Republicans for smaller government? Think again.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 19, 2008 4:26 PM GMT
    An article by Jeannine Aversa and Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press Writers .

    Bush administration wants hundreds of billions, new powers ASAP to attack financial crisis:

    President Bush, flanked by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, acknowledged that the program will put a "significant amount of taxpayers' money on the line."

    The administration is asking Congress to give it sweeping new powers to execute the plan. Paulson said it "needs to be big enough to make a real difference and get to the heart of the problem."

    http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080919/financial_meltdown.html


    I don't know how I feel about about granting president Bush any more powers, especially after the Patriot's Act, which is scary enough on its own. Wouldn't even more power seriously put our rights as U.S. citizens at risk?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 19, 2008 4:29 PM GMT
    I have concerns as to where this might lead, too, as expressed on another thread:

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/289772/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 19, 2008 8:32 PM GMT
    I doubt very much if the US Government had much choice. Why risk a serious global recession because of some nebulous concerns over US citizens "rights". Lack of Government action after the October 1929 stock market crash is partly to blame for the Great Depression of the 1930s.

    Of course the ideal situation would have been to not got into this mess to begin with, but it is too late now. Hopefully lessons have been learned.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 19, 2008 9:34 PM GMT
    SurrealLife saidI doubt very much if the US Government had much choice. Why risk a serious global recession because of some nebulous concerns over US citizens "rights". Lack of Government action after the October 1929 stock market crash is partly to blame for the Great Depression of the 1930s.

    Of course the ideal situation would have been to not got into this mess to begin with, but it is too late now. Hopefully lessons have been learned.


    I agree: citizen rights are nebulous, theoretical concerns that need not interest us. All power to the government, all power to the few at the top, to whom we ordinary citizens are subordinated and humbled.

    The ends justify the means, and if the US has a financial crisis, then to hell with citizens rights if it gets the job done, and saddles individuals with heavy debt they didn't cause. The chronic post-war financial crises in Germany were mostly what brought the Nazis to power, their dictatorial measures welcomed by people who chose a promise of prosperity over freedom. In the end they got neither.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 19, 2008 9:53 PM GMT
    I disagree, government action after the stock market crash of 1929 started this whole mess and it just keeps getting worse. The 16th amendment to the Constitution was a dumb move too. Had the Republicans not passed the Smoot Hawley Tariff act in 1930 the Great Depression would have worked itself out instead of going on a global tour.

    People in the 20s buying stock on margin was similar to people entering into sub-prime mortgages they knew they couldn't repay.

    Then FDR tried to go the USSR route and we're still living with the fallout from that fiasco with the help of LBJ's "Great Society".

    We need to ween ourselves off of government regulation.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 19, 2008 10:28 PM GMT
    John43620 saidI disagree, government action after the stock market crash of 1929 started this whole mess and it just keeps getting worse. The 16th amendment to the Constitution was a dumb move too. Had the Republicans not passed the Smoot Hawley Tariff act in 1930 the Great Depression would have worked itself out instead of going on a global tour.

    People in the 20s buying stock on margin was similar to people entering into sub-prime mortgages they knew they couldn't repay.

    Then FDR tried to go the USSR route and we're still living with the fallout from that fiasco with the help of LBJ's "Great Society".

    We need to ween ourselves off of government regulation.



    First of all, while the Smoot-Hawley act likely contributed to the Great Depression, it is not regulation - its trade protectionism... and would never even be considered in todays world.

    Its widely believed that lack of regulation during the 20s, cheap credit (leading to huge debt) and subsequent inaction by the government (Federal Reserve) to stabilize the banking system were the major causes of the Great Depression http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Depression#Causes.

    HMMM... sound familiar?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 19, 2008 10:35 PM GMT
    RyanReBoRn saidAn article by Jeannine Aversa and Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press Writers .

    Bush administration wants hundreds of billions, new powers ASAP to attack financial crisis:

    President Bush, flanked by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, acknowledged that the program will put a "significant amount of taxpayers' money on the line."

    The administration is asking Congress to give it sweeping new powers to execute the plan. Paulson said it "needs to be big enough to make a real difference and get to the heart of the problem."

    http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080919/financial_meltdown.html


    I don't know how I feel about about granting president Bush any more powers, especially after the Patriot's Act, which is scary enough on its own. Wouldn't even more power seriously put our rights as U.S. citizens at risk?


    Huh???

    "The administration is asking Congress for far-reaching new powers to take over troubled mortgages from banks and other companies, including purchasing sour mortgage-backed securities. Administration officials and congressional leaders are to work out details over the weekend"

    What does that have to do with personal freedoms or the patriot act?... I think you are getting a bit paranoid....
  • SkyMiles

    Posts: 963

    Sep 19, 2008 10:57 PM GMT
    No DOUBT! Republicans want "smaller" government? That's what they always say, but my GOD! The Bush govt declares war at will, spies on it's own citizens en masse without probable cause (or really, ANY cause), created like a dozen new government offices, gags and threatens scientists, funds countless subcontractors (who then kick back to republican political campaigns), and now owns an insurance company and about a million forclosed homes and businesses!!?

    SMALL government? Puh-leeeze! icon_mad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2008 12:05 AM GMT
    daystroom said
    RyanReBoRn saidAn article by Jeannine Aversa and Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press Writers .

