1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Democrats Will Never Fix Obamacare

MoreFreedom Wrote: Sep 28, 2014 12:27 PM
Why isn't the GOP leadership supporting and advocating for these bills? Is it because they know Reid will block their bills, or is it because they don't support the bills? Consider John Boehner's actions. These inlcude claiming on his website that "John is leading the fight to fully repeal and defund" Obamcare http://www.johnboehner.com/issue/healthcare, and he got mad at the Tea Party for forcing a vote on funding of Obamacare. The RINOs like Boehner, actually like Obamacare because they believe it will help elect more RINOs. What has the GOP done to increse our freedom since HW Bush? Nothing because they really don't want to, and prefer big government that fattens their wallets and power. They are just lying to conservatives, about being conservative.
Thanks Mr. Fontova, I didn't know of this.
Government statists continue to increase the size of government, while public opinion of our government are near all time lows, and they want to continue growing government, their power and their resulting increase in wealth. Since most in government are big government statists, their campaign strategy is "Vote for me, the other guy is worse, and let me tell you why." At least the Tea Party and libertarians (who aren't in the GOP leadership or RNC) are offering policies that give us more freedom, and as a result, are being attacked by both the Democrats and the RINOs.
Apparently the Republican leadership, has nothing to offer voters, other than they aren't as bad as Obama and the Democrats. They are for what? They vote for more government, more spending, more debt and for war. That's what they offer voters. At least the Tea Party and libertarians in the GOP are for less government and more freedom. But as Rush said, the GOP leadership and RNC are willing to lose a few elections to get rid of the Tea Party. The statists that dominate both parties want them gone - because they threaten the ability of government to steal for the benefit of those in power.
In response to:

Power of Positive Campaigning

MoreFreedom Wrote: Sep 25, 2014 10:34 PM
I disagree with Cushman that Boehner has "been pushing forward with ideas" or that the Republican leadership has supported anything except autopilot spending. Instead, they are busy fighting to keep the Tea Party's ideas from consideration. What are RINOs like Boehner offering except autopilot spending? While Boehner's web site claims he's leading the effort to defund and repeal Obamacare, what has he done except get mad at the Tea Party for forcing a vote on it and voting to fund it? Might as well have a Democrat.
In response to:

Blacks Must Confront Reality

MoreFreedom Wrote: Aug 29, 2014 9:57 AM
Actually, liberals/Democrats/socialists have ALWAYS tried to protect blacks from having to make their own decisions. After all it was Democrats who supported slavery, supported segregation when slavery was abolished against their will, then supporte Jim Crow laws when segregation was abolished against their will. And it's Democrats who support the welfare state that also takes that freedom and responsibility away. It makes sense - the Democrats are racists.
In response to:

Blacks Must Confront Reality

MoreFreedom Wrote: Aug 29, 2014 9:54 AM
Your post sounds like Michael Brown's story. But the media hasn't reported on Michael Brown's family situation, though he had a step-father per http://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/michael-brown-die-ferguson I guess it's no longer politically correct to report such facts. Thanks to Williams for pointing out that avoiding reality won't help them, and going against this liberal/progressive idea of protecting them from reality.
In response to:

Let’s Privatize Medicare

MoreFreedom Wrote: Aug 23, 2014 12:04 PM
David Goldhill, CEO of the Game Show Network, author of "How American Health Care Killed My Father" and life long Democrat, writes: "So even with the government paying almost all of their bills, today's seniors pay a higher share of their income for health care than seniors did before Medicare." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-goldhill/a-democrats-case-for-no_b_502229.html This suggests that just abolishing Medicare would reduce the health costs of those on Medicare - that's how lousy a deal Medicare actually is. Abolishing it might be better than Ryan's privitization plan. While Ryan's plan removes the Medicare bureaucracy from being a competitor in the health insurance marketplace, it doesn't remove the bureaucracy that decides what health insurance plans can or cannot be sold. Nor does it remove the bureaucracy approving who can deliver medical care, and what care they can or cannot deliver. Still it's an improvement, and Ryan deserves our appreciation for delivering a plan that is far more specific, concrete and understandable than Obama's words, and one that would be an improvement.
In response to:

No Facts, No Peace

MoreFreedom Wrote: Aug 22, 2014 9:01 AM
The DOJ doesn't want the facts released from their investigation of the killing of Miriam Carey by the Secret Service and Capitol Hill police. She was a black killed by a white cop, she was unarmed with her child in her car, and was shot in the head by police. She wasn't charged with a crime, with everything caused by the reaction of the police for her inadvertently driving into the White House complex via an entrance thanks to police negligence. The reason Holder doesn't care for this to become news, is it's his police and in a Democrat controlled jurisdiction. http://www.wnd.com/2014/08/slain-moms-family-wheres-holders-outrage-for-us/ And to think the Democrats want a white Democrat prosecutor to step down in Ferguson, because his family has been employed by the police. Isn't this Democrats claiming that a Democrat is racist?
In response to:

Faulty Ideas About Marriage

MoreFreedom Wrote: Aug 19, 2014 11:48 AM
Schlafly uses a libertarian economist to claim "There is simply no basis for that notion [to get government out of marriage] in the works of classic libertarian writers." She would prefer that we ignore the large body of libertarian text that discusses exactly that and which is easy to find: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_perspectives_on_LGBT_rights Plus there are many more - just google "libertarians on marriage". Or the Libertarian party platform which states: "Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships." Schlafly, and social conservatives believe government has the right to jail/fine/penalize those who offend, but do not physically harm, them. For example, doesn't the tax law reward married couples where one stays at home? And doesn't it also reward those who can and do have children at the expense of others? Unfortunately, giving that power to government, also means that liberals can use government to jail/fine/penalize those who offend them, including social conservatives who say, don't want to bake a cake for a wedding of racists or homosexuals. Schlafly, social conservatives, and liberals have a flawed view of government. One in which they want to use government to harm people who aren't like them.
1 - 10 Next