Previous post
Finally, after months–no, years–of Democratic wrangling, the House of Representatives will vote on whether they should refer the articles of impeachment against Donald Trump to the Senate. This comes amid stories yesterday that the Democrats were now ready to start pushing legislation through Congress before they recess for the holidays. Funny how they haven’t been concerned about doing their jobs until now. Could it be they want the proposed legislation to distract the public from their weak case against Trump? Only time will tell and the question becomes how history will judge the dog-and-pony show that has gone on for far too long.
One thing is certain, no matter what the Dems do, the questions about how we got here will continue. That is especially true after”the chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court [FISC] strongly criticized the FBI over its surveillance-application process.” It should surprise no one that the Carter Page investigation weighed heavily on the judge’s decision. What should bring all of us up short is the fact that this condemnation was made public. The FISA court operates in the shadows, rarely letting the public see what goes on.
How bad must things be that the curtains are being drawn back and what sort of long term ramifications will our country face?
Bad as that is, it is only one aspect of the witch hunt that has gone on at the behest of Democratic leaders since the Electoral College results were announced. They have been after Trump since he won the election. He upset their apple cart and they weren’t going to have it. How much taxpayer money has been spent getting us to the vote today? How much damage have they done to the country in the process.
I’ve stated before that I’m not a huge Trump fan. However, he is miles above what we would have had in the Oval Office had he lost. The Dems whine and whinge about how he has polarized the country when, in reality, the polarization has come from their side of the aisle. It started years ago but Hillary Clinton confirmed it with her “deplorables” comment. It has continued with their classification of Trump supporters as white supremacists, etc.
Helping them along the way has been the media. Even as it wonders why it no longer has the subscriber base it once had, the MSM does its best Pravda and TASS imitation. Here’s an example from the New York Times homepage. This screen cap was taken at 10 pm Central, give or take a few minutes, last night.
Five headlines about the impeachment. Five headlines that are anti-Trump. I long ago quit expecting unbiased reporting, but the Times, not to mention so many others, no longer try to hide the fact they are writing with one goal in mind: to get rid of Trump and bring about a time where only Dems (or socialists) will sit in the Oval Office.
Trump’s letter was, according to the Times, “angry and rambling”.
Also according to the Times, a majority of the House, 219 at the time the article was written, will vote for impeachment. Funny, what we don’t see in the headline above is that there were 172 committed to voting against impeachment. That includes two Dems. There were two, including one Dem, who had yet to make up their minds about how to vote. Thirty-eight had not responded to the Times question. Of that 38, 12 were Democrats. Now, math isn’t my strong suit, but that means the vote very well could be a lot closer than the Dems and the MSM want us to believe.
The Times also tries to swing its readers into believing in the righteousness of impeaching Trump with an opinion piece by Debbie Dingell (D-MI). Dingell has been in the House since 2015. Her late husband, John, was the longest-serving Congressman. She was a super-delegate in 2012. She has been steeped in Democratic political campaigns and causes since her marriage in 1981.
When you read her piece, Dingell comes across, initially at least, as reasonable and thoughtful. Then you get to this little tidbit:
While the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees undertook the job of gathering the facts, House leaders and other committees worked to lower prescription drug prices, protect the environment, restore voting rights to citizens and devise trade deals that level the playing field. . . Each day, after attending my own committee hearings and markups, meetings and events with constituents, I would come home to start my own studies on the impeachment inquiry.
I read testimonies from firsthand witnesses, parsed the majority and dissenting opinions from the committees’ reports and listened to the voices on both sides. I spent weeks reading the Constitution, constitutional scholars, the Federalist Papers and papers from both the Nixon and Clinton impeachment processes.”
First of all, those facts she refers to were carefully cultivated by Schiff and Nadler. Second, while I applaud her for going to her other committee meetings and doing her “homework”, I take issue with her conclusions. She didn’t have all the facts. She didn’t step up and ask her party leaders to allow the Republicans the same ability to call witnesses her own party had. She would have considered the FISA report and the questions it raises into the credibility of some of the so-called evidence. Most of all, she would admit the Dems have been looking for something since the day Trump won.
