You’ll never guess the top political label in America

[Clementine]

This isn't at all surprising, but I wonder how many people realize just where they are politically. If some listen to nothing but rhetoric, they are seriously misguided about on where politicians actually stand on issues. While many agree on the issues below, certain people deny that some of these are even a problem or claim that only the "other party" engages in it. All I hear when it comes to NSA spying is the whiny excuse that, "Bush did it, too", and never any criticism of the current occupant, not only continuing the spying but putting it in overdrive. Despite who did it or who does it now, it is right or wrong to do it at all, and to what extent? The national debt is a problem and it is caused by too much spending, but again one side blames it totally on the other.

As far as all the laws passed by congress, there are too many. I'm sure most of you have seen the picture of the stacks of paperwork showing just how massive the new laws are. And it is impossible to enforce them all. Of course, the enforcement will be selective. If the government wants to go after any American, they will be able to find some law broken and those laws are more of a control mechanism than a means to make us safer.

I'm just curious what others here think about each of the issues. Just offer your take on why it's right or wrong without pointing fingers or denying that your party does it.

Polls show solid majorities of Americans agree with the libertarian perspective on:

*foreign policy (let’s mind our own business),

*nation-building (unwise),

*warrantless mass surveillance (illegal, immoral, and just plain creepy),

*domestic drone use (bad idea),

*the national debt (it’s a big problem),

*federal spending (waaaay too much),

*the Federal Reserve (audit it),

*health care (DC isn’t competent to handle it),

*government welfare (inefficient and not helping),

*the drug war (legalize marijuana),

*food choice (don’t mandate nutrition),

*marriage (let the couples decide),

*Congress (passes too many laws and the wrong kinds of laws),
and our government in general (too big and burdensome).

You’ll never guess the top political label in America -
You?ll never guess the top political label in America | Rare

 

[Clementine]

I guess libs can't comment without bashing, so decided to pass. That's what I get for asking for a simple explanation of views.

 

[g5000]

If you are stupid enough to believe this poll indicates most Americans are Libertarians, then you are probably a Libertarian. This poll does not ask those questions about issues which actually separate Libertarians from the rest of the country.

For example, the Libertarians don't want to just audit the Fed, they want to end it. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to legalize crack cocaine. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to eliminate the FDA. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians want to shrink our Defense posture down to the size of a cub scout troop. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

These and many other deliberately unasked questions will never be seen on an honest Libertarian poll.

 

[SwimExpert]

If you are stupid enough to believe this poll indicates most Americans are Libertarians, then you are probably a Libertarian. This poll does not ask those questions about issues which actually separate Libertarians from the rest of the country.

For example, the Libertarians don't want to just audit the Fed, they want to end it. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to legalize crack cocaine. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to eliminate the FDA. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians want to shrink our Defense posture down to the size of a cub scout troop. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

These and many other deliberately unasked questions will never be seen on an honest Libertarian poll.

I think there is a big problem with what you are saying. Namely, the fact that Libertarianism is poorly defined. We need only look at those who are self professed Libertarians to see that. There are some very liberal Libertarians, and some very conservative Libertarians. Some of them hold contrasting feelings about some issues.

From where I sit, Libertarianism is emerging as an alternative to the traditional right/left, Republican/Democrat dichotomy that currently exists in our politics. Most especially, people seem to begin gravitate toward Libertarianism as a way to avoid the inherent contradictions on both sides of this old system. This creates substantial diversity within the Libertarian camp.

Libertarianism in the 21st century, therefore, is a gap bridging position for many people. Inasmuch as most people in the US are not extremists within the left/right spectrum, it's not unreasonable that most people could be "plotted" as being Libertarian based on an assessment of their positions on a variety of issues.

 

[kaz]

If you are stupid enough to believe this poll indicates most Americans are Libertarians, then you are probably a Libertarian. This poll does not ask those questions about issues which actually separate Libertarians from the rest of the country.

For example, the Libertarians don't want to just audit the Fed, they want to end it. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to legalize crack cocaine. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to eliminate the FDA. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians want to shrink our Defense posture down to the size of a cub scout troop. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

These and many other deliberately unasked questions will never be seen on an honest Libertarian poll.

