Who's the bigger threat to your personal freedoms?

[NETim]

Which faction do you feel is the biggest threat to your personal freedoms?



Tim

 

[Rman]

strap in... here we go!

 

[Gray Ghost]

I'm ready. Love fast horses, women and cars.

 

[NETim]

Whaaat??

Originally posted by rhickman

strap in... here we go!

What do you mean? This is just an innocent research question. Would I try to stir up trouble?



Tim

 

[mcoleman]

Guns, fast horses, fast cars, fast trucks, the ability to ride my horses on all of the National forest property, more money in my paycheck instead of supporting gov mandated care for the useless and lazy etc... . Uh-huh

 

[Hummerchick]

Hate rules and laws, I rather get what I can out of life instead of being told you can't do that or it's against the law... More freedom, more fun to enjoy life, NO MORE TAXES!!Oo.

 

[illflem]

No vote from me

Should have been one more choice, extremes of either

 

[fest3er]

Originally posted by illflem
Should have been one more choice, extremes of either

You forgot 'Both', too. A reasonable and fair balance of the two usually works out best.

N

 

[John]

I figured that once I voted and viewed the poll results it would show something like the biggest threat being liberals (i. e. , dirty little liberal lemmings as Michael Savage says). But noooo, looks like there are far too many liberals on here too!



Remember, it's ALWAYS better to take a conservative approach to ANYTHING! You can always progress forward in a controlled, calculated manor, weighing the pluses and minuses to each, making the appropriate adjustments as required/desired. The liberal approach is more like...



hold my beer and watch this!



The extreme liberals of this country are absolutely placing this great nation in serious peril! Just for instance, take the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals... their job is to interpret law, not twist it placing an EXTREMELY liberal spin on it to suit their beliefs!



Again, as Michael Savage says...



borders, language, culture! Stop the collapse of these three points and everything else will fall into place.





NO SPIN ZONE

 

[loncray]

John, the problem is that you're using the classical meaning of conservative, not the current use of the word referring to the right wing (religious or not). I agree that a calm, collected approach to issues is usually the best one. Unfortunately, that's not what's used by extremists at either end of the political spectrum. Personally, I happen to think we're in greater danger from the far right than the far left - there's more far righters than far lefters - but both are dangerous. What's the difference between those Earth First maniacs burning down SUV's and anti-abortionists shooting doctors? For the most part, the far left isn't killing folks. And it isn't the left wing of the political spectrum that's building the biggest Federal government we've ever seen, while simultaneously launching preemptive wars on other countries, cutting taxes to the rich, and assaulting our civil rights. So what dangers does the left pose to you? Most of the folks here worry about gun rights, but do you really believe non-extremist liberals will really make you get rid of your guns? The left tends to support gay rights - what does it matter to you? The left supports more controls on pollution - as Illflem said in another post, go to Mexico City sometime and try to breathe the air. I don't mean these to be fighting words, I'm just curious.

 

[jgillott]

Every time there is a political debate, someone has to bring up the "Cutting taxes on the rich" argument. I have yet to understand why this is a bad thing. Have you ever had a poor man give you a job???

 

[loncray]

Didn't say they shoulda cut taxes on the poor - I simply believe that the Bush tax cuts were ill-advised, esp. when he has to pay for a huge new bureaucracy and a war at the same time, and they did not a thing to increase jobs. He's turned a huge surplus into a much larger deficit. Gov. Arnie is going to have the same problem in CA, except that I think he's not allowed to have an unbalanced budget there.

 

[jgillott]

loncray,

I have always been an advocate for a flat tax rate. Lets say 20% for instance. If we would adopt this method... ... . nobody can feel left out or overly burdoned. As for my last post, let me explain a little further. Many of us who are what you would consider middle class may get the feeling that the "Rich" get all the favors. But in essence, most of us would like to live like that some day. Now I do realize that many "Rich" may come off as greedy and out of touch with the rest of us. But, simply these are the people who employ us (Unless you can get a government job). The more free capital these people or their companies have, the more they can invest in employing us. Now this doesn't necessarily mean that they will hire more employees, but it will increase their capibility to do so.



