Don't disagree. Being significantly older my anguish runs a more intense anguish I believe, perhaps because for my earlier years I was a staunch independent. I voted regardless of party. Then, as I became more and more burdened by tax liabilities and more involved in the business arena I found myself more in line with the GOP mantra. But no more, not because I have changed my views but I feel they changed into a talk the talk but never walk the walk. This is not to say I align with the Dems but more to say I just don't see (in action) the difference. Nor do I see either party less corrupt than the other (although I do believe with all my being HRC is a new standard bearer).
I'm not sure how you can say there's no difference. I'm not saying they're perfect. However, and I know many scoff when I say this, you have to consider context. If you don't completely run the show, then you have to make concessions. You're not going to get everything you want. "Running the show" means having the Presidency, having 218 reliable votes in the House, and 60 reliable votes in the Senate. How big those concessions are depend on how close you are to "running the show," the political realities of the day, and your ability to influence the public. I've heard a lot of people saying the GOP should have gotten rid of Obamacare, stopped his executive actions, etc., but procedurally and politically there's only so much they can do. I've never heard any of their critics offer any specific options that they should have followed but didn't.
And the bottom line is that if Democrats had held control of Congress for the last eight years, things would be very, very different. We would almost surely have single payer now, cap and trade, a more liberal judiciary, higher taxes, and MUCH higher spending levels by hundreds of billions of dollars per year. The GOP has made a difference. You may not recognize it, because they haven't been able to bludgeon a President into signing a repeal of his signature legislative achievement, but they have made a major difference.
This is what I believe wholeheartedly but what I do not believe is that those who he exploits are necessarily fools, just mad and VERY 'anyone but Hillary blind.' How bad that is for the country we may disagree.
Being angry is fine, but that doesn't mean any course of action is fine. Instead of doing something bellyaching and then doing something foolish, they should act rationally, and that means looking inward rather than lashing out.
First, they should learn conservative principles, and yes, that means they need to turn off talk radio and pick up a book. They need more William F. Buckley and Friedrich Hayek and less Sean Hannity and Michael Savage. In terms of officeholders, they should favor people like Dick Armey over people like Sarah Palin.
Second, they should educate themselves on how the separation of powers actually work, which means perusing the Constitution. If you don't understand the separation of powers, then you can't know what your expectations reasonably should be.
Third, they need to take what they learn about conservative principles, and use it to convince others to accept conservatism, because the public isn't very conservative right now. The most powerful weapon that conservatism has is that it's right, but its adherents need to know what conservatism is and how to advocate it in a consistent and disciplined manner. The Left owns public education and the media. You're not going to counter that with incoherent babbling.
Finally, they should stop acting like ******** and calm the hell down, and they need to stop rewarding politicians who act like ********. Conservatives should advocate their ideology in a measured, intelligent, and disciplined manner. Apocalyptic and vitriolic rhetoric don't make a position look strong. They make it look dangerous, stupid, and weak.
