Federal Budget Thread (Was: RNC to spend $10 million to reach minorities)

[Seven]

I'm not so sure about your last sentence. I think their decisions may fall along the lines of peer pressure, because a majority of minorities pay very little attention to politics in general.

That's a good point.

[XxKnightxX]

Sadly, I couldn't agree more.

While nothing would make me happier than seeing a true conservative or libertarian in office I just don't see it happening.

...especially with the rapid growth in the minority population.

I think the biggest issue is that they are taking conservatism and libertarianism and trying to sell it under the Republican Party Agenda. Not a good mix. I think that this country for all its claims of radical enemies we have them in our own soil when it comes to the republicans and democrats. They sell some bullshit, irrelevant social issue and it distracts us all from the real issues were facing. The conservative or libertarian is just concerned with 1. How can we realistically maintain true American positive values and reduce government and 2. Are my rights being protected.

I can give a shit less about abortion and religion. Last I remember I have my rights that are being infringed upon and I have a bill to pay by the end of the month.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2

[SteelerEmpire]

The problem with less government is that the Corporations gain in influence. They are just as bad as government having too much power. And are just (if not more) ruthless. I can run off some "true" horror stories from both camps. Your dammed if you do, your dammed if you don't type situation.

[Seven]

The problem with less government is that the Corporations gain in influence. They are just as bad as government having too much power. And are just (if not more) ruthless. I can run off some "true" horror stories from both camps. Your dammed if you do, your dammed if you don't type situation.

The difference is, even with less government, the Government can still control/regulate private corporations that go too far. Private corporations can't, however, control/regulate a government that has gone too far - in anyway that has a positive outcome on society, anyway. That's why the pick your poison argument has never struck a cord with me. In any scenario I'd rather be dealing with corrupt corporations than I would a corrupt government.

[SteelerEmpire]

The difference is, even with less government, the Government can still control/regulate private corporations that go too far. Private corporations can't, however, control/regulate a government that has gone too far - in anyway that has a positive outcome on society, anyway. That's why the pick your poison argument has never struck a cord with me. In any scenario I'd rather be dealing with corrupt corporations than I would a corrupt government.

Good deal. But to me, a sin is a sin. I've (personally) had just as many problems with corporations and their lawyers. Rothschilds said whoever cntrols business, controls the government... and that's a true story. The two are inseparable, to me. I'm in the banking industry, I have NO love for business. These are the "little dictarors" of our society... true story. I see people getting totally wiped out all the time by the private "business" industry. It has no friends.

[Wallace108]

Democrats dont have an image problem with minorities

That's correct. And that's because Democrats have done a great job of selling them on the idea of false hope, empty promises, and lies. They've convinced minorities that Republicans are racists and are out to get them. Just out of curiosity, if you walked up to 100 African-Americans on the street and asked them which party was behind the KKK, how many would say it was the Democrats? I bet very few. Perhaps the Democrats' image would be tainted a little if the following bit of history was common knowledge:

At the time of Ulysses S. Grant's election to the presidency, white supremacists were conducting a reign of terror throughout the South. In outright defiance of the Republican-led federal government, Southern Democrats formed organizations that violently intimidated blacks and Republicans who tried to win political power.

The most prominent of these, the Ku Klux Klan, was formed in Pulaski, Tennessee, in 1865. Originally founded as a social club for former Confederate soldiers, the Klan evolved into a terrorist organization. It would be responsible for thousands of deaths, and would help to weaken the political power of Southern blacks and Republicans.

Racist activity in the South often took the form of riots that targeted blacks and Republicans.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexpe...cle/grant-kkk/

It seems MSNBC's Al Sharpton needs to take remedial history classes.

According to Sharpton, Democrats "stood up for the Civil Rights Act of '64 and Voting Rights Act of '65."

But history shows that is not what happened at all.

Not only did both pieces of legislation have more Republican support than Democrat, Democrats, including Senator Robert K Byrd filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Act was also opposed by Al Gore, Sr. - the father of the future Vice President and global warming alarmist.

