Quantum Windbag
Gold Member
- May 9, 2010
- 58,308
- 5,100
- 245
Quantam Windbag argues for massive government. He says he is a right winger, but he is arguing for progressive left wing big government.
Where did I argue for massive government?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Quantam Windbag argues for massive government. He says he is a right winger, but he is arguing for progressive left wing big government.
You have argued to support big government in refusing to downsize the various agencies and their redundancies.
Son, that is big government statism, left wing big government statism.
Don't go back and revise your original posts because I have copied them.
The Original Post and oh, topic of the entire thread...
it said, stream lining it..
Okay I guess you don't understand. The way he proposes streamlining the government is by reducing it. There are six layers to the commerce department that all do essentially the same thing. He has proposed eliminating five of them. That would reduce the size of government.
Sorry, thought that was pretty obvious and really hadn't considered the possibility that streamlining would be thought of any other way.
So it's funny. He's talking about reducing duplicitous government - the mantra of all things Conservative and Libertarian - and both groups have criticized him on this very thread.
Think about it. A DEMOCRAT proposing a reduction in the size of government! I mean obviously it's not going to solve every problem all at once. Duh. But it's a start! And what if other Dems picked up on this trend???
How on Earth can ConservaRepubLitarians criticize this???
Well, there IS the fact that Obama has proposed it.
And the SBA thing could be FANTASTIC!!
You have argued to support big government in refusing to downsize the various agencies and their redundancies.
Son, that is big government statism, left wing big government statism.
Don't go back and revise your original posts because I have copied them.
Pointing out one small part that I think he got wrong while agreeing with most of it is not refusing to downsize the various agencies and their redundancies.
Please, feel free to go back through my revised posts and show how I did anything else.
You have argued to support big government in refusing to downsize the various agencies and their redundancies.
Son, that is big government statism, left wing big government statism.
Don't go back and revise your original posts because I have copied them.
Pointing out one small part that I think he got wrong while agreeing with most of it is not refusing to downsize the various agencies and their redundancies.
Please, feel free to go back through my revised posts and show how I did anything else.
If you disagree with downsizing and elimination of redundancy and work force, you are a statist.
it said, stream lining it..
Okay I guess you don't understand. The way he proposes streamlining the government is by reducing it. There are six layers to the commerce department that all do essentially the same thing. He has proposed eliminating five of them. That would reduce the size of government.
Sorry, thought that was pretty obvious and really hadn't considered the possibility that streamlining would be thought of any other way.
So it's funny. He's talking about reducing duplicitous government - the mantra of all things Conservative and Libertarian - and both groups have criticized him on this very thread.
Think about it. A DEMOCRAT proposing a reduction in the size of government! I mean obviously it's not going to solve every problem all at once. Duh. But it's a start! And what if other Dems picked up on this trend???
How on Earth can ConservaRepubLitarians criticize this???
Well, there IS the fact that Obama has proposed it.
And the SBA thing could be FANTASTIC!!
He picked a fight, nothing else. If he were serious he would have addressed the entire 300 billion or so in redundancy.
The Original Post and oh, topic of the entire thread...
it said, stream lining it..
Okay I guess you don't understand. The way he proposes streamlining the government is by reducing it. There are six layers to the commerce department that all do essentially the same thing. He has proposed eliminating five of them. That would reduce the size of government.
Sorry, thought that was pretty obvious and really hadn't considered the possibility that streamlining would be thought of any other way.
So it's funny. He's talking about reducing duplicitous government - the mantra of all things Conservative and Libertarian - and both groups have criticized him on this very thread.
Think about it. A DEMOCRAT proposing a reduction in the size of government! I mean obviously it's not going to solve every problem all at once. Duh. But it's a start! And what if other Dems picked up on this trend???
How on Earth can ConservaRepubLitarians criticize this???
Well, there IS the fact that Obama has proposed it.
And the SBA thing could be FANTASTIC!!
