JC Watts Endorses Rand

[SicEmBaylor]

Watts is endorsing Rand Paul for President based largely on the fact that Paul is really the only Republican making an effort to outreach with the black community (especially on criminal justice reform efforts.) Good for Watts! #StandWithRand

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2015/04/03/j-c-watts-to-endorse-rand-paul/

[champions77]

Didn't JC also endorse BHO? I think Rand would be a good President. He would seem really good after what we've seen the last few Presidents. All about being a great communicator. If he can communicate the conservative message well, then he will have a chance. I too like him going into the black communities. He has a message that "you can do better than this", and they can. Young voters seem to favor him too.

[okie52]

I know JC was talking about endorsing BHO but I didn't know if he ever went through with it.

Of course Colin Powell endorsed BHO twice because of BHOs strict conservative policies.

[champions77]

I know JC was talking about endorsing BHO but I didn't know if he ever went through with it.

Of course Colin Powell endorsed BHO twice because of BHOs strict conservative policies.

Colin Powell should hide in shame after endorsing BHO. You think he would have endorsed a white guy with the same ideas and values? Not a chance. I thought Powell's "character" was deeper than that. Still somewhat shocked. Seems to be rather quiet these days. Can't blame him.

[Serenity Now]

Colin Powell should hide in shame after endorsing BHO. You think he would have endorsed a white guy with the same ideas and values? Not a chance. I thought Powell's "character" was deeper than that. Still somewhat shocked. Seems to be rather quiet these days. Can't blame him.
He's hiding in shame for lying to the American people and the United Nations. He likely supported Obama out of guilt for his part in getting us into that unfunded war that we are 12 years into and all we did was create a vacuum.

[champions77]

He's hiding in shame for lying to the American people and the United Nations. He likely supported Obama out of guilt for his part in getting us into that unfunded war that we are 12 years into and all we did was create a vacuum.

Let me remind you that a slew of Dems were for those "unfunded" wars, (especially the one in Afghanistan) including the next Democratic Presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, someone you will vote for undoubtedly.

A lot of what the Feds do today is "unfunded", that's why we sit at 18 Trillion in debt, will be 20 by the time BHO leaves office. The vacuum was created when we picked up and left Iraq...entirely, despite the pleas of top Military advisors. Got to placate that leftist base. What we have today is so predictable.

[Serenity Now]

I said war not wars. Selling Iraq is where Powell was doing the sales pitch. I just tire of the right griping about our grandchildren's future with regard to spending they disagree with but they seem to remain silent when it comes to giving the money to the defense industry. It makes the griping hollow and invalid to me.

[okie52]

I said war not wars. Selling Iraq is where Powell was doing the sales pitch. I just tire of the right griping about our grandchildren's future with regard to spending they disagree with but they seem to remain silent when it comes to giving the money to the defense industry. It makes the griping hollow and invalid to me.

I'm fine with defense industry cuts...maybe 2-3% a year for 15 years or so to diminish the impact and get us down to where we are somewhere near a 2-1 advantage over the next biggest spender which is China.

Now would you support a balanced budget amendment or is that something that is unpalatable to the left?

[SicEmBaylor]

Didn't JC also endorse BHO? I think Rand would be a good President. He would seem really good after what we've seen the last few Presidents. All about being a great communicator. If he can communicate the conservative message well, then he will have a chance. I too like him going into the black communities. He has a message that "you can do better than this", and they can. Young voters seem to favor him too.

No. He said he considered voting for Obama -- based on negro solidarity and all of that jazz.

[Serenity Now]

I'm fine with defense industry cuts...maybe 2-3% a year for 15 years or so to diminish the impact and get us down to where we are somewhere near a 2-1 advantage over the next biggest spender which is China.

