Why MLK was Republican . . .

Nothing quite like a hanging breaking ball ...

Reinventing Government/National Performance Review
Earned Income Tax Credit
Head Start
Clean Water Act
National Hurricane Center
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Medicare/Medicaid
WIC (every dollar the federal government spends on WIC translates into $4 Medicaid doesn't pay later on)
Peace Corps
School lunches and breakfasts
National Weather Service
Bans of leaded gasoline, DDT and PCBs
Ban on CFCs
National Crime Information Center
Bureau of Economic Analysis
Consumer Product Safety Commission
Interstate highway system
Food labeling
GI Bill
Family and Medical Leave Act
Mine Safety and Health Administration
Meals On Wheels
National Health Service Corps

 

Great, you just named one-millionth of the government. And plenty of what you've listed is debatable -- either because they're gov't programs that over-reach or they should be state or local, not federal.

One "hanging breaking ball" you've given me is the Family and Medical Leave Act. Government has no business telling private businesses they have to give people boatloads of time off.

And school lunches should be handled by states, not the feds. In fact, when did it become government's responsibility to feed kids. Last I looked, that should be the parents' responsibility.

And some of the Acts you named are just that -- Acts -- also known as laws. Laws are not programs.

And Medicare/Medicaid's only "success" has been at drastically driving up the cost of health care.

Head Start is basically free day care. Nothing more.

 

And conservatives say we liberals are naive...

 

So it's not the parents' responsibility? Then why do parents who don't feed their kids get thrown in the slammer for neglect?

 

The kids still need to get fed, you ass. Fuck it, let 'em starve. Effective population control, no doubt. :

 

Yes, they do. And when they don't, we throw their parents in the clink. So if they still starve, do we throw government in the clink?

 

I was one of those kids. There was a time the only meal I'd receive would be the free lunch provided by the federal government.
Should we take that away because "it's the parents' responsibility?"
Hey, I'm all for going after neglectful parents, but you aren't going to catch them all and you have to have something to keep the kids from starving until you do.

 

That makes absolutely no sense. Do you think about things before you type?

But while we're on the subject, let's talk about incarceration. You want to cut government spending, then how about overhauling the criminal justice system? It's more wasteful than the bullshit Iraq War.

 

Problem with your thinking is that incarcerating criminals is one of the few things government should be doing. Coddling criminals is your side of the aisle's affliction, not my side's.

 

If "the market" can provide for virtually everything else, why can't it provide for incarceration? There are private jails.
I thought your types said things like, "Just protect us from foreign enemies. Capitalism will take care of the rest."

 

The U.S. imprisons more people per capita than any nation on Earth. Yep, real efficient. Not to mention the racist mandatory minimums "your side of the aisle" cooked up. The "War on Drugs" is an abject failure. Thank you very much, Gipper. :

 

Hey, I'd be all for letting the market sort most things out. But, like I said, incarcerating criminals is one of the few legitimate functions of government. It amazes me how people who want government involved in every facet of life and then wonder why their freedoms are dwindling.