Only 61 percent of Democrats supported that bill, versus 80 percent of Republicans.

http://www.examiner.com/article/al-s...ts-act-of-1964

On This Day in 1964, Democrats Filibustered the Civil Rights Act

June 10, 1964, was a dramatic day in the United States Senate. For the first time in its history, cloture was invoked on a civil rights bill, ending a record-breaking filibuster by Democrats that had consumed fifty-seven working days. The hero of the hour was minority leader Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen (R-Ill.).

On this day in 1964, Everett Dirksen (R-IL), the Republican Leader in the U.S. Senate, condemned the Democrats’ 57-day filibuster against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Leading the Democrats in their opposition to civil rights for African-Americans was Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV). Byrd, who got into politics as a recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan, spoke against the bill for fourteen straight hours. Democrats still call Robert Byrd “the conscience of the Senate.”

In his speech, Senator Dirksen called on the Democrats to end their filibuster and accept racial equality.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012...il-rights-act/

Democrats have convinced minorities that Republicans are the party of the KKK and opposed civil rights. Republicans need to start setting the record straight and countering the false hope, empty promises, and lies. They have to stop allowing Democrats to define who they are. But before they can do that, they have to figure out who they are. Are they Republicans, or are they Democrats-Light? Once they figure out that the answer is in conservatism and the Constitution, then they can figure out how to sell their message to minorities. And yes, it'll be difficult. It'll take time and a hell of a lot of effort, but it can be done.

The kind of message Republicans need to sell to minorities is not the one offered by Democrats: "Vote for us and we'll give you free stuff." As I said in the first post of this thread, watch the documentary "Runaway Slave." The messages presented in that film are spot on.

- - - Updated - - -

The difference is, even with less government, the Government can still control/regulate private corporations that go too far. Private corporations can't, however, control/regulate a government that has gone too far - in anyway that has a positive outcome on society, anyway. That's why the pick your poison argument has never struck a cord with me. In any scenario I'd rather be dealing with corrupt corporations than I would a corrupt government.

Well said.

[SteelerEmpire]

Sorry. Corporate rule is just as bad as government rule. No doubt.

[GoSlash27]

The problem with less government is that the Corporations gain in influence. They are just as bad as government having too much power. And are just (if not more) ruthless. I can run off some "true" horror stories from both camps. Your dammed if you do, your dammed if you don't type situation.

The problem with that argument is that it assumes corporations are controlled by government, when in reality it's the other way around.

[steeldawg]

The problem with that argument is that it assumes corporations are controlled by government, when in reality it's the other way around.

Thats how i see it as well big business runs this country.

[GoSlash27]

^ The other problem is that the government spends the vast majority of it's time (and your money) doing things other than making and enforcing regulations to control corporations (or more accurately, peddling their influence to said corporations) . You could cut out almost everything the government does and not lose that ability, so it's not like it's an either- or choice.

[Godfather]

Democrats have convinced minorities that Republicans are the party of the KKK and opposed civil rights. Republicans need to start setting the record straight and countering the false hope, empty promises, and lies. They have to stop allowing Democrats to define who they are. But before they can do that, they have to figure out who they are. Are they Republicans, or are they Democrats-Light? Once they figure out that the answer is in conservatism and the Constitution, then they can figure out how to sell their message to minorities. And yes, it'll be difficult. It'll take time and a hell of a lot of effort, but it can be done.

Well, in fairness the Republicans bear some responsibility for their image problem among minorities. From Nixon and his "Southern Strategy" to the Willie Horton ad to the small but vocal element that uses racial imagery in its attacks on Obama, there are plenty of reasons for minorities to see "Republican" as a dirty word. The GOP has to overcome that before it can expect minorities to listen to its message.

The GOP can make a good case on the issues. The Democrats oppose school vouchers in virtually all circumstances. Minorities are more likely than whites to be pro-life and support school prayer. The more libertarian types in the GOP can point out the damage the War on Drugs has done to the inner cities, and maybe even argue that a War on Guns will do the same. Minorities (on the macro level) hold the military in higher regard than whites do, in part because of the perception that the military is better than the private sector when it comes to equal opportunity.

