Redstate

They need to do something to cut the deficit, and skipping a few flat screen TVs is simply out of the question.

Higher taxes on the "rich" is their only option to be responsible.

"My heart was here...I feel like I have unfinished business here." - Roy Hibbert

and being a fiscally conservative republican (at least the last 6 years) is just about spending more money without raising taxes and letting the next generation worry about it.

We need to stop raising taxes, and stop spending what we don't have. The first candidate that promises to not only stop adding to the national debt but work to reduce it will get my vote!

that would be a "compassionate conservative"

___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson

nc

[and if that doesn't make one feel dirty, I don't know what would...]

And I'm feeling......yes.....assuaged. Yes, my guilt over making millions of dollars in a capital economy [you can see why I didn't channel the Breck Girl - who can't identify with the concept of guilt] is measurably lessened when I see that my tax dollars, confiscated from my filthy winnings, are being spent on frivolous items, as if to punish me for being so lucky as to having had won in life's lottery.

And while I'm busy making atonement for sins, where the heck is that UGLY STICK?????? I haven't had my daily beating!!!!!

It's war -- so when can we start shooting back at the enemy Democrats?

use dirty words on RS. S*san S*randon makes The Management writhe in agony....

I'd rather see Gore get oxed than my ox get gored.

This is a Conservative forum, with a capital C.

I don't think you're going to get alot of support for a view that taxes are OK, as long as they being used "..to fund worthwhile programs to help everyone live a better life."

That's called Socialism and it has failed or is failing everywhere it has been implemented. The only way to get these crooks to stop wasting our money is to end taxation.

in places like Iraq and Afganistan?

Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.

First of all, I'm not talking about Iraq or Afghanistan. I am talking about society in this country (the United States if you hail from somewhere else). Spreading democracy to other countries is none of my concern.

I've been a frequent visitor to Redstate for a while now and I enjoy the dialogue expressed here. At times it is far superior to other sites of similar intent in its depth and thought. For the most part though, all viewpoints fall into line with a particular ideology (Ive actually had my login suspended a couple times for things I've said here). However, its only an opinion I have stated. I've noticed, for the the most part, everything that falls outside that line is accepted (or at least tolerated) and then either mocked or debated. I have no problem with the latter.

In supplement to my previous post:

Does no one feel that helping your fellow man has any moral value? Or is spending billions upon billions of dollars to liberate a country a smoke screen?

Just a question... thank you for your toleration and consideration.

Does no one feel that helping your fellow man has any moral value?

If you do, you shouldn't want government to have anything to do with it. They just screw it up and make things worse (see welfare for example).

___________________________________
The CIA has better politicians than it has spies - Fred Thompson

I agree. The government can make a hell of a nuke, but when it comes to helping its citizens, we usually end up getting the short end of the stick.

I'm just stating the obvious I guess by saying this on here that a government as a whole is a catch 22. However, having a government far out weighs the negatives of not having one.

etc, please cite specific Constitutional authority for each program you are pleased with.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

Why its ok to spend that much money to help them over there, but neglect our own citizens over here.

Maybe I'm all wrong here and the current political thinkers are the most generous people to ever walk the face of the earth.

our efforts in Iraq are for our own ultimate benefit, so that we may continue to build lives for ourselves that really shouldn't require additional domestic spending to bolster. Not that ideals make it all the way to realpolitik but they do inform our choices. We could spend every dime we can tax, borrow and fake building the total welfare state but foreign threats won't go away just because we disengage from them.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

Just a matter of clarification though: Going back to a response to my original post and in regards to your post I have no interest in a welfare state. I don't think that is the way to go. Obviously a pure socialist economy cannot exist (especially in this country) unless the persons in charge of the absolute highest moral and ethical quality (god-like) which is impossible in a human being, there is no such thing.

However, I think that like everything else in the world there is some good in everything. There are aspects of every political thought that has merit and could be implemented into our existing system to augment and enhance the quality of life for everyone. Because isn't that a basic tenant of 'human rights'? To be able to live a free and happy life? What they do with that freedom is up to them and how they attain that happiness is up to them (within the confines of the law of course).

