47 Comments

1. promoguy:

Hell, I’m not surprised. If I was 20 something and had to listen to the dems the last six years with all of their back biting of the system, I’d probably see it the same way.

As I mentioned to someone the other day (pre-election) as they were lamenting the current system, how wonderful it was to be 62 y.o. and know that I wouldn’t have to put up with it as long as that 20 something person. Only problem is I’m pretty healthy.

Nov 9, 2006 - 7:52 am 2. jedrury:

Enough pessimism already.

The president can effectively deal with Congress on immigation and education and hopefully prescription medicine issues. Though playing nice, he’ll not cave to the liberal agenda. This president got along with the Dems in Texas and will deal effectively with these new players in power.

I snagged a look at the Supreme Court argument on partial birth abortion yesterday and maybe, just maybe, Mr. Justice Kennedy will side with the Roberts, Alioto, Thomas, Scalia wing of the Court and make all the trench work in the last two years getting these two new judges on the court worthwhile. Kennedy should rule that way given his strong 2002 dissent in Stenberg v. Carhart.

What a win that will be for the conservative cause. A big step. Victories and effective governance are not always noticed by the media. Look upon Tuesday’s election as an opportunity.

Nov 9, 2006 - 8:17 am 3. Rhod:

Just a guess. The ahistorical post-WWII economy and the prosperity and excess it produced (I was part of it) ended in 1973, but the idea of it is still lodged in our minds, and we’ve passed it to the young. The American Dream is a $4000 house and a $2000 car.

I wonder, too, if the members of my generation, the asset-heavy thieves who are picking the pockets of the young to armor our possessions , aren’t letting our fears of losing it all infect the exist polls.

Add in those whose pockets are being picked by guys like me and you have a lot of fearful people.

Nov 9, 2006 - 8:23 am 4. promoguy:

Actually, I am looking at the loss of both houses an an opportunity. I’m not pessimistic at all. Just an observation.

I’m actually thrilled that there will be a complete change to the look of the party.

I did however hear on the radio this morning that the senate/presidential pardon for illegal aliens might be looking better.

Nov 9, 2006 - 8:24 am 5. promoguy:

But Rhod, does that makes us bad people :)

Nov 9, 2006 - 8:36 am 6. pacwaters:

Granted the system is broken but can you name any country where the system ist’t and what would you do to “repair” it? The system has taken over 200 years to develop and I doubt it will change overnight.

Nov 9, 2006 - 9:43 am 7. Andrew Koenig:

Well, duh.

Both parties have been borrowing and spending money like drunken sailors for as long as I can remember. Where is that money going to come from?

And on top of that is the shell game called Social Security. It pretends to be a trust fund, but is really just shifting money from current wage-earners to current retirees. Becaue of the baby boom, there are relatively many workers per retiree now; but when all those baby boomers retire, there won’t be enough active workers to pay for their retirement. On top of that, an awful lot of people who are going to retire in the next decade have little or no money saved.

So the next generation is looking at a social-security meltdown coupled with a large number of people without enough money saved to keep going, even with social security. I imagine that the “solution” to that problem will be to confiscate wealth from those who have it in order to distribute the misery more evenly.

Is there a reason not to be pessimistic? I’d love to hear it.

Nov 9, 2006 - 9:48 am 8. Rhod:

Promoguy:

Actually, the system is morally neutral for me. I use the excess gained by the Lib Ponzi Schemes to contribute to conservative causes and organizations, and shower my kids with the remaining unearned riches.

Trouble is, my benefactors are going to figure this out before I’m dead, as Mr. Koening has revealed. Then, there goes the house in St. John and the expensive moneky gland injections. Damn.

Nov 9, 2006 - 9:53 am 9. promoguy:

Rhod

Fortunately, my kid is an LAPD cop and married to an LAPD Sgt. There future is well taken care of. You can go to the bank on that one (pun intended) Me and my dear wife will be spending our unearned riches on ourselves. She knows to give my son a few thousands when I check out. But that’s it.

We actually go to STJ every year but have opted to just pay and give the keys back. As to the monkey gland injections, can you recommend anyone competent.

