Hey, let's bring back the Articles of Confederation!

 

Yeah, that was such a huge success it had to be scrapped and replaced after less than a decade.

---

Taxes are collected at the state level, the states then fund national programs such as the defense budget. You'd see a much more efficient defense budget if the states where directly paying the bill themselves every year.

 

Do the states then contribute at a level of to their own choosing, and the federal government then assigns defensive assets in direct proportion to that state's contribution?

 

Canada is just itching to get their hands on North Dakota. Why would Iowa contribute to North Dakota's defense?

 

By the way, I'm still waiting on TMD to tell us why HE believes Liberalism will fail.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

I was shopping today and saw a pickup truck with a bumper sticker that featured a picture of Ronald Reagan and a caption reading "Avenge Me!", surrounded by other stickers featuring standard Tea Party rhetoric, most of the "Take Our Country Back!" variety. Oh, the irony. If Ronnie Raygun was president today, they would be all over him for being too moderate and pro-government.

Ain't that the truth. It is completely forgotten what Reagan's roots were and where he came from.


The main problem I see is that people treat politics like a team sport instead of addressing issues. That, and people want to BRAND someone with a label and not look past it.


That's why you have idiots suing the POTUS for delaying implementation of a law they are against to begin with.


That's why you have people screaming "IMPEACHMENT!" Yet they cannot iterate a rational specific reason why.


That's why NOTHING gets done in Congress, and they cannot even agree within their own parties.


That's why they are complaining about the POTUS overusing executive authority, then stating the border and immigration problem is a issue he'll have to address himself.



Reagan's and other successful Presidents greatest ability was moving to the middle and getting stuff done.


Diplomacy is the art of letting someone else get YOUR way. Both sides have failed in this respect, although I tend to put more blame on the Right as it sits today as they can't agree on anything in their own party,making it impossible to begin to get anything done.

---

I disagree. 

 

I think the thing about Reagan was not as much his positions on specific issues as it was his core convictions in general.  In the areas that matter to most true conservatives, he was spot on.  In areas where he was willing to compromise, I think most conservatives today would be willing to look past that.  Why?  Because he had a spine.  The current crop of politicians who have tried to claim his mantle don't have that core belief.  They're nothing more than political chameleons who are willing to say or do whatever they need in order to get elected. 

 

There were core principles Reagan would not abandon, but there was also a practicality in other areas where he knew he was dealing with a congress his party did not control, so he had to work with them.  It hurt Reagan at times to deal with democrats on things like immigration where he was given promises by congress that they would deal with securing our borders if he'd sign into law an amnesty bill back in 1986.  Congress never bothered with enforcement, and the rest is history.  It's the same thing with the Reagan tax cuts.  Congress made a deal to pass his tax cuts that included promises to cut spending, and they never did.

 

It's funny to look at the situation today where congress is divided, and the White House is under democrat control.  This president sees no need to negotiate with the other side.  He says he'll do so happily, but the truth is that in his world, negotiation is defined as agreeing with his position.  He's not backing off any positions that aren't beholding to his handlers on the left.  He's not going to sit down and craft any meaningful legislation that brings republicans in for a real negotiation.  It's his way or no way regardless of what he says.

 

Reagan showed he was far more of a statesman when it came to negotiating with the other side.  0bama should take notes, but his ego won't allow that to happen.

Seems difficult to negotiate with a group that is itself utterly fractured.

---

Seems difficult to negotiate with a group that is itself utterly fractured.

That's the main problem with libertarianism.  They're all over the place depending on the issue.  If the GOP had a lick of sense, they'd pull all of their factions together and lay out a platform that most can agree to that focuses more on fiscal and domestic policy and not so much on the social issues.  People are certainly entitled to their beliefs, but they need to be removed from the political forum.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Do the states then contribute at a level of to their own choosing, and the federal government then assigns defensive assets in direct proportion to that state's contribution?

