If Republican Scott Brown has his way on January 19th, the SHTF for democrats in the Senate, as they stand to lose their super majority.
“With all due respect, it’s not the Kennedy seat and it’s not the democrat seat, it’s the peoples’ seat and they have a chance to send someone down there who’s going to be an independent voter and an indepedent thinker and going to look out for the best interest of the people of Massachusetts.”
As of last week Brown trailed democrat candidate and Attorney General Martha Coakley 50% to 39% in the polls. In a state that President Obama carried by 23 points, Brown seems to have closed the gap, signaling a shift in popularity for the Democrat Party since the 2008 election.
Slowing down the momentum of the democrat controlled Senate would be a welcome change in Washington D.C.
Unfortuantley, I do not think a Republican resurge will make much of a differeance. You said it best Mac, “Slowing down the momentum.” The Republicans cannot put the breaks on the inevitable Greatest Depression.
They will offer tax cuts, but that is no solution in this enviornment with massive deficits and exploding debt.
TheyÂ will keep feeding the War Machine further adding to our debt and increasing our venerability here at home.
We need this Depression. The Great Reset. It must happen or the U.S.A will descend into a hundred years of 3rd world darkness.
I do not mean to sound gloomy, but unforutanley that facts don’t lie.
Brian, I agree. To be frank, republicans, like democrats, are responsible for the dilapidated state of our economy. Conservatives and republicans have a solid fiscal platform, but it’s been nothing but lip service since I can remember. Nothing ever gets done.
We need a complete cleaning of the political system, meaning most, if not all, of our elected officials need to be thrown out of office. As a safety mechanism we need term limits.
We probably need to end the Fed as we know it today and stop unabated printing of money and easy credit and change the rules on how financial institutions (i.e. Goldman et. al.) operate, meaning breaking the investment banks from retail banks.
Perhaps even, and I know this is going to sound crazy, go back to the Constitution and use it, not as a document that supposedly gives us our rights through the mechanism of goverment, but rather, one that PROTECTS the unalienable rights given to us by birth.
Also, maybe if we had elected officials that understood that government serve the people and not the other way around, we’d be a lot better off.
The system reset you mention is coming, regardless of whether we have a democrat or republican or third party in Congress/Executive. It seems that at this point, it cannot be stopped.
The severity of the reset is yet to be determined, however.
“We do not support government bailouts of private institutions. Government interference in the markets exacerbates problems in the marketplace and causes the free market to take longer to correct itself. ” – http://www.gop.com/2008platform/economy.htm. Yet government bailouts is exactly what Bush and McCain wanted. These socialists have no principles or integrity – only BS and deception. Why should we expect Scott Brown to be any different?
IFÂ Scott Brown does win the seat , He will not be allowed to take it right away .Â The democrats will delay his confirmation until AFTER the health care vote !Â Â And yes thay can do that and get away with it too .
Although I tend to agree more with Republicans, I don’t which party fills the seat – well, I guess my pick would be a Libertarian or something…and that is not going to happen.
I just want someone who hasn’t (or won’t) sold their soul to the devil.
My guess is that there are less than a dozen members of the House and Senate who fall into that category.
I think you have to go back to the Eisenhower administration to find the last Republican administration that had a solid economic platform.Â Anyway, as much as the democrats are acting like spineless wimps, they are governing(for better or worse).Â Until there are Republicans out there that have real, common sense ideas on how to make this country better place for all instead of this conservative drivel they’ve been spewing, I don’t want them within sniffing distance of the levers of power.Â Oh, and Coakley is the democratic candidate. Not the democrat candidate (Let’s at least get the party names right.).
I’m not positive, but I think Mac has done his share of Republican bashing too.
IÂ think there is a point to be made thatÂ IF a Republican wins that race, it will be a sign of just how pissed people are in general.
Also, I for one would like to hear what exactly is included in a “solid economic platform.”Â I doubt it comes from either party these days.
Each party speaks of their economic platform, but talking about it and enacting it are two different things. Politicians from both major parties regularly fail to deliver on their campaign promises and supposed platforms. If I had to place blame on why we are in this mess, the democrats and republicans are equally responsible. Same animal. Unless it is a scenario as described below, I will not cast a vote for either party, though I will consider candidates on an individual basis who may be running as republicans or democrats who may not tow the party line, Ron Paul for one.
I believe the immediate threat is the super majority control of the Senate by a single party. We have only had a taste of why this is dangerous to our Republic. While not ideal, a republican candidate would be able to at least provide some defense against unchecked passage of laws in Congress. If elected, Brown, as Airborne mentioned, may not be sworn in in time to vote on health care, and democrats will certainly do everything they can to keep his vote out. We’ll have to cross the bridge when we get there, but the primary goal now should be to seat an opposing party member as quickly as possible.
Shogun, this is an issue of semantics, and I will leave it at that. There are several links out there, but here’s one as a reference on why I feel it’s ok to refer to the democrat candidate or Democrat Party: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/8/3/19100/76708
Great insight all!
Frankly, I’m voting for gridlock.Â Minimize the damage.Â
Altho I do like Brown’s Cosmo spread…
I realize that it is semantics and that there is some history behind the name, democrat party, but I look at it as a matter of courtesy and respect.Â I can’t stand the current thinking of republicans and conservatives, but I respect them enough to address them by their proper name.
That said, I do agree that if Brown wins it will be a telling sign of how pissed people are.Â I would not mind us having other choices that reflect where people are on the political spectrum, or, better yet, abolishing political parties altogether.Â Someone out there can probably correct me on this, but didn’t George Washington advise against the formation of political parties?
