So, if things have changed for the worse, we should all just go along with it? Not my style.
You sure put a lot of words in my mouth. "Slackards....exponentially....past 6 years".....I said none of that but you did. Why? Did you really think a comparison of Reagan's numbers to Obama was effective? Did you just look at overall numbers? Total government employee numbers are broken down by Civilian, Military, and Legislative/Judicial. In the 4 years following Reagan's election, rounding up and down (numbers in the thousands), Reagan maintained a Civilian number of 2800, 2800, 2800, and 2900 with a Military number of 2100, 2100, 2200, and 2200. In Obama's first 3 years following his election his Civilian number was 2800, 2800, and 2800 with a Military number of 1600, 1600, and 1600.
http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-over...ables/total-government-employment-since-1962/Oh....bummer. The Feds are holding steady but in the midst of multiple worldwide conflicts we have managed to reduce our military. And BTW, Obama's Civilian numbers increased significantly over that of his predecessor. The 2 years with the highest number of Civlian employees were 1968 and 1969.....LBJ and Nixon, lol.
Moving on.....despite your Karnak-like abilities, you are incorrect. Allow me to speak for myself. What did I mean by massive beaurocracy? TSA, IRS, EPA, SEC, DoE, a $488B price tag for increased government regulations under the current administration.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cost-regulations-under-obama-488-billion_652691.html Fraud in nearly every corner and every organization. A government so big it is losing money hand over fist and then running around like crazy to catch and prosecute, thereby requiring more employees and pretending to appear effective.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/157210.php
http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/School-Imp...ding-for-Education-Fraud-Waste-and-Abuse.aspx,
http://www.sec.gov/News/PressRelease/Detail/PressRelease/1370539751924#.UgPEeqbn_cs
Violent crimes. The mass shootings to which YOU opened with in terms of mental health do not account for anywhere near the number of overall violent crimes in the US. They get the media attention for obvious reasons but they are the exception not the rule and legislating to the exception is a major mistake which will result in unintended consequences. Violent crimes are murder, nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Just this summer alone in Chicago, over 100 people have been murdered. That number will increase by another 20 or 30 by the end of August. Do the people who commit all of these crimes and those in Chicago have a history of mental illness? Why not just get rid of prison sentences for violent criminals then and send them all to psychiatric hospitals? Most of the specific people you mentioned in terms of the mass shootings did have a history of mental illness....and all of them gave repeated signals that both family and health professionals either ignored, did not believe, or did not pursue other than putting them on meds. How did that work? And somehow you think the federal government is going to detect them prior to a major incident? Not a chance. Time marches on, society changes you say....it sure does and if you aren't advocating the removal of guns from citizens then you have to accept that tragic incidents will occur, crazy people will do bad things. Our government can't figure out how to properly frisk a child at an airport. They can't effectively find and treat severe psychosis. They can develop things like MKULTRA though.
Back to Benghazi....pressure on the incoming FBI director caused charges to be filed. Shocking.
Click to expand...