Here is an entertaining and informative rant from Marianne Edain in response to a recent anti-government letter to the editor:
“Ms Anita Dragoo complains in the 8-18-11 issue of the Whidbey Examiner about the excesses of government, and quotes Commissioner Homola as saying government should “provide the critical public services that taxpayers pay for.” Does Ms Dragoo prefer that government NOT provide the services taxpayers pay for? And which of these services does Ms Dragoo propose to cut?
Let’s see, we could begin with cutting the emergency services to veterans. After all, who needs veterans? Shouldn’t they be forced to fend for themselves, just like every other self made person?
Then we can cut out the juvenile drug court. If kids want to kill themselves and each other with addictive drugs, surely that’s their business and not the taxpayers’. Of course the kids who go through the program (as reported in the Examiner) are far less likely to re-offend and much more likely to become self supporting and contributing citizens (as well as being happier human beings). So the tax money we put into these programs actually prevents greater expenses later. But no matter, it’s a government service which should be cut.
And who needs dog pounds? Just let the animals wander the roads, steal chickens, run sheep, bite people, and eventually be hit by cars.
So let’s get to the specifics of what Ms Dragoo considers intrusive.
Continue reading
