EX Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's conciliatory words to the obstructionist, do nothing republicans is telling:
" The message from voters is clear: They want us to work together."
... and apparently the only way to do that is to kick democrats out of the positions of power.
As always though, the hubris that is the major political parties, this mandate will be misread by the flip side of the power hungry statist government coin as a reason to curtail even more civil liberties and expand our involvement in even more places we don't belong.
Some improvement last night T S but you are absolutely correct, the statist elements remain in place. Less absolute progressive though, so that's a positive movement.
Next local Tea Party meeting tomorrow night. Assessing the results and moving on in the background.
It will be interesting to observe how Ms. Rodham comes to her decision in light of her and Billie ' s candidates going down in flames. Very interesting indeed.
Congrats William I know you are happy. Me.... well it's okay because in reality William the party in power does not really affect my life all that much. Use your two years of power wisely until we take it back in 2016. I will be watching William. Oh by the way your tea party might as well fold the tents. While in a minority the establishment repubs used your representatives to be their mouthpieces to instigate trouble and leave the establishment senators and reps unsoiled for the long haul. Now William expect that the republican establishment that you barely care for more then the dems will now jerk your tea party asses into line and require that you toe the establishment line so as to prove that the republicans can govern, they need your support on everything, and you must do this is order to have any chance of holding onto power. As for the election wasn't it a great one. So many races right down to the wire. Shows how divided America is. But we will be back in 2016. You see William you didn't win by enough in the individual races. Once the dems get their full voting power back in the general electio ( Minorities just don't vote in off year elections) you will lose at least half of what you just gained. Use your power wisely William although I doubt that you can. I won't hide on you William. You see this whole blog is a game for me. I love to push your buttons friend and will continue to do so. It's all just a game.
We don't claim to have power rick and don't need to be. It's not about the Tea Party or for that matter the pubs or dems. Rick it's about our children and grandchildren living under the American Constitution. We just want them to have a level chance, no more, no less.
I would like to hear your opinion of Hillary ' s next move though my NC friend.
No William your tea party people are going to be told to toe the establishment line. Unity you know. As far as living under the constitution we have been doing just fine even today. William it has to change times change needs change rules change and that's what the constitution is in the end a set of rules by which to build a government. So in the end William nothing has been solved. I think the time is right for Hilary and I hope that this election doesn't determine her will to run or not. This thing was close in many races with out the broadest of democratic bases showing up. This election was a rejection of Barack Obama more then the democratic party. Hilary and Bill are the ones who can pull the party back together, probably more then any other candidate that the dems could field. We'll see.
Their home State of Arkansas has not one solitary house member, or Senator. The governor is now GOP also.
I know the left is spinning that Hillary wanted to clean out Obama's house but now the GOP has 32 of 50 governors, 52-54 Senators, and more house members than any time since 1929. They lost the MD, MASS, ILL, WIS, and MICH governor races, hardly right leaning states.
At least they retain Moombeam and Cuomo II. Do you seriously think she will want to embellish her tarnished legacy with another defeat? Aren't Monica, 2008, and Bengazi enough?
Hillary better trade in her pant suit for a track suit.
Auh...blaming the messenger. It’s never the message with you guys.
If they’re willing to throw their Messiah under the bus, you know there’s no changing your perspective. Most of the house democrats and all of the Senate democrats were in lock step with this President... until they realized they weren't in lockstep with a whole lotta democrats.... Its the message man... the message.
Congratulations on getting the government you deserve. I wonder however what would have been the result if all of the eligible people had spoken. According to our National Broadcaster, only forty percent of those eligible to vote actually did so. My interest in American politics is of fairly recent origin but I wonder why today feel somehow sad that your people are paying lip service to your "rights” rather than considering the election of a government a "responsibility" Slightly less than forty percent of eligible voters is an indictment of your system is it not?. Cheers my friends from Aussie
I will reiterate a point that I made to you about your compulsory vote... http://mwamericanpolitics.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/stop-coming-civil-war.html
Creating a far superior voter participation record isn’t really that difficult when faced with the coercion of the state but what does that touted number really say? The argument of course is that it is a civic duty which is a small price to pay for ‘democracy’. Of course putting a mark on a ballot is not a civic act at all... knowing why you put the mark where you did, is. Most casual generally vote in line with the party that reflects their views or in the case of the uninformed, the view they are told to have. Perhaps voter literacy is higher in Australia than in other countries but your 96% headline number doesn’t really speak to that. There is an important group of voters that disappear in a compulsory election. Well informed but not moved to vote in every election, these voters only participate when issues of importance compel them to. By forcing them to vote, the anger or despair that caused them to participate and perhaps radically change the outcome in intermittent elections disappears. There is another reason that a compulsory vote is just wrong in a democracy... some people refuse to legitimize the party lead structure of most country’s elections.. In a democracy, that should be their right.
