Republicans or Democrats: Who's to blame?

[TripleDigitRide]

If my calculations are correct, during the last 200 years or so, there's been roughly twice as many Republican presidents as Democrat presidents. Why is our country in such bad shape when the Republicans have had so much control?

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[Guest FIST]

Simple answer to that question. Neither side truly is in it for the people. It's about money, power, and hookups.

[plank white]

[Guest bkelm18]

Both parties, and for that matter, liberalism and conservatism, are both sides of the same coin. You can't have one without the other, and you can't blame one without blaming the other. No politician has your best interests in mind. Anybody who believes so is a damn fool.

[daddyo]

Both parties, and for that matter, liberalism and conservatism, are both sides of the same coin. You can't have one without the other, and you can't blame one without blaming the other. No politician has your best interests in mind. Anybody who believes so is a damn fool.

So you agree then, that Romney is no better than the foo' we currently have.

[D3vo]

So you agree then, that Romney is no better than the foo' we currently have.

I disagree. He might not be my perfect candidate, but most would say he is not hard left and that is the foo' we have now.

Edited August 4, 2012 by D3vo

[Guest bkelm18]

So you agree then, that Romney is no better than the foo' we currently have.

Never said he was but he's getting my vote. We've tried Obama. Now we can try Romney. Those are the only two options.

[Will H]

Both are to blame. A perfect example of this is the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act with it's infinite detainment clause. Not only was it signed by Obummer, it was supported by McCain. The federal government overall has become drunk on it's own power.

I heard it said that Ron Paul was our last chance for constitutional freedom. I agree, but he was not able to get the job done. Now we are right back in the "lesser of two evils" vote.

[leroy]

This is a bit of a loaded question and it may contain a bit of a false presumption (...the democrat vs republican thing...) which im sure is an innocent addition. As others have wisely said, the problem with government is with those who govern. Said another way, the actions of individuals determine how "good" or "bad" things are. In my mind, this aint a demorat of republican question when ya look back thru history. Each era or administration has to be looked at on an individual basis. Political parties evolve over time and morph into new organisms.

In my view, the problem with the country today is the problem of socialist thinking and keynesian economics (...eg. the "Big Government, meddling in business way of governance"....); coupled with a good dose of autoritianism plus the self delusion of "we are the best and brightest and we know best" snobbery from the elite politcal class from both political parties. This concept started with Woodrow Wilson and came to its flower under the great god FDR. If ya look at things from this perspective, most all administrations from FDR forward followed the socialist-keynesian model to some extent with regulation of business, large government spending, government meddling in the free market, removal of freedoms, all for the "collective good" ya understand, etc.

There are those here who say that democrats and republicans are simply different sides of the same coin; and im old enough to remember when they were. That time is long gone. It died in the late sixties with JFK. LBJ pushed the democrat party left toward socialism again with his "War on Poverty" thing.

Fast forward to now; the demorats moved so far left toward the socialist model that

the new demorat model that you are seeing today is anti business, anti freedom, and anti everything else. It is an attempt to bring back the "Old World Fiefdoms" populated by ruling elites, pure and simple. Its a complete destruction of everything this country was founded to get away from. It's the "New Old World" (...read that as europe...)masquerading as a utopia; governed of course, by a "governing elite; the political class.

The republican thing aint much better, and that's why they are in trouble. I believe lots of folks are fed up with both sides of this. I will say, that when ya consider the demorat view, republicanism doesnt look so bad. At least the republicans for the most part are capitalists. They may be overbearing, snobbish, and aristocratic; but, again, at heart, they are capitalists.

I think the birth of the Tea Party movement points out all the bad problems with both political parties. The fact is that the presently constituted political parties are both in trouble. Folks dont like what the major parties are doin and they are calling them out. The Tea Party folks (...and the Libertarians....) believe that the Constitution actually means what it says, and that political operatives should operate within the limits of the Constitution. The demorats and republican establishment stand for "business as usual"; which most folks dont like and are doin something about. The sad fact is that both parties are ratty and they need a housecleaning. I think ya saw some of the housecleaning in the 2010 mid-terms and i think it will continue in 2012. I think the demorats are dead because no one except the socialists and trash among us believes what they believe. They are, as a party, a bunch of anti liberty dimwits. The republicans are simply the lesser of two evils. I believe that if The republicans dont do exactly what they say they are goin to do this time around, they will be replaced by a new conservative party.

leroy

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Plus, you have to get rid of the notion that it is all the President's fault or glory. There are other things to consider

like, Congress, the courts and outside influences. The President can sometimes steer the ship, but Congress

sends the bills to him.

