Most liked posts in thread: Thank God!

"If I had to come up with one word, this is a revolution," Fox News' Sean Hannity

:lol::lol::lol:

 

Wow, the standards of revolutions has really gone down, a few hundred years ago a revolution was started by dressing like a native and dumping a boat-load of tea in a harbor, now you just have to elect someone who's not a Kennedy.

All the politicians need to wake up and realize that whoever you are, liberal or conservative, dem or republican, you're not safe unless you're listening to your constitutuents. President Obama said it very well shortly after the election, he equated the win there with the same public feelings that put him in office, people aren't happy and want a change.

 

Just the silent majority clearing their throat a little bit...

 

I've found.....

a whole new respect for the folks in Mass.

 

A very smart man (who, no doubt, a few here consider an idiot) writes very coherently about this today.

washingtonpost.com

And it's not even in the Daily Mail.

 

I think he's close to right, but I think it's far more than just the health care that cost the democrats the election in Mass. and doubt Obama was tying this all in to Bush somehow with his comments. The fact is that the last 8 years of the legislature has been controlled by both parties and the public is happy with neither. The biggest thing they don't want is more of the same and so any change has a better chance of working to get votes than a promise to "Stay the course.", even if that course is a relatively recent shift from some previous course.

 

Make no mistake about it, this vote was against Obamacare and the arrogant way the representatives in both houses attempted to push it through with little regard too "We The People" and the American way (please see Not Socialist) of life. But it also represents a total disgust with everyone in Washington and Republicans better know that they are also standing on very thin ice.

 

Yep... if I were an incumbent Republican, I'd be almost as nervous as an incumbent Democrat in many districts.

A candidate like Scott Brown could run on the same fiscally conservative, socially moderate platform under the banner of EITHER party and beat an unpopular incumbent of EITHER party who is seen as "part of the problem" by his/her constituents.

And, frankly, I'd be just fine with that. I don't care which *party* is "in charge"... I only care what *ideology* is "in charge"... I'd love to see an environment with bipartisan cooperation around spending constraint and relatively libertarian social policy...

Wait - this IS the legalized Mary Jane thread, isn't it?

 

No, it's down the hall, kind of hazy, with a table full of munchies

Mark

 

If we could just get back the Democratic party of, say, the 1880's. All would be well.

 

Wasn't that the one that called all republican's carpetbaggers? I want to get back to the Bull-Moose party of Teddy Roosevelt myself.

I don't think either party has an ideology that fits with the libertarian ideals, both parties are way too in favor of more government to fix the government problems. If the republican party hadn't allowed itself to be consumed by the religious right and neo-conservatism it may have a chance but that's all the past now.
I was watching a show on PBS yesterday where three obviously liberal pundants were discussing the political environment today. Although they were generally full of themselves, they did raise a good point that the republican party today is doing a much better job of working the democratic system than the democrats are doing. They are better able to organize fringe movements to support their group (as opposed to the democrats which let fringe movements detract from their overall support, ie the Green Party) and these "tea partiers" are actually going to the town hall meetings, running for local offices and actively working to voice their opinions, something the Obama campaign had made a lot of democrats do but they've been mostly silent and inactive since the election. Sure there's still that whole conservative silent majority, but there's also the conservative vocal minority that's going to really set the tone for the next few elections.

 

....the becoming, not so silent majority?

 

IMO......

We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility and strong national defense.

Whatever party that may be.

 

Ya gotta pay lots of taxes to have strong national defense. You can't spend a trillion $ on Iraq and Afghanistan and just put on the deficit forever. The Republicans maxed out the credit card, now the bill is coming due.

Smaller government isn't always a good thing. Bush did his best to weaken government and not all the results were good. They couldn't handle Katrina, and a decade of deregulation allowed banks and other financial institutions to run wild. You need strength and competence in some branches of government., and you need to balance the power of corporations with the power of government.

Large corporations are less answerable to the people than our government is. If you weaken government, corporations will fill the void.

 

Blaming Bush for everything is wearing a bit thin. The fact is that this adminstration and Congress has gone on a drunken spending spree while enlarging Government at every turn. Socializm doesn't work, history proves it and those that wish for it should embrace it in the places it already exist. I hear the weather is very nice in Cuba right now!


PS: Quote:
We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility and strong national defense.

Whatever party that may be.

Exactly!!

 

Thank goodness bringing up socialism hasn't yet.