Also, it's been about 50 years since we sent our military across one of our neighboring country's borders in an act of armed conquest. Our boundaries have been pretty stable since the 1950's. If anyone is really trying to build an American Caliphite, they're going about it as badly as you'd expect the INS or TSA to go about their assigned duties.

Also, people over here need far less help than people over in Iraq and Afghanistan. On April 15th, most of the US citizerns wish their government would neglect them for another couple of weeks.

I'd rather see Gore get oxed than my ox get gored.

I wasnt aware of that either... when did that happen?

priority in any case. Locally, a water district was required by eviro-nazis to build a $9 million fish ladder so that "steelhead" could re-establish themselves in the Ventura River, a basically dry riverbed except for the rainy season and some sewage outfall. Right downstream from said fish ladder "our people" are living in tents in the dry river bottom. However, according to the fish migration video monitoring system, in the last 3 years at least 3 fish have used the ladder.

If Algore had a lick of sense, he would understand that GW will at least keep "our people" from freezing in their cardboard beds in the alleys. Where is the liberal angst about that?

Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.

People tend not to look for better deals when they are spending someone else's money.

I could go to walmart and get 4 TV's for $150 a piece. If its just to "keep informed" why the high end HD TV...does information get degraded on a SD TV. But I guess $600 vs $8000 isnt a real big deal when it isnt your money. Your right no waste here.

1. Those 4 TV's for %150 a piece are going to be useless in 2009 when the analog signal stops, so assuming that she still has a job in Congress then (I hope she doesn't, but she probably will considering her district), then buying el cheapo tv's would only delay purchasing HDTV's for two years.

2. And that's assuming buying four el cheapo TV's would suit her needs. There's probably a good reason why she needs 40" flat-panel tv's. Greater viewing angle and distance, and space considerations, would be my guesses. Why don't you write her a letter and ask?

3. I don't know about you, but I don't want my congress critter spending too much time on shopping for tv's. I don't care if they got the absolute best deal if they waste too much time in getting it. Once the need is established, buy the suckers and move on to more important business. Like being a real fiscal conservative and NOT wasting millions and billions of dollars. I can forgive wasting a few thousand.

A lot of people get along with the cheap tv's, and a lot of those people are the ones footing the bill here. Again if she desperatly needs these and she really cares about cutting government waste shwe could pay for them out of her own pocket.

Secondly there is a difference between wants and needs, nobody needs a highend spiffy HD TV, they want one. If you have a need for a TV...get a TV, but dont claim you need anything more than the minimum. But again its not really spending when its not your money.

Sorry I dont believe some one will cut "millions" in wasteful spending, yet waste thousands on themselves. The thousands start to add up after a while.

Human beings don't "need" much more than food, water, and shelter. Everything else is a "want". I could have said that she had a "demand" for four tv's, which in economics parlance is a "want" along with the "means" to obtain that "want". But I didn't; I chose to write simply to make a simple point. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough for you.

As for you believing that she "wasted" thousands of dollars on four tv's, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that. I'm not claiming that she is a fiscal conservative. She isn't. But there are real fiscal conservatives who do spend thousands on tv's, just as she did, and probably for the same reasons.

Taxpayers get stuck with the bill, even if she is taking it out of her own salary. No argument there. The argument is over whether or not this is "waste" and whether or not we should be focusing on a few thousand dollars, wasted or not.

And I assume you will join with me in petitioning the Congress to eliminate:

1. The US Department of Education and all block grant spending on education.
2. Completely privatize social security, getting the feds out of the "retirement" business.
3. Privatize medicare.
4. Eliminate the Department of Commerce.
5. Eliminate all agriculture subsidies.
6. Eliminate the Energy Department.

For starters. Feel free to add to the list.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

Here are a couple of additions.