Now would you support a balanced budget amendment or is that something that is unpalatable to the left?I think a similar approach on domestic spending would be appropriate.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Of course Colin Powell endorsed BHO twice because of BHOs strict conservative policies.haha

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Colin Powell should hide in shame after endorsing BHO. You think he would have endorsed a white guy with the same ideas and values? Not a chance. I thought Powell's "character" was deeper than that. Still somewhat shocked. Seems to be rather quiet these days. Can't blame him.ANYBODY endorsing Beary or any sorry a*sed democrat ought to be in hiding, withered up in corner from shame.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Let me remind you that a slew of Dems were for those "unfunded" wars, (especially the one in Afghanistan) including the next Democratic Presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, someone you will vote for undoubtedly.

A lot of what the Feds do today is "unfunded", that's why we sit at 18 Trillion in debt, will be 20 by the time BHO leaves office. The vacuum was created when we picked up and left Iraq...entirely, despite the pleas of top Military advisors. Got to placate that leftist base. What we have today is so predictable.The Libs can't/won't see it.

[SicEmBaylor]

ANYBODY endorsing Beary or any sorry statist from either party ought to be in hiding, withered up in corner from shame.

fify

[SoonerProphet]

Was disappointed with Rand's decision to sign off on the Cotton letter. Assumed he was above being bought out by AIPAC and the neoconservatives.

And Powell gave up any and all credibility as a serious foreign policy thinker when he acquiesced to the foolhardy invasion of Iraq.

[SicEmBaylor]

Was disappointed with Rand's decision to sign off on the Cotton letter. Assumed he was above being bought out by AIPAC and the neoconservatives.

And Powell gave up any and all credibility as a serious foreign policy thinker when he acquiesced to the foolhardy invasion of Iraq.

I completely agree. Honestly, I think it was a problem of him not thinking through the consequences of the letter. There's no getting around how wrong and disappointing that was.

[hawaii 5-0]

Now would you support a balanced budget amendment or is that something that is unpalatable to the left?


As a moderate I'm all for balancing the budget. Just not at the expense of the middle class and poor.

Remember how Warren Buffet paid less taxes that his secretary?

I have no idea how much it cost but once my bro-in-law was stationed in Guam. The Navy ( thru our tax dollars) sent him to Japan for 10 days to play in the Trans-Pacific Badminton Tournament. Somehow that just didn't seem like the right way to spend the defense budget.


5-0

[hawaii 5-0]

Back on topic, I kinda like Ru Paul's moderate views. He would be very weak on Foreign Policy tho.

I would consider voting for him.

5-0

[hawaii 5-0]

Selling Iraq is where Powell was doing the sales pitch.


I see some are still trying to re-write history.

It's well documented the pressure Cheney put on Powell to lie about Iraq in front of the UN.

5-0

[SicEmBaylor]

I see some are still trying to re-write history.

It's well documented the pressure Cheney put on Powell to lie about Iraq in front of the UN.

5-0

Right. Powell was always uncomfortable with it. Cheney/Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld are responsible for that bull**** in front of the UN,

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

ANYBODY endorsing Beary or any sorry a*sed democrat ought to be in hiding, withered up in corner from shame.However bad the republican might be, he or she will be better than any democrat in politics. Book it, and don't sit home or vote 3rd party...Sicem

[SicEmBaylor]

However bad the republican might be, he or she will be better than any democrat in politics. Book it, and don't sit home or vote 3rd party...Sicem

This is simply not true. There are Republicans every bit as bad as their Democrat counterparts -- they are simply bad in differing ways. Either I vote for someone who truly deserves the office or I don't vote. JEB Bush will never get my vote. Rick Santorum will never get my vote. Marco Rubio is highly unlikely to ever get my vote. I'm on the fence about Scott Walker. I would vote for Paul (much more preferable); I would vote for Cruz (much less preferable). That's the way it is for me, and that's the way it will remain.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

This is simply not true. There are Republicans every bit as bad as their Democrat counterparts -- they are simply bad in differing ways. Either I vote for someone who truly deserves the office or I don't vote. JEB Bush will never get my vote. Rick Santorum will never get my vote. Marco Rubio is highly unlikely to ever get my vote. I'm on the fence about Scott Walker. I would vote for Paul (much more preferable); I would vote for Cruz (much less preferable). That's the way it is for me, and that's the way it will remain.Whatever, if you truly think any republican running for office is as bad as any of the democrats, then you do. Voting 3rd party or sitting home at least isn't as bad as voting for the democrat.

