Originally Posted By TomSawyer Romney was always going to be the GOP candidate and from the start they figured his main liability was his faith, but he's the only business-friendly moderate in the field. They didn't count on the fact that he's an empty suit who wouldn't connect with the voters who didn't have friends who owned NASCAR teams and who don't have a Cadillac at both of their houses. They figured that a Republican that can take the most liberal state in the Union would do well on the national scale. They are just so out of touch themselves that they don't sense the resentment against business people like Romney that have destroyed communities and families over the past 30 years.
Originally Posted By Rsey103 From the book, The Storm Before The Calm by Neale Donald Walsch: “What should really have nothing to do with politics is economics. That’s where the danger is. These two should never be allowed to mix. There should be a law that says that all political decisions made in the halls of legislatures and congresses and senates may not be based on, or take into account, any economic considerations whatsoever, but be foundationed in one thing and one thing only: what is best for the largest number of people. There should be another law that bars any contributions of any kind to political candidates or parties by any economic interests (in other words, companies or corporations) or any firm representing any economic interests. There should be a third law that simply says that corporations are not persons, and shall not be accorded rights equal to those accorded to people. (This law alone would solve much!) Everyone in the United States is so intense about maintaining a separation between Church and State when the real concern should be about keeping a separation between Corporations and State---because in America (and most of the rest of the Western World, for that matter) economics is the real religion.” --Neale Donald Walsch, The Storm Before The Calm
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones I disagree with Walsch. We don't have much economics in Congress. A lot of these people are lawyers and they like laws. They like regulation. That's what they know. If you had economists in there you might have some honest debate about methods like cap and trade or taxing negative externalities and stuff like that, instead of just saying, "The law says you can't pollute this much or your car needs to have this MPG rating." That guy is not talking about economics. He's talking about businesses and corporations. A lot of what economics is is the study of scarcity and choice.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones It should be noted that there isn't a great respect for scarcity in Congress on either side of the aisle. They all want to give their side everything they want. That's why I can't get down on a guy like Ron Paul because he understands you can't have everything. There are choices to be made and they are not easy.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>That's why I can't get down on a guy like Ron Paul because he understands you can't have everything. There are choices to be made and they are not easy.<< If only he also understood that there are better choices than extremist dogmatic koo-koo-osity.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones The choice is what you and your state decide is best through a democratic process.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>The choice is what you and your state decide is best through a democratic process. << Until the same kooks disagree with what the state is doing, then it's "the state is usurping the Constitutionally protected rights of the cities and counties!!!" Sorry, no sale.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "Until the same kooks disagree with what the state is doing, then it's "the state is usurping the Constitutionally protected rights of the cities and counties!!!"" This is what they did recently in California. <a href="http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_22,_Ban_on_State_Borrowing_from_Local_Governments" target="_blank">http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/in...ernments</a>_(2010) Local government is superior at certain things than state government. In this case the local governments asserted their rights to their own money. As a transit advocate I supported the ballot measure.
Originally Posted By Labuda ">>That's why I can't get down on a guy like Ron Paul because he understands you can't have everything. There are choices to be made and they are not easy.<< If only he also understood that there are better choices than extremist dogmatic koo-koo-osity." You forgot racist & misogynist.
