Sarah Palin / Associated PressWingnuts of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but election ... after election ... after election.
That's the lesson from the far right's stinging defeat in yet another Republican congressional district this week. Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman harangued GOP Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava into dropping out - hailed as a huge victory for Real Republicans - and then the clueless teabagger-cum-carpetbagger went on to lose the upstate New York seat to a little-known Democrat.
Brilliant strategy.
But it's one we've seen from Republicans over and over again, thanks to the shadowy anti-tax group Club for Growth. ...... ]
>That's the lesson from the far right's stinging defeat in yet another Republican >congressional district this week. Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman >harangued GOP Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava into dropping out - hailed as a huge >victory for Real Republicans - and then the clueless teabagger-cum-carpetbagger >went on to lose the upstate New York seat to a little-known Democrat.
>Brilliant strategy.
>But it's one we've seen from Republicans over and over again, thanks to the >shadowy anti-tax group Club for Growth. ...... >]
>That's the lesson from the far right's stinging defeat in yet another Republican >congressional district this week.
<snip> ========== The article's "lesson" is valid only if you assume that the primary political objective is to elect Republicans over Democrats, which indeed it is for large numbers of people.
If however the objective is to elect people that will limit government and taxes to a tolerable size, and limit governmental intrusion INTO THE LIVES OF THE INDIVIDUAL, then denying a Congressional seat to another RINO was the next best thing to a conservative win.
The fact that the RINO candidate endorsed the Democratic candidate when she withdrew from the race, and the national Republican committee also initially endorsed the Democratic candidate illuminates the "one party -- two branches" problem and mind set.
With the current socio-political situation and the increasingly rapid drive to "corporate governance" (i.e. fascism), election and choice between the Republicans and Democrats has become as meaningless to the majority of citizens as the choice between the "blues" and the "greens" in Byzantium.
Both parties appear to have far exceeded their useful lifespan in the sense of developing new ideas and approaches to governance in response to changed conditions and circumstances and are now only organizations that act as "marketing arms" and conduits for political contributions for their constituent political hacks and functionaries.
Ask yourself what change has occurred as the result of the Obama election and Democratic control of Congress, and not just talked about in the continual and endless political soap opera. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq continue at enormous expense in blood and treasure with no end in sight, Glass-Steagall has not been re-enacted, derivatives have not been regulated, municipal bonds sales remain a rigged game, the FRB is still exempt from annual GAO audit, etc., etc., even as the bond, commodity and gold bubbles inflate, setting the stage for yet another financial crash (and taxpayer bailout).
If the Republicans won't/can't correct, or even meaningfully discuss, these critical and proximate problems, then it is better to have the Democrats elected and in control. At the very least this eliminates the bipartisan fig leaf behind which so many of our politicians hide. FWIW -- Almost all of the disasters, debacles, catastrophes, etc. of the last generation, from the S&L collapse on, have been the result of "bypartisianship" which is politicalspeak for "ain't no body here but us chickens, ain't no body here at all."
Unka' George [George McDuffee] ------------------------------------------- He that will not apply new remedies, must expect new evils: for Time is the greatest innovator: and if Time, of course, alter things to the worse, and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better, what shall be the end?
Francis Bacon (1561-1626), English philosopher, essayist, statesman. Essays, "Of Innovations" (1597-1625).
> On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 05:34:40 -0500, Cliff > <Clhuprichguessw...@aoltmovetheperiodc.om> wrote: > <snip> >>That's the lesson from the far right's stinging defeat in yet another >>Republican >>congressional district this week. > <snip> > ========== > The article's "lesson" is valid only if you assume that the > primary political objective is to elect Republicans over > Democrats, which indeed it is for large numbers of people.
> If however the objective is to elect people that will limit > government and taxes to a tolerable size, and limit governmental > intrusion INTO THE LIVES OF THE INDIVIDUAL, then denying a > Congressional seat to another RINO was the next best thing to a > conservative win.
> The fact that the RINO candidate endorsed the Democratic > candidate when she withdrew from the race, and the national > Republican committee also initially endorsed the Democratic > candidate illuminates the "one party -- two branches" problem and > mind set.
> With the current socio-political situation and the increasingly > rapid drive to "corporate governance" (i.e. fascism), election > and choice between the Republicans and Democrats has become as > meaningless to the majority of citizens as the choice between the > "blues" and the "greens" in Byzantium.
> Both parties appear to have far exceeded their useful lifespan in > the sense of developing new ideas and approaches to governance in > response to changed conditions and circumstances and are now only > organizations that act as "marketing arms" and conduits for > political contributions for their constituent political hacks and > functionaries.
