Friday, December 01, 2006

What Happened to the "Downsize Government" Idea?

President George W. Bush already has our government larger than life and much bigger and more burdensome than can be feasibly maintained. I thought it was the conservatives that didn't believe in big government and I thought it was the republicans that didn't believe in the government's involvement in everyone's every day life. And I thought republicans believed in a balanced budget. Well, I've misspoken here, I didn't think all that, I just thought that's what they claimed to believe. When we get right down to the brass "tax" of it all, President Clinton was much more conservative, fiscally; as well as with his foreign and domestic policies. He's the one that established welfare limits and removed the generational hopelessness. And President Clinton is the one that aimed for a balanced budget and to reconcile the horrible debt racked up by Presidents Reagan and George the First. He is also the one that was leading at the time of America's involvement in Kosovo and Bosnia without causing an International incident and in alliance with other nations. Unlike what we are presently looking at, which is the "lone gunslinger approach" then ask for help. I think the icing on the cake for today was the article I read about giving a 4.4 million dollar grant for technological aid for sheep and goat herders in Afghanistan to find grass by satellite and obtain the latest stock market prices by cell phone. Hey, if I had such a huge area for my goats to graze that I needed satellite information, maybe I would find that helpful, but since their country is still wartorn and apparently the fighting is getting worse, wouldn't it be great if the same technology that could find grass in the mountains and analyze manure could find bin Laden, since that was the reason we were told we went to Afghanistan? As I listened to the conservative talk radio host this morning, discuss with a caller the various conservatives that need to compromise on their views that are dividing them, for a common strength. There are the neo-cons, the paleo-cons, the socio-cons, the moral-cons, fiscal-cons, even "crunchy-cons" and I just don't know how many other "cons" there are, but I do see the common denominator. Maybe that's what the rest of America has seen, and voted accordingly. We're just tired of being "conned."
None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity.

No comments:

Blog Archive