What are Republican's domestic policy's?

[ninja007]

libs pretending to care about kids but abort a million a year.

 

[rdean]

But I have to admit, your message seems a little strange.

My message is very simple..... what America needs us a wakeup call and a return to a much more Traditional way of life. Since the end of the 1950s, we've lost our way Morally and Socially. Until and Unless we correct these issues this nation is just waiting for these chronic diseases to finish us off.

Liberals and Leftists are screaming to pull the plug on the nation and replace it with a new Union of Socialist States of America; while Conservatives fight to save it. It's as simple as that.

Would Jesus approve?

 

[rdean]

I'll clue you in on what the Repugnant, Repugs, and the Bagger agenda will be::

No healthcare reform, ACA is stripped if some poor guy gets sick just go to the ER, or just die.

Forget about the EPA, let's have everyone just get sick and maybe cancer, so corporate fat cats can get richer..

You get laid off forget about unemployment , the Repugs will just say oh well go live in a box under a bridge..

We will probably be in about 5 or 6: wars and lose them all, LOL..

The banks will be deregulated again making another 2007-2008 crash inevitable..

Every state will be that right to work bullshit, let's have everybody working for 10 bucks an hour no benefits of course..

More cops will be killing unarmed Blacks and Hispanics, of course a Repug AG will just sweep it under the rug..

Abortion will be ILLEGAL all over the country, Women will have to go to the back alley just like in the 60's..

They will try to lock up all the pot smokers to please their Cuntservative base, especially the Blacks and the Browns. Repugs love to send folks of color to prison...

I can think of many more but I'm getting depressed here..

Fortunately we won't have to worry about it, a Repug or. Tea Maggot isn't gonna beat Clinton..

Basically a Repug will turn the country into Mississippi...

The banks will be deregulated again making another 2007-2008 crash inevitable..

I must have missed it, when was the first time they were deregulated?
What did that supposed deregulation do to cause the crash?
Be specific.

From the start, Bush embraced a governing philosophy of deregulation. That trickled down to federal oversight agencies, which in turn eased off on banks and mortgage brokers. Bush did push early on for tighter controls over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but he failed to move Congress. After the Enron scandal, Bush backed and signed the aggressively regulatory Sarbanes-Oxley Act. But SEC head William Donaldson tried to boost regulation of mutual and hedge funds, he was blocked by Bush's advisers at the White House as well as other powerful Republicans and quit. Plus, let's face it, the meltdown happened on Bush's watch.

See Bush's biggest economic mistakes.

25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis - TIME

Under Clinton with a Republican congress, deregulation started to take hold with this idea that if only we had fewer unnecessary regulations, business could flourish. But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids.

If you ever learned how to use Google, you could actually spend some time learning through some very interesting reading. Don't listen to what you've heard about learning from the GOP. Education is for everyone, not just for snobs.

You could start with:

deregulated wall street and the 2009 crash - Google Search

check out:

what are financial derivatives - Google Search

maybe move on to:

why did lehman bros collapse - Google Search

Believe me, ignorance isn't comforting. It's better to "know".

Making comments like:
I must have missed it, when was the first time they were deregulated?
What did that supposed deregulation do to cause the crash?

should make you embarrassed. I don't know why it didn't, make you embarrassed I mean.

After the Enron scandal, Bush backed and signed the aggressively regulatory Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

So Bush added more regulations, the opposite of deregulation.

But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids.

Which regulations did he eliminate? Gotta list?

regulations abolished under Bush - Google Search

You don't want a real discussion when you won't even bother to look anything up.

 

[rdean]

Someone said the Democrats domestic policy is just giving away free stuff. Why would they think that? Here are a few "give a ways" Democrats are running on:

Build and update America's infrastructure to provide jobs and make America competitive..

Help people get an education that targets actually getting a well paying job.

Help people get health care that manages good health for a longer and more productive life and drops the cost of care.

Help poor children have at least one nutritious meal a day so they can concentrate on school and not be distracted with the feeling of being hungry.

Help young parents with affordable day care so both parents can work and create the kind of life they want their children to have.

It's easy to prove that Republicans are against all these things. So what are they for. They can't run on "stop everything". That's not even conservative. What are they actually planning on doing to help the country?

Considering none of those things are the feds roll constitutionally, it's absolutely conservative to run against them. Those are States responsibilities if they chose to do them.

