I’ll split the difference on this one. I’d rather see the government come to a standstill if I get nothing that I want. This of course I mean on an ongoing process, what is on the table now. It would be easy to say, hey , you’ve got the Bill of Rights, don’t you want them? But that’s what we all already have. An example of what I’m talking about could be the spending bills. Personally, I would not mind if the government shut down for a period of weeks if it resulted in enormous cuts in spending. Yes, it is expensive to shutdown but what they never tell us is that if Congress agrees to cut several trillion or instead of spending a few trillion more, it is cost effective. Think about all the lives impacted by the shutdown? I am. We can take the pain now and try our best to manage through or we can face a more painful, less manageable crisis if we kick the can down the road. They’ve always said this and apparently they were correct. Another example is border security and illegal immigration. If this had fixed when Reagan did his deal making, we’d be in a much less painful and easier managed state with our borders, national security and legal immigration problems. I know it’s easier said than done but this is exactly what I expect Congress to be able to handle. Allen is right about both major parties culling the herd. I think we need a 50% turnover in Congress to flush out some of the crap that is clogging the system. These are just thoughts off the top of my head, not something I’ve chiseled in stone.
jeebling wrote:
