Oh my gosh, yes, "patriot", payroll taxes have gone back to where they
were during the. . . wait for it. . . George W Bush era. Gasp! It's the end
of the world as we know it! Good heavens.
Obama didn't vote himself in on Nov 6th - the MAJORITY of the people in
this country did it with their eyes wide open. This tells you more about the
sorry state of the people of this once great country than anything else.
Liberals have been barking with joy since Nov 6 and rightly so since their guy
won. Some of that joy was diminished a bit a week ago when reality set in and
many people got their first pay check of 2013 and saw LESS take home pay and
MORE taxes. The way it was supposed to work was ONLY the evil rich got a tax
increase but surprise surprise. Wait a year for more "surprises"
liberals - HINT: your take home pay will continue to DECLINE but remember you
voted for it.
Mark,You are correct the GOP that was in office during the time of GW Bush
was not what most GOP members wanted.They spent a lot of money and
did some pretty stupid things.. that cost them in the 2006 election...They realized they had strayed from their core beliefs... Well Now the
democrats have taken over and in 4 years raised the debt more than Bush did in 8
years.their really far left members have caused some pretty
stalemate sittuation in Congress. then on 2010, the Tea Party members got
elected on the GOP ticket. Now we have two extremes portions in
their respective party that is stagnating the congress into being the congress
of do nothing....My point to all this is pretty simple. When both
parties members (the people that vote these guys into office) will wake up and
vote for people who will actually work for them and not the party, who will work
with other side to come up with the best solution, this sitution will become
better, until then? gridlock, bickering, etc will contiune.
confused, George W Bush had a Republican controlled Congress, both houses, when
he came into office, and for six of his eight years in the presidency. He was
handed a budget surplus and a path to having the National Debt paid off by now.
The Federal fiscal year begins in October. When the Republicans lost control of
congress in '06, their budget plans would run for almost another year
before anything the Democrats would do would kick in. For those of
us that can actually learn from history, we saw exactly what the Republicans did
when they had total control of the federal government. They spent like there was
no tomorrow, and they ran up massive debt, and put us firmly on the fiscal
trajectory we are on now. Plus, the Republicans that were behind the Bush
disaster are still sitting in both the House and Senate, and they are asking for
us to trust them. They are pretending they are fiscal conservatives. No thanks.
I saw what they do.
Your right, liberals do not lose the big elections. This last one was the
biggest election of all time and so according to Beck we were going to have a
miracle new great leader. It happened and he won.
Joyce,Actually the way you wrote that the GOP does not want reduced
government by siting several GOP presidents...So my response was
"you can say the same thing about the Democrats"...I then
point out what mountainman was saying... Every time there has been a smaller
Federal government, it was due to the fact that the GOP control House and or
Senate was in charge.BushI, Bush II (second term) Reagan all had to
deal with democrats controlling the house and/or senate....
@higvWhat differences and reason justify denying marriage to this group
There is a bigger diffrence between Man and Women and race. Blacks, Whites,
Indian Men and Women can do the same things, Same for Women. There are many
things Men can do that women can't and vice versa. Gender diffrence there
for a reason.
Confused - no I cannot give you an example of a Democratic president reducing
the size of government nor do Democrats constantly espouse reducing government.
If you will read just about any comment from Mountanman he almost always brings
up that issue so I was addressing his constant comments about
conservatives/Republicans and their supposed 'belief' in small(er)
government but when given the opportunity they never do anything about it. So actually there was no need for you to response to something I did not
George, you are absolutely correct. I am a huge fan of freedom. Unfortunately,
it is people like lost that do not understand true freedom. They think it is
more acceptable for them to control who you can love and marry, then for you to
have the freedom to choose for yourself who you will marry. They
love freedom, only when they can control it.
@lostThose that where against interracial marriage pined that all
people have the same right to marry people of their own race. Forty plus years
later this argument still makes no more sense when applied to this situation.
Joyce,Can you name a democratic president that has reduced the government?
