PDA

View Full Version : How do you tell a Republican from a Democrat?



MannyIsGod
08-11-2005, 03:34 PM
You can't.


Republicans Display the Arrogance of Power

by David Boaz

David Boaz (http://cato.org/people/boaz.html) is executive vice president of the Cato Institute (www.cato.org) and author of Libertarianism: A Primer.

What does Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) have in common with James Madison? Madison's home is in the congressional district that Allen has represented in the House and Senate. And that's about all.

Madison, the principal author of the U.S. Constitution, sought to establish a limited federal government. In arguing for its ratification, he promised Americans, "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined." A few years later, faced with a bill appropriating $15,000 for the relief of French refugees, he rose on the floor of the House to say that he could not "undertake to lay [his] finger on that article in the Federal Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."

That's a far cry from the philosophy of George Allen, who has introduced a bill in the United States Senate to require official approval of any TV ratings system. Indeed, if Madison's spirit could visit the Commerce Committee hearing room where Allen's bill was discussed, it would probably say with some severity, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article in the Federal Constitution which granted a right to Congress to regulate television ratings."

Allen is hardly the only member of Congress who would be a great disappointment to the Founders. For years, Republicans argued that the Democratic majority in Congress was intruding the federal government into more and more matters best left to the states, the local communities, or the private sector. After 10 years in power, however, the Republicans have seen the Democrats' intrusiveness and raised them. The Republicans have pushed the feds further into the local schools with the No Child Left Behind Act and tried to take marriage law away from the states with the Federal Marriage Amendment. They overruled a series of Florida courts in the Terri Schiavo case, imposing the massive power of the federal government on a tragic family matter.

But it's not just these big-ticket items. Republicans have come down with a serious case of Potomac Fever. They believe that their every passing thought is a proper subject for federal legislation. They hold three-ring-circus hearings on steroids in baseball. They sharply increase the fines for alleged indecency on television. They hold hearings on whether college textbooks are too expensive. They threaten to punish Major League Baseball if the owners allow left-wing billionaire George Soros to be a part owner of the new team in Washington. They vote for a federal investigation of the video game "Grand Theft Auto."

Many of these gambits do target real annoyances and even real problems. But in a free society citizens don't turn to the national government to solve every problem. Indeed, a free society is measured by the amount of life that remains outside the control of government. We may all be tempted from time to time to say "There oughta be a law!" when we're angry or frustrated. That's why we write a Constitution -- to protect us from our own temptations to turn our exasperation into laws, and to protect us from our fellow citizens yielding to the same temptation.

Republicans took control of Congress in 1994 by declaring that Democrats had given us "government that is too big, too intrusive, and too easy with the public's money." Now, intoxicated with their own power, they have forgotten those words. They too use the powers of the federal government to lavish money on favored constituents, summon us before congressional hearings to explain ourselves, and intrude into our most local and personal decisions.

When Major League Baseball owners suggested that Congress had no authority to investigate steroid use, committee chairman Tom Davis (R-Va.) and ranking Democrat Henry Waxman replied that the committee "may at any time conduct investigations of any matter." So much for Madison's promise that those powers "delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined."



http://cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4068

MannyIsGod
08-11-2005, 03:36 PM
Republican Pork Barrel

"Three years ago, President Bush went to war against congressional pork. His official 2003 budget even featured a color photo of a wind-powered ice sled -- an example of the pet projects and alleged boondoggles he said he would no longer tolerate," reports the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/10/AR2005081000223.html).

The article continues: "Yesterday, Bush effectively signed a cease-fire -- critics called it more like a surrender -- in his war on pork. He signed into law a $286 billion transportation measure that contains a record 6,371 pet projects inserted by members of Congress from both parties."

