The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Aggregated money is far more efficient than an equal amount of money distributed. A single entity offering 2 Million dollars for road work will get more roads built than 50,000 individuals offering $40 each for road work. I'm not going to argue that everything our government is spending its money on is being done efficiently, but having a combined resource pool benefits me more than having that $40 in my pocket. The difficult bit is finding the balance point.

Yes-

I hate the way the gov't spends our money.

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

I hate the way the gov't spends our money.

Me too. Idiotic waste of money war.

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

Me too. Idiotic waste of money war.

oh ha-

The list of things the gov't wastes money on seems endless. And since the POTUS sees no reason to limit spending- there it goes!

bah

[Ghoulish Delight]

Well shoot, at least I don't live in Arizona

[Nephythys]

nope- Cali is three up from AZ.

What is that??

Heh- CO is right about middle- hmmm

[Alex]

What a weird methodology they use. The entire basis for "smartness" seems to be based on public primary school statistics.

If you accept their criteria as valid measurements of something, it seems to be me it would just be statewide quality of public primary schools. By thoes criteria the entire graduating classes of Ivy League universities from 1990-2006 could move to California and the state would not get at all "smarter."

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

By thoes criteria the entire graduating classes of Ivy League universities from 1990-2006 could move to California and the state would not get at all "smarter."

Don't worry. Sleepyjeff is coming down in a couple of weeks. California will get slightly smarter for a few days.....(heh, heh)

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Out of curiosity does this mean that if the Democrats with the House and Senate this year that you'll vote Republican for president in 2008 regardless of candidates because that would be too much power for the Democrats?

Possibly. Depends on who the parties run as candidates. I’ll vote for who I think will do the better job, regardless of party affiliation.

Originally Posted by Nephythys

OOO race baiting. How impressive. Not immigrants JW- ILLEGAL immigrants.

The right use immigrants (legal and illegal – some on the right don't seem to make that distinction) as bogeymen to scare people with. If this isn’t race baiting, I don’t know what is. The problem of illegal immigration is a complex one. One that can’t be solved in terms of black and white (color, not race). There is no simple answer. But using illegal immigrants as a scare tactic to win elections is just plain wrong. These are people we are talking about, not demons.

If you really care about the issue, then demand that Congress and the President do more to secure our borders. Complaining about the rain coming in the window does no good when you ignore that the window is still open.

Originally Posted by Nephythys

If you can't see the damage illegal immigration is doing to this country I can't help you.

And just what damage would that be?

“They take our jobs?” They take jobs no one else will take.

“Their children take up room in our schools?” Yes, let’s deny an education to children (who may be US citizens) because their parents are here illegally. Let’s punish children for the crimes of their parents. Good policy.

“They don’t pay taxes, but use all the benefits.” Wrong. Illegals pay into the tax base, but are denied most government benefits.

“Health care services are overburdened by illegals!” Health care services are overburdened by people who do not have health insurance – the majority of which are not illegal immigrants. If there is a problem with the health care system, then let’s fix it. Blaming one group is not going to solve anything.

Originally Posted by Nephythys

…cause guess what, we used to have a huge problem with white euro illegals- same problem.

Really? Do tell.

Originally Posted by Nephythys

Spare me your reflective bigotry- it's insulting and not worth notice. Disgusting tactic.

I’m sorry… Did I touch a nerve?

Anyway, I refuse to get pulled any farther in to a debate on immigration. It tends to get ugly.

[Nephythys]

No- you did not touch a nerve.

One thing I am not is a bigot- but you have reminded me why I usually ignore your posts.

Thanks- lesson learned.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by JWBear

But do Republicans not claim to be the party of traditional values and morality? Nothing reeks more of hypocrisy than claiming the moral high ground in public, but being very immoral in private. Republicans tried to crucify Clinton because he lied about his sex life. Yet they defend Foley and those who covered up for him. Can you not see the double standard?

Who is yelling out about the "culture of corruption"? Is that not the same thing as claiming a higher moral ground? It is saying "you are corrupt and we are not".

Who has defended Foley?

I won't bother to go into Clinton, but the situation to me was not about his private sex life.

There is no shortage of hypocrisy anywhere in politics. It simply comes down to whose is more palatable to you based on your own politics.