Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
it's very dangerous to go after these goverment teats politically, remember the "Gingrich wants to let your entitlement wither on the vine" episode?....there is great power in having large portions of the electorate dependent on your various Ponzi schemes, particularly if you have no shame when it comes to riling up the dependents against those that you say threaten their place at the teat....it's about as low as you can go but it does work...  |
I agree with you 100%, this gets back to my whjole point that liberal doctrine DEPENDS upon a large block of voters addicted to liberal entitlements, and then every year at election time, liberals attack any conservative who dares to suggest that we might need to cut entitlements. It's a putrid tactic, but very effective. Again, if we had term limits, no one would care about re-election, so they would have more ability to do the right thing, versus doing the politically correct thing.
I'd love to hear RIROCKHOUND'S take on this. He usually sides with liberals (from my observation), yet he seems to grasp that we need to address these entitlements. So rockhound, if you do indeed think we need to address these entitlements, how do you feel about the left's long-standing practice of demonizing anyone who dares to mention entitlement reform?