Dingell isn’t the only Democrat to try to explain why they are voting for impeachment. One of Dingell’s Michigan cohorts, Elissa Slotkin who represents one of the state’s swing districts, appeared at a town hall meeting. To say the audience wasn’t receptive to her explanation is putting it mildly.
Perhaps it is something the Dems should pay attention to . . . not that they will.
If there is any question about the Democrats trying to ramrod the vote through, consider this: today is the first time the entire House will have a chance to debate the two charges against the President as a single body. Will the members of the House be able to fully discuss and debate the issue? Hell no. Once again wielding power to preventany illusion of fairness, “the House Rules Committee on Tuesday voted 9-4 along party lines” to debate for what amounts to six hours.
Six hours to decide an issue as important as the impeachment of a president.
Tell me again that they are looking out for our country and not for their own political ends.
Debbie Dingell writes:
Did President Trump’s actions rise to the level of a threat to our democracy? Yes. Future generations and historians will judge us if we did not address these dangers. I will cast my vote to protect our Constitution, our democratic republic and the future of our country.”
The real threat to our republic is the witch hunt that has been going on since Trump won the election. This has been nothing but an attempt by the Dems to nullify the vote. If you doubt it, remember this: Maxine Waters admits she doesn’t have proof there is any sort of a conspiracy between Trump and Putin but she believes there is one. Apparently, that’s enough for her to vote for impeachment. The House has said it will continue to try to impeach Trump if the Senate fails to act the way they want. This farce has nothing to do with whether or not Trump committed acts that rise to the level of being impeachable offenses.
This has everything to do with the Democrats refusing to accept the results of the last election and doing everything they can to take the vote out of our hands in 2020.
What they are doing is little different from enacting a coup. This one might not be with guns. People may not be dying in the streets. Even so, it is just as dangerous because, if they are allowed to get away with it, no conservative or libertarian president, no politician who isn’t a Democrat, will be safe from similar treatment.
If you want to know who poses the biggest threat to our nation, look to the majority party in the House of Representatives. Look at how they have acted to strip us of our constitutional rights, of our vote. Watch what happens today and speak up. Let your senators know your opinion on the impeachment. Then let your representative know how you felt about their vote. It is time the Democrats understand they are not invincible. This is our country. It is time to take it back.
Welcome, Instapundit Readers!
Featured Image: “Trump’s portraits” by Svetik Petushkova, Andrew Sharapov is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
CaptDMO says: How will history judge?
Sorry but…stupid question.
Who’s writing the history, and who decides which “version” is the approved txt for teaching?
How did “history” judge (eg)Joe McCarthy?
How much of (eg)Cllinton/ Kennedy Family Incorporated antics is doomed to be “inexpedient to prosecuted”
from “history”?
Amanda Green says: I will disagree. It isn’t a stupid question. Not unless you have already thrown in the towel and ceded not only this issue but our country going forward to the liberals. I haven’t. I hope no one else reading this blog has either. We have to step up and take our country back. That is our responsibility. I am ready to do it. Are you?
B Smith says: This line from the congress woman’s editorial caught my eye, “…restore voting rights to citizens…”.
It does not directly have anything to do with impeachment but it highlights how deluded the Democrats are. Can someone, anyone, please point to me when the voting rights of citizens was withdrawn. Is this about voter ID laws in some states?
The same people wringing their hands over this are perfectly comfortable over-turning an election. The Democrats are not interested in voter rights, they are interested in doing whatever is necessary to get and maintain power.
Amanda Green says: The Dems have run with the voting suppression argument so long they actually believe it. They forget the images of Obama supporters patrolling voting places with bats and other weapons—intimidating conservative voters. They claim voter ID laws are aimed at suppressing votes instead of insuring the integrity of the voting place. They ignore how most, if not all, states with voter ID laws in place have either discounted ID cards or ways to vote provisionally without ID. Neither of those options fit the narrative.
Of more concern to me is how the MSM no longer hides the fact it is little more than the propaganda arm of the DNC. Fortunately, we now live in an age where there are alternate news sources. There is still hope for our nation, but it means we have to step up, speak out and vote out those who see no problem taking away our vote or negating it because they don’t like the result.
