Not Getting the Point

 Caveat - I read Non-Sequitur every day, and have for over a decade.  

I don't think Wiley Miller, the artist who does the wonderful Non-Sequitur cartoon, understands what he's criticizing here.

He seems to be suggesting that there's a disconnect between wanting good government and not liking government very much.  He also doesn't seem to understand the concept that someone can be a good statesman without wanting to make politics a career.

"That government is best which governs least" - Thoreau

What the TEA Party, which I believe is who he is attempting to lampoon here, is looking for is simply this:  The government should fulfill those roles that are enumerated for it in the Constitution of the United States, and nothing more. Cutting the direct role of the government will make it more efficient and allow us to either pay down our insanely humongous public debt or cut taxes on our citizenry, which will spur growth more than 20 million union shovel leaners ever could.



I have an in-borne distrust of authority, due at least in part to watching the growth of the Federal Government and its reach into all aspects of our lives during my lifetime.  And it goes back further.  The Roosevelts, Teddy and Franklin,  Woodrow Wilson, and Lyndon Johnson pushed the envelope violently during the 20th century to expand the powers of the government into areas that the founding fathers didn't see fit to put in the Constitution.  Clinton, Bush II, and now Obama seem to have been spending a lot of their energies in expanding even further during the 21st. 

I am a member of the Republican party, but I consider myself an independent.  I will vote for a Democrat if he or she makes sense and promises to govern in a way that I approve of.  Yes, I have my own sacred cows  (defense) that I have to make a conscious effort not to knee-jerk approve of any expenditure, but overall, I think the government could do its job better and more efficiently if it concentrated on those areas that are actually its job.  These include security of the United States, which is different from Homeland Security, regulating trade between the states and with foreign countries, and collecting the minimal taxes that it needs to operate.  I believe that a lot of the things that our government does need to either be terminated or be spun off to the private sector.  I plan on doing a series of posts detailing this sometime in the future.

As for those in government not wanting to do it, I support candidates who promise to serve for only one or two terms.  It is my opinion that enforceable term limits would require an amendment to at least the federal Constitution, and possibly the constitutions of the various states.  But if a good candidate tells me that she will serve for at most two terms, then that's a plus for them.  But Cthulhu help her if she runs for a third term.

Government service should be an honor, served well and in a limited time span.  If you have been in the Congress or an executive branch position for longer than I've been allowed to drive, you really need to go do something more useful for the country.

Those of us who hold these beliefs are ridiculed as being naive, but I'd rather be idealistic and effective than cynical and stagnant.