We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Did some research (wikipedia) into FDR last night and found a very interesting, concise, and easy to read description of his five children. There was a sixth child who died as a baby. The last two children were born during the first two years of FDR's affair with Lucy Mercer. What I encourage all MF folks to do is to take a look at this interesting family picture--their involvement with the mob, corruption, and other unpleasant events during the 20th century. Click here first:
then scroll down to the Marriage section and the list of the children--click on each child's name for a link to a summary about their "positive contributions" to this country! Pour yourself a nice eggnog and enjoy the insight--
A thought on the new consensus for smaller government and the alleged emergence of conservative values. I am not convinced. Of course, folks will say they prefer smaller government if they think it means keeping more of their own money in pocket. However, those same folks don't think their pet entitlements will be reduced. They assume it will be the other guys who will be short changed. Generally speaking, for many self described conservative, 'Tea' party types, and I know a good many of them, this means less food stamps, general assistance money, subsidized housing and so forth. Meanwhile, they would loudly object to any reduction in the innumerable defense / construction / government / education related industries and the millions of high paying 100% tax subsidized jobs therein. Are there any industries or jobs that don't, in some manner, rely on a subsidy? I doubt it. Further, almost nobody would sit still for a reduction in social security benefits. So, where is the fiscal conservatism and self reliance? The truth is, it exists only as simplistic propaganda for those who wish to pretend they are true conservatives. The truth is, we exist in a society that has long ago made that leap into nearly total government dependence. Nurturing false self images as champions for liberty and limited government is not a constructive place to be.
SS taxes pay for the SS benefits. Some years back the federal government decided to roll those taxes and the benefit payments into the general budget. That was a mistake. It should be seperate and out of the control of congress. Additionally the federal government borrowed (took) trillions from the SS revenues. They owe that to the trust fund and those payments will insure SS stays solvent.
As for paying for defense I would point out that the constitution explicitly says that the federal government is responsible for our defense. As such it is more of a mandate then welfare or obamacare. It is a strong defense that prevents other countries from thinking that they could actually win a war with us. What will be the result of a weak defense?