Nov 9, 2006 - 10:01 am 10. Rhod:

They’re available at The Westin, but you gotta see the right people. If you don’t, you get plain old Iguana injections; then you find Pelosi irresistible and start voting for Democrats. But I really can’t say, promoguy.

Thanks to your son and D-in-law for doing a thankless job.

Nov 9, 2006 - 10:35 am 11. Captain Hate:

“Thanks to your son and D-in-law for doing a thankless job.”

That goes for me too; unlike the “we” that the rabbit referenced last night, I consider them heroic.

Nov 9, 2006 - 11:17 am 12. Anthony (Los Angeles):

I don’t think it’s the system that’s broken, so much as the people we elect to run it are themselves unworthy of it. And that’s the fault of We, The People.

Nov 9, 2006 - 11:52 am 13. patrick neid:

“The Republicans may find themselves back in power before they know it.”

i don’t think so.

if the repubs think they lost the election because of iraq etc they won’t see congressional control again for a generation. the repubs lost because they turned into dems. their spending was out of control these last 6-8 years. the dems ran candidates locally who touted fiscal restraint. the essential core value that defines a republican was thrown away in a short 6 years. a pathetic record for anyone. record spending and record growth of government caused the loss. independents fled in droves. the amazing thing is–it wasn’t by even a larger margin. the electorate isn’t stupid. if we are going to bankrupt ourselves we might as well have free medical while we circle the drain. the coming surprise will be how quickly the remaining repubs jump ship and pass every dem bill these next two years. career first, state and country second and third. there are at least 10 senators and 30 reps who will help pass every bill including new taxes on big oil etc.

the dems will have to commit hari-kari to lose the house and senate. folks have no idea what a whip pelosi cracks. she will marginalize the extreme left of her party as they go for the white house.

social security is actually not the immediate threat both parties claim it to be during different election cycles. with a 10-15% cut in benefits it is self funding for the next 75 more years. by that time very few will depend on it. most folks under 35 already accept (wrongly) that they will never see a dime. interest on the overall debt is probably what will be our downfall.

speaking of st john, a little self promo

http://bordeaux-mountain.blogspot.com/

Nov 9, 2006 - 12:12 pm 14. Rhod:

Patrick:

If you haven’t already found it, ask around about the pit at the top, supposedly used by pirates. Fascinating.

Nov 9, 2006 - 12:20 pm 15. patrick neid:

rhod,

i haven’t heard about it. but i’m sure i will as i build. sometimes i think i should have just bought a sports car!

Nov 9, 2006 - 12:29 pm 16. Joe Schmoe:

Patrick,

I don’t think people were that upset about the spending. I personally, do not believe that the pork problem is any worse today than it was under the Dems. Nor do I think that the Dems, now that they are in control, will don little green eyeshades and cut every last bit of wasteful spending. You’d have to be born yesterday to beleive that.

I think that people were upset at the GOP becuase of (1) Iraq, and (2) more importantly, becasue they didn’t DO ANYTHING. They spent their days playing golf with lobbyists and toasting one another at ceremonial dinners. Meanwhile, people on Main Street were struggling to pay the bills and worried about their kids’ education.

The GOP isn’t espeically corrupt, no more so than other politicians. And it is clearly better than the Dems with respect to fiscal constraint and limiting the size of government. I’ll don’t like GOP pork projects like the Alaskan Bridge to Nowhere, but I’ll take a $300 million Birdge to Nowhere over a $300 billion Department of Socialized Medicine any day of the week.

But none of this matters if the GOP is sitting on its ass instead of working on the nation’s problems. People were rightly upset at Congrgress for acting like a bunch of do-nothing, fat cat politicians. No one hates the GOP, and no one has rejected their principles, but people felt (not unreasonably) that the current crop of stooges in Congress just had to go.

I don’t think anyone was voting for Nancy Pelosi, or for big government libealism, but most people beleive that a Congress that will do SOMETHING is better than one that will do NOTHING. Personally, I generally agree with that, although in this particular case I would much prefer nothing. But you certainly can’t blame people for being disgusted at clowns like Dennis Hastert and deciding to vote the bums out.

Once the GOP gets back in touch with the voters, they’ll be back in office. Even a buffoon like Hastert, for all his faults, has a far better feel for Main Street than somone like Nancy Pelosi. It will not be difficult for us to become competitive again.

