reply to post by Hefficide
It is always an honor to speak with you, I think you're responsible for persuading me to stay on ATS. (Beginning to regret that one, aren't you?)
But may I ask a favor?
When you're using satire, or exaggeration for humorous effect, would you be a little less subtle? I took your first paragraph seriously for
the next POTUS will likely be a staunch right wing Republican who will run on ultra, ultra conservative promises ( Ban abortion, eliminate
minimum wage, cut taxes across the board, gut social services, defund Medicaid, Medicare, TANF, and Social Security... and all of the other things
that make extreme neocons blush and smile )....
You see? I finally realized you were joking, but not all will. Of course it was obvious
when I thought about it. No Republican above the level of City Councilman in a town of three hundred people, has ever, or will ever, consider making
the promises you mention.
As far as running a staunch right-wing Republican, that may be a possibility. Since Reagan, the Republicans haven't run one, so maybe, just by
chance, one will pop up this time. Of course, whoever the Republicans run will be instantly labelled an extreme, fringe, right-wing, kook, no matter
what his or her record and platform may be. We've seen that happen often enough to know it's true. So whatever names you apply to the Republican
candidate now, you'll be right. That's what Democrats and the Press will call him.
Then He'll get into office and continue the same exact program that every President since Reagan has followed.
I'm very sorry, but
if you believe Obama is just a continuation of Reagan, I am stunned. Oh, wait a minute. I get it. That's your super-subtle humor again. Fooled
I agree that the concept of crony capitalism is more appropriate to our government now than ever before. But your solution of banning lobbying is so
completely unconstitutional that an America based on laws could never consider it. Term limits? Maybe, but how long has that idea been kicking
around with absolutely no progress?
Why not try making government small enough that there is no incentive for industry to spend umptyleben billion dollars in lobbying? If government
says "None of our business whether you build electric cars or V-8 guzzlers," subsidies for electric cars disappear and companies don't lobby for
them. How much lobbying goes away if we tell the states to educate their own kids, the federal government won't spend money on it? All the
The beauty of my solution is that it is completely Constitutional, cuts waste, returns power and freedom closer to the citizen, and reduces federal
corruption. It also resolves your concern over the government serving Walmart. The governmant simply announces that beyond some safety laws (and
maybe a little more), it won't interfere with Walmart, it won't hurt Walmart, it won't help Walmart or any other business. That leaves the
government free to serve us.
If I've misunderstood you anywhere here, I'm truly sorry. You're a fine person and I respect you. Sometimes I think I can't keep up with you.