 

Canada is just itching to get their hands on North Dakota. Why would Iowa contribute to North Dakota's defense?

 

By the way, I'm still waiting on TMD to tell us why HE believes Liberalism will fail.

 

If you're keeping a federal union, why wouldn't their be a national defense? The level the taxes are collected at has nothing to do with the national defense changing.

---

Seems difficult to negotiate with a group that is itself utterly fractured.

 

Funny wasn't a problem when there was 3 sometimes 4 national parties, but you have two factions in the GOP and nothing can get done, lazy argument.

 

the problem is Obama wants it his way or the highway, as in his words "he won" and "elections have consequences" so if you're looking to blame someone for not "negotiating" look at the great one for starters.

 

That's the main problem with libertarianism.  They're all over the place depending on the issue.  If the GOP had a lick of sense, they'd pull all of their factions together and lay out a platform that most can agree to that focuses more on fiscal and domestic policy and not so much on the social issues.  People are certainly entitled to their beliefs, but they need to be removed from the political forum.

 

Libertarians are more consistent then conservatives so I don't see how they're all over the place, the libertarian answer is free market solutions period. Conservative advocate big government to legislate morality such as drug enforcement laws, same sex marriage laws, abortion laws, end of life laws, assisted suicide laws, prostitution laws, and so on.

 

As a Libertarian I oppose almost all of that, but I oppose a big federal government telling people what to do more.

---

That's the main problem with libertarianism.  They're all over the place depending on the issue.  If the GOP had a lick of sense, they'd pull all of their factions together and lay out a platform that most can agree to that focuses more on fiscal and domestic policy and not so much on the social issues.  People are certainly entitled to their beliefs, but they need to be removed from the political forum.

Conservatives are worried that they'll lose some of their voter base if they turn away from social issues.  Just looking at guys like Rick Perry and Rick Santorum, and my wife and I (who used to vote Republican) could never vote for them.  Conservatives want to get out a certain portion of their voter base, and feel they can't win without it.  Probably because their fiscal policy isn't really all that different from liberals.  Of course it's also turning some conservatives more liberal.  I'd say I'm closer to the green party than the libertarian party, though I once considered myself Republican.  My views have changed over time to be a little more liberal (with some libertarian leanings, and some green party leanings)

 

What they don't realize is that they are losing an even more important demographic -- the rich voters who are starting to be more Compassionate Conservatives that turn to Democrats because they have the answers for their social policy.  

 

If Conservatives want to get back into it, they're going to need to prop up someone who is likable.  They had it with George W. Bush -- who though he sometimes could appear dumb, was at least relateable.  He knew how to play a crowd.  The Democrats learned their lesson when John Kerry (who I'd say had the personality of a sponge, but that would be an insult to sponges.) lost to the one guy they were sure couldn't beat a loaf of bread.  (A loaf of bread beats a sponge).  Obama knew how to relate to a crowd.  I'm not sure Republicans know how to do that.  Most of their candidates are either guys who have never had a day of hard work in their life, or guys who work hard but can't relate to your average American because of differing viewpoints regarding social issues.  They need someone who can step forward, and relate to people.  They're looking for the next Reagan, but they apparently forgot that Reagan was an actor -- that he wasn't just a politician.  He came off as strong, but relateable.  You can try to copy Reagan's policies all you want.  But if you don't have the personality, it won't matter.  


"The nine scariest words in the English Language are:  "We're from the Government, and we're here to help."


The man was, no matter what flaws he had (and like all politicians, he had many) very quotable.  And not for all the wrong reasons.  He also had a sense of humor.


""My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."


