An off-year election often goes to the party that is not in The White House, so says the data, and so says the many major networks that covered Tuesday’s nationwide U.S. elections. Michael Bloomberg, the mega rich billionaire who financed his own campaign to the tune of $100 million barely came out alive and just beat his Republican opponent by a mere 5%. The incumbents across the board had it tough yesterday. If it weren’t for Bloomberg’s money, who knows where he would have ended up.
I just barely got off the plane, back in town, and this is the major news. The Republican party, despite its low public rating, seems to have had a great day on Tuesday. Both in Virginia and New Jersey, where President Barack Obama actively campaigned for the incumbents, both Democratic Party Governors still lost. Despite the losses, President Obama still maintains high ratings in both states, and was seen as not the main reason why voters did not vote for both Governors. Local issues played the bigger role in most cases.
I’m not sure exactly where this is all headed come 2010 in the midterm elections that should prove crucial for the direction of President Barack Obama’s agenda, and the overall makeup of Congress, but winning begets winning, and win The Republicans managed to do.
Michael Steele, the RNC Chairman has declared that it was a referendum on The Obama administration, it was a clear indication that the people are refusing a Health Care plan that they do not want, they are weary of Obama’s administration altogether. The data says otherwise, and in an off-year election, this was to be expected, but it must still be seen as a probable jumpstart to a Republican Party comeback.
Already in the midst of these losses, Harry Reid is expecting that the Health Care Bill may not be passed by the end of this year as planned by President Barack Obama. Even in that front, it seems The Republicans who have gone the way of attacks, but with little substance and without even their own proposed bill, is indeed going to be putting forward their own bill. It has not been made public as of yet, but from the drafts, it is only around 200+ pages long, as compared to the almost 2000+ pages inherent in the proposed Democratic Party’s Health Care Bill.
I’m going off track though, the most important thing to take away from this recent election is that we should never ever count any party down, especially when the economy is in such a rut. The recession may be officially over, but a jobless recovery in the eyes of Americans may as still be a recession. Without a growth in jobs, the party in power has all the disadvantages in the world.
Considering that exit polls both in Virginia and and New Jersey, the states where both Democratic and incumbent Governors lost, both showed numbers around 50-60% that President Obama did not play a factor, I have to wonder however, that it still leaves 40-50% going other routes and factoring Obama in, whether it was good or not. Substantial or not, in both races, where both governors received strong backing from President Obama, the President’s magic still had no effect. And that should be a bit worrisome for some strategists out there.
Will the machinery work for individuals other than a Barack Obama?
If The Democrats needed some good news from Tuesday’s dismal losses, it is that Sarah Palin’s ultra conservative bet for a congressional district in New York lost. This specific race actually garnered wide national attention, because it had an internal fight between a moderate Republican and a conservative Republican. The base of The Republican party did not like the stand of Dierdre Scozzafava, the moderate Republican, on abortion and same-sex marriage. Even former presidential candidate Fred Thompson a very conservative Republican came in just to stump for Doug Hoffman, the chosen nominee for The Conservatives.
Again, even in that race, where the Republicans were split, it seemed that the focus was still on jobs and local issues.
The main takeaway from the whole bunch of races that took place on Tuesday, is that at the end of the day, contentment breeds support, and discontentment breeds the straying away of voters. In this case, as many politicians have come to realize the hard way, it’s the economy stupid. All things being equal, the economy is the most tangible thing that connects with voters, money in the bank, job security, the list goes on and on. In the hierarchy of recent political needs, economy seems to be king. Democrats should be worried if come 2010, the economy still has not picