-20% GDP range. If I lived in Israel, I wouldn’t feel comfortable with government expenditures at 4% at any time, and would probably agitate for more military spending. In short, I’m fine with military spending where it’s appropriate. Indexing military expenditure to GDP is a bad idea, though: there’s nothing wrong with reducing our military expenditures if there are no ongoing or upcoming conflicts, and even Heritage Foundation’s preferred baseline (considered the outer periphery among think tanks dealing with such issues) is only 4.1%. I want a powerful America that can meet its foreign policy objectives and project force worldwide. Reasonable people can disagree (don’t you abhor that phrase?
), but I think that such a goal is easily achievable at 2-3% GDP during peacetime.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Random prediction:
aesthete (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 7:50PM EST (link)China is fixing to head into its own analogue of Japan’s “Lost Decade”, and will continue to be affected to a much greater extent by the economic crises than will the US and other nations. That could be a good or bad thing for the region.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Doesn't diminish the threat...
rbdwiggins (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 7:26PM EST (link)“…we could easily ratchet up our military spending in wartime.”
By then, its likely to be too late. Especially considering our diminishing manufacturing capabilities, or an administration/congress that is not serious about national security in the interim and seeks to reap the “Peace Dividend.”
Case in point:
Senate Armed Services Committee Letter to Secretary Gates
Re: 2010 Report on the Military Power of the People’s Republic of China (PRC)
July 23, 2010
Establishing a baseline for defense spending at 5% is the prudent thing to do.
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.” – Ronald Reagan
China's entire economy is approximately
aesthete (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 8:13PM EST (link)a third the size of the US’, and future trends indicate that its time in the sun, as Japan’s before it, is coming to an end. This report only serves to prove the fact that China is making do with lots of tech from the 60s and the 70s, whereas we have a lot of 80s, 90s, and some 00s tech. Wile E Coyote gives me precedent for saying that China’s “plans” don’t really matter if reality doesn’t bend to their will (though I will freely admit, “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” has convinced me that nothing is impossible in the Far East
). Ultimately, the question should be what they can do with a military budget that is a little under 2% of their GDP (which is smallish relative to ours). I doubt that it is enough to bridge the gap of a nation with a 3-4% GDP budget and a GDP three times their size. BTW, I was wrong on my ratio: we actually outspend China at a ratio of 12:1. We have nothing to worry about on their end as far as equivalence goes, though we should be concerned about the possibility of a regional conflict.
From a realist perspective, additional military spending could potentially do two things:
First, it could make China look like a bigger threat than it is. That perceived parity would give China substantially more latitude in foreign policy, whether to cow neighbors or to get other nations to back off on human rights abuses, free market reforms, and treaty compliance.
Second, it would indicate to other nations that the US wants some sort of conflict, essentially setting us up for a self-fulfilling prophecy type scenario where other nations grow more antagonistic in the hopes that they can form alliances to defend against perceived US “imperialism”.
Since we wouldn’t gain much from this increase in spending (thus far, nothing specific has emerged regarding where that money will be spent, and how that will help us), it’s not good bang for our buck, IMO. To your credit, though, it’s better to support somewhat excessive military spending than to starve it of necessary funding; our leftist and isolationist friends have proven the folly of going with too low of military spending.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Agreed, but keep in mind that GDP is not necessarily equivalent to technology
JSobieski (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 9:00PM EST (link)The USSR had technology that far outstripped its general economy (they couldn’t even make a decent calculator in the 1970s). North Korea is an even more extreme example.
China’s general economic strength far exceed that of the USSR in its prime, and they are smart about acquiring technology where they can in a systematic manner from Russia, the West, and others.
I agree with keeping a lid on defense spending, but am very much concerned about the current priorities which in my view, presume that we will simply always be ahead.
Give our relatively low tolerance for casualities in comparison to places like China, Russia, or Iran, we need to sustain a dominance . . . not merely superiority.
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
Two points:
aesthete (Diary) Monday, August 9th at 2:38AM EST (link)First, the USSR consistently invested 15-30% of its GDP into military spending (15% being the low measure; That, and its network of one-party Communist states and their monetary and political support, are what allowed Russia to compete with the US and the West, which spent very little of their enormous GDPs relative to the USSR.
N Korea, likewise, spends around 22% of its GDP on guns for Kim’s army. However, N Korea’s army is laughably outdated, relying on WWII relics and little in the way of tactics. The only reason they’ve been in the picture is because a) China’s propping them up, and b) S Korea’s not really interested in re-unification.
China doesn’t have nearly as much influence as the USSR had, either around the world or nearby. Its neighbors, for example, are not friendly with them at all, with even one-party Communist states like Laos and Vietnam wanting to throw their lot in with the rest of the region against Chinese hegemony. China’s still-primitive economy, relatively low military spending, and low technological base make them no match for any potential matchup against the US and its regional and NATO partners in the short- or medium-term (the UK, Australia, and Canada, at the very least, would support us militarily). That’s not to say that one should ignore China and the region, it is simply to say that China is a regional competitor, and one that is probably headed towards a rough patch pretty soon. It isn’t even close to becoming an imminent threat, and thus, one should find reasons to support a 5% budget that don’t rely on an ascendant China that can compete with the US.
China being a more regional power is, unfortunately, not the common view. If anything, I find that too many believe, not that we are far ahead of potential competitors, but that China is already the US’ equivalent on the world stage, soon to be its. That is a gross exaggeration, bad for constructing foreign policy, and I blame sensationalistic journalism’s penchant for the melodramatic.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
I don't think we are disagreeing about numbers BUT
JSobieski (Diary) Monday, August 9th at 2:54AM EST (link)I just want to point out that in the long term, there are reasons to conclude that China will do better than the USSR did in terms of military technology. Why?
The Chinese economy is stronger.
The Chinese economy is integrated with the Western world, so they have access to all sorts of dual-use technologies.
The Chinese have money, and the Russians are in need of that money, so they can buy a lot of Russian assistance.
The USA isn’t what it used to be—during the Cold War we were focused on military technology, now we aren’t
I frankly don’t care so much about % of GDP as a metric as I do spending money on the right stuff. I don’t want our military to focus more on low-tech conflicts like Iraq/Afghanistan. I think thats a mistake for a whole host of reasons.
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
a final thought---be wary of matchups in a assymetrical conflict
JSobieski (Diary) Monday, August 9th at 2:58AM EST (link)If a dozen or so men with boxcutters can bring our country to a halt on 9/11, the capacity of take out satellites coupled with a willingness to lose a lot of people should not be underestimated.
The Chinese are taking their shiny new credit card and buying up all sorts of military technologies from the Russians. Their ability to reduce the gap is pretty substantial, and they don’t need to eliminate it to effectively eliminate it.
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
The only thing we disagree on
aesthete (Diary) Monday, August 9th at 3:24AM EST (link)as far as I can tell, is the extent to which China is a threat, both economically and militarily. I honestly don’t see much in their modernization programs, besides their ballistics programs, that poses a threat to the US. Fact of the matter is, and it’s hard to overstate it relative to the overstatement of the China = new US meme, that China is so far behind the US and its allies that it’s not even funny. If Japan alone decided to renege their country’s pacifistic nature (which is an ongoing discussion now) and more vigorously support their “Self-Defense Forces”, they and the regional powers in Southeast Asia and the Far East would be the superior of China in military capability.
I’ll also point out (though I’m sure you already know it) that much of the USSR’s relative success on a technological front can be attributed to the various advances made in and after WWII, particularly with its capturing of German scientists, as well as its sophisticated and integrated espionage network. For that reason I think that, even on the metric of available technological sources and their costs, the USSR wins pound for pound over China.
As far as assymetrical warfare goes, you’re right. There are, however, more costs imposed on a nation-state that uses such tactics than on a rogue group like al-Qaeda. Would we be able to occupy China with a 5% budget, or involve ourselves in other scenarios where asymmetric warfare could be used to China’s advantage on a large scale? Probably not. Are there any foreign policy goals in the region which would require us putting ourselves in such situations, and should we base our spending on such improbable needs? Again, probably not.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Are you presuming that China is not doing the kind of espionage that the USSR did?
JSobieski (Diary) Monday, August 9th at 3:35AM EST (link)I believe that China has embraced economic as well as technological spying. They also have greater access given economic integration. In short, I think China has the advantages of the USSR but not its weakneses. The fact that China can just buy Russian brain power is also a factor.
I guess what I am saying is, in twenty years, the differences could be neglible. Stealing technology is a lot faster than developing technology.
I think we agree on the present.
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
USSR espionage ran up to
aesthete (Diary) Monday, August 9th at 4:24AM EST (link)Cabinet-level position, and sympathetics ran all the way up to Vice President Wallace. That’s just in the US: the UK had its fair share of Communists under its Labour government, and the Frenchies had their own problems with Communist groups and fronts. I would be extremely surprised if Chinese espionage were nearly as engrained, endemic, or as effective as that of the USSR.
China’s policy of population reduction and the resulting shortage of females, in addition to various economic troubles (they are worse off than we are from the crises), and the limits of convergence in growing their economy, are really going to come back to bite them. I don’t know how those demographic and economic troubles are going to play out, but I doubt that they will work to China’s advantage. That, and the sheer breadth of opportunities that we would have to nudge them where they hurt. Putting the screws on the EU to continue its arms ban against the PRC and continuing to foster regional cooperation and alignment mildly against China are more important for boxing in China, and a better investment to that end, IMO (though joint operations with India and Japan wouldn’t hurt).
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Your original ratio was correct...
rbdwiggins (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 10:04PM EST (link)According to the Annual Report to Congress: Military Power of the People’s Republic of China 2009, China’s military spending was estimated to be between US $105 Billion and $150 Billion, whereas, US military spending was approximately $719 Billion. China has reported limiting its increase in military spending for 2010 to about 7.5%.
On your second point:
“…where other nations grow more antagonistic in the hopes that they can form alliances to defend against perceived US “imperialism”.”
That’s already happening… In our own hemisphere… Iran/Venezuela and Iran/Nicaragua. The second being more troubling to me for its obvious national security implications.
Back to the proper level of defense spending….
We’ll just have to be in honest disagreement. I’ll never support spending levels in the 2-3% range, and it’s apparent that you won’t support spending levels at 5%, or better, unless/until the threat is imminent. Sobeit.
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.” – Ronald Reagan
Thanks for correcting the ratio
aesthete (Diary) Monday, August 9th at 1:08PM EST (link)The mixup was due to the fact that the Chinese government claims that it is spending ~50 billion, but the US DoD believes that the real measure is closer to $100-150. Sorry about that!
My point with defense spending is (and you’re going to hate me for using this phrase): it’s all relative. 20% GDP dedicated to the military is not necessarily too high, and 2% GDP is not necessarily too low (it is, IMO, too low for the present). It all depends on force projection, current tech, and impending threats on the horizon.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
The better argument "for" is that the armed forces are a Useful Thing to have around.
acat (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 10:41AM EST (link)Recall the whining on the Left that the Louisiana National Guard weren’t available immediately after Katrina because they were in Iraq? If we had a larger standing army, or larger national guard units, this would not have been a problem.
The Armed Forces offer one of the best ways out of the hells that are the inner city, one of the best ways to get to that American Dream. The combination of offering a way up and reducing the number of idle young men could help a number of social ills.
The Armed Forces show a much better return on government “stimulus” than the recent so-called ‘private sector’ attempts.
This completely ignores the civilian applications of technologies first developed for military purposes including the computer (for calculating trajectories) and the internet (for fault-tolerant communication systems) and .. well, the list is rather long, actually.
A yearly 5% investment in the armed services would do this country a lot of good.
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
It's an argument in favor
aesthete (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 12:04PM EST (link)It’s also one that should be rejected, mostly for the reason that all of those things you mention, while nice side benefits, are just side benefits, and don’t justify the additional spending in and of themselves. The military is not America’s Mr Fixit; it is there to kill people and break stuff. That is a very useful tool in foreign policy, and if I do say so, our military is pretty awesome at doing just that. The more it starts delineating from that goal and getting bogged down in peripherals, the less chance it has at success. One of the more troubling post-Cold War developments for the military has been the trend towards establishing the military as the armed branch of AmeriCorps, or as proselytizers for democracy. The military is not institutionally designed for either task, and it shows in our operations thus far in OEF and OIF, where our military victories have contrasted sharply with a distinct lack of progress towards our political ends. Military spending also carries with it opportunity cost; that is, whatever value the money was to accrue in the private sector is certainly more than what it will get through the military and its contractors.
If we’re going to throw more money in the Money Hole, then sure, let’s dedicate it to defense spending, but just because it is Constitutional doesn’t necessarily make it less wasteful.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
See your point, asthete.
acat (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 3:25PM EST (link)And I’ll go one further – when we get to where its’ necessary to “sell” citizens on the armed services, there’s worse problems afoot.
To slightly misquote Heinlein, “Roman matrons used to say to their sons: “Come back with your shield, or on it.” Later on, this custom declined. So did Rome.”.
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
Which Heinlein book was that in?
aesthete (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 8:27PM EST (link)I’m thinking either Starship Troopers or one of the Lazarus Long ones, but that’s about half of Heinlein’s catalog
Also, great point: I don’t think that when it is necessary, the average American begrudges parting ways with his funds for the purposes of national defense. But having seen how the military and contractors work first and second-hand (more second-hand knowledge than first, I’m afraid), I can say that no budgeting office is going to say no to extra money, even if it goes to something silly: they don’t want their operating budgets slashed for the next year, and welcome new funds regardless of their need for them. That appetite is one that should be kept in check, and which left unrestrained (which would be the case for a 5% budget in peacetime), would be spent outrageously: hundred dollar hammer, anyone?.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
IIRC, it's from one of the Lazarus Long ones. [nt]
acat (Diary) Monday, August 9th at 12:23AM EST (link)——
Caveat Suffragator
You are correct, acat.
TNJim (Diary) Monday, August 9th at 12:57AM EST (link)It’s from the notebooks of Lazarus Long, found in Time Enough for Love.
Thanks, TNJim and acat nt
aesthete (Diary) Monday, August 9th at 2:07AM EST (link)The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
bird dog, I'd refute this post point by point but
eburke (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 2:09PM EST (link)I don’t have 3 days to disassemble your tripe especially because your subsequent comments prove you intellectually unable grasp them anyway (pearls before swine and all that)
The bottom line is if your ‘moderate’ crap worked, John McCain would be POTUS right now, and the ‘Pubs would still control both Houses of Congress because they sure as hell didn’t govern as conservatives during the 2000′s.
And furthermore, it’s *you* guys who take your ball and go home when your guy/gal doesn’t win and then have the audacity to accuse conservatives of wanting a small tent when you guys are the ones who are too ‘sophisticated’ and ‘embarassed’ to support a conservative when they win the primary. Then, you use your lack of support which often is the decisive factor in teh conservative losing the race as proof that conservatives can’t win in the general.
You, and your ilk, utterly disgust me.
“All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”
Unified Patriots
Some polling info that puts your "moderate plan" in the trash can
Scope (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 2:10PM EST (link)By a margin of 55-40 independents believe that government is doing too much. That trend is going in the Republicans favor, and will only continue to gain steam as the O admin. brings on more and more destruction.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/cr_20100807_9955.php
From the last polling I can find, back in Oct. 2009, Gallup has shown trends going away from “moderates” and towards a Conservative platform. Back then, 40% considered themselves Conservative, 36% Moderate, and 20% liberal.
