Political Questions
I really wish I was less political on these posts. But outside of work has me working out and editing a sitcom we filmed. That means only time I can post is at work. So usually I'm restricted to what's on my mind at lunch. I did have a few questions:
- Is there an acceptable level of taxation for conservatives or will they always want it lower? I mean this like the NRA's insistence on no restrictions of guns (I actually respect that about them. If you're an advocacy group then it's not in your best interest to compromise one iota).
- Are there any worthwhile government programs or acceptable programs for taxes to be used?
- How come conservatives never want to touch the defense budget when talking about balancing a budget? I'm sure there's some inefficiencies and it makes up 50%+ of spending.
- Is it ever patriotic to oppose war or military aggression?
- Will Sammy Hagar ever follow up "I Can't Drive 55" with a more time appropriate song to reflect the changing speed limits? Our country needs his brand of protest rock and political insights in these difficult times.
posted by Tom G at 1/16/2007
5 Comments:
Your sense of outrage at the corruption of our elected officals seems to be rather selective. Be honest - if a Republican Speaker of the House were were involved in a sleezy maneuver like the Nany Pelosi Starkist sweat shop affair (http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/pol/262626162.html), you'd have bitched about it. Ypu are curiusously mum about this, not to mention the dems failure to fulfil their promise of 6 sweeping new bills in the first hundred days. I suspect you'll counter that these charges are just art of the vast right wing conspiracy.
Actually, the Democratic party has been pretty successful in passing their legislation in the house. Most likely it will be a harder task in the Senate. Click Here.
As far as your Samoa statement goes... It looks like that ammendment will be taken out. Using this as proof of corruption is somewhat questionable:
It's not clear that this is definitely a case of corruption. A spokesperson for Pelosi has stated that the amendment was made at the suggestion of a Samoan Delegate, who argued that such a wage increase would "devastate" the tuna industry.
Last I checked the Dems have been in for 7 days. That leaves 93 days before I could judge them on their 100 day pledge. If only you were so fast in judging the Republicans maybe our country wouldn't be in such awful shape.
Next time just give us the link to your blog if you want to discuss an isue. Otherwise, please shut up. A comment should have some relevance to the post. Yours has no relevance.
Thank you and have a great day!
Tom -
OOPS - The democrats promised 6 sweeping bills in their first 100 HOURS - I mistakenly wrote 'days'. (shoot me). An inane promise they couldn't keep and haven't kept. Again, I see you insist on labeling me Republican. (Mike K would say *sigh*) Star Trek's Mr. Spock would say 'fascinating'. Let me repeat once again, the Republicans SUCK, W is the worst president we've ever had. I haven't voted for a Republican presidential candidate since Bush Sr. in '88 (honest).My point is and has always been simply that the democrats ALSO SUCK. Why is that so hard for you to believe?
Mike-
Oh, a spokesperson for Pelosi says its not her fault, and that's enough for you, huh? You're being sarcastic, right? I mean, you aren't seriously suggesting that Pelosi's spokesperson's buck passing statement carrfy weight with you, are you? I thought you were more objective than Tom in these matters, with your favorable reviews of Lou Dobbs' comments criticizing BOTH parties and whatnot. Now your going partisan again. Don't defend Pelosi - she's a corrupt spoiled bizatch. You can put her and W on a boat made of ice and push it towards Bimini for all care.
Peace Out
PS - Tom, why don't you post some of these videos you keep talking about? I'm intrigued...
Joe,
When did I label you a Republican? My comment was the lack of complaints about Republicans which in no way means I'm calling you a Republican. It's more a point about your objectiveness. If you're objective, you generally are even handed in your complaints.
As for corruption, you'll notice that Mike and I refrained from even mentioning most of it. It was only when people started getting indicted or fired and there were hundred of thousands of dollars. For me, corruption is boring. Both sides do it and it takes a lot of time and effort to decide who's telling the truth. Most are he said/she said. And in most cases there needs to be intent. From what I can tell, this Pelosi thing is very minor if anything is even wrong. I would rather investigate the missing billions of dollars in Iraq than Pelosi's possible violation.
As for the Dems, sure the 100 hours thing might be crazy. But it wasn't meant to be binding. Am I gonna fret over them introducing only 4 vs 6 pieces of legislation in the first 100 hours? Not if they keep working on stuff. Right or wrong, Dems get a little bit of a break in the short term. When I start a new job (even new department), I don't have the same expectations as someone who has been doing it for 12 years.
BTW, we're not trying to be objective here. That's never been our point. My views are decidedly on the progressive side. If you're keeping track at home, don't. I guarantee you will find more posts critical of Republicans. If I wanted to be objective, I could probably find enough on both sides. But I'm going to focus on issues that matter the most to me. Sadly, Republicans are overwhelmingly the party most likely to be on that other side.
Post a Comment
<< Main