Nov 9, 2006 - 12:35 pm 17. Hunter McDaniel:

Well, I’m in a dark mood because I see nuclear apocalypse becoming increasingly likely before (or maybe when) my life is over and I see our political class in denial. I think I’d be willing to give the Democrats everything they seem to want against my natural interests (higher taxes, gay marriage, socialized medicine, unionized WalMart) if they would just get on the team as Americans and stop pretending Bush is what ended the Gay 90’s.

Nov 9, 2006 - 12:49 pm 18. Godzilla:

Patrick,

the dems will have to commit hari-kari to lose the house and senate. folks have no idea what a whip pelosi cracks. she will marginalize the extreme left of her party as they go for the white house.

And they’ll have some help from overseas when the next bomb goes off in a town hopefully not near me. I can take the econonomics or leave it, and if the dems show seriousness against the growing Islamist fanatical threat, they could grow moss around their rear ends as they sit on the seats of power, for all I care. I’ll start squabbling over taxes after the enemy is dead, not before.

But from the looks of it, I’ll be continuing to vote republican, given these head-in-the-sand democrats that we have.

Nov 9, 2006 - 12:58 pm 19. Steven Mitchell:

Look at the bright side. Now the MSM will suddenly discover that the economy is in good shape. If they were smart, they would wait until the next Congress raises the minimum wage or some other piece of pablum that they can sell as the cause. But this is the MSM we are talking about. I expect we will be hearing stories before December.

Put me down as someone that doesn’t think Pelosi and company can govern effectively from the center-left. They’ve been spewing their own rhetoric too long to back down now. However, I’d like to be wrong. I’d like to see the Dems become a viable (aka grown up) party again. I’ve said for several years now that the Republicans were lazy because they were not pushed by a decent opposition.

Either way, long term the country will be ok. If the Dems govern like I think they will, they will not hold power long. If they surprise me, then they’ll be doing ok. If I’m right, then a lot more Americans will get killed by emboldened terrorists over the next few years. That’s awful, but it’s not the end of Western Civilization. The terrorists will over extend, and we will hit them hard again.

There is a liberal/conservative rachet effect in various parts of the country. For many reasons, the conservative rachet effect runs slower than the liberal one. However, when the conservative rachet does finally click over a notch, it generally stays.

Nov 9, 2006 - 1:04 pm 20. patrick neid:

i still say the big surprise these next two years will be pelosi marginalizing the anti war left wing of the dem party. she has bigger fish to fry. she will, with broad dem approval under the cover of night support bush in iraq, iran etc. you can be sure that there will be a lot of hearings and paper shuffling but at its core the mission will be unchanged. the MSM will tout this supposed new direction with complimenting stories out of iraq etc. it will be a re- run of nixon taking over from LBJ. nixon ran on the same programñend the warñhe did, 7 years later! as the extreme left jumps up and down pelosi will bitch slap them as they prepare for the clinton white house. if clinton wins the white house then i think the gloves will come off. until then there will be a constant flow of feel good bills that will be passed with the consent of many repub senators and reps. a wolf in sheepís clothing will be the dem’s MO.

as for dem vs repub spending, the electorate accepts dem spending and has since the “new deal”. however the repubs are the go to party when they want restraint, aka the contract in 94. the repubs violated this trust and have now paid. we will have to get tired of dem spending again before the repubs get back the congress. the presidency is a whole other dynamic.

Nov 9, 2006 - 1:24 pm 21. Old Dad:

Well it was a poll, and an exit poll at that. We’re healthier, living longer, and more affluently than any population in history. We’re spoiled.

That said, I’d guess that the threat of Islamic terrorism weighs heavy even on moonbats who deny it. We all saw the towers fall. Most know that our enemy rapes women, murders children, and saws the heads off of prisoners. They fill us with dread and disgust, and so many try denial, but the dread is still there.

Perhaps, the poll suggests a perverse weakness. Rather than address the threat, we pretend it away, but down deep we know that the mullahs are coming for us–in a generation, two, three? But we lack the guts or the discipline to fight them now. And so we curse our kids.

Damn, now I’m depressed.