Scott says: Amanda and B, I will slightly disagree here, the Dems HAVE actually been working (and succeeded in some places) to restore voting rights to citizens. The ones the deluded congresswoman is most likely speaking of would be CONVICTED FELONS! They have been working very hard to restore the ability to vote to this heavily democrat block of individuals… Think about that for a minute..
Amanda Green says: True, but you are leaving out one big “group”, one that could have a serious impact on how our elections turn out–illegal aliens (sorry, undocumented immigrants). There are already municiplaities that allow them to vote. There are certain Dems pushing to give them both state and national voting rights, despite the intention of our Founding Fathers or the danger such action would present to the Republic. If they think Russia interfered in the last election, consider what allowing non-citizens to vote in major elections could do.
GWB says: No, they are illegal aliens. They are aliens (not from here, yet here) and they are here (which makes them aliens) illegally. That makes them <em.illegal aliens.
(I know, you agree, but even snark about it trips my linguistic purity circuits.)
Scott says: Oh, I’m not forgetting at all, I was just addressing my comments to “citizens”.. iIlegals is a whole nother can of worms, but you’re 100% correct, the left is doing it’s best to imort tons of leftist voters from third world shitholes, where they’re already used to being ruled over by their “betters” and as such will have no problem voting for dems, and becoming card carrying members of the Free Shit Army!
Timothy Powell says: It is obvious that you only listen to those non veteran democratic and liberal haters on AM radio and Fox News.
Amanda Green says: If you are referring to me, you are so far off it isn’t funny. I start my day reading not only my local paper but also the NYT, WaPo as well as checking CNN, MSNBC and other outlets. I don’t listen to AM talk radio and rarely listen to Fox News.
Timothy Powell says: Very good, you sound very enlightening.Maybe I misunderstood you. I apologize for my comment.
Timothy Powell says: If Obama supporters are walking around with bats and weapons to intimidate voters, this is something Trump would agree with since he has said many times in the past “knock the crap out of them”.
Scott says: Like the Black Panthers outside the polls in Philadelphia that Eric Holder ignored? Yeah, seen that before.
Timothy Powell says: Oh what you really mean is angry whites going into black neighborhoods during the Jim Crow era lynching innocent blacks, destroying black businesses and burning down their homes just to satisfy their jealousy of blacks trying to get ahead.
I know you knew that this was a regular thing going on in America since the 1880s up and until about the 1970s. 90 years of blacks being victimized by white violence. This history shows that the whites invented the riot. It was the Ku Klux Klan in America who invented terrorism. It was they who taught the terror over there in the middle east on how to be terrors. Even Hitler was influenced by American white Supremacist. Please understand, I am not against white America. The past is the past and there is nothing anyone can do about it today to change it. My point is whites have a tendency to forget things like this.
And as far as the Black Panthers are concerned it was originally an organization started in the 1960s by young blacks in their neighborhoods to do good and protect their neighbors from police brutality and the crime that they we’re not responding to end there neighborhoods. It was whites who felt that the black panthers were a threat. This is because when they (The Panthers) were present in the black neighborhoods white police officers couldn’t come in and beat up blacks men whenever they felt like it. Now just imagine if you were black. Wouldn’t you want the Panthers to be around instead of the Ku Klux Klan marching through your neighborhood without any protection.
One more thing, there were no Black Panthers during the Obama administration.
Scott says: Well, you are correct about the things the democrat founded KKK did, and their fears / goals. As to the founding of the Black Panthers, you’re partially right, though they were also founded very much on Black Liberation Theory, a Marxist attack on anything white, so they were NEVER really the “good guys”..
As to you last statement, that’s PROVABLY FALSE! .. as a 3 second search would have shown you. But you knew that.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/nov/6/problems-black-panthers-surface-pa-polling-places/
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/07/12/team_obama_turns_blind_eye_to_voter_intimidation_106267.html
GWB says: This history shows that the whites invented the riot.
Okey-dokey. No longer giving you the benefit of the doubt. You’re incredibly mixed-up and ignorant.
You should probably spend more time reading this blog. You would definitely learn a lot – from the ladies and from the commenters.