Libertarians don't want to just audit the Fed, they want to end it

- any rational conservative or liberal would want the same. The conservative because of the amount of money they steal from the American people and liberal because their stealing is done in a way that is clearly a regressive tax.

Libertarians also want to legalize crack cocaine

- not a fair way to state it, we want to eliminate all drug laws. You just picked one to portray an inflammatory connotation. Good job our laws are doing eliminating it, aren't they? What our laws are doing is funding organized crime, terrorizing our inner cities and destabilizing governments across the world

Libertarians also want to eliminate the FDA

- Well, certainly as we know it. I don't have a problem with an FDA which is driven to inform consumers rather than make their decisions for them, and do it endlessly corruptly.

Libertarians want to shrink our Defense posture down to the size of a cub scout troop

- Not so, we want it large enough to actually defend the United States, that's a lot bigger than a "cub scout troop." But it is far smaller than we have now.

 

[Clementine]

One thing that is clear. Each party tends to misrepresent what the others are about.

Conservatives are not about serving the wealthy. Not all of them are white and wealthy. They are not all racists. Most Repub presidents have been business owners. They understand wealth creation and building a ladder for people to climb to the top. They don't want people to be poor, they want them to jump in the game and take advantage of the opportunities this country offers. When it comes to welfare, they want a safety net, not a hammock. People need to make themselves more desirable to employers and too many don't do that. Offering an out through welfare doesn't put any fear in people about consequences of bad choices. It would help if politicians got out of the way and stopped making it more difficult for companies to expand and hire.

ALL politicians cater to the real 1%, which is the Federal Reserve.

Liberals are not all about serving the poor. Not all liberals are poor. There are more wealthy Dem politicians than Repub politicians. Some Dems are racist, as are their policies. Most Dem presidents have been lawyers. They don't understand how wealth is created, but they are experts at getting their hands on other peoples' money, keeping some for themselves and giving the rest to their clients. By confiscating tax dollars, they don't make other people wealthy, they don't create wealth and they don't help people climb out of poverty. They sustain them in poverty, which means they have to keep confiscating indefinitely. If there were few poor people, the problem would be so easy to manage that most of their programs would fall apart. They would have nothing to run on. They must always have villains to protect people from.

Libertarians are not all about eliminating government. It's about following the founders' vision of having a small government controlled by the people, not the 1%.

We do need to abolish the Federal Reserve. It was never supposed to be created in the first place and the banks are the ones who designed it. Anyone believe that their goal was to serve the people? An accurate audit would likely result in people wanting to end it. Few understand the damage they do and the fact that they were never supposed to exist in the first place.

The FDA and other government agencies started innocently enough and had clear goals, but virtually all have expanded to ridiculous sizes and have gone further than they have a right to under the constitution. Safeguarding and ensuring that private companies abide by fair laws are one thing, seeking to control private companies in every aspect is another.

Government's role is to uphold the constitution by creating reasonable laws and enforcing them. We're already in trouble right there because it is impossible for them to enforce all the laws on the books at this time. And many are not reasonable. Laws are currently used to prosecute certain people, but not everyone. Virtually all of us are guilty of some violation, but unless they have reason to come after us, we need not worry. In the past, countries used an oppressive amount of laws to punish political dissenters. Everyone was safe as long as they obeyed and didn't speak out, but there were constant threats hanging over people's head if they went against the powers that be.

The FDA is supposed to protect consumers against low standards with our food and medicines. Has that stopped bad drugs and substandard food from hitting the market? No. Yet some people trust everything they say, despite a history of being wrong on many things. They also seek to ban things, like transfat, yet at the same time allow drugs with serious side effects to hit the pharmacy shelves. Thing is, everyone knows fat is bad for you, but we have to trust others to tell us if prescription drugs are safe. When it really matters, we can't rely on them.

The EPA is supposed to be all about clean air and water and ensuring that everyone respects that and acts accordingly, yet now they are all about creating laws that seek to redistribute money by making cap and trade a reality. They, like other agencies and appointed people, are there to make things happen when they don't have the support of congress or the people. They are shortcuts to pursue agendas.