    Bush administration wants hundreds of billions, new powers ASAP to attack financial crisis:

    President Bush, flanked by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, acknowledged that the program will put a "significant amount of taxpayers' money on the line."

    The administration is asking Congress to give it sweeping new powers to execute the plan. Paulson said it "needs to be big enough to make a real difference and get to the heart of the problem."

    http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080919/financial_meltdown.html


    I don't know how I feel about about granting president Bush any more powers, especially after the Patriot's Act, which is scary enough on its own. Wouldn't even more power seriously put our rights as U.S. citizens at risk?


    Huh???

    "The administration is asking Congress for far-reaching new powers to take over troubled mortgages from banks and other companies, including purchasing sour mortgage-backed securities. Administration officials and congressional leaders are to work out details over the weekend"

    What does that have to do with personal freedoms or the patriot act?... I think you are getting a bit paranoid....



    Wow, dude. It's called gaining power bit by bit until it's too late for anyone to do anything about it. That's why you bring up the issue of pwer grabs before they become an issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2008 12:13 AM GMT
    daystroom said
    First of all, while the Smoot-Hawley act likely contributed to the Great Depression, it is not regulation - its trade protectionism... and would never even be considered in todays world.

    Its widely believed that lack of regulation during the 20s, cheap credit (leading to huge debt) and subsequent inaction by the government (Federal Reserve) to stabilize the banking system were the major causes of the Great Depression


    Correct. I used to teach US History and Political Science. And if as part of "cheap credit" you include "margin" buying of stocks, then you have identified most of the major causes of the stock market crash in 1929.

    Once again the current crop of Republicans has created, through deregulation, a financial situation that was ripe for unsound exploitation and ultimate collapse. But that's OK in Republicanland: nobody gets held accountable or punished, we're just told to "move on" and pay the bill for the greater public good. Asking for the guilty names is positively un-American in their world.

    Nobody goes to jail, no decision-maker suffers more than a "golden parachute" landing to seek his or her fortune elsewhere. Only the ordinary citizens are left to face the real consequences of the greed and incompetence of the select few whom the Republicans promote & protect, in return for unquestioning political support.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2008 1:02 AM GMT
    The only smaller government republicans have already converted over to libertarians anyways icon_wink.gif
  • SkyMiles

    Posts: 963

    Sep 20, 2008 1:14 AM GMT
    Trance24 saidThe only smaller government republicans have already converted over to libertarians anyways icon_wink.gif


    Babar for President!!

    Oh...Bob Barr?

    Nevermind.

    Oh, Trance, I dig the hat. Just wanted to say 8^)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2008 1:17 AM GMT
    Thanx icon_cool.gif

    Oh and Bob Fart is the reason I'm voting Obama unless McCain pulls some not much expected wonder. I seriously wonder what went across people's minds on Bob's selection. They can kiss goodbye half the newly attracted members, especially the younger ones.

    Ron Paul 2012 icon_cool.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2008 1:21 AM GMT
    It's a joke....an outrage....a farce and big====BIGGER!! True......We need another depression. Could you handle it???
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2008 1:28 AM GMT
    Nope. I don't even have 'real' a job... I'm a student. -.-
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2008 4:55 AM GMT
    Great! So stop listening to your Liberal professors and get some information on your own.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2008 5:44 AM GMT
    Gettingharder saidGreat! So stop listening to your Liberal professors and get some information on your own.


    Ha ha, screw you too.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 20, 2008 12:25 PM GMT
    I agree: citizen rights are nebulous, theoretical concerns that need not interest us. All power to the government, all power to the few at the top, to whom we ordinary citizens are subordinated and humbled.

    I would never say that individual rights are not important, but I think in rare situations the common good should take precedence. The Spanish flu epidemic of 1918-19 was one such situation. What happened last week although painful was probably necessary. A lot of people would have suffered tremendously if the financial system went into a free-fall. Although to be honest I am not clear yet what citizen's rights have been taken away!

    Lack of timely Government action right after the October 1929 stock market crash helped a stock market crisis turn into a global economic crisis. The Government refused to cut interest rates or run a budget deficit, nor did it step in when banks started failing in the hundreds. Couple that with trade protectionism (Smoot-Hawley) and before you knew it unemployment had reached epidemic proportions and the Dow Jones Industrial had lost nearly 90% of its' value.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Sep 20, 2008 12:53 PM GMT
    SurrealLife said

    Lack of timely Government action right after the October 1929 stock market crash helped a stock market crisis turn into a global economic crisis. The Government refused to cut interest rates or run a budget deficit, nor did it step in when banks started failing in the hundreds. Couple that with trade protectionism (Smoot-Hawley) and before you knew it unemployment had reached epidemic proportions and the Dow Jones Industrial had lost nearly 90% of its' value.



    I would endorse what Surreal said there, a few points... Issues really began under the administration of conservative (and I think personally "odd") president Calvin Coolidge. There were a number of farm failures and real issues in the farming community. The environment created during this administration in the mid 1920's allowed for the kind of mess that eventually erupted. I think some of the same has occurred now. Deregulation and atmosphere created under the administration of this idiot has fueled what has occurred here.