In "The Grand Old Spending Party: How Republicans Became Big Spenders, (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3750)" Cato's director of budget studies Stephen Slivinski writes, "President Bush has presided over the largest overall increase in inflation-adjusted federal spending since Lyndon B. Johnson. Even after excluding spending on defense and homeland security, Bush is still the biggest-spending president in 30 years. His 2006 budget doesn't cut enough spending to change his place in history, either.

"The GOP was once effective at controlling nondefense spending. The final nondefense budgets under Clinton were a combined $57 billion smaller than what he proposed from 1996 to 2001. Under Bush, Congress passed budgets that spent a total of $91 billion more than the president requested for domestic programs. Bush signed every one of those bills during his first term. Even if Congress passes Bush's new budget exactly as proposed, not a single cabinet-level agency will be smaller than when Bush assumed office.

"Republicans could reform the budget rules that stack the deck in favor of more spending. Unfortunately, senior House Republicans are fighting the changes. The GOP establishment in Washington today has become a defender of big government."

SWC Bonfire
08-11-2005, 03:45 PM
Republicans are the ones spending the money, and Democrats are the ones complaining that they don't get to spend the money.

JoeChalupa
08-11-2005, 03:54 PM
Good points.

Ocotillo
08-11-2005, 04:01 PM
I'm not libertarian but the line between Democrat and Republican is and can be somewhat blurred. i.e. Lieberman, Joe v. Chafee, Lincoln, which is which?

Extra Stout
08-11-2005, 04:02 PM
Democrat: Tax-and-spend
Republican: Borrow-and-spend

Seriously, if the Democrats could get halfway serious about national security, they could wash the Republicans out of power like a storm surge.

JoeChalupa
08-11-2005, 04:41 PM
Do you think democrats needs to start a war to prove it?

SWC Bonfire
08-11-2005, 04:47 PM
Do you think democrats needs to start a war to prove it?

(A) Korea
(B) Vietnam

MannyIsGod
08-11-2005, 04:54 PM
Democrats started neither of those wars. They were ongoing before our involvement.

Cant_Be_Faded
08-11-2005, 05:34 PM
(A) Korea
(B) Vietnam


dork

SWC Bonfire
08-11-2005, 05:38 PM
Democrats started neither of those wars. They were ongoing before our involvement.

So when did the war on terror start? It is arguable.

That was a legitimate post, a Democrat was in power when the US entered those wars largely of our own accord.

SWC Bonfire
08-11-2005, 05:50 PM
BTW waterworld was the bomb

The defense rests, your honor.

Cant_Be_Faded
08-11-2005, 05:53 PM
i said that in a different thread, waterworld is a very quotable movie.

people did not like it cuz they were expecting another classic like prince of theives

i never said it was an all time great, nor did i say that democrats started the korean and vietnam wars

no this statement is not arguable

google the wars, you'll learn something

MannyIsGod
08-11-2005, 06:35 PM
Dude, I loved Waterworld. That movie was great. Even the Postman wasn't bad. Especially with the Tom Petty cameo.

Jim Rome
08-12-2005, 12:55 AM
KEVIN COSTNER IS THE GREATEST ACTOR OF OUR TIME.

Trainwreck2100
08-12-2005, 03:41 AM
One's a donkey and one's an elephant. And as we all know when you put a donkey and an elephant together you get alot of shit.

mookie2001
08-14-2005, 01:04 AM
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a59/aggiessuck/36.jpg

gtownspur
08-15-2005, 04:54 PM
Republican's favor military overspending
Democrats favor social overspending

Republicans wants america to remain a superpower
Democrats want us to be a socialist satellite for Russia and Cuba.

Republicans support privitaization and free market
Democrats support socialized markets and heavy regulation

Republicans support National soveriegnty
Democrats want Globalization

Republicans support the Constitution as the highest law in the land.
Democrats think the constitution should be second to internartional law.

Republicans are pro life
Democrats are pro choice

ididnotnothat
08-15-2005, 07:41 PM
Republican = Democrat
Democrat = Republican


Both are the same. Idiots!