So you don't feel that people deserve any of that kind of help? How will this country compete with other countries? Corporations want immigrants with degrees because Republicans in Red States aren't qualified. There are 5.8 million jobs available. But people don't have the skills. Isn't it a matter of national security to keep people from being ignorant and unskilled?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Slash, cut, abolish and burn.

Science = no more funding
Education = no more funding!!!!
Unemployment = get the fuck to work!!!!
Infrastructure = learn to drive on dirt roads, sucka!!!
r&d??? = Go work for a fortune 500 company and be a nigga!!! No tax payer funded of anykind...
Clean air and water = suck it up, bitch!

Infrastructure!



Derp

Explain








meep

Mathew is a moron and you are a troll.

Satisfied?

 

[OKTexas]

Someone said the Democrats domestic policy is just giving away free stuff. Why would they think that? Here are a few "give a ways" Democrats are running on:

Build and update America's infrastructure to provide jobs and make America competitive..

Help people get an education that targets actually getting a well paying job.

Help people get health care that manages good health for a longer and more productive life and drops the cost of care.

Help poor children have at least one nutritious meal a day so they can concentrate on school and not be distracted with the feeling of being hungry.

Help young parents with affordable day care so both parents can work and create the kind of life they want their children to have.

It's easy to prove that Republicans are against all these things. So what are they for. They can't run on "stop everything". That's not even conservative. What are they actually planning on doing to help the country?

Considering none of those things are the feds roll constitutionally, it's absolutely conservative to run against them. Those are States responsibilities if they chose to do them.

So you don't feel that people deserve any of that kind of help? How will this country compete with other countries? Corporations want immigrants with degrees because Republicans in Red States aren't qualified. There are 5.8 million jobs available. But people don't have the skills. Isn't it a matter of national security to keep people from being ignorant and unskilled?

You can't force people to learn, inner city schools are proof of that. Why is it the majority of really substandard schools are in regressivecrat run cities?

Also why do you regressives allow colleges to reject qualified US citizens in favor of foreign students, in fact you give the foreigners subsidies with taxpayer money to study here. Then you bitch about uneducated Americans, typical regressives, create a problem, then demand more taxpayer money to fix it. You want to educate foreigners, chose the ones that came here legally and have been given permanent residency. Regardless, education is a State responsibility, not the feds.

 

[rdean]

Someone said the Democrats domestic policy is just giving away free stuff. Why would they think that? Here are a few "give a ways" Democrats are running on:

Build and update America's infrastructure to provide jobs and make America competitive..

Help people get an education that targets actually getting a well paying job.

Help people get health care that manages good health for a longer and more productive life and drops the cost of care.

Help poor children have at least one nutritious meal a day so they can concentrate on school and not be distracted with the feeling of being hungry.

Help young parents with affordable day care so both parents can work and create the kind of life they want their children to have.

It's easy to prove that Republicans are against all these things. So what are they for. They can't run on "stop everything". That's not even conservative. What are they actually planning on doing to help the country?

1. the two huge stimulus' were supposed to help.

2. school isnt free.

3. hc was rammed down are throats and millions lost their HC they were very happy with because of a few.

4. its not our job to feed the poors children in school. Besides if lib big gov. weren't daddy to millions of black kids MAYBE black daddies and mamas might stay together. PS. cons already pay for their meals and rent and clothes and entertainment through taxes- called welfare.

5. more handouts.

6. no its not easy. libs want to use other peoples hard earned money for themselves.

This is what I'm talking about. Posts this ignorant. Well, my hand is feeling better so I don't mind handing out a few more bitch slaps to the determined ignorant since this isn't a discussion but a list of ignorance:

1. the two huge stimulus' were supposed to help.
Why Obama's Economic Stimulus Worked
Obama stimulus successes - Google Search

2. school isnt free.
No one said it was. It's all about figuring out ways to reduce the cost. For instance, banks were making 6 billion a year from loans without risk, since the federal government was GIVING the FREE money to the banks if a loan went unpaid until Obama removed the loan program from the banks and poured that 6 billion back into student loans and grants. You're the one complaining about "free money". Then why does your kind insist on giving billions in free money to the banks. That's kinda tarded.

3. hc was rammed down are throats and millions lost their HC they were very happy with because of a few.
Why do Republicans hate children?
Why would Republicans go after children's health insurance?