> Ask yourself what change has occurred as the result of the Obama > election and Democratic control of Congress, and not just talked > about in the continual and endless political soap opera. The > wars in Afghanistan and Iraq continue at enormous expense in > blood and treasure with no end in sight, Glass-Steagall has not > been re-enacted, derivatives have not been regulated, municipal > bonds sales remain a rigged game, the FRB is still exempt from > annual GAO audit, etc., etc., even as the bond, commodity and > gold bubbles inflate, setting the stage for yet another financial > crash (and taxpayer bailout).
> If the Republicans won't/can't correct, or even meaningfully > discuss, these critical and proximate problems, then it is better > to have the Democrats elected and in control. At the very least > this eliminates the bipartisan fig leaf behind which so many of > our politicians hide. FWIW -- Almost all of the disasters, > debacles, catastrophes, etc. of the last generation, from the S&L > collapse on, have been the result of "bypartisianship" which is > politicalspeak for "ain't no body here but us chickens, ain't no > body here at all."
> The article's "lesson" is valid only if you assume that the > primary political objective is to elect Republicans over > Democrats, which indeed it is for large numbers of people.
> If however the objective is to elect people that will limit > government and taxes to a tolerable size, and limit governmental > intrusion INTO THE LIVES OF THE INDIVIDUAL, then denying a > Congressional seat to another RINO was the next best thing to a > conservative win.
> The fact that the RINO candidate endorsed the Democratic > candidate when she withdrew from the race, and the national > Republican committee also initially endorsed the Democratic > candidate illuminates the "one party -- two branches" problem and > mind set.
> With the current socio-political situation and the increasingly > rapid drive to "corporate governance" (i.e. fascism), election > and choice between the Republicans and Democrats has become as > meaningless to the majority of citizens as the choice between the > "blues" and the "greens" in Byzantium.
> Both parties appear to have far exceeded their useful lifespan in > the sense of developing new ideas and approaches to governance in > response to changed conditions and circumstances and are now only > organizations that act as "marketing arms" and conduits for > political contributions for their constituent political hacks and > functionaries.
> Ask yourself what change has occurred as the result of the Obama > election and Democratic control of Congress, and not just talked > about in the continual and endless political soap opera. The > wars in Afghanistan and Iraq continue at enormous expense in > blood and treasure with no end in sight, Glass-Steagall has not > been re-enacted, derivatives have not been regulated, municipal > bonds sales remain a rigged game, the FRB is still exempt from > annual GAO audit, etc., etc., even as the bond, commodity and > gold bubbles inflate, setting the stage for yet another financial > crash (and taxpayer bailout).
> If the Republicans won't/can't correct, or even meaningfully > discuss, these critical and proximate problems, then it is better > to have the Democrats elected and in control. At the very least > this eliminates the bipartisan fig leaf behind which so many of > our politicians hide. FWIW -- Almost all of the disasters, > debacles, catastrophes, etc. of the last generation, from the S&L > collapse on, have been the result of "bypartisianship" which is > politicalspeak for "ain't no body here but us chickens, ain't no > body here at all."
I'm sorry but I have to differ. Anyone that can't tell any difference between the Bush/Cheney administration and the new one isn't very perceptive. Everything about the country is going in a different direction than it did just a year ago. There are big differences between what we just had and what we now have.
It may be you aren't noticing it because it takes time to make real changes in the American system because it's set up to be very difficult to change. It's also hard to make changes when you are in deep shit. At this point Obama has been simply trying to stop the bleeding. Before you can move ahead you have to fix what is badly in need of repair. But even as Obama is trying to repair the state he's also trying to make major changes. We're going from a laissez-faire government to one that believes in regulation. We're going from staying put to moving forward. The change is big and it will take time to implement. Momentous health care change is being voted on today. When that gets passed it'll make a big difference in American's lives. There are too many changes in the works to go into. Suffice it to say Obama is making radical changes from what the last administration did. They will be showing up over the next few years. The political philosophy of the Democrats is virtually the opposite of the republicans. It's going to show.
I think people are forgetting that Obama just started work in February. He's in the process of making a lot of changes but he does have republicans standing in his way, and the mess left over from their incompetent rule is massive. It's going to take a couple of years at least to get things going in the right direction but at least we have someone in place who seems to know what he's doing. That alone is a major change. Just hold your horses. It's going to get better.
>I'm sorry but I have to differ. Anyone that can't tell any difference >between the Bush/Cheney administration and the new one isn't very >perceptive. Everything about the country is going in a different >direction than it did just a year ago. There are big differences between >what we just had and what we now have.
