Republicans Only: What should our Party be?

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Perhaps I'm issuing an open invitation for Phil to berate me with more attacks, but I believe this is the fundamental question for Republicans.

We have entire movements within the Republican Party that are dedicated to purging those within the Party who disagree with them.

33% of Americans identify themselves as conservative, and this number has remained stable for years.  50% of Americans identify themselves as moderate.  With such a disparity in ideological self-identification, why would it make sense for the Republican Party to lampoon moderation (as Rush Limbaugh does all the time) and to systematically remove moderate Republican elected officials?

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

I think people still like those tax cuts, my friend.

Our grandchildren will love them too, it will give them something to remember us by when they are slaving away in a Chinese-owned factory trying to pay off the debt we created.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

I think people still like those tax cuts, my friend.

Our grandchildren will love them too, it will give them something to remember us by when they are slaving away in a Chinese-owned factory trying to pay off the debt we created.

I blame that on spending, rather than tax cuts. 

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Anyway, I'm sure the tax cuts were the straw that broke the camel's back when it comes to our grandchildren slaving away in a Chinese factory. 

Tax cuts.  War.  Bailouts.  Earmarks.  Pork.  Entitlements.  All things for our grandchildren to ponder while they are learning Mandarin.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Anyway, I'm sure the tax cuts were the straw that broke the camel's back when it comes to our grandchildren slaving away in a Chinese factory. 

Tax cuts.  War.  Bailouts.  Earmarks.  Pork.  Entitlements.  All things for our grandchildren to ponder while they are learning Mandarin.

All things that your hero wanted, by the way. 

By the way, I opposed half of those things listed and so did most conservatives.

so did Wayne Gilchrest

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Don tax cuts are not the same as Gov't spending. Tax cuts involve taking money out of Washington DC and putting it back into the hands of the people. Spending is just the opposite. We should have paid for the tax cuts by cutting spending but you can't force congressmen, who prefer to buy reelection with pork(Many of you your so called moderates are in this group like Lisa Murkowski), to cut spending.

Can you explain that in Chinese?  That way they don't think you're just mumbling as they throw us all into the Hudson New Yellow River.

EDIT: I'm not trying to be an ass - I respect your viewpoint because, in a perfect world, it's my viewpoint too.

Obviously spending cuts paired with tax decreases would be the best scenario.  But even when Republicans had control of the Presidency, House, and Senate - we couldn't get that done.  And if you think that's the fault of the Snowes and Specters of the world, you are deluding yourself.  All of this mess happened during the rise of RINO-hunting when moderates were excluded from leadership in favor of ultra-conservatives like Tom Delay.

Pork and earmarks are a symbolic problem that should be dealt with, but its a very small piece of the debt pie.  The war hurt, and the bailouts are killing us.  And, on top of that, we aren't collecting the money - via taxes - to pay for these things.

My point is that if we can't get rid of the spending, then we HAVE to pay for what is spent.  Obviously passing tax cuts doesn't do anything to curb spending - spending exploded after the tax cuts were passed.  A balanced budget amendment would help greatly, but we couldn't even get that done after the '94 revolution.  We have to start dealing with reality.  Living in an ideology-driven dream world has not served us, our country, or future generations well.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Tax cuts.  War.  Bailouts.  Earmarks.  Pork.  Entitlements. All things for our grandchildren to ponder while they are learning Mandarin.

Your grandchildren should also ponder why you enthusiastically enabled all of this.

Kids: "Granddad, what did you do when our country was sliding into hell at the turn of the century?" Don: "Well, kids, I prided myself on being a worthless hack, so I just kept
voting for the people who were doing it and blamed the Democrats!" *awkward silence*

Kids:  Didn't you do anything about it granddad?
Don: Yes, I attempted to change conservative hearts to return to their roots of fiscal sense and responsibility.  Paying for what you spend and not stealing from you kids.
Kids:  Did it work?
Don: What languages do you speak?
Kids: English, and a lil Spanish I guess
Don: No Chinese?
Kids: What's a Chinese? 
Don:  Exactly.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

You know, Don, you lecture us in another thread about our alleged fears of different languages and cultures (which is totally false in my case at least) and then you go on this fear campaign against the Chinese. Just take a step back and think about that for awhile before you go branding others xenophobes.

My fear campaign is against the debt, and China is the largest foreign holder of our public debt. (22%)  Feel free to insert "Japanese" (19%) or any other country you please.  Hell, the British own 12%, could you imagine if we all had to stop speaking American

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

A tax cut is still a goddamned hand-out, no better than a welfare check. Ronald Reagan was the biggest welfare-whore this country has ever seen, and you didn't even need to be poor to qualify for welfare checks under him - they were just called 'rebates'.

How is a tax cut a hand-out?  When your taxes are reduced, you get to keep more of the money you've earned.  When you get a welfare check, you get money that other people have earned for you. 

Very true.

However, you live in a country with a government.  If that government accumulates liabilities on your behalf, you are responsible for these liabilities.  If you choose, via your representatives, not to pay for those liabilities through your taxes - said liabilities do not disappear just because you do not want to pay them.   Your government collects enough from you to pay for debt service, and eventually, your grandchildren become responsible for those liabilities.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

If I have to pay less in taxes, the government isn't giving me anything.  They're taking less from me.

That's great.  But if the government doesn't take enough from you to pay the bills that you co-signed for by being a citizen of this country, then what do you think happens?