---by Dave Buhlman
When I first read the headline, "New policy governs criminally insane" (The Telegraph, 7/26/09), I thought it would be about revised policies regarding how to better supervise the Governor and the Democrat-controlled legislature, due to their penchant for passing significantly increased state budgets and associated tax and fee boosts to support their wild spending sprees. Also included in this group, of course, are the Republican quislings in the legislature who ignored their party's platform, and supported these raids on the often meager finances of innocent taxpayers, also known as their constituents, the ones who voted them into office.
This behavior at the State House is "criminal" because the awesome power of government was used to take money from citizens, using the color of law; and "insane" because the perpetrators are convinced, despite all historical evidence to the contrary, that somehow, someday, somewhere outside of the Land of Oz, ever increasing spending and taxes will finally bring us the bliss promised by those who believe government is the answer to everything. It isn't, it was never intended to be, and it never will be.
But my first impression of the article was wrong. It was about those who committed specific criminal acts while later were adjudged to be insane. Although these acts no doubt delivered some awful pain to a relatively small number of people, when those under the golden dome in Concord engage in their irresponsible behavior, hundreds of thousands are hurt.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A Conservative Take on Life, Politics and More, from New Hampshire
Authors
|
Ron Dupuis: 1945-2015, founder of imho-nh, freelance writer, and former State Representative. |
- |
 |
Micheal Shackelford NH resident, political independent, curmudgeon, foam peanut columnist |
|
 |
Dave Buhlman: NH resident, published novelist, former State Representative. |
|
 |
Jerry McConnell: Lifetime New Hampshire resident, Marine veteran of Guadalcanal, and published author. |
1 comment:
The way the NH House of Reps is elected is seriously retarded and antiquated. Some urban districts elect as many as 13 reps at-large. If the district is majority D or R all are likely to be of the same party. What is the point of this kind of redundancy?
If you want to keep a large legislature, here is an example of better plan: elect 300 by single-member districts and 100 by open-list,party-list proportional representation. Single-transferable vote is another option.
Something similar is done in many, many countries around the world.
Post a Comment