RSS Feed

a playground of art, photos, videos, writing, music, life


You are here

Random Quote

I get a fine warm feeling when I'm doing well, but that pleasure is pretty much negated by the pain of getting started each day. Let's face it, writing is hell.
-- William Styron


Blog - Blog Archive by Month - Blog Archive by Tag - Search Blog and Comments

<-- Go to Previous Page

How I'm Going to Vote at the Iowa Caucus


Like most others these days, my biggest concern is government spending. Less government is better government is more freedom is a stronger America.

So I am likely to vote for the person who aims to cut government spending the most and stands the greatest chance of implementing their plan.

You want to know who that is? Read their plans, or, their lack of plans.

Michele Bachmann

Rick Santorum

Rick Perry

Newt Gingrich

Jon Huntsman

Mitt Romney

Ron Paul

In synopsis:

Michele Bachmann doesn't have a detailed plan, and only vaguely discusses the problem.

Rick Santorum doesn't have a detailed plan, and only talks about his past achievements.

Rick Perry has a very detailed plan: he wants to cap spending at 18% of the GDP.

Newt Gingrich, surprisingly, doesn't really talk about spending. Other than promising to balance the budget, that's it.

Jon Huntsman doesn't talk about spending at all.

Mitt Romney has a detailed plan and wants to cap spending at 20% of the GDP.

Ron Paul wants to cuts $1 trillion in spending during the first year and eliminate five cabinet departments.

Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Jon Huntsman, and Newt Gingrich are out. They don't have any detailed plans about reducing government spending.

Who can implement their plan?

Mitt Romney - he can likely implement his plan, but he created RomneyCare, and that required money from the federal government to work. Based on his history, he didn't cut spending as a governor. He just got creative with it.

Rick Perry - he can likely implement his plan, and as governor of Texas, balanced the budget and in some ways reduced spending, but mostly relied on job creation as a means to finance the state forward.

Ron Paul - not a leader in Congress and not influential in getting things passed, his aggressive anti-spending agenda is admirable and likely correct in its goals, but not really something he can muster the votes to pass. There's often a difference between being right and being influential, and Ron Paul more often repels his fellow Congressfolk than attracts them.

In synopsis:

Three Republican candidates of seven have detailed plans for cutting spending in a year where cutting spending is the highest priority for voters.

3 out of 7. Good god, that's dumb.

Of the three that remain:

Mitt Romney isn't very aggressive and doesn't have a history that indicates anything but smoke and mirrors.

Ron Paul is aggressive, but doesn't have the proven capacity for leadership that he would need to pass his agenda. Great theory only.

That leaves Rick Perry. In my opinion, it's not aggressive enough, but he has a track record for it that even the Washington Post had to acknowledge. So Rick Perry gets my vote.


by Brett Rogers, 12/27/2011 11:19:21 AM


Add Your Comment:
Name (required):
Web Site:
Remember Me:   
Content: (4000 chars remaining)
To prevent spammers from commenting, please give a one-word answer to the following trivia question:

What do you call the white fluffy things that float in the sky? (plural)