[okie52]

Whatever, if you truly think any republican running for office is as bad as any of the democrats, then you do. Voting 3rd party or sitting home at least isn't as bad as voting for the democrat.

Rush,

Not voting for an absolute POS like jeb is not the same as voting for a dem. There are almost no circumstances where I will vote vote for jeb, rubio, graham, Christie, or any other amnesty supporters. Let the dems get the black eye for passing such a horrible policy and burden on to the US taxpayers.

[BoulderSooner79]

Rush,

Not voting for an absolute POS like jeb is not the same as voting for a dem. There are almost no circumstances where I will vote vote for jeb, rubio, graham, Christie, or any other amnesty supporters. Let the dems get the black eye for passing such a horrible policy and burden on to the US taxpayers.

You don't get the way this works. You pick sides as you would a football team and then you blindly play the us vs. them game. Don't get all caught up on specific issues like this or you'll hurt your brain. If you do this right, you don't even need a brain.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Rush,

Not voting for an absolute POS like jeb is not the same as voting for a dem. There are almost no circumstances where I will vote vote for jeb, rubio, graham, Christie, or any other amnesty supporters. Let the dems get the black eye for passing such a horrible policy and burden on to the US taxpayers.If the dems win again in 2016, you expect them to not be as bad as they are now? Makes no sense to me.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

You don't get the way this works. You pick sides as you would a football team and then you blindly play the us vs. them game. Don't get all caught up on specific issues like this or you'll hurt your brain. If you do this right, you don't even need a brain.Please forgive me if I think it's kind of sad when a democrat thinks he has made a smart choice.

[Serenity Now]

Please forgive me if I think it's kind of sad when a democrat thinks he has made a smart choice.
I can't think of a time that you/yours have ever agreed with any democrat thought. I do agree with some non democratic ideas. Hell, I voted for W twice.

[SoonerorLater]

I can't think of a time that you/yours have ever agreed with any democrat thought. I do agree with some non democratic ideas. Hell, I voted for W twice.

For the most part ideas are not generated by political parties. Most ideas are co-opted, leveraged and sold to the public by each party for their own ends. At that point it just depends on what you are selling.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Wowza!

[hawaii 5-0]

Psychobabble.

I had to read it twice to fully comprehend the BS.

When it comes to which Party will take which side of an issue I prefer to use the term 'knee jerk'. Doesn't even take a brain.


5-0

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I can't think of a time that you/yours have ever agreed with any democrat thought. I do agree with some non democratic ideas. Hell, I voted for W twice.good for you. Don't know why you voted for him, but he was certainly better than Algore and John effing Kerry.

[Soonerjeepman]

T


Remember how Warren Buffet paid less taxes that his secretary?




5-0
You realize buffet is a big Obama supporter?

[SicEmBaylor]

I would vote for Jim Webb over JEB Bush 10 times out of 10 without hesitation or regret.

[okiewaker]

Would you vote for Cruz?

[SicEmBaylor]

Would you vote for Cruz?

Absolutely. Paul and Cruz are the only two I'd vote for without hesitation; although, Cruz is a distant second to Paul. I'd consider Walker. I won't vote for anyone else, and if it were between Bush and Webb then I'd vote for Webb rather than abstain.

[okiewaker]

Christie, Jeb are out of the question. I'm pulling for a Cruz/Paul combo of some sort.

[okie52]

If the dems win again in 2016, you expect them to not be as bad as they are now? Makes no sense to me.

Yeah, I do expect the dems to follow the same path we've had with obama. I'm not voting for them. But we've also had the pub elite/establishment pushed W and McCain and now Jeb while ignoring their base or even more importantly...me.

i won't vote for an amnesty supporter no matter what party he/she's from.