Okay I guess you don't understand. The way he proposes streamlining the government is by reducing it. There are six layers to the commerce department that all do essentially the same thing. He has proposed eliminating five of them. That would reduce the size of government.
Sorry, thought that was pretty obvious and really hadn't considered the possibility that streamlining would be thought of any other way.
So it's funny. He's talking about reducing duplicitous government - the mantra of all things Conservative and Libertarian - and both groups have criticized him on this very thread.
Think about it. A DEMOCRAT proposing a reduction in the size of government! I mean obviously it's not going to solve every problem all at once. Duh. But it's a start! And what if other Dems picked up on this trend???
How on Earth can ConservaRepubLitarians criticize this???
Well, there IS the fact that Obama has proposed it.
And the SBA thing could be FANTASTIC!!
He picked a fight, nothing else. If he were serious he would have addressed the entire 300 billion or so in redundancy.
Okay, I was wondering HOW the Right would find a way to criticize Obama for initiating what they have been whining about for 3 years.
Congratulation. I think you have best BS line so far. (Oops, didn't see Stephanie's post before. She gets to share the credit - actually I've been out playing tennis all day and since two of you are saying exactly the ssame thing, I'm betting when I turn on FOX, I'll find it being said there... "coincidentally").
Of Course! The solution is always to never do anything unless you can solve every problem in the universe at once!
Okay I guess you don't understand. The way he proposes streamlining the government is by reducing it. There are six layers to the commerce department that all do essentially the same thing. He has proposed eliminating five of them. That would reduce the size of government.
Sorry, thought that was pretty obvious and really hadn't considered the possibility that streamlining would be thought of any other way.
So it's funny. He's talking about reducing duplicitous government - the mantra of all things Conservative and Libertarian - and both groups have criticized him on this very thread.
Think about it. A DEMOCRAT proposing a reduction in the size of government! I mean obviously it's not going to solve every problem all at once. Duh. But it's a start! And what if other Dems picked up on this trend???
How on Earth can ConservaRepubLitarians criticize this???
Well, there IS the fact that Obama has proposed it.
And the SBA thing could be FANTASTIC!!
He picked a fight, nothing else. If he were serious he would have addressed the entire 300 billion or so in redundancy.
Okay, I was wondering HOW the Right would find a way to criticize Obama for initiating what they have been whining about for 3 years.
Congratulation. I think you have best BS line so far. (Oops, didn't see Stephanie's post before. She gets to share the credit - actually I've been out playing tennis all day and since two of you are saying exactly the ssame thing, I'm betting when I turn on FOX, I'll find it being said there... "coincidentally").
Of Course! The solution is always to never do anything unless you can solve every problem in the universe at once!
If you have revised your posts to agree with my points, I compliment you for learning.
And, by the by, QWB, almost all of us in 21st century America believe in organized, competent government operations. We, as Americans, live better with such at the city, county, state, regional, and country levels.
The question is not "whether regulation", only "what is the right regulation".
More funds to piss away at OUR expense.Obama wants congress to give him more power... Yeppie!!
Committee News - News - Joint Economic Committee Republicans[/url]
This son-Of-A-Bitch is in for a fight.
Okay so let me get this straight. Jroc and T are against reducing the size of government.
I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the fact that Obama is doing it!
Unreal. I mean I predicted exactly this but well, it's still funny to see!
More funds to piss away at OUR expense.
This son-Of-A-Bitch is in for a fight.
Okay so let me get this straight. Jroc and T are against reducing the size of government.
I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the fact that Obama is doing it!
Unreal. I mean I predicted exactly this but well, it's still funny to see!
Apparently you are one that is easily fooled by Obamas bullshi,t he's counting on people like you while governement growws he'll throw you a little bone congradulations you bite
More funds to piss away at OUR expense.Obama wants congress to give him more power... Yeppie!!
Committee News - News - Joint Economic Committee Republicans[/url]
This son-Of-A-Bitch is in for a fight.
