God is not going to solve the problem when three fools in your price range with similar "comps" go belly up. Now your house is worth a whole lot less when those houses go up for auction, especially when it's your neighbor. What is that going to cost you in the end. How do the "Democrats" fall to all the blame here after eight years of George Bush. Lots of blame to go around.

 

You could do that, but you'd never get elected. Not a good plan for a conservative agenda. Fairly left Liberals in this country are considered conservatives in most of Europe.

 

I have looked at the libertarian party and it is unfortunate that they stand on the wrong side of many of my core values. For instance legalizing many drugs! Ron Paul, while some of the things that he says make a lot of sense, he is in my opinion an un-electable lunatic. There is no way that he could ever get elected. The third party that I am talking about would be a CONSERVATIVE party that would not be affiliated with either party. Even then the person that was running for President would not be elected just because he wasn't affiliated with either of the parties. Ross Perot could have won that election, but I believe that he really didn't want to be president, he just didn't want Bush to win. The result of what he brought up during his campaign did help to bring about the "Contract with America" that Newt Gingrich and many others used to Balance the budget. Clintonites would have you believe that Clinton was responsible for balancing the budget but he fought it tooth and nail. I am not a Republican, I am a conservative and I don't care which party a person belongs to, I vote for the person. It is unfortunate that today's 2 party system is broken. I think that Obama could be the one that could bring back conservatism but I won't hold my breath. I don't say that Obama himself will bring it back, I believe that as a result of his policy that people will bring it back once they see that what he is doing will NOT work. Like Margaret Thatcher said " The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money". I have talked myself silly on some of this stuff and will continue to do so I guess, but it is places like this that it can begin. We have to do our best as American's to educate as many people as possible and see to it that we remain a free country. Well, at least as free as we have been.

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: cody700

I have looked at the libertarian party and it is unfortunate that they stand on the wrong side of many of my core values. For instance legalizing many drugs! </end quote></div>

What is wrong with that? Before "The War On (some) Drugs" one could walk into a pharmacy and obtain any sort of pharmaceutical without prescription or license. We had about the same number of drug addicts as we do today yet there wasn't the crime, corruption and loss of Liberty which we have since we started a war on ourselves and our citizens.

The curtailment of Liberty and the expansive growth and power of government which republicans and conservatives ostensibly oppose can nearly all be traced to The War On (some) Drugs. A few of them, Bill Buckley, Pat Buchanan to name two, recognize the futility and the evil of this fascist, nannyist government war on drugs and damage this is causing to American Liberty.

We've been fighting this so-called war for over a century now and it has done nothing but make two bit thugs into billionaires, destroyed Liberty wholesale, imprisoned millions of non-violent citizens,corrupted police and politicians, turned peace officers into a standing occupying army and sent neighboring nations into chaos. It is an abject, immoral, Liberty smashing failure as are all malum prohibitum ("wrong because prohibited") "crimes".

Do I do drugs? Nope. I don't even drink. Do I want my kids to do drugs? No. Just because something is morally wrong, bad or harmful doesn't mean it should be illegal. It's too bad that our bi-factional ruling party can't understand that simple, American concept.

 

Sounds great, but the problem is there weren't 300+ million people living in the US when the founding fathers made their decisions. There probably wasn't 300 million people in all of Europe at that time. Things change. No "social programs" of any kind....take a trip down to Brazil and have a walk through the squalor of the slums. It ain't pretty. Zero middle class / lower middle class means no education, means no workers for an affluent society. What worked in the 1770s economy, has very little to do with our modern American economy.

 

Why not??? Are you kidding me??? There are so many problems with what you are saying here it is amazing. If you don't have a problem with legalizing drugs then maybe you won't have a problem with legalizing drunk driving, working under the influence of drugs/alcohol, hit and run, pedophiles, prostitution, rape. Where does it end? The moral fiber of America has to be preserved in some manner. IMO there really hasn't been a "War on Drugs". Yes there have been feeble attempts to do away with it, but it is not even remotely close to a war. If it were truly a war, there would be harsh penalties for having anything to do with illegal drugs. How about public executions and horse whipping, real prison time where the conditions are horrific. Doing time on the chain gang and having to endure public ridicule for the rest of your life for not obeying the laws. There isn't a real punishment for almost any crimes that we have today. The death penalty is only administered after as many as 20 years after the crime. By the time a person is executed all but the imediate family of the victims have mostly forgotten why the person is being executed. In earlier times we hung people for as little as stealing a horse. We didn't wait years to do it either. If we as American's would get over this liberal " can't we all just get along" crap we could have a much better society to raise our children and become a more productive country that is not standing around waiting to see what the government will do for us.

 

You guys listen to to too much "talk radio". It's not the minorities "poor people" that are to fault, although many would love to believe this and often spout it as fact.

The campaign to racialize a global financial meltdown operates in a fact-free zone. A national study of the performance of banks covered by the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), enacted by Congress in 1977, shows that these government-backed banks were much less likely than other lenders to make the kinds of risky, high-cost home purchase loans that helped fuel the foreclosure crisis. The average interest rate for CRA loans was much lower than other lenders. CRA banks were more than twice as likely as other lenders to keep the loans they write instead of selling them off to the highest bidder.

By and large, the problem with subprime lending was that independent, unregulated brokers pushed inappropriate loans to poor borrowers and to many American middle-class and wealthy consumers who could not qualify for their second or third vacation home and who took a "liar's loan" from brokers, not covered by CRA. These loans were then sliced and diced into mortgage-backed securities by Wall Street investment houses that then sold them to the financial institutions of the world.

 

Now add the 2010 budget -

QUOTE:

• The government will spend about $34,700 per U.S. family.
• The government will collect about $23,300 per U.S. family.
• The national debt will increase about $11,400 per U.S. family.

The current national debt of just under $10.9 trillion works out to about $111,500 per U.S. family, so we’re talking about increasing the national debt by about 10% in just one year.

 

Just hope and pray it falls out of the package..........the way its worded the dollars can be used for the elimination of those trails and with the direction the USFS and the Democrats are headed that is just what will happen.......the dollars will be spent to stop things........not to make anything better.....Tass

 

That's part of my signature, not the topic of discussion. I'm not sure what you mean by +_________________. The idea contained in the lyrics of this Randy Stonehill song is that either we were created or we are just another collection of cells that came into existance entirely by accident.