4. its not our job to feed the poors children in school. Besides if lib big gov. weren't daddy to millions of black kids MAYBE black daddies and mamas might stay together. PS. cons already pay for their meals and rent and clothes and entertainment through taxes- called welfare.
That doesn't even make sense. You talk as if Republicans are all employed. They aren't. That's why they hate immigrants. Duh. Republicans get the lions share of food stamps and welfare. The statistics have been posted dozens of times. Why make an argument against something that's been posted dozens of times on the USMB. It has to be a determined ignorance. You simply refuse to learn.

5. more handouts.
You mean like the millions in free money Republicans handed out to themselves in the Farm Bill? How many times has that been posted?

6. no its not easy. libs want to use other peoples hard earned money for themselves.

You guys have simply got to do better than talking points from Fox. If you believe something to be true, just to be on the safe side, go look it up. Find out the truth, not what you imagine, but real numbers based on research and data. You'll feel better.
Besides, now my hand hurts again.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'll clue you in on what the Repugnant, Repugs, and the Bagger agenda will be::

No healthcare reform, ACA is stripped if some poor guy gets sick just go to the ER, or just die.

Forget about the EPA, let's have everyone just get sick and maybe cancer, so corporate fat cats can get richer..

You get laid off forget about unemployment , the Repugs will just say oh well go live in a box under a bridge..

We will probably be in about 5 or 6: wars and lose them all, LOL..

The banks will be deregulated again making another 2007-2008 crash inevitable..

Every state will be that right to work bullshit, let's have everybody working for 10 bucks an hour no benefits of course..

More cops will be killing unarmed Blacks and Hispanics, of course a Repug AG will just sweep it under the rug..

Abortion will be ILLEGAL all over the country, Women will have to go to the back alley just like in the 60's..

They will try to lock up all the pot smokers to please their Cuntservative base, especially the Blacks and the Browns. Repugs love to send folks of color to prison...

I can think of many more but I'm getting depressed here..

Fortunately we won't have to worry about it, a Repug or. Tea Maggot isn't gonna beat Clinton..

Basically a Repug will turn the country into Mississippi...

The banks will be deregulated again making another 2007-2008 crash inevitable..

I must have missed it, when was the first time they were deregulated?
What did that supposed deregulation do to cause the crash?
Be specific.

From the start, Bush embraced a governing philosophy of deregulation. That trickled down to federal oversight agencies, which in turn eased off on banks and mortgage brokers. Bush did push early on for tighter controls over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but he failed to move Congress. After the Enron scandal, Bush backed and signed the aggressively regulatory Sarbanes-Oxley Act. But SEC head William Donaldson tried to boost regulation of mutual and hedge funds, he was blocked by Bush's advisers at the White House as well as other powerful Republicans and quit. Plus, let's face it, the meltdown happened on Bush's watch.

See Bush's biggest economic mistakes.

25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis - TIME

Under Clinton with a Republican congress, deregulation started to take hold with this idea that if only we had fewer unnecessary regulations, business could flourish. But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids.

If you ever learned how to use Google, you could actually spend some time learning through some very interesting reading. Don't listen to what you've heard about learning from the GOP. Education is for everyone, not just for snobs.

You could start with:

deregulated wall street and the 2009 crash - Google Search

check out:

what are financial derivatives - Google Search

maybe move on to:

why did lehman bros collapse - Google Search

Believe me, ignorance isn't comforting. It's better to "know".

Making comments like:
I must have missed it, when was the first time they were deregulated?
What did that supposed deregulation do to cause the crash?

should make you embarrassed. I don't know why it didn't, make you embarrassed I mean.

After the Enron scandal, Bush backed and signed the aggressively regulatory Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

So Bush added more regulations, the opposite of deregulation.

But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids.

Which regulations did he eliminate? Gotta list?

regulations abolished under Bush - Google Search

You don't want a real discussion when you won't even bother to look anything up.

You don't want a real discussion when you won't even bother to look anything up.

You made the claim, why can't you back it up?

 

[rdean]

Slash, cut, abolish and burn.

Science = no more funding
Education = no more funding!!!!
Unemployment = get the fuck to work!!!!
Infrastructure = learn to drive on dirt roads, sucka!!!
r&d??? = Go work for a fortune 500 company and be a nigga!!! No tax payer funded of anykind...
Clean air and water = suck it up, bitch!

Infrastructure!



Derp

Explain








meep

Mathew is a moron and you are a troll.

Satisfied?

