We need some Sam Houston’s, instead we have weak-kneed phonies.

I meant the use of the money being spent in the current version of the stimulus (bad, I guessing you think) versus spending money for the fence (good, I presume you think).

Well then wouldn’t insisting that a fence be one of the infrastructure projects (again, in lieu of another project, not added on) be magically converting it from a bad use to a good use?

Since when was the idea of a well-maintained and securable border fence ever a bad idea, Chapoutier? I’m not reading you on this comment of yours.

On January 28th, 2009 at 5:13 pm, chapoutier said:

Interesting thought…how many here would support the stimulus if a portion of it was going to fund construction of the border fence?

didn’t we already do that and then they took it back….

Money spent on border enforcement, however, is a necessary government action (it is enforcement of an existing law).

Well then wouldn’t insisting that a fence be one of the infrastructure projects (again, in lieu of another project, not added on) be magically converting it from a bad use to a good use?

It is this thing called “principle.”

That and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee…but alas, no fence.

Nothing like proposing something when you know it doesn’t have a chance in Hades of passing. These politicians make me sick.

chapoutier said:
Interesting thought…how many here would support the stimulus if a portion of it was going to fund construction of the border fence?

I’ll give you a straight answer.
“Nay”
This thing is a disaster.

Making a bill too broad, or rather, shoving too many things in it, is a threat to government transparency. It’s easier to find things in a grocery store when they haven’t dumped everything into the same aisle, isn’t it? If you write a history book, don’t you write it in some kind of order, give it nice, bold, separate headings, and so forth? If you just mash together random historical facts, it makes neither a good reference nor an easy read. (“Fidel Castro took power in Cuba in 1959. Athens was a Greek city-state. Americans fought World War II on two fronts. The Pope refused to annul Henry VIII’s first marriage.” Would you find much use in a whole book of that?) Laws are similar. It’s not easy for the citizens to find the exact provision that says whether you’re allowed to drive the whatever bird off your property if it’s under “Measure 68 Against Gang Violence.” It’s not any deficiency on the part of the citizens. It’s bad organization on the part of the legislators.

With all this stuff in the bill, how can we keep track of where all the money-our money-goes?

And like I said, a lot of the stuff being spent on is just ridiculously inappropriate. The federal government should not have its sticky fingers in education, period. That is just much too much power at much too high a level of government. Same with health care. We have repeatedly seen with other countries where socialized health care goes; I don’t want to see that here.

Any time the government subsidizes an industry, it dilutes the power of my wallet ballot. If I don’t want to spend my money on a car that I would own and drive, why would I want someone else to spend my money paying people to make cars that I would have nothing to do with? Is it appropriate to undermine my budgeting and saving strategies when the economy is bad?

I’ll take my chances with putting a border fence bill through by itself, not with these destructive and power-grabbing add-ons, not hidden in a bill that could hardly be better designed to hide what our legislators are actually doing, and at a much, much more reasonable financial price.

I hope you continue asking questions like this, Chapoutier. I think the kind of question you asked is good for stimulating thoughtful discussion, and would hardly wish to discourage any curiosity you may have as to how conservatives think in any case. Besides, why would I turn down an opportunity to practice trumpeting conservative ideas and trying to sell people on them, especially now?