The bigger they become, the more corrupt and expensive. Time to pare down or eliminate them.

One agency could likely take on the responsibility of many and we should streamline things to be more efficient.

Yes, we need a military and we can cut a lot of waste from that as well. The point of military is to protect the country. A big job that needs a strong military.

Of course, part of the national security is securing the borders and I would say some do that as well as they do anything. They give us lip service is lieu of action and we are worse off for it.

 

[g5000]

If you are stupid enough to believe this poll indicates most Americans are Libertarians, then you are probably a Libertarian. This poll does not ask those questions about issues which actually separate Libertarians from the rest of the country.

For example, the Libertarians don't want to just audit the Fed, they want to end it. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to legalize crack cocaine. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to eliminate the FDA. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians want to shrink our Defense posture down to the size of a cub scout troop. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

These and many other deliberately unasked questions will never be seen on an honest Libertarian poll.

I think there is a big problem with what you are saying. Namely, the fact that Libertarianism is poorly defined. We need only look at those who are self professed Libertarians to see that. There are some very liberal Libertarians, and some very conservative Libertarians. Some of them hold contrasting feelings about some issues.

From where I sit, Libertarianism is emerging as an alternative to the traditional right/left, Republican/Democrat dichotomy that currently exists in our politics. Most especially, people seem to begin gravitate toward Libertarianism as a way to avoid the inherent contradictions on both sides of this old system. This creates substantial diversity within the Libertarian camp.

Libertarianism in the 21st century, therefore, is a gap bridging position for many people. Inasmuch as most people in the US are not extremists within the left/right spectrum, it's not unreasonable that most people could be "plotted" as being Libertarian based on an assessment of their positions on a variety of issues.

I based my statements on official Libertarian policy planks. I have documented these planks many times on this forum. Usually when someone posts yet another lie-by-omission poll about how Libertarian Americans really are.

Americans are not Libertarian. That's why the LP scores only about 3 percent in elections.

If you polled Americans on truthful Libertarian Party planks, you would quickly see how unpopular Libertarians are. You would lose most Republicans just on the Defense issue alone.

 

[g5000]

These bogus polls are akin to, "Do you like ice cream? Libertarians like ice cream, too!"

*the national debt (it’s a big problem)

See what I mean?

 

[R.D.]

I guess libs can't comment without bashing, so decided to pass. That's what I get for asking for a simple explanation of views.

If you are stupid enough to believe this poll indicates most Americans are Libertarians, then you are probably a Libertarian. ...
.

They never disappoint

 

[deltex1]

This isn't at all surprising, but I wonder how many people realize just where they are politically. If some listen to nothing but rhetoric, they are seriously misguided about on where politicians actually stand on issues. While many agree on the issues below, certain people deny that some of these are even a problem or claim that only the "other party" engages in it. All I hear when it comes to NSA spying is the whiny excuse that, "Bush did it, too", and never any criticism of the current occupant, not only continuing the spying but putting it in overdrive. Despite who did it or who does it now, it is right or wrong to do it at all, and to what extent? The national debt is a problem and it is caused by too much spending, but again one side blames it totally on the other.

As far as all the laws passed by congress, there are too many. I'm sure most of you have seen the picture of the stacks of paperwork showing just how massive the new laws are. And it is impossible to enforce them all. Of course, the enforcement will be selective. If the government wants to go after any American, they will be able to find some law broken and those laws are more of a control mechanism than a means to make us safer.

I'm just curious what others here think about each of the issues. Just offer your take on why it's right or wrong without pointing fingers or denying that your party does it.

Polls show solid majorities of Americans agree with the libertarian perspective on:

*foreign policy (let’s mind our own business),

Fine with me...but when we have to mind their business, do it with nukes.

*nation-building (unwise),

Let the UN do that...they're the experts.

*warrantless mass surveillance (illegal, immoral, and just plain creepy),

We need the haystack to find the needle...find wrongdoing punish the perp

*domestic drone use (bad idea),

why?