[Serenity Now]

The problem that I see is that the GOP candidate has to go so far to the right to win the nomination that he can't get back to the middle enough to get the moderate votes. I think the theology driven part of the party is part of this problem. Also, a black president has been a curve ball that makes behavior and motives of the other side more difficult to figure out or predict.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The problem that I see is that the GOP candidate has to go so far to the right to win the nomination that he can't get back to the middle enough to get the moderate votes. I think the theology driven part of the party is part of this problem. Also, a black president has been a curve ball that makes behavior and motives of the other side more difficult to figure out or predict.Far to the right like McCain and Romney? haha People in the middle, what, want the government to engage in unconstitutional acts SOME of the time? Those that want that will vote democrat, or not vote. A Media, school system and entertainment industry that are out to destroy conservatives and even republicans who aren't as conservative as would be best, are the biggest detriments to the country right now.

[Serenity Now]

Far to the right like McCain and Romney? haha People in the middle, what, want the government to engage in unconstitutional acts SOME of the time? Those that want that will vote democrat, or not vote. A Media, school system and entertainment industry that are out to destroy conservatives and even republicans who aren't as conservative as would be best, are the biggest detriments to the country right now.quit being obtuse.

Romney and McCain had to go to the right to get the nomination and couldn't get back to the middle. They had campaigned and put this talking points in the ether for a year or so starting in Iowa and they couldn't get back to the middle.

[badger]

It might never be too early to start praying that the rest of the country gets the presidential vote right, both in primary nominations and general election.

I say right-of-the-country because Oklahoma always picks the Republican nominee regardless and other than taking Rick Santorum in 2012, we've pretty much gone with whoever's headed for the nominee.

[hawaii 5-0]

T
You realize buffet is a big Obama supporter?


I suppose you have a political point to make but I don't see it.

My point is that the tax system is screwed to favor the rich and that's not right, regardless of politics.

You make more, you are taxed more. At least it should be that way.

Your plan is..........what ??

5-0

[badger]

the tax system is screwed to favor the rich and that's not right

The rich will just tax haven their profits anyways, so what difference does it make if their rate is 35 percent or 100 percent ;)

:mad: No seriously. They have the army of lawyers and accountants. They won't pay anymore taxes than they want regardless of the law. It's why most jurisdictions have lottery and jock taxes --- new millionaires don't have the means to fight wealth taxes (yet) so the governments get their cuts while they still can.

[okie52]

I suppose you have a political point to make but I don't see it.

My point is that the tax system is screwed to favor the rich and that's not right, regardless of politics.

You make more, you are taxed more. At least it should be that way.

Your plan is..........what ??

5-0

The bottom 50% don't pay any federal income taxes (and probably little if any state income taxes either). How is that in favor of the rich?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

quit being obtuse.

Romney and McCain had to go to the right to get the nomination and couldn't get back to the middle. They had campaigned and put this talking points in the ether for a year or so starting in Iowa and they couldn't get back to the middle.Preposterous! Both those guys LIVE in the middle. I don't know what you think Romneycare in MA is/was, but it's proof Romney isn't a true conservative, and of course, he's still vastly preferable to any democrat.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

It might never be too early to start praying that the rest of the country gets the presidential vote right, both in primary nominations and general election.

I say right-of-the-country because Oklahoma always picks the Republican nominee regardless and other than taking Rick Santorum in 2012, we've pretty much gone with whoever's headed for the nominee.OK is fortunate to still have most of the field available on primary election day. They chose Steve Forbes back in the 90's and I was quite proud of my home state for that.(looks like FDR, but acts like Milton Friedman)

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The bottom 50% don't pay any federal income taxes (and probably little if any state income taxes either). How is that in favor of the rich?DOESN'T COUNT to the Leftists' mantra

[badger]

OK is fortunate to still have most of the field available on primary election day. They chose Steve Forbes back in the 90's and I was quite proud of my home state for that.(looks like FDR, but acts like Milton Friedman)

There were some local girls who did a Youtube video song about Santorum. They're probably as much to blame for Oklahoma picking him as Mitt Romney being Mormon ;)

