Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
host, do you bother to read posts any more or do you just search based on keywords? I'm honestly curious because the post above certainly seems like the latter.
Ustwo took an online poll about which candidate lines up the most with his beliefs.
Can you justify your response in its relevancy to the OP or any other post besides Ustwo's 9 words?
|
I think that American presidential politics in general...since they "serve up" an unindicted criminal as Duncan Hunter as a "candidate", are in a crisis state. Ustwo's posted affinity for Hunter and what he "stands" for, is icing on the cake.
When and where would it be more appropriate to post a reaction to Hunter, considering Ustwo's mention of him, than here, and now?
We're averaging less than ten new posts per day on the threads on this forum. It didn't require any extraordinary search to find Ustwo's post.
Update: I edited my previous post, and this one. I initially reacted to Ustwo's post because his mention of Duncan Hunter helped set off my larger issue with what goes on at the most responded to thread on the forum, about Ron Paul's candidacy. So many dismiss the federal government now, as something that "doesn't work".
If it "doesn't work", and the reaction is to support the proposals of Ron Paul, instead of examining why it "doesn't work", and how and when did the government's performance get worse, I don't think supporting Ron Paul's goals of "shrinking" the government, will improve anything.
Where were we, less than ten years ago? Non-military employment in the federal government had been reduced, the 1993, annual US treasury debt increase of $290 billion had been reduced to $18 billion, and agencies, FEMA, for example, had been upgraded and was managed by the disaster response professional, James Witt.
More recently, in 2005, FEMA fell on it's ass, managed first by a Bush campaign manager with no disaster preparedness/response experience, and then handed off to the management of the former campaign manager's old college buddy, a dismissed Arabian horse competition judge.
The annual US treasury debt increases have, for the last several years, been at about the $540 billion racked up in the fiscal year ended 9/30/07.
I don't think that "the problem" is that the government "doesn't work". I think that the record shows that it has been intentionally undermined. Take for example, a bright spot, republican lawyer turned non-partisan US inspector general in Iraq:
Quote:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...14&ft=1&f=1001
<h2>Mosul Dam Repairs Were Botched, Inspector Says</h2>
Listen to this story...
All Things Considered, October 30, 2007 · Stuart Bowen, the Special Inspector General for Iraq
Reconstruction, reports Tuesday on 21 contracts totaling $27 million that the government
awarded to repair the Mosul Dam in northern Iraq.
The crumbling structure threatens to flood Iraq's two largest cities, and Bowen calls grouting
work on the dam unsatisfactory and U.S. oversight of the contracts weak.
He says the botched job stands in contrast to other contracts handled properly; for example,
electricity output in Iraq this quarter reached a postwar high.
Bowen talks with Robert Siegel
|
Duncan Hunter had attempted a stealth insertion of a provision, in an already completed and reconciled in conference, defense appropriations bill, to end Stuart Bowen's much needed and fruitful inspections:
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2.<br />
html
Gov't Watchdogs Under Attack From Bosses
By LARRY MARGASAK
The Associated Press
Wednesday, December 27, 2006; 9:23 PM
....Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., outgoing chairman of the House Armed Services Committee,
inserted language in a defense bill to close down the Iraq inspector general by the end of
2007.
That inspector general, Stuart Bowen Jr., has conducted several high-profile investigations of
how the Bush administration has spent money during Iraqi reconstruction. He found dramatic
examples of missing weapons, wasted billions and excessive overhead costs by Halliburton.
<h3>Hunter said he agreed that Bowen's office had been useful but that a termination date was
needed so that normal oversight functions could be returned to the Defense and State
departments.
Democrats and key Republicans rebelled and saved Bowen's job.</h3>
"It is inconceivable that we would remove this aggressive oversight while the American
taxpayer is still spending billions of dollars on Iraq reconstruction projects," Sen. Susan
Collins, R-Maine, said....
|