SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TimF who wrote (281159)3/21/2006 7:30:04 PM
From: Road Walker  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572903
 
re: So what made the world and the US better?
______
Economic growth and technological improvements.


And going way back in the posts and to the heart of the question, I suppose you don't think that the governments coming out of WW2 had anything to do with that?

re: We might disagree about the size of the difference, and the cause of the difference, or the circumstances of the difference, but we both agree about the difference, and that this is one measure where Clinton came out ahead of Bush.

Thank you. Most people wouldn't put 3 disclamers on it, but I realize you are partisan a Republican so I will forgive.

re: 1 - While a balanced budget is something that would probably have support from a lot of libertarians it isn't really a small government vs. large government issue.

Clinton grew government at a smaller pace than recent Republicans. You can nail him for that if you like, but it doesn't ring true.

re: But government spending is not the only issue that libertarians care about. There are many other issues and concerns for most libertarians. A better record on controlling spending doesn't necessarily mean a more libertarian record.

I never claimed Clinton was a libertarian. Just that his policy fit your views better than Bush.

re: 3 - That better record on spending was in very different circumstances. Winding down the spending from the cold war for Clinton, winding up spending for the war against Islamofacist terrorism for Bush. A new Republican congress wanting to cut government for Clinton, vs. a more settled and corrupt Republican congress for Bush.

Do libertarian support "Islamofacist terrorism" spending? I think not. Libertarians are isolationists by nature... they are not nation builders for sure.

re: 4 - Clinton got action on a lot of things by regulation that required other people to spend rather then on increasing spending. The action is just as against real libertarianism as increasing spending, perhaps more so.

You think Bush didn't? Bush just put it on the Fed credit card. Passed it on to the next generation. That abhorent.

re: 5 - I have other political/ideological opinions besides libertarianism. Bush tends to fit better on these concerns than Clinton. Some of these ideas might be what you call my "strong Republican bias", but its more ideological than partisan.

Yeah, that's pretty obvious. It appears you will dump the libertarian part for the Republican part is a second.

That's OK, just be honest.