Nov 9, 2006 - 2:38 pm 22. Soldier's Dad:

The system is not even close to broken.

People didn’t worry about catastrophic health care costs 50 years ago. If you had a disease that penicillan couldn’t cure, they either cut it out or it killed you. Either way you were either well in a week, or dead in a week.

People didn’t read about how many war dead there were in the newspapers, they went to the funerals. They didn’t read newspaper articles about the suffering of the families, they were the families.

No one needed an EPA test to determine if the air was clean. Air pollution was something that you could see.

No one needed an EPA test to tell if a river was polluted, you could smell it.

People stayed married because they couldn’t afford to get divorced.

There wasn’t a homeless problem, because all of the seriously mentally ill were locked away in insane asylums.

There was nothing wrong with the education system because there were plenty of jobs that required no education.

Nov 9, 2006 - 4:08 pm 23. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

The Democrats adopted a strategy after 2004 that has payed off: make sure the media is constantly full of bad news. The result is to give people a general (if vague) feeling that things are off track and a change is needed. Naturally, the anti-Bush MSM went along with this – and did a very good job of spreading doom and gloom when really things are looking pretty good – except for the future of Islamoterrorism and Eurabia – which the Dems in the past have done nothing but abet.

And guess what! The tactic worked. Nobody can identify solid issues that drove this election – just a general grumpiness with the Republicans and a vague feeling of malaise.

….

Note also that the Libertarians played the Ross Perot / Ralph Nader / Pat Buchanan role in the Senate races. Two races were lost by margins far smaller than the Libertarian vote, which would possibly have been mostly Republican otherwise.

I hope the ‘tarians like what they get. Nothing like throwing the Senate (and potentially the Royal Supreme Court) to the party of ever encroaching government, Libertarians!

Of course maybe, given Libertarian absolutism, they figure that getting rid of an annoying war that they runs against their ideology, and ending counterintelligence snooping is worth it a nanny state, high taxes, increased interference with the free market.

And maybe a bunch of the Libertarians’s are really libertines confused about the terminology, wanting a party that won’t get in the way of their predilections, whether serial monogamy, homosexual marriage, infanticide, or whatever.

Nov 9, 2006 - 4:28 pm 24. Wolverine:

In Communist China, their MSM routinely produces segments about villages getting electricity.

John, are you Chinese?

Nov 9, 2006 - 4:57 pm 25. Luther McLeod:

Mr. Moore

Your post on libertarians pushes me further to the belief that their essential politics is one of narcissism. Or, for another explanation, tempered anarchy. I do not believe their convictions pass the A. Jackson test. One may eschew government, but one will not survive without it.

rabbit, piss off.

Nov 9, 2006 - 5:09 pm 26. Wolverine:

Your post on libertarians pushes me further to the belief that their essential politics is one of narcissism.

Heaven forbid if you rely on anything more than a blog comment to formulate an opinion…

Nov 9, 2006 - 6:11 pm 27. Wolverine:

LA’s Finest…
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-ex-beating110906,0,2761547.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Nov 9, 2006 - 6:13 pm 28. promoguy:

Stuff happens wolfie. I’m sure in your three cop town there’s little change of a couple of guys beating up on a guy. Hey, on the other hand why don’t you put on the suit and deal with the dregs on your 10 hour shift.

What town you from??

Nov 9, 2006 - 6:32 pm 29. Foobarista:

I’m more optimistic than most. Each generation has its Big Calamities, and ours are frankly rather small beer in comparison with the past. One huge irony is that the above discussion has been dominated by the theme of “how do I deal with getting money from the government for my old age”? 50 years ago, most people didn’t live that long. Also note that I don’t drink the enviro Kool-aid, which is where most of the gloom&doom is coming from – as it has for at least a century.

I figure that by 2100, when the poverty rate is 100K/year (in today’s money), people will be pining about this and that, and how to handle all the nasty medical issues they hit when they hit 200. The big discussion will be around those nasty trillionaires, whether they deserve their money, and whether the national debt will hit a quadrillion dollars or not.

Nov 9, 2006 - 8:12 pm 30. Sandy P:

The boomers have just visited the Nam legacy on their kids and these goat *#%*$)(%* really, really want us dead.