Okay so let me get this straight. Jroc and T are against reducing the size of government.
I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the fact that Obama is doing it!
Unreal. I mean I predicted exactly this but well, it's still funny to see!
If you have revised your posts to agree with my points, I compliment you for learning.
And, by the by, QWB, almost all of us in 21st century America believe in organized, competent government operations. We, as Americans, live better with such at the city, county, state, regional, and country levels.
The question is not "whether regulation", only "what is the right regulation".
You told me not to bother revising my posts because you already had them. I mocked you by inviting you to go through the posts that actually agreed with Obama's decision, with a minor proviso that has bipartisan support already, and use them to prove that I am a statist. Your problem was that, since you react instead of researching and thinking, you assume I do.
If you live with a competent government operation at any level you are a rare breed in this day and age. Oakland is going to have to layoff staff, cut the budget, and possibly cut salary for the mayor and city council, all because they used redevelopment money, which is supposed to be used to take land from poor, usually minority, people and give it to rich, usually white, developers to help them get richer. That is what most people in the 21st century live with at the city level. Do you really want me to point out the typical faults of county, state, regional, and country governments? Perhaps I can use Venezuela as an example, didn't Chavez just win another term despite the fact that their constitution flat out forbids it?
If you want to be condescending to someone you should try it with children, adults are smarter than you are.
Okay so let me get this straight. Jroc and T are against reducing the size of government.
I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the fact that Obama is doing it!
Unreal. I mean I predicted exactly this but well, it's still funny to see!
Apparently you are one that is easily fooled by Obama’s bullshi,t he's counting on people like you while governement growws he'll throw you a little bone congradulations you bite
Let me dumb this down for you junior as obviously ya ain't et yer smart pills. The OP makes very clear he is proposing it. Conceptually, I think this is a good thing. (If "conceptually' is too big a word for you, have one a them thar "Liberal Elitist" explain it to you).
Glad I could help you there little one. I'm a helper. It's what I do. I help.
Okay so let me get this straight. Jroc and T are against reducing the size of government.
I'm sure this has NOTHING to do with the fact that Obama is doing it!
Unreal. I mean I predicted exactly this but well, it's still funny to see!
Apparently you are one that is easily fooled by Obamas bullshi,t he's counting on people like you while governement growws he'll throw you a little bone congradulations you bite
Let me dumb this down for you junior as obviously ya ain't et yer smart pills. The OP makes very clear he is proposing it. Conceptually, I think this is a good thing. (If "conceptually' is too big a word for you, have one a them thar "Liberal Elitist" explain it to you).
Glad I could help you there little one. I'm a helper. It's what I do. I help.
Okay I guess you don't understand. The way he proposes streamlining the government is by reducing it. There are six layers to the commerce department that all do essentially the same thing. He has proposed eliminating five of them. That would reduce the size of government.
Sorry, thought that was pretty obvious and really hadn't considered the possibility that streamlining would be thought of any other way.
So it's funny. He's talking about reducing duplicitous government - the mantra of all things Conservative and Libertarian - and both groups have criticized him on this very thread.
Think about it. A DEMOCRAT proposing a reduction in the size of government! I mean obviously it's not going to solve every problem all at once. Duh. But it's a start! And what if other Dems picked up on this trend???
How on Earth can ConservaRepubLitarians criticize this???
Well, there IS the fact that Obama has proposed it.
And the SBA thing could be FANTASTIC!!
He picked a fight, nothing else. If he were serious he would have addressed the entire 300 billion or so in redundancy.
Okay, I was wondering HOW the Right would find a way to criticize Obama for initiating what they have been whining about for 3 years.
Congratulation. I think you have best BS line so far. (Oops, didn't see Stephanie's post before. She gets to share the credit - actually I've been out playing tennis all day and since two of you are saying exactly the ssame thing, I'm betting when I turn on FOX, I'll find it being said there... "coincidentally").
Of Course! The solution is always to never do anything unless you can solve every problem in the universe at once!