Is this the government we want?

Advertisement

You can’t miss the political turmoil in our country today.

Our forefathers wanted a democratic government that would pool the knowledge and resources of individuals for the good of all. They thought each citizen would contribute knowledge and money to carry out programs and build projects for the good of all.

They conceived a system of representatives and senators to pass laws and budgets. A president would be elected and his administration would carry out programs and use the money for the good of the people.

Now we have a two-party system.

Republicans wonder why people aren’t buying their promises to reduce government and protect the upper class so they can trickle jobs and money down to lower classes.

Democrats won the White House by saying they are part of the people and trying to do what is best for all. Then there are the rest of us — the ones without a party in the race. We helped the Democrats win, but did they win? We are watching the same obstructionist politics we saw for the past four years. Republicans attempt to block any effort our black president makes for our good.

Ninety percent of the population wants some kind of gun control. The Senate just voted it down. Ninety percent of Democrats voted for it; 90 percent of Republicans voted against it. Under the Republican rules, 60 percent was needed for it to pass. It fell one vote short. Is this the kind of government the people want?

Republicans say our government is too big, yet they won’t work intelligently with Democrats to identify unnecessary programs and costs and cut only bad programs. Instead they want to cut “entitlements” such as Social Security and Medicare that all wage earners contribute to, as though “entitlement” is a dirty word. The government of the people voted those insurance programs in — now Republicans want to vote them out.

Some say we have too many regulations. British Petroleum is running ads on TV telling us what wonderful things it is doing for the Gulf Coast it polluted. If it could, it would walk away like mine owners did in northern Idaho before there were tough environmental regulations.

The Environmental Protection Agency cleans up superfund sites while taxpayers foot the bill. Is that what we want, to continue to pay the costs while the rich walk away with the profits?

John McKern

Walla Walla

Comments

PearlY 1 year, 8 months ago

You say, "Ninety percent of the population wants some kind of gun control. The Senate just voted it down. Ninety percent of Democrats voted for it; 90 percent of Republicans voted against it. Under the Republican rules, 60 percent was needed for it to pass. It fell one vote short. Is this the kind of government the people want?"

The truth is 100% of the population wants SOME KIND of gun control. But that doesn't mean they want what the Senate just voted down. This IS one of the (fairly rare) instances where we DID get the kind of government we want: One that doesn't vote to do a bad thing just because something should be done.

And although I'm not thrilled with what the Republicans are doing on cutting costs, it's only fair to recognize that according to Democrats, there ARE no bad programs, just not enough of them or not enough that are big enough. Makes it hard to get a grip on wasteful spending.

3

PearlY 1 year, 8 months ago

By the way, there's very little in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution or the Federalist Papers that supports your idea of what our forefathers wanted. They were shaking off the bonds of oppressive government (remember the British?), not forming a support group.

You do know, I hope, that "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need," was a saying used by Karl Marx, not a U.S. founding father.

2

namvet60 1 year, 8 months ago

Mr McKern - It's very hard to dicipher delusional and plain ignorance. Since 2007 at all times the democrats have held two of the three departments of government. You imply that it is mainly the Republicans fault at the lack of success of the current President. If you care to remember for two years the Democrats held all three branches of government and what did we get - the never ending Obamacare! It's hard to understand the thought processes of individuals.

As far as entitlements are concerned - Social Security is a mandatory earned viable income when the government hasn't drained the cookie jar. Invasive entitlement is payments to Illegal Immigrants that seem to miss the definition of Illegal. Any and all Illegal movements and transactions are a crime punishable by law.

2

BluMtn 1 year, 8 months ago

The teabaggers have spoken

2

namvet60 1 year, 8 months ago

blumtn - they say ignorance is bliss - you must be a happy camper.

0

barracuda 1 year, 8 months ago

If people would look at the bill that just failed... You would see that there is very little in this bill that would have stopped or curbed the recent school violence in any way! Please, just google it.... It was an amaing bill !!!

It would not have changed the way "bad guys" get guns!!!!

1

Chas 1 year, 8 months ago

Bullseye Mr. McKern. These yahoos think the United States began in 1776, too. They've forgotten we've a century and half of colonial constitutions, laws, trials, Colonial Supreme Courts, under the British. Those Signers & Founders, many with early colonial ancestry, knew what the New World promised from the lips of their mothers and fathers..

You Mr. McKern know too.

0

PearlY 1 year, 8 months ago

If you have sound arguments, it is unnecessary to call your opponents 'teabaggers' or 'yahoos.'

1

sohcammer 1 year, 8 months ago

Why doesn't the current President address the problem that is rooted in his own demographic.....a demographic that is responsible for almost 50% of the homicides in the country, yet only comprise 13% of the population? Why isn't he talking about this on the gun control stump?

http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/blog/index.php/2013/01/startling-homicide-statistics-among-blacks-and-the-cause/

0

Sign in to comment

Click here to sign in