If the boomers are fearful their kids won’t be better off, then mebbe they should have been open to fix social security.

But we’ve always been greedy bastards.

Wanting utopia w/no responsibility.

Part of the dread is we don’t want to handle what’s coming.

That’s OK McGovern will save the 60s boomers so they can live to 100 and keep trying to build their perfect world.

Nov 10, 2006 - 7:44 am 31. Sandy P:

Wulfie, you mess w/John Moore at your peril.

Nov 10, 2006 - 8:08 am 32. Sandy P:

Conspiracy to keep you poor and stupid has an interesting post:

http://poorandstupid.com/chronicle.asp

…According to a poll conducted by Basswood Research in 15 key battleground congressional districts, 39% of voters labeled the Republicans “The Party of Big Government” ó only 28% gave that label to the Democrats. In those districts, Republican candidates got slaughtered on Tuesday.

But consider what happened in seven other districts, where the Club for Growth ó a political organization dedicated to small government, lower spending, and lower taxes ó financed the congressional campaigns of eight Republican newcomers dedicated to the Club’s ideals. Seven out of eight of them won on Tuesday ó Iraq or no Iraq, corruption or no corruption.

A number of so-called “Blue Dog” Democrats were elected on Tuesday, too. Those are Democrats whose economic agenda is more like what the Republican one is supposed to be ó smaller government, less spending, and more fiscal sanity….

Nov 10, 2006 - 8:21 am 33. Always right:

Put me down as someone that doesn’t think Pelosi and company can govern effectively from the center-left.

Put me down as someone who doesn’t believe Pelosi and company will govern in a bi-partisan (non-partisan) way with the nation’s best interest in mind.

They had the “my way or the high way” attitute when they were the minority, call me a cynic and prove me wrong now that the Dems in control they will change their spots and suddenly want to comprimise to the middle ground in order to get things done.

Schumer can warn the giddy Dems all he wants till blue in the face “to produce” the result. The Dems will just interpret the 06 success as Ameicans given them a blank check, endorsing all their party idealogy. Listen carefully to Pelosi’s words yesterday, she’s going to work bi-partisanly when the other side sees the wisdom of her views.

Nov 10, 2006 - 8:55 am 34. Wolverine:

Please, as if the past 6 years wasn’t demonstrative enough of the GOP’s inability to comprehend concepts such as compromise and bipartisanship.

Now I realize why there are 57 million blogs in the world- it promotes half baked conspiracy theories about MSM (please, you guys have your own state run media, Fox News) and it allows minds of similar perversity to congregate under the anonymity of the internet and post totally preposterous “theories” about why the rest of the world doesn’t agree with them. Here’s a hint- all of you are going through a severe mid life crisis and need to get out more with an open mind.

Nov 10, 2006 - 10:53 am 35. Wolverine:

Promoguy.

I live in Los Angeles proper, probably not to far from this blog’s keeper.

I post that article about the LAPD as a reminder that blanket generalizations based on profession is a poor mechanism to determine heroism.

My interactions with LAPD were generally cordial. Yet the consent decree exists for a reason; because, in the past, the LAPD has demonstrated poor judgement (and in the case of Rampart, criminal activities).

Nov 10, 2006 - 10:57 am 36. dclydew:

John Moore,

Of course maybe, given Libertarian absolutism, they figure that getting rid of an annoying war that they runs against their ideology, and ending counterintelligence snooping is worth it a nanny state, high taxes, increased interference with the free market.

Damn straight.

The Republicans, for the past six years have played the nanny government and have interfered with personal liberties, while growing the federal government’s powers. Better yet, they’ve consistently acted more and more tempted to fiddle with the rights of individuals and states (see Terri Schivo for example). Most Libertarians, be that Christian or Atheist have been very concerned by the Republicans dance with the Fundamentalist Christians.

In the end, many Libertarians that I know seem happy with a shifting of the power, because the Republicans weren’t acting like Libertarians, Conservatives or even Liberals. I think this year wasn’t a slap to the Republican or Conservative political view, but rather the failed Neo-Conservative/Evangelical political bastardization that’s been hanging out in Washington for the past 6 years. Heck, if the Republican party had dumped the Neo-Con agenda two years ago, I would wager they might actually have won.