Coming from a proven moronic tard, that's a compliment.

 

[rdean]

I'll clue you in on what the Repugnant, Repugs, and the Bagger agenda will be::

No healthcare reform, ACA is stripped if some poor guy gets sick just go to the ER, or just die.

Forget about the EPA, let's have everyone just get sick and maybe cancer, so corporate fat cats can get richer..

You get laid off forget about unemployment , the Repugs will just say oh well go live in a box under a bridge..

We will probably be in about 5 or 6: wars and lose them all, LOL..

The banks will be deregulated again making another 2007-2008 crash inevitable..

Every state will be that right to work bullshit, let's have everybody working for 10 bucks an hour no benefits of course..

More cops will be killing unarmed Blacks and Hispanics, of course a Repug AG will just sweep it under the rug..

Abortion will be ILLEGAL all over the country, Women will have to go to the back alley just like in the 60's..

They will try to lock up all the pot smokers to please their Cuntservative base, especially the Blacks and the Browns. Repugs love to send folks of color to prison...

I can think of many more but I'm getting depressed here..

Fortunately we won't have to worry about it, a Repug or. Tea Maggot isn't gonna beat Clinton..

Basically a Repug will turn the country into Mississippi...

The banks will be deregulated again making another 2007-2008 crash inevitable..

I must have missed it, when was the first time they were deregulated?
What did that supposed deregulation do to cause the crash?
Be specific.

From the start, Bush embraced a governing philosophy of deregulation. That trickled down to federal oversight agencies, which in turn eased off on banks and mortgage brokers. Bush did push early on for tighter controls over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but he failed to move Congress. After the Enron scandal, Bush backed and signed the aggressively regulatory Sarbanes-Oxley Act. But SEC head William Donaldson tried to boost regulation of mutual and hedge funds, he was blocked by Bush's advisers at the White House as well as other powerful Republicans and quit. Plus, let's face it, the meltdown happened on Bush's watch.

See Bush's biggest economic mistakes.

25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis - TIME

Under Clinton with a Republican congress, deregulation started to take hold with this idea that if only we had fewer unnecessary regulations, business could flourish. But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids.

If you ever learned how to use Google, you could actually spend some time learning through some very interesting reading. Don't listen to what you've heard about learning from the GOP. Education is for everyone, not just for snobs.

You could start with:

deregulated wall street and the 2009 crash - Google Search

check out:

what are financial derivatives - Google Search

maybe move on to:

why did lehman bros collapse - Google Search

Believe me, ignorance isn't comforting. It's better to "know".

Making comments like:
I must have missed it, when was the first time they were deregulated?
What did that supposed deregulation do to cause the crash?

should make you embarrassed. I don't know why it didn't, make you embarrassed I mean.

After the Enron scandal, Bush backed and signed the aggressively regulatory Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

So Bush added more regulations, the opposite of deregulation.

But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids.

Which regulations did he eliminate? Gotta list?

regulations abolished under Bush - Google Search

You don't want a real discussion when you won't even bother to look anything up.

You don't want a real discussion when you won't even bother to look anything up.

You made the claim, why can't you back it up?

I did. You point out a single regulation by Bush and then say SEE? HE MADE REGULATIONS. Well, congress did and he signed. But so what? He made a regulation. He is a Republican and you have no idea of what else he did? Why did you vote for him? And what did he do to help the economy? Make it good.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The banks will be deregulated again making another 2007-2008 crash inevitable..

I must have missed it, when was the first time they were deregulated?
What did that supposed deregulation do to cause the crash?
Be specific.

From the start, Bush embraced a governing philosophy of deregulation. That trickled down to federal oversight agencies, which in turn eased off on banks and mortgage brokers. Bush did push early on for tighter controls over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but he failed to move Congress. After the Enron scandal, Bush backed and signed the aggressively regulatory Sarbanes-Oxley Act. But SEC head William Donaldson tried to boost regulation of mutual and hedge funds, he was blocked by Bush's advisers at the White House as well as other powerful Republicans and quit. Plus, let's face it, the meltdown happened on Bush's watch.

See Bush's biggest economic mistakes.

25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis - TIME

Under Clinton with a Republican congress, deregulation started to take hold with this idea that if only we had fewer unnecessary regulations, business could flourish. But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids.

If you ever learned how to use Google, you could actually spend some time learning through some very interesting reading. Don't listen to what you've heard about learning from the GOP. Education is for everyone, not just for snobs.

