I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce it's size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first determined whether it is Constitutionally permissable. And if I should be attacked for neglecting my constituent's "interests" I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is Liberty, and in that cause I am doing the very best I can.
I abhore politicians that do not adhere to the majority of these ideals, and long to find a candidate that holds them all dear, as I do.
Obviously, your standards only are that they have (R) after their name.
Again, Sir, a pox upon you and like minded "conservatives".
I was talking about all these arguments...gossip about talk show hosts.
I don't pick my candidates due to the "R", but that is where I start looking.
You try to be a conservative elite and that's fine, but exactly what good have you accomplished fomenting arguments among allies?
In my old occupation I would accuse you of aiming at the wrong targets. We have to stop the libs before we start turning on our own.
The question remains: what has all this bickering (and spreading poxes) accomplished?
It sounds VERY familiar, vintage Goldwater, and I LOVE it! Thanks for posting it!