POSTED BY BILL
This is more in the nature of a vent than a political analysis, but I have noticed a disturbing trend lately.
One of my favorite magazines is "The Weekly Standard", yes that "neo-con" publication that some folks left and right love to hate. Of late, each issue contains one or more full page ads for very high-end Washington, D.C. restaurants - the kind to which lobbyists and politicians repair after a hard day micro-managing our lives.
These ads only serve to remind me that far to much of our money winds up in that place, to be spent by people who don't really do anything productive.
Washington, D.C. needs to become a far less important place for our nation.
13 comments:
Washington serves no purpose other than regulating the lives of the productive, purely for the sake of regulation. It's awful!
Bill, I concur. Just back from DC yesterday.
Bill said: Washington, D.C. needs to become a far less important place for our nation.
The question now becomes, who can make that happen? Who will even try?
Perry? Romney? Palin? Bachmann? Giuliani? Cain? Gingrich? Santorum? Huntsman? Obama?
No? Who then?
Any of the ones you named with the obvious exception can make it happen, some more than others. It's basically Perry's message.
Only a total cynic thinks "all politicians are the same." It's the lazy way out.
The U.S. has been in a death spiral (a la every democracy) for a very long time. That spiral has continued unabated under Democrats and Republicans alike. Why should we believe that the above named politicians will do anything but continue, perhaps even accelerate, that spiral?
I would classify someone who holds that view as overly pessimistic. Were you politically aware in the late 1970's? We had just given up in Viet Nam, "celebrated" a joyless bicentenneal, and the Soviets were on a roll. We had a weak Obama prototype, and Reagan was derided as an extremist actor.
Your point being...?
It should be clear that my point is that things looked just as bad or worse 35 years ago and a new president turned it completely around.
Want another example? 150 years ago our country embarked on a civil war that killed 100's of thousands of Americans and devastated a region of the country for decades. That seem worse than today, maybe?
Did history begin yesterday for you?
Thirty-five years ago was 1976, the year Carter was elected. Is Carter the turn-around president to which you refer?
The battle between big government and State's rights was decided in the 1860's. The progressive movement has been layering on Socialism for more than 100 years (starting with the Progressive Income Tax). Conservative leaders have slowed down the growth of Big Government, but never turned it back. Now, the remnants of our private economy stagger under the weight of the socialist economy on their backs. Only a complete repudiation of Socialism and a rolling back of ALL Entitlement programs can save us.
I think your analysis is pretty accurate, Anon.
Ronald Reagan slowed down the growth of big government?
George W. Bush slowed down the growth of big government?
Pass that joint you're smokin' my way, Anon; let me take a toke or two on that bad boy.
(The correspondent formerly known as i.a.n.)
This won't really have effect, I think so.
Post a Comment