The republicans need a personality.  And they need to be able to relate to the average American (which has changed in the last twenty years).  I'm not sure they have any of those left (at the national level)

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Conservatives are worried that they'll lose some of their voter base if they turn away from social issues.  Just looking at guys like Rick Perry and Rick Santorum, and my wife and I (who used to vote Republican) could never vote for them.  Conservatives want to get out a certain portion of their voter base, and feel they can't win without it.  Probably because their fiscal policy isn't really all that different from liberals.  Of course it's also turning some conservatives more liberal.  I'd say I'm closer to the green party than the libertarian party, though I once considered myself Republican.  My views have changed over time to be a little more liberal (with some libertarian leanings, and some green party leanings)

 

What they don't realize is that they are losing an even more important demographic -- the rich voters who are starting to be more Compassionate Conservatives that turn to Democrats because they have the answers for their social policy.  

 

If Conservatives want to get back into it, they're going to need to prop up someone who is likable.  They had it with George W. Bush -- who though he sometimes could appear dumb, was at least relateable.  He knew how to play a crowd.  The Democrats learned their lesson when John Kerry (who I'd say had the personality of a sponge, but that would be an insult to sponges.) lost to the one guy they were sure couldn't beat a loaf of bread.  (A loaf of bread beats a sponge).  Obama knew how to relate to a crowd.  I'm not sure Republicans know how to do that.  Most of their candidates are either guys who have never had a day of hard work in their life, or guys who work hard but can't relate to your average American because of differing viewpoints regarding social issues.  They need someone who can step forward, and relate to people.  They're looking for the next Reagan, but they apparently forgot that Reagan was an actor -- that he wasn't just a politician.  He came off as strong, but relateable.  You can try to copy Reagan's policies all you want.  But if you don't have the personality, it won't matter.  


"The nine scariest words in the English Language are:  "We're from the Government, and we're here to help."


The man was, no matter what flaws he had (and like all politicians, he had many) very quotable.  And not for all the wrong reasons.  He also had a sense of humor.


""My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."


The republicans need a personality.  And they need to be able to relate to the average American (which has changed in the last twenty years).  I'm not sure they have any of those left (at the national level)

I don't care if someone is likeable.  If that's what it's come down to for identifying a president for this country, then let's just turn it over to Fox and create a reality show like American Idol to pick someone. 

 

Sorry, but I want someone who has the fortitude to lead, and to take positions that may not always be popular, but that he or she truly believes is the best approach for this country. I don't want someone who is wishy washy.  We need someone who is accountable, and who has the vision to set a course for this country. 

 

We've seen what electing someone because of the perception he's cool, or has a good personality gets us.  We wind up with some empty suit like 0bama, or a faux conservative like Bush.  For once it would be nice to have a substantive debate with serious candidates.  Instead, we're going to get more clown shows with idiots like Biden or Clinton grappling with who will give away more benefits we can't afford vs. guys like Romney and Bush who are grappling with how to sound conservative while also trying to see who can give away more benefits (not quite as many as democrats of course. 

 

If this country throws those idiots out there again to run, we get the leadership we deserve.  Until the American public gets serious about electing a president, and leaders in congress who are intent on doing what's best for this country and not for the perpetuation of their political careers, we're screwed.  

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Funny wasn't a problem when there was 3 sometimes 4 national parties, but you have two factions in the GOP and nothing can get done, lazy argument.

 

the problem is Obama wants it his way or the highway, as in his words "he won" and "elections have consequences" so if you're looking to blame someone for not "negotiating" look at the great one for starters.

 

How did you like the negotiating on the border crisis? That was sweet.


Basically, Boener told POTUS, "well, you should use executive action, as we have failed." They couldn't even agree on ANYTHING, while at the same time bemoaning Obama when he does use EOs.


Not a lazy argument, just one based upon the current circumstances.

---

 

If this country throws those idiots out there again to run, we get the leadership we deserve.  Until the American public gets serious about electing a president, and leaders in congress who are intent on doing what's best for this country and not for the perpetuation of their political careers, we're screwed.

