Obama press conference

#103
#103
The Dude said:
Interesting, did not know that one's economic philosophy was contingent to certain factors like how the ecomomy is. That's news to me. So for so-called fiscal conservatives, exorbitant spending is okay if the economy isn't a front page headline, but if its in the tank it's not?

I'm just asking for a little consistancy on both sides, and that's something the right hasn't shown in this regard.
Click to expand...
I don't understand the first sentence and which fiscal conservative are you talking about being OK with exorbitant spending? Reagan maybe. He spent in a huge way on the military and funded it with debt while the economy was in the crapper. He overcame an idiot like Tip O to strengthen our military back to useful and grew the economy enormously in his second term. His tax regime set the stage for tremendous growth of the 90s by inducing enormous investment of the riches reaped in the late 80s.

He spent money to a very good end. Bush and the current economic idiot simply pissed away money. There is no fiscal conservative happy with either one.

Seems to me that you're simply supporting the current idiocy by trotting out prior idiocy, which makes no sense at all to me.
 
#104
#104
BigPapaVol said:
I don't understand the first sentence and which fiscal conservative are you talking about being OK with exorbitant spending? Reagan maybe. He spent in a huge way on the military and funded it with debt while the economy was in the crapper. He overcame an idiot like Tip O to strengthen our military back to useful and grew the economy enormously in his second term. His tax regime set the stage for tremendous growth of the 90s by inducing enormous investment of the riches reaped in the late 80s.

He spent money to a very good end. Bush and the current economic idiot simply pissed away money. There is no fiscal conservative happy with either one.

Seems to me that you're simply supporting the current idiocy by trotting out prior idiocy, which makes no sense at all to me.
Click to expand...

The first sentence was a response to a poster saying that the increased criticism from fiscal conservatives toward Obama's spending is somehow more understandable than the criticism toward W's spending because of our current economic state, Iraq had our attention then, and because that Obama makes W look like a small timer. A true FC would hold on to the core value of not supporting extravagant government spending, regardless.

I don't support the current idiocy. Nor do I support opinions of convenience, where in one instance wasteful spending was either okay or the criticsim was subdued you couldn't hear it. Was every conservative easily forgiving of Bush in that way? No, but my point is most of the folks that are all up in arms over O's spending only started worrying about government spending after Obama was elected or when the right lost power in 2006. That makes many of O's critics and Obama really identical to one another.
 
#105
#105
The Dude said:
The first sentence was a response to a poster saying that the increased criticism from fiscal conservatives toward Obama's spending is somehow more understandable than W's because of our current economic state, Iraq had our attention then, and that Obama makes W look like a small timer. A true FC would hold on to the core value of not supporting extravagant government spending, regardless.

I don't support the current idiocy. Nor do I support opinions of convenience, where in one instance wasteful spending was either okay or the criticsim was subdued you couldn't hear it. Was every conservative easily forgiving of Bush in that way? No, but my point is most of the folks that are all up in arms over O's spending only started worrying about government spending after Obama was elected or when the right lost power in 2006. That makes many of O's critics and Obama really identical to one another.
Click to expand...
If you do a little homework, you'll find that the majority of fiscal conservatives when he went to the spending for votes routine with his rx drug program. That started the big shift and got them voted out of office, and rightfully so.

I could even deal with his silly pandering to the morons of the Christian Coalition until the reelection campaign. Thereafter, he was just an average idiot.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#106
#106
BigPapaVol said:
I don't understand the first sentence and which fiscal conservative are you talking about being OK with exorbitant spending? Reagan maybe. He spent in a huge way on the military and funded it with debt while the economy was in the crapper. He overcame an idiot like Tip O to strengthen our military back to useful and grew the economy enormously in his second term. His tax regime set the stage for tremendous growth of the 90s by inducing enormous investment of the riches reaped in the late 80s.

He spent money to a very good end. Bush and the current economic idiot simply pissed away money. There is no fiscal conservative happy with either one.

Seems to me that you're simply supporting the current idiocy by trotting out prior idiocy, which makes no sense at all to me.
Click to expand...

I have a lot of respect for anyone that sticks by their conservatism even if their choice for President or some other elected office abandoned it. What is your opinion of George W.? And what are your opinion of those that seemed unable to differentiate between their beliefs and values (fiscal conservatism) and Bush's economic policies? It seems as if the Republican party is trying to figure out whether to resort back to Reagan politics or try to move forward in their politics, which do you hope happens and which do you think will happen? Regardless, it will certainly be intersting to see what direction the Republican party moves towards!
 
#107
#107
WPAINE said:
I have a lot of respect for anyone that sticks by their conservatism even if their choice for President or some other elected office abandoned it. What is your opinion of George W.? And what are your opinion of those that seemed unable to differentiate between their beliefs and values (fiscal conservatism) and Bush's economic policies? It seems as if the Republican party is trying to figure out whether to resort back to Reagan politics or try to move forward in their politics, which do you hope happens and which do you think will happen? Regardless, it will certainly be intersting to see what direction the Republican party moves towards!
Click to expand...

What is this silliness about moving forward? Reversion toward Reagan and focus on minimizing government is the only direction to go.

Your implication that moving forward is a good thing is bothersome. The forward we are seeing today is not what anyone believes Amwruca to be.

I thought W was an idiot fiscally and for leaning toward the idiots of the Christian Coalition.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#108
#108
BigPapaVol said:
What is this silliness about moving forward? Reversion toward Reagan and focus on minimizing government is the only direction to go.