<snip>
One example among [too] many.
Under Bush2 the major financial companies and their employees were allowed to elbow their way to the head of the line when the rescue funds were being handed out. The rest of us got pink slips and foreclosure notices.
The rest of us got excuses and "we just ran out -- come back next week." While someone must be first, it would seem common sense to have the medical personnel and public safety [police, fire, and essential court personnel] at the head of the line with the banksters and politicians at the end of the line.
Unka' George [George McDuffee] ------------------------------------------- He that will not apply new remedies, must expect new evils: for Time is the greatest innovator: and if Time, of course, alter things to the worse, and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better, what shall be the end?
Francis Bacon (1561-1626), English philosopher, essayist, statesman. Essays, "Of Innovations" (1597-1625).
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 12:56:25 -0600, F. George McDuffee
<gmcduf...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote: >The fact that the RINO candidate endorsed the Democratic >candidate when she withdrew from the race, and the national >Republican committee also initially endorsed the Democratic >candidate illuminates the "one party -- two branches" problem and >mind set.
On Sat, 07 Nov 2009 12:56:25 -0600, F. George McDuffee
<gmcduf...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote: >Both parties appear to have far exceeded their useful lifespan in >the sense of developing new ideas and approaches to governance in >response to changed conditions and circumstances and are now only >organizations that act as "marketing arms" and conduits for >political contributions for their constituent political hacks and >functionaries.
Lots of firms got distributions. The key was having qualified staff to give the shots.
>The rest of us got excuses and "we just ran out -- come back next >week." While someone must be first, it would seem common sense >to have the medical personnel and public safety [police, fire, >and essential court personnel] at the head of the line with the >banksters and politicians at the end of the line.
The others get them too but at this stage it's limited to those most at risk.
I saw the same news earlier but checked a bit more I guess .. -- Cliff
> > The article's "lesson" is valid only if you assume that the > > primary political objective is to elect Republicans over > > Democrats, which indeed it is for large numbers of people.
> > If however the objective is to elect people that will limit > > government and taxes to a tolerable size, and limit governmental > > intrusion INTO THE LIVES OF THE INDIVIDUAL, then denying a > > Congressional seat to another RINO was the next best thing to a > > conservative win.
> > The fact that the RINO candidate endorsed the Democratic > > candidate when she withdrew from the race, and the national > > Republican committee also initially endorsed the Democratic > > candidate illuminates the "one party -- two branches" problem and > > mind set.
> > With the current socio-political situation and the increasingly > > rapid drive to "corporate governance" (i.e. fascism), election > > and choice between the Republicans and Democrats has become as > > meaningless to the majority of citizens as the choice between the > > "blues" and the "greens" in Byzantium.
> > Both parties appear to have far exceeded their useful lifespan in > > the sense of developing new ideas and approaches to governance in > > response to changed conditions and circumstances and are now only > > organizations that act as "marketing arms" and conduits for > > political contributions for their constituent political hacks and > > functionaries.
> > Ask yourself what change has occurred as the result of the Obama > > election and Democratic control of Congress, and not just talked > > about in the continual and endless political soap opera. The > > wars in Afghanistan and Iraq continue at enormous expense in > > blood and treasure with no end in sight, Glass-Steagall has not > > been re-enacted, derivatives have not been regulated, municipal > > bonds sales remain a rigged game, the FRB is still exempt from > > annual GAO audit, etc., etc., even as the bond, commodity and > > gold bubbles inflate, setting the stage for yet another financial > > crash (and taxpayer bailout).
> > If the Republicans won't/can't correct, or even meaningfully > > discuss, these critical and proximate problems, then it is better > > to have the Democrats elected and in control. At the very least > > this eliminates the bipartisan fig leaf behind which so many of > > our politicians hide. FWIW -- Almost all of the disasters, > > debacles, catastrophes, etc. of the last generation, from the S&L > > collapse on, have been the result of "bypartisianship" which is > > politicalspeak for "ain't no body here but us chickens, ain't no > > body here at all."
> I'm sorry but I have to differ. Anyone that can't tell any difference > between the Bush/Cheney administration and the new one isn't very > perceptive. Everything about the country is going in a different > direction than it did just a year ago. There are big differences between > what we just had and what we now have.
