What does it seem to mean in the context of an election for a Congressional seat? It is supposed to conjure up an impression of careful thinking and weighing the pros and the cons of an issue. However, if your mentors are Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and Howard Dean then “Reasonableness” doesn’t figure into anything resembling, being objective. These (3) mentors have never voted for spending restraints by the government. Only tax increases on employers interested them and it was never about balancing the budget, it was always about new ways to grow the size and reach of government. There is not one coherent economic argument that can be made, that how increasing taxes on employers will encourage them to hire more private sector employees. Nancy Pelosi tried to explain it once and bogged down into incoherent chatter (please remember I did use the word coherent)! I have never heard Gwen Graham suggest a significant down sizing of government and much less speak against it’s continuous expansion!
All (3) of Gwen Graham’s mentors voted or supported the Stimulus Bill (nearly a trillion $ of money, that we didn’t have) for shovel ready jobs. All, part of the $6 trillion of new debt created in the last 6 years. Even the President callously joked that his Jobs’ Bill wasn’t so shovel ready. I can’t remember Ms. Graham coming out publicly and denouncing her mentors’ support of this wasteful shovel ready jobs bill! Wouldn’t that have been more like the North Florida way of acting. She was probably too busy weighing her opportunities of running for a South Florida congressional seat at the time and hadn’t discovered “Reasonableness”, yet.
North Florida, “Reasonableness” probably means not spending money that you don’t have. If it is a bad idea for your family, then it is a worse idea for the government to do it! There is only one candidate running for the 2nd Congressional District that believes it is important not to spend money that you don’t have and his name is Cong. Steve Southerland.