As for how it might have turned out... There may have been some surprises there as well. Blacks are starting to figure out the game and are starting to see that they are the pawn in the democratic strategy. Of course Democrats are smart and know that, with respect to black and women’s votes, their days are numbered.... so let’s bring in a bunch of socialist raised Latin Americans. This too is not lost on minorities who see a shrinking pool of jobs being absorbed by these people. I would have to say that in a backhanded way President Obama has done more for the liberty, constitutional and rule of law movements that no amount of direct advertising and campaigning could ever elicit... and if he sticks to his guns, he will kill the Democratic Party for a considerable length of time. America has seen the rule of man... and it scares the hell out of them.
As for the fiscal discipline and constitutional principles of the tea party movement and the values ascribed to by the Libertarian movement... They are not irrelevant. Democrats are trying to twist the wins by republicans as republicans addressing democrat issues. In part that is true but it is by way of Libertarians who care about social equality but don’t care much for socialism....
The GOP statists are are already spouting that they won't shut down the government (read, further deficit spending), and they won't impeach the President (read, go along to get along).
We have made some small gains by killing off some of the progressive vampires. They have a way of rapidly mutating and regenerating (for instance ACORN) as they have no core beliefs they are tied to.
Republicans now have every congressional seat for Arkansas for the first time in 141 years http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/11/05/republicans-now-have-every-congressional-seat-for-arkansas-for-the-first-time-in-141-years/
Bill Clinton made his hometown of Hope, Ark., famous in his 1992 presidential election, but he couldn’t deliver any good news for in-state Democrats running this year.
Representative Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) won a convincing victory over Senator Mark Pryor, despite Bill Clinton’s best efforts to efforts to salvage a victory for Democrats in his home state.
Fox News called the race for Cotton pretty quickly — he leads 52 to 45, at the moment. That’s got to be a disappointment for Clinton, who urged voters to push President Obama out of their minds, because he’ll only be in office two more years, whereas a Senate term lasts six years.
“They want you to make this a protest vote,” Clinton said during a rally for Pryor. “They’re saying, you may like these [Democrats], but hey, you know what you’ve got to do. You’ve got to vote against the president. After all, it’s your last shot.”
Bill Clinton’s old campaign driver, Mike Ross, also lost his bid for governor — Republican nominee Asa Hutchinson won 52–45 — as the state seems to have joined the rest of the south in making a definitive turn away from the Democratic party.
The Clintons are useless everywhere...Bill has his own private war on women...by humiliating his wife with countless adulteries and forcing himself on vulnerable young women. Hillary's obscene acceptance of his behavior because of her desire for power and the Presidency. Why anyone would over look these peoples actions and consider them eligible to move back in the White House is mind boggling. Hillary's part in the Benghazi tragedy disqualifies her from being in charge of people's lives. I am praying the GOP comes up with a candidate that is a competent confident leader with integrity and morals. Someone we can have confidence in to do the rights things for our country....
I Vote For Making Compulsion Non-Compulsory by Don Boudreaux on November 5, 2014
in Politics, Seen and Unseen
Here’s a letter to the Washington Post:
Ironically, Ruth Marcus’s case for compulsory voting (“A case for compulsory voting,” Nov. 5) appeared in your pages only two days after the death of my emeritus colleague Gordon Tullock - one of history’s most insightful and influential students of the reality of politics and of voting. Gordon famously refused to vote. Among his reasons was that no individual vote is likely to determine the outcome of any election.
Yet Gordon’s case for not voting was based on more than the reality that it’s foolish for an individual to waste time and effort on an activity whose outcome that individual cannot hope to affect. More deeply, Gordon understood that politics is a nest of corruptions and deceptions that are made invisible by the romantic lenses through which too many people view democratic processes. Consider, for example, Gordon’s keen observation that “[t]he politician who sells his decision in Congress for votes is not obviously in better moral shape than the politician who sells it for cash. Nevertheless, the first act is not strictly speaking illegal.”* Surely no one should be obliged to participate in a process that selects which particular scoundrels win the privilege of selling their legislative decisions, be the sales in exchange for cash or for votes.
Does Ms. Marcus not see that there is both ethical and informational value in allowing people to express their opinion of politics by refusing to participate in any of its rites and rituals?
