"Pledge to America" Unveiled by Republicans

[Nobunaga]

Highlights:

Jobs:

- Stop job-killing tax hikes

- Allow small businesses to take a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their income

- Require congressional approval for any new federal regulation that would add to the deficit

- Repeal small business mandates in the new health care law.


Cutting Spending:

- Repeal and Replace health care

- Roll back non-discretionary spending to 2008 levels before TARP and stimulus (will save $100 billion in first year alone)

- Establish strict budget caps to limit federal spending going forward

- Cancel all future TARP payments and reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac


Reforming Congress:

- Will require that every bill have a citation of constitutional authority

- Give members at least 3 days to read bills before a vote


Defense:

- Provide resources to troops

- Fund missile defense

- Enforce sanctions in Iran

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html

... Any thoughts?

[edocsil]

Well I know which side of things I desire to vote for. Hopefully my local republican is a total wackjob like some highlighted here.

[Simon Viavant]

The "do nothing" approach.
Good to know.

[Night Strike]

Doing nothing is better than doing the things that took place over the past 2 years. But those ideas clearly aren't "doing nothing". They're trying to get the government out of the way of people and businesses so the economy can grow.

[Simon Viavant]

Doing nothing is better than doing the things that took place over the past 2 years. But those ideas clearly aren't "doing nothing". They're trying to get the government out of the way of people and businesses so the economy can grow.

If their plan for running the government is "getting the government out of the way", then that is indeed doing nothing.

[bradleybadly]

Well I know which side of things I desire to vote for. Hopefully my local republican is a total wackjob like some highlighted here.

Agreed

There's nothing in the Pledge To America that addresses masturbation or regulation of witchcraft. Democrats will increase their numbers easily this election year.

[Night Strike]

Doing nothing is better than doing the things that took place over the past 2 years. But those ideas clearly aren't "doing nothing". They're trying to get the government out of the way of people and businesses so the economy can grow.

If their plan for running the government is "getting the government out of the way", then that is indeed doing nothing.

Because the government should NOT be doing what they have been doing.

[CouchSerf]

Meaningless, hollow pandering. Each pledge is without any real substance, and a few are even outright hypocritical (decrying the Healthcare-Industrial Complex while implying that they don't mind dropping billions on the Military-Industrial Complex, for instance).

f*ck these fascists and their empty rhetoric.

[spurgistan]

Highlights:

Jobs:

- Stop job-killing tax hikes

- Allow small businesses to take a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their income

- Require congressional approval for any new federal regulation that would add to the deficit

- Repeal small business mandates in the new health care law.


Cutting Spending:

- Repeal and Replace health care

- Roll back non-discretionary spending to 2008 levels before TARP and stimulus (will save $100 billion in first year alone)

- Establish strict budget caps to limit federal spending going forward

- Cancel all future TARP payments and reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac


Reforming Congress:

- Will require that every bill have a citation of constitutional authority

- Give members at least 3 days to read bills before a vote


Defense:

- Provide resources to troops

- Fund missile defense

- Enforce sanctions in Iran

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html

... Any thoughts?

So, they're gonna do the exact same thing they did throughout the 2000's? Does long-term memory still exist in this country?

[tkr4lf]

Doing nothing is better than doing the things that took place over the past 2 years. But those ideas clearly aren't "doing nothing". They're trying to get the government out of the way of people and businesses so the economy can grow.

If their plan for running the government is "getting the government out of the way", then that is indeed doing nothing.

Look, I'm no fan of the republicans (or the democrats, for that matter), but I think anything that will reduce the size of government (eg. get government "out of the way") is a good thing. We are quickly becoming a European Social Welfare State. Which I really don't think is good. America was always about personal responsibility, individualism, that kind of thing. This may not be the best solution, but it certainly moves us forward a little, I think.

[DangerBoy]

So, they're gonna do the exact same thing they did throughout the 2000's? Does long-term memory still exist in this country?

Huh?

There was no Obama healthcare reform act to repeal throughout the 2000s. There was no TARP program until 3 months left in Bush's term. How could they have canceled payments from a program which didn't even exist? Republicans are hardly promising to do the same things they did in the 2000s. Doing the things they did in the 2000s got them fired in 2006. You're either purposely in denial or not remembering the past decade.

[Phatscotty]

Government! Get out of the way!!!

Let me keep more of what I earn, and I will start a new business tomorrow morning, and hopefully create one job, maybe 2. I already know what I would do, I just need to earn/keep a little bit more

[CouchSerf]

Government! Get out of the way!!!

Let me keep more of what I earn, and I will start a new business tomorrow morning, and hopefully create one job, maybe 2. I already know what I would do, I just need to earn/keep a little bit more

Letting you keep "more" of what you earn is all you want?