But before they can make that pitch, they have to succeed in making the "we don't bite" argument.

- - - Updated - - -

Thats how i see it as well big business runs this country.

I agree with this as well. The bigger and more powerful the government, the better for the fat cats. They just buy off the lawmakers and regulators. Look at the individual mandate or the ridiculous sweetheart loan deals the biggest banks get from the Fed. Look at the ethanol mandate, an economic and environmental disaster but one that benefits a few very large companies.

[Seven]

I guess it's time to get the tinfoil out.

[Wallace108]

Well, in fairness the Republicans bear some responsibility for their image problem among minorities. From Nixon and his "Southern Strategy" to the Willie Horton ad to the small but vocal element that uses racial imagery in its attacks on Obama, there are plenty of reasons for minorities to see "Republican" as a dirty word. The GOP has to overcome that before it can expect minorities to listen to its message.

I don't disagree with that. Republicans certainly need to look in the mirror. That's why I think that before they can sell their message to minorities, they first have to figure out who they are (or, more to the point, who they're supposed to be).

[GoSlash27]

I don't disagree with that. Republicans certainly need to look in the mirror. That's why I think that before they can sell their message to minorities, they first have to figure out who they are (or, more to the point, who they're supposed to be).

That's what I've been saying for years! Right now the Republicans don't have a core philosophy, but rather a loose collection of positions that they turn around and violate whenever they get the chance. They don't stand for anything, let alone anything that's appealing.
Sorting that out and then sticking to it would improve their appeal across the board.

[GBMelBlount]

Whether government or big business the biggest problem tends to be lack of competition and choices.

That being said, you can whine about big business all you want but NOTHING is worse than being FORCED to give your money to the government because they feel they can better spend YOUR money by giving it to others whether it is something you ethically or morally believe in or not.

This is what our government is now doing, trying to socially engineer a utopian society by forceably taking what belongs to one group and giving to another group to whom it does not belong...AND lining their own pockets along the way.

Increasing prosperity through massive wealth redistribution has never worked but amazingly liberals think the reason it isn't working is because they have not done enough of it and yet.

The kicker is that although our government has ruined this country they have brainwashed the ignorant masses to blame everything on freedom, free markets and capitalism even though that, and limited government is what made us the most prosperous country in the history of the world at one time.

We are toast.

[Seven]

We are toast.

Tyranny of the majority. It's happening.

[steeldawg]

Whether government or big business the biggest problem tends to be lack of competition and choices.

That being said, you can whine about big business all you want but NOTHING is worse than being FORCED to give your money to the government because they feel they can better spend YOUR money by giving it to others whether it is something you ethically or morally believe in or not.

This is what our government is now doing, trying to socially engineer a utopian society by forceably taking what belongs to one group and giving to another group to whom it does not belong...AND lining their own pockets along the way.

Increasing prosperity through massive wealth redistribution has never worked but amazingly liberals think the reason it isn't working is because they have not done enough of it and yet.

The kicker is that although our government has ruined this country they have brainwashed the ignorant masses to blame everything on freedom, free markets and capitalism even though that, and limited government is what made us the most prosperous country in the history of the world at one time.

We are toast.

govenment has always done this, its called paying taxes. As far as massive wealth distribution, i just dont see it, the rich have never been richer and the middle class is shrinking, so where are they distributing all this wealth too?

[GoSlash27]

govenment has always done this, its called paying taxes. As far as massive wealth distribution, i just dont see it, the rich have never been richer and the middle class is shrinking, so where are they distributing all this wealth too?

Themselves and their rich buddies. That's why I get a kick out of liberals who call for more "wealth redistribution".

[steeldawg]

Themselves and their rich buddies. That's why I get a kick out of liberals who call for more "wealth redistribution".

This is what I mean people are acting like rich people are being stripped of their money, look at the rise in income over the last 40 yrs for the wealthy in this country compared to the rest of us, it would make you want to throw up. The US ranks the highest of developed countries in income inequality. If they are trying to distribute wealth they are doing a terrible job of it. I dont think anyone wants wealth distribution, I think people just want a job where their wages can support them.