Sincerely, Donald J. Boudreaux Professor of Economics and Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center George Mason University Fairfax, VA 22030
This chapter displays a low opinion of flatterers; Machiavelli notes that “Men are so happily absorbed in their own affairs and indulge in such self-deception that it is difficult for them not to fall victim to this plague; and some efforts to protect oneself from flatterers involve the risk of becoming despised.” Flatterers were seen as a great danger to a prince, because their flattery could cause him to avoid wise counsel in favor of rash action, but avoiding all advice, flattery or otherwise, was equally bad; a middle road had to be taken. A prudent prince should have a select group of wise counselors to advise him truthfully on matters all the time. All their opinions should be taken into account. Ultimately, the decision should be made by the counselors and carried out absolutely. If a prince is given to changing his mind, his reputation will suffer. A prince must have the wisdom to recognize good advice from bad. Machiavelli gives a negative example in Emperor Maximilian I; Maximilian, who was secretive, never consulted others, but once he ordered his plans and met dissent, he immediately changed them.
Dear Democrats: -- Quit crying "racist" every-time you get your panties in a bunch -- Quit puking out the tenants of Communism in disguise.... what are you afraid of? -- Quit defending Islamo-Nazi's and trashing Israel -- Quit trashing Capitalism.... without wealth there is no money for welfare, idiots. -- Quit lying about equal pay for women. Women have had equal pay since the sixties. The stats you toss around are the average of ALL women vs men (has nothing to do with equal work, period) -- Quit this war on women cr a p, 150 million women are NOT Democrats, idiots. -- Why are only radical Muslims capable of violence BUT you declare that ALL gun owners in the US are capable of violence? -- We will NEVER succumb to progressivism so go away and quit trying -- Quit shoving GAY rights down our throats
You didn't vote enough times ric.
ReplyDeleteEX Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's conciliatory words to the obstructionist, do nothing republicans is telling:
ReplyDelete" The message from voters is clear: They want us to work together."
... and apparently the only way to do that is to kick democrats out of the positions of power.
As always though, the hubris that is the major political parties, this mandate will be misread by the flip side of the power hungry statist government coin as a reason to curtail even more civil liberties and expand our involvement in even more places we don't belong.
You think so Harry?
DeleteSome improvement last night T S but you are absolutely correct, the statist elements remain in place. Less absolute progressive though, so that's a positive movement.
Next local Tea Party meeting tomorrow night. Assessing the results and moving on in the background.
It will be interesting to observe how Ms. Rodham comes to her decision in light of her and Billie ' s candidates going down in flames. Very interesting indeed.
1773-2009
Congrats William I know you are happy. Me.... well it's okay because in reality William the party in power does not really affect my life all that much. Use your two years of power wisely until we take it back in 2016. I will be watching William. Oh by the way your tea party might as well fold the tents. While in a minority the establishment repubs used your representatives to be their mouthpieces to instigate trouble and leave the establishment senators and reps unsoiled for the long haul. Now William expect that the republican establishment that you barely care for more then the dems will now jerk your tea party asses into line and require that you toe the establishment line so as to prove that the republicans can govern, they need your support on everything, and you must do this is order to have any chance of holding onto power.
DeleteAs for the election wasn't it a great one. So many races right down to the wire. Shows how divided America is. But we will be back in 2016. You see William you didn't win by enough in the individual races. Once the dems get their full voting power back in the general electio ( Minorities just don't vote in off year elections) you will lose at least half of what you just gained. Use your power wisely William although I doubt that you can.
I won't hide on you William. You see this whole blog is a game for me. I love to push your buttons friend and will continue to do so. It's all just a game.
1773-2014
We don't claim to have power rick and don't need to be. It's not about the Tea Party or for that matter the pubs or dems.
DeleteRick it's about our children and grandchildren living under the American Constitution. We just want them to have a level chance, no more, no less.
I would like to hear your opinion of Hillary ' s next move though my NC friend.
No William your tea party people are going to be told to toe the establishment line. Unity you know. As far as living under the constitution we have been doing just fine even today. William it has to change times change needs change rules change and that's what the constitution is in the end a set of rules by which to build a government. So in the end William nothing has been solved.
DeleteI think the time is right for Hilary and I hope that this election doesn't determine her will to run or not. This thing was close in many races with out the broadest of democratic bases showing up. This election was a rejection of Barack Obama more then the democratic party. Hilary and Bill are the ones who can pull the party back together, probably more then any other candidate that the dems could field. We'll see.
Their home State of Arkansas has not one solitary house member, or Senator. The governor is now GOP also.
DeleteI know the left is spinning that Hillary wanted to clean out Obama's house but now the GOP has 32 of 50 governors, 52-54 Senators, and more house members than any time since 1929. They lost the MD, MASS, ILL, WIS, and MICH governor races, hardly right leaning states.