You could start with:

deregulated wall street and the 2009 crash - Google Search

check out:

what are financial derivatives - Google Search

maybe move on to:

why did lehman bros collapse - Google Search

Believe me, ignorance isn't comforting. It's better to "know".

Making comments like:
I must have missed it, when was the first time they were deregulated?
What did that supposed deregulation do to cause the crash?

should make you embarrassed. I don't know why it didn't, make you embarrassed I mean.

After the Enron scandal, Bush backed and signed the aggressively regulatory Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

So Bush added more regulations, the opposite of deregulation.

But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids.

Which regulations did he eliminate? Gotta list?

regulations abolished under Bush - Google Search

You don't want a real discussion when you won't even bother to look anything up.

You don't want a real discussion when you won't even bother to look anything up.

You made the claim, why can't you back it up?

I did. You point out a single regulation by Bush and then say SEE? HE MADE REGULATIONS. Well, congress did and he signed. But so what? He made a regulation. He is a Republican and you have no idea of what else he did? Why did you vote for him? And what did he do to help the economy? Make it good.

You said, "But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids"

I'm not interested in proving your claim.
And apparently you're unable to prove your claim.

 

[hortysir]

Someone said the Democrats domestic policy is just giving away free stuff. Why would they think that? Here are a few "give a ways" Democrats are running on:

Build and update America's infrastructure to provide jobs and make America competitive..

Help people get an education that targets actually getting a well paying job.

Help people get health care that manages good health for a longer and more productive life and drops the cost of care.

Help poor children have at least one nutritious meal a day so they can concentrate on school and not be distracted with the feeling of being hungry.

Help young parents with affordable day care so both parents can work and create the kind of life they want their children to have.

It's easy to prove that Republicans are against all these things. So what are they for. They can't run on "stop everything". That's not even conservative. What are they actually planning on doing to help the country?

I knew when I clicked that you'd answer your own question......But about that "free" stuff you say you're not proposing - everything you started with the word "help" is the exact things you tell your sheep that you're giving them for free

 

[rdean]

Someone said the Democrats domestic policy is just giving away free stuff. Why would they think that? Here are a few "give a ways" Democrats are running on:

Build and update America's infrastructure to provide jobs and make America competitive..

Help people get an education that targets actually getting a well paying job.

Help people get health care that manages good health for a longer and more productive life and drops the cost of care.

Help poor children have at least one nutritious meal a day so they can concentrate on school and not be distracted with the feeling of being hungry.

Help young parents with affordable day care so both parents can work and create the kind of life they want their children to have.

It's easy to prove that Republicans are against all these things. So what are they for. They can't run on "stop everything". That's not even conservative. What are they actually planning on doing to help the country?

Considering none of those things are the feds roll constitutionally, it's absolutely conservative to run against them. Those are States responsibilities if they chose to do them.

So you don't feel that people deserve any of that kind of help? How will this country compete with other countries? Corporations want immigrants with degrees because Republicans in Red States aren't qualified. There are 5.8 million jobs available. But people don't have the skills. Isn't it a matter of national security to keep people from being ignorant and unskilled?

You can't force people to learn, inner city schools are proof of that. Why is it the majority of really substandard schools are in regressivecrat run cities?

Also why do you regressives allow colleges to reject qualified US citizens in favor of foreign students, in fact you give the foreigners subsidies with taxpayer money to study here. Then you bitch about uneducated Americans, typical regressives, create a problem, then demand more taxpayer money to fix it. You want to educate foreigners, chose the ones that came here legally and have been given permanent residency. Regardless, education is a State responsibility, not the feds.

How international students are subsidizing U.S. universities

A growing number of international students are finding that their dreams of studying in the U.S. comes with a nearly impossible price tag. Many schools have limited funds for student aid, and the lion’s share of that money is reserved for U.S. students. And most foreign citizens are not eligible for federal student aid from the U.S. Department of Education.

-----------------

I'm not bothering with the rest of your post. I'm guessing it's equally ignorant.

 

[rdean]

From the start, Bush embraced a governing philosophy of deregulation. That trickled down to federal oversight agencies, which in turn eased off on banks and mortgage brokers. Bush did push early on for tighter controls over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but he failed to move Congress. After the Enron scandal, Bush backed and signed the aggressively regulatory Sarbanes-Oxley Act. But SEC head William Donaldson tried to boost regulation of mutual and hedge funds, he was blocked by Bush's advisers at the White House as well as other powerful Republicans and quit. Plus, let's face it, the meltdown happened on Bush's watch.

