I'm Officially Over My Chris Christie Bromance

Quote from Maverick74:

To be fair, the 2016 primary has started and Rand is giving speeches in Iowa already. That has to be pissing Christie off. So you are going to see him Christie take shots at Rand and Cruz daily now.

Having said that, I do agree with you that Christie is all over the map politically and he probably did himself in when he was making out with Obama on camera. They probably should have gotten a room.

Yes, they should have gotten a room.

I really like Rand Paul, and support him. I hope Christie doesn't do any more harm than he did when he and Ocommunist made out publicly.
 
cmon guys... ricter is getting concerned about the fascist state.
let him ease his way off that leftist team. (I consider veneration of state and big govt to be leftists even if it is called fascist... but the left right designation does not matter... big govt is bad no matter which wing. )

good post ricter... It is difficult to say where the line should be if we do not know the programs and how they achieve their goals.

we know they will be invading our privacy.
Which is why we need a weaker federal govt.

The risk is now there for all to see after this IRS and Press stuff.
The govt has the workers who will abuse the rights of fellow americans.

Right now we see the govt trying to control the size of their sodas.
Then because of obamacare they will ration certain foods.
Then they will move to complete control of the food supply.
Then everyone will be drones... not just the low info lefties on net.

you see it... you know it.
we must vote all the big govt types out.
 
Quote from jem:

cmon guys... ricter is getting concerned about the fascist state.
let him ease his way off that leftist team. (I consider veneration of state and big govt to be leftists even if it is called fascist... but the left right designation does not matter... big govt is bad no matter which wing. )

good post ricter... It is difficult to say where the line should be if we do not know the programs and how they achieve their goals.

we know they will be invading our privacy.
Which is why we need a weaker federal govt.

The risk is now there for all to see after this IRS and Press stuff.
The govt has the workers who will abuse the rights of fellow americans.

Right now we see the govt trying to control the size of their sodas.
Then because of obamacare they will ration certain foods.
Then they will move to complete control of the food supply.
Then everyone will be drones... not just the low info lefties on net.

you see it... you know it.
we must vote all the big govt types out.
So if we have a weaker government, but the bad guys abroad strengthen their efforts to hurt us, can we strengthen our government, or do we have to stick to weaker government no matter what?

Edit: rhetorical question, of course.
 
Quote from Ricter:

I really don't like the NSA scrutiny, and I've been worried about something I've called "database convergence" (now with drones!) for years. But I do have to admit that we are still under attack, every day if you include cyberwar. Somehow we have to keep watching and listening. I don't like it, but how can it be done any differently?

ok, where do you draw the line?

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=276963

Feds ask web firms for users' online passwords
 
Quote from Maverick74:

To be fair, the 2016 primary has started and Rand is giving speeches in Iowa already. That has to be pissing Christie off. So you are going to see him Christie take shots at Rand and Cruz daily now.

Having said that, I do agree with you that Christie is all over the map politically and he probably did himself in when he was making out with Obama on camera. They probably should have gotten a room.

To take the first part a step further, if Christie decides to run in '16, he would have to resign from the governorship as he would not be able to raise campaign funds directly for the election:

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/22/christie_may_be_forced_to_quit_as_governor/

Maybe he is trying to sabotage anyone elses efforts for '16 so that if he stays in office and runs in '20 instead, he wont be running against a Repub?
 
If the Fed govt was not trying to control education and health care and tax everything that walked....

I think we might allow them a little bit leeway for to execute what they they are supposed to do... which is protect us from foreign invasion and keep us safe.

There should be no income tax...now that we are an importanting nation drop the income tax and go back to what the founding father set up.

A straight tariff. No exceptions. Maybe 3% if any part comes from overseas and 7% if made overseas.

Combine that with no income tax and you will see americans back to work fast and our industries leading the world again within 20 years.




Quote from Ricter:

So if we have a weaker government, but the bad guys abroad strengthen their efforts to hurt us, can we strengthen our government, or do we have to stick to weaker government no matter what?

Edit: rhetorical question, of course.
 
Quote from Ricter:

So if we have a weaker government, but the bad guys abroad strengthen their efforts to hurt us, can we strengthen our government, or do we have to stick to weaker government no matter what?

Edit: rhetorical question, of course.

Ricter that is why the federal govt is tasked with defense. We are already many times stronger than our enemies or potential enemies. They are also tasked with protecting our liberties here at home. Instead of spending tax revenue trying to bail out banks, create new sources of energy that clearly aren't ready, throwing parties, increasing welfare spending, and ADDING ENTITLEMENTS, they should just stick to their fucking job, which is defending the place. War was historically the only time that our fed govt ran a deficit and that's the way it was designed.

Terrorism by the way, is nothing new, in the past have we had to give up our Rights to stop terrorism? nope. This is all bullshit anyway, this nsa program didn't stop the tsarnaev fucks, did it? nope. And they had every reason to be suspicious of those assholes. There have been former nsa agents on the news saying they retired because of this program, and also stating the obvious, that there were less costly and more efficient alternatives to spying on EVERY American.

The feds need to find a better and legal way. We should drop a fucking nuke on that NSA storage facility.
 
Quote from PiggyBank:

Ricter that is why the federal govt is tasked with defense. We are already many times stronger than our enemies or potential enemies. They are also tasked with protecting our liberties here at home. Instead of spending tax revenue trying to bail out banks, create new sources of energy that clearly aren't ready, throwing parties, increasing welfare spending, and ADDING ENTITLEMENTS, they should just stick to their fucking job, which is defending the place. War was historically the only time that our fed govt ran a deficit and that's the way it was designed.

Terrorism by the way, is nothing new, in the past have we had to give up our Rights to stop terrorism? nope. This is all bullshit anyway, this nsa program didn't stop the tsarnaev fucks, did it? nope. And they had every reason to be suspicious of those assholes. There have been former nsa agents on the news saying they retired because of this program, and also stating the obvious, that there were less costly and better alternatives to spying on EVERY American.

The feds need to find a better and legal way. We should drop a fucking nuke on that NSA storage facility.
You're right. I just wanted to make sure everyone knew the subject has some nuance. Too often I get the sense from jem that he thinks government should always be smaller, that taxes should always be lower, etc. No, not always. Circumstances matter. That said, we could move on to have an interesting discussion about the actual present size of our actual government, not some philosophical principle which can only be always true in theory.

Edit: Re the Boston bombing, how many plots are foiled, or not even launched, because someone is watching? Hard to say, but it's safe to say "some, for sure".

Edit two: Is the actual NSA actually going too far at the present time? ; )
Yes, I believe it is. Our only hope is with the sheer volume of the world's daily emails and tweet. Not even the best algorithm can filter through that, and there will never be enough people on the NSA payroll to make up for it.
 
Back
Top