- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
Perhaps Professor de la Paz's solution (Moon is a Harsh Mistress) of having one body whose entire purpose was to repeal laws would be a good idea.
I would like to see a candidate run on repealing/reversing previous presidents' executive actions.
Seeing congress remove/repeal legislation would be much better, but far less likely.
Any real change will have to start with reining in the agencies.
I'd like to see all laws include a sunset provision of, say, five years. That would ensure that 1) Congress stays out of mischief and 2) new legislation would be given a fair chance to see if it works. If it does, re-approve for another five years. If not, it just drifts away without the usual sturm und drang in the halls of government.
So would spooning out our alphabet soup of regulatory departments and agencies.
Trying to protect every species that exists isn't even reasonable science. They come and go all the time.
The IRS can go away before all else.
(That would also erase Obamanationcare.).
It struck me as a great idea.
For the religious folk choosing evil means you are not - for example - a Christian. For the non religious folk it's I was only following orders, I did'n't want to flush my vote. It was the best of bad choices. The first group now they are violating both the Golden Rule and one or more of the Ten Commandments. The Golden Rule I should add is present in everyone of the world's monotheistic religions.Ergo sum they are sinning when they vote for evil.
The others in turn are the Nuremberg Defense which is admission of guilt with a plea for mercy, and two other variations of making excuses and asking to be excused for supporting evil.
A Conservative means someone who makes change slowly as opposed to a liberal who want's it all now. Neither of the two are necessarily left or right wing. they may be left, right, centrist, religious or corporatist.
A Fascist is one who believes in getting their way using any means and usually believes anything they say and do to control the party is perfectly OK. they may be left, right, centrist, religous, or corporatist.
Getting to the heart of the matter - Harry Reid was a registered Democrat. His public face party decidedly left wing. Let's pick on the current President Pro Tem. His or Her party is right wing. In both cases it begs the question. Lett and right wing of what?
Where the rubber meets the road there is little difference.
Look at the terms left and right. Leftists believe in government control of citizens
Right wing means government by divine right or in a secular sense a single group who believes, and have done so since 1776 that citizens alone hold the right to control government.
So what happened? The left picked up the sign marked center which in the case of the USA was the Constitution and moved it to the center of the left.
Democrats are indeed the left wing of the left. Republicans are the right wing OF THE LEFT. Both are more usefully called the Government Party. They have no center, no sacred ground except staying in power, greed, and disregard for the citizens.They represent the looters and the moochers, the war lords and the witch doctors.
Explains Carville's unanswered question some election cycles ago.. Where's the Sacred Ground. He asked it of the Democrats but even he did not look to the Constitution.
So who represents the people? By their choice at the polls the seventy percent who didn't register or if registered didn't vote and a third of those who did vote. The whole thing is about which third of one half of one half or 8.333333% picked up .67 votes. that's point .67 Usually not that close they get three or four percent more and call ten plus percent a landslide and a mandate.
To be nice I'll give their party platform
I alone have the right without explanation to take all of your rights without exception.
The rest is just threats and radical reasoning mostly just forms of The Big Lie. Such as claiming the right to free speech when the subject is buying votes with various forms of money laundering.
Who would be better off with Harry Reid running the Senate? No One except the looters and moochers. Same as before.
I hold the sole right without explanation to take all of your rights without exception.
Sad part is they aren't wrong. Illiterate, Greedy, Evil but they are not wrong.
Doubt me?
Whose going to run on a Citizens Control Government platform?
Anyone who believes they can look you straight in the face and lie - if they are Republican or Democrat
I hold the sole right without explanation to take all of rights without exception.
liberals run the congress and do some damage
there is gridlock and nothing gets done
conservatives run the congress and give us away
if we had gridlock, it would be better than Reid. . or are
the first and second alternatives blended together? -- j
.
The DemReps have to GO.