*the national debt (it’s a big problem),

It's THE problem

*federal spending (waaaay too much),

Too much waste

*the Federal Reserve (audit it),

No harm

*health care (DC isn’t competent to handle it),

Obviously true

*government welfare (inefficient and not helping),

Proven


*the drug war (legalize marijuana),

Bought PHOT today...40000 shares...go ahead and make me rich(er)

*food choice (don’t mandate nutrition),

Let us be fat

*marriage (let the couples decide),

Calling a man your wife changes nothing

*Congress (passes too many laws and the wrong kinds of laws),

Get the fuck out of my life

and our government in general (too big and burdensome).

Yowsa

You’ll never guess the top political label in America -
You?ll never guess the top political label in America | Rare

Amen

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

This poll means nothing to me. People certainly aren't voting this way, so it's moot, and there are a lot of people out there who call themselves libertarians who really aren't.

 

[SwimExpert]

This poll means nothing to me. People certainly aren't voting this way, so it's moot, and there are a lot of people out there who call themselves libertarians who really aren't.

Then again, most people don't vote in accordance with their feelings about government and policy nowadays. Congress' approval rating is 10% or somewhere around there, right? You think that 90% of incumbents are going to be voted out of office come November?

 

[kaz]

I guess libs can't comment without bashing, so decided to pass. That's what I get for asking for a simple explanation of views.

Most people are born libertarian. In kindergarten, you're taught to do your own work. You're taught to not grab but to ask. You're taught to help other kids, but from your own choice. As adults, that common sense seems to just leave most of them. Though I doubt the liberals did learn the not grabbing rule...

 

[TemplarKormac]

If you are stupid enough to believe this poll indicates most Americans are Libertarians, then you are probably a Libertarian. This poll does not ask those questions about issues which actually separate Libertarians from the rest of the country.

For example, the Libertarians don't want to just audit the Fed, they want to end it. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to legalize crack cocaine. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to eliminate the FDA. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians want to shrink our Defense posture down to the size of a cub scout troop. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

These and many other deliberately unasked questions will never be seen on an honest Libertarian poll.

Let me take the time to address your hit piece here:

1. We want to end the fed, simply because they have devalued the dollar on purpose, it has lost roughly 96% of it's original value since 1913, when the Federal Reserve was established. A dollar today has roughly 4 cents of purchasing power. If you don't believe me, I can prove it with a simple bit of math. One 2014 dollar equals 23 1913 dollars. Meaning the value of the dollar has decreased roughly 2250% since then. It's not rejection, it's reality.

2. Current drug laws have no effect. Why wage war on it, killing thousands upon thousands when you can simply regulate it? Look at Portugal for instance, they've legalized all forms of drug use, and drug related crime is nonexistent.

Evaluating Drug Decriminalization in Portugal 12 Years Later - SPIEGEL ONLINE


3. The FDA has gone haywire. Why, it won't even let schoolchildren enjoy a pizza anymore. It somehow thinks it can dictate nutritional standards for every American citizen, why should they be telling us what we can and cannot put in our stomachs?

4. No, we want to keep our defense limited to our country, g5. Does that mean shrink our military? No! Make it as big as you want, but stay out of other wars that don't pertain to us in any sort of way. The term "defense" does not me launching invasions into other foreign parts of the world without an ounce of provocation.

 

[Zander]

The battle in this country is not left versus right. It's not Republican versus Democrat. It's Authoritarian versus Libertarian. The Authoritarians are winning........for now.

 

[Ava]

The battle in this country is not left versus right. It's not Republican versus Democrat. It's Authoritarian versus Libertarian. The Authoritarians are winning........for now.

A very astute post.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

If you are stupid enough to believe this poll indicates most Americans are Libertarians, then you are probably a Libertarian. This poll does not ask those questions about issues which actually separate Libertarians from the rest of the country.

For example, the Libertarians don't want to just audit the Fed, they want to end it. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to legalize crack cocaine. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians also want to eliminate the FDA. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

Libertarians want to shrink our Defense posture down to the size of a cub scout troop. Why did the poll not ask this question? Because Libertarians can't take rejection.

These and many other deliberately unasked questions will never be seen on an honest Libertarian poll.