Justin

 

[loncray]

Our system is SUPPOSED to be fair, non-regressive, and able to support the needs of the government. I fear that, even if a real flat tax system was put into place, the next bill out of the door would be filled with exemptions to that flat tax. I didn't mean my comment to be a cut on the rich, and I wasn't commenting on whether or not they deserve this last tax cut - my comment was on the tax cut itself being ill-advised given other economic conditions, and hasn't done what the President swore up and down it would do - create jobs and help the economy recover.

 

[Rman]

i'm not sure if i'm one of the rich, but i sure got a big tax cut and built a new house with the "savings" that i don't have to give to the Fed anymore. Oh yeah, it's bad though right... sure. Poor people always say it's bad. All I know is i'm payin less and i'm happier than before, whether or not it was needed ain't up to me.

 

[jgillott]

I definately agree with your last statement. As soon as any policy is passed, 100 exceptions are added. We would be a lot further along in this country if we started treating everyone the same instead of making excuses for them. It was good hearing your opinion... . have a good day.

 

[loncray]

The same to you, JGillott. As to me, I'm comfortably middle-class, not at all poor. I was indeed a beneficiary of the tax cut, and I spent it right away. However, I'm a fiscal conservative who happens to think that the Federal deficit is BAAAAAAAD - and one of the reasons I like Clinton Administration economic policies is that they were able to get a surplus - which the next administration has either spent or frittered away in tax cuts. They haven't created jobs, they didn't help the economy recover, they just put a lot of money in the hands of people who started off with a lot more than you and I - the middle class got the crumbs in this deal.

 

[Hale on wheels]

loncray, Rome wasn't built in a day. It took a long time and a lot of factors to make the economy go sour... I think it will take a long time for it to recover.



So many people talk about the budget deficit/surplus. This is created through the sale of bonds. They will not all mature at the same time, so its really just a matter of book keeping, right?



I benefitted some from the tax cuts also, and my wife spent it quickly... I'm sure with the intent to help spur the economy

 

[John]

loncray, I am by no means one of the wealthy conservatives. In fact, years ago I had always considered myself totally non-partisan. However, after taking a close look at my beliefs, the people I had been voting for in the last few years (long ago now), I had somehow mistakinly aligned with the moderate liberals. Not that that was totally a bad thing (to me... at the time) however, after giving much thought to the direction I had turned, my ideals, and the direction I thought my state and country should take, I felt I was best served by a much more conservative approach. Since then I've almost swung completely around to the right... not the extreme right, somewhere between there and a moderate conservative... at least on some issues. Other issues I would proudly say that yes, I am on the far right, believing that our forefathers had it right to begin with!



Although I didn't agree with the tax rebate per se [I thought the money would have been better utilized to pay for the war/rebuilding effort in Iraq], I still see the infinite wisdom of President Bush's move... to stimulate the economy. And contrary to what some might remember, the economy was going into the dumper in the last 6-8 months of the Clinton administration.



Another thing...



a very good friend of mine that earns (key word here being EARNED) well in excess of $200k per year was kind of peeved at President Bush for not receiving his $400. tax rebate check this year. That is until I told him of the political "deal" that was struck with the liberals otherwise it would still be held hostage "pending approval. " In fact, Neil Bortz put it very well in stating that it was for the most part "Tax re-distribution. " You see, some of the people that received the rebate checks never actually paid a dime into IRS in the first place... they received Eearned Income Credit. In other words, they got free money for being slackers (to put it bluntly).

 

[NETim]

Let's not forget that Clinton never submitted a balanced budget. After '94, for some strange reason (Contract with America anyone?) suddenly we had balanced budgets.



I purposely omitted a "both" option. Too many would dodge the question by selecting the middle ground and nothing would be learned.



On the whole, I obviously feel that Liberalism is a greater threat to my personal freedom than Conservatism ever has been and probably ever will be.



The present admin is not a good example of Conservatism. They're growing the Federal government almost as well as the Libs ever have. All in an attempt to buy votes I'm afraid.



Tim