freeheelbillie

OK, so what you're saying is that you don't like the liberal philosophy as explained by Limbaugh and friends, not necessarily the liberal philosophy espoused by actual liberals. Got it. Okay, I was under the impression that I asked an open ended question of you. Enlighten me, what is your definition of a "actual" Liberal these days? I mentioned what I thought one was or what I thought one used to stand for. (Classic Liberals believed in limited government, individual freedom and individual responsibility.) Again, if that is the case today they have a funny way of showing it. Maybe you are as lost as the rest of your party. If in fact you can't define your party, maybe thats because Liberals and Republicans alike change the rules to suit their needs, as needed. The attempt to link me to Rush Limbaugh although funny seems to be nothing more than an attempt to draw attention from your avoidance of my question. Before you go back on the offensive remember I am not NOT a Republican I am a Libertarian. This fact seems to be missed over and over again. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

I would not pretend to know what ALL liberals think. It was a blanket statement, maybe unfairly so to some not most liberals. The term "liberal" was actually taken from the Libertarians. Classic Liberals believed in limited government, individual freedom and individual responsibility. Although it would be near impossible to use any of those terms to describe Democrats (or Republicans for that matter) today. I d like to hear your definition of "liberal". Maybe you and I are not so different. Generally for Democrats aka Liberals it comes down the "peace, love, dope" philosophy of the 60's and the sickly sweet wishes of how things "should" be (for others of course, "not them" - the liberal "intelligentsia" in the mold of Al Gore maybe? Who asks his followers to ride bikes and take public transportation to his environmental revival meetings while he flies in his private G4 Jet and then takes Suburbans and Town Cars to his speaking engagements. Its all such a farce and the majority of American are lapping it up like mindless fools. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

Thanks for helping to prove my point. I REST MY CASE! Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

Most of Latin America and the Middle East are neither, and still the vast majority of the people are poor. Capitalism doesn't share wealth, it allows those who owns the resources to get rich. And the oil barons are doing quite well, with palaces, mercedes and bentleys, and big lines of credit at casinos. After the Vietnam war ended, Carter dramatically reduced the deficit, but look where that got the nation and the Democratic Party. Reagan immediately jacked up the deficit and most people remember his reign much more fondly. Capitalism may be imperfect but it is proven to be the best thing going. It has created more wealth than any other form hands down. Very few places on Earth (maybe none) are as fortunate in such great numbers as here in the US. The issue is that many American’s think fortune and success is a “right” You are only granted the pursuit of happiness here…there are no guarantees. The sickly sweet views of the liberal party sound wonderful, then again so does the Communist Manifesto, but we know how that worked out. It’s easy to point a finger at those more successful than you and blame them for your shortcomings. You and I both know they have not kept you down. You and you alone are in charge of successes and failures. Maybe that’s the greater issue, people today don’t want to take responsibility. They want government to provide, government to “level the playing field” government to bail them out, government to keep them going and when they succeed stop them. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

As it did under Clinton...again, I am not a REPUBLICAN. The debt has been going up under both parties since NIXON. Just like I said in my post... So I guess I am missing what you are driving at??? Both take part in Voodoo Economics, democrats are just better at calling it something else. Hey as long as the cause is "good" it must be the roll of gevernment right? Wrong. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

I take it you were not all that pissed when the majority of that 11 TRILLION dollars of debt... can be laid right at the feet of those who practiced.. VOODOO Economics. Someone is going to have to pay for your lifestyle.... looks like its your kids and theirs.... Bush and his buddies must have thought they were going to be RAPTURED out and not to worry about it I think that you and funjumper101 are under the impression that I liked BUSH...I did not. They spent like drunken fools. I find it interesting that you are using BUSH spending on silly war ect. to rationalize the largest government spending bill in US history. Childish really..."we ll BUSH got to do it !" B-O-O-H-O-O Also the only form of government that can actually make people poor is socialism and communism. I think you also need a history lesson for who is to blame for our national debit. BOTH parties suck at managing OUR $$! Our debit has been on the rise since Nixson... nice try, maybe you should turn off MSNBC and CNN and do a little diggin of your own. I ll help...here ya go; http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm The good news is the answer lies in government...LESS of it on both sides of the isle! Pay for "my lifestyle" have we met? LOL this is coming from a guy that supports tax dollars being spent on a bail out? I know that you don't believe that Bush is to blame for all the problems in the US...or do you?! This has been coming for decades, good gawd. Wake up wake up GOVERNMENT is the problem it always has been. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

