Five Ft. Three

“A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.” ― Milton Friedman

Back to politics

on January 20, 2011

I knew Bush wasn’t fiscally conservative, but in reading Glenn Beck’s “Broke” I am seeing the numbers that show how bad he was!  Which is why conservatives want actual, limited government!  Because then politicians cannot buy votes by spending money the government doesn’t have.

Repealing Obamacare is a start towards fiscal conservatism, better late than never.

Advertisements

12 responses to “Back to politics

  1. soapster says:

    Repealing Obamacare is of course a positive step. HOWEVER, that it is coming from this lot of Republicans is, I'm afraid, little more than grandstanding. Do consider that the vast majority of these newly polished Republicans support A) guarantee issue, coverage for pre-existing conditions, and community rating; and B) early indicators showing strong support from the part for Mitt Romney in 2012 (mind you a man who as governor of Massachusetts supported and signed into law a health care plan eerily similar to that of Obama's and the Democrats.

  2. Repealing Obamacare is a start towards fiscal conservatism, better late than never. You are right, except I doubt if it will get past the Senate. I’d be shocked if anything towards repealing anything that Obama did ever makes it to Obama’s desk.But lets keep the faith.

  3. Doug says:

    I'm afraid I have to somewhat side with soapster on this. I'm reminded of the Clinton "impeachment". Only the republican controled branch passed it, claimed victory, yet he stayed in office and really was never impeached.From a republican and political point, repealing has to be done, is mostly grandstanding and in the end, the health care bill will still be in effect.

  4. GWB was a neocon, which has been defined by certain pundits as a neoliberal. Jus' sayin'.

  5. Couves says:

    The Bush years demonstrate that the Republicans lose all fiscal restraint without a real conservative in the White House. That’s why I’m excited about Gary Johnson’s potential campaign for President. As Governor of New Mexico, he vetoed more bills than all other governors combined. That’s the kind of discipline we need in the White House right now. Without it, I’m afraid we’ll just continue our current drift towards national bankruptcy.

  6. Beth says:

    I remember reading about Gary Johnson, definitely looked promising, wonder what the odds are that he'll actually run?Doug & Soapie – we need to hold the newbies to Congress' feet to the fire!Mal – never say neverAOW – I never did understand the Neo thing, we just need an actual conservative to win next time!

  7. Couves says:

    It's pretty much a sure thing Gary Johnson will run (the rumor is that he'll announce next month). He's running in all but name already – been to New Hampshire five times and has already hired staff there. I was lucky enough to see Gary speak at a tea party event in Boston last month.

  8. ..But I did say, lets keep the faith.

  9. BB-Idaho says:

    " remember reading about Gary Johnson, definitely looked promising, wonder what the odds are that he'll actually run?"..probably not. As a social libertarian, he ispro-choice. He wants to cut defense 50-90%. Not a good fit for a GOP candidate, IMO…but interesting guy.

  10. Couves says:

    BB-Idaho: Gary Johnson opposes Roe on Constitutional grounds. As governor he supported a late-term abortion ban and parental notification. Simply calling himself “pro choice” hurts him with the so-cons, but his record is like that of many “pro life” Republicans.On defense, I don’t think Gary is quite the isolationist you think he is (he’s no Ron Paul!). Gary is against nation building and wants to bring home our troops from Afghanistan. He also wants to consider closing bases in countries like Japan and Germany… as 99% of our foreign aid is in the form of providing military defense to allies who can do it for themselves. For sure, Gary Johnson is a dark horse. But I wouldn't count him out, especially in this political climate.

  11. Beth says:

    The thing about late term abortion bans is, if you think you are killing a human being in the later term of the pregnancy, it could be the same baby earlier being killed in abortions! So, what is the difference, it is killing at any stage of the pregnancy!

  12. Couves says:

    Beth: Of course you’re right about late term abortion bans. But under Roe v. Wade, states can only legally prevent abortion at that late stage in the pregnancy. Many states would like to stop all abortion outright, but a late term abortion ban is the best they can do under current law. To protect life completely, we would have to repeal Roe v. Wade as Johnson supports.

Thanks for joining in on the discussion!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s