If the Dems move toward some utterly insane Liberal policy, then we have the chance to kick them out in ‘08. Maybe by then the Republicans will act like intelligent adults and we can have a balanced political system…

Well, I can dream, can’t I?

Ratatosk, Squirrel of Discord

Nov 10, 2006 - 1:08 pm 37. dclydew:

And maybe a bunch of the Libertarians’s are really libertines confused about the terminology, wanting a party that won’t get in the way of their predilections, whether serial monogamy, homosexual marriage, infanticide, or whatever.

Imagine the stupid bastards thinking that they should have the right to make their own decisions, instead of basing them on the laws of a Bronze Age God.

Nov 10, 2006 - 1:11 pm 38. Barrett:

First, I don’t think that the system is broken. Our structure of government, including the electoral college, is nothing short of brilliant.

Second, the pessimism about the future is interesting. There are huge challenges in front of us ranging from the war in Irag and radical Islamism to domestic spending issues like Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid (healthcare). It reminds me of the Jimmy Carter era.

Regardless of what you may think about Ronald Regan, he did restore optimism in America and our ideals and he has to receive a large part of the credit for winning the Cold War.

What we need is articulate, fiscally conservative leadership. People need to understand that the Islamists have been at war with us since 1979 and are not going to stop until we stop them. (Just like the multi-generational conflict with the Soviets.) People need to be reminded of all good things that come with personal freedom and responsibility. People need to hear how government centric solutions to Social Security and healthcare will not only take their treasure, but also limit their freedom.

The Dems will fall flat if they run to the left. Conservatives need to take back the Republican party from the Bush wing of the party. Hallmarks such as a strong national defense coupled with rational foreign policy, fiscal conservatism and smaller government need to be front and center.

Bush is not a conservative. He has been fiscally unrestrained as has the Congress. (He has never vetoed a spending bill to my knowledge.) In addition, Bush will probably mess up immigration policy with the help of the Dems during the next two years, although you could actually have conservative Republicans fillibustering the President and their own party to try and block bad legislation. (That would be interesting.)

I do think Bush has gotten the big idea right in taking on the Islamists. The execution has been shoddy.

There is no place like America and that is why generations have defended her, made the ultimate scrifice and given us our future. It is our responsibility to take our part in making this true today as well. The future does not have to be dim, but it will take competent and aggressive leadership to deal with all that is at hand.

By the way, did you read the latest about Al-Queda stating that they believe they are winning the war?

Nov 10, 2006 - 2:01 pm 39. Steven Mitchell:

“Well, I can dream, can’t I?”

“Hallucinate” would be a better word when you start talking about neoconservatives or evangelicals. You wouldn’t know one, if it jumped out of the bushes and gave you a Bible.

Nov 10, 2006 - 3:08 pm 40. Steven Mitchell:

“MSM (please, you guys have your own state run media, Fox News) ”

Are you sure you are American? I have a hard time thinking that someone that actually lives here and pays attention would say something that uninformed. Please explain why Fox News is “state run”. I really want to hear this.

Nov 10, 2006 - 3:10 pm 41. Rhod:

Steven:

Dclydew sometimes lapses into hyperbole, and he’s often overcome by his agnosticism, but he’s generally good-natured, honest and decent. I think he’ll answer.

I’m confused, too, about why he fused Evangelicals with Neo-conservatism. I suppose you could make the case that Evangelicals might represent a kind of hyper-Americanism, which could be expressed in Neo-con foreign policy, where it connects with support and aid for Israel.

I wonder if this is what dclydew meant.

Nov 10, 2006 - 3:58 pm 42. Vulgorilla:

I think the exit polls are probably fairly representative of how most serious Americans feel.

I know I see us spiraling ’round the toilet bowl, accelerating towards the drain. We just gave the terrorists a huge morale boost, and a psycological kick in the teeth to our valiant troops.

The only thing I’m looking for now is a pool with reasonable odds on where the 1st nuke is going to be lit off in this country. The Dems will gut nearly every national security effort we have so I suspect it will be sooner than later.

Nov 10, 2006 - 5:22 pm 43. ricpic:

One of the advantages, maybe the only advantage, to growing old is the realization that: the sky is falling, NOT!