At least they retain Moombeam and Cuomo II. Do you seriously think she will want to embellish her tarnished legacy with another defeat? Aren't Monica, 2008, and Bengazi enough?
Hillary better trade in her pant suit for a track suit.
Auh...blaming the messenger. It’s never the message with you guys.
DeleteIf they’re willing to throw their Messiah under the bus, you know there’s no changing your perspective. Most of the house democrats and all of the Senate democrats were in lock step with this President... until they realized they weren't in lockstep with a whole lotta democrats.... Its the message man... the message.
Rickie - what do you think of the election results?
ReplyDeletelol
Seems as if The People have spoken.
f you lou. you think I don't know who you are,
DeleteB-L-O-O-D-B-A-T-H!!!!!!!!!!!
DeleteBWAAHAHAHA
Sorry Rick, it's not me. On Wednesday I was driving in Iowa.
DeleteMichigan was much nicer as I spent a week there on Lake Mich. Stayed in a resort for 500 bucks a week. In season 2500-3K a week.
Finished the jobs in Iowa and Michigan and I am home today.
Kitchen is finished and looks great as well as 2 baths. Master bath starts first of December. Few smaller jobs then done and back to sabbatical.
Congratulations on getting the government you deserve. I wonder however what would have been the result if all of the eligible people had spoken. According to our National Broadcaster, only forty percent of those eligible to vote actually did so.
ReplyDeleteMy interest in American politics is of fairly recent origin but I wonder why today feel somehow sad that your people are paying lip service to your "rights” rather than considering the election of a government a "responsibility" Slightly less than forty percent of eligible voters is an indictment of your system is it not?.
Cheers my friends from Aussie
I will reiterate a point that I made to you about your compulsory vote...
Deletehttp://mwamericanpolitics.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/stop-coming-civil-war.html
Creating a far superior voter participation record isn’t really that difficult when faced with the coercion of the state but what does that touted number really say? The argument of course is that it is a civic duty which is a small price to pay for ‘democracy’. Of course putting a mark on a ballot is not a civic act at all... knowing why you put the mark where you did, is. Most casual generally vote in line with the party that reflects their views or in the case of the uninformed, the view they are told to have. Perhaps voter literacy is higher in Australia than in other countries but your 96% headline number doesn’t really speak to that. There is an important group of voters that disappear in a compulsory election. Well informed but not moved to vote in every election, these voters only participate when issues of importance compel them to. By forcing them to vote, the anger or despair that caused them to participate and perhaps radically change the outcome in intermittent elections disappears. There is another reason that a compulsory vote is just wrong in a democracy... some people refuse to legitimize the party lead structure of most country’s elections.. In a democracy, that should be their right.
As for how it might have turned out... There may have been some surprises there as well. Blacks are starting to figure out the game and are starting to see that they are the pawn in the democratic strategy. Of course Democrats are smart and know that, with respect to black and women’s votes, their days are numbered.... so let’s bring in a bunch of socialist raised Latin Americans. This too is not lost on minorities who see a shrinking pool of jobs being absorbed by these people. I would have to say that in a backhanded way President Obama has done more for the liberty, constitutional and rule of law movements that no amount of direct advertising and campaigning could ever elicit... and if he sticks to his guns, he will kill the Democratic Party for a considerable length of time. America has seen the rule of man... and it scares the hell out of them.
As for the fiscal discipline and constitutional principles of the tea party movement and the values ascribed to by the Libertarian movement... They are not irrelevant. Democrats are trying to twist the wins by republicans as republicans addressing democrat issues. In part that is true but it is by way of Libertarians who care about social equality but don’t care much for socialism....
The GOP statists are are already spouting that they won't shut down the government (read, further deficit spending), and they won't impeach the President (read, go along to get along).
DeleteWe have made some small gains by killing off some of the progressive vampires. They have a way of rapidly mutating and regenerating (for instance ACORN) as they have no core beliefs they are tied to.
1773-2009 We will take the battle to our graves.
Republicans now have every congressional seat for Arkansas for the first time in 141 years
Deletehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/11/05/republicans-now-have-every-congressional-seat-for-arkansas-for-the-first-time-in-141-years/
Bill Clinton—Useless in Arkansas
DeleteBy Joel Gehrke
November 4, 2014 9:00 PM
Comments
905
Bill Clinton made his hometown of Hope, Ark., famous in his 1992 presidential election, but he couldn’t deliver any good news for in-state Democrats running this year.
Representative Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) won a convincing victory over Senator Mark Pryor, despite Bill Clinton’s best efforts to efforts to salvage a victory for Democrats in his home state.
