Posted on Sep 30, 2015
5
5
0
From "Rasmussen Reports"
“Let the government handle it” is a common sentiment, but how do American really feel about the federal government these days? We decided to find out what America thinks.
For starters, most Americans feel the federal government plays too big a role in their lives and think, generally speaking, that there is too much government power and too little individual freedom. The freedoms granted in the Bill of Rights, such as the freedom of religion, free speech, the press and the right to bear arms are supremely important to voters, but the majority believes the federal government is a threat to those rights rather than the protector it should be. A plurality of 46%, for example, feels the government discriminates against people of religious faith.
Just 19% of voters trust the government to do the right thing all or most of the time.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/what_america_thinks/2015_09/what_america_thinks_back_off_feds
EDITORIAL COMMENT:- Assuming that the statistics are accurate, what does that say about the health of the country?
More importantly, what can be done about it?
“Let the government handle it” is a common sentiment, but how do American really feel about the federal government these days? We decided to find out what America thinks.
For starters, most Americans feel the federal government plays too big a role in their lives and think, generally speaking, that there is too much government power and too little individual freedom. The freedoms granted in the Bill of Rights, such as the freedom of religion, free speech, the press and the right to bear arms are supremely important to voters, but the majority believes the federal government is a threat to those rights rather than the protector it should be. A plurality of 46%, for example, feels the government discriminates against people of religious faith.
Just 19% of voters trust the government to do the right thing all or most of the time.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/what_america_thinks/2015_09/what_america_thinks_back_off_feds
EDITORIAL COMMENT:- Assuming that the statistics are accurate, what does that say about the health of the country?
More importantly, what can be done about it?
Posted in these groups: 
Politics
Government
Politics Government
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 17
4
4
0
Consent is the wrong word.
I tolerate the government. Repeat. I tolerate the government, much like I tolerate my neighbors. If my neighbor comes into my house uninvited, that tolerance will be very short, and end very quickly.
My tolerance of the government is based on their interference on my life. I love my country. I tolerate my government.
I tolerate the government. Repeat. I tolerate the government, much like I tolerate my neighbors. If my neighbor comes into my house uninvited, that tolerance will be very short, and end very quickly.
My tolerance of the government is based on their interference on my life. I love my country. I tolerate my government.
(4)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SFC James Sczymanski The Road to hell is paved with the stones of good intentions.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SFC James Sczymanski - "Primum non nocere" First, do no harm.
It's all well to try and do good, but like our basic first aid training, don't cause more injury. That's what I think our policy builders are forgetting. Society will generally fix itself 95% of the time. We don't need anyone to "fix" things. We might need someone to "play referee" and call foul, but society is a self correcting machine because People are very good about getting rid of damn fools, especially since there's lots of holes in the desert is someone gets to uppity.
It's all well to try and do good, but like our basic first aid training, don't cause more injury. That's what I think our policy builders are forgetting. Society will generally fix itself 95% of the time. We don't need anyone to "fix" things. We might need someone to "play referee" and call foul, but society is a self correcting machine because People are very good about getting rid of damn fools, especially since there's lots of holes in the desert is someone gets to uppity.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
... I think we really put too much weight on the Federal level ... we pay too much attention to them and give them too much power, and they do too much in respond. ...
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
Sure it does even if only on a nominal level. If there wasn't consent of the governed, then there would be mass uprisings, rebellions, etc.
(2)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
SGT David T. - Sergeant; Unfortunately your opinion (regarding consent) isn't shared by around 60% of the American people (according to the poll).
As far as the "mass uprisings, rebellions, etc." are concerned, those things require both leaders and SPECIFIC grievances. As long as the populace is placated by being handed "bread and circuses" and the potential leaders are marginalized then you won't see them happening in a concerted manner. Equally, you won't see them happening as long as the populace can be kept internally divided (although you might see one section of the populace being pitted against another).
As far as the "mass uprisings, rebellions, etc." are concerned, those things require both leaders and SPECIFIC grievances. As long as the populace is placated by being handed "bread and circuses" and the potential leaders are marginalized then you won't see them happening in a concerted manner. Equally, you won't see them happening as long as the populace can be kept internally divided (although you might see one section of the populace being pitted against another).
(0)
(0)
SGT David T.
COL Ted Mc - I am not saying the majority are happy. I am saying that there is a nominal consent.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
COL Ted Mc great article, my opinion is "Government of the Pupil, by the Pupil". Government needs to be more transparent to the American citizen.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I think they usually don't in the moment, but sometimes it turns around in the long run. The tricky part of governing is making decisions in your constituents' best interests that they may disagree with at the moment.
(2)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
LCDR (Join to see) - Commander; The REALLY tricky part is how to make decisions that are in the best interest of the whole but not in the best interest of your SPECIFIC constituents - and stay in office.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Our government is supposed to be acting on the will of the people while protecting the freedom of the individual. Unfortunately, it has become a quagmire of political favors, lobbyists, pandering, and deceit. The government has gotten to a point where it ignores the will of the people while trampling the rights of the individual. If we are being honest, I am surprised that the number of people who have faith is as high as 19% of the survey group.
