The bike paths were funded by individuals elected by the people. Don't like it, vote them out. It's called democracy.
Stebben posted this in the VP Rand Paul thread but it seems like we are getting way off topic there and he does raise an interesting point that should be addressed.
He is quite right that we should vote out the people whose policies we do not like. While I support radical, even revolutionary, change, I support doing it at the ballot box. I do not support doing it by any other means. In my experience, virtually all liberals/libertarians take a similar view.
So let us try a thought experiment. Let us say that my best case scenario comes to pass (or worst case depending on POV) Let us say that a Paul, Palin or someone like them gets elected prez.
Let us also suppose that the repos in general and the tea party repos in particular increase their majority in the House and gain 61 seats in the Senate.
They then start slashing the federal govt eliminating departments, agencies and employees, repealing various laws, pushing govt functions from the federal back to the state, local and individual levels and so on.
Perhaps they even cut spending by 50% and implement a flat tax of, say, 10% on all income.
And so on.
I know, I know, it will never happen. What I am posing is strictly a hypothetical. (I can dream, can't I?)
I am assuming that all here would be fine with this. This is what democracy looks like, right? The people have spoken and all that.
After all, if you don't like it, you can always vote them out, right?
I guess my real question is: Should there be any limits to democracy?