First, government stimulus on research and development – both military and non-military – spur innovation & enable technological competitiveness. If you and I agree that the benefit to the US population and US industry from such government stimulus programs is “a mile long” (benefit to the wider world is a normative bonus), why the opposition? (Short list of examples I’ve provided previously here.) And second, Constitutionality: “Welfare” is mentioned explicitly in the US Constitution twice. The Preamble states explicitly that the Constitution of the United States of America is established in order to “promote the general Welfare” as one of the primary causal reasons to form the govenment. The US Constitution established the government of the US. It is part of the function of federal government. Article 1 Section 8 states “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.” It’s hard to argue that “welfare” was not in the Constitution. What welfare meant to the Congressional founders, what welfare constitutes today, what it should or should not in the future are separate issues. /Marg I think your interpolation of the term “welfare” (Article I Section 8) is misguided as it is obviously used in reference to US defense. I assume you would agree that the founding fathers were not insinuating food stamps, and a welfare check… Welfare being the exact same thing as charity, it is NEVER mentioned. That is the duty of the individual to his neighbor. Would you not agree that government has nothing to give but what it has taken from another? I applaud your intimate knowledge of the Constitution, do you support the 1st and 2nd Amendments? Or do you support the gradual erosion in the name of “fairness”… Millions of American’s today believe that as long as the cause is good, it’s the duty of government. They look upon government as a fountain of happiness and material goods. Our founders wrote the Constitution as well as a Bill of Rights. These separated powers, gave checks and balances to the system and contained countless “thou shalt nots” directed mainly at government itself. They knew unlike most American’s that a government who confuses rights with WANTS would lead to tyranny Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

I got here (Speaker’s Corner on the internet’s WWW) literally because of government stimulus programs - ARPA’s Intergalactic Computer Network that was expanded by the NSF. And I’m using a graphical browser directly evolved from the Mosiac browser, rather than Unix-based interface (e.g., pine, elm), that was developed by government funding in a government-funded facility/institution. We all got _here_ as a result of government stimulus programs. /Marg One could make a list a mile long containing technology, which was derived from military defense programs. (ie internet) US citizens...and people from across the globe benefit from this, as they sould. But, as far as I know welfare and charity are not mentioned in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. This is because these are not functions of the federal or state governmet. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

Far too many people think that government exists to provide anything for anybody, when they ask for it. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

OKAY that was funny....to answer your question, i see stupid people. "They're all around me. Some of them don't even know that they're stupid." Blues, Dave ROTFLMAO!!! Thats hilarious Dave! Good one! Wait a second... touche' Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

OKAY that was funny....to answer your question, i see stupid people. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

I would agree with you however, I though the Patriot Act was a blatant infringement on our privacy rights. You also assume that I liked bush, I did not. I don’t think we will look back in 10 years and think he was half as bad as we do now, considering the events that took place during his term. I would encourage you to look into the Fairness Doctrine/Act. Its been getting kicked around for a long time and has recently resurfaced. Just this morning Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow was on the radio saying that it was time for the Fairness Doctrine or something like it. Scary stuff at best. Never mind the fact the she is married to the VP of Air America Media, a liberal progressive radio company. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

Alright…I got a little fired up there and deleted my post. I just see this country giving itself away at the burden of the taxpayer and future taxpayers to come. I see people with good intentions not thinking about the long term ramifications. I see big spending, that like the New Deal of the great depression, fixed nothing and froze the economy. I think about our children’s children paying this back with interest. I see a president that preached “hope” and “change” and see him spew fear and see the same tired rhetoric. He spoke about bipartisanship and now chastises Republican’s for having the audacity to question his bill. I see a president who rewards illegal actions. I see a president who chooses people to enforce our systems and laws who can’t abide themselves. I see big government using our money to gain control of our banks our insurance our retirement. Once this power is granted it will NEVER be returned. I wonder how a government (Republican or Democrat) that can’t manage the nations budget could be expect to run a business or insurance company any better. I see a president that thinks he knows what’s better for me than I do. I see a president that wants to take the liberties granted to me by the Constitution. I see a party that supports encroaching on my freedom of speech. (through the Fairness Doctrine) I see a public that refers to the government as a god like entity that will be there to provide and fix any problem or short coming we have. I wonder how the greatest country who has cured diseases, fed the starving…brought freedom and hope under the power of capitalism could think this system is forever broken. I am pissed Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

