Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Are Republicans Really for Smaller Government?

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
5,746
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
There is no Interactive Transcript.

Uploaded by on Jun 8, 2011

We keep hearing fiscal conservatives claiming that the Republican Party is for smaller government, and call for the party to "get back to its roots." But are the roots of the Republican Party small government? For that matter, have Republicans EVER been for smaller government? This video looks at the history of Republican presidents to answer that question.

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (shanedk)

  • Where do you get your statistics? I don't necessarily doubt that what you're saying is true; I just don't know where to look. Office of Management and Budget?

  • @IJUSTLOVETURTLES usgovernmentspendingDOTcom.

see all

All Comments (815)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @sinistar99 Does everyone vote? Can people be manipulated? Do people put competence over party?

    Citing one thing and ignoring all the rest is ignorant... plus I didn't state that we should have a pure democracy. I'm just showing a point that people are manipulated. I challenge you to find ONE political news website/station that is not biased!

  • @sinistar99 "That's exactly what IM SAYING! But it's not about the government "taking" it's about what it gives."

    A bunch of corpses in the Middle East?

    "The government's job is whatever we want it to be"

    Even if that were true, we doesn't mean you.

  • @shanedk

    The Social Contract: Justifying tyranny since 500 BCE.

  • @sinistar99

    Maybe we ought to regulate what you can say too, because your voice could cross state lines, and so congress has the power to regulate it too. Maybe they ought to use FCC right upto your mouth and ears. That would be totally justified because we have bit-torrent and it is not 1768, today. (what 1768 or modern technology has to do with rights and privileges... is curiously never specified)

  • @sinistar99

    What about modern society makes it so different? Is theft not theft, that we have iphones? Is rape not rape today because we have hybrid cars? This claim that we don't live in 1768 and so ... whatever the supreme court decides must be true? Whatever Bush or Obama decide to do is okay? whatever congress decides to do is okay?

    If this is what you think the constitution is about, then its good that it is being destroyed piece by piece. Such a document is worthlessly evil.

  • @sinistar99 "The government's job is whatever we want it to be it's our government."

    No, that's that "social contract" garbage again.

    And you claiming that it works is just hilarious!

  • @shanedk That's exactly what IM SAYING! But it's not about the government "taking" it's about what it gives. People say "it's not the government's job to " this or that and it's ridiculous. The government's job is whatever we want it to be it's our government. It's not a foreign entity it's a machine we created to make our lives better and it's us. And it works so fantastically we can grumble in our historically unprecedented ridiculous amount of comfortable safe free time over nuances.

  • @sinistar99

    "Is it YOUR contention tha we should selectively completely ignore this clause and rigidly pretend it's 1768 and we live in an agrarian society with a hand full or so of states?"

    Appeal from time (argumentum ad tempus)

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more