The problem is we debate and argue too much with ourselves. That leads to weak campaigning.

Ok, but what does that have to do with the responsibility of the Republican party?

So lets hear it...what do the Reeps do that is responsible?

More environmentally responsible - historically have worked much harder at protecting our natural resources

- Reeps believe in RESPONSIBLE environmental protection. The understand that in the world in which we live, environmental protection has to be balanced with economic and social improvement. I feel just as bad for a snail darter as anybody on the Left would feel, but I'm not ready to commit national suicide or put 20,000 workers out of a job to protect it. Sorry.

More socially responsible - actually fund social services (elderly, developmentally disabled, etc.)

- Reeps believe in social responsibilty, accountability and AUTHORITY. Reeps believe that responsibility and authority for these services should naturally be held in the hands of the various state governments. It is our belief that you can't manage the detailed particulars of social services programs from an office in Washington, D.C. It's better to provide a pro rata level of funding to states and then oversee their efforts, not dictate their efforts. It is also a belief of most Reeps that social services support should not only be state-based, but should also integrate community and faith-based initiatives. It's kind of a play off old Hillary's book "It takes a village to raise a child". :-)

More fiscally responsible - Reagan/Bush/Bush have all contributed to blowing out the national debt, after Clinton's terms we had surpluses

- How does one argue with this? Most economists will tell you that you many times have to engage in deficit spending in order to pull a nation out of a recession, which is what Dubya stepped into upon taking office. The October just completed saw over 350,000 new jobs created, taxes are lower so that people have more money to save and spend and invest as they see fit, which will in turn futher prime the pump of the national economy.

It's highly debatable that Clinton and his fiscal policies alone created surpluses. The '94 Republican takeover of the House and a sense in the Congress that fiscal discipline at that time was what was needed kept the worst impulses of the Clintonites in check. His national health plan would have been ruinously expensive, and he saw that his own presidential reelection prospects would've been jeopardized had he continued on with the classic Democrat tax and spend philosphies of the past. I'd give equal credit to the Executive and Legislative branches on this one, and the fact that the preceding Administration had laid the conditions for success in the next Administration.

Other contributing factors were our dollar's relative strength, the "Dot Com bubble" and Alan Greenspan's monetary policies. Interestingly enough, Greenspan supports the means and methods of our deficit spending at this time. It seems to have been a success, as the economy is getting stronger by the month. Then will be the time, during these next four years, for a reduction in the budget deficit and the national debt.

In short, Reeps are very responsible. They also are pragmatic enough to realize that economics and government are more than just simply balancing a household checkbook, so to speak.

K

-- Reeps believe in RESPONSIBLE environmental protection. The understand that in the world in which we live, environmental protection has to be balanced with economic and social improvement. I feel just as bad for a snail darter as anybody on the Left would feel, but I'm not ready to commit national suicide or put 20,000 workers out of a job to protect it. Sorry.

Your snail darter reference only serves to illustrate the lack of understanding of the impact this administration has had on our environment. If you want some of the actual facts go to NRDC.org and find out how "responsible" Bush is.

-- - Reeps believe in social responsibilty, accountability and AUTHORITY. Reeps believe that responsibility and authority for these services should naturally be held in the hands of the various state governments.

But freezing social spending so we can pursue the war in Iraq? Sorry, not a lot of responsibility here either.

-- It's highly debatable that Clinton and his fiscal policies alone created surpluses.

Is it coincidence that both Reagan and W both enacted tax cuts during war time and both busted the budget?

-- In short, Reeps are very responsible. They also are pragmatic enough to realize that economics and government are more than just simply balancing a household checkbook, so to speak.

Talk is cheap, I prefer results. The fact is the Republican record has not been good on any of these issues. I guess in 4 years we'll dig this up again and try to figure out who is going to be best suited to clean up the mess.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4915573/

You're playing pretty loosely with how Greenspan feels about deficits.

And has anybody seen what the dollar is doing now that W is reelected?



...

Greenspan cautioned against being lulled into a false sense of security about the deficit, Americans’ low savings rates or the nation’s trade deficit just because these problems have not yet triggered rising interest rates or a steep fall in the value of the dollar

Posing the question of whether something has fundamentally changed that would allow the country to “disregard all the time-tested criteria of imbalance and economic danger,” Greenspan said, “Regrettably, the answer is no. The free lunch has still to be invented.”

Greenspan told a banking conference that the federal budget deficit was a bigger worry to him than the soaring trade deficit or the high level of household debt because those two problems can be corrected by market forces.

“Our fiscal prospects are, in my judgment, a significant obstacle to long-term stability because the budget deficit is not readily subject to correction by market forces that stabilize other imbalances,” he said in remarks to a banking conference.

...

Uhhh. I must've been drunk when I posted that. Because it doesn't make any sense to me either, now.

PROOF!!!

---

customerjon @gmail.com is where information happens.