When republicans shout "small government" what does it mean?

I believe we are in 100% agreement, here.

My only issue is slippery slope. Yes, it happens, but nobody is going to force you to wear a bubble while in a car. It just doesn't qualify for slippery slope examples.

The Patriot Act was my "best" slippery slope prediction. I would have much preferred to be wrong on that.

Mask mandates are being touted as a slippery slope in the making. This rings hollow for me.

We're fighting about baking cakes, masks and seatbelts while the government is legit stealing our freedoms from us. Not a peep from partisans who want to worry about cakes, masks and sugary drinks.

 

Nice.

My opinion on any issue this stems from, "what gives people the most freedom?"

I'm libertarian light. Ron Paul should have been a president. We missed the boat on that one.

Americans can think masks reduces their freedom greatly, but are completely okay with no-knock warrants, FISA courts & civil forfeiture.

It disgusts me sometimes.

 

I 100% believe that. Every bit of it. They keep us fighting over wedding cakes while they openly steal our money and our freedom. Partisans disgust me on this point. When they are right, they are very right, but when they are wrong, they are very, very wrong.

Loyalty to a letter is about the dumbest thing a human being can do. Approximately 50-60% of the country is loyal to a letter; not the country, not the constitution. A letter next to a name. In parenthesis. I'm not sure if the parenthesis are important. (sarcasm.)

Partisans are destroying my country. My mission is to destroy partisanship.

We need everyone to bind together and vote out every incumbent, just one time.

435 new reps and 33 new senators would be a major hurdle. Fixing it should be downhill from there. THEN we go back to fighting about whether or not a cake is a religious statement.

 

I literally do not care if our politics don't align. I respect and love my fellow Americans for wanting to protect America, even if we don't agree on the road we take to get there.

Our main problem is seeing the other side as anti-patriotic, because we disagree on the path.

People who put letter before country are about as un-patriotic as you can get.

By this, I mean, accepting a behavior in your team's person while claiming it as a reason to completely disregard their team's person.

I don't see you as my enemy. You are someone I can have an honest and interesting debate, where I may even learn something.

Thank you for the honest, intelligent and civil debate.

 

If the EMT's can refuse to treat or transport the idiots who refused to wear a seatbelt, sure. Let Darwin take the wheel.

 

Personally, I find it tragically amusing that the party that claims government is the problem goes so far out of its way to make government the damned problem. I find it even more tragically amusing that their supporters seem unable to see this.

 

I posted the down side along with the expense. Are you taking the position that our government is efficient and cares about our health?

 

Well said. (skydiving is low risk. My kids and I did it.) I raced GP motorcycles for years, love snowboarding, and couldn't imagine a life where risk excuses the loss of freedom. Perhaps those that need protection from themselves should receive a government issued helmet!

 

Yes. People who are stupid enough to not wear a seat belt while carrying illegal drugs, are of little concern to me.

 

Those that paint an entire group with a broad stroke are in no position to criticize.

 

It still cost money to imprison them. Is society better off since the war on drugs began? Cartels and prison for profit are better off.

 

I'm against the war on drugs. Always have been.

It is 100% unrelated to seat belts.

 

We'll just have to disagree on health care.

 

Yeah....

"I take no responsibility" --Donald Trump

Got it.

 

Like I said before, we've already debated this, your statement is false, as the hard statistics favor dems over repubs, and I've posted this before, on national stats over a period of decades. Your reference was cherry picked from one state, California, in a much shorter time frame, ignoring the influence of federal policies over states, of which the national statistics refute your premise.

Your argument has failed on every level, yet you continue to make the same bogus claim, over and over.

Since Reagan, Neoliberalism has been the dominate framework for national policy, and that is when the decline really accelerated.

There is no need to rehash this argument with you, for above stated reason.

 

You are incorrect. Many people are arrested for having a plant and it all starts with being pulled over for a minor infraction. Given the cost of incarcerating people, seat belt laws may end up costing more than it saves.

 

You are incorrect. I posted hard statistics refuting your false claim. I was not the one cherry picking; you specifically used the example of Dems in control without interference from Reps. Thats why you had to adjust your position to Dem presidents that had plenty of Rep interference and gridlock and are now moving to your Neoliberalism argument.

If so many Reps can believe they are right while being wrong, shouldn't you take a look at your own?

 

Sigh..................once again CONGRESS controls the purse strings not the PRESIDENT. Reagan requested LESS spending every than Congress authorized and Congress did not pass all the spending recessions he sent to them. The Democrats of 2008 and 2009 increased spending first 10% for FY2008 and then 20% for FY2009. Bush43 was able to hold them to that 10% with his veto threats but they cut him out for FY2009. Bush and the Republicans after hitting a $400B deficit in the 2001 recession with their fiscal policy brought that down to a paltry $161B for FY2007. Gingrich and Kasich through their fiscal policy actually produced the surpluses of the late 1990's and BTW Clinton was the only modern President to that time to request MORE spending than Congress authorized. Even now it is Trump calling for less spending and spending offsets and the Republicans in Congress that would support the Democrats want blank checks.

 

Broken tail lights; expired tags; missing rearview mirror, etc.

 

No seat belt.

 

And as a counter point, the democratic led quarantines while somehow pinning the economy on the executive branch. Now Trump could have rescinded his emergency order which gave them the quasi legal authority but you and I both know what a hoot you and others would've made in that reality.

 

Ok. Fair enough. I appreciate the honest response.