Fucking weak, man. Why not take everything you've earned? Why not abolish all of the market entry barriers that prevent the working class from becoming independent, self-employed contractors?

[ViperOverLord]

Highlights:

Jobs:

- Stop job-killing tax hikes

- Allow small businesses to take a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their income

- Require congressional approval for any new federal regulation that would add to the deficit

- Repeal small business mandates in the new health care law.


Cutting Spending:

- Repeal and Replace health care

- Roll back non-discretionary spending to 2008 levels before TARP and stimulus (will save $100 billion in first year alone)

- Establish strict budget caps to limit federal spending going forward

- Cancel all future TARP payments and reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac


Reforming Congress:

- Will require that every bill have a citation of constitutional authority

- Give members at least 3 days to read bills before a vote


Defense:

- Provide resources to troops

- Fund missile defense

- Enforce sanctions in Iran

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html

... Any thoughts?

So, they're gonna do the exact same thing they did throughout the 2000's? Does long-term memory still exist in this country?

I agree. We can't simply do 'nothing.' We need to continue on our way to bankruptcy. I also see nothing in here about being pro masturbation and so I just don't know what they expect to accomplish.

[Phatscotty]

Government! Get out of the way!!!

Let me keep more of what I earn, and I will start a new business tomorrow morning, and hopefully create one job, maybe 2. I already know what I would do, I just need to earn/keep a little bit more

Letting you keep "more" of what you earn is all you want?

Fucking weak, man. Why not take everything you've earned? Why not abolish all of the market entry barriers that prevent the working class from becoming independent, self-employed contractors?

because, that isn't realistic and therefore a waste of time. I try to focus on the possible

[CouchSerf]

Government! Get out of the way!!!

Let me keep more of what I earn, and I will start a new business tomorrow morning, and hopefully create one job, maybe 2. I already know what I would do, I just need to earn/keep a little bit more

Letting you keep "more" of what you earn is all you want?

Fucking weak, man. Why not take everything you've earned? Why not abolish all of the market entry barriers that prevent the working class from becoming independent, self-employed contractors?

because, that isn't realistic and therefore a waste of time. I try to focus on the possible

So you're not actually a principled person.

At least we cleared that up.

[BigBallinStalin]

Government! Get out of the way!!!

Let me keep more of what I earn, and I will start a new business tomorrow morning, and hopefully create one job, maybe 2. I already know what I would do, I just need to earn/keep a little bit more

Letting you keep "more" of what you earn is all you want?

Fucking weak, man. Why not take everything you've earned? Why not abolish all of the market entry barriers that prevent the working class from becoming independent, self-employed contractors?

because, that isn't realistic and therefore a waste of time. I try to focus on the possible

So you're not actually a principled person.

At least we cleared that up.

Come on now. He may not believe in your principles, but Phatscotty certainly has a point given his circumstances. Sure, abolishing all of the market entry barriers that prevent the working class from becoming independent, self-employed contractors would be a great idea, but will it happen anytime soon? Of course not. So what would you suggest?

[CouchSerf]

Government! Get out of the way!!!

Let me keep more of what I earn, and I will start a new business tomorrow morning, and hopefully create one job, maybe 2. I already know what I would do, I just need to earn/keep a little bit more

Letting you keep "more" of what you earn is all you want?

Fucking weak, man. Why not take everything you've earned? Why not abolish all of the market entry barriers that prevent the working class from becoming independent, self-employed contractors?

because, that isn't realistic and therefore a waste of time. I try to focus on the possible

So you're not actually a principled person.

At least we cleared that up.

Come on now. He may not believe in your principles, but Phatscotty certainly has a point given his circumstances. Sure, abolishing all of the market entry barriers that prevent the working class from becoming independent, self-employed contractors would be a great idea, but will it happen anytime soon? Of course not. So what would you suggest?

It isn't that he believes in my principles, it is that he is inconsistent. Insisting that government get at of his way with posturing while confirming that he only looks to take it so far and not follow through on his rhetoric is an indication of some sort of internal inconsistency from his espoused rhetoric and his actual views.

I'm not trying to beat up on the guy, but I just think his posturing is meaningless and he shouldn't delude himself with it.

[BigBallinStalin]

Ah, now I understand your view, but based on my history with this Phatscotty character, I've assumed that his perspecitve is something like this: "Move, government, get out the way, get out the way--but OH OH OH WAIT a minute! ... There! You stick around, but don't get in the way of everything."

[ViperOverLord]

Ah, now I understand your view, but based on my history with this Phatscotty character, I've assumed that his perspecitve is something like this: "Move, government, get out the way, get out the way--but OH OH OH WAIT a minute! ... There! You stick around, but don't get in the way of everything."