I almost feel sorry for your idiocy. We already do that in the emergency room everyday! Take it from a guy with 4 years EMS under his belt. This expands the scope to actual health care, not just emergency services. This must be part of obama’s big plan to slow the rate of illegal immigration into this country ??? Damn…you don’t have to pay taxes, you get free health care, in state college tuition rates. Not a bad deal. Actually, you sir may be on to something! I wonder how I can apply for illegal immigrant status!? It seems like a WAAAAY better deal than I am getting as a tax paying US citizen. FUCKING SIGN ME UP! Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

Not sure if anyone caught this or not…if you have a brain in your head this should enrage you, whatever your political affiliation. obama signed his health care bill, covering under and uninsured children. Let me say although I disagree with universal “socialized” healthcare systems (hey it works like shit in Canada, but I m sure it will be great here) but to cover children is a good thing. Not that you would catch this in the mass media frenzy but did you know this also covers illegal aliens in this country! Obama also noted that the legislation lifts the ban on states allowing the children of illegal immigrants to enroll in the program, eliciting another big cheer from the invited audience. Unbelievable and shameful at the same time. Now our “social responsibility” requires the taxpayer to cover people whose first act in this country was to break the law? Wow! There is even an effort to get illegal’s in state college tuition! So YOU as a citizen would pay out-of-state rates to go to the college of your choice and a person who is not only NOT a citizen of the US but also here illegally will get a better rate than you! YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME! I saw a guy post recently that “Republicans: were loosing the battle for brains” I would beg to differ. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

The Bush tax cuts sure kept the economy humming along in great shape. I hope that you are kidding...the DOW hit record highs even in the wke of 911. Are you aware that the dip in the econ shadows the Democrats taking control of the House. Mind you, they have lower approval ratings than Bush himself did! Isn't it interesting that "hope" has turned into "crisis" and "catastrophe" if the taxpayers don't cough it up." Get on board or youre not partisan! Is this his idea of reaching across the isle? What a joke! This $ will not get spent for 2 maybe 3 years...to have it rammed up the tax payers ass proves how foolish and EGO driven he really is. Our childrens children will be paying this back with interest. I think we owe it to them to make sure its done right. DONT YOU! Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

Worse yet obama is on TV telling republicans to "stop the gamemenship" Is this his idea of reaching across the isle????? Should this not be a well thought out process? Is another month 2, 3, 12 really going to make a bid differencein the macro economy? answer NO NO NO Its no secret that very little of the $$$ actually creates jobs. This the biggest liberal pet project funding in history!!! Wake up AMERICA Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

Take it from a guy who is still working through AFF...you are not alone! I stuck my first 2 landings and was like...this stuff is EZ! Gawd was I wrong... hahah My level 3 was a total wake up call, very unstable in free fall after they let me fly solo the first time. After I pulled I knew I was going to have to repeat the level and was pissed. In a fit of rage I was not paying attention and ended up over the swoop pond (not a good place to be) my instructor was yelling turn left 90 over the radio...yarding on the toggles I kept doing 180's !!! hahha Getting even more worked up I finally got on my final approach (with the wind at my back!) I flaired early then went back to full flight just before a huge rolling PLF in front of a crowd of swoopers! These were the same swoopes that were upset that i was in their air-space to begin with! hahaha After spending a few minutes getting out of a birds nest of chute and lines I dusted myself off and took a bow! That got some laughs, I said I was sorry and all was well. I guess if I had some advise I would say stick with it...but you will have to get over your fear...thats a mental block you dont need in any sport. Spend some time in a wind tunnel (if you have one near by) Although you cant learn to land in a tunnel it could make you more relaxed after free fall and that can make all the difference in the world. Glad you made it out okay...sounds like you nailed the plf anyway! take care, Billie Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