I don't remember much about Steve Forbes' campaign since I was in elementary school at the time, but I remember thinking he seemed a bit socially awkward... something that this era of social media and Internet would have mercilessly mocked if he ran today.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

There were some local girls who did a Youtube video song about Santorum. They're probably as much to blame for Oklahoma picking him as Mitt Romney being Mormon ;)

I don't remember much about Steve Forbes' campaign since I was in elementary school at the time, but I remember thinking he seemed a bit socially awkward... something that this era of social media and Internet would have mercilessly mocked if he ran today.Poor!? Steve isn't much to look at, but he's a truly great person, a leader, and would have been an excellent president. Dole won the nomination in '96, and der Schlickster got reelected.

[badger]

der Schlickster got reelected
Now now no name calling :P

8 years of Bill Clinton likely means we won't get any years of Hillary Clinton. See? Our country does sometimes plan for the future --- get the Clinton out of the way in the 90s so that when our economy needs a better president 20ish years later we might get one. ;)

[Serenity Now]

Preposterous! Both those guys LIVE in the middle. I don't know what you think Romneycare in MA is/was, but it's proof Romney isn't a true conservative, and of course, he's still vastly preferable to any democrat.Preposterous!!!

You're still being obtuse.

http://fair.org/blog/2015/03/24/rebranding-mccain-and-romney-as-moderates-to-facilitate-a-sharp-right-turn/


Before the 2000 campaign, McCain was consistently among the party’s most conservative members. In the 107th Congress (2001-02), McCain was the sixth most liberal Republican senator, according to the VoteView statistical analysis of voting patterns. In the next congressional session, he was the fourth-most conservative.

And he’s more or less stayed there since. According to VoteView, McCain’s voting record in 2005-06 made him the second-most conservative senator in the 109th Congress, and the eighth-most conservative in the 110th Senate. Outside of McCain’s brief tack to the middle, his overall voting record makes him a reliable member of his party’s caucus.


As for Romney, his reputation as a “moderate” was largely based on his having implemented as governor of Massachusetts a healthcare program inspired by the Heritage Foundation.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/12/michael-cohen-republicans-embrace-extreme-right


When he ran for governor of Massachusetts in 2002, he strayed only marginally from those positions, continuing to stress his pro-choice bona fides and even adopted a position on gun control that ran counter to the powerful National Rifle Association. As late as 2008, when he first ran for president, Romney was prone to tout his one major domestic policy initiative – healthcare reform.

Those were the days. As the Republicans have moved consistently further to the right Romney has followed the crowd, adopting increasingly strident political positions. This was true throughout the Republican primary season as Romney, facing off against a motley collection of Tea Party-approved also-rans, was forced to take stances on immigration, government spending, taxes, abortion and a host of other issues favoured by the party's most conservative members but that left him vulnerable to Democratic counterattack.

Illegal immigration is perhaps the best example. It's an issue that is a veritable cri de coeur for the Tea Party and Romney embraced their views to the point where he attacked unpopular Texan governor Rick Perry for insufficient rigour in cutting social services for illegal immigrants in the state. It gave Romney a boost in the Republican primaries but also provides a hint as to why he is losing Hispanic voters to Obama by a 2-1 margin.

But the romancing of the Tea Party continues. Just last week, the Romney campaign ran two controversial ads, one attacking Obama on welfare benefits, the other accusing the president of declaring a war on religion, because of his backing of a provision of the healthcare law that forces businesses to provides contraceptive services to their employees. Both ads are basically made-up attacks; lies for lack of a better word. But the mendacity of the Romney campaign is by now well chronicled.

What's more interesting is the target for them: conservative voters who recoil at the thought of welfare cheats absconding with their taxpayer dollars and religious voters convinced by years of Republican rhetoric that their faith is under assault. Just as Republicans in the Senate have reason to be fearful of the wrath of the Tea Party, so does Romney. Just three weeks before his convention, he is in the uncomfortable position of reassuring the right about his conservative bona fides.


