To you they do, to others they don't. Really the only differences I see between Democrats and Republicans are social issues.
The only reason why they appear to have a difference on social issues is that they are shooting for a different demographic of voters. In the end they all want the same thing, government interference, just some want to be able to say God while others don't. The rhetoric during an election makes them appear different, but their actions in office make them look like twins. Democrats promised to get us out of the war, yet once they gained a majority in congress no bill was attempted until election talk started, and even that was just fluff.
Republicans talked about fiscal responsibility.....I don't even think I need to say more on this. Even removing the war from the equation they were anything but.
How do you figure? Someone who had a different ideology rhetoric was elected.
Let's call it like it is, shall we? Sure, voters voted for ideology, but all they were getting was rhetoric. Before the election even happened the Obama campaign was attempting to reduce expectations because they had gone too far. Now he has dropped his windfall profits tax idea. His economic recovery plan is the exact same as what Bush was doing. What people voted for and what they are getting are too different things and they got so caught up in his charisma that they couldn't see that.
So, they did it wrong. They thought they were doing it right, but that doesn't make it so. You and I voted for an actual change that might have actually made a difference, at least as far as bringing up a new way of thinking. Sure none of the third-party candidates would have gotten anywhere against this Congress, but at least they had a truly new way of thinking.
If Obama fails then we will probably see a Republican president in 2012.
Which is also not change.
I hear a lot of this but I haven't heard anyone who is against the government bailout come up with a better plan that will fix the economy and cause people like me to still have a job after spending $50,000 to get through school. Seriously, I'm all ears. If someone has a better idea I would welcome them telling me.
The better idea: Letting the free economy actually work.
Yeah, you might struggle to find a job longer and it will be a painful transition. But that is the cost of fixing a bad economy. It cannot be avoided if you want to do it right. It isn't compassionate or sympathetic, I know, but it is the truth. We bail out an automotive industry that is making the same mistakes they made 20 years ago so they can compete against the same companies they struggled against 20 years ago? Obviously, this industry is failing.
How is it that people have become convinced that taking over a trillion dollars from the people that do know how to run a business and giving it to failing businesses is a good idea? Or that adding over a trillion dollars to our national debt is a good idea?
Why is it that when it comes to the environment we are supposed to think about our children's children's children, but when it comes to the economy the same people tell us to pass the buck on to a later generation?
Sure, you may have trouble finding a job now (I won't even pretend to know what the archeology/anthropology job situation looks like), but at least your kids or grandkids won't be wondering why the Chinese run everything.
Does Walter Williams still guest-host? That's about the only time to tune in.
