Since Sep 20, 2002

view home page, enter name:
I am a Civil Engineer (registered professional - structural) who has worked on infrastructure (streets and sanitary & storm sewers) for 40 years now. A few years ago, bridge inspections and traffic engineering were added to the list. That means I work for the "damb gubbamint" (at least according to some of the people who post here). However, there are darned few private streets, sewers, bridges, or traffic signals out there. It doesn't seem to matter to them that I am working for a private Consulting firm, so I am doing exactly what the same people are saying should be done - hire out all the gubbamint work to private companies who can do it quicker and cheaper.

However, I have worked with (really, for) Liberal politicians and Conservative politicians through the years. I can tell you from personal experience that there is ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE between the two. They still want to take our money and spend it on what THEY want, not on what you want and especially not give it back. The only difference is that they want to give it to different friends. Note that the very few times a "conservative" politician actually cuts taxes, it is a mere pittance and it never seems to equal the raises that they "reluctantly went along with" in the past.

When a "Conservative" politician says "I want to cut taxes, but not services (by cutting waste, fraud, lazyness, or alien abductions)", you can tell right there that he/she is lying. The only way to really cut taxes is to cut services. I have NEVER seen a politician (Liberal or Conservative) say that. There is constant pressure from the voters to increase services; not to stay the same and certainly NOT cut back. And both Liberal and Conservative politicians regularly give in to these requests. 50 years ago, my City plowed the snow on main streets when it got too deep to drive on with chains on the car. Residential streets were never plowed. Later it was whenever more than 6" was expected. Then it was both main streets and residential streets. Then it was when more than 3" were expected. Now, it is plowed to clean concrete every time there is a dusting. It costs more for the snowplow drivers, the equipment, and the salt/sand for EACH increase. When they do this kind of "mission creep", taxes will increase. Nothing else is possible.

The politicians on both sides want to cut each others programs and shift the money over to something that they would rather spend it on, but they don't really want to cut service or give it back. All it takes to get lower taxes is a politician who says "NO" when someone wants him to give them something for free. HAAAAA.

If you are willing to spend longer in traffic jams, not get streets plowed, travel slower over rougher roads, occasionally get sewer backups when you try to flush, and do with fewer police, firemen or EMT's (which means you might die of a heart attack or your house burn down before anyone can get to you), you can expect lower taxes. Until then, you (like the lying politicians) are blowing smoke.


Primary elections are where you get to vote your conscience. You vote for the person you hope will win, regardless of "electability". The "final" election is where you must vote against the person who will harm the country the most. Anyone who doesn't close ranks after the primary and prevent the person who will harm this country the most from being elected is actively complicit in trying to destroy this country.


When voting, I look at the two people most likely to win. I will take a conservative over a “moderate Republican” if I can get it. I will accept a “moderate Republican” over a RINO if I have to. I will live with a RINO over a Demoncrat if I must. I will not vote for a Demoncrat under any circumstances. Neither will I a vote for a conservative (regardless of the label he wears) if it means that a Demoncrat is sure to win (for example, in a 3-way race). If a conservative is only pulling 5%, 10% or 15% of the votes, all he is is a spoiler, not a serious candidate. And, no; this does not contradict the previous statement.


I am disappointed that some Conservatives learned the wrong thing from Ronald Reagan. Many (especially here) seem to think that his victories were ONLY because he was conservative. I cannot count the number of times I have heard, "Give the voter a "true" conservative and they will flock to him." Wrong. It hasn't happened yet and will never happen.

Every voter votes for the person they think is nearer the way they (the voter) thinks. Everyone would like to have someone JUST LIKE THEM win. When averaged over the entire population, the person nearest the center wins. Reagan won because the two Demoncrats who ran against him were way, WAY further from the center than Reagan.

That is why BillyBoy Clinton won. He talked center, but governed from the left. We knew that from the start, but he fooled enough people to win. Of course, the help he had from "true conservatives" in 1992 also helped put him over the top -- the 75-80% of the Perot voters who would have voted Republican if it had been a two-man race. Think of how much we lost between 1992 and 2000 because of their "principles". The people who refuse to close ranks after the primary and defeat the Liberal-Left in the general election are not principled. They are traitors.

Update: 0bama learned this lesson well. He talks more conservatively than Reagan. We all know that he doesn't believe that or practice it. But, he doesn't care about what we think. He is talking to the swing voter -- the middle of the road voter. They, along with the hard left elected him. And his lies are working. I just hope that our country will survive.


I still consider myself an engineer, but I am retired now.