What's worse is that it has evolved to a point where, in my opinion, it cannot be fixed. It started with conditioning people to believe that the only choices we have are Republican and Democrat. To suggest voting for someone else is to be told "you are wasting your vote." Politician is a career, not a term of service. In the military, some of us serve for a career, and others serve for a term of service. The difference is that even a career military person is serving. A career politician becomes loyal to the corporations that fund campaigns. They lose any ideals, or caring for the people that they had when elected. They are paid for life, have great benefits, and control their own pay raises.
So how do we fix it? I am not sure we can. It is like a cancer. How do you cure a cancer? The tumor is violently removed through surgery, this is followed by irradiation or chemotherapy to prevent further growth. It takes a huge toll on the body to kill the cancer. I WANT TO BE PERFECTLY CLEAR THAT I AM NOT ADVOCATING FOR VIOLENCE! I do not think that will do anything but destroy our nation. I think that the first step is getting rid of ANY political parties. If we want to make a real change, we need to have candidates that are elected based on position rather than affiliation. The second thing that needs to happen is that we the people need to become educated. I don't mean in a scholastic way, I mean on the issues. We need to understand the positions that we support, and oppose so that we can make better choices at the polls. Imagine a ballot with ten candidates for the office of President. Imagine that those ten candidates all have a legitimate chance to win. Imagine that they are being voted for based on actual support rather than party affiliation. That would be beautiful. Next, we need to take power away from the lobbyists. As much as I hate using public funds, I think that elections should be publicly funded. I think that if we the people are putting the only money into the elections, then the power of those who would use money to get their policies pushed through would lose that ability. Next take the power from the congress to control their pay. I think that midway through the term, we should vote on the salary. I think they should have a zero, three or six percent raise option. That way a good representative can be rewarded, and a bad representative cannot profit from it. I also think that everyone should be limited to one eight year term in office. That way there are no re-election campaigns and politicians do not go to Washington and stagnate.
Sadly, I do not see any of these ideas coming to fruition. I see our government continuing status quo until the government collapses under its own weight. That will be a sad day.
COL Ted Mc LTC Stephen F.
What's worse is that it has evolved to a point where, in my opinion, it cannot be fixed. It started with conditioning people to believe that the only choices we have are Republican and Democrat. To suggest voting for someone else is to be told "you are wasting your vote." Politician is a career, not a term of service. In the military, some of us serve for a career, and others serve for a term of service. The difference is that even a career military person is serving. A career politician becomes loyal to the corporations that fund campaigns. They lose any ideals, or caring for the people that they had when elected. They are paid for life, have great benefits, and control their own pay raises.
So how do we fix it? I am not sure we can. It is like a cancer. How do you cure a cancer? The tumor is violently removed through surgery, this is followed by irradiation or chemotherapy to prevent further growth. It takes a huge toll on the body to kill the cancer. I WANT TO BE PERFECTLY CLEAR THAT I AM NOT ADVOCATING FOR VIOLENCE! I do not think that will do anything but destroy our nation. I think that the first step is getting rid of ANY political parties. If we want to make a real change, we need to have candidates that are elected based on position rather than affiliation. The second thing that needs to happen is that we the people need to become educated. I don't mean in a scholastic way, I mean on the issues. We need to understand the positions that we support, and oppose so that we can make better choices at the polls. Imagine a ballot with ten candidates for the office of President. Imagine that those ten candidates all have a legitimate chance to win. Imagine that they are being voted for based on actual support rather than party affiliation. That would be beautiful. Next, we need to take power away from the lobbyists. As much as I hate using public funds, I think that elections should be publicly funded. I think that if we the people are putting the only money into the elections, then the power of those who would use money to get their policies pushed through would lose that ability. Next take the power from the congress to control their pay. I think that midway through the term, we should vote on the salary. I think they should have a zero, three or six percent raise option. That way a good representative can be rewarded, and a bad representative cannot profit from it. I also think that everyone should be limited to one eight year term in office. That way there are no re-election campaigns and politicians do not go to Washington and stagnate.
Sadly, I do not see any of these ideas coming to fruition. I see our government continuing status quo until the government collapses under its own weight. That will be a sad day.
COL Ted Mc LTC Stephen F.
(1)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
PO3 Steven Sherrill - PO; "Our government is supposed to be acting on the will of the people while protecting the freedom of the individual. Unfortunately, it has become a quagmire of political favors, lobbyists, pandering, and deceit. The government has gotten to a point where it ignores the will of the people while trampling the rights of the individual. If we are being honest, I am surprised that the number of people who have faith is as high as 19% of the survey group." seems to sum up the opinion of about 60% of the American people.
I agree that the (strict) "Two Party System" has become dysfunctional (if it was ever "functional" in the first place). America NEEDS a true "Centerist" or even a "Left-Centerist" political pole to counteract the two existing ("Right-leaning") political parties and get a true political dialogue going again (rather than running elections of which is "better for the country" - "Big Business" or "Big Money").