We do get the leadership we deserve, for sure. We sell out. Allow them to sell out. Allow ourselves to be blatenly lied to even when American lives are being thrown around. We refuse to hold these fools accountable. We openly refuse to be informed. We allow ourselves to walk around with the "Merica is the Greatest" cliche tatted to our chest, yet not do anything to earn it. We act like every achievement deserves an ongoing Medal of Honor, and insist upon forgetting or ignoring anyone who paved the way or helped us get there. I believe we are content to whine and complain about things while doing nothing to make a difference.


I don't buy the dramatic "we're screwed" notion, although ill have to put some additional thought into the basis for this.

---

I don't care if someone is likeable.  If that's what it's come down to for identifying a president for this country, then let's just turn it over to Fox and create a reality show like American Idol to pick someone. 

 

Sorry, but I want someone who has the fortitude to lead, and to take positions that may not always be popular, but that he or she truly believes is the best approach for this country. I don't want someone who is wishy washy.  We need someone who is accountable, and who has the vision to set a course for this country. 

 

We've seen what electing someone because of the perception he's cool, or has a good personality gets us.  We wind up with some empty suit like 0bama, or a faux conservative like Bush.  For once it would be nice to have a substantive debate with serious candidates.  Instead, we're going to get more clown shows with idiots like Biden or Clinton grappling with who will give away more benefits we can't afford vs. guys like Romney and Bush who are grappling with how to sound conservative while also trying to see who can give away more benefits (not quite as many as democrats of course. 

 

If this country throws those idiots out there again to run, we get the leadership we deserve.  Until the American public gets serious about electing a president, and leaders in congress who are intent on doing what's best for this country and not for the perpetuation of their political careers, we're screwed.  

The fact is, if a candidate isn't likeable, they won't be elected.  Likability doesn't matter to you.  But to the average voter, they want someone who doesn't seem like they bought their personality from the same place Rick Santorum buys his sweatervests.  Probably because they think that someone who is 'just like them' is less likely the be what they really don't want in office -- a politician. 


As the 'older than time' joke goes


Politician 
päləˈtiSHən
noun
From the latin word 'poly' meaning many, and from the word tick' meaning 'blood sucking creatures.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Conservatives are worried that they'll lose some of their voter base if they turn away from social issues.  Just looking at guys like Rick Perry and Rick Santorum, and my wife and I (who used to vote Republican) could never vote for them.  Conservatives want to get out a certain portion of their voter base, and feel they can't win without it.  Probably because their fiscal policy isn't really all that different from liberals.  Of course it's also turning some conservatives more liberal.  I'd say I'm closer to the green party than the libertarian party, though I once considered myself Republican.  My views have changed over time to be a little more liberal (with some libertarian leanings, and some green party leanings)

 

What they don't realize is that they are losing an even more important demographic -- the rich voters who are starting to be more Compassionate Conservatives that turn to Democrats because they have the answers for their social policy.  

 

If Conservatives want to get back into it, they're going to need to prop up someone who is likable.  They had it with George W. Bush -- who though he sometimes could appear dumb, was at least relateable.  He knew how to play a crowd.  The Democrats learned their lesson when John Kerry (who I'd say had the personality of a sponge, but that would be an insult to sponges.) lost to the one guy they were sure couldn't beat a loaf of bread.  (A loaf of bread beats a sponge).  Obama knew how to relate to a crowd.  I'm not sure Republicans know how to do that.  Most of their candidates are either guys who have never had a day of hard work in their life, or guys who work hard but can't relate to your average American because of differing viewpoints regarding social issues.  They need someone who can step forward, and relate to people.  They're looking for the next Reagan, but they apparently forgot that Reagan was an actor -- that he wasn't just a politician.  He came off as strong, but relateable.  You can try to copy Reagan's policies all you want.  But if you don't have the personality, it won't matter.  


"The nine scariest words in the English Language are:  "We're from the Government, and we're here to help."


The man was, no matter what flaws he had (and like all politicians, he had many) very quotable.  And not for all the wrong reasons.  He also had a sense of humor.


