Comments on: Sponsorship and Cosponsorship Activity Levels of U.S. Senators, 2007-2008 http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2008/04/30/sponsorship-and-cosponsorship-activity-levels-of-us-senators-2007-2008/ When old landmarks crumble, established roads no longer lead the way. New paths open to those with an irregular eye. Our news is unfit for print. Sat, 26 May 2012 19:21:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Patricia http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2008/04/30/sponsorship-and-cosponsorship-activity-levels-of-us-senators-2007-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-373104 Patricia Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:16:26 +0000 http://irregulartimes.com/?p=7812#comment-373104 Bill, you said, "Republicans believe government to be the problem and that the private sector to be the only solution." That's nonsense. What's the biggest discretionary spending? Military, by far. Who's promoting spending 170 billion dollars, in addition to the in-budget Pentagon spending? Who's promoting that big government spending? Republicans - and their policies of big government militarism have failed. The <b>middle ground</b> is actually the progressive way: 1. Stop the bleeding of trillions of dollars from unnecessary wars and corrupt military spending. 2. Reinvest in the American nation with appropriate spending that increases Americans' standard of living. Bill, you said, “Republicans believe government to be the problem and that the private sector to be the only solution.”

That’s nonsense. What’s the biggest discretionary spending? Military, by far. Who’s promoting spending 170 billion dollars, in addition to the in-budget Pentagon spending? Who’s promoting that big government spending?

Republicans – and their policies of big government militarism have failed.

The middle ground is actually the progressive way:

1. Stop the bleeding of trillions of dollars from unnecessary wars and corrupt military spending.
2. Reinvest in the American nation with appropriate spending that increases Americans’ standard of living.

]]> By: Jim http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2008/04/30/sponsorship-and-cosponsorship-activity-levels-of-us-senators-2007-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-373100 Jim Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:39:22 +0000 http://irregulartimes.com/?p=7812#comment-373100 Did I say I find it shocking? Your word. Actually, a fair part of what conservative Republicans have been active on is writing bills that would extend government authority over individual liberty, and you're right on target when you say that Republicans ARE actually big spenders when it comes to military procurement... which is an ever-larger part of our nation's budget. Did I say I find it shocking? Your word.

Actually, a fair part of what conservative Republicans have been active on is writing bills that would extend government authority over individual liberty, and you’re right on target when you say that Republicans ARE actually big spenders when it comes to military procurement… which is an ever-larger part of our nation’s budget.

]]> By: Bill Johnson http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2008/04/30/sponsorship-and-cosponsorship-activity-levels-of-us-senators-2007-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-373099 Bill Johnson Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:35:34 +0000 http://irregulartimes.com/?p=7812#comment-373099 How is it that you find this either insightful or shocking? Activist Democrats pursue activist policies and bills that spend money. Conservative Republicans get elected to stop activist Democrats from spending money. This goes straight to each party's base political philosophy: Democrats believe government to be the solution to public ills; Republicans believe government to be the problem and that the private sector to be the only solution. The number of bills they sponsor or co-sponsor is directly correlative. Unfortunately, there are few reasonable members of either end of the spectrum that see the wisdom (and fiscal sanity) in accepting that both extreme sides have it a little right and a little wrong. Kerry's 469 co-sponsored bills, if actually passed, would add trillions of dollars to our (children's) debt while Shelby's thumb-twiddling, spend nothing (except on military adventures and my pet projects) routine fails to address real problems that demand government action -- like a war that's costing billions every month, a bankrupt social security system, a nonexistent national energy policy, misguided federal handouts to agribusinesses, etc. etc etc. There's got to be some middle ground on this, yes? How is it that you find this either insightful or shocking?
Activist Democrats pursue activist policies and bills that spend money. Conservative Republicans get elected to stop activist Democrats from spending money. This goes straight to each party’s base political philosophy: Democrats believe government to be the solution to public ills; Republicans believe government to be the problem and that the private sector to be the only solution. The number of bills they sponsor or co-sponsor is directly correlative. Unfortunately, there are few reasonable members of either end of the spectrum that see the wisdom (and fiscal sanity) in accepting that both extreme sides have it a little right and a little wrong. Kerry’s 469 co-sponsored bills, if actually passed, would add trillions of dollars to our (children’s) debt while Shelby’s thumb-twiddling, spend nothing (except on military adventures and my pet projects) routine fails to address real problems that demand government action — like a war that’s costing billions every month, a bankrupt social security system, a nonexistent national energy policy, misguided federal handouts to agribusinesses, etc. etc etc. There’s got to be some middle ground on this, yes?

]]>