My Take

Well, every yahoo who can string together a few words is commenting on the election results.  Reckon I might as well, too.

Back when the health care reform was passed, lots of folks said they were going to remember it come November.  Looks like they weren’t kidding.  Not only did Congress pass a bill few people understood, they pushed through a bill they said had to be passed now or else.  According to polls at the time (and now, for that matter), a majority of people were agin the bill.  When people found out it was going to be 2014 before most of the major provisions kicked in, folks really got to wondering what the rush was when about 10% of Americans don’t have jobs.  Have said it before, folks ain’t gonna be happy ‘til there’s more jobs out there.  FDR figured that out and created several job programs.  Didn’t really help the economy at the time, but people felt better cuz they had paying jobs.

One exit poll I saw last night said people were mad about the economy first then health care reform then a list of other things including taxes, the war, and some other things.  Another poll I saw said just as many people were wanting to “fire” Nancy Pelosi with their votes as were wanting to send a message to President Obama they ain’t happy with his agenda.  Thought that was kind of interesting.

There are several other things I found interesting about the election.  In no particular order:

• Maybe it was just my perception, but seemed to be several media folks with long faces last night.  Not really sure what that means.  Can say I saw one Chicago reporter talking about the e-mails and tweets she was getting from the Dem party and President Obama asking the recipients to encourage people to get out and vote.  One can only wonder why she would be on those e-mail lists much less reporting on the content?  Maybe she’s on the Pub lists, too, but they just weren’t sending out that stuff. Yeah, right.;
• The last time the Pubs gained this many seats at once was right after Social Security was passed, which was very unpopular when it was passed, too;
• Was reminded last night if the Pubs do manage to pass a bill reversing the current health care reform bill, it will have to be signed by Mr. Obama, who has the power to veto it.  Just sayin’; 
• Many Dems wanted nothing to do with Obama during this election and actually called on Bill Clinton to campaign for them rather than the president.  Neither one of ‘em seemed to have helped much;
• Guess the American people didn’t really give the Dems a mandate back in ‘08.  Or, if they did, it was quickly revoked.  Voters sure can be fickle sometimes;
• Some exit polls reflected Pub voters think the gov’t is going too far and the Dem voters think the gov’t ain’t going far enough.  What a shock;
• All of a sudden, the Dems think both parties should work together rather than just one party dictating everything.  Imagine that;
• The Pubs claim they are not interpreting this election as being given a mandate…for now.  They say this is the American people saying it’s time to put up or shut up.  Voters ain’t happy with the Dems and the Pubs are the only alternative.  Imagine if they don’t like what the Pubs do the next two years, they’ll kick them out, too;
• California elected Dems in the two major races but weren’t so liberal-minded when it came to Prop 19, which would have legalized marijuana.  Got voted down by a purty healthy margin.  Guess they don’t want their weed taxed.  How anti-establishment of them;
• The Tea Party did fairly well.  They won some and they lost some.  Hear they don’t want to be a third party.  They just want to reform the GOP.  Think they would be better off splitting off on their own.  They’ve tapped into a lot of voter anger.  If their candidates in DE and NV hadn’t been so out there, they probably would have won those seats, too;
• Maybe it’s just me, but think the media is giving Sarah Palin a little too much credit for last night.  Yes, she endorsed some people who went on to win.  But, think people voted for those candidates despite Mrs. Palin rather than cuz of her.  Have my doubts many people will want to vote her into the Oval office as I heard insinuated several times last night.  Only time will tell…

Hope both parties learned an important lesson with this election.  While sometimes you have to show leadership courage and take folks down a path they may not want to go, there are times you have to listen to what the people are tryin’ to tell ya and change accordingly.  Ultimately, we voters have the final say-so on your job performance.  We the people have the power to pick and choose our leaders, and we ain’t afraid to use it.

Anyway, that’s what this yahoo thinks about the election.  Whether you are happy with the results or not, they are what they are.  It’s long been past time for folks to come together and find solutions rather than being hard-headed ninnies thinking they are the only ones with the answers.  If this bunch wants to be the latter, reckon they’ll find out who’s boss two years from now, too.

Y’all have a good one.