""My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."


The republicans need a personality.  And they need to be able to relate to the average American (which has changed in the last twenty years).  I'm not sure they have any of those left (at the national level)

 

I can somewhat agree with what you are trying to say, but I think that there is something that needs to be understood when it comes to Ronald Reagan.

 

Yes he was an actor earlier in his life/career, but what he was not was a politician.  By that I mean that he wasn't a career politician, much like what we have today.

 

Reagan wasn't born and raised with a "silver spoon in his mouth".  He grew up as pretty much an "average American".  He embraced hard work, and had a good grasp on "what was right and what was wrong".  He took responsibility whenever there was something wrong under his administration, rather than either try to cover it up or place blame elsewhere.  He was a leader and not a ruler.

 

I do agree that he was very quotable, but yet, I do also believe that he truly said as he believed.  His notes and speeches weren't written by "advisers" or a team of speech writers, they were written by him... by hand.  I had the opportunity to visit the Reagan Library, and one of his famous quotes which is a favorite of mine is written on his tombstone.

 

"I know in my heart that man is good, that what is right will always eventually triumph, and there is purpose and worth to each and every life."

 

Ronald Reagan honestly cared about this country and the people that live in it.  I have no doubt in my mind that he truly was trying his best to serve his country to the best of his ability.  Was he always right?  Probably not.  However, I don't think that there is a President since him that had that same kind of ethic.  I believe that pretty much every President since him was all about "the party" and all about politics rather than what is right or best for the country.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

We do get the leadership we deserve, for sure. We sell out. Allow them to sell out. Allow ourselves to be blatenly lied to even when American lives are being thrown around. We refuse to hold these fools accountable. We openly refuse to be informed. We allow ourselves to walk around with the "Merica is the Greatest" cliche tatted to our chest, yet not do anything to earn it. We act like every achievement deserves an ongoing Medal of Honor, and insist upon forgetting or ignoring anyone who paved the way or helped us get there. I believe we are content to whine and complain about things while doing nothing to make a difference.


I don't buy the dramatic "we're screwed" notion, although ill have to put some additional thought into the basis for this.

 

I agree America Deserves Obama and Bush, when you elect candidates based upon their likeability this is what you get. It's exactally why I prefer an earned voters license, make people put some skin in the game. We can do better than a pulse, no felonies and be born here to pick the most powerful leader in the world.  

 

Hell we require more for people to drive a car then pick our president.

 

How did you like the negotiating on the border crisis? That was sweet.


Basically, Boener told POTUS, "well, you should use executive action, as we have failed." They couldn't even agree on ANYTHING, while at the same time bemoaning Obama when he does use EOs.


Not a lazy argument, just one based upon the current circumstances.

 

there was no negotiation, Obama and the Establishment GOP wanted some form of amnesty the hard-line conservatives have said absolutely not. That's how negotiations go sometimes, sometimes there is no compromise to be made and nothing gets done. 

 

I don't fault either side for sticking to their stance it's a pretty clear choice either your for borders enforced or your not, what compromise did you want? Well lets make this group legal and we will stop the next group, cause that worked so well when Reagan did it right?

---

I agree America Deserves Obama and Bush, when you elect candidates based upon their likeability this is what you get. It's exactally why I prefer an earned voters license, make people put some skin in the game. We can do better than a pulse, no felonies and be born here to pick the most powerful leader in the world.  

 

Hell we require more for people to drive a car then pick our president.

 


 

there was no negotiation, Obama and the Establishment GOP wanted some form of amnesty the hard-line conservatives have said absolutely not. That's how negotiations go sometimes, sometimes there is no compromise to be made and nothing gets done. 

 

I don't fault either side for sticking to their stance it's a pretty clear choice either your for borders enforced or your not, what compromise did you want? Well lets make this group legal and we will stop the next group, cause that worked so well when Reagan did it right?