From 1994 through about 2002, more considered themselves moderate rather than conservative. That was throughout the Clinton admin., and in the early Bush years. In about 2005 that trend had reversed, and moderates have been on the decline ever since. It was in 2005 (election day) that voters turned to the Democrats, and gave them majorities, and again in 2007 (again election day). The voters gave up on the moderate Republicans, that blurred the lines between the parties, and, acted as though they had the same goals as the Dems, just at a slower pace.
http://www,gallup.com/poll/123854/conservatives-maintain-edge-top-ideological-group.aspx
That was back in October 2009. I would be willing to bet that those considering themselves Conservative have increased, especially since there have been more and more disasters passed by the Congress. The Federal Government, without any doubt is the most radical far left since about the Woodrow Wilson days. In order to bring the country back to even a reasonable semblance of the exceptional and great nation we were, the swing to the right must be drastic, as the moderates have been moving more left and more left, so that we can all just get along. There is no such animal as a moderate conservative. That’s like trying to mix oil and water. You are one or the other.
Scope - I'm pleased to agree with you.
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 2:36PM EST (link)It doesn’t happen every day, but you are consistently armed with facts and write clearly. I am pleased to agree with your assessment.
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
Thanks acat
Scope (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 3:42PM EST (link)for your complimentary words. So, something is going on here. Today you, mikerazar, and I have been on the same page at least with the issue of the skunks laying on the yellow lines (I like that) in the middle of the road. I think most all of us here have one core goal- get rid of the terrorists in every branch of the Federal Government. Then we can get back to the work of the government that Michelle O will once again not be proud of.
Indeed, Scope. Perhaps, if Michelle isn't proud of the U.S.A. she could stay in Spain? [nt]
acat (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 5:43PM EST (link)——
Caveat Suffragator
Wow
Black River Wolf (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 2:31PM EST (link)Maybe we should just give up and let the statists take over and stick our heads in the sand.
I guess that sums up your plan
“In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame,
two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.”—-John Adams
5 x 5, BRW. -nt-
eburke (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 2:34PM EST (link)“All that need be done for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”
Unified Patriots
Marceaux and Greene duke it out
tngal (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 4:04PM EST (link)Birdog, how about if we just let Basil and Alvin duke it out. And we will adopt the winner’s policy for a1 year term. Fair enough? They’re both ex military. Equal ground.
I suspect after a year, both the dems and republicans would be a little more civil to the other side once they see how bad it can really get. How’s that for common ground?
I love this idea
Black River Wolf (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 5:44PM EST (link)it needs to be on Pay Per View
“In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame,
two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.”—-John Adams
We have a party dedicated
aesthete (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 5:16PM EST (link)to the advancement of your ideals. It’s called the Democratic party. There’s no reason that the Republican party should jettison what few ties it has to fiscal conservatism, even in a rhetorical sense, to become the “me too” party. Let me revise that statement: right now, what we have is a “me too” party, and it would be nice to move away from that. Posts and ideas like yours don’t help in that regard, and on several issues that you mention (Economy, Social Security, Healthcare, Immigration, and Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell), we would be polling worse than we currently are. This is all besides the fact that such an agenda would kill any momentum and enthusiasm that GOP and independent voters have going into Nov 2010, by basically agreeing with the Democrats’ agenda.
The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice – G.K. Chesterton
Great stuff, guys, sorry I missed it.
Vassar Bushmills (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 5:51PM EST (link)Nothing I can’t add to what AChance said (should be in a book soon, maybe Limbaugh will use it). KNowing we can’t count on your votes this November, I’m only glad to say, we won’t be needing them anymore. The times they are a’changing.
Some you teach, some you preach,, some you just push to the side of the road. We are in a time when iffiness is no longer a virtue, but closer to that dead possum in the center of the road.
Cheers, and thanks for looking in.
If moderates are the answer to the question what is wrong with the Republican Party....