ding, ding. We have a winner. If you'd ever lived in a truly socialist nation, you wouldn't say that. Neveretheless, capitalist greed led to this mess, so maybe a little control will indeed be a winner. Chris Dodd who was a "friend of Angelo", took $133,000 from Fannie Mae and said “To suggest somehow that [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] are in trouble is simply not accurate,” Dodd replied. And “The facts are that Fannie and Freddie are in sound situations,” Dodd said. “They have more that adequate capital, in fact more than the law requires.” Oh, by the way, he got a "sweetheart deal" on a mortgage and he nearly single handidly cause a run on IndyMac all while Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. You mean the like of Barney Frank, Financial Services Chairman (last time I checked these guys were in the front pocket of the liberal movement), who not too long ago said "These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis,"? He also said, "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." when Bush adminstation officials tried to reign in Fannie and Freddie because they feared they were taking on too many risks. Barney gets the credit for destroying billions in wealth by promoting lending to people who weren't qualified. Yup we've got winners alright! Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

I have some frightening news for you…deficit spending does not create wealth. For every dollar that is borrowed interest at an inflated rate will need to be re-paid. This type of spending is meant only to “freeze” an economic disaster, NOT fix it. I would encourage you to show me what percentage of the bailout $ actually finds its way into sectors that create wealth NOT act as a black hole for it! History repeats itself…this is nothing more than The New Deal II. Maybe I have just been a better student of history but unemployment rates never got below 14% during the spending blitz of Roosevelt’s time in office. Its no secret that The New Deal kept America in the depression longer rather than it would have without. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

The fact that he admitted he screwed up is nothing of no real importance. He after all had little choice in the matter. To do nothing would have looked like politics as usual, which he vowed to clean up. What is a rather big deal is that only a few days ago obama was boasting his allegiance to Tom Daschle and professing that he stood by his choice. Worse yet is the lack of detective work on the part of obama’s staff. You would think that a “simple tax” goof (as it’s been eloquently put) would be as simple a thing to dig up! Guess not… Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

Tom Daschle's Washington His riches illustrate the expanding power of the political class.Just as Tom Daschle's Senate pals were preparing to grant absolution for his six-figure tax-free limousine -- could've happened to anyone -- the former Majority Leader yesterday withdrew his nomination to be Secretary of Health and Human Services. Give Mr. Daschle credit for making the honorable choice, and sparing President Obama from a bipartisan populist revolt. Before this episode vanishes into Beltway lore, however, it's worth drawing a few lessons. Especially because the political left seems to want to make this a morality play about Mr. Daschle's $5.2 million post-Senate windfall as lobbyist and speaking-circuit regular, notably in front of the health-care industry. Apparently these people expected Mr. Daschle to return to Sioux Falls after his 2004 re-election defeat and eke out a hardscrabble existence as a farmer. But Mr. Daschle's embarrassment of riches is a typical story, and in fact is the result of the liberal ideology his critics have been advocating for decades. The main story of the Obama Presidency so far isn't the contradiction between Mr. Obama's campaign promises and the messier reality of his nominees. That was always inevitable. The real story is the massive transfer of power and wealth now underway from the private sector to the political class. Mr. Daschle could make so much money and achieve such prominence because he was expected to be a central broker in that wealth transfer. Alston & Bird, the white-shoe law firm that took in Mr. Daschle, is a lobbying shop. Any normal person would therefore consider Mr. Daschle, who does not have a law degree, to be a lobbyist. But he was not technically a lobbyist under Beltway rules, and while it is still unclear exactly what services he performed as "Special Public Policy Advisor" to pile up $2.1 million, we do know he consulted for the insurance conglomerate UnitedHealth Group. Mr. Daschle cashed in to the tune of nearly a quarter million dollars from various health-care businesses. The Health Industry Distributors Association paid $14,000 to hear him speak in March 2008 about "the impact an Obama administration will have on the industry." America's Health Insurance Plans, the insurers' lobby, gave $20,000 for another speech, as did health-care consulting firms, hospital systems and pharmacy boards. Mr. Daschle's critics say he breached some fanciful code of honor separating corporate America and government. Please. Business groups spend to get intelligence and minimize political risk. In the case of Mr. Daschle, he was trading less on his career in "public service" than his proximity to and early support for Mr. Obama. While he was the recipient of industry generosity, the going wager was that he'd be White House Chief of Staff. What Mr. Daschle's lucrative career as influence peddler really illustrates is how much Washington is now expanding its reach over the economy. Politicians and their staffers can make or break fortunes by slipping a rider into a "must pass" bill or dispensing billions of dollars in subsidies to favored constituencies. Naturally businesses are going to protect their interests and hire lobbyists to get the decisions to come out their way. Had Mr. Daschle been confirmed, he would have been the most important man in a health-care industry expected to be worth $2.5 trillion in 2009, which is larger than the economy of France. With merely a torque to this or that regulation -- to say nothing of the "reform" he was to oversee as White House "health czar" -- he would have channeled all this wealth in one direction or the other. Just another day at the office. This is all part of the same entitlement mentality that caused Mr. Daschle's former colleagues to barely raise an eyebrow over his "disappointing mistakes" on taxes, as Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus put it. West Virginia Democrat Jay Rockefeller said Mr. Daschle's tax oversights had to be weighed against the value he brings "in terms of the moral necessity of getting universal health care." So tax avoidance is justifiable as long as you're saving mankind. We have come a long way from liberal outrage over the "K Street Project," Tom DeLay's effort to strong-arm lobbyists into hiring more Republicans. True, when the DeLay GOP settled into incumbency, it dumped the spending restraint and reform that might have limited the ecosystem that allows the Daschles of the world to proliferate. Still, it's amusing to see liberals, who run as the party of government, get momentarily indignant when one of their own cashes in on the spoils of their system. As for Mr. Obama, as recently as Monday night the President was saying he "absolutely" stood by his nominee before reluctantly accepting his withdrawal. So much for promising to vanquish the lobbyists before banishing the special interests. This was always an implausible bill of goods, considering that the major special interest in Washington is Washington itself Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