I just enjoy that they said he should use an executive order. That just cracks me up.

---

That's the main problem with libertarianism. They're all over the place depending on the issue. If the GOP had a lick of sense, they'd pull all of their factions together and lay out a platform that most can agree to that focuses more on fiscal and domestic policy and not so much on the social issues. People are certainly entitled to their beliefs, but they need to be removed from the political forum.

The social issues are what drive me away from the GOP. On most of the fiscal issues, especially on the need to rein in entitlements, I am on their side.


But they continue to insult my intelligence with all the hyper- religious nonsense like fighting the teaching of evolution.


Plus, they spend too much time attacking Obama. I wish they would go down to the White House and find some kind of agreement on cutting the deficit. They're afraid to do that because if they evidence any sort of cooperation with the other side of the aisle, they'll get a primary challenge for not being conservative enough.


What happened to the Republican Party I used to vote for? It's gone, gone to the wackos. I can't vote for them.

---

The social issues are what drive me away from the GOP. On most of the fiscal issues, especially on the need to rein in entitlements, I am on their side.


But they continue to insult my intelligence with all the hyper- religious nonsense like fighting the teaching of evolution.


Plus, they spend too much time attacking Obama. I wish they would go down to the White House and find some kind of agreement on cutting the deficit. They're afraid to do that because if they evidence any sort of cooperation with the other side of the aisle, they'll get a primary challenge for not being conservative enough.


What happened to the Republican Party I used to vote for? It's gone, gone to the wackos. I can't vote for them.

There is no agreement to be made with 0bama.  That's the point.  He's not interested in negotiating unless the terms are in complete agreement with his viewpoint.  Otherwise, he hits the campaign trail and fundraising circuit demonizing the other side at every turn.  Heck, all of this talk about impeachment?  There are few prominent members of the GOP who have even mentioned it, but that hasn't stopped dear ruler and his democrat minions from running around saying that's what they're planning to do so they can raise money for the mid terms. 

 

This country has a dumbed down electorate that has been chipped away at for decades.  They're easily influenced by hot button issues and shiny objects, and do very little in the way of critical thinking.  If you ever watched some of the man on the street interviews guys like Kimmel or Leno did around politics, it's utterly amazing just how poorly informed most average people are when it comes to what is happening to their country, and I honestly think that's by design.  The masses have been trained like dogs to avert critical thought, and conditioned to defer to whoever is in charge telling them what they can or can't do, what they should or should not think, and who they should or should not vote for. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

We do get the leadership we deserve, for sure. We sell out. Allow them to sell out. Allow ourselves to be blatenly lied to even when American lives are being thrown around. We refuse to hold these fools accountable. We openly refuse to be informed. We allow ourselves to walk around with the "Merica is the Greatest" cliche tatted to our chest, yet not do anything to earn it. We act like every achievement deserves an ongoing Medal of Honor, and insist upon forgetting or ignoring anyone who paved the way or helped us get there. I believe we are content to whine and complain about things while doing nothing to make a difference.


I don't buy the dramatic "we're screwed" notion, although ill have to put some additional thought into the basis for this.

 

If we are only electing people based on personality, and not on the content of their character, and their position on critical issues that impact this nation as a whole, we are screwed.  We wind up with unqualified ideologues who are partisan to the core like 0bama who read a teleprompter competently, but have never actually run a stinking thing in their life.

 

This country is already well down a path from which I am not quite certain we'll ever full rebound.  What's sad is that our president is the one determining that course, and it's as if the American people have fallen asleep at the wheel.  They bought the empty rhetoric in 2008, and then again in 2012 despite evidence showing this country was headed in the wrong direction.  Polling numbers overwhelmingly supported that notion, but the voters who were polled evidently didn't think a course correction was required as everything remained status quo. 

