Your original premise (correct me if I'm wrong) is that we can recover from this mess, but not with Øbozo at the helm.
Sort of. I think it's possible to fix the problems we have with the right person leading us. I don't know if Romney is that right person or not, but I don't respond well to overwhelming negativity and defeatism. That's the sense of what I'm getting from a lot of people around here.
One poster - Weisshaupt - says that we are in so deep on SS that we'll never see the light of day (my paraphrase). In turn you said something to the effect that (your premise stipulated) we could accomplish the sea change in four years.
Not exactly. He was talking about the sum total of the unfunded liabilities of the various "promises" government has made.
Have I stated the current playing field correctly?
Not exactly, but I think we're straight now.
Your premise: "even if everyone in the nation woke up tomorrow and were of one accord and decided that drastic change needed to occur". Right?
Wrong. I didn't say drastic change needed a unanimous consensus of the nation to occur. I was merely making that point if even if we DID have unanimous consensus, we'd STILL not be able to make the changes we need to make in a single year.
I can recall no time in our history when everyone has awoken with identical sentiments. Even in the wake of 9/11 we may have offered similar sentiments, but we couldn't agree on much more than that we had been attacked and it was generally a sad and ugly thing.
Given what I said above, I don't know that this statement is relevant anymore.
I'm sure that you've watched Congress as closely as I have and seen the obstructionism of the left. How many days has it been since the Senate proposed a budget? 1085 days I believe. With that in mind I would ask again how in the world we are going to suddenly find the equanimity and generosity of spirit that you are suggesting?
The Senate isn't required to present a budget. The President is. And the President has, only he has't presented one that stood a chance. While he's met the letter of the requirement of the Constitution, he certainly isn't anywhere close to meeting the spirit of it. The Senate is being obstructionist, yes. With the right leader as President, that can be overcome. Like Reagan did, who had a hostile congress his entire presidency...yet he still managed to cut taxes, among other things.
I also recall GW attempting to rein in SS by advocating reform. Do you remember how well that went over?
Of course I do.
So no, I don't reject your premise out of hand - but I do reject it as unrealistic.
That's rejecting it out of hand.