JadedByPolitics (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 7:19PM EST (link)then you and every moderate from here to kingdom come is going to be MISERABLE! John McCain “moderate” NOT President. WE had tripe like this in 2008 and WE got slammed! What don’t you “moderates” understand about SMALL GOVERNMENT! If you don’t like Conservatives then leave the Party but damn well know that the Republican Party is being WRENCHED RIGHT come hell or high water!
Unified Patriots – How-To:
Activists Taking Action
Here you go Bird Dog with your idea of moderate Republicans- take Voinivitch as an example
Scope (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 8:39PM EST (link)He, unfortunately placed on the Debt Commission, by the mighty Baaarack, along with also retiring Judd Gregg, is, and has been in favor of hiking gas taxes. Guess that might be one little reason he is retiring. He can no longer vote the way his constituents want him to. So he will really screw everyone over, and then some. This is yet another example of why every member of Congress doesn’t only affect their little hole in the country, it affects all of us in the US. Thankfully we are awake to that little inconvenient fact. Every race should be a national race, with national support.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/113159-voinovich-hike-in-gas-tax-would-create-jobs
I can't believe that this diary with 94 comments
The_Rebel (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:05PM EST (link)has yet to mention the names Snowe and Collins. Without the cloture votes of those Maine twins, Obama would have very little to show for his 19 months in office.
It’s too bad neither of them is up for re-election this year. A good conservative in a primary could have disposed of one of these rino’s. Unfortunately, when they are ready to run again we won’t have this national groundswell available to help take them out.
You know what The Rebel
Scope (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:22PM EST (link)there is no doubt that many of the 94 commentors considered Snowe and Collins as they typed. You forgot a few, such as McCain. The argument here for as long as I’ve been here, is that that is the best you can hope for out of Maine. If that is the best we can hope for out of Maine, I would prefer a Democrat made those disastrous votes rather than a so-called Republican, which the Dems then consider billsas bipartisan. Like San Fran Nan, they will be back in DC as sure as Nan will be, and as sure as the sun sets in the morning. Hey, they just saved 6,000 jobs in their state by voting for the Teachers Union bailout, and the Maine teachers had nothing to reap from it, their unionized shipbuilding industry reaped the rewards. Ain’t it great when one little old state Senator can wreak havoc on the rest of the country?
Well, the diary was about moderates...
rbdwiggins (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:30PM EST (link)You can’t get much more liberal than the Maine Twins and still call yourself a Republican.
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.” – Ronald Reagan
Sorry, but there is no such thing
The_Rebel (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:42PM EST (link)as a liberal Republican to me. You are either liberal or a Republican. You can’t be both.
You don't have to convince me...
rbdwiggins (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:55PM EST (link)Tell that to the Main Street Republicans. They certainly believe you can be both.
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.” – Ronald Reagan
You can "believe" that its OK to grab hold of a 440v line while standing in water and survive.
mbecker908 (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 10:50AM EST (link)That doesn’t make it so.
Man, there is so much there that I don't like
Richard Mullins (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 9:36PM EST (link)95% of this plan is a waste to me and you must have have been thinking of it on the toilet. Start over and figure what stupid ideas you can come up with.
Richard Phillip Mullins BlogThe Squash Satire SiteNews on Happy Jet Airlines
Rmullins Pics
Rpmullins Twitter
Joe Biden is like a Decrepit Park owner with a Meth lab that happens to not only be a dealer but a user.
Let’s Bankrupt the Democratic paty. Make spend all the money to defend thier candidates.
Main problems aren't addressed
katesmith (Diary) Saturday, August 7th at 11:38PM EST (link)Following are entities/people I think would like this plan: Center for American Progress, George Soros, Obama, Gingrich, Rove, Romney, the NY Times, Washington Post, ABC, CBS, and NBC. These types often confuse character and honesty with the negative of turning ‘hard right’, or being a Neanderthal, hick, or half-breed. For example, many people with influence and/or access to media knew what was going on in both the sub-prime and the global warming frauds, but no one spoke up in time to prevent our country from being destroyed and moving Soros into the Oval Office.
