Why can't "the solution" be LOWER taxes, NO deficits, SMALLER government...?
- Thread starter gnome
- Start date
That's an excellent question. And although there are few innocent bystanders among past and current governments in this regard, it is a question best asked of the Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. administrations, since their overspending collectively contributed to about 70% of America's total national debt.
So, you can choose to be idealistic and symbolic, and abstain from voting altogether, or you can be pragmatic and realistic, and choose the best candidate likely to win among those available to you. Sure, it's an imperfect world. But if you refuse to play because you can't choose from your desired list of realistic candidates, then you may indirectly and inadvertently be participating in the electing of the less suitable candidate. Unintended consequences, and all that.
By "revolution" I take it you mean riots?
For starters.
I have quite openly favored Obama. I believe he is the better of the TWO AVAILABLE choices. America's treasury has been raped under Bush. McCain's economic policy is, near as I can figure, identical.
Truth be told, I don't know enough about his political career. Although I can say that he talks a good talk on Larry King. I Googled him and came up with this:
http://www.google.com/search?q=jess...s:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7
The first entry is:
http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/200212/17_mccalluml_venturalegacy/
And it begins with:
"As Gov. Jesse Ventura prepares to leave office, he ends a term that saw one of the most dramatic four-year shifts in Minnesota's financial picture. Ventura inherited a $4 billion surplus, and leaves office with the state facing a $4.5 billion deficit. Will he be remembered as the man at the helm when the state's economy took a nosedive? Or as a competent CEO who left a lasting stamp on state government?"
So, you tell me.
'...Ventura's finance commissioner, Pam Wheelock, says the governor did propose a fiscally responsible plan that would have minimized the current deficit, and lawmakers discarded it. She says Ventura didn't have a single ally in the Legislature for most of his term, yet he still managed to push through some of his major priorities.
"The good news is that it took both of these parties in both of these houses until the last legislative session to really effectively figure out how to box out the governor, because they had no interest in having an Independence Party governor look effective," Wheelock said.
___________________________
Jesse at least TRIED to reduce the size of state government, but the "good old boys" would have none of it. Just another example of how difficult it would be to change the system... the politicos have things just the way they like 'em and have no interest in changing anything.
Minnesota voters elected Independent Jesse because they were tired of the same old crap... didn't change "the system", did it..
America cannot thrive where the private sector keeps losing jobs while all along the Gummint adds jobs.
Bend over and grease up... we're all F*CKED... regardless of who wins in November.
You're missing the point. We only have a favorable administration that does NOT spend like drunken sailors when you have a Congress that is one party and the President of the other party. That's why Reagan worked, that's why Clinton worked and that's one of the big reasons why Bush did not!
If Obama is elected you will have Democrats across the board and if you think the Bush/Republican Congress acted like drunken sailors wait 'til you see the Democratic flush ticket act like Pacman Jones (make it rain) at a topless club! If for no other reason this alone should make you vote McCain and watch it all work. The checks and balances even things out.