Your implication that moving forward is a good thing is bothersome. The forward we are seeing today is not what anyone believes Amwruca to be.

I thought W was an idiot fiscally and for leaning toward the idiots of the Christian Coalition.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I thought the same thing when I read the "moving forward" comment. Is the implication the republican party should change to be more like the democrats and that would be moving forward?

Agree with your assessment about less government.
 
#109
#109
WPAINE said:
I have a lot of respect for anyone that sticks by their conservatism even if their choice for President or some other elected office abandoned it. What is your opinion of George W.? And what are your opinion of those that seemed unable to differentiate between their beliefs and values (fiscal conservatism) and Bush's economic policies? It seems as if the Republican party is trying to figure out whether to resort back to Reagan politics or try to move forward in their politics, which do you hope happens and which do you think will happen? Regardless, it will certainly be intersting to see what direction the Republican party moves towards!
Click to expand...

Well, that just makes my day, thanks you Mr Ivey Leaguer. Do you always do your best "thinking" at 2 am?
 
#112
#112
I won't apologize for going to Harvard Divinity School. And to the aforementioned remarks, I don't think I implied that moving forward was a good thing? I asked you if you thought the Republican party would attempt to "move forward" as implied by Michael Steele's remarks and recent remarks by John McCain's daughter, or if you think they will resort back to the fiscal conservatism that allowed them to dominate the past quarter century? Just a question, no reason for personal attacks. I said it will be interesting to see which direction the party moves TOWARDS, not forward.
 
#116
#116
BigPapaVol said:
I made the comment, not him.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Ok, well what do you have against it? And also, what do you think about my post that clarified that i was not implying that moving forward was better? Do you think the Republican party will follow you in resorting back to fiscal conservatism and other ideas principles by Reagan, or will they acquiesce these beliefs and try to become more "hip" and progressive like John McCain's daughter is asking for? I think John McCain's daughter is significant because she represents the youth of the republican party, and am wondering if the party will try and appeal to them more or if they will resort back. Thoughts?
 
#118
#118
WPAINE said:
Ok, well what do you have against it? And also, what do you think about my post that clarified that i was not implying that moving forward was better? Do you think the Republican party will follow you in resorting back to fiscal conservatism and other ideas principles by Reagan, or will they acquiesce these beliefs and try to become more "hip" and progressive like John McCain's daughter is asking for? I think John McCain's daughter is significant because she represents the youth of the republican party, and am wondering if the party will try and appeal to them more or if they will resort back. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I have nothing against the divinity program, except that I believe it operates with a different set of rules than the remainder of the school.

The Republican party, in order to survive, has get rid of populist clowns like McCain and move back to its strengths, fiscal conservatism and minimalism toward gov't. Otherwise, it simply becomes another wing of the Obamas. I know Obama represents the absolute far left lunacy of the party, but you get the point.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#120
#120
BigPapaVol said:
I have nothing against the divinity program, except that I believe it operates with a different set of rules than the remainder of the school.

The Republican party, in order to survive, has get rid of populist clowns like McCain and move back to its strengths, fiscal conservatism and minimalism toward gov't. Otherwise, it simply becomes another wing of the Obamas. I know Obama represents the absolute far left lunacy of the party, but you get the point.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

and his daughter.....Dems would love for the party to "move toward" the McCain brand of politics
 
#121
#121
T-TownVol said:
and his daughter.....Dems would love for the party to "move toward" the McCain brand of politics
Click to expand...

I don't think so, because then that will require Dems to move even further left in order to keep the political scale balanced. It would take at least two elections before the social and fiscal conservatives realized that neither party was representing their interests, at which point a 3 party system would emerge.

I think that is what ruined McCain's campaign. He tried to appeal to the social and fiscal conservatives which he already had in the bag (even if most of them would have voted for him b/c he was the "lesser of two evils" they would have voted for him nonetheless). This is particularly noted in McCain's pick of Palin, who certainly appealed to the more conservative base.
 
#122
#122
Don't be silly, the fiscal conservatives now realize that neither party had an interest is stopping spending and limiting government.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#123
#123
T-TownVol said:
is BPV going to get a footnote in the paper you are compiling info for
Click to expand...

Unsure, are you going to continue to plagiarize his thoughts or do you have some of your own? I just enjoy political conversations where people don't get branded a certain way, a.k.a. "Ivy Leaguer", "liberal" etc.
 
#124
#124
BigPapaVol said:
Don't be silly, the fiscal conservatives now realize that neither party had an interest is stopping spending and limiting government.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I think you give too much credit to fiscal conservatives. Last I checked, Ron Paul wasn't getting a lot of support. I wish you were right, but most fiscal conservatives voted in the primary and the general.
 
#125
#125
BigPapaVol said:
I have nothing against the divinity program, except that I believe it operates with a different set of rules than the remainder of the school.

The Republican party, in order to survive, has get rid of populist clowns like McCain and move back to its strengths, fiscal conservatism and minimalism toward gov't. Otherwise, it simply becomes another wing of the Obamas. I know Obama represents the absolute far left lunacy of the party, but you get the point.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Yeah, I get the point, but do you think that is what the Republican party will do?

And, yeah it operates differently than other schools, but I think the School of Design, School of Education, School of Public Health, etc all fall under that category as well. Quite frankly, outside of the Business School, Law School, Med. School, and Kennedy School, Harvard's schools are all pretty independent. The great thing about the Div School though is that there are no required courses, so I have been able to take multiple courses at the Kennedy School, Law School, and the College. Just one pretty cool thing with the Div School.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top