Fox News called the race for Cotton pretty quickly — he leads 52 to 45, at the moment. That’s got to be a disappointment for Clinton, who urged voters to push President Obama out of their minds, because he’ll only be in office two more years, whereas a Senate term lasts six years.
“They want you to make this a protest vote,” Clinton said during a rally for Pryor. “They’re saying, you may like these [Democrats], but hey, you know what you’ve got to do. You’ve got to vote against the president. After all, it’s your last shot.”
The 2014 race was a test of Clinton’s strength in his home state. “The election ballot for next year looks like a Clinton political family tree, full of the former president’s protégés and ex-staff members and family friends,” as the New York Times noted last year.
Bill Clinton’s old campaign driver, Mike Ross, also lost his bid for governor — Republican nominee Asa Hutchinson won 52–45 — as the state seems to have joined the rest of the south in making a definitive turn away from the Democratic party.
Delete−
mrsgayle2 hours ago
The Clintons are useless everywhere...Bill has his own private war on women...by humiliating his wife with countless adulteries and forcing himself on vulnerable young women. Hillary's obscene acceptance of his behavior because of her desire for power and the Presidency. Why anyone would over look these peoples actions and consider them eligible to move back in the White House is mind boggling.
Hillary's part in the Benghazi tragedy disqualifies her from being in charge of people's lives. I am praying the GOP comes up with a candidate that is a competent confident leader with integrity and morals. Someone we can have confidence in to do the rights things for our country....
King Came across this and it seems appropriate:
DeleteI Vote For Making Compulsion Non-Compulsory
by Don Boudreaux on November 5, 2014
in Politics, Seen and Unseen
Here’s a letter to the Washington Post:
Ironically, Ruth Marcus’s case for compulsory voting (“A case for compulsory voting,” Nov. 5) appeared in your pages only two days after the death of my emeritus colleague Gordon Tullock - one of history’s most insightful and influential students of the reality of politics and of voting. Gordon famously refused to vote. Among his reasons was that no individual vote is likely to determine the outcome of any election.
Yet Gordon’s case for not voting was based on more than the reality that it’s foolish for an individual to waste time and effort on an activity whose outcome that individual cannot hope to affect. More deeply, Gordon understood that politics is a nest of corruptions and deceptions that are made invisible by the romantic lenses through which too many people view democratic processes. Consider, for example, Gordon’s keen observation that “[t]he politician who sells his decision in Congress for votes is not obviously in better moral shape than the politician who sells it for cash. Nevertheless, the first act is not strictly speaking illegal.”* Surely no one should be obliged to participate in a process that selects which particular scoundrels win the privilege of selling their legislative decisions, be the sales in exchange for cash or for votes.
Does Ms. Marcus not see that there is both ethical and informational value in allowing people to express their opinion of politics by refusing to participate in any of its rites and rituals?
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030
Avoiding flatterers (Chapter 23)
ReplyDeleteThis chapter displays a low opinion of flatterers; Machiavelli notes that “Men are so happily absorbed in their own affairs and indulge in such self-deception that it is difficult for them not to fall victim to this plague; and some efforts to protect oneself from flatterers involve the risk of becoming despised.” Flatterers were seen as a great danger to a prince, because their flattery could cause him to avoid wise counsel in favor of rash action, but avoiding all advice, flattery or otherwise, was equally bad; a middle road had to be taken. A prudent prince should have a select group of wise counselors to advise him truthfully on matters all the time. All their opinions should be taken into account. Ultimately, the decision should be made by the counselors and carried out absolutely. If a prince is given to changing his mind, his reputation will suffer. A prince must have the wisdom to recognize good advice from bad. Machiavelli gives a negative example in Emperor Maximilian I; Maximilian, who was secretive, never consulted others, but once he ordered his plans and met dissent, he immediately changed them.
Maximilian or BO?
DeleteDear Democrats:
ReplyDelete-- Quit crying "racist" every-time you get your panties in a bunch
-- Quit puking out the tenants of Communism in disguise.... what are you afraid of?
-- Quit defending Islamo-Nazi's and trashing Israel
-- Quit trashing Capitalism.... without wealth there is no money for welfare, idiots.
-- Quit lying about equal pay for women. Women have had equal pay since the sixties. The stats you toss around are the average of ALL women vs men (has nothing to do with equal work, period)
-- Quit this war on women cr a p, 150 million women are NOT Democrats, idiots.
-- Why are only radical Muslims capable of violence BUT you declare that ALL gun owners in the US are capable of violence?
-- We will NEVER succumb to progressivism so go away and quit trying
-- Quit shoving GAY rights down our throats