The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: tombogan03884 on January 21, 2011, 04:46:58 PM
-
I've been saying this since before the 2010 elections
http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2011/01/20/get-ready-for-an-obama-victory-in-2012/?singlepage=true
The best thing to happen to Barack Obama is that the Republicans cleaned his clock in 2010. He is suddenly looking not so bad for 2012.
The November debacle made it obvious — even to the ultra-conventional left-liberal Obama — that the United States of America is a center-right country. He hired business-friendly William Daley as his chief-of-staff and came out roaring with an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, of all places, that made him sound like a re-upped columnist for Reason magazine (well, mostly). It’s not hard to predict that his State of the Union address will stress cutting the deficit and reprise tropes from his let’s-all-learn-to-love-each-other kumbaya from the Tucson memorial.
November also helped him in that it further marginalized his left flank. Left-wing Democrats can now be placated by the most minor of bones. They have nowhere else to go, except perhaps running Dennis Kucinich in the primaries, which would be comic relief. And given the state of the global economy, few believe in Keynesian economics anymore anyway, except a handful of last-ditch bureaucrats in Brussels and the commenters on the Huffington Post.
But wait, you say, isn’t Obama a leftist ideologue? Won’t that come out in the end? What about Bill Ayers, Rashid Khalidi, and Reverend Wright?
Well, sure, but that was then and this is now, I’m sorry to say. As many have pointed out, Obama is a supreme narcissist and, for such a person, advancement of self trumps ideology virtually anytime. Forget the mind-numbing palaver about sticking to his ideals even if it means losing the election. If Obama has to tilt right to win, he will tilt right.
And he doesn’t need Dick Morris to explain to him how to “triangulate.” The information is in plain sight to a ninth grader running for middle school president. Obama also doesn’t need to be as politically astute or emotionally centrist as Bill Clinton to execute this plan. He’s the president, with all those levers at his disposal. Besides, as I mentioned, it’s not all that complicated. He doesn’t even have to believe it. The media will do that for him.
So where does this leave the Republicans’ presidential ambitions? Not in a particularly good place, I am again sorry to say. They must rely on a serious financial decline or, at best, a continued luffing of our already bad economy — something few of us really want — to win. Or they must hope I am wrong and Obama’s true leftist tendencies — and/or those of his czars — emerge to such a degree that its gets the president rejected by the American public. This latter is not very likely and, even if it does happen, can be walked back or spun by that complaisant media.
The president’s big Achilles heel is the nearly universally despised ObamaCare, which, as many have written, is simultaneously an economic and medical disaster while being incomprehensible in the first place. But even in this arena, he may be saved by a conservative Supreme Court, which seems primed to overturn the legislation, leaving Obama free to walk away from the mess or blame it on Reid and Pelosi.
Is there any hope in all this? Well, yes. It seems as if the Senate will still go Republican in 2012 and we are headed for years of gridlock. Business loves that and the economy should revive at some point. That will be good for this country and the world. So be of good cheer and remember these words by William Morris (the Victorian, not the agent) in a novel he wrote set during the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381:
I pondered how men fight and lose the battle and the thing that they fought for comes about in spite of their defeat and when it comes turns out not to be what they meant, and other men fight for what they meant under another name.
That’s the way I see things now. Of course, like any good member of Congress, I reserve the right to emend and extend my remarks.
-
Isn't Obummer already handicapped to get 100,000 votes anyway because of affirmative action? ::)
-
If the GOP doesn't wake up and get it's head out of its ass, they will end up looking like the Keystone Kops, running around looking like a monkey humping a football (to borrow a Fred Thompson movie line).....and come election time, they will hand four more years to the ol' sow's ear himself.
-
If the GOP doesn't wake up and get it's head out of its ass, they will end up looking like the Keystone Kops, running around looking like a monkey humping a football (to borrow a Fred Thompson movie line).....and come election time, they will hand four more years to the ol' sow's ear himself.
AMEN, my brother! (even if'ns ya are flatlander! ;D)
-
Rep. have to expose the BHO agenda AND submit very loudly, their PLAN.
Make the Libs defend everything they rammed down our throats. Time and time again, this country polls with a center/right majority.