We're Not Gonna Take It

Been reading a lot of analysis on this whole Massachusetts-election thing. Have had a chance to ruminate on what happened and why and thought I'd share my thoughts on it for what they're worth.  These opinions apply to both parties so please don't think I'm trying to single either party out:

Think what both parties are overlooking is, in the grand scheme of things, neither one represents the whole country.  In fact, would venture to say neither one of them even represent half of the country. A majority of folks probably consider themselves independent from both parties.  We just have to vote for one of the two major parties cuz that's all we really got to choose from.  But, whenever a party gets the majority in Congress and/or the White House, they automatically think the whole country only cares about what they have to say.  "We have been given a mandate by the American people!" to which I say "Bullfeathers!  You have, but not what you think!"  The real mandate is we're looking for folks to get along and actually get something done that makes a lot of folks happy, not just one party. When they overlook their counterparts on the other side of the aisle, they aren't listening to a large number of citizens in our great land, which angers a lot more people than makes happy.  The term 'compromise' seems to have died when Henry Clay did.

In the specific case of health care reform, think most people in the country realize reform is needed and want to see it done.  However, they are not happy with this particular brand of reform being forced down their throat.  It appears they are more worried about getting something passed than getting the right thing passed.  Besides, if this reform is 'The Answer,' why won't it apply to Congress, too?  Seems to me (and others) like they would want this health care themselves if it's as great as they say it is.  Anyway, I digress...

The politicians usually make the basic excuse that people opposing their ideas are just angry hate-mongers who don't love their country.  Well, they're partially right.  People are angry all right.  But it ain't cuz they're hate mongers who hate their country.  It's cuz they love their country and they are tired of being ignored!

Politicians from both sides usually say they are going to be bipartisan and work with the other party in the spirit of togetherness while they are campaigning.  However, what they really mean to say is, they are going to be bye-partisan, and tell the other side to kiss their behind cuz we're in control now.  We've all heard politicans on both sides of the aisle say these things just in the last 15 years or so.  In fact, this philosophy has been around since the beginning of our great country.  So, it shouldn't be much of a surprise to anyone when that's how it ends up going down.

Was Tuesday's vote a vote against President Obama or the system? My answer would be the system as polls seem to indicate folks generally like him although they are not real sure about his policies right now.  The key to any election is how many independent voters show up, what they want, and who they vote for.  Say right now, as always, they just want to be listened to.  As long as neither party chooses to believe this, we will keep bouncing from side to side with the optimistic hope they actually mean it this time.  Maybe this election will serve as a wake-up call for both parties, but somehow doubt it will.

As always, thank you for your time.  And, I'm interested in what you think about all this, whether you agree with me or not.  Please feel free to leave a comment or send me an e-mail.

Do As I Say...

No, I'm not trying to hypnotize you. I'm talking about that old expression, "Do as I say, not as I do." What's making me think of that? Glad you asked. Politicians!

The last couple of months I've been reading how one political party wants to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. Say they want to make sure both sides of the story are available to contradict the Rush Limbaughs of the world. They talk about ideals such as freedom of speech. But, I suspect that's not really their agenda.

When people attended the tea parties several weeks ago, some people who lean left talked about how un-American it was to protest taxes. Excuse me? People have a right to express their political beliefs as long as they "peaceably" assemble. (See the First Amendment if you don't believe me) I even heard several people say the protesters were racists because they were not for President Obama's agenda. Sad to see people have stooped to that accusation. Are there people against President Obama because of the color of his skin? I'd be an idiot to say no. Is everyone who does not agree with him a racist? Absolutely not. Political discourse is one of many things which make our country great. This country was founded by people who protested about things they did not agree with. When people resort to name-calling, that usually means they cannot defend their position with facts. There are a lot of facts which can be used without having to resort to calling people names. Do not agree with many of them, but they are there.

Today I read about Al Gore testifying before Congress on global warming. Also read the majority party would not let someone with a contrasting opinion offer his testimony. It's pretty sad they talk about bringing back the Fairness Doctrine so people can get both sides of the story, but they only want to allow both sides when it suits them.

Before my liberal-leaning friends start protesting, I would like to point out the party that leans right is just as guilty. Case in point, anyone who opposed them in recent years was un-American and threatening national security. That argument was just as bogus. And, that's just one example that comes to mind.

My point is, everyone is for freedom of speech. The caveat is they only support freedom for the speeches which support them. And, that, my friends, is what I call un-American. Thomas Jefferson must be shaking his head somewhere.

Have a great day.