If Romney loses in November, which increasingly appears likely, don't expect soul-searching within the Republican party. Instead, conservatives will likely convince themselves their mistake was failing to nominate a true rightwinger

[Serenity Now]

http://www.brownpoliticalreview.org/2015/04/courting-evangelicals-a-misguided-gop-strategy/


The danger of the power of the far-right was evident in both Mitt Romney’s and John McCain’s campaigns. Both candidates postured themselves too far to the right in the nomination battle, alienating moderates and losing the general election as a result. John McCain nominated Sarah Palin to appease evangelicals and was then forced to a deal with an unpredictable and uneducated running mate who continually embarrassed him. Mitt Romney did the same by flip-flopping on almost every social position he held as governor of Massachusetts, only furthering the view that he had no legitimate beliefs. The complicated truth for Republicans is that their evangelical base is making it impossible for them to win national elections. As the public’s views on social issues continue to liberalize, the GOP will either have to abandon their solid evangelical voting bloc or continue to lose the moderate vote, and therefore lose the White House.

Foretelling the demise of one Ted Cruz.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

...8 years of Bill Clinton likely means we won't get any years of Hillary Clinton. See? Our country does sometimes plan for the future --- get the Clinton out of the way in the 90s so that when our economy needs a better president 20ish years later we might get one. ;)we can at least hope.

[Serenity Now]

Since you've awakened, Rush. Any commentary on the links and cut/paste? Very 8th of me, if I do say so myself.

[champions77]

I suppose you have a political point to make but I don't see it.

My point is that the tax system is screwed to favor the rich and that's not right, regardless of politics.

You make more, you are taxed more. At least it should be that way.

Your plan is..........what ??

5-0

The "rich don't pay any taxes" is a old Democratic lie that has been around for decades. The problem is that is a falsehood that unfortunately has to be refuted from time to time.

The Top 1%, the folks that have been demonized to the nth degree and have been accused of everything but the holocaust, pay in excess of 35% of the Federal income tax bill. The top 10%? Pay approximately 70% of the total federal income tax bill. As 52 states, the bottom 50% hardly pay anything. The last time I checked it was about 3.5%.

A number you should be more alarmed at is the almost 50 Million Americans that receive food stamps. Or the fact that almost half of all Americans received some form of federal government payment each month. Thanks to the DC politicians who have learned that dishing out more and more government "goodies" helps perpetuates themselves into office for seemingly ever, we now can state that we've become a bona fide welfare state. That virtues like self reliance, personal responsibility and work ethic created the greatest country on earth. And why now we have done everything possible to undermine those virtues, is in a big way why we see this country's slide into what you see today. Sad, very sad.

[Serenity Now]

My issue is that the capital gains tax decrease. I'm all for cutting out systemic welfare. It's there for when you need it to fill a gap. It's not supposed to be a lifetime program. Does that make me a Pub?

[champions77]

My issue is that the capital gains tax decrease. I'm all for cutting out systemic welfare. It's there for when you need it to fill a gap. It's not supposed to be a lifetime program. Does that make me a Pub?

NO it makes you someone with common sense. When LBJ rolled out the "Great Society" in 1965 which the central theme was the "War on Poverty", the welfare programs that were instituted were done so in a very poorly conceived way. To not have had a work requirement, or at least community service requirement in exchange for assistance was for me the beginning of our slide from greatness. It is easy to project that if you reward someone for needing assistance, that over time, you will have more in need of assistance. While at the same time increasing taxes in effect penalizes someone for working. The dependency that ill managed federal government programs, and others that were added through the years, gives a person a plethora of government goodies that make it not only feasible to live on the dole, but it provides a pretty decent quality of life. It is said that in the US one in poverty can have an I-phone, HD TV, computer and a car in the driveway, all at tax payers expense. You recall the soup line a few years back when Michelle Obama visited and everyone in line produced a cell phone.