Yet, the sheeple, vote under the guise of not having to worry about their mortgage and gas anymore.
Note the price of gas, and the costs of food lately? Bush was hammered by Libs for $3 gas. Now where's the BHO equivalent? He won't drill, won't let permits to drill go quickly, no ANWR, or anywhere else....
Expose the hypocrisy. Confront them and their socialist agenda. Wake the sheeple up.
(http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm182/twyacht/2004countymap-final2.gif)
Gee, how can they win?
-
Gee, how can they win?
Easy. The blue areas have all of the population.
As far as Ovomit in 2012. He's a shoo-in if the Repubs run the same old candidates (Gingrich, Romney, Huckabee, etc.).
-
If the GOP doesn't wake up and get it's head out of its ass, they will end up continue to looking like the Keystone Kops, running around looking like a monkey humping a football (to borrow a Fred Thompson movie line).....and come election time, they will hand four more years to the ol' sow's ear himself.
Fixed it for ya... ;D
-
The GOP has one main problem. They don't have a plan beyond saying no. Even McConnell said in public that one of their main priorities would be winning back the White House. :o WTF? Your agenda is to make the President look bad for two years so you can score political points? Is that tar I smell, or just some hemp?
They've spent two years telling us what they are against, but what are they for? Until they can answer that and give us a program to get there they are srewed. BO lied about half his agenda, but at least he had one. If you voted for him you got healthcare, an end to Gitmo, a withdrawal from Iraq, a more engaged FP in re Cuba and Iran, and a focus on jobs. It didn't all happen but there was a plan. Can anyone tell me what the GOP leadership's top three positive issues are? Until they they can say to the American people "Vote for us and we will do X,Y and Z" they are hopeless. They need to remember Newt. He had a plan and he won.
FQ13
-
I think you guys are right on in one way or another with your observations. It only took BO one word to win.."Change"..the sheeple were in lock-step behind him. Sure he lied...which one hasn't?...even Reagan had some issues. I don't thing BO would make a pimple on R.R.'s ass. I think the people are waking up to his socialist appointees and ultimate agenda. He has sorrounded himself with known communists, socialists, community organizers, etc. He has come full circle with his buddies of his younger years..Ayers, Piven, and numerous other progressive country killers. I feel in the long run this will serve to haunt him. Unfortunately almost everything he has done or everyone he has appointed was discovered and publicized. I think most Americans still despise the Socialist, Communists and Marxist ideology and can see through this Community Organizing outreach. At least those I communicate with can. I think BO is striving to get the Unions, the poor, the unemployed and the other "entitled" moving in his direction in order to win the white house again...only to turn on them in the long run. I believe history has already revealed this many moons ago in another galaxy far, far away. They all ended up wearing little gray uniforms with a well placed star on their caps..living in little houses all the same size and color. I seem to remember about 20+ million of them didn't live to see how it all came out in the end because they spoke up against it. What was that old saying?? History repeats itself?... A big chunk of voting Americans are content with the fact that they have a nice house, car and groceries on the table, etc. They are comfortable and turn a blind eye to whose running what in Washington. Hopefully this sudden surge of inflation (gas, food, cotton, etc. which is soon to skyrocket) will wake them up before it bites them in the ass. Maybe then they will unite and force the (I use the term loosely) Political leaders to start cleaning up our own back yard and stop trying to change the world with our tax dollars such as bribing one Korea to not invade another Korea with billions of our taxpayer dollars. That's only one example. Wow! I haven't ranted like that in a couple of days... ??? Must be gettin old ....
-
Fixed it for ya... ;D
Thanks....a minor oversight on my part..... ;)
-
It depends on the what happens during the Dem primary. Everyone is talking about the Republican primary, but fail to remember that the Dem primary of 1980, made Carter look like he had been in a bitch slap contest with Kennedy. It left a less than favorable impression with the voters and enabled Reagan to win his first term. The Republicans also won the Senate that year, although they lost control in 82.
-
(I use the term loosely) Political leaders
Please bear with me as I pick a minor nit. I realize I am in the minority, but I don't want a lawmaker or a leader. I want a representative that carries my will to Washington. Is that too much to ask?
