Oldstyle
Platinum Member
- Jul 19, 2011
- 31,206
- 4,935
Agreed...but I'm not confident that any candidates currently running will do what needs to be done.I guess that's where we dissagree....I get the impression you think Republicans will actually do that this time around. Or possibly they are more likely then Democrats to do so?.....correct me if I'm wrong.How is it a lefty like me, and I'm typical but a bit moderate...can agree with a righty like you?I've always been a proponent of across the board cuts phased into effect. I do so for two reasons. First, I think there is so much waste in the Federal Government that there isn't an agency or program that couldn't save huge amounts of tax payer money if they were FORCED to do so. Secondly, I think if everyone has skin in the game...defense...social programs...etc...etc...then nobody can whine about the cuts being one sided.
Bottom line is this...we elect these people...and we are solely to blame if we don't have enough common sense to realize that someone's blowing smoke up our shorts when they make promises that are unfulfillable.
I'll tell you.
Throughout our dialog we peeled away the layers of misconceptions that our respective political influences have created, and found we fundamentally agree on a desired outcome...if not the process as well.
I'm a fiscal conservative, Toxic but I'm a results driven realist at heart. You're a "lefty" but you're also a realist. Common sense solutions are there to make things better for the country...it's time we elected people that understand that and get rid of the ones that don't.
I don't think the GOP, DNC, or the Tea Party will.
Then they fail to act at their own peril, Toxic.
Would you agree with me that the #1 goal of our members of Congress is to get reelected? God knows they don't want to have to go back to having a REAL job! The voters may have actually started to send the message that they might not send their reps back to Washington if they don't stop being so dysfunctional. I don't know as the "blame game" is going to work like it has in the past. That is especially true for Republicans. The remaining Democrats are ensconced on the two very liberal coasts and what's left of the Rust Belt. I have more doubts about them being willing to compromise than the GOP at this point simply because they feel "safer" in their districts. As I said before...as long as we keep sending people to Washington that are dysfunctional then we're going to keep getting the same result.
On a tangent...I'm always annoyed when new networks show colored maps of counties across the US, by red and blue counties. It is decieving in that there is so much red, as opposed to blue. It gives the impression of overwhelming support for red states (the GOP), and blue states (the DNC). That reinforces my opinion that the electoral college is obsolete. The logistical disadvantages of being rural in relation to the seats of power in Washington, and the prospect of newly forming states forming thier own independent countries...no longer exist. There remains no reason for 1 person in Montana to have a vote weighted equally to 30 Californians
Other than the fact that most people in Montana have a lot more common sense than most people in California do? (Just kidding...sort of...)
The Founding Fathers came up with the electoral college because they didn't want an excess of power to lie with big cities at the expense of people who live in rural areas. Quite frankly I'm OK with that even though I'm from one of those urban areas. It isn't farmers that are getting this country into trouble. They get up and go to work each and every day just as they always have. All they're really asking is that you don't impose the views of someone living in San Francisco or New York City on them.