7. Eliminate progressive taxation and institute a flat tax, thus eliminating the need for most of the IRS.
8. Eliminate the prohibition on drugs which has done nothing to slow or stop the drug trade, and has greatly increased the amount of violent crime in the U.S., just as the prohibition on alcohol did. Eliminate the DEA.

for anyone already using satellite TV or digital cable, and with a converter, of course. SDTV's will always be useful for your old movies and games, too. I'm not sure I would buy a new SDTV now, myself, because used ones will be much cheaper after the next year or so and many more will be given away through Freecycles. I got a big one recently for nothing and it works very well.

lesterblog.blogspot.com

the irony in the situation. Yeah, congresspeople blow $$ all the time. But in this case, it's one who has made a habit of blowing smoke about the debt and spending, etc. One would expect a wee bit more fiscal restraint from someone who is raising such a ruckus over spending.

by not buying a TV to run Fox News on.

And it makes for a funny picture. But it's not a serious argument.

If she spends $8,000 on tv's and votes against millions and billions in wasteful spending (she doesn't, but that's another argument) then I say more power to her. Once it's been established that she does have a use for four tv's, and she does, then the rest is just penny pinching.

This is a tempest in a teapot, except that this particular tempest makes fiscal conservatism look silly.

The English language begs to differ.

Cackling at a several thousand dollars being spent when millions and billions are being wasted. It's just not a serious argument.

I suppose you're right that a post can't make fiscal conservatism look silly: the idea stands on its own merits. What I should have said is that it makes fiscal conservatives and Republicans look silly, because we should be focusing on saving those millions and billions of dollars, and not just a few thousand.

Everyone spending those "small" thousands of dollars eventually adds up to millions in waste.

And who, both Republican and Democrat, has how many?

Thousands add up to millions. Millions add up to billions. Billions add up to a $1.4 TRILLION dollar federal budget. All I'm saying is that we should be focused on cutting that billions and millions in certifiable government waste, before we get to the thousands of dollars that may or may not have been spent more wisely.

Correction: $2.9 TRILLION dollar federal budget. Which could probably be halved if some real fiscal conservatives got elected.

How a person deals with the little things in life is an indicator on how they treat the big things in life.

When ever I asked him for $5 so I could go roller skating, he asked me what I did with the $2 he gave me last week. He was very insistent on an accurate accounting. Then an axiom that he always repeated, and I knew it was coming, if I can't trust you with only $2, how do you expect me to trust you with this $5?

Stewardship is a funny thing. The Bible is filled with lessons on stewardship. One of the biggest lessons is that is if God cannot trust with a little, how can He trust you with much?

That is why silly little televisions matter so much.

Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }

But the problem is that we do trust Congress with a vast some of money and power, and we should be focusing on how unwisely the vast majority of it is being spent, not on the small sums.

Silly little televisions are a distraction from the big picture.

Pardon the pun. =)

...with their "small" office budget, I believe that they are wasteful period, and especially with a big budget. The human condition has proven out to be consistent on that.

You can repeat your assertions of wanting to stop the big waste, but until you stop the little waste, you will never stop the big waste. Covering your ears and eyes won't stop it from being true.

Do you know how Rudy cleaned up crime in New York? He went after all the petty criminals and porn shops, and he went after them hard. In other words he took care of the little criminals. The big crime rates dropped in their wake.

The same principle applies to all things in life. This is just a reflection of that, and your trying to defend it is part of the problem. Congress has you believing that their little waste is not a big deal. However, that only reinforces the big waste. You become the enabler in their addiction.

...but that is my opinion.

Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println("An argument is a sequence of statements aimed at demonstrating the truth of an assertion.); }

I was going to quote the Giuliani example as well. That was the first thing that came to mind. Fix the little stuff and the big stuff should follow.

1. I still don't agree that a congressperson purchasing televisons that they need to do their job is wasteful.

2. You're correct that waste is waste, no matter the amount, but I disagree that going after the small amounts is an efficient or effective strategy. We're not talking about crime here, we're talking about politics. They may be related, but they aren't the same. =)

3. Speaking of crime, Rudy, and cleaning up New York, your interpretation of what he did isn't exactly correct. Rudy didn't clean up New York simply by going after petty criminals; he cleaned up New York by going after career criminals, and keeping after them whether he could put them in jail for a petty crime or a big one.

You say Rudy didn't clean up New York simply by going after petty criminals; he cleaned up New York by going after career criminals, and keeping after them whether he could put them in jail for a petty crime or a big one.

Actually, a lot of Giuliani's approach was based on the "Fixing Broken Windows" theory, which basically says that fixing problems while they're small avoids larger problems later.

As you will see in the Wikipedia article, the theory is somewhat controversial and has not necessarily proven successful across the board. A more thorough analysis of the Broken Windows theory can be found here.

Who's this "us" you've been talking about?

And BTW, Donald Trump was being interviewed and was asked about his desire to save a few thousand on multi-million$ condo projects. He said, "When I can pick up the phone and save ten thousand dollars, I'm going to do it."

"Us" would be referring to fiscal conservatives. As for Donald Trump, I doubt he would be nitpicking over purchasing a few televisions that he needed to do his job. He wouldn't overpay, that's for sure, but no one is saying that Ms. Bean overpaid. Many of the commenters here seem to think that she shouldn't have bought the tv's at all, which is a silly notion.

Perhaps the thousand-mile journey of fiscal conservatism begins with a single step. Or four TV's.

The picture is an accurate snapshot of hypocrisy. The message it conveys stands.

Master, say that this is not so! XD

But the snapshot is only accurate if those four TV's are waste. I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that.

Or can she shift her viewpoint really quickly ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

and several channels that they need to keep tabs on. So I guess that would be 36 eyes and 36 ears (not counting visitors) that need to watch multiple channels (picture in picture only goes so far) and there are probably corners and walls in the office and I don't think we elect people with x-ray vision. Usually people who can see through walls have something better to do than run for Congress, namely saving people and fighting crime. The pay isn't as good, but the perks are great.

and her staff to watch television.

I understand the new season of Dr. Who is good.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

...to boot. Watching tv is part of the job. And surfing the internet, and listening to the radio, and making and taking lots and lots of phone calls. It's called "staying informed".

And if they only watched Dr. Who and quit wasting millions and billions of dollars, you wouldn't here me complaining, as long as the government continued to run reasonably well.

Yes and they need to do it with expensive televisions because lesser models won't do.

Especially seeing as you can get a 20 inch set for about 400 dollars.

Lets see what the savings would be, we let the reps keep the big screens. (Big ego, big screen) so 3 sets per office at 1200 vs 4800 thats a savings of 3800/office. Multiplied by 535 we get about two million.

Well there is your first step toward fiscal responsibility.

And personally I would gladly supply them with porn if they would just agree to watch it during office hours.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

The cost savings would be wiped out by the lawsuits!

Oh, BTW, a 40 inch screen is not about ego. This would be about ego. And I would be right beside you screaming about what a waste it is. BECAUSE I WANT ONE.

I just bought a 47 inch westinghouse LCD full 1080P for 1600.00 delivered.

See you have just made a contribution to fiscal responsibility. So could have our congresscritters. 200,000+ K and they get bigger sets.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I would like to responsibly spend 1600.00 on a 47 inch tv. Where does it fall off the truck? =)

Just bought one a month ago.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

FWIW, I hope to be able to work the whole "if you have a frog to swallow" thing in another thread later on. (If I can just remember how it goes).

I and a few others can, but don't worry at this point. You'll be warned if you start crossing the line, but as far as I've seen you haven't even come close to violating any of our rules yet, and we do enjoy spirited debate :-)

I actually wasn't thinking about getting kicked off the site. I was talking about not being considered part of the group. Although, technically, I don't know where I stand because I am a fiscal conservative, and I have donated to Republican candidates, but I refuse to register in any party. Oh well, I've been lurking on this site since Tacitus announced it, and I haven't been kicked off yet, so I'm not too worried. Not that I'm tempting you. =)

...you've been here, and it's fairly impressive. There's no party affiliation required to be a member; even one of our front-pagers is a registered independent.

If there is one thing I know, it is that. Matthew was responding to my insinuation that he may not be one of "us". Which he is. So he is welcome in the secret clubhouse as long as he watches his head when he gets to the top of the ladder.

and demand to use your TVs...