I think that I hear agreement that government is the problem
[QUOTE=Miamipro; 412507]I actually agree with that. Just as long as the 3rd party isn't the Tea Party. The way we have our government set up. Is suppose to give us checks and balances. But instead of being realistic about policy and progressing forward for the people, it always becomes party over policy. And that can cut both ways.
[/QUOTE]Then why wouldn't the 'party' that wants to reduce the size and role of government be attractive to you?
[quote=]The rest of the real 1st world countries. Are probably just sitting back and being entertained by how this country deals with problems.[/quote]They will be entertained right up until they need us to save them from something. They more likely will be impressed with the swiftness that the electorate throws Obama's agenda out the window. Germany, France and England have been moving towards capitalism while we have moved toward socialism.
Blackshirt, unfortunately the gridlock didn't come soon enough to prevent all the stimulus, Obamacare and financial reform. Gridlock is good (if gridlock means that the Congress can't pass new, overreaching legislation.
We already have too many laws. Let's just put some restraints on congress:
- For every new law passed, an archaic law should be repealed.
- make it a part time legislature, all they need to do is take up really important issues and pass budgets
- each member gets a fixed operating budget for his / her office and a limit of 5 staffers.
- Members should only get paid something on the order of 75% of the cost of living so that they have to earn something to live (with strict prohibitions on sources of income so that they really have to work. That is the ones that aren't already rich. Which is most of them)
- absolute transparency into the finances of each member's office activities.
Delaware goes for O'Donnell. Alaska is a slam dunk, Murkowski is a non-factor, side-show (a fabrication of the media trying to show the Republicans in disarray.
Because that isn't the way the ruling class works
[QUOTE=Miamipro; 412519]As I am sure some of you already heard. The senate rejected the Don't Ask Don't tell Policy. A couple of the the Dems sided with the Rep's on this. Its to my understanding that there are provisions in this bill that Rep's don't like. Theres a fucking surprise. But really thats not what I am getting at.
Why can't we just create a bill that has nothing else attached to it for either side. And just Repeal this stupid policy. Let the gays serve. If anyone wants to serve and possibly pay the ultimate price for their country. Who gives a rats ass who they or what they like to do with their private life. Every other country (France, England and Germany) get this. Except us. For the USA to be such a "land of the free" kinda place. We sure are repressive in so many ways. Especially when it comes to sexual orientation. More pussy for me. [/QUOTE]If every piece of shit legislation (regardless of party of origin) had to pass on its own merits in the light of the day, the govt would be much smaller as would our tax burden and our national debt. The bastardization of the legislative process is all the more galling considering that congress long ago abdicated its legislative function to the judiciary.
FYI on the Left and the Right
I have often wondered why it is that conservatives are called the “right” and the liberals are called the “left”.
The Bible has all the answers right?
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)
“The heart of the wise inclines to the right,
But the heart of the fool to the left. ”
Yep, that’s it!
Food for thought.
Harry Reid Trying His Best To Fumble DE and NY Senate Races
With enemies like this, you don't need many friends. No joke on the info below:
On Monday, [Harry] Reid was speaking at a Manhattan fundraiser thrown on his behalf by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg when he paused to offer an unusual compliment to New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who was in the audience. "Many senators are known for many things, " Reid said (according to Politico's Maggie Haberman, who heard it from sources. "We in the Senate refer to Sen. Gillibrand as the hottest member. "
Gillibrand, according to Haberman's sources, flushed red, and the comment "created a bit of a stir" among the audience. "It was pretty shocking when he said it, " one source tells Politico.
* * * * *
[T]he comment comes just a week after Reid offered an equally unusual endorsement for Democratic Senate candidate Chris Coons in Delaware, referring to Coons as "my pet. " "I'm going to be very honest with you: Chris Coons, everybody knows him in the Democratic caucus. He's my pet. He's my favorite candidate, " Reid told the Hill's J. Taylor Rushing.
[url]http:/news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100921/el_yblog_upshot/reid-calls-gillibrand-the-hottest-member-of-the-senate[/url]
This is the same guy that brought you:
"Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid apologized on Saturday for saying the race of Barack Obama – whom he described as a "light skinned" African-American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one" – would help rather than hurt his eventual presidential bid. "
[url]http:/www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/09/harry-reid-negro-comment-_n_417406.html[/url]
This guy makes George Bush look like he has the gift of gab. Thank god he's on the Dems' team and thank goodness none of them have the sense to tell him to stay away from their campaigns.
Now, if they could just invite Pelosi and Obama out on the campaign trail a bit more. I suppose that would be a bit awkward, however, since most Dems are running attack ads either against her (Pelosi) or his policies (Obama) . Turns out, no one likes the House Speaker and no one actually voted for ObamaCare or any of the Stimulus measures. Who knew?
Like Rats From A Sinking Ship
President Barack Obama's top economic adviser, Lawrence Summers, plans to leave the White House at the end of the year.
[url]http:/news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100921/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama_economic_adviser[/url]
Obama purportedly asked him to "stay until the end of 2010". Translation: "You have until 2011 to get the heck out. And don't let the door hit your arse on the way out."
So, after Democrats blasted Republicans for suggesting that Obama's economic team resign, the only top member left now is Geithner. Orszag, Romer and now Summers have resigned. The end of their Keynesian experiment with our money can't come soon enough. As Obama's out there telling voters to 'stay the course and let his economic measures play out' his own staff are turning tail and running. It is not uncommon to have top economic staff resign, especially during a President's second term. It is uncommon, however, to have 3/4ths of your economic team fail to make it even two years.
What's the over-under on how long until Geithner announces his resignation? I'm going with November 3, the day after the mid-term election. Hopefully, he can manage to pay his taxes before then and take care of that nasty lien on his paycheck.
