en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/3454071 Comments by blueeyedfly http://biggovernment.com/jdunetz/2012/01/31/cbo-study-federal-workers-compensated-much-better-than-private-sector/#IDComment280237636 Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach get some other government job... Wed, 1 Feb 2012 00:16:48 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/jdunetz/2012/01/31/cbo-study-federal-workers-compensated-much-better-than-private-sector/#IDComment280237636 http://biggovernment.com/mrctv/2012/01/27/high-school-teacher-refuses-to-accept-mlk-award-from-paul-ryan/#IDComment276232254 I bet you the teacher is more than willing to accept a conservatives tax money though... Fri, 27 Jan 2012 21:06:54 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/mrctv/2012/01/27/high-school-teacher-refuses-to-accept-mlk-award-from-paul-ryan/#IDComment276232254 http://biggovernment.com/jbradley/2012/01/26/gingrich-sees-permanent-us-moon-base-by-end-of-his-second-term/#IDComment275884904 Yep - the space role of our federal government should be purely military defense. Orbital platforms are indeed the ultimate high ground, and kinetic kill devices would be awesome deterrents. Of course, the spin-off affects of learning how to defend from space and take advantage of the resources there (Solar powered satellites feeding ground based rectenna farms, ultra-high powered lasers, asteroid mining, etc...) would spin off enormous opportunities to the private sector. Long term it would likely be cheaper than our current way of 'defending' our country. Great post Peregry - thanks! Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:04:47 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/jbradley/2012/01/26/gingrich-sees-permanent-us-moon-base-by-end-of-his-second-term/#IDComment275884904 http://biggovernment.com/jbradley/2012/01/26/gingrich-sees-permanent-us-moon-base-by-end-of-his-second-term/#IDComment275880027 You wouldn't have to ship them there - you'd just have to make them believe you were shipping them there... MooHaHaHa (cough) Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:56:50 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/jbradley/2012/01/26/gingrich-sees-permanent-us-moon-base-by-end-of-his-second-term/#IDComment275880027 http://biggovernment.com/jbradley/2012/01/26/gingrich-sees-permanent-us-moon-base-by-end-of-his-second-term/#IDComment275878802 It's half the right answer though. If Gingrich would tie it all together by pointing out that the governments role in the partnership would be in removing bad regulation so that private organizations could begin competing for the extraordinary benefits available from a space based society, he could make a good case for a moon base that would kickstart America. Of course, we'd need to repattern our society to admire successful businesses and business leaders again to make it really work. Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:54:58 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/jbradley/2012/01/26/gingrich-sees-permanent-us-moon-base-by-end-of-his-second-term/#IDComment275878802 http://biggovernment.com/libertychick/2012/01/19/breaking-anonymous-hits-fbi-doj-others-after-feds-bust-file-sharing-website/#IDComment270498960 Back when everything local was point-to-point and store and forward, I was one of the last hops before passing the data to 3M for transcontinental connections. I had always assumed that given IP's routing abilities the backbones were a mesh of those early corporate connections. It's pretty frightening if there is a controllable number of throttle points - we really need to reduce the federal government to it's constitutional role. I'm too old to become a serf. Sat, 21 Jan 2012 14:35:23 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/libertychick/2012/01/19/breaking-anonymous-hits-fbi-doj-others-after-feds-bust-file-sharing-website/#IDComment270498960 http://biggovernment.com/libertychick/2012/01/19/breaking-anonymous-hits-fbi-doj-others-after-feds-bust-file-sharing-website/#IDComment269674936 I'd like a reference on that - I just tried to find one and couldn't, but it's certainly possible that at some point the corporations that provide backbone services started taking money from governments. That didn't use to be the case in the USA. I'm suddenly very curious about this - I sure as heck hope the backbones aren't maintained as part of our government. Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:30:03 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/libertychick/2012/01/19/breaking-anonymous-hits-fbi-doj-others-after-feds-bust-file-sharing-website/#IDComment269674936 http://biggovernment.com/whall/2012/01/17/112th-congress-passed-just-80-bills-lowest-number-since-1947/#IDComment266810518 That was true, but now the Democrats have started liking corporate welfare as well. Good post... Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:05:14 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/whall/2012/01/17/112th-congress-passed-just-80-bills-lowest-number-since-1947/#IDComment266810518 http://biggovernment.com/sberry/2012/01/16/jim-demint-is-right-its-time-for-a-debate-between-conservatives-and-libertarians/#IDComment266775442 I honestly don't see the purpose of including item 5. You can certainly not believe in any god and still believe in inalienable rights. Certainly religions other than Judeo-Christian believe in inalienable rights. Why muddy the waters and be divisive by bringing in a creator and a particular flavor of belief systems? I'm not arguing to be argumentative - I'm arguing because those two items go against the grain of personal freedom espoused in the rest of the points, and they turn people away in droves. Abstract those two points and you will get a much greater number of people to agree with the overall series of tenets. Aside from that I think the remainder is marvelous, and I appreciate your post a great deal - thanks! Tue, 17 Jan 2012 14:13:39 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/sberry/2012/01/16/jim-demint-is-right-its-time-for-a-debate-between-conservatives-and-libertarians/#IDComment266775442 http://biggovernment.com/whall/2012/01/16/cbs-news-obamas-11-more-solyndras/#IDComment266039271 $20,000,000,000 will buy 2,000,000 votes at $10,000 a pop. I think that's pretty much enough to swing an election - tell me again how Obama was the choice of the people? Mon, 16 Jan 2012 18:06:59 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/whall/2012/01/16/cbs-news-obamas-11-more-solyndras/#IDComment266039271 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2012/01/13/judge-rejects-suit-to-add-candidates-to-virginia-primary-ballot/#IDComment264149703 Palin might make a good VP for Paul - she'd bring in a fair number of women and make a lot of the social conservatives happy. If Paul turned out to be as good for the economy as I expect he would be, Sarah might well get the presidency in four years. Sat, 14 Jan 2012 14:51:59 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2012/01/13/judge-rejects-suit-to-add-candidates-to-virginia-primary-ballot/#IDComment264149703 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2012/01/13/judge-rejects-suit-to-add-candidates-to-virginia-primary-ballot/#IDComment264132147 I have never in my life felt so inclined to sit an election out, with complete and full realization of what four more years of Obama will do. This was the election that could have finally put the GOP in the drivers seat for a long time - small government all the way - and they ran a fiscal moderate / social gumby. At this point primary voters need to think about the realities. The 'anybody but Obama' (ABO) crowd will vote for Ron Paul or Romney - it doesn't matter which one runs. The Ron Paul crowd will only vote for Ron Paul, even if it gives Obama the presidency for four more years. I think Romney has a slim chance to win, but it's really slim. I think Ron Paul has a better chance to win - you'll get the youth vote, the libertarian vote, the ABO vote. If he chose the right VP he could pick up another portion of our balkanized electorate. Sat, 14 Jan 2012 14:21:30 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/publius/2012/01/13/judge-rejects-suit-to-add-candidates-to-virginia-primary-ballot/#IDComment264132147 http://biggovernment.com/tloudon/2012/01/13/white-house-official-heather-higginbottom-needs-to-explain-marxist-connection/#IDComment263423639 What we've done is have two parties that have the same goal of unregulated government. Feudalism is really fun for the people on top. Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:12:06 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/tloudon/2012/01/13/white-house-official-heather-higginbottom-needs-to-explain-marxist-connection/#IDComment263423639 http://biggovernment.com/kmartin/2012/01/13/dc-mayor-calls-upon-the-national-park-service-to-remove-occupy-dc-from-mcpherson-square/#IDComment263413301 It has to be George Bush's fault. If it weren't for him, all their plans would work. Fri, 13 Jan 2012 18:59:55 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/kmartin/2012/01/13/dc-mayor-calls-upon-the-national-park-service-to-remove-occupy-dc-from-mcpherson-square/#IDComment263413301 http://biggovernment.com/bhealy/2012/01/11/breaking-huge-error-rate-in-same-day-election-registrations-found/#IDComment261808135 It can't work - it disenfranchises all those people born with purple index fingers. We really should have a program for those poor pitiful purple people. Thu, 12 Jan 2012 01:09:55 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/bhealy/2012/01/11/breaking-huge-error-rate-in-same-day-election-registrations-found/#IDComment261808135 http://biggovernment.com/jpollak/2012/01/11/aeis-arthur-brooks-make-the-moral-case-for-freedom/#IDComment261743750 I think a much easier way to sell small government, because it's both positive and it seems to resonate with people I've talked to, is to propose that the government only do things that 80% or more of all constituents agree with. If you can't get 80% to agree on the federal level then try at the state, if not the state then try the county, city, neighborhood, family and if none of those agree that it should be done, I think it's pretty safe to say it's not in the communities interest to do it. I can't think of many government boondoggles that had 80% approval. It would certainly reduce the size of government, and by definition it would increase the governments approval rating... Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:33:24 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/jpollak/2012/01/11/aeis-arthur-brooks-make-the-moral-case-for-freedom/#IDComment261743750 http://biggovernment.com/cjohnson/2012/01/09/rick-perry-the-tea-partys-candidate/#IDComment259690113 Thank you for the well written and on point reply - I really appreciate that. My off the cuff reaction to nullifying a candidates belief because it's unlikely to happen is that the same probably applies to Ron Paul. Ron Paul's views on defense are unlikely to have much traction in any congress that will support his economic platform. For many people who despise Ron Paul, this is the deciding point - is Ron Paul then not an equally good candidate to Rick Perry using this principle? Your point about 2/3's of the states approving for it to become law feels more concrete to me, though I'm terrified about a government that feels social mores are fair game. What happens when the wheel turns and someone who doesn't share your beliefs is in charge? It will happen, and the only remedy I can see is a long history of limited government. Regarding the flat-tax. I think I'll have to call that a simplified tax as it doesn't fit the parameter of us all paying an equivalent percentage. By no means can the IRS be eliminated when you have five separate and hugely involved methods for reducing your tax. There will still be a need for audits or there will be wholesale fraud with that complex a system. I have not read the link you posted - I will do that when I get some time - thanks! Mon, 9 Jan 2012 18:26:01 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/cjohnson/2012/01/09/rick-perry-the-tea-partys-candidate/#IDComment259690113 http://biggovernment.com/cjohnson/2012/01/09/rick-perry-the-tea-partys-candidate/#IDComment259658162 I'm curious how a marriage amendment to the constitution is not big government social engineering? I'm all for the rest, but experience seems to indicate that social policy becomes the focus once someone gets elected. The federal government has no constitutional role in relationships - none. Our country simply can not work when a significant minority disagree with restrictive laws. A repressive government is still repressive even if you happen to agree with them. Also note that a 20% flat tax at the federal level is ludicrously high if it's applied to all working adults. That will vastly expand the amount of money available to the federal government. I hope that is not a Perry talking point. Mon, 9 Jan 2012 17:44:24 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/cjohnson/2012/01/09/rick-perry-the-tea-partys-candidate/#IDComment259658162 http://biggovernment.com/cjohnson/2012/01/09/to-win-ron-paul-knows-he-needs-the-caucus-states/#IDComment259561439 I'd like to see a companion piece with the opening line "We know that Barack Obama and Mitt Romney share a big government policy". This 'anybody but Obama' meme has the RINO's laughing all the way to the polls, where I'd give better than even odds they will lose. Mon, 9 Jan 2012 15:26:06 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/cjohnson/2012/01/09/to-win-ron-paul-knows-he-needs-the-caucus-states/#IDComment259561439 http://biggovernment.com/jwurzelbacher/2012/01/06/a-government-for-the-rest-of-us/#IDComment256769553 Trusting in someone to be selfless isn't just naive, it's counterproductive. The only way out of a government that is doing 'the wrong thing' by someones viewpoint is to have it do things that only a vast majority approve of. I'm sure this would reduce the role of government precipitously and enormously increase our satisfaction with our government. We need people to run on platforms that espouse ideas that systemically reduce the size of government. Maybe something like sunset clauses on all legislation, term limits on all elected officials, a maximum amount of money/stuff you can receive from the government under any sort of circumstances (employment, welfare, etc...), supermajorities required to pass all spending increases, superminorites allowed to pass spending reductions, etc... We need systemic change, and we need it now - more 'promises' are going to get us the same government we already have. Fri, 6 Jan 2012 12:50:29 +0000 http://biggovernment.com/jwurzelbacher/2012/01/06/a-government-for-the-rest-of-us/#IDComment256769553