I think there is a big problem with what you are saying. Namely, the fact that Libertarianism is poorly defined. We need only look at those who are self professed Libertarians to see that. There are some very liberal Libertarians, and some very conservative Libertarians. Some of them hold contrasting feelings about some issues.

From where I sit, Libertarianism is emerging as an alternative to the traditional right/left, Republican/Democrat dichotomy that currently exists in our politics. Most especially, people seem to begin gravitate toward Libertarianism as a way to avoid the inherent contradictions on both sides of this old system. This creates substantial diversity within the Libertarian camp.

Libertarianism in the 21st century, therefore, is a gap bridging position for many people. Inasmuch as most people in the US are not extremists within the left/right spectrum, it's not unreasonable that most people could be "plotted" as being Libertarian based on an assessment of their positions on a variety of issues.

I based my statements on official Libertarian policy planks. I have documented these planks many times on this forum. Usually when someone posts yet another lie-by-omission poll about how Libertarian Americans really are.

Americans are not Libertarian. That's why the LP scores only about 3 percent in elections.

If you polled Americans on truthful Libertarian Party planks, you would quickly see how unpopular Libertarians are. You would lose most Republicans just on the Defense issue alone.

Seems silly to use election results as a vehicle for seeing who Americans most agree with, at this point.

If the actions and rhetoric of politicians regarding campaign funds and lobbyists are any indication, money buys a lot of votes. Otherwise Democrats wouldn't be shitting bricks over Citizens United and Republicans wouldn't be foaming at the mouth about where union funded political donations end up.

I'm sorry, but the fact that the libertarian candidates tend to get wrecked come election time says to me more than the wealthy special interests aren't libertarian than it says that the country isn't.

That said, I can't help but think there's some logic to your conclusion, if not the path by which you've reached it. Very few people are truly libertarian, though most will seem to be if ask the proper questions. Essentially, if you ask someone whether or not they feel that the government should be allowed to regulate the rights that rank highly on their personal list of values, EVERYBODY comes off like a libertarian. The sad fact of the matter, however, is that the majority of people out there, both those that consider themselves left and right of center (even those who define their views as moderate), enjoy a duality of philosophy that allows them to reconcile regulating those same rights when they don't feel that said rights are as important as X. (Take your pick on the value of X, though it usually boils down to security or the satisfaction of some dogma or other).

Democrats generally don't want the government telling people what to do with their bodies. Don't tell women whether to use birth control. Don't tell me I can't smoke a little pot (though that one's far less universal in the D party). On the other hand, fat people cost a lot of money, so go ahead and tell them they can't eat trans fats. My body is sacred. . . those fat fucks? Not so much. Nationalize their meat, just don't do it to me.

Republicans, same deal. When they wanna be the party of small government, it's 10th amendment this and federal overreach that. When it comes to marijuana, though? 10th who?

THe libertarian outlook is that the ideal society is one where the government is minimal (essentially there to protect the borders, build/maintain roads, bridges, etc, and enforce the laws that keep people from oppressing eachother) and each individual is allowed to pursue the values of his or her own conscience. On the back half, everyone is a libertarian because everyone wants to pursue the values of his or her own conscience (that's what makes them the values of his or her own conscience). In my experience, however, the vast majority of people are not satisfied to allow others to pursue their own values when they don't feel that those values are appropriate. Most people in the US, and to an even greater degree most people on the planet, are decidedly un-libertarian, much to the detriment of all.

Edit: I wanna make a t-shirt that says, "JESUS SAID MIND YOUR OWN FUCKIN BUSINESS!"

Eventually one'll come to me to piss off stereotypical leftists with the same sentiment.

 

[Erand7899]

Having looked at the chart on the link provided by the OP, I agree except for the fact that personal freedom is not possible without economic freedom.

I am libertarian is some aspects and conservative on others. I do not agree with the libertarian position of pulling in our military horns and let the rest of the world take care of itself. This might have been a good idea 100 years ago, but it is impossible today. We live in a world market and we have an obligation to protect our interests in that world market. Freedom of the seas, and that sort of thing.

We also have a problem with radical Islam, that will not go away just because we choose not to go after them. They are at war with us, regardless of whether, or not, we recognize we are at war with them.

 

[SwimExpert]

personal freedom is not possible without economic freedom.