America is a tremendously dynamic country that gets itself into binds and then, Houdinilike, gets itself out again. Whatever our troubles (name your poison) we’ll blunder, barrel, muscle our way through. Uplands ahead, folks.

Don’t sit around moping in the corner. Grab a shovel and join in the joyous work of digging out!

Nov 11, 2006 - 4:42 am 44. dclydew:

I’m confused, too, about why he fused Evangelicals with Neo-conservatism. I suppose you could make the case that Evangelicals might represent a kind of hyper-Americanism, which could be expressed in Neo-con foreign policy, where it connects with support and aid for Israel.

I agree that this is a good summation of the issue. My main point was that the past 6 years have been dominated by a agenda where foreign policy has been dictated by the neo-conservatives, which I don’t think represents most Americans views about foreign policy. Domestic Policy has been dominated by an agenda which appears to fit frighteningly with the most extreme of the evangelical/fundamentalist view. Even though most Americans are Christians, I don’t think the domestic policy fits what most Americans want.

Both the neo-conservative and the fundamentalist movements seem to take extreme views. They seem to hold an almost dogmatic position, where their way IS right and anything else is appeasement, sin or foolishness. This has never played well to the American people throughout history. Sure a war, attack or a threat might get the excited and willing to accept an extreme for awhile, but they soon calm down and realize that One Way rarely appears to be the best way. That, I think is why the Democrats won. Not because they have the best agenda, but because the other side had an extremist agenda. Americans may be a lot of things, but in the end they’re pretty tolerant folk…

Nov 12, 2006 - 8:02 am 45. Luther McLeod:

Yes, dclydew, as an American and a non-believer I am pretty tolerant. So tolerant in fact that I fail to see how the “evangelical/fundamentalist view” has had much of an influence upon domestic policy in this country. Sure there are some ‘faith based’ programs out there receiving government assistance that did not receive such before. But even after thinking real hard, I am failing to remember how else my life has been effected by such “extremist” views/groups. Help me out here, what is there that has really changed in the last six years that I need fear for my personal freedom.

Nov 12, 2006 - 7:57 pm 46. dclydew:

Luther,

Sorry if my point was unclear. I was pointing to the extreme view that the administration of the past 6 years has taken on issues that the evangelical/fundamentalist political groups feel are important.

For example, the Terri Schaivo instance was one where a traditional conservative or Republican view would have kept the federal government out of that poor woman’s life. It would have, instead deferred to the State, which in this instance deferred to the husband. To believe that Mrs. Schaivo’s situation was worth federal intereference was an extreme viewpoint. Most Americans did not approve of the extreme view. This is similar in the questions surrounding abortion, same sex marriage, etc. Most Americans seem to want a middle of the road approach, yet the past 6 years have laid heavily on the far right. The Neo-Con foreign policy seems similar. Most Americans are willing to defend the homeland and even go on the offense when necessary… they do not, however, tend to accept a single extreme policy that relies entirely on the views of one subset of the American people.

I hold no false hope about the Democrats. I find their tendency to do the same is concerning. We shall see if they have learned their lesson, but I doubt it. I can foresee an agenda dominated by crazy Global Warming fundamentalists, or a foreign policy based on some extreme Neo-Chomsky philosophy.

If that happens, I think we’ll see the American people react as they did last Tuesday.

Does that seem more clear?

Nov 13, 2006 - 9:50 am 47. Luther McLeod:

dclydew

Re Schaivo, I do not disagree. But did the actions of the “extreme”, in that instance, have lasting effect?

I don’t think so.

Though I do not disagree, either, with your basic assumption on other domestic matter’s. Most American’s do search for and vote for the middle ground. On most occasion’s that is a good thing.

I do not think that applies in regard to the larger battle that we are currently engaged in. The middle ground could be the death of us all.

I think it all comes down to equivalence. Caution, here comes my ‘nut’ side. We have been conditioned for so many years to think that nothing is better than any other thing. That compromise is the order of the day, that we should take no pride whatsoever in our lives as American’s. I just think our way of life is worth fighting for. But, oh so many think not.

Sorry if incoherent, it is late.

Nov 13, 2006 - 6:59 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: