And frankly that sounds like it's at odds with my opinion that people are too stupid to vote anyway. But it is complicated and I don't know how we would change it for the better.

WSS

@gftchris said:

Different question - is it *right* that it's necessary to spend so much money on campaigning? It does seem silly that the candidates are campaigning not even for the presidency at the moment but for the nomination. Party members should just vote and get it over with, I have no idea why there isn't just a single voting day, why the voting period is stretched out over such a long time.

I'm not sure that right or wrong has much to do with it.

WSS

@gftchris said:

Different question - is it *right* that it's necessary to spend so much money on campaigning? It does seem silly that the candidates are campaigning not even for the presidency at the moment but for the nomination. Party members should just vote and get it over with, I have no idea why there isn't just a single voting day, why the voting period is stretched out over such a long time.

I'm not sure that right or wrong has much to do with it.

WSS

@gftchris said:

Sure but that doesn't mean that campaign finance has to come in big lumps from 'interested parties' such as wall street, oil or pharma.

I don't have as much of a beef with the big interests as some people do I guess.

Corporations are people too.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

Sure but that doesn't mean that campaign finance has to come in big lumps from 'interested parties' such as wall street, oil or pharma.

@gftchris said:

Why's that?

It should be obvious sir. Ask yourself why should every American not have an equal chance at the presidential election?

Why shouldn't my own personal candidacy be worth as much as anyones? And if it is how do I get my message to every person in the country? How do I distinguish mine from die hard or Cal or Cleve or BB?

We could have hundreds of thousands of candidates with no way to tell them apart without media and there is no media without money.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

Why's that?

@baconhound said:

Oh it's not for the money but no one has stopped the insanity that is campaign finance. It looks bad. We claim that we are this great republic when we are closer to an oligarchy than many will admit.

I understand but you don't have much choice with a nation his large is this.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

Oh it's not for the money but no one has stopped the insanity that is campaign finance. It looks bad. We claim that we are this great republic when we are closer to an oligarchy than many will admit.

@baconhound said:

Personally I don't trust anyone who thinks spending $500 million to secure a 4 year contract worth $50 million is a good system.

Citizens Unite!

I honestly don't think it's for the money. Sure every politician wines up rich as a bitch after they get out of office but it's the glory, I guarantee it.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

Personally I don't trust anyone who thinks spending $500 million to secure a 4 year contract worth $50 million is a good system.

Citizens Unite!

@baconhound said:

The problem is we have complex problems in this country and many want to solve them with knee-jerk simple responses.

Well even if there was the tiniest possibility that any of those problems could be solved how could that happen within a couple hours of pre-programmed sound bites?

WSS

@calfoxwc said:

States rights vs Federal rule was addressed in the Civil War and why people try to use the US Constitution vs their State Constitution to prove a point.

A very clear example of the wasteful aspect of a single level of government is Homeland Security but we won't talk about that. We will just rehash the Federal government infringing on State and local authorities.

@westside-steve said:

The problem is we have complex problems in this country and many want to solve them with knee-jerk simple responses.

referring to my earlier comments:

"There is a lot of waste in gov, that's a great place to start.

But libs won't talk about the fed EPA, the fed NEA,,, etc etc, orgs that should just

remain at the state level."

correction:

"ONLY military spending"

I was IN THE MILITARY, woody. Of course there's waste in the military.

And most other parts of our gov.

But repetitive, overlapping gov depts is very costly, and usurps the power

of the states over state concerns.. Fed control over ponds, mud puddles and ditches

is stupid. States like Arizona, etc, surely WISH they had ponds, and mud puddles..

"we can't cut military spending"

@baconhound said:

Yeah one division for the environment, education, state affairs, energy, etc.

Two for the fear mongers.

And trust me I'm all for a curb on entitlements, unfortunately our economy is going to need more than the trickle down of wealth from the benevolence of the aristocracy

I have no doubt that more redistribution will make everyone smarter, better looking, happier and more productive.

WSS

@calfoxwc said:

Yeah one division for the environment, education, state affairs, energy, etc.

Two for the fear mongers.

And trust me I'm all for a curb on entitlements, unfortunately our economy is going to need more than the trickle down of wealth from the benevolence of the aristocracy

Because they are ingrained with a free stuff for voters and political power pandering.

There is a lot of waste in gov, that's a great place to start.

But libs won't talk about the fed EPA, the fed NEA,,, etc etc, orgs that should just

remain at the state level.

@calfoxwc said:

How about the creation of Department of Defense II in Homeland Security? Oh wait you can't say anything bad about the military or law enforcement or you're unpatriotic.

Spending won't be cut anywhere else, except for the military,

per the liberal leftist "dems".

When gas prices bounce back up to nearly 4 bucks and higher,

that 22 cents will be very bad. Many companies have big

energy bills. They will have to raise their prices, like trucking companies, etc.

Then you have the impetus for inflation surge.

and temporary taxes usually become permanent, because of more and more and more spending.

It must stop. We are going to be at least very, very close to 22 TRILLION dollars in our national debt.

Big, serious, looming trouble closer and closer all the time.

@the-cysko-kid said:

Take that money out of the f-35

I say Alzheimer's because apparently we're fairly close to a cure - we know the cure "in theory" just need the money to develop it.