No no no this is for the betterment of “society” Business should stay in business at a loss. Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. Atlas Shrugged…52 years later it ALL comes true!!!! Who is Jon Galt? http://www.obamadeception.net/ Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

I would agree…which is why I disagree with the “bailout” all together. THINK! people THINK! This will and I repeat will leave the front door (not the back door) open to more government control. Example: what to invest in and where, how much to pay employees, who to and not to do business with. Don’t you see the danger in this? Aside for the fact that these measures completely overstep the scope and function of government…This is Socialism, plain and simple. As long as you can admit this to yourself and are okay with becoming a socialist country you should have nothing to worry about. Hey the government has done a real bang up job managing the tax payers dollar so far, I m sure things will be fine. God help us. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...

I was with you until the end of this post...I think as the author of The Declaration of Independence 'Ole Tom Jefferson would roll over in his grave to hear you say what you have about free market practices. I am sure you would agree that lack of responsibility on the part of the lender as well as "greedy" public struggling to keep up with the Jones's got us where we are today. Capitalism is not broken! Government on the other hand does not answer to the natural checks and balances that the private sector does (and that's why Barney Frank and Chris Dodd retain their positions). That's why your well intentioned viewpoint is unrealistic. Certainly the bright side in this dismal economic environment is that the solutions lies in government....less of it. If you want to see real wealth, wealth that lifts every man, then release men from the shackles of tyrants, bureaucrats and weight of the federal bureacracy. I understand that you have no faith in mankind (although I think that's a pretty sad way to go through life, you should find some volunteer work to do), however, if you become a true free marketer, a libertarian, you will understand that although free markets are imperfect, they have proven to be the one system that actually does improve mankind and advance humanity. Maybe I've just been a better student of history. I also understand the attraction of Mr. Obama if you just listen to words and didn't pay attention to his prior voting record. His theme of "hope" and "change" is an easy one to fall for, but change for the sake of change means nothing. I judge on deeds, not words and his deeds up to that point in time didn't earn my respect and still have not. As a citizen I support the country but I can't support socialism under any name or for any economic reason. I therefore reserve the right to change my mind if Mr. Obama proves to be a defender of freedom and liberty. I would rather lose everything I have worked for than to give up the opportunity to live in liberty and freedom. Gently pushing comfort zones since 1976...