Ah you might say "President Clinton", but you would be wrong....You see the only way the goverment gets smaller is by the House of
Representative. You see they are the ones that controls the purse strings for
the government.There is only one time that I can think of in modern
history where the goverment actually reduced itself and that was when Clinton
and the House speaker (Newt Gringich) actually worked together to come up with a
plan and actually sold it to the house.The issues today is not if
you are liberal or conservative. That is actually a good thing because it helps
produce a better system. The issue that is stagnating this country and ripping
it by it threads, is the "Extreme" members of both parties. They have
just enough votes to clog any type of common sense (word compormise works as
well)solution to actually happened.
re:Christian 24-7Cite the cases. Name or places of the pastor who was
required to perform a marriage against his religious beliefs, and the pharmacy
required to dispense the abortion pill(RU486). The Deseret News did
print a story of Cathy DeCarlo in New York who filed suit because she was
allegedly required to participate in an abortion which went against her
religious beliefs. Obviously this was an anamoly which is why it made the news.
So, should we base our assumptions on the exceptions or the rule
Truthseeker:All three of those examples came from lawsuits in
various states, and lower courts have ruled to force these people to give
services against their religion. All have been appealed as well. There is a liberal constituency trying to deny Americans the right to choose
to live their religion, and obviously, in the case of those suing the doctor and
the pharmacists, these are people who profess to be pro-choice. While supporting homosexual marriage does not usually get called
"pro-choice", it is about giving a group of people a specific choice.
But when supporters of homosexual marriage seek to take away the choice of
others that seems very hypocritical.We can only hope those demanding
choices that some of us find abhorrent and morally wrong, will learn that others
also have the right to choices in their personal lives too, and will quit
hauling them to court, bankrupting them, and trying to take those rights and
their businesses/parishes away. We also need solid court precedence so lower
courts will rule correctly, instead of ruining lives and bankrupting people in a
sea of appeals.
@Mountanman; God does nothing. @DC; Your double standard is
showing.@TG "Bud" Mahas; If your marriage is threatened by
gays getting married, you should take a good, long look at just what it is
you're doing wrong. It isn't "the gay's fault", it is
Lost in DC "“guns” on hip protesting Obamacare? Really?"
Yes really..no hyperbole at all. News cast after news cast showing tea party
organized rallys against the ACA with multiple people walking around with guns
on their hips. Mountain man..you have all of history backwards.
The founding fathers were liberal revolutionaries who tried a small federal
government and then rejected it for a strong central government. Joyce is
absolutely right about the modern conservative movement. They have no interest
in the size of government. What they are interested in is the structure of
government. They want as big a government as it takes to funnell most of the
wealth of the nation to the top. They have no interest in the size of
government relative to the welfare of the citizenry just size and structure it
takes to influence the flow of wealth.
I love hearing people on the Right side of the political spectrum say that they
want smaller government, yet when they controlled both houses of Congress and
the White House from 2001 to 2007 we had the largest growth of government in
history. Also the largest growth of the deficit.
Re:Christian 24-7You are very uninformed. You stated:
“Being a physician and choosing NOT to murder the unborn”Fact: 46 states allow individual health care providers to refuse to
participate in an abortion. 43 states allow institutions to refuse to perform
abortions, 16 of which limit refusal to private or religious institutions. You stated:“Pastors choosing to perform marriages only in
accordance with their religious beliefs”Fact: Pastors are NOT
REQUIRED to perform marriages not in accordance with their beliefs. You stated: “Being a pharmacist and choosing NOT to carry abortion
pills” Fact: Mifepristone (RU486/abortion drug) was approved
under the second part of sub-section H. The result is that women CANNOT pick the
drug up at a pharmacy but must receive it directly from a doctor.
Pastors choosing to perform marriages only in accordance with their religious
beliefsExpressing values in public (lest someone be offended)Choosing to live my religion in everything I do and everywhere I go
We have a Constitution that LIMITS the Federal Government to ONLY do those
things that are enumerated in the Constitution. Anyone, liberal or
conservative, who demands that we receive anything from the Frederal Government
that we have not authorized the Federal Government to provide - and authorized
the Federal Government to tax ALL of us to provide that service - is to be left
to the States or to the people.
Another favorite double standard, the DNC is pro-choice. But they only apply it
to murdering the unborn.But not to:Being a physician and
choosing NOT to murder the unbornBeing a pharmacist and choosing NOT to
carry abortion pillsand...