-
Please bear with me as I pick a minor nit. I realize I am in the minority, but I don't want a lawmaker or a leader. I want a representative that carries my will to Washington. Is that too much to ask?
Its not too much to ask, but it is the biggest conondrum in American politics. We are a democratic republic. The two words partially contradict each other and lead to an unresolved tension. The question is this. Are our representatives instructed delegates, like a lawyer or an accountant (the pro-democracy POV)? Or are they leaders who's judgement we trust to set policy for us (the pro-republic POV)? We aim for a middle ground, but what we get (and its not a bad thing, just mesy) is a confused system where we want our leaders to be responsive and in touch, but still able to tell us no on occasion. The media is making it increasingly difficult for them to do the latter.
FQ13
-
Interesting analysis. I guess I lean more toward the "of the people, by the people, and for the people" POV. I completely reject any notion that Congressfolk are somehow our betters. I'm trying to think of an instance when I would want the federal government to tell me "no." I guess Congress did that with ObamaCare. I have a strong Libertarian bent, so I think we should spend more time telling the government "no." Not doing that has led to poorly restrained gov't and, thus, to our present circumstances. The last thing I want is to send somebody to Congress and forget about them for 2 or 6 years.
I read an article that attributed the differences in our thinking to urban and rural mindset. Rural folks tend to want to be left alone and be able do their thing. City folks have to live in close proximity to each other. Therefore, they look to make laws and regulations to restrain others "for the greater good." I'm not anti-government. I just think the federal government's role should be VERY limited.
-
Here's a MAJOR problem for us;
Romney Wins New Hampshire Republican Party Committee Straw Poll
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/01/romney-wins-new-hampshire-republican-party-committee-straw-poll.html
Romney will NOT win against Ovomit.
-
Interesting analysis. I guess I lean more toward the "of the people, by the people, and for the people" POV. I completely reject any notion that Congressfolk are somehow our betters. I'm trying to think of an instance when I would want the federal government to tell me "no." I guess Congress did that with ObamaCare. I have a strong Libertarian bent, so I think we should spend more time telling the government "no." Not doing that has led to poorly restrained gov't and, thus, to our present circumstances. The last thing I want is to send somebody to Congress and forget about them for 2 or 6 years.
I read an article that attributed the differences in our thinking to urban and rural mindset. Rural folks tend to want to be left alone and be able do their thing. City folks have to live in close proximity to each other. Therefore, they look to make laws and regulations to restrain others "for the greater good." I'm not anti-government. I just think the federal government's role should be VERY limited.
Good points....
Without generalizing, I'd bet most people who went to the polls a few months ago, didn't know who their Congressman's name until the months before the election. I'm always badgering mine, their email addresses are in my contact lists.
"We The People" need to get involved. I can say, in my own family, my wife and daughter have no idea who their Congresscritter is or their Senators. Where I work, I see pretty much the same thing.
The people who are chartered to listen to us are our Congresspersons and we can replace the bums every two years. Here in CT, they gave all five of them their jobs back even though it's been proven they failed in those jobs miserably.
-
Odamna may not have such an easy time of it in 2012. On Face the Nation this morning, Florida's own Alan Grayson was quoted as saying he would run for the Dummycrap presidential nomination. If you listen to Grayson for more than a minute or two, you can tell he's an absolutely certifiable nut-case--but the looney-left seem to love him. And, I think some of the other ultra-lefties may have a go at Odamna if he doesn't stick to his socialist agenda. And, if he does veer back to the left, the majority of America will reject him. We are, after all, a center-right kind of nation.
I hope I am not being a pollyanna, but I think there is a chance we can dump this load in 2012. But I agree with Haz that we need a viable candidate. I kind of like Herman Caine, but he isn't well enough known. (sigh)
Crusader
-
True, it would be a blessing to have a viable candidate but once you separate the wheat from the chaff, there really aren't any!
I've said before, I'll vote for a high functioning moron over a democrat any day. I really don't much care what his grades were in college or if he wears two left shoes. The 2012 election cycle should be about maintaining the House and getting back the Senate.
Self serving dirtbags, all of them!
Stop writing laws that only serve the government.
