"There are, the last time I looked three branches to the federal government. The Executive Branch which is what everyone is talking about is being pulled into realms that never were a part of that branches duty. The legislative branch is the branch that has the responsibilities for ensuring Domestic Tranquility and the only way for that to happen is for them to get out of the way of the entrepreneur and their ability to move the economy forward. The president sets out broad goals and it is the responsibility of the congress to work together to achieve those goals and maybe even come up with a few of their own. No child left behind was the brain-child of one President Bush and a reach across the isle to Ted Kennedy. Want to blame someone for it failing blame the congress for failing to see it thru, they had the responsibility for funding it."
I agree that the different branches have very different jobs and very different duties. I do believe however, that as commander-in-chief of the country and leader of his party, the president has the responsibility of uniting the country. Just like any leader of a country or business, the success or failure of that country or business ultimately is the responsibility of the president. It has been tough for President Bush with a recently democratic-run house, but the blame cannot be on congress alone. Like congress, President Bush has refused to compromise or to meet congress in the middle, both the President and Congress have stubbornly refused to get together on issues. The House doesn't like Hillary and I don't seem them bending over backwards to support her, they don't really favor John McCain either. They are rallying around Barack and that could be an advantage to him if he was to step into an administration that would support him and come together for American.
The president is also in charge of not only the military as commander in chief but also foreign policy to which he has done a fine job along with his very capable and diverse staff. We were hit on 911 but what led up to that attack, 8 years of the man whose wife people want to put back in there and he will be there also. His failed leadership of riding the Reagan economic wave and prayerfully the american people electing a Republican lead congress saved the economy for a while. But then the democrats took over and look at what Bush inheritted, remember the recession right before 911? Remember the investigations into the Clinton Administration for cooking the books and how it stopped because of 911? And we want this type of mentallity back in the white house?
I also agree that the Bill Clinton administration was a disaster and one of my fears of Hillary becoming President is the fact that he comes with her, but Bill, as all presidents do, walked into an office full of left over "Regan baggage." The Regan years were good years on the surface, but underneath it was Reagan who started dipping into the surplus of the Social Security Funds that have lead to the state we are in today. It might have been gravy during the Reagan years, but he left a lot to clean up, just as all presidents do. The lead up to 911 was not all during Clinton's watch, it started long before that with easy access across borders and a judicial branch that refused to support immigration laws.
"...... the Senate and have failed to do anything for me except fight with one another. I say throw them all out and start fresh with a bunch of folks who have some common sense. "
I agree, give me some new choices. The American people have spoken, in some states anyway, and these are our choices, so I am trying to make the best of what we have. John McCain has been one of the leaders of disagreement with the republican party and he doesn't even stand for most of the Republican values. I truly believe that if he is elected, we will be no better off in the next four years than we are today. I know that Hillary has made a campaign about "talking about change is just talk", but John McCain has not even talked about change.
"Katrina was the failure of a democratically controlled state and local government that failed to use the money given to them in the proper place. They failed to evacuate a town that had been warned of the levee's failing in the face of a cat three huricane and they got hit with a cat five. He bares the load for that failure, not the federal government. The federal government could only watch as those who were in charge fail to do their job and the common sense factor never kicked in. Why? Because we created that society, totally dependent on others for everything.
I agree that the brunt of Katrina falls on Ray Nagan, but within hours of the local government failing, the federal government should have stepped in. In the US, we do not let our citizens sit in the heat for days without food and water. I don't care if the people are elderly, homeless, poor, rich, black, or white, we don't watch as they suffer. The federal government has the authority and responsibility to protect and save its citizens. The state of LA made a lot of mistakes, but George Bush had the ultimate authority to send it troops to restore order and bring supplies and he had the ability to get them there fast. The local government failed to use the money correctly? The people failed to take personal responsibility and get out of the city? That does not give the federal government an excuse to stand by and let people die.
We do live in a society of non-responsibility. I agree it is a problem and I don't have the answer for that. A complete revamp of the government aid system would be a great first step, but no one, not Barack, Hillary, or John McCain, has a plan for that.
If we put democrats in the white house that is exactly what will happen. A society that is dependent upon the federal government, that's socialism and I don't want it. I want them to get out of my way and out of my pocket so I can achieve."
So go and achieve. A democratic president will not hinder you. But what about the people who have never been given a break. Outside of the perfect Republican world, there are millions of middle class Americans who work very hard, but cannot provide health insurance for their families either due to cost, availability, or eligibility. These are the same people who pay a higher percentage of taxes than people who make three times what they do. The system has been vamped for the wealthy and the poor. At this time the democrats are providing some answers and hope for those in the middle. I wish the Republicans had a choice that would do the same, but they don't.
1 comment:
Let me work backwards and also go with addressing your comments to mine:
I am going out and acheiving but could be able to achieve more were I not taxed at above 30% because of the job I have and the business that I have on the side. The democratic party, whether it be the president or a democratically controlled congress are always about raising taxes and taking more to give to failed social programs that they have created. It is the wealthy who own the businesses, who hire the workers and can do more with the federal government out of their pockets.
About Katrina: The old saying, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, 'nough said. The federal government did respond but had to determine the condition and needs, and no body knew how large of a failure it was. Once it was discovered and the current head of FEMA didn't react how the president thought he should have he got fired. The three star general put in charge got things done. How much help and federal assistance were needed in the states of Alabama and Mississippi? 'Nough said
On Reganonimics: If you go back and check, it wasn't Ronald Reagan who dipped into social security you'll discover it was the democrats led by Speaker of the House Tip O'Neal. And they didn't just dip they put it into the general fund. The gravy during the Reagan years cam from tax cuts, spending cuts on pork and strict physcal responsibilty which President Reagan insisted on as a lifetime of belief in that system had lead him. It worked. He took over from Carter who had totally destroyed the economy, the military and our image around the world. Reagan in heritted a deficit, high unemploymemnt and interest rates out of this world. He turned it all around and Bill Blew it. Eight years of nothing but failure after failure and chasing women.
About leadership: The buck stops here. Fine I can agree with that. But, President Bush has reached across the isle, somtimes at the demise of his own party just to try and unite. When he hired people of color for his cabinet trying to show his compassionate conservatism, the democrats responded with calling them 'Uncle Toms' (Ms Rice and Mr Powell). He put together the most diverse cabinet that any president has and only to get slapped by those on the other side of the isle.
Our leadership for the past eight years has been trying to compromise with the democrats who were in the minoirty. When they took over the majority it continued with them wanting to get their way. They continue to be the party that will not compromise, will not meet half way on anything except to point fingers and blame others.
We need a leader who is going to try and please God rather than man. None of the choices are willing to do that and I will not compromise that stance that God compells me to make. If that means sitting out of this election then I'll be sitting out.
Post a Comment