The 'Net, The Body Politic, and Me
I finally got my backwards-compatible PlayStation 3 this week. It only took roughly 15 days to get to me from Newfoundland. Note to self: buying a PS2 AND a PS3 saves time, effort, and probably costs about the same. I also bought a new game for it: Warhawk. Now, I knew it was a game you could play online if you wanted. Problem was, I didn't
( Read more... )
It's true, I think that in some cases *cough Robert Gates cough Nancy Pelosy cough* the Dems are a bit to high in the saddle and think that they are invulnerable. Maybe making things a bit less liberal is all right, but all I am hearing from the party leaders like Mitch McConnell is "Do as we say, not as we do!", and it makes me wonder just who they are fooling? As for the Health Care dilemma, I've been thinking for a few months now that there will need to be a Part Deux (or part Duh, depending on your perspective) to this whole plan. I, too, wish we could keep several progressive points on the plan, but I have my doubts.
Back in the Jacksonian days, they had a little bit more of the down home flavor to D.C. After reading up on what went on then, I think I would gladly give the capitol city back to the insiders. We do NOT need people the likes of Newt or Palin or any one else who tries to be an average citizen to run the "free" world. I'm not saying that each president must be an Ivy League grad, but they damned well better have some level of intellect that can compete with the Ivy folk. The pundits can also leave whenever they want, I really don't need them. Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert can stay lol. Seriously, these pundit nuts are proof that there is no such thing as a liberal media bias because, for one thing, most of the TV networks and newspapers in this country are owned by about a dozen people or less. The most infamous of them being Rupert Murdoch, and he will end you if you so much as infer that his is liberal.
Reaganomics was actually more of giving tax breaks to the wealthy with the idea that the wealthy might spend some more money on the little guys of the US, by either buying from them or hiring them. This sums up the "Trickle Down Theory". Problem is, that trickling was mainly the rich pissing on us small peons that earn a decent living but can't seem to climb into a higher echelon of life. I don't mean the richest 5% should get a break. I mean the folks making 35,000-50,000 a year, who could actually make a much larger impact on the economy were they to get a bigger kickback on their tax returns. Now, that IS assuming a bit much since we are now being taught to save more than we spend, but dammit, I have multiple things I could spend $5000 on, no question!
Reply
Leave a comment