> It may be you aren't noticing it because it takes time to make real > changes in the American system because it's set up to be very difficult > to change. It's also hard to make changes when you are in deep shit. At > this point Obama has been simply trying to stop the bleeding. Before you > can move ahead you have to fix what is badly in need of repair. But even > as Obama is trying to repair the state he's also trying to make major > changes. We're going from a laissez-faire government to one that > believes in regulation. We're going from staying put to moving forward. > The change is big and it will take time to implement. Momentous health > care change is being voted on today. When that gets passed it'll make a > big difference in American's lives. There are too many changes in the > works to go into. Suffice it to say Obama is making radical changes from > what the last administration did. They will be showing up over the next > few years. The political philosophy of the Democrats is virtually the > opposite of the republicans. It's going to show.
> I think people are forgetting that Obama just started work in February. > He's in the process of making a lot of changes but he does have > republicans standing in his way, and the mess left over from their > incompetent rule is massive. It's going to take a couple of years at > least to get things going in the right direction but at least we have > someone in place who seems to know what he's doing. That alone is a > major change. Just hold your horses. It's going to get better.
> Hawke- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
Well said Hawke.
George "The Destroyer of Nations" Bush was in office 96 months whild Barack "The Leader of the Triage Team" Obama has been in office for 9 months.
It takes time to effect any change...and more time to effect change in many areas.
The choice of health care as the first major change is because of the economic iceberg is rapidly becoming.
Note how the Republicans want the good ship United States of American to continue to sail directly into this iceberg.
While I understand the impatience of the public, I have to question the wisdom of some of those who are now attacking Obama for "not doing anything". It says more about their own personality than the Administration's efforts since the numbers clearly show that Obama is on track with his promises.
Unka' George [George McDuffee] ------------------------------------------- He that will not apply new remedies, must expect new evils: for Time is the greatest innovator: and if Time, of course, alter things to the worse, and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better, what shall be the end?
Francis Bacon (1561-1626), English philosopher, essayist, statesman. Essays, "Of Innovations" (1597-1625).
>Unka' George [George McDuffee] >------------------------------------------- >He that will not apply new remedies, >must expect new evils: >for Time is the greatest innovator: and >if Time, of course, alter things to the worse, >and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better, >what shall be the end?
>> The article's "lesson" is valid only if you assume that the primary >> political objective is to elect Republicans over Democrats, which indeed >> it is for large numbers of people.
>> If however the objective is to elect people that will limit government >> and taxes to a tolerable size, and limit governmental intrusion INTO THE >> LIVES OF THE INDIVIDUAL, then denying a Congressional seat to another >> RINO was the next best thing to a conservative win.
>> The fact that the RINO candidate endorsed the Democratic candidate when >> she withdrew from the race, and the national Republican committee also >> initially endorsed the Democratic candidate illuminates the "one party >> -- two branches" problem and mind set.
>> With the current socio-political situation and the increasingly rapid >> drive to "corporate governance" (i.e. fascism), election and choice >> between the Republicans and Democrats has become as meaningless to the >> majority of citizens as the choice between the "blues" and the "greens" >> in Byzantium.
>> Both parties appear to have far exceeded their useful lifespan in the >> sense of developing new ideas and approaches to governance in response >> to changed conditions and circumstances and are now only organizations >> that act as "marketing arms" and conduits for political contributions >> for their constituent political hacks and functionaries.
>> Ask yourself what change has occurred as the result of the Obama >> election and Democratic control of Congress, and not just talked about >> in the continual and endless political soap opera. The wars in >> Afghanistan and Iraq continue at enormous expense in blood and treasure >> with no end in sight, Glass-Steagall has not been re-enacted, >> derivatives have not been regulated, municipal bonds sales remain a >> rigged game, the FRB is still exempt from annual GAO audit, etc., etc., >> even as the bond, commodity and gold bubbles inflate, setting the stage >> for yet another financial crash (and taxpayer bailout).
>> If the Republicans won't/can't correct, or even meaningfully discuss, >> these critical and proximate problems, then it is better to have the >> Democrats elected and in control. At the very least this eliminates the >> bipartisan fig leaf behind which so many of our politicians hide. FWIW >> -- Almost all of the disasters, debacles, catastrophes, etc. of the last >> generation, from the S&L collapse on, have been the result of >> "bypartisianship" which is politicalspeak for "ain't no body here but us >> chickens, ain't no body here at all."
> I'm sorry but I have to differ. Anyone that can't tell any difference > between the Bush/Cheney administration and the new one isn't very > perceptive. Everything about the country is going in a different direction > than it did just a year ago. There are big differences between what we > just had and what we now have.
Oh, there's a difference, all right. Obama has taken the worst of the Bush/Cheney policies and made them about three times as worse.
How long does it take, as Commander-in-Chief, to say, "Withdraw all of the troops NOW"?, like he promised?
It sure didn't take him long to triple the Bush/Cheney deficit by bailing out the UAW on the taxpayers' dime.
|
