The federal government will now spend $21,000 per household, up from $16,000 in 1999, according to the Heritage Foundation's Riedl. How much of that $21,000 could you spend that would produce better results for yourself and family?
We are moving rapidly, under Republican "leadership," past the nanny state and the welfare state to what might be called the state as family. The government will be our keeper (we shall not want). Though we walk through the valley of the shadow of poverty, the federal government will be there to comfort us. Anyone who complains about this will be called "rich" and (by definition) insensitive and uncaring about his fellow man.
The time when the Republican Party stood for something worth standing for is over. The "G" in GOP might as well stand for government. Smaller, less intrusive government with less spending and lower taxes is the stuff of history books and fond memories for a party that once had a purpose. But Republicans, having tasted power, are now drunk with it. Like the Democrats before them who became inebriated with the wine of success, Republicans now seem interested only in preserving their elective offices.
Truly there is less than a dime's worth of difference between the two parties. If only term limits would catch on! But the very people who are the problem would have to vote for the idea and there isn't any money in it.
Defense and anti-terrorism spending aside, there is no excuse for much of the rest of it. It is a pathetic betrayal of the faith many had put in the Republican Party to reduce the size and role of government in our lives.
Is it time for another revolution yet? Who's got the tea?
DHS Complicit in Cartel Human Trafficking of Minors to Illegals Living in the United States | Katie Pavlich
Oops: Officials Urge 30,000 Illinoisans to 'Start Over' on Obamacare Application Process | Guy Benson