[Slingin Sammy 33]

[quote=Trample the Elderly;580567]Thankfully you are the only true beacon of conservatism in a stormy sea of liberals, communists, socialists and whatever you've labeled me as, which I assume is a socialist Republican.

As a friend of mine said in one of these threads, "Don't label me."

First shall we define Socialism:
Socialism refers to various theories of economic organization advocating state, worker or public ownership and administration of the means of production and allocation of resources, and a society characterized by equal access to resources for all individuals with an egalitarian method of compensation.[1][2][3] Contrary to popular belief, Socialism is not a political system; it is an economic system distinct from capitalism.
Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and derives its wealth through exploitation, creates an unequal society, does not provide equal opportunities for everyone to maximize their potentialities and does not utilize technology and resources to their maximum potential nor in the interests of the public. Therefore socialists advocate the creation of a society that allows for the widespread application of modern technology to rationalize economic activity by eliminating the anarchy in production of capitalism[4], allowing for wealth and power to be distributed based on the amount of work expended in production, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how and to what extent this could be achieved.

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33
Bush positives: - concept of No Child Left Behind (Government intervention into the affairs of others is socialist. Why is it my responsibility to pay for the education of children, especially if I have none of my own? Once upon a time education was left up to the States.)

Education is still left up to the states. You may want to check this out
Archived: 10 Fact About K-12 Education Funding

Federal funding in 2006 was $ 37.6B for K-12 education. Only about 8.3 % of overall funding. The vast majority of K-12 education is done with state/local funding. I would also argue that a better educated populace make the U.S. more competitive globally, increasing GDP, which you would benefit from.

I stated the CONCEPT of No Child Left Behind is a good one. What's wrong with increasing student/school performance and holding schools accountable? The execution and implementation hasn't been the best, but again the execution is left to each state. If a state doesn't want funds they don't have to participate. If you've got a problem with this "socialist" program on principle, take it up with the state legislature in VA and tell them to refuse the funds. Let's put $37B in perspective, about $412B is being spent on interest on the national debt alone.

- Tax cuts resulting in 52 consecutive months of job creation (This is actually conservative.)

Wow I actually got one right.

- minimized federal funding of abortion (Why the Federal government is funding abortions to begin with is beyond me..)

If you've read any of my posts on the subject, I thought I've been pretty clear that I don't support any government funding of abortion. I'm not naive enough to believe there isn't funding of abortion going on though.

- Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act (There is nothing in the Constitution about reproductive rights. Everything that isn't in the Constituiton is left to the State or to the people themselves. If they want to make a Federal law about abortion than they need to reach down, grab some, and do it. Politicians play both sides of the issue.)

The Declaration of Independence states, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Without going too far down the whole abortion debate rathole, Partial Birth Abortion denies life. Since Roe v. Wade is currently "settled law" and the abortion genie isn't going back into the bottle at least scaling back on the most despicable of abortion practices is a good thing. But I do agree that abortion should be a matter left to the states in most cases. In this case the Bush Admin did "grab some" and pushed this law through.

- Global HIV/AIDS funding (Pure Progressive Socialism. Who gave that SOB the right to take my money for AIDS? Where do they get this right from? It would be one thing to do it in America but in Africa? I've got the cure for AIDS. Don't screw around and don't shoot dope.)

There is no right other than Congress has the right to approve the President's budget and appropriate funds. However without risking U.S. military lives in combat it's estimated that this program saved over 1 million lives at a cost to the U.S. taxpayer of about $5B per year. Sometimes pure political philosphy is outweighed by the real cost of human lives, be they U.S. or not. We can't save the world, but if we can make this type of impact with a relatively small investment it's a cost/benefit that I'm sure the folks who are alive now appreciate. I'm pretty sure this blip in the federal budget most folks don't have a problem with.

- instrumental in expanding NATO alliance (Why? TJ warned us about alliances. But Progressive Republicans and Democrats don't see it that way. Who gave them the right to wage war on the Serbs?)

Let's define the alliance that kept Western Europe free from the USSR for four decades and protects against threats today by a two month incident. Of course there's no U.S. interest to democracies in Europe.

- Roberts & Alito and other strict constructionalist judge appointments. (I'm not so sure about these judges records since they've been in. I do know that the court has voted that emminent domain can be used for tax purposes. IE Oakland & Texas.)

Neither was on the SC for Kelo-New London. I'm not sure about the other cases you refer to, but I would be surprised if either voted for eminent domain to be used to increase a tax base.

- consolidated and reformed intelligence sharing ( Why they weren't brought up for dereliction of duty I don't know. I would consider it a Conservative move to scrap a few of these agencies and have just three, Military, CIA, and FBI.)

keep in mind 9/11 happened in 2001, less than 1 year after Bush took office. Hard to undo years of institutional issues in less than a year. Although without 9/11 I doubt Bush would've tackled this. However, he did remove barriers between various intel agencies which is a good thing. To go farther to increase performance and efficiencies would be better but to use this to justify that Republicans are socialists is a real reach...even for you.

- parts of Homeland Security (agencies under HS should've consolidated more to reduce costs not as much new spending) (Creating more beauracracy to solve the problems of having too much beauracracy is a classic socialist attribute.)

Sometimes you don't read. If you know anything about Homeland Security there's a consolidation of about 13 agencies under the umbrella of DHS. What I said was these agencies should've been consolidated to reduce costs....but I guess you missed that part.

- Bush Admin thwarted additional terrorist attempts to attack US citizens/interests. (Even socialist don't like glowing in the dark. Kuddos to the SOB for keeping me safe after 9/11.)

No comment is necessary here, I'll just use a "Matty"

- Afghanistan (should've had better long term strategy) (Should have declared war and nuked the MFers of the face of the face of the EARTH. Decided to go the socialist route and nation build.)

This is something my kid would say. I guess it makes sense to murder 32M people, a vast majority who had absolutely nothing to do with terrorists or 9/11. I'm sure there would've been no additional attacks then :frusty:

- Iraq (actual war well executed, long term strategy not-so-much.) Troop surge worked though. (Classic progressive nation building.)

What part of "long-term strategy not-so-much" did you not get. I'm a fan of the Lemay Doctrine.

- Response to early 2000s (Clinton) recession. (Why Presidents get all the credit or flak for the economy is beyond me? Congress controls the purse strings, and Kenysian economics (socialist) goes up and down no matter who's in Congress or the White House.)

We all know the President only has so much control over the economy, but the steps he did take were the correct ones IMO.

- Economic Stimulus Act (mostly tax rebates) (Bailout out the big boys at the expense of the little guy, classic Socialism. When Corporations are allowed to do business as long as they behave and do what their told, then it is socialism. When the government becomes a business and the Corporations become part of the government, that is the epitomy of Fascism.)

Again you have your wires crossed. The Bush Economic Stimulus Act was "mostly tax rebates".
Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When the corporations do what their told by the government it's called Gov't oversight or regulation. When government becomes part or takes over the corporation it's socialism

- Do Not Call Act (From a conservative point of view, this should be left up to you, the phone company, and the jerks calling you at dinner.)

It was left up to the American people and they overwhelmingly let their representatives know they approved of this legislation or there would've been more debate over it. I don't really care what point of view it's from, I'm just glad I don't get those damn calls anymore and it's a minimal cost to the U.S. taxpayer.

The only difference between a Communist and a Fascist is that a Fascist loves his country. They're both left wing a**hole autocrates. Conservatives mind their own business. If they say they do but really do not, they're probably just Republicans.

Since we're labeling, isolationists and anarchists mind their own business too.