Timothy Powell says: I see you called me ignorant and mixed up, but you could never be sure that what I sat is true. Whites in America in history has always Felt like they can go into black neighborhoods and do all kinds a harm and destruction. And whenever this went on it was never to be reported in the news. Most America history has been written by Whites. And whenever they write something how about whites it is shown to be positive and good. Whenever they write something about blacks it is negative. The black panthers were not robbers and murderers or anything else that we think as being bad. People never think about why J Edgar Hoover and the FBI made war on the black panthers? The FBI and the media at the time created a narrative that the black panthers were bad because they were young black men who carry and displayed guns in their neighborhood. Today whites consider that defending the Second Amendment. Don’t ever think that the Ku Klux Klan when they went through black neighborhoods destroying everything they didn’t do it by the method of the riots. Remember the Ku Klux Klan terrorist organization goes all the way back to the ending of the Civil War started by the Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest. In that time you could not tell me that nowhere else in world history that sort of thing went on.
GWB says: Yep, you’re an idiot marxist, believing Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky. My assessment is confirmed.
Orangemanbad says: The universities are ground zero for leftism, and history along with it. History will lie, lie, lie because that’s what leftism does. “Truth is not a left wing value, “ as Dennis Prager says. I see no effort to either take back the existing institutions that are corrupted or to create news ones to replace the dead ones, therefore history will applaud the Democrats.
Amanda Green says: So let me ask you this. Do we sit still and let this slide into socialism continue or do we fight? Just because you aren’t seeing a pushback doesn’t mean we shouldn’t start–or continue–the fight. That’s one reason why this blog exists. Conservatives need to let their voices be heard. We need to make sure our votes count and we need to fight back when the liberals work to strip us of our constitutional rights. If we don’t, then we have only ourselves to blame for whatever happens because we were complicit in our inaction.
Timothy Powell says: Those who believe that higher education is infested with liberals and leftist ideas are bound to stay ignorant. I hope (if you are a parent) that you are not trying to encourage your children to not get a college education for fear of them being contaminated by liberal and leftist ideas.
Whenever you listen to Dennis Prager (who is college-educated) on the radio, remember this, he is getting paid to say whatever the station wants him to say.
I have no respect for anyone who talks patriotism and love for country when they never worn the uniform to defend it. This is what I think of when I hear Dennis Prager‘s name.
Nina Bookout says: If I understand you correctly, you are saying that radio personalities such as Dennis Prager, aren’t credible because they didn’t serve in the military.
By your standards, doesn’t that mean any conservative radio hosts or writers who DIDN’T serve in the military have no credibility among conservatives?
Timothy Powell says: I know that there are some conservatives who have served there country. This is OK with me. They are not the ones I’m referring to. I am only referring to those AM radio haters. I do not know all their names. I do know, they all have one thing in common, none of them have ever worn the uniform of the US military. What I’m really trying to say is none of them have any business judging others on their love of country unless they were willing to serve that country and fight for it themselves. It is crude for me to say that they have a lot of mouth and no guts. It may be too late for them to prove otherwise but it is so. I volunteered to join the US Army. And during that time it was the Vietnam war.
GWB says: And you’re absolutely totally wrong on the idea that people who have not served in the military are not patriots or should not judge who IS a patriot. TOTALLY wrong.
Veteran, son of a veteran, husband of a veteran, cousin to numerous veterans, nephew to multiple veterans (one of whom was one of the very few to walk down off Hamburger Hill), grandson to a veteran, friend of veterans, work with veterans, work with active duty.
So, no, you’re WRONG.
Timothy Powell says: . I agree with what you are saying. But I am not referring to just anyone who didn’t serve. I am only referring to those haters on the radio who likes to criticize others patriotism. They are wrong to do that because no one knows where anyone’s heart is on the subject. They feel like they can question others. This is wrong . Here is an example of what I mean. Candidate for president Donald Trump looked pretty silly talking about he didn’t like people who got Captured. And how he had the nerve to questioning John McCain‘s patriotism. A comment like that can only come from somebody who didn’t serve. It was disgusting to see swift boat actors on TV who never served lie about John Carrie service. It is easy for them to talk about patriotism but it is not so easy when they have to put their own lives on the line for their country. These haters on the AM radio are repeating this kind of rhetoric from Trump and the conservatives. For veterans like myself and the ones who didn’t come home, there mothers, there sons and daughters, there wives and there husbands, I can respect their thoughts and opinions.
