Party labels: 'Yes' or 'No'?
Alan Journet tags the GOP the party of "No" without giving proper consideration to the constituents they represent. Of course, Journet hardly garners credibility when he stereotypes a major political movement as "nut cases" while calling for a rational and intelligent debate.
I've asked my representatives to say "no" to Obamacare, continued bailouts of failed private companies, a defense appropriations bill with hidden social legislation designed to gain fringe support and corporate carbon credits while taxing cattle rear-end emissions. I've asked them to say "no" to the ridiculous so-called Fairness Doctrine.
Conversely, should we tag Democrats the party of "Yes"? Yes, increase unfunded entitlements to secure future votes. Yes, use tax dollars subsidizing the failed liberal media. Yes, use government leverage to unfairly favor union bosses over the stockholder. Yes, authorize CIA drones to kill U.S. citizens without a trial. Yes, print and spend money in a fashion that dwarfs any previous administration. Yes, keep bringing tax cheats and lobbyists into the administration. Yes, let the oil coat our shoreline while managing a response that makes the federal assistance during Katrina look masterful. Yes, tell the world that we're not a Christian nation. Yes, slur the tea party movement while drowning in progressive arrogance.
Now if we could just get these same Democrats to say "yes" to accepting responsibility in their current positions of authority and their accompanying responsibilities. "Yes," the rhetoric failed to contain substance. "Yes," we'll vote smarter in November.
CHAD CRAFT, Jackson