(Or, wottheheck, for ducks; you might as well, sometimes).
Found myself taken to task a little yesterday for suggesting you otta vote in one post and two posts later, saying "we can't fix this by voting," referring to what I think is an ineviatble collapse of the monetary system, probably taking the fed.gov down with it. ("It can't happen here?" A lot of Russians thought that, too.)
Okay, if it is going to go smash, why bother?
A. You can slow it down, put off the crash. Better hungry later than sooner!
B. You can make a difference on specific issues. Look at the progress made on gun rights, for instance.
C. You can get rid of the worst offenders. Take Indiana State Supreme Court Justice Steven H. David, who figures you have no right to resist police, ever, even if they just kick in your door sans warrant or exigent circumstances. We have one (1) chance to send this witless jackboot down; it's coming up this November and you need to get out there and vote NO on the question, "Shall Justice Steven H. David be retained?" Oh, hells no! He needs to find other work. Vote no now or we will be stuck with him until he decides to step down, probably using someone's face as a step.
Can you save the U.S. from the voting both? In the long run, probably not.* But there's a whole lot you can do in the short term, up close, and if you don't, the morons who got us in this mess will keep hastening the eventual end. Why let 'em?
* For instance, Mr. Romney is, I think, a better choice than Mr. Obama. But he's not a great choice, and the same can be said about most of the candidates for the Legislative Branch, too. They don't grasp the problem and even if they did, they lack the fortitude to address it; it wouldn't play well with the voting public to do so.
T. R. MCELROY'S STREAMLINED TELEGRAPH KEYS
11 months ago