My brother and I are veterans and both of us are disabled. my father was a World War II veteran and both of my grandfathers were veterans and the veteran history in my family go all the way back to the buffalo soldiers and the Civil War.
I apologize for getting carried away here.
GWB says: because no one knows where anyone’s heart is on the subject
Bullhockey. I can tell by their statements and their actions.
A comment like that can only come from somebody who didn’t serve.
Well, it came from plenty of people who DID serve. So, you’re wrong.
swift boat actors on TV who never served lie about John Carrie service
Bullhockey. The folks criticizing him were the very people who served with him. (And “John Carrie”? Really? *eyeroll*)
These haters on the AM radio are repeating this kind of rhetoric from Trump and the conservatives.
You keep rolling these folks together in a way that tells me you don’t have any idea what those people believe/advocate.
Tmo P tepowell55@gmail.comTiTi P says: The only thing I have to say to you is I served and defended this country. I would assume you didn’t serve but if you had server you would understand where I’m coming from.
GWB says: I am STILL serving.
And, no, the stuff you’re spouting has nothing to do with your service and everything to do with a weak mind and crappy sources of information.
Scott says: My grandfathers were both very much patriots, though neither wore a uniform. One tried to enlist, but was classified 4-F due to an injury sustained as a kid working on the farm. The other wasn’t allowed to enlist because he was a math teacher, and the govt felt he was more valuable in that role, though he did spend his weekends as a coast watcher at the Jersey shore. If you don’t have respect for either of those gentlemen, or others like them, then your opinion doesn’t mean much…
As a parent, I have one child who was contaminated by leftist ideas at college, and no longer talks to me. The other is much more intelligent, and he’s gone to a trade school where he learned a valuable skill instead of being indoctrinated in liberal ideals.
And before you ask, yes, I do have a college degree, which i got after serving in the army, so when i went to a brick and mortar school, I knew enough to ignore the indoctrination crap, and when I finally found an online school that caters to veterans and those in Public Safety, none of the professors tried to pull such crap.
So all that being said, I dare you to question the patriotism of my grandfathers, or the intelligence of me or my son. you’d be flat wrong on all counts.
Amanda Green says: So, by your own words, you have no respect for someone who is unable to “wear the uniform” when it comes to their patriotism. Wow, really broad-minded of you. I didn’t know you had to wear the uniform to love this country.
GWB says: That’s only generally true of countries where everyone has to wear a uniform. *cou-Mao’s China-gh*
GWB says: I read testimonies from firsthand witnesses
Funny, based on the witnesses the Dems called, it was all second-hand testimony. So you’re either a liar or an ignorant dupe.
I spent weeks reading the Constitution, constitutional scholars, the Federalist Papers and papers from both the Nixon and Clinton impeachment processes.
THERE! There it is! I knew this would pop up after that little dustup about the photog! Though, she doesn’t mention the Bible – strategic or forgot?
Tell me again that they are looking out for our country and not for their own political ends.
Well, they are also looking to get home before Christmas break.
Did President Trump’s actions rise to the level of a threat to our democracy?
You keep using those words. I don’t think those words mean what you think they mean.
I will cast my vote to protect our Constitution
BULLSHIT.
nothing to do with whether or not Trump committed acts that rise to the level of being impeachable offenses crimes, or even unethical
the biggest threat to our nation, look to the majority party in the House of Representatives
Well, to be fair, there’s also an awful lot of the minority party who have also been more interested in turning our country into a technocracy than in protecting the Constitution and our freedoms.
Amanda Green says: Yep, on all points. However, to your last, they are the lesser of two evils, in my mind, compared to the Dems who actively hate what our nation stands for, the foundations upon which it is built and the rights we are guaranteed. They seem determined to force us into civil war. I honestly believe they think we will roll over and let them turn this into the USSA. The only question is if we, as Conservatives and Libertarians, will stand by and let them do so. I pray we, at least, have learned from history and know that is not a road we want to go down.
GWB says: My problem is that I think they are the more insidious of two evils, looking as if they are pro-republic, all the while merely slowing our descent into the pit of totalitarianism.