Can I just say how PROUD I am of the Redstate community this morning....
JadedByPolitics (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 7:30AM EST (link)NOT ONE recommend for this POS diary calling for liberalism to run rampant in the Republican Party. That you all recognize that it has been the bane of the Conservative Movement’s existence to have these JFK Democrats infesting the Republican Party and calling themselves moderates has been an enjoyable and heart warming moment for me
The time has come for all good men and women who act and call themselves Conservative by a 42% margin in America to do the necessary lifting to WRENCH the Party back to its limited government roots and to then WEED OUT the destructive forces such as Lindsey Graham and John McCain who are so far gone as the lay in the lap of the Political Class at the expense of the FREEDOM’S that WE The People hold dear. I said this in 06 and 08 and I am imploring you ALL in 10 to get out on November 2nd in prior in the primaries to END the careers of those who are destroying this great Country with their “moderate” views.
WE all know they are liberals who like a tax cut and WE all know them as Rockefeller Republicans and WE ALL KNOW it is time for them to revert back to the TRUE right or join the Democrat Party but there cannot be room for those who vote with the progressive Democrats in the only other viable party in the United States of America because she is counting on US to restore her to her former glory!
Unified Patriots – How-To:
Activists Taking Action
5! Jaded you're spot on. nt
Brian Hibbert (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 8:28AM EST (link)Candidate for Trustee of Illinois Central College
Socialism doesn’t work. It looks nice on paper, but it’s been tried and it’s failed miserably every time (usually accompanied by widespread death and suffering).
Proud member of the V.R.W.C.
Take back our party!
Check out Unified Patriots
Amen Jaded
Scope (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 9:17AM EST (link)You said it all, and, just perfectly.
Bird_dog, you've got it wrong, you're a Democrat.
penguin2 (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 10:01AM EST (link)Everything you wrote is Democrat trying to sound Republican. While our side has critters who fall by the wayside having been seduced by Washington, your points are just dressed up Dem pretty speeches for use on the campaign trail so they can get elected. This time of year, we hear it from the candidates themselves. Did I mention Dem candidates?
You’re not fooling anyone, but if by some chance you are a registered Republican, you might want to do yourself a favor, and change your registration in order to have peace of mind. The direction that the Republican party is going to go is the one that makes it distinct from the Democrat party.
Funny how you didn’t mention a thing about the Constitution or Declaration of Independence, or limited government, or Freedom and Liberty.
Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. – Benjamin Franklin
When Good stands up to Evil, Evil blinks. – Vassar Bushmills
Conservative Education: Suggested Reading List
Activists Taking Action: Unified Patriots
and on that note, the Penguin has called the game...lol...nt!
JadedByPolitics (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 4:31PM EST (link)….
Unified Patriots – How-To:
Activists Taking Action
Congress can also restrict citizenship
renny (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 10:39AM EST (link)and is supposedly about to take up “anchor baby” issues. Not that little o would sign any such leg. or that Dems. would produce it. But another election comes.
Moderate? ok... but nothing conservative.
snowshooze (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 5:59PM EST (link)Economy
Clearly the economy can be bought and paid for with government money.
This is obviously the solution that Obama just can’t see, right?
Jobs
See Economy… and note that government employees do not generate original money. They are additional overhead. SOMEBODY has to do the paying work around here, and we are an endangered species.
Trade
No need for negotiation, just do unto others as they do unto you.
If a country is putting large tariffs on our stuff, send it right back.
If Japan takes exception with our Beef, well we can have a look at those cars and electronics…and it is a really bad idea to sell raw materials and buy them back as finished product…so don’t.
Taxes…
Spending restraints is the only way out. If you allow the government to have your money, they will take as much as they can get, from every source available, spend it all and borrow more… that’s how we got here.
Social Security
Should have been privatized at the outset. Government has this money in the general fund, they spend it at will for anything they feel like, give it away, loan it to other countries…there is no security here at all.
