Nation torn apart by routine election starting to wonder if government may be too powerful
“I was starting to wonder why we were all at each other’s throats,” said one Democratic voter in Oregon. “And then it hit me: the politicians and policies we’re voting on could shake up who has the government’s blessings for the next few years, and which groups will get left out. And then I was like, ‘Whoa. Maybe if the government weren’t so huge and bloated, we wouldn’t care about elections that much.”
He then dismissed the idea as “crazy talk,” however.
Somebody help me out here: I can never keep straight whether root cause analysis is the answer to everything or the silliest idea anybody ever concocted…
Knowing full well that some here might disagree, I submit that the divided government that’s emerging from this election will be a great improvement over the present scheme, where one party effectively controls all four segments of government. Why? Because it should be difficult for government to make new laws to control our behavior and limit our liberty, not easy.
Democrats, Republicans, Calvinists, Martians, I don’t care what group you mention, I don’t want any one of them in full control of our government. Why not? Because sooner or later any leadership group will come to believe that it knows better than the people it governs, and it will have at its disposal all the tools needed to impose its wishes on us.
Democracy should be difficult, never easy.
With the single caveat that I’d change “democracy” to “rule,” I think that right there is a quote for the ages.
I’ve said for years that if the Fed budget, for example, was limited to say, $50 billion, nobody would give a damn what they did because it would be too small to screw with you.
Government corruption isn’t a function of party, it’s a function of size.