Originally Posted by Joe Wrabek
Seriously, Sam, I would ignore it. I think Bill Clinton did more than any other President to prove the Federal government irrelevant, and I would like to see the process continued. The way the stock market plunges every time Obama suggests a "solution" is a great "the government can't do anything right" opening I keep wishing he'd take advantage of. I'm sure he won't (thereby underscoring my point, I guess).

I think what we really need is effectively functioning *local* governments--with an actively involved citizenry, be it noted--with state governments that get in the way as little as possible. Keep things on a small scale, and you force people to cooperate to get things done, because they can't accomplish things on their own.

You have noticed, I'm sure, the recent warning that came out of the Federal Homeland Security Department that anybody who wanted to reduce the Federal government--even if it was to increase the power of local or state government--was to be considered a "right-wing terrorist" and must be stopped. Accordingly, you should probably not listen to me. You'll end up on a list somewhere. At least, *pretend* not to listen.

Joe


As for local government, our Neighbor Americans had it down.
The Cherokee Apache, Kiowa, Lakota nations governed from within their camps, and it worked for them.

As for the government list?

F**k 'em.

IF OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH US, AS THE POPULATION, WHATSOEVER, MARIJUANA WOULD BE LEGAL, TOBACCO WOULD NOT BE SUDDENLY OUT OF REACH BY THE AVERAGE AMERICAN WHO SIMPLY CHOOSES TO INDULGE, AND LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD BE ALL ABOUT HOW TO LOOK OUT FOR US, INSTEAD OF HOW TO SCREW US OUT OF EVERYTHING.

Co-Write Friendly.....Look at my blog on My Space.

http://www.cherokee46x@yahoo.com
http://www.myspace.com/ronnievanzantfan
http://www.facebook.com/sambwilson

Ronnie Van Zant fan