[43Hitman]

Themselves and their rich buddies. That's why I get a kick out of liberals who call for more "wealth redistribution".

THIS!!!!

- - - Updated - - -

This is what I mean people are acting like rich people are being stripped of their money, look at the rise in income over the last 40 yrs for the wealthy in this country compared to the rest of us, it would make you want to throw up. The US ranks the highest of developed countries in income inequality. If they are trying to distribute wealth they are doing a terrible job of it. I dont think anyone wants wealth distribution, I think people just want a job where their wages can support them.

Also this.

[GoSlash27]

This is what I mean people are acting like rich people are being stripped of their money, look at the rise in income over the last 40 yrs for the wealthy in this country compared to the rest of us, it would make you want to throw up. The US ranks the highest of developed countries in income inequality. If they are trying to distribute wealth they are doing a terrible job of it. I dont think anyone wants wealth distribution, I think people just want a job where their wages can support them.

It's not that they're doing a terrible job of it, it's that they're embezzling it. "Income inequality" isn't the problem. The problem is corruption and graft in the process of income redistribution. They take money from the middle class and small business, pocket most of it, and hand out pennies on the dollar to the poor in exchange for their vote, while people like yourself wonder why all of our wealth redistribution programs aren't working.

Take a look at the list of richest counties in America, and it becomes painfully obvious. If you want to level the playing field, you have to get these corrupt politicians out of the process, not demand that they do even more.

[GBMelBlount]

It's not that they're doing a terrible job of it, it's that they're embezzling it. "Income inequality" isn't the problem.

The problem is corruption and graft in the process of income redistribution.

They take money from the middle class and small business, pocket most of it, and hand out pennies on the dollar to the poor in exchange for their vote, while people like yourself wonder why all of our wealth redistribution programs aren't working.

Take a look at the list of richest counties in America, and it becomes painfully obvious. If you want to level the playing field, you have to get these corrupt politicians out of the process, not demand that they do even more.

EXACTLY. Talk about delusional. Many people pay over 50% of their income in total taxes when you add it all up.

The politicians who are running our country today are far more sleazy and corrupt than the typical businesses....

Why can't the government cut back and live within it's means like the middle class is forced to do?...

The reason is because they know they can forceably take more from others to pay for their excesses and mismanagement so why give up the good life when someone else is paying for it?

Throw the poor guy a few cents and feel good about yourself, line your pockets and then blame EVERYTHING on freedom and the rich.

Nice racket.

[X-Terminator]

This is what I mean people are acting like rich people are being stripped of their money, look at the rise in income over the last 40 yrs for the wealthy in this country compared to the rest of us, it would make you want to throw up. The US ranks the highest of developed countries in income inequality. If they are trying to distribute wealth they are doing a terrible job of it. I dont think anyone wants wealth distribution, I think people just want a job where their wages can support them.

This is true, but at the same time, a large part of the reason why wages haven't increased proportionally is because of all of the increased costs of doing business through regulations, mandates, taxes and fees. If it costs a business 3x as much to create a job than that job is worth, it either won't be created, will be eliminated or outsourced. If the government would simply give business owners a break, make it easier and more cost-effective to run a business, then there would be more good-paying jobs available. But they are all too enamored with their own power to give a damn, as long as they get to stay in Washington and milking that cash cow.

[steeldawg]

If you want to blame freedom and liberty instead of a very poor quality government run education system that teaches children WHAT to think instead of how to think and rewards people for sitting on their asses and reproducing out out of wedlock then go ahead.

LMAO.

Nice racket.

Blame freedom and liberty for what? What are you talking about? People get rewards for having kids out of wedlock? Lol what does that trophy look like? Wealth distribution is not happening we are not turning into a socialist country, Denying that the gap between the wealthy and the rest of country continues to grow just means your not paying attention to whats really happening. Why do you think more people use entightlement programs? are they all lazy? No! more people use them because the wages in the country are not increasing at the same rate as expenses. Why are corprit profits soaring but no jobs being added no salaries being increased? Its a rich mans game they control the money they control the stock market the money never trickles down it only moves laterally.

