This is the only comment I'm going to directly address. Put your remembering hats on. What was the trigger for the economic meltdown in 2008? Generically the housing bubble burst substantially lowering the value of investments large banks had made. Specifically sub-prime mortgages bundled as credit default swaps and sold to the large banks as investments. Banks have not always been able to invest in these types of vehicles. The law that allowed banks to invest in this type of product was passed in 1998. Who was running the government at the time? It was a Republican Congress and a Democrat president. So the blame goes to both parties. Additionally President Clinton started to force banks (under threat of discrimination lawsuits) to lower their lending requirements so low income borrowers could qualify for mortgages. These loans for low income borrowers were later called sub-prime mortgages. So yes the democrats do bear the majority of the blame. With that said the Bush administration didn't do anything to right the ship. Several attempts were made by congress under Bush, but they were all blocked by Democrats. Once a government entitlement is given it does not go away until the program collapses. It will happen with all of the other government entitlements, eventually.

As to the rest sitting on the 50 yard line means you don't take a stand for anything, but get upset at those who have. My personal perspective is a financial Conservative and social right leaning Liberal, which places me squarely in the libertarian ideology. Unfortunately until they actually get someone who has a chance of winning that leaves me to decide who is least bad for the country.

My thought always goes back to po-po 101. Don't be have tombstone courage and make sure to arrive alive. What that means is if you go ***** out to get to a scene or go running and gunning while under fire, you will most likely be killed or injured, making you a liability not an asset. If we spend butt loads of money as a country on frivolous things we will not have the money to spend on things that are really needed. One in particular, cell phones for the poor. That sounds good, until you ask what the compelling government interest is in providing the phones. They don't need them for 9-1-1. All landline phone jacks whether phone service is connected or not will dial 9-1-1 if you connect a phone to them. So what compelling reason does the government have for spending over a billion dollars of our money per year to provide a cell phones for the poor? I can't see any reason to provide them. Heck I watch commercials advertising the program and they have access to a better cell phone plans than I have, for about 1/3 the price.

Our primary spending needs to be on national security. What point is providing a crap load of benefits if we are simply taken over by another country or our economy is destroyed by small cells of trained people. This does not mean we need to have a larger military than the next 10 countries combined, but we do need to have the best equipment. I would guess that if politicians would approach the government from a what is the compelling reason for us to provide this the majority of programs would be cut or eliminated, because there is no compelling government reason for half of the things they provide. The reason as others have stated is to buy votes. That is the downfall of this country.

I don't think any politician hates the country. They are just idealists and don't understand human nature. The whole Communist idea is great. Equality for everyone sounds great. To everyone their needs from everyone their skills. The problem, even my 11 year old figured out, is everyone wants to be the one with no skill. If nobody has any skill then nobody will be performing the great feats and jobs and the society will fall apart. Why should a person go to school for 20 years to be a doctor when they can go to school for 8 years and be a factory worker and have the same standard of living? You will have a few who are willing to put forth the effort to do great things, but most won't humans are generally lazy and greedy creatures. They can be counted on 99% of the time and an economy based on those traits will be a good economy 99% of the time.

Until we have more than a two party system we will always of the "my team your team mentality". I've lived in countries with more than two parties. Their governments have not been strong, because nobody would get a clear majority. They have all been generally more dysfunctional than our government.

 

And now it is Romney/Ryans fault.

http://freebeacon.com/cutter-benghaz...mney-and-ryan/