We are way too focused on the President when assigning blame. Not as simple as that.

Bill Clinton gets all the credit for his budget balance, when it never would have happened if he had a different

Congress.

I'm much more concerned with Congress and it's leadership than I am with the President.

Edited August 4, 2012 by 6.8 AR

[sigmtnman]

Congress is absolutely at fault. Who the heck thinks bills with over 1000 pages of legalese are acceptable?

Instead of putting a fence across the mexican border we need one around washington.

[Caster]

I blame humans. If I had to be more specific, I'd say old white men but I don't wanna get all racial. Career politicians, these old farts who can't be unseated. It'd take a chisel to get their corpse out of the chair the occupy. They're all old white men. Get some young blood with short term limits. I'd say 4 years maximum for ANY political seat. You'd see a lot of corruption fizzle away if you get those old bastards out.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It's what happens when we allow too much power to be centralized in one place.

[Trekbike]

6.8 is correct, the President gets too much credit for the success or failure of the county. Congress IMO are the ones running the show.

TDR it would be interesting to see which party has had the most times at controlling both the House and the Senate at the same time. Either way you can't get much traction flipping back and forth between parties each election cycle.

Term limits its the only way to keep them focused on the country and not themselves.

[sigmtnman]

If you consider executive orders, the President does wield a good bit of power. Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation; FDR's new deal and order against hording of gold and japanese internment; Nixon's creation of the DEA and stabilization of prices, rents, wages, and salaries; and Bush IIs creation of the Office of Homeland security are some biggies.

Also consider that the President is a single voice that is able to direct public discourse.

Edited August 4, 2012 by sigmtnman

[Guest 6.8 AR]

He does have a lot of power, but it is up to the power of Congress and the courts to keep that in check,

along with our vigilance with those we allow to govern at all levels. We need to keep a tighter reign on them.

That "Bully Pulpit" can be a good or bad thing, depending on who we put there to utilize it.

[sigmtnman]

You mean bully puppet?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Yep. In this case, especially. That was good!

[Guest FIST]

How much power can reliably be allowed to congress? Didn't they recently vote to not do their job in regards to presidential appointees being confirmed? Who's to say they stop there.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

The senate did, with our dear Lamar in on it.

[G27]

Republicans or Democrats: Who's to blame?

Yes.

[kieefer]

Neither.

As said, it's actually Congress that steers us into drowning debt and regulation but an encouraging President no doubt makes it worse. Sad thing is that it's the same problems that we've had for years, all the way back to FDR.

Seems to be a continuing cycle.

Bottom line is that it's OUR FAULT. WE put these crooks and lairs in office thinking they have our best interest in hand and maybe they would IF they relied on the Constitution.

[Volzfan]

IMO the blame falls on the American people who sat back and allowed the politicians to get totally out of control.

[Guest ThePunisher]

The founding fathers warned us to be alert against government tyranny.

[kieefer]

Some may have seen this chain email and I have no idea if it's true but it does have some good solutions to the problems.

Warren Buffett, in a recent interview with CNBC, offers one of the best quotes about the debt ceiling:

"I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election.

The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971 - before computers, e-mail, cell phones, etc.

Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took one (1) year or less to become the law of the land - all because of public pressure.

Warren Buffet is asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.

Congressional Reform Act of 2012

1. No Tenure / No Pension.

2. A Congressman/woman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they're out of office.

3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.

4. All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.

5. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all

Americans do.

6. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

7. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

8. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

9. All contracts with past and present Congressmen/women are void effective 12/1/12. The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen/women.

Congress made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message. Don't you think it's time?

THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!

(I'm guessing Hell will freeze over when this happens.)

Edited August 5, 2012 by kieefer