Even if your analysis is spot on, I'll take that over what we have, which is the government thinking they are more important than the individual.

[BigBallinStalin]

Ah, now I understand your view, but based on my history with this Phatscotty character, I've assumed that his perspecitve is something like this: "Move, government, get out the way, get out the way--but OH OH OH WAIT a minute! ... There! You stick around, but don't get in the way of everything."

Even if your analysis is spot on, I'll take that over what we have, which is the government thinking they are more important than the individual.

Well, let's not mistaken my views with Phatscotty's, but I've got some questions for ya:

Do you think the current way the American people are governed could be improved?

If yes, then please tell me. If no, then what's so fine and dandy with the current rules of the game?

[CouchSerf]

Ah, now I understand your view, but based on my history with this Phatscotty character, I've assumed that his perspecitve is something like this: "Move, government, get out the way, get out the way--but OH OH OH WAIT a minute! ... There! You stick around, but don't get in the way of everything."

Which makes him at best a vulgar libertarian. I honestly find it amusing that he parades around calling himself a libertarian, but when it actually comes to the principles of libertarianism, he openly states that he finds his own views unrealistic.

Phatscotty, this isn't meant to be a rag, by the way. I think you're very well intentioned from what I have seen, but I do think maybe a bit more immersion in the literature of thin and thick libertarianism would do you wonders for your views.

Ah, now I understand your view, but based on my history with this Phatscotty character, I've assumed that his perspecitve is something like this: "Move, government, get out the way, get out the way--but OH OH OH WAIT a minute! ... There! You stick around, but don't get in the way of everything."

Even if your analysis is spot on, I'll take that over what we have, which is the government thinking they are more important than the people.

Coming from you, this is meaningless. Again, using the rhetoric of liberty without accepting the actual premises or implied consequences is an exercise in self-contradiction.

[BigBallinStalin]

Ah, now I understand your view, but based on my history with this Phatscotty character, I've assumed that his perspecitve is something like this: "Move, government, get out the way, get out the way--but OH OH OH WAIT a minute! ... There! You stick around, but don't get in the way of everything."

Which makes him at best a vulgar libertarian. I honestly find it amusing that he parades around calling himself a libertarian, but when it actually comes to the principles of libertarianism, he openly states that he finds his own views unrealistic.

From what I remember, he's a moderate libertarian. Does that deserve to be called "vulgar," good sir?

[tkr4lf]

When speaking of libertarians, one must be careful to not assume too much. Not all libertarians agree on everything. And not all who identify as libertarian agree with the official platform of the Libertarian Party. Just like the democratic and republican parties, there are rifts in the libertarian party.

[CouchSerf]

Ah, now I understand your view, but based on my history with this Phatscotty character, I've assumed that his perspecitve is something like this: "Move, government, get out the way, get out the way--but OH OH OH WAIT a minute! ... There! You stick around, but don't get in the way of everything."

Which makes him at best a vulgar libertarian. I honestly find it amusing that he parades around calling himself a libertarian, but when it actually comes to the principles of libertarianism, he openly states that he finds his own views unrealistic.

From what I remember, he's a moderate libertarian. Does that deserve to be called "vulgar," good sir?

Perhaps I should explain what I mean by "vulgar" libertarian. This perversion (kinder folk would call it a school) of libertarianism has inscribed on its banner the reactionary watchword: "Them pore ole bosses need all the help they can get." For every imaginable policy issue, the good guys and bad guys can be predicted with ease, by simply inverting the slogan of Animal Farm: "Two legs good, four legs baaaad." In every case, the good guys, the sacrificial victims of the Progressive State, are the rich and powerful. The bad guys are the consumer and the worker, acting to enrich themselves from the public treasury. As one of the most egregious examples of this tendency, consider Ayn Rand's characterization of big business as an "oppressed minority," and of the Military-Industrial Complex as a "myth or worse." The ideal "free market" society of such people, it seems, is simply actually existing capitalism, minus the regulatory and welfare state: a hyper-thyroidal version of nineteenth century robber baron capitalism, perhaps; or better yet, a society "reformed" by the likes of Pinochet, the Dionysius to whom Milton Friedman and the Chicago Boys played Aristotle.

Moreover, vulgar libertarian apologists for capitalism use the term "free market" in an equivocal sense: they seem to have trouble remembering, from one moment to the next, whether they’re defending actually existing capitalism or free market principles. So we get the standard boilerplate article arguing that the rich can’t get rich at the expense of the poor, because "that’s not how the free market works"--implicitly assuming that this is a free market. When prodded, they’ll grudgingly admit that the present system is not a free market, and that it includes a lot of state intervention on behalf of the rich. But as soon as they think they can get away with it, they go right back to defending the wealth of existing corporations on the basis of "free market principles."