A solid economic platform for me would encourage savings and manufacturing rather than consumption and financial gimmickery, require a balance budget and provide enough regulation on business so that they don’t run roughshod over people yet allow them to thrive.Â I guess I am as cynical regarding the “free market” as you are about government.Â Both a well functioning market and a strong but lean government (notice I didn’t say small)Â are necessary for a prosperous society.
Uh oh, Shogunole – we agree on something.
At least I agree on everything up to your point on regulation…and I will concede that point until after the government does in fact start encouraging savings and manufacturing.
Re lean vs. small government, I’ll concede that one too until after our government becomes even remotely lean..and by lean, I assume you would include efficient, correct?
Yes, efficient.Â I don’t want the government wasting my money(What we consider to be waste is in the eye of the beholder).Â People tend to confuse big gov’t with fat gov’t.Â I want a government that is big, strongÂ and agile enough to deal with entities and problems that I can’t(e.g. big corporations, foreign enemies, natural disasters, assuring clean air, water, food, medicine,roads,Â poverty, etc.).Â Â I don’t mind paying taxes if the benefits I get are commensurate with what I am paying.Â What I do mind is when my taxes get wasted on a $5000 hammer that you can get a Home Depot for $20 because the gov’t has specs on the hammer so it becomes a custom made hammer.Â Or when my tax dollars pay for foreign grad students(How many of your Physics TA’s spoke English?) to get their PhD’s in math, science or engineering tax free(Profs earn Tenure from the amt. of gov’t grant $ they bring in(DOD, NSF, NIH) which come from your taxes.Â The grants pay for grad students which are primarily foreign in math and the sciences).
Regulation is not all bad.Â Regulations, if they are enforced, make sure you don’t get screwed by entities that are more powerful than you.Â Regulations make sure that you have clean water, air, food, medicine, safe toys for your kids, a safe work environment etc.Â Market forces can’t provide that protection.Â They only work after the fact.
In addition, markets have been, are and will be manipulated.Â Heck, markets are made up of people with all of their vices and virtues. Regulations serve to keep manipulation under control.Â That is why they are needed.
I don’t have a problem with some regulation…there is probably some sort of balance that needs to be obtained to optimize “everything.”
That being said, what would happen if tomorrow ten thousand Ford F-150s instanteously exploded because of leaks in their gas tanks or something, thus killing everyone who was in those cara at that time?
First, Ford would getÂ its ass sued off.Â Second, Ford would sell a lot less F-150s this year.Â Third, GM would sell a lot more Silverados (or whatever).Â Fourth, maybe another manufacturer would realize that with Ford’s light truck sales in the toilet, they have a good opportunity to enter that market with trucks that don’t explode.
Then again, that’s a bad example because no one is buying cars right now.
My point is thisÂ – the free market does provide some protection to the consumer.
I’m not saying I want to can all regulation…I’m just saying the free market does provide some protection.
Regulation should be used to make things better for people. The problem with regulation is that is soon becomes a tool for lobbyists and politicians alike to increase profits or political power at the expense of people. Regulation in the last 50 years has not benefited the people. The problem with *ANY* regulation is that there it is just too much of a temptation. Regulation fosters corruption. It is the manure, the fertilizer that feeds the tree of corruption.
I see that Mac has run off the end of the pier!!! Go back to The Constitution? What? Are you crazy? How are we supposed to push the socialist agenda to empower the elites if we do that? Come now, surely you jest. If we followed The Constitution for The United State people would be free, prosperous and would not be supporting the elite superstructure that has been hung around their necks.
Somebody throw Mac a mental life preserver…
…or just assists us. The elitist agenda is failing. Help us keep poking holes in it. It will die eventually by a thousand tiny cuts…
“That being said, what would happen if tomorrow ten thousand Ford F-150s instanteously exploded because of leaks in their gas tanks or something, thus killing everyone who was in those cara at that time?
First, Ford would getÂ its ass sued off.Â Second, Ford would sell a lot less F-150s this year.Â Third, GM would sell a lot more Silverados (or whatever).Â Fourth, maybe another manufacturer would realize that with Fordâ€™s light truck sales in the toilet, they have a good opportunity to enter that market with trucks that donâ€™t explode.”
You just made my point behind why regulation is needed and why the “free market” isn’t enough.Â One, yes, Ford gets sued, but it is after the fact.Â It does nothing to protect those ten thousand dead people.Â Two, Ford could easily put its army of lawyers to work defending the suits( which would take years to go through)or settle with families out of court.Â Meanwhile, Ford launches a big PR blitz blaming the gas tank manufacturer for a faulty design and sowing doubt in the minds of the public as to who is responsible; therefore, manipulating the market.Â Oh, and if there are laws on the books making it difficult for people to sue due to “tort reform” , people don’t get to sue at all and are SOL.
“Regulation in the last 50 years has not benefited the people. The problem with *ANY* regulation is that there it is just too much of a temptation. Regulation fosters corruption.”
I guess the clean air and water acts did not benefit a soul.Â Oh, and I guess the Family Medical Leave Act did not benefit anyone either.Â Â Regulation does not foster corruption, the idea that businesses should only have the profit motive in mind does.Â Because it provides the incentive for them to circumvent the law.
Even though I am not a republican, congratulations are in order for Scott Brown on his victory.Â He worked for it and beat someone that unfortunately did not ask for people’s votes.Â That said, here is a link to the Evolving Excellence Blog that hits the nail on the head regarding what should be taken from his victory: http://www.evolvingexcellence.com/