[Nameplate] Fair ~ 91°F  
Feels like: 96°F
Wednesday, Aug. 31, 2016

Gridlock may be good government

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

It appears the best argument the Democrats have against a Republican take-over of Congress is that it will lead to massive "gridlock" for the foreseeable future.

Well folks, given the "progress" handed down by Washington over the past two years, gridlock looks warm and inviting.

As a small government advocate, I have learned that less is always better when it comes to the federal government. The feds can move money around but it's important to remember that the money they move comes from some place. It comes from you. They don't create this money magically - unless you think turning on the printing presses somehow actually "makes" more money.

Given the past two years of Obamacare, stimulus of highly questionable results and a growing divide along social, racial and economic lines, gridlock is looking just fine.

Gridlock doesn't mean nothing will get done. It means less will be done. And it means that which is done may be of a more moderate nature and not on the extreme far left side of the political equation.

Gridlock means putting the brakes on a runaway spending spree that has no end in sight.

I think the Republicans err when they shun the "Party of No" label. Embrace it you fools. Say no to unending spending. Say no to a redistributive mentality that reduces our society to the least common denominator. Say no to an oppressive federal government that firmly believes they know more about how we should conduct our lives than we know ourselves.

The current administration has taken the "blame game" to new heights. Arrogance breeds that approach. Arrogance, by its very definition, means someone cannot or will not accept blame for their failures. Now doesn't that sound familiar?

So the acceptable approach for the next two years will be to blame the "gridlock" in Washington for the lack of progress on the road to Utopia.

I hope we awaken on Nov. 3 to the prospect of gridlock in our federal government. All that will mean is that only programs that truly have bipartisan support, that control spending and that allow our system of capitalism to flourish will have a good prospect for support.

And gridlock will assure that there will be a massive fight and an uphill battle when it comes to spending your tax dollars for programs of questionable purpose.

At this point, gridlock seems very inviting.

Michael Jensen
Michael Jensen