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.
Republicans will only support federal government spending if it is for the military (seeing as the Constitution does explicitly give the federal government the job of national defense).
I have a solution for this problem. Democrats should stop calling infrastructure spending "investment" (which has become a politically controversial term thanks to Republicans) and start calling it defense spending.
We only need to look at our highway system as an example. It is officially called the "Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways."
Democrats need to start adding the word defense to any proposal to build a new road, bridge, rail, or any other infrastructure project.
If President Obama wants to build a transcontinental HSR network, he should call it the National Defense High Speed Rail Network.
Republicans will only support federal government spending if it is for the military (seeing as the Constitution does explicitly give the federal government the job of national defense).
I have a solution for this problem. Democrats should stop calling infrastructure spending "investment" (which has become a politically controversial term thanks to Republicans) and start calling it defense spending.
We only need to look at our highway system as an example. It is officially called the "Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways."
Democrats need to start adding the word defense to any proposal to build a new road, bridge, rail, or any other infrastructure project.
If President Obama wants to build a transcontinental HSR network, he should call it the National Defense High Speed Rail Network.
You must understand Republicans, many are elected mainly by suburbs, and HSR is only for cities, it's a pro-cities tool, and they want to use money from suburban taxpayers to pay it, it's not possible.If you look at empty high speed trains in China you see the problem.
If Democrats want to invest in infrastructure they must stop to do that only for their constituency...They must focus on light trains linking cities to suburbs, it's the best thing to do.
There is enough double speak and misrepresentation from the federal government already, no need to advocate for more.
I guess i'll take your non-denial of the OP's accusations as an admission that you guys are defense spending crazy....and that infrastructure spending isn't all that important in comparison.
I guess i'll take your non-denial of the OP's accusations as an admission that you guys are defense spending crazy....and that infrastructure spending isn't all that important in comparison.
Got'cha!
A quick check of my posting history would prove you wrong.
Enjoy your misconception
And similarly, since you don't denounce the tactict of the of the federal government lying to achieve a goal forwarded by the o.p., we can assume you endorse such tactics.
What agency do you work for?
Obama was already given $800 billion for "infrastructure projects". Those were the "shovel ready" jobs he LIED ABOUT. Instead the money went to his union buddies.
The only thing the infrastructure got was some stupid Obama stickers that had to be placed on every road project as propaganda eventhough Barry had nothing to do with it.
We've had a Dem President and Dem Congress for 2 years..Repubs just took over the House.
Yet..we have 3, yes 3 wars going.
And it's the Repubs that are for war and military spending ?
Someone hasn't read their current events since 2008 it seems.
I have always said that the only way we would get High Speed Rail is if it were a defense project. The Department of Defense would of course have the power to commandeer it for troop movements. Veterans would be able to ride at reduced fares and those retired from the military could ride for free. There is precedent: Eisenhower sold the Interstate Highway system as a link in our national defense.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,373,658 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
We've had a Dem President and Dem Congress for 2 years..Repubs just took over the House.
Yet..we have 3, yes 3 wars going.
And it's the Repubs that are for war and military spending ?
Someone hasn't read their current events since 2008 it seems.
So if we look back more than 2 years we'll find many examples of Republicans opposing increases in defense spending and fighting to stay out of wars?
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.
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.