See Bush's biggest economic mistakes.

25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis - TIME

Under Clinton with a Republican congress, deregulation started to take hold with this idea that if only we had fewer unnecessary regulations, business could flourish. But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids.

If you ever learned how to use Google, you could actually spend some time learning through some very interesting reading. Don't listen to what you've heard about learning from the GOP. Education is for everyone, not just for snobs.

You could start with:

deregulated wall street and the 2009 crash - Google Search

check out:

what are financial derivatives - Google Search

maybe move on to:

why did lehman bros collapse - Google Search

Believe me, ignorance isn't comforting. It's better to "know".

Making comments like:
I must have missed it, when was the first time they were deregulated?
What did that supposed deregulation do to cause the crash?

should make you embarrassed. I don't know why it didn't, make you embarrassed I mean.

After the Enron scandal, Bush backed and signed the aggressively regulatory Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

So Bush added more regulations, the opposite of deregulation.

But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids.

Which regulations did he eliminate? Gotta list?

regulations abolished under Bush - Google Search

You don't want a real discussion when you won't even bother to look anything up.

You don't want a real discussion when you won't even bother to look anything up.

You made the claim, why can't you back it up?

I did. You point out a single regulation by Bush and then say SEE? HE MADE REGULATIONS. Well, congress did and he signed. But so what? He made a regulation. He is a Republican and you have no idea of what else he did? Why did you vote for him? And what did he do to help the economy? Make it good.

You said, "But it was under Bush that deregulation really took off on steroids"

I'm not interested in proving your claim.
And apparently you're unable to prove your claim.

It did, and that's why I gave you a google search. Check it out. This report is on the very first page:
The Bush Legacy: An Assault on Public Protections | Center for Effective Government
Public protections are regulations. I give you links to the reports. What do you want to be? Spoon Fed? That's a determined ignorance of the worst kind.

 

[rdean]

Someone said the Democrats domestic policy is just giving away free stuff. Why would they think that? Here are a few "give a ways" Democrats are running on:

Build and update America's infrastructure to provide jobs and make America competitive..

Help people get an education that targets actually getting a well paying job.

Help people get health care that manages good health for a longer and more productive life and drops the cost of care.

Help poor children have at least one nutritious meal a day so they can concentrate on school and not be distracted with the feeling of being hungry.

Help young parents with affordable day care so both parents can work and create the kind of life they want their children to have.

It's easy to prove that Republicans are against all these things. So what are they for. They can't run on "stop everything". That's not even conservative. What are they actually planning on doing to help the country?

I knew when I clicked that you'd answer your own question......But about that "free" stuff you say you're not proposing - everything you started with the word "help" is the exact things you tell your sheep that you're giving them for free

So American infrastructure, education, helping parents to work is "free stuff"?????

To me, these are national security issues. Imagine the entire country was made up of the most ignorant southern states like Alabama and Mississippi. Would America be a super power? Would it be a world leader? Or would it be a banana Republic?

 

[sealybobo]

Someone said the Democrats domestic policy is just giving away free stuff. Why would they think that? Here are a few "give a ways" Democrats are running on:

Build and update America's infrastructure to provide jobs and make America competitive..

Help people get an education that targets actually getting a well paying job.

Help people get health care that manages good health for a longer and more productive life and drops the cost of care.

Help poor children have at least one nutritious meal a day so they can concentrate on school and not be distracted with the feeling of being hungry.

Help young parents with affordable day care so both parents can work and create the kind of life they want their children to have.

It's easy to prove that Republicans are against all these things. So what are they for. They can't run on "stop everything". That's not even conservative. What are they actually planning on doing to help the country?

I asked them that in a thread I started. I asked them for reasons I should vote Republican.

And I don't want to hear lower taxes because Republicans have proved they raise our taxes in order to give the rich tax breaks. Republicans do not lower the tax burden on the middle class.

And I don't want to hear the same old less regulations tort reform or less government.

Why should I vote GOP? I'm a middle class middle age white and I don't see the benefit of the GOP.

 

[rdean]

Why can't we get any Republicans to say what GOP domestic policies are? Don't they have any beyond let him die and cut education?

