Comments on: A Few Short Solutions http://www.nextgengop.com/2008/11/10/a-few-short-solutions/ Political Commentary and Analysis from the GOP's Future Leaders and Visionaries Mon, 24 Oct 2011 08:04:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: sisterconservative http://www.nextgengop.com/2008/11/10/a-few-short-solutions/comment-page-1/#comment-51 sisterconservative Fri, 14 Nov 2008 04:25:09 +0000 http://www.nextgengop.com/?p=208#comment-51 I believe the solution to almost all of the problems is smaller government. But we have to define what that means. Bottom-up solutions are ALWAYS better than top-down. To be pro-life is a conservative social issue. Therefore, it should be decided by people who hold your same values. The values of people in rural Texas are likely to be very different than those in urban California - so decide these issues with the people who share your values. Get the Federal government out of the business of social and moral issues. This is the way the founders intended it. Charities: ALWAYS better run by local and state governments than by giant beauracracies. Schools: ALWAYS run better by the local governments and parents because they have a stake in the results. So small government means more liberty for the people and more liberty means more prosperity. We can be conservative without making moral and social policy that polarizes people into one party or the other. Truly being conservative means allowing freedom of the people to believe their own values systems. And we need to drive home the point that overturning Roe v. Wade does NOT mean abortion becomes illegal. sheeesh..... I believe the solution to almost all of the problems is smaller government. But we have to define what that means. Bottom-up solutions are ALWAYS better than top-down. To be pro-life is a conservative social issue. Therefore, it should be decided by people who hold your same values. The values of people in rural Texas are likely to be very different than those in urban California – so decide these issues with the people who share your values. Get the Federal government out of the business of social and moral issues. This is the way the founders intended it. Charities: ALWAYS better run by local and state governments than by giant beauracracies. Schools: ALWAYS run better by the local governments and parents because they have a stake in the results. So small government means more liberty for the people and more liberty means more prosperity. We can be conservative without making moral and social policy that polarizes people into one party or the other. Truly being conservative means allowing freedom of the people to believe their own values systems. And we need to drive home the point that overturning Roe v. Wade does NOT mean abortion becomes illegal. sheeesh…..

]]> By: jayx588 http://www.nextgengop.com/2008/11/10/a-few-short-solutions/comment-page-1/#comment-38 jayx588 Thu, 13 Nov 2008 01:03:09 +0000 http://www.nextgengop.com/?p=208#comment-38 redefining polarized phrases won't change the dynamics of the issue. the republican party wont survive if all it attempts to do is change the way the issues are discussed, rather than adjust to the issues themselves im a republican who voted for obama because there was just too much vitrol coming from the republican side. that, and sarah palin is an idiot. ill be waiting to see how the party re-introduces itself to see if ill vote (R) in 2010 redefining polarized phrases won’t change the dynamics of the issue. the republican party wont survive if all it attempts to do is change the way the issues are discussed, rather than adjust to the issues themselves

im a republican who voted for obama because there was just too much vitrol coming from the republican side. that, and sarah palin is an idiot.

ill be waiting to see how the party re-introduces itself to see if ill vote (R) in 2010

]]> By: Ruud http://www.nextgengop.com/2008/11/10/a-few-short-solutions/comment-page-1/#comment-36 Ruud Wed, 12 Nov 2008 00:17:47 +0000 http://www.nextgengop.com/?p=208#comment-36 Bueller? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?

]]> By: Ruud http://www.nextgengop.com/2008/11/10/a-few-short-solutions/comment-page-1/#comment-34 Ruud Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:55:50 +0000 http://www.nextgengop.com/?p=208#comment-34 Why is government in the business of saying who can and cannot get married in the first place? What's wrong with civil union for all: man/woman, man/man, or woman/woman? Why is government in the business of saying who can and cannot get married in the first place? What’s wrong with civil union for all: man/woman, man/man, or woman/woman?

]]>