 

People believe the narrative they're spoon fed by the mainstream media.  When the president says the economy is improving, and he touts unemployment numbers that are around 6%, nobody questions how that is possible.  Nobody bothers to look at the actual numbers, or the REAL unemployment rate that isn't adjusted before it's released to make it more palatable.  Nobody recognizes that the labor market has been shrinking to the point where the labor participation rate is the lowest it's been in at least 4 decades. People have simply given up looking for work, so they're no longer counted in the unemployment number.

 

The same is true when they tout the fact that the stock markets have continued to grow.  Again, nobody is talking about how that whole thing is being propped up by the Federal Reserve.

 

We've spent the past decades electing people to congress who pay us lip service.  They've played the "ordinary man" card to make us believe they're just one of us.  Meanwhile, they're doing everything they can to hoard power, and shelter themselves from the realities of the impact they're having on this country.  They exempt themselves from laws we must endure, and they scoff at the notion of term limits.  And even if the voters do start to wake up and realize they've been scammed, the power base of either party simply do their magic to assure their chosen few remain in office.  Just look at the senate race in Mississippi to see what a farce the political process has become. 

 

The electorate has become a population of "what's in it for me" people.  They've been conditioned to demand more and more freebies, especially among the younger voters who aren't really out there paying taxes or creating wealth and opportunity.  The mindset that we should punish the rich is laughable as the definition of what's rich has been watered down to the point where anyone making an income above say &75k a year is deemed to be wealthy as far as the government is concerned.  This administration has done a wonderful job of fostering class warfare, racial animus, and disdain for anything faith based.  They do this because their political strategy is to divide and conquer.  This administration sees themselves as rulers of sheep, and anyone who opposes them is targeted.  Sadly, the idiots in congress on both sides of the aisle are, for the most part, more concerned about perpetuation of their political careers than they are about standing up to an ever encroaching executive branch.  And why?  Many are afraid to oppose him because they might be labeled a racist, even if their opposition has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with philosophy.  Despite one failure after another from this administration, the opposition party you and others think attack this president have shown the tenacity of a mouse when it comes to actually standing up and doing what they think is right. 

 

When I see the way people like our veterans and elderly have been treated under this administration, it's shameful.  But, even the most vociferous of opponents to the administration are smothered into submission by the power base of either party because rocking the boat jeopardizes their seat at the table with the "in crowd" in DC.  Anyone who preaches that we should reduce the size of government and return as much power as is feasible to the states to manage are chided by good little liberals who live by the mantra that the federal government can never be too big, unless it's the Department of Defense, in which case, slash and burn. 

 

Until we start to identify true leaders who are willing to step up and serve their country and not just themselves, we're going to be stuck in this vicious cycle, and as long as that's the case, we are indeed screwed. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

The problem is that no politician wants to cut government spending where everyone but politicians want to cut.  So it doesn't really matter if Republicans or Democrats get into office.  Both of them will muck it up.  


My grandfather used to have a saying.  "If they weren't crooked going into office, they become crooked before they get out."

 

There are areas that Democrat and Republican constituents can agree on cutting.  The problem is neither party wants to cut that spending.  Because as long as they fill their pockets, they don't care.  As long as they can tell people everything is going to be alright, they'll keep getting elected.  


And even when they can agree they want to cut spending -- they don't because it's 'too hard to do'.  It's too much work.  Just like they passed ACA because it was too long to read, so they could find out what was in it.  (Why wasn't there a summary?  Surely you can summarize the bill in less than 5000 words.)  Unused Government owned buildings cost taxpayers 1.7 Billion annually.  


To give you an idea of how much money that is being spent on unused buildings each year:


-You could give everybody in America $5.00 and still not spend that much.

-You could give every public school teacher in America a $515 raise, and still not spend that much

-You could fill Everbank Field and give everybody $25,000 and still not spend that much

-The salary cap for 12 NFL teams combined is not that high


Now imagine if instead of spending that money, we actually sold those buildings.  