[X-Terminator]

Take a look at the list of richest counties in America, and it becomes painfully obvious. If you want to level the playing field, you have to get these corrupt politicians out of the process, not demand that they do even more.

I agree. Washington D.C. is the richest municipality in the country. Wealthier even than Silicon Valley. It doesn't take rocket science to figure out why.

[steeldawg]

It's not that they're doing a terrible job of it, it's that they're embezzling it. "Income inequality" isn't the problem. The problem is corruption and graft in the process of income redistribution. They take money from the middle class and small business, pocket most of it, and hand out pennies on the dollar to the poor in exchange for their vote, while people like yourself wonder why all of our wealth redistribution programs aren't working.

Take a look at the list of richest counties in America, and it becomes painfully obvious. If you want to level the playing field, you have to get these corrupt politicians out of the process, not demand that they do even more.

Im not looking for the government to do anything im looking for corporations to step up to the plate and start hiring at decent wages, giving decent hours, instaed of just trying to drive the stock price up. I am all for bigger breaks for the middle class because i believe the middle class is what drives the actual economy and not just the stock market.

[GoSlash27]

Im not looking for the government to do anything im looking for corporations to step up to the plate and start hiring at decent wages, giving decent hours, instaed of just trying to drive the stock price up. I am all for bigger breaks for the middle class because i believe the middle class is what drives the actual economy and not just the stock market.

I honestly don't mean to come off as condescending, *but* I don't see how I have any choice if I'm to respond to this intelligently. Please remember that I mean no disrespect or insult by what I'm about to say...

Corporations (or any company) are not in the business of giving people jobs at decent wages. They are in the business of turning a profit on their product or service and making themselves an attractive investment risk for their lenders.
They will hire people who are qualified to perform the jobs, and pay them only what the market will bear for their skill.
You don't go around purchasing goods and labor that aren't useful to you. To do so would be economically foolish, and would drive you into bankruptcy in short order. It's exactly the same with them; they're trying to run a business, not a jobs program.

I honestly hope that wasn't overly- harsh...

[Count Steeler]

Im not looking for the government to do anything im looking for corporations to step up to the plate and start hiring at decent wages, giving decent hours, instaed of just trying to drive the stock price up. I am all for bigger breaks for the middle class because i believe the middle class is what drives the actual economy and not just the stock market.

Government must decrease, wealth will increase.

[GBMelBlount]

Sounds like somebody wants people in the private sector to be overpaid regardless of productivity, qualifications, results or profitability just like government employees are...of course this person is not actually the one that pays them, somebody else does so why not say what a politician would say and sound like a good guy who cares, right? Typical government stooge who wants to pay everyone with other peoples money and has no idea where it comes except "other people".

I think somebody is forgetting that the majority of employers are small businesses that are trying to stay afloat despite strangling taxes and regulations and make a profit. GOD FORBID!

This rhetoric sounds like something an out of touch socialist or government employee with no real world experience in the private sector running a small business would say.

Just being honest.

[steeldawg]

I honestly don't mean to come off as condescending, *but* I don't see how I have any choice if I'm to respond to this intelligently. Please remember that I mean no disrespect or insult by what I'm about to say...

Corporations (or any company) are not in the business of giving people jobs at decent wages. They are in the business of turning a profit on their product or service and making themselves an attractive investment risk for their lenders.
They will hire people who are qualified to perform the jobs, and pay them only what the market will bear for their skill.
You don't go around purchasing goods and labor that aren't useful to you. To do so would be economically foolish, and would drive you into bankruptcy in short order. It's exactly the same with them; they're trying to run a business, not a jobs program.

I honestly hope that wasn't overly- harsh...

Im well aware businesses are out to make money, and i realize they dont have to do anything, they can continue to pay low wages and outsource jobs thats what they are doing now thats why their profits are soaring. Im not suggesting a company hire itself into bankrupcy and spend every dime of profit on the employees, all i said was im looking for corporations to do it, they are the only ones that can do it. Higher wages and more people working means more money being pumped into the economy its better for business especially small businesses. Its a tough pill to swallow to see profits through the roof and unemployment through the roof.