I'm not sure that I am in favor of STRICT "term limits". With the size of the federal bureaucracy, I can see where it might well take someone quite some time to become effective (and tossing them out just when they really start to get the hang of it is silly). [ASIDE:- "High staff turnover" is one of the worst things that any business can have built in, and I can't see why it would be any better for a government.]
Now, maybe, if say one half of the people whose terms were expiring were to be "voted off the island" by their peers and the remainder allowed to stand for re-election if they wanted to, that might work.
As far as pay raises are concerned, why not limit them to the same percentage as the average household income has increased?
I agree that the (strict) "Two Party System" has become dysfunctional (if it was ever "functional" in the first place). America NEEDS a true "Centerist" or even a "Left-Centerist" political pole to counteract the two existing ("Right-leaning") political parties and get a true political dialogue going again (rather than running elections of which is "better for the country" - "Big Business" or "Big Money").
I'm not sure that I am in favor of STRICT "term limits". With the size of the federal bureaucracy, I can see where it might well take someone quite some time to become effective (and tossing them out just when they really start to get the hang of it is silly). [ASIDE:- "High staff turnover" is one of the worst things that any business can have built in, and I can't see why it would be any better for a government.]
Now, maybe, if say one half of the people whose terms were expiring were to be "voted off the island" by their peers and the remainder allowed to stand for re-election if they wanted to, that might work.
As far as pay raises are concerned, why not limit them to the same percentage as the average household income has increased?
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Two things, first, I would suggest this said nothing about the health of the "country", and a lot about the feelings regarding the progressively unconstitutional actions of our government, it's politicians, bureaucrats, and its expanding regulatory nature.
Secondly, I would point out that the Bill of rights granted no rights, but rather recognizes these rights as inherent, and makes clear, the idea that the Federal government had no place in infringing upon them. To hit the idea home, the last of the Bill of of rights tells us that any powers not specifically granted the government by the Constitution belong in the hands of the States, or of the people.
Secondly, I would point out that the Bill of rights granted no rights, but rather recognizes these rights as inherent, and makes clear, the idea that the Federal government had no place in infringing upon them. To hit the idea home, the last of the Bill of of rights tells us that any powers not specifically granted the government by the Constitution belong in the hands of the States, or of the people.
(1)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
SSG Gerhard S. - Staff; If the people do not trust the government, what does that say about the ability of the government to actually govern?
If the government cannot actually govern, what does that say about the health of the country?
No one is arguing that the Bill of Rights "granted" any rights.
In fact the original Constitution didn't include any of the first ten amendments (depending on which view you take EITHER because the drafters were so convinced that those rights were totally obvious that no government would ever be able to infringe on them OR because the drafters had every intention of infringing on those rights so as to ensure that "the right people" continued to run the country) [and those first ten amendments really emphasize "the Rights of Englishmen" that the American Revolution was supposedly fought to ensure for the colonists].
If the government cannot actually govern, what does that say about the health of the country?
No one is arguing that the Bill of Rights "granted" any rights.
In fact the original Constitution didn't include any of the first ten amendments (depending on which view you take EITHER because the drafters were so convinced that those rights were totally obvious that no government would ever be able to infringe on them OR because the drafters had every intention of infringing on those rights so as to ensure that "the right people" continued to run the country) [and those first ten amendments really emphasize "the Rights of Englishmen" that the American Revolution was supposedly fought to ensure for the colonists].
(1)
(0)
SSG Gerhard S.
I would suggest the less our Federal government "governs", the healthier the Country will be. The Federal government would have to back-track quite a lot to approach the proscribedl level of governance allowed by the Constitution. The Country, through State, and Local governments, and market economics will largely run itself if the Federal government would stick to its Constitutionally enumerated powers. Regards.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
The only solution possible is for the people to take control in the polling places; if we fail to do that we will have lost our Democratic Republic.
(1)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
Capt Seid Waddell - Captain; But first you have to regain control over whom you are being permitted to vote for.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
Capt Seid Waddell - Captain; I wouldn't count on it.
Assuming that you wanted to run for a seat in the House of Representatives and that you were the most qualified (through education, training, and temperament) person in your electoral district but had never been politically active in your entire life and only earned around $65,000 per year from your job where you were paid on an hourly wage basis.
What do you think your chances of getting selected at even the "primary ballot level" would be?
Assuming that you wanted to run for a seat in the House of Representatives and that you were the most qualified (through education, training, and temperament) person in your electoral district but had never been politically active in your entire life and only earned around $65,000 per year from your job where you were paid on an hourly wage basis.
What do you think your chances of getting selected at even the "primary ballot level" would be?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Col. Sir just a short comment. I received a survey recently from one of my Senators want to know how I feel about the mounting debt of our nation and what could we do about it. My response was that i didn't have any control over what they did in Washington and i had plenty of suggestions. But when I write and ask why on something I get the run around reply. Calls and letter writing doesn't get it.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google