Immigration
The only problem is it is a political football.
Just enforce what we got. Another unenforced law is just as good as nothing at all. Quit jerking my chain, reform is deform and everyone’s hip.
The States should self enforce and send the bill to the Federal Government, which is what Arizona is about. Border enforcment should fall to the military.
It IS national defense. How else could it be defined….
Health care reform
Just say no to Government Health Care Reform and repeal it. We have a number of great common sense ideas that would help, but they have been moderated out.
Afganistan
Well…sometimes I have to agree with you. But let’s get in there to win and quit playing games. If Stan had received the support he asked for, we would still have him, but I did disagree with the ROE.
Iraq
Again, I agree, but by no means do I believe we are done there.
Pakistan
We are getting mixed signals. Assist they in deciding that they want the help. We can’t be playing chicken at their border.
War against militant Islam
Zero tolerance. As Islam and their governments areare two heads of the same dragon, neither should be put up with. If they consider Mosque to be grounds of the Nation of Islam, then the Mosques need to be confined to their respective embassies.
Israel – Palestine
Support Israel.
Cuba
I believe the Communist aggenda can now be smashed there. I believe we could open it up, but it is Cuba..and I don’t feel much motivation. Why should we concern ourselves, I don’t know.
Don’t ask, don’t tell.
Tell ya what, it’s working fine. All we need is some idiot to start another headache. But I don’t see that the battlefield as any place for this horsing around, if you are going to repeal it then how about co-ed barraks? Where you going to draw the line. Just say no to idiocy.
Redifing Marriage
Then it ain’t marriage. And good luck when an old sexual deviant marries your kid right out from under your roof.
Abortion
On occaision, medically necessary, however once the medically necessary ones are funded, all comers are accepted. No-fund.
Energy
wouldn’t be a problem if there wasn’t so much meddling. We are energy rich. Coal is fine, and we can burn it well. Nuclear is fine, but nobody wants to be the garbage dump. Solar and wind…they just do not pay. They may augment a bit but they aren’t realistic. The windmills fall apart, they cost more than they will produce over time, China has all the Neodium for the magnets..solar work well when the sun shines and the glass is clean. There’s some stuff we could do with tidal action, but it takes gobs of volume and rather large structures too.
In Alaska we have a lot of natural gas, can’t move it. Dirt cheap and redily available all over too. Let’s not pipe it, liquify it or move it. Let’s burn it where it is and put in a powerline.
Race
Now who keeps bringing that up? Not me. That all seems to be coming from Democrats and Moderates.
No child left behind
End it. If you cannot pass third grade the first time…try again. Allow those funds allocated for public schools to be re-allocated to charter schools on a share basis. Do so with school capital project funding as well. See what public schooling can do to compete with for-profit results driven private schools… I’ll tell you what. Where the choice is available, somehow the peoples schools of government waste aren’t doing so well.
The Tea Party
Consisting of the at large conservative majority just plumb full of bad ideas..
right.
It is a lousy plank and in the overall defines the problems that the Republican party has allowed themselves to become diluted with.
Moderation is more infiltration and the RNC trying to buy membership at the expense of ideals. Cast a wider and more attractive net. Power, influence and money. Professional Bureaucrats.
I think when we cross the isle, we should carry a gun and a knife. It is a mission to gather scalp. In case it hasn’t been noticed, that is exactly what the other side has been doing.
So in fact, it is only a two party system….the Conservatives, and everyone else. Gutless moderates..piff.
An' I forgot detainees...
snowshooze (Diary) Sunday, August 8th at 6:52PM EST (link)Dang…just so many targets.
Process them, don’t detain them.. Just try putting them in my county jail…!
No, they are enemy combatants, they should have been shot were it was necessary, if they are innocent, send them home. If they aren’t innocent, let them rot, but make it a bit more interesting. Give them tents and a fence. A bit of food…hey, it’s prison, have a nice life.