Charley says it better than I could...

Quote :

"The Elections by Charley Reese, October 16, 2006 I don't know if the Democrats will gain a majority in either the Senate or the House. I don't think it is knowable. I hope they do, because the Republicans have proven that having control of the White House, the Senate and the House produces bad government. With today's Republicans acting like their sole duty is to do whatever the president wants them to do, the system of checks and balances is destroyed. A president, especially one who doesn't feel bound by the Constitution, needs a restraining hand. Even if the restraining hand is guided by partisan motives, it still acts as a restraint. Granted, the Democrats are no prize and are hardly distinguishable from the Republicans. Nevertheless, if they controlled either the Senate or the House, they could put the brakes on the president, even if it were for the basest of motives. I'm one of those people who thinks legislative deadlock is a good thing. Most legislation passed these days is bad legislation. The country would be better off if legislators didn't pass any laws. The country would be greatly better off if they devoted a whole session to doing nothing but repealing bad laws. Many Americans have too much faith in government and in laws. Government is like a retarded giant – very powerful but stupid. Almost nothing government tries to do succeeds. Just looking back at the past few decades, it has – despite enormous expenditures – failed to find a cure for cancer, failed to stop illegal drugs, failed to stop illegal immigrants, failed to protect the American people from terrorists, failed to improve public education, failed to keep up with repairing the infrastructure, failed to eliminate the deficit, failed to eliminate the trade deficits, failed to curb inflation, etc., etc., and so forth. I could go on and on, because virtually every program started by government has failed in its objectives or sputtered along in the most ineffective and expensive manner. There is a simple explanation. Men do not become gods when they are elected to public office. To use the vernacular, "there ain't nobody here but us humans." All humans are fallible. They don't change just because their paycheck comes from the government. People on government payrolls are no more or no less honest, smart, stupid, vain, ambitious, etc., than people in the private sector. We don't expect either perfection or miracles from the private sector, and we shouldn't expect them from the public sector. The way to handle a retarded giant is exactly the way our Founding Fathers intended. Keep it simple. Give the government simple tasks, and not many of those. The way to keep it from usurping its legitimate powers is to maintain a divided government. The only way the people can protect themselves from corruption is to make sure the politicians have nothing to sell. If Congress stuck to its constitutional duties and only to them, there would be no favors it could grant for cash or other goodies. People should read their Constitution. After listing the specific tasks Congress is authorized to do, it does not say "and anything else that might cross your mind." I don't expect a return of the constitutional republic that Abraham Lincoln destroyed. It would be enough if the American people just realized that elected officials are no smarter than they are, and some of them are a whole lot dumber. There are some people in public office who couldn't run a hot-dog cart. In the words of a Georgia politician, if you expect government to solve your problems, "You done come to the henhouse looking for wool." "

10/16/2006 11:11:11 AM

Quote :

"Many Americans have too much faith in government and in laws. Government is like a retarded giant – very powerful but stupid"

article is pretty much right

10/16/2006 11:15:51 AM

And libertarians rejoice.

Historical evidence suggests an overwealming Republican majority in Congress coupled with a Democrat controlled Presidency is nearly optimal.

Evidence is that a Democrat controlled Congress coupled with a Republican controlled Presidency engenders poor results.

10/16/2006 11:18:53 AM

what validity does that correlation have past 40 years ago or so? (when the nature of each party shifted during the civil rights mvmt.?)

(and this is an honest question -- i don't really know much of the congressional fluctuations too far back into the past)

10/16/2006 11:30:38 AM

^^but i thought the Reagan era was libertarian shangri-la?

10/16/2006 12:37:52 PM

^ Then you were confused.

10/16/2006 12:58:17 PM

so what good did reagan do in your eyes?

10/16/2006 1:08:50 PM

He did a lot of good, some argue he did as much good as he could given a spiteful congress.

But he was also a war monger and engaged in a lot of underhanded dealings overseas.

He failed to cut spending as much as he should have (blames congress).

He should have deregulated more (blames congress) Jimmy Carter deregulated more than Reagan did. We had to wait till Clinton to continue with radical reforms.

10/16/2006 1:16:12 PM

Quote :

"LoneSnark: Jimmy Carter deregulated more than Reagan did"

10/16/2006 1:39:56 PM

^ I might be mistaken, but it was my understanding that it was Carter that (secretly) led the deregulation of the railroads, truck lines, and airlines. Carter also appointed Paul Volker, the guy that ended the inflationary policies of the Federal Reserve. Even if actual implementation of these policies spread into Reagan's term he can't take credit for executive orders and appointments made under Carter.

Reagan deregulated energy, some banking, and what? Am I forgetting something?

10/16/2006 2:03:02 PM

Quote :

"I don't expect a return of the constitutional republic that Abraham Lincoln destroyed."

Thank fucking God! I would make a terrible cotton picker.

10/16/2006 3:23:29 PM

Quote :

"^^but i thought the Reagan era was libertarian shangri-la?"

i generally like Reagan, but I wouldn't call it "libertarian shangri-la".

10/16/2006 4:26:16 PM

more like libertarian new jersey

pretty good in the big scheme of things, but kinda shitty by itself

10/16/2006 4:30:55 PM

The republicans told us in 2000 how wonderful life would be if only we would put them in power. Finally we could shrink gov't spending and federal intrusion while the democrats could only sit on the sidelines and shriek their disapproval. Well we gave Bush and his GOP party control of the government and what did it get us?

More government control
Runaway federal spending
Less Liberty
Less security
and another war that half the country refuses to support.

No my friends, we should learn this lesson well and never again allow any party to control the reigns of gov't. Our liberty erodes with whatever party is in charge. It would be better to have them keep cancelling each other out. Let them keep filibustering and vetoeing each other while we live our lives. Like Bele and Lokai, let them fight to a draw for eternity.

10/16/2006 10:11:13 PM

I think the people of the US are the retarded giant.

more like abunch of little retards.

10/16/2006 10:14:32 PM

^^^ yeah, something like that

it was the best we've done in a long, long time...but hardly perfect

10/16/2006 10:44:12 PM