If you enable the socialists (and compromising when the only movement is toward the left, IS enabling), then you are just as guilty as the socialists, themselves.
Timothy Powell says: President Trump is already trying to turned his country into a new USSR. Since he is so in love with Putin and Kim and the way they does things over there, I believe former President Ronald Reagan will turn over in his grave . Remember President Reagan described Russia as the evil Empire. I wonder what President Reagan would say if he was still alive today knowing that a republican president has become a Putin puppet.
GWB says: *facepalm*
What a jumble of misstatements. Across all four of your comments.
Oy vey.
Kevin says: Here’s the one thing true about any action Congress takes (whether lead by the Republicans or Democrats) … if the facts aren’t on your side, create a smoke screen and talk about the “flawed process.”
GWB says: The problem with your “centrism”, Kevin, is that there is a truth. In this case it most certainly does not support the Dem’s approach to the process. The facts are on the side of the Republicans and Trump.
Unless, of course, you live in an alternate universe, like so many anti-Trumpers.
(Oh, and, of course, there’s also the issue of Dems complaining about constitutional, legal and institutional processes that have been in place for a loooooong time, and the Repubs complaining about the other side making shit up as they go in the fashion of ends-justify-the-means. Yeah, one of those is clearly more flawed than the other, in any rational comparison.)
Timothy Powell says: Saying that the Congress is an “action Congress” can be considered a complement since they are the branch who makes the laws. Remember this the congress is the only branch of government that is directly elected by the people and the closest to the people.
The president is elected by the states known as the electoral college. This is why in the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton who receives 3 million more votes than Trump did not win. It’s funny that I hear all the time Republicans are saying Trump receives 63 million votes. When will they remind the people of our country that Hillary Clinton receive 65 million votes. This alone shows you that the president is not elected by the people. The people elect members of Congress and the states elect the president. Finally a third branch of government has no connection with the people at all since the judges on the Supreme Court are appointed by the president who is elected by the states.
GWB says: Since you’re talking about a government that is at the federal level, that’s how it’s supposed to be. It’s supposed to be a government of the states.
BTW, he didn’t call them an “action Congress”. He said “any action [that] Congress takes.” The “that” I put in there is unnecessary for proper grammar, but is allowed for clarity.
Subotai Bahadur says: How will history judge? If the enemy wins, their histories will praise themselves and glorify the . . . elimination of the anti-social elements, racists, and rightist deviationists in the camps. If we win, given the fact that we are beyond legal, constitutional, and non-violent means to change things in all likelihood; we will be doing the equivalent.
When the entire Federal Law Enforcement apparatus, much of the Intel apparatus, the courts, the Federal civil service, and much of the Congress in both parties deliberately ignore the law and Constitution and are subservient to the Democrats seeking the establishment of a one-party dictatorship; you reach a point where we are not one people or country anymore and the matter of who rules is decisive and irrevocable.
[…] Of Christmas, Day 7 This Ain’t Hell: Haste Makes Waste, also, Wednesday FGS Victory Girls: How Will History Judge Democrats’ Impeachment Antics Volokh Conspiracy: Court Rules Federal Flooding Of Homes During Hurricane Harvey Is A Taking, also, […]
JohnS says: History is written by the winners. So . . . A turning point when great heroes defeated evil white supremacy! Unfortunately, out of sheer malice the evil white supremacists sabotaged our economy before they were defeated and that’s why you live in poverty now.
Timothy Powell says: It was not the white supremacist who sabotage our country. Our country’s economics is being sabotaged by the greedy rich. By saying this, I do not mean all those who are rich. I do believe in capitalism. Some of the rich is very compassionate and understands how they got there by making there fortunes. It is the greedy rich through the means of the political process has use the race card to suede whites against nonwhites for the control of government. I called this divide and conquer. Their main goal is to turn our democracy into an oligarchy. Why are conservatives so angry all the time? In the past generation the conservatives has enjoy control of government more than liberals ever had. But yet they are still angry and believes nothing is getting done. This is because the people they are voting in office are not for gun rights, Christian values or the right to life. They are only for how much money they can get out of your pockets to their pockets. And I mean the pockets of those who do not have much. For example, justice Cavanaugh was not chosen by President Trump because of his views on abortion. He was chosen by him (the president) because of his views on the rights of the Corporations and big business to screw everybody else.