-
Interesting analysis. I guess I lean more toward the "of the people, by the people, and for the people" POV. I completely reject any notion that Congressfolk are somehow our betters. I'm trying to think of an instance when I would want the federal government to tell me "no." I guess Congress did that with ObamaCare. I have a strong Libertarian bent, so I think we should spend more time telling the government "no." Not doing that has led to poorly restrained gov't and, thus, to our present circumstances. The last thing I want is to send somebody to Congress and forget about them for 2 or 6 years.
I read an article that attributed the differences in our thinking to urban and rural mindset. Rural folks tend to want to be left alone and be able do their thing. City folks have to live in close proximity to each other. Therefore, they look to make laws and regulations to restrain others "for the greater good." I'm not anti-government. I just think the federal government's role should be VERY limited.
The problem with FQ's analysis is that we ARE NOT a "Democratic" Republic, but a "Constitutional Republic". In a Democratic Republic the majority vote makes the rules, under a Constitutional Republic there are defined limits on what the majority can do.
I agree with you about the split between Urban and Rural, Country folks have to do for themselves while city people develop a hive mentality, that is one of the things that got Obummer elected, the small portions of the states that he actually carried were the major population centers.
Government is the one business where increased productivity is a BAD thing.
-
Easy. The blue areas have all of the population.
As far as Ovomit in 2012. He's a shoo-in if the Repubs run the same old candidates (Gingrich, Romney, Huckabee, etc.).
Truer words never spoken, Haz. And that's what I fear they will do. Trot out the same old crap.
Frankly, I'm liking the Paul Ryan, Mitch Daniels, Michelle Bachmann's of the world. Just don't know if they are electable.
-
Pawlenty ?
-
Newt is definately in the race. He's forming an exploratory committe and is schmoozing with Ga. movers and shakers. I'm a bit torn by this. On the one hand, he's a very smart guy with ideas and he has plan. On the other hand, he's kind of an asshole and very polarizing. Plus, he's been (I think accurately) described as a guy who is easily sold on the last good idea he heard. Not a bad trait for an academic, but we don't need another President with ADD. Still, between him, Palin, Romney or Huckabee, Newt has my vote.
FQ13
-
Pawlenty ?
That's just an Italian name for grits, ain't it?
;D ;D
ba da bing, ba dum dum!!!!!!!!
tip your waiters and waitresses....I'll be here FOREVER!
;)
-
Newt is definately in the race. He's forming an exploratory committe and is schmoozing with Ga. movers and shakers. I'm a bit torn by this. On the one hand, he's a very smart guy with ideas and he has plan. On the other hand, he's kind of an asshole and very polarizing. Plus, he's been (I think accurately) described as a guy who is easily sold on the last good idea he heard. Not a bad trait for an academic, but we don't need another President with ADD. Still, between him, Palin, Romney or Huckabee, Newt has my vote.
FQ13
You're the one that voted for Obummer because you claim Palin had no experience :
This is part of an E-mail I received;
By Dewie Whetsell, Alaskan Fisherman.
As posted in comments on Greta's article referencing the MOVEON ad about Sarah Palin.
The last 45 of my 66 years I've spent in a commercial fishing town in Alaska . I understand Alaska politics but never understood national politics well until this last year. Here's the breaking point: Neither side of the Palin controversy gets it. It's not about persona, style, rhetoric, it's about doing things. Even Palin supporters never mention the things that I'm about to mention here.
1. Democrats forget when Palin was the Darling of the Democrats, because as soon as Palin took the Governor's office away from a fellow Republican and tough SOB, Frank Murkowski, she tore into the Republican's "Corrupt Bastards Club" (CBC) and sent them packing. Many of them are now residing in State housing and wearing orange jump suits. The Democrats reacted by skipping around the yard, throwing confetti and singing, "la la la la" (well, you know how they are). Name another governor in this country that has ever done anything similar.
2. Now with the CBC gone, there were fewer Alaskan politicians to protect the huge, giant oil companies here. So she constructed and enacted a new system of splitting the oil profits called "ACES." Exxon (the biggest corporation in the world) protested and Sarah told them, "don't let the door hit you in the stern on your way out." They stayed, and Alaska residents went from being merely wealthy to being filthy rich. Of course, the other huge international oil companies meekly fell in line. Again, give me the name of any other governor in the country that has done anything similar.
