Who is the scariest Democrat?

[ambitious_wench]

Don't ask me how I got this email. No, I am not a Democrat mole in the RNC. But I trust my source not to have cooked it up in any way.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:46:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: RNC eCampaign <ecampaign@gop.com>
To: (REDACTED)
Subject: Scariest Democrat Halloween Contest

SCARIEST DEMOCRAT CONTEST!!!

Dear (X).,

What do Halloween and politics have in common? Scary Democrats!

Every year the Republican National Committee has a hard time determining who is the scariest Democrat of the bunch. Just like the fall harvest, there's an abundance from which to choose. That's where you come in. We need your help in determining who the RNC should announce as the "Scariest Democrat" in 2007.

We'll announce your choice before Halloween Day.
(End)

Several things come to mind:

How childish.
How lame.
This ain't nearly as funny as the various masks I've seen in the past; Ronald Reagan, George Bush (Sr. and Jr.) and my personal fav, Condoleeza Rice.

So which Democrat should the Rethuglicans be most afraid of? I'll tell you;

ME.

That's right. ME. Because I am a registered voter. And I vote core Democratic values. I pay attention to what is happening in congress, I let my Congressional representatives know my views, and I am not afraid of taking back my government.

We can play childish games like this back and forth, or we can get down to business. I'd love it if my name were put up as Scariest Democrat in America. I'd love to the the Rethuglicans running scared of me. Because they should.

But more importantly, I'll be voting. Will you? Have you registered to vote? Will you be voting in the primaries?

Be the scariest Democrat with me. We are worse than hordes of undead zombies, packs of rabid werewolves!

Comments

with links!

[(Anonymous)]

http://thetrubandit.blogspot.com/2007/10/fwd-scariest-democrat-halloween-contest.html

Re: with links!

[ambitious-wench.livejournal.com]

He needs to fix his html tags.

(http://www.flickr.com/photos/ambitious_wench/1713839324/)

I'll be voting...

[mongo.livejournal.com]

But I registered Republican. I got tired of beating my head against the outer walls, I'm going to try to subvert from within. The idea of less, more-efficient government is appealing to me. These religious God-fearing wonks went astray somewhere when they decided staying in office was more important than doing what they were elected for in the first place (of course the Dems aren't much better in that regard).

It seems like the lines between Democrat and Republican have been blurring into one inefficient blob.

But I'll help be scary with you. You send them one way, and I'll send them right back until they run themselves right out of office.

Re: I'll be voting...

[ambitious-wench.livejournal.com]

Be careful what you ask for: a smaller government means longer waiting lines at the DMV.

Re: I'll be voting...

[barberio.livejournal.com]

Republicans seem to stand for smaller government... Except where those funds go to their home state, or are supporting their pet cause, or are going towards immigration control...

Incidentally, here's a fun game... Find the enumerated congressional power in the US Constitution that allows for a Federal Immigration Service. Spread the fun, get the next Libertarian who mentions 'Congress taking up too many tax dollars for unconstitutional programs' in the same breath as 'Not doing enough about Immigration' to play too

Re: I'll be voting...

[mongo.livejournal.com]

That's more of the shifting blob stuff. Because the Dems have their pork too. Silly me, I want to see bills passed and voted on their merits without tacking on all the non-sequitors. Maybe that means a line-item veto power for the next president. It's not going to be a quick fix in any way.

Immigration needs massive reform and probably some control instead of building a big-ass fence.

As far as the DMV, maybe it's time to federalize and consolidate that too. As opposed to 50 different sets of rules and loopholes.

Re: I'll be voting...

[barberio.livejournal.com]

A major problem with the US congress is that there's very little restraint on adding amendments to a bill. And fiscal bills almost always turn into omnibus bills following a flurry of amendments added to them after they get out of the committees. It that point that causes the huge 'bloat' of spending.

Over here in the UK, budget is in operation an executive function that is then approved or not by the legislature. With a budget that comes out of the Treasury, and no other funding bills occur except by extraordinary act of parliament to release emergency funds. Getting the budget passed is a 'vote of confidence' issue, and failing to do so almost automatically triggers the dissolution of parliament and snap elections.

I think the US congress might act a little differently if they only had one funding bill a year, and failing to pass it resulted in having to immediately go back to their states to face an election.