To be fair, government should not be engaged in "Corporate Welfare" either. Stay out of their business, cut some of the red tape, taxes and silly regulations that affect in a great way whether a business is a success or failure, and let them sink or swim. This has given rise to the "crony capitalism" that you see today. BHO has made this an "art form" with the billions of tax dollars he has distributed to companies he wanted to help, most being green energy companies. It has become shameful, and not at all what the Framers had in mind.

This country I'm afraid is doomed by these very welfare programs. Why? Every time a politician (usually a Republican) comes forward with a plan to determine if the program is still doing what it was initially implemented to do, is the program run efficiently? or is mired in fraud, waste and abuse? And every single time, the Dems come out with a video of Granny being rolled over a cliff, or the GOP is guilty of starving poor little children. The main stream media jumps into the discussion, and the PR battle is won by the Dems....every time. Despite the fact that everyone knows that these programs are fraught with waste. And nothing gets done. And the National debt continues to increase to ever more dangerous levels... and no one cares.

[Soonerjeepman]

NO it makes you someone with common sense. When LBJ rolled out the "Great Society" in 1965 which the central theme was the "War on Poverty", the welfare programs that were instituted were done so in a very poorly conceived way. To not have had a work requirement, or at least community service requirement in exchange for assistance was for me the beginning of our slide from greatness. It is easy to project that if you reward someone for needing assistance, that over time, you will have more in need of assistance. While at the same time increasing taxes in effect penalizes someone for working. The dependency that ill managed federal government programs, and others that were added through the years, gives a person a plethora of government goodies that make it not only feasible to live on the dole, but it provides a pretty decent quality of life. It is said that in the US one in poverty can have an I-phone, HD TV, computer and a car in the driveway, all at tax payers expense. You recall the soup line a few years back when Michelle Obama visited and everyone in line produced a cell phone.

To be fair, government should not be engaged in "Corporate Welfare" either. Stay out of their business, cut some of the red tape, taxes and silly regulations that affect in a great way whether a business is a success or failure, and let them sink or swim. This has given rise to the "crony capitalism" that you see today. BHO has made this an "art form" with the billions of tax dollars he has distributed to companies he wanted to help, most being green energy companies. It has become shameful, and not at all what the Framers had in mind.

This country I'm afraid is doomed by these very welfare programs. Why? Every time a politician (usually a Republican) comes forward with a plan to determine if the program is still doing what it was initially implemented to do, is the program run efficiently? or is mired in fraud, waste and abuse? And every single time, the Dems come out with a video of Granny being rolled over a cliff, or the GOP is guilty of starving poor little children. The main stream media jumps into the discussion, and the PR battle is won by the Dems....every time. Despite the fact that everyone knows that these programs are fraught with waste. And nothing gets done. And the National debt continues to increase to ever more dangerous levels... and no one cares.

yup

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

ditto yup

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The "rich don't pay any taxes" is a old Democratic lie that has been around for decades. The problem is that is a falsehood that unfortunately has to be refuted from time to time.

The Top 1%, the folks that have been demonized to the nth degree and have been accused of everything but the holocaust, pay in excess of 35% of the Federal income tax bill. The top 10%? Pay approximately 70% of the total federal income tax bill. As 52 states, the bottom 50% hardly pay anything. The last time I checked it was about 3.5%.

A number you should be more alarmed at is the almost 50 Million Americans that receive food stamps. Or the fact that almost half of all Americans received some form of federal government payment each month. Thanks to the DC politicians who have learned that dishing out more and more government "goodies" helps perpetuates themselves into office for seemingly ever, we now can state that we've become a bona fide welfare state. That virtues like self reliance, personal responsibility and work ethic created the greatest country on earth. And why now we have done everything possible to undermine those virtues, is in a big way why we see this country's slide into what you see today. Sad, very sad.You're on a roll, Ronny!

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Since you've awakened, Rush...dafuque! haha

[hawaii 5-0]

Rand has thrown his hat in the ring.

I agreed with a lot of what he said.

I imagine a lot of the Neocons didn't.

I especially liked his call for term limits.

I also noticed he didn't mention Obamacare or entitlement reform.

5-0