If I have two cows, I should give one to you because you have none. If I have
two goats, I should give one to you because you have none. If I have two horses
- stop, you know I have two horses.
Another favorite double standard, the DNC is pro-choice. But they only apply it
to killing the unborn.But not on:Being a physician and
choosing NOT to kill the unbornBeing a pharmacist and choosing NOT to
carry abortion pillsFree speech which is pro-religion or
pro-conservativeOwning the gun of my choiceChoosing the size of my
sodaChoosing my type of light bulbChoosing whether or not to buy
health insuranceAnd a bunch of others the screeners won't let
to Mountanman 9:41 a.m. Jan. 5, 2013Then explain; a bloated DoD,
TSA, DHS, & the Patriot act?
Lost in DC,Thank you for the delicious dose of irony in your last
post:"One could also easily argue that liberals do have one very
solid standard – “everything associated with conservatives is
bad” seems to be their most solid standard."Preceded
by:"one could easily argue liberals have no standards, whatever
suits them at the time is OK"You accused "liberals" of
doing the same thing you yourself did two sentences earlier. Just thought I
would point that out.As far as Mr. Mahas's editorial, you can
find an example of conservatives doing everything he accuses liberals of doing.
It's a deliberately partisan article that ignores practices within his own
political party. That's worth pointing out too.
Can I just suggest that there's not a more pointless exercise on the planet
than to define one's political opponents. "Liberals believe" or
"conservatives believe"; it's all just nonsense. "Well, as
everyone knows, conservatives believe in torturing kittens. As it happens, I
just disagree with that. I think we should gently pet kittens." Really,
what's the point.Liberals and conservatives are mostly reasonable,
intelligent, patriotic people who happen to disagree about policy. And those
disagreements don't necessarily mean we care about the same issues.
Conservatives do actually believe in smaller government. That doesn't mean
liberals believe in larger government. It could mean, for example, that the
size of government is an issue liberals don't care about at all.
Mountanman - I love breaking it to you but no republican/conservative president,
no republican/conservative majority in Congress has ever reduced the size of
government or reduced its intrusive power. Not Nixon. Not Reagan. Not a Bush.
Not the 'Contract On America' crowd. Not the Tea Party faction. None
of them. In fact,they have almost always expanded its powers, costs, and its
deficits, or simply let the status-quo remain (paraphrased from another
site).So you can spout your tired old rhetoric about small(er)
government but when the opportunity is present it just never happens. I am a
Democrat and an LDS one at that but I am also fiscally conservative and a
moderate on most of my views - yep, a rare breed indeed. I have not and do not
buy into any national party platform as I have my own personal platform which I
believe most Americans have their own also. I will not go lock-step with any
party but unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case with many of my
fellow Utahns that think a particular letter defines the individual or themself.
T.G.You are accurate in your description of liberals.But one
could also say you are very inaccurate – in order to have a double of
anything, you need to have the initial one of that thing, and one could easily
argue liberals have no standards, whatever suits them at the time is OK.One could also easily argue that liberals do have one very solid
standard – “everything associated with conservatives is bad”
seems to be their most solid standard.Screwdriver,Gays have no
fewer rights than anyone else. The basis for your argument erroneous.Pragmatist,“guns” on hip protesting Obamacare? Really? More
hyperbole that old man likes to decry, but this time it reflects DNC hate
speech.Hutterite,If you truly are the former, you could not
have done the latter.
But, Ultra Bob, do you think things might just be a whole lot better if we DID
have to account for them?And now, before anyone tries to nail me for
that comment, let me confess that I struggle very hard to avoid them. Trouble
is, I don't always succeed.But anyone who claims to have no
double standards is simply not being truthful.Y'know, it really
is tough being a human sometimes.
@mountainman. Conservatives do not believe in limited government. If they did
they would of not kicked Ron Paul to the curb. Conservatives believe
corporations should have the power of the people. Conservatives believe they
should legislate morals instead of letting people choose for themselves.
Conservatives believe we should occupy the world in the name of self defense.
Other popular double standards people use include those for rich versus poor,
men versus women, black versus white, business versus workers, big versus
little, adults, versus children, God-religious versus Non-God-religious
and a million others. The clear winner at the top of the list seems
to always be rich versus poor. Thank heaven we don’t have to
account for all our double standards.
