To: PJr who wrote (40012 ) 11/7/2012 9:01:00 PM From: Kirk © 2 Recommendations Read Replies (4) | Respond to I agree but most of the trouble comes from arguing over who gets their share of the goodies. Why should the Federal Government give ANY tax deductions for having kids, being married, using debt to buy a home? Or why should people in Texas subsidize my "generous" (and SPUPID... don't get me going on that) government in CA that takes a HUGE chunk of my income in property ($10,200 a year), sales (now about 9% after the election) and income taxes? The gay marriage is only a federal issue because we give UNFAIR, BETTER benefits to people who are married than to those who don't marry. When the Fed government sticks its nose so deeply into social issues that evoke so much emotion, voters are distracted from what perhaps should be the criteria to choose their Federal Representatives. Most voters agree that we shouldn't spend more than we take in. Most voters believe in making sure we have a military that can adequately protect us. Most voters agree that we need to provide safety nets for those who need help. In fact, when considered without other distractions, probably even most Federally elected Representatives have similar beliefs. If those issues were the narrowed focus by which we choose our Federal elected officials, we'd probably see elected officials who could more easily find consensus on the issues that have the potential to be our collective undoing.