Elaborate, please.

 

[Bfgrn]

One thing that is clear. Each party tends to misrepresent what the others are about.

Conservatives are not about serving the wealthy. Not all of them are white and wealthy. They are not all racists. Most Repub presidents have been business owners. They understand wealth creation and building a ladder for people to climb to the top. They don't want people to be poor, they want them to jump in the game and take advantage of the opportunities this country offers. When it comes to welfare, they want a safety net, not a hammock. People need to make themselves more desirable to employers and too many don't do that. Offering an out through welfare doesn't put any fear in people about consequences of bad choices. It would help if politicians got out of the way and stopped making it more difficult for companies to expand and hire.

ALL politicians cater to the real 1%, which is the Federal Reserve.

Liberals are not all about serving the poor. Not all liberals are poor. There are more wealthy Dem politicians than Repub politicians. Some Dems are racist, as are their policies. Most Dem presidents have been lawyers. They don't understand how wealth is created, but they are experts at getting their hands on other peoples' money, keeping some for themselves and giving the rest to their clients. By confiscating tax dollars, they don't make other people wealthy, they don't create wealth and they don't help people climb out of poverty. They sustain them in poverty, which means they have to keep confiscating indefinitely. If there were few poor people, the problem would be so easy to manage that most of their programs would fall apart. They would have nothing to run on. They must always have villains to protect people from.

Libertarians are not all about eliminating government. It's about following the founders' vision of having a small government controlled by the people, not the 1%.

We do need to abolish the Federal Reserve. It was never supposed to be created in the first place and the banks are the ones who designed it. Anyone believe that their goal was to serve the people? An accurate audit would likely result in people wanting to end it. Few understand the damage they do and the fact that they were never supposed to exist in the first place.

The FDA and other government agencies started innocently enough and had clear goals, but virtually all have expanded to ridiculous sizes and have gone further than they have a right to under the constitution. Safeguarding and ensuring that private companies abide by fair laws are one thing, seeking to control private companies in every aspect is another.

Government's role is to uphold the constitution by creating reasonable laws and enforcing them. We're already in trouble right there because it is impossible for them to enforce all the laws on the books at this time. And many are not reasonable. Laws are currently used to prosecute certain people, but not everyone. Virtually all of us are guilty of some violation, but unless they have reason to come after us, we need not worry. In the past, countries used an oppressive amount of laws to punish political dissenters. Everyone was safe as long as they obeyed and didn't speak out, but there were constant threats hanging over people's head if they went against the powers that be.

The FDA is supposed to protect consumers against low standards with our food and medicines. Has that stopped bad drugs and substandard food from hitting the market? No. Yet some people trust everything they say, despite a history of being wrong on many things. They also seek to ban things, like transfat, yet at the same time allow drugs with serious side effects to hit the pharmacy shelves. Thing is, everyone knows fat is bad for you, but we have to trust others to tell us if prescription drugs are safe. When it really matters, we can't rely on them.

The EPA is supposed to be all about clean air and water and ensuring that everyone respects that and acts accordingly, yet now they are all about creating laws that seek to redistribute money by making cap and trade a reality. They, like other agencies and appointed people, are there to make things happen when they don't have the support of congress or the people. They are shortcuts to pursue agendas.

The bigger they become, the more corrupt and expensive. Time to pare down or eliminate them.

One agency could likely take on the responsibility of many and we should streamline things to be more efficient.

Yes, we need a military and we can cut a lot of waste from that as well. The point of military is to protect the country. A big job that needs a strong military.

Of course, part of the national security is securing the borders and I would say some do that as well as they do anything. They give us lip service is lieu of action and we are worse off for it.

A HUGE pile of dogma, ignorance and right wing propaganda...

The 'Reagan revolution' was the biggest failure in American history.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

"Grover Norquist has no plan to pay this debt down. His plan says you continue to add to the debt..."
Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.)

“Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not.” That was Barack Obama in 2008. When Attacked, Obama's Now Hitting Back And he was right. Reagan was an ideological inflection point, ending a 50-year liberal ascendancy and beginning a 30-year conservative ascendancy.
Charles Krauthammer