3. The other thing she did when she walked into the governor's office is she got the list of State requests for federal funding for projects, known as "pork." She went through the list, took 85% of them and placed them in the "when-hell-freezes-over" stack. She let locals know that if we need something built, we'll pay for it ourselves. Maybe she figured she could use the money she got from selling the previous governor's jet because it was extravagant.
Maybe she could use the money she saved by dismissing the governor's cook (remarking that she could cook for her own family), giving back the State vehicle issued to her, maintaining that she already had a car, and dismissing her State provided security force (never mentioning - I imagine - that she's packing heat herself). I'm still waiting to hear the names of those other governors.
4. Now, even with her much-ridiculed "gosh and golly" mannerism, she also managed to put together a totally new approach to getting a natural gas pipeline built which will be the biggest private construction project in the history of North America. No one else could do it although they tried. If that doesn't impress you, then you're trying too hard to be unimpressed while watching her do things like this while baking up a batch of brownies with her other hand.
5. For 30 years, Exxon held a lease to do exploratory drilling at a place called Point Thompson. They made excuses the entire time why they couldn't start drilling. In truth they were holding it like an investment. No governor for 30 years could make them get started. Then, she told them she was revoking their lease and kicking them out. They protested and threatened court action. She shrugged and reminded them that she knew the way to the court house. Alaska won again.
6. President Obama wants the nation to be on 25% renewable resources for electricity by 2025. Sarah went to the legislature and submitted her plan for Alaska to be at 50% renewable by 2025. We are already at 25%.
What did Obummer ever do, except take credit for community projects that other people started, and inflate his academic credentials ?
Tim Pawlenty :
http://www.ontheissues.org/Tim_Pawlenty.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Pawlenty
http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Tim_Pawlenty
-
The problem with FQ's analysis is that we ARE NOT a "Democratic" Republic, but a "Constitutional Republic". In a Democratic Republic the majority vote makes the rules, under a Constitutional Republic there are defined limits on what the majority can do.
By the book, you're absolutely correct. However, the effect of the 10th Amendment has been largely non-existent due to lack of gov't restraint.
-
By the book, you're absolutely correct. However, the effect of the 10th Amendment has been largely non-existent due to lack of gov't restraint.
And that is part of the reason I have such a low opinion of the voting public.
In a Govt "of the people" who is responsible for reining in Govt excess ?
-
And that is part of the reason I have such a low opinion of the voting public.
In a Govt "of the people" who is responsible for reining in Govt excess ?
Good points....
Without generalizing, I'd bet most people who went to the polls a few months ago, didn't know who their Congressman's name until the months before the election. I'm always badgering mine, their email addresses are in my contact lists.
"We The People" need to get involved. I can say, in my own family, my wife and daughter have no idea who their Congresscritter is or their Senators. Where I work, I see pretty much the same thing.
The people who are chartered to listen to us are our Congresspersons and we can replace the bums every two years. Here in CT, they gave all five of them their jobs back even though it's been proven they failed in those jobs miserably.
Nuff said...
-
Good points....
Without generalizing, I'd bet most people who went to the polls a few months ago, didn't know who their Congressman's name until the months before the election. I'm always badgering mine, their email addresses are in my contact lists.
"We The People" need to get involved. I can say, in my own family, my wife and daughter have no idea who their Congresscritter is or their Senators. Where I work, I see pretty much the same thing.
The people who are chartered to listen to us are our Congresspersons and we can replace the bums every two years. Here in CT, they gave all five of them their jobs back even though it's been proven they failed in those jobs miserably.
+1...especially on the "get involved" part.
My newly elected US Congress representative, Austin Scott (R-GA), just happens to be the son of my orthopedic surgeon. He was our state rep for 14 years and has a fairly decent head on his shoulders.
I'm sure he will get tired of hearing from me over the next two years ( :D ).
To his early credit, he is already polling his constituents through several networking areas and asking what we want him to address in congressional meetings (including a White House meeting with the POTUS). I know there is no such thing as an ideal 'politician'...but at least he is trying and I'll give him that for now.