Most white supremacist or any kind of supremacist based on race are poor and powerless to change the fabric of our country.
GWB says: In the past generation the conservatives has enjoy control of government more than liberals ever had.
Progressive control of gov’t began in the early 1900s. It hasn’t relinquished that control very often over the last century. The last generation hasn’t seen any conservatives in control of our gov’t. (Define “generation as 20 years and you get Clinton, Bush, 0bama, with Bush being a northeastern liberal. Define it as 40 years and you get Reagan in there, who was more conservative than Trump, but Congress was still primarily progressive. Congress has been Big Gov’t for just about that entire run.)
Timothy Powell says: Everybody likes big government. Conservatives, liberals Democrats and Republicans all like what big government has to offer . If the government was small there would be no Social Security, no Medicare or Medicaid. And most of all there would not be any unemployment, welfare or food stamps for those who don’t have enough to eat. Those who do not like panhandlers and people begging on the streets , if the government was small there would be a lot more of them all over the place. Tell me now, who among you would rather have it that way?
By your statement, I should believe that big government solves the problems of shelter, sustenance, and all the ills of society. If this is the case, what size government is required to eradicate homelessness? California has a budget that outranks most nations. A very generous welfare system as well. Their homeless population is estimated to be in excess of 300,000 people. If BIG government is the solution to every problem, CA should be void of panhandlers etc.
Federal tax dollars should be spent only on federal interests. I don’t want my federal taxes underwriting the poor legislative choices in CA. If I wanted to support CA legislative decisions, I’d live there. I don’t, yet my dollars go there. I’m fine paying taxes that support the military, border patrol, coast guard, and national interests. But welfare, jobs programs, state insurance programs…. that’s a states right to govern as they see fit. They need to fund it without my federal taxes.
Small federal is the way to go. If a state wants to have big government… so be it. Their citizens can stay or leave as they see fit.
Scott says: Agree across the board NC (other than allowing liberals to leave California.. they made the mess, they need to live in it! (they’ve already trashed Colorado)..
As to “bg government” being to cure for all ills as Mr. Powell suggests, I’d counter with these words from the esteemed Mr. Crockett…https://www.constitution.org/cons/crockett.htm
Timothy Powell says: Why are Republicans and conservatives lawmakers are always talking about cutting taxes? If you want clean water to drink, good schools for your children’s education, your garbage picked up once a week, police protection, fire protection, a strong military and whatever else you may want that I did mention, pay your taxes and don’t complain.
Your statement, ” If you want clean water to drink, good schools for your children’s education, your garbage picked up once a week, police protection, fire protection, a strong military and whatever else you may want that I did mention, pay your taxes and don’t complain.”
is nonsense.
Federal tax dollars
clean water to drink (EPA), a strong military (DoD)
State tax dollars
??? Nohting you listed falls under this
Local/County Property tax dollars
good schools for your children’s education (local property taxes), police protection, fire protection (again, property taxes at the county level or city level)
Not funded by taxes
your garbage picked up once a week (individual contract, HOA. Not always a city/county function. But if deemed so, usually billed with trash/sewer by the city. NOT tax funded)
I do pay my taxes. To the tune of about $30,000 this year, just to federal. I don’t get the child tax credit, I don’t get to deduct my rental property losses because we make too much money. On top of that $30,000 I paid local taxes and property taxes to the tune of about $25,000 (No state income tax, but hella high property tax. See that “good schools” comment you made).
Meanwhile, someone who paid $500 but gets a refund of $1500 due to EIC, Child Credit etc is complaining that “tax breaks for the rich are wrong!” REALLY?! My taxes literally pay for someone else to get a refund three times what was deducted from their paycheck. All of which they had returned.
I feel as though I’ve paid a sufficient amount to complain.
You really want to hear complaining? Ask me about the FASFA and how being a responsible parent who planned for my kids to go to college (even if it is a sadly underfunded 529) will net me a 100% financial responsibility for my kid’s college tuition. Meanwhile, politicians want to give it away for free to people who made different, and often less responsible choices.
50 Comments