Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (7843)	3/16/2004 8:45:10 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 81568

I felt we must 1) lean against the growth in government and 2) move as much of government as possible to the local area. These are classic Republican principles. Actually, they are classic Classical Liberal politics. It's the neo-liberals who pushed big government most strongly. Starting with the Great Society, which has produced a highly mediocre society. I used to think “tax and spend” was the worst policy. I was wrong. “Tax cut and spend” is far worse! Agree completely. Bush is out of control on his budget proposals. Hopefully Congress will cut a lot out of the budget. A WHOLE lot. Bush has made no effort to change course. Every year he promises to restrain government spending and every year he fails. Bush has made no serious effort to cut government spending and is creating a financial time bomb. The "tax cut and spend" policy is reckless and irresponsible. Agree. But you have to add that Congress is enabling him. And adding a chunk of their own pork, and demanding spending in their own constituencies or for their pet projects as the price of their vote. So it's not entirely Bush, though I agree, he's the main culprit. But what about John Kerry? If you are looking for him to be a champion of smaller government, I think you will be disappointed. I again, I agree. He's been one of the enablers, and one of the more aggressively lobbied by special interests over the years. However, I do believe he will 1) be more fiscally responsible than Bush (not hard) and 2) have smaller increases in government spending. I would love to see that. But not if the way he wants to reduce spending is by cutting the intelligence budget big time. So far, that's the only major budget cut he has advocated that has had any publicity. If he has sponsored or voted in favor of other, more responsible, budget cuts, he ought to publicize them. So far, I haven't seen any. For a Republican like me, that at least gives me hope. For a classical liberal and libertarian like me, hope is too much to expect from either one of these guys. While I would hate to see Hillary in national office, I would love to see a woman who has spent the last twenty years raising a family on a middle-class income, balancing a family budget, dealing with the health care needs of herself, her husband, her children, and her aging parents, and still having time to volunteer in the schools and in church. If Kerry would pick such a person as his VP candidate, and it looked as though he would listen to her, he would get my vote in a heartbeat. I'm tired of all these presidential candidates who grew up in wealthy families going to private schools and getting the special priviliges of wealth. And especially the ones who have spent years or decades in D.C. They have no idea what it's like out here in the real America.