But there are ridiculous requirements for selling those unused buildings.  So nobody does it.  Instead they pile up, and we owe more and more money each year.  Those unused buildings are doing nobody any good.  It's a fantastic example of waste that needs to be cut, and nobody wants to do anything about it. 


Then of course you have people in Washington paying for Chinese hookers to learn to drink more responsibly on the job.  $2.6 Million.  Other such wastes that pretty much anybody sensible would find a complete waste.  And yet it's spent.  

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

If we are only electing people based on personality, and not on the content of their character, and their position on critical issues that impact this nation as a whole, we are screwed.  We wind up with unqualified ideologues who are partisan to the core like 0bama who read a teleprompter competently, but have never actually run a stinking thing in their life.

 

This country is already well down a path from which I am not quite certain we'll ever full rebound.  What's sad is that our president is the one determining that course, and it's as if the American people have fallen asleep at the wheel.  They bought the empty rhetoric in 2008, and then again in 2012 despite evidence showing this country was headed in the wrong direction.  Polling numbers overwhelmingly supported that notion, but the voters who were polled evidently didn't think a course correction was required as everything remained status quo. 

 

People believe the narrative they're spoon fed by the mainstream media.  When the president says the economy is improving, and he touts unemployment numbers that are around 6%, nobody questions how that is possible.  Nobody bothers to look at the actual numbers, or the REAL unemployment rate that isn't adjusted before it's released to make it more palatable.  Nobody recognizes that the labor market has been shrinking to the point where the labor participation rate is the lowest it's been in at least 4 decades. People have simply given up looking for work, so they're no longer counted in the unemployment number.

 

The same is true when they tout the fact that the stock markets have continued to grow.  Again, nobody is talking about how that whole thing is being propped up by the Federal Reserve.

 

We've spent the past decades electing people to congress who pay us lip service.  They've played the "ordinary man" card to make us believe they're just one of us.  Meanwhile, they're doing everything they can to hoard power, and shelter themselves from the realities of the impact they're having on this country.  They exempt themselves from laws we must endure, and they scoff at the notion of term limits.  And even if the voters do start to wake up and realize they've been scammed, the power base of either party simply do their magic to assure their chosen few remain in office.  Just look at the senate race in Mississippi to see what a farce the political process has become. 

 

The electorate has become a population of "what's in it for me" people.  They've been conditioned to demand more and more freebies, especially among the younger voters who aren't really out there paying taxes or creating wealth and opportunity.  The mindset that we should punish the rich is laughable as the definition of what's rich has been watered down to the point where anyone making an income above say &75k a year is deemed to be wealthy as far as the government is concerned.  This administration has done a wonderful job of fostering class warfare, racial animus, and disdain for anything faith based.  They do this because their political strategy is to divide and conquer.  This administration sees themselves as rulers of sheep, and anyone who opposes them is targeted.  Sadly, the idiots in congress on both sides of the aisle are, for the most part, more concerned about perpetuation of their political careers than they are about standing up to an ever encroaching executive branch.  And why?  Many are afraid to oppose him because they might be labeled a racist, even if their opposition has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with philosophy.  Despite one failure after another from this administration, the opposition party you and others think attack this president have shown the tenacity of a mouse when it comes to actually standing up and doing what they think is right. 

 

When I see the way people like our veterans and elderly have been treated under this administration, it's shameful.  But, even the most vociferous of opponents to the administration are smothered into submission by the power base of either party because rocking the boat jeopardizes their seat at the table with the "in crowd" in DC.  Anyone who preaches that we should reduce the size of government and return as much power as is feasible to the states to manage are chided by good little liberals who live by the mantra that the federal government can never be too big, unless it's the Department of Defense, in which case, slash and burn. 

 

Until we start to identify true leaders who are willing to step up and serve their country and not just themselves, we're going to be stuck in this vicious cycle, and as long as that's the case, we are indeed screwed. 

 

This pretty much describes my feeling in a much better way than I ever could.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.