 

[sealybobo]

Someone said the Democrats domestic policy is just giving away free stuff. Why would they think that? Here are a few "give a ways" Democrats are running on:

Build and update America's infrastructure to provide jobs and make America competitive..

Help people get an education that targets actually getting a well paying job.

Help people get health care that manages good health for a longer and more productive life and drops the cost of care.

Help poor children have at least one nutritious meal a day so they can concentrate on school and not be distracted with the feeling of being hungry.

Help young parents with affordable day care so both parents can work and create the kind of life they want their children to have.

It's easy to prove that Republicans are against all these things. So what are they for. They can't run on "stop everything". That's not even conservative. What are they actually planning on doing to help the country?

I knew when I clicked that you'd answer your own question......But about that "free" stuff you say you're not proposing - everything you started with the word "help" is the exact things you tell your sheep that you're giving them for free

So American infrastructure, education, helping parents to work is "free stuff"?????

To me, these are national security issues. Imagine the entire country was made up of the most ignorant southern states like Alabama and Mississippi. Would America be a super power? Would it be a world leader? Or would it be a banana Republic?

I don't like having to pay for daycare. People who can't afford kids shouldn't.

I know we need workers but I'd be OK with a shrinking population over a population that doubles every 50 years.

 

[OKTexas]

Someone said the Democrats domestic policy is just giving away free stuff. Why would they think that? Here are a few "give a ways" Democrats are running on:

Build and update America's infrastructure to provide jobs and make America competitive..

Help people get an education that targets actually getting a well paying job.

Help people get health care that manages good health for a longer and more productive life and drops the cost of care.

Help poor children have at least one nutritious meal a day so they can concentrate on school and not be distracted with the feeling of being hungry.

Help young parents with affordable day care so both parents can work and create the kind of life they want their children to have.

It's easy to prove that Republicans are against all these things. So what are they for. They can't run on "stop everything". That's not even conservative. What are they actually planning on doing to help the country?

Considering none of those things are the feds roll constitutionally, it's absolutely conservative to run against them. Those are States responsibilities if they chose to do them.

So you don't feel that people deserve any of that kind of help? How will this country compete with other countries? Corporations want immigrants with degrees because Republicans in Red States aren't qualified. There are 5.8 million jobs available. But people don't have the skills. Isn't it a matter of national security to keep people from being ignorant and unskilled?

You can't force people to learn, inner city schools are proof of that. Why is it the majority of really substandard schools are in regressivecrat run cities?

Also why do you regressives allow colleges to reject qualified US citizens in favor of foreign students, in fact you give the foreigners subsidies with taxpayer money to study here. Then you bitch about uneducated Americans, typical regressives, create a problem, then demand more taxpayer money to fix it. You want to educate foreigners, chose the ones that came here legally and have been given permanent residency. Regardless, education is a State responsibility, not the feds.

How international students are subsidizing U.S. universities

A growing number of international students are finding that their dreams of studying in the U.S. comes with a nearly impossible price tag. Many schools have limited funds for student aid, and the lion’s share of that money is reserved for U.S. students. And most foreign citizens are not eligible for federal student aid from the U.S. Department of Education.

-----------------

I'm not bothering with the rest of your post. I'm guessing it's equally ignorant.

10 Universities That Offer International Students the Most Aid

Among the schools that gave the most financial aid to international students, the average award was $54,718.
<<<snip>>>
A record number of international students – 886,052 undergraduate and graduate students – enrolled during the 2013-2014 school year, according to an annual report on study abroad trends.
<<<snip>>>
Skidmore has been listed before as one of the top 10 schools for awarding the most aid to undergrads from abroad, though its average aid amount in previous years has been lower. It was $53,600 during the 2013-2014 school year.

10 Universities That Offer International Students the Most Aid

886,052 US citizens that can't get in a US school because the slots are taken by foreigners.

 

[BluesLegend]

Illegals get the hell out of our country! At the rate illegals are killing Americans we'll have to build a memorial in Washington next to the Vietnam memorial.

What rate is that?

These people never have anything to offer besides overly emotional fluff that gives them the warm and fuzzies. They don't care about objective, factual information when it comes to political issues.

Pick a side, raping murdering illegals or your fellow Americans.

Uh well you should know that crime among illegals is statistically low so your dichotomy is fallacious.

No its not, thousands of American citizens have suffered at the hands of these foreign criminals. More than were killed on 9-11 and we went to war over that.