Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-24-2010, 09:17 PM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
14,576 posts, read 23,137,727 times
Reputation: 10357

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas_Thumb View Post
So what do Democrats suggest on out of control spending? Oh, I see... more government spending.
The difference is we tend to spend that money here at home where it's needed. We've spent alot of money on infrastructure (you know, that **** that the government is actually supposed to take care of here) that was largely neglected under Bush.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas_Thumb View Post
You guys are funny. If Bush is spending on the wall street bailout, than it is out of corruption. If Obama is doing it, then it is out of necessity. If Bush is bombing countries, he is a war monger. If Obama is doing it (again, I mention Pakistan), then it is out of necessity. Obviously the right does the newspeak. But you left are no better.

Oceania does not need a Ministry of Truth; when most people rewrite history in their own minds.
None of those views are my own, so I don't really know what your point is here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-24-2010, 09:47 PM
 
436 posts, read 757,324 times
Reputation: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post
The difference is we tend to spend that money here at home where it's needed.
No. The Democrats tend to spend money everywhere, hence, the reason why we are going broke. They are just as happy sending money overseas as the Republicans. In fact, they wrote the book on nation building and overseas spending. Most democrats will ignore this.
And the last stimulus had very little to do with infrastructure and shovel-ready projects. Most of it is just being flushed to government corporations. You state that this is being done in a responsible manner. Why are you giving the left a pass.
Seriously, you guys are being "bamboozled". It is not OK to give money to the big banks and wallstreet (which was overwhelming voted in by the Bush Administration and Democrats). But it is OK to give money to all these slimy government corporations? Yes, giving company ABC a few billion dollars to generate two jobs is a great investment.

Last edited by Thomas_Thumb; 07-24-2010 at 09:59 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2010, 10:08 PM
 
436 posts, read 757,324 times
Reputation: 257
But to get back to the OP's question, I think we need to find candidates who are willing to reduce overseas spending. I know that Barney Frank (D) and Ron Paul (R) have suggested cutting military defense spending. That is where I would start.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2010, 10:40 PM
 
Location: Out in the Badlands
10,420 posts, read 10,862,021 times
Reputation: 7801
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
How are GOP candidates saying they will achieve a smaller federal government if elected? Obama is spending and hiring feds right now and it isn't just temp Census workers. I'm wondering, if elected, are Republican candidates saying they will eliminate Departments? Eliminate Agencies within Departments? Let people go who were hired in the last so many years? Eliminate executives? Eliminate programs? Eliminate positions, pemanently? Have a long term hiring freeze and not replace workers who leave, just let them go by attrition? Give incentives to people to retire and not replace them?

I'm sick of political candidates just mouthing what we want to hear. I'd like to hear how GOP candidates running for the Senate, House and eventually for President plan to make the federal government smaller so we can hold their feet to the fire and make sure they follow through after we elect them. So, I'm asking in the elections forum: Which GOP candidates are saying they are for a smaller government and how are they proposing it be achieved? And will some TV/radio hosts/newspaper reporters please ask them?
What is the alternative? An ever growing engorged FEDZILLA?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-25-2010, 08:27 PM
 
48,502 posts, read 97,066,464 times
Reputation: 18310
Well we have already heard form the democrat and thr republican leaders i the new commision at the governors conference held rec. The word is cuts coming in federal programs. I also expect higher taxes either direct or indirect. The commission will make it easy to do this with new blood in congress plus those seeing the light of 11% unfavorable ratings. We have cut before and can agian.Then listening to the governors confrence they are way ahead in going the same.If you look at europe they are already starting down the cuts road.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2010, 10:13 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
37,822 posts, read 41,139,484 times
Reputation: 62300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretzelogik View Post
What is the alternative? An ever growing engorged FEDZILLA?
By allowing the Federal government to continue to grow, the GOP is signing its own death warrant. The federal government is a giant petrie dish to grow Democrat voters because government employees vote their pay checks/benefits. Obama and Pelosi/Reid know this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2010, 01:00 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,862 posts, read 46,783,913 times
Reputation: 18523
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
How are GOP candidates saying they will achieve a smaller federal government if elected? Obama is spending and hiring feds right now and it isn't just temp Census workers. I'm wondering, if elected, are Republican candidates saying they will eliminate Departments? Eliminate Agencies within Departments? Let people go who were hired in the last so many years? Eliminate executives? Eliminate programs? Eliminate positions, pemanently? Have a long term hiring freeze and not replace workers who leave, just let them go by attrition? Give incentives to people to retire and not replace them?

I'm sick of political candidates just mouthing what we want to hear. I'd like to hear how GOP candidates running for the Senate, House and eventually for President plan to make the federal government smaller so we can hold their feet to the fire and make sure they follow through after we elect them. So, I'm asking in the elections forum: Which GOP candidates are saying they are for a smaller government and how are they proposing it be achieved? And will some TV/radio hosts/newspaper reporters please ask them?


Chris Christie and Jan Brewer seem to know the formula.
Not just talk either. They even have some Democratic support for their policies to be sovereign.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:54 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top