Spin? Or tell the truth? Can anyone explain exactly why pointing out that the
patriots of the revolution were liberals and Tories were conservatives is
"spinning?"Does truth make conservatives dizzy? Apparently
One old man-Not sure how you come to the conclusion that the tories
were conservatives. They wanted the big bloated government and a king to
provide and protect them. Sounds to me like the liberal of today.The revolutionary patriots wanted government out of the way, there to protect
their rights, not grant them.
These labels being tossed out just don't fit. I'm a conservative who
When conservatives win an election, they like to say they're the most
American, the Patriotic, the most American. They say they will fight and defend
the Constitution.They say States laws supercede Federal law.But when they lose, they call it a fraud and a sham. It's always declared
unconstitutional, illegal or Chicago-style politics. They petition the
Government to secede from the United States of America. They suddenly say States
like Washington and Colorado CAN'T make their own laws. They want Peace and
Start Wars. They want lower taxes and less spending - yet they spend more, and
make ZERO effort to fund it -- creating Nation debt. They say they want
Government out of their lives, but they tell people who they can marry, how
women can take care of themselves, and make laws based on racism.Ya-
there's a Double standard alrighty....but Liberals are hardly the example
One old man: Conservatives have always believed in limited government, always
have, always will and you trying to spin history doesn't change anything!
"When liberals win an election, they like to say it's the voice of the
people."Yeah, so do conservatives. The 2004 presidential and
2010 congressional elections come to mind. What's your point, Mr. Mahas?"But when they lose, it's often declared unconstitutional,
illegal or racist"As opposed to conservatives, who first blamed
the media, then blamed "free stuff" promised to the poor &
minorities, then blamed the American citizenry, then blamed Romney himself for
the 2012 presidential election loss? "When conservatives try to
protect traditional marriage"Banning rights from gays does not
protect traditional marriage. Only heterosexual couples who work to keep
traditional marriages from failing at a rate of 50% can do that. Your marriage
is not threatened by gays."I cry for future generations"When I think of the advances we have made in tolerance and secularism, I
certainly don't. If you want to cry for future generations, do so because
of the resource challenges that are likely to accompany a world with 20 billion
people living on it.
And the tea party, with their guns on hip protesting the Affordable Health Care
Act were what? You know mountainman this whole god gives rights not
government would be funny if it weren't so sad. Where was Rosa Parks god
given right to sit at the front of the bus? Where was my grandmothers god given
right to vote when she turned 21? And by the way try getting a business license
from god. Liberals don't worship government. Government just
is what it is..a secular organization to manage the secular affairs of our
society..that's it..nothing more. Your rants about liberals intentions and
purposes are ridiculous.
Mountanman,I see you found little in the original letter to actually
comment about and just used this as an opportunity to make baseless attacks.Government is God? Well, on criteria that weak I could make the claim
that conservatives believe Money and Guns are their Gods.
Funny thing is that the naughty patriots were indeed LIBERALS. In those days,
the conservatives were called Tories.Sometimes history is downright
inconvenient, isn't it?
T.G. Mahas,Yes, we liberals will continue to fight for social
justice because that is what we do. Your comment about
"protecting traditional marriage" is simply disingenuous. Denying
marriage rights to some does nothing to "protect" those rights for
others. Traditional marriage will be just as it is, if not stronger, by
including everyone who wants and deserves it.
God gives people rights, not the government! At least that is what our founding
fathers believed and wrote a constitution that limits the power of the
government. Liberals think the government is God and thou shalt have no other
Gods before the government! King George really knew what was best for those
naughty patriots didn't he liberals?
I know you won't get it but it's a 180 degree difference to give
rights to people rather than take them away. So you will find a lot
of opposition to keep gays from having rights and liberals will have a lot of
trouble trying to restrict conservatives guns. See, it's not all that
different is it?
Okay, let's try again to please the DN censors.This letter can
equally apply to the reactions of conservatives when something controversial
doesn't go the way they want it to go. Rush and Glenn and others who use
hate radio to stir the masses begin bleating loudly and various conservative
publications editorialize endlessly.Perhaps the real problem is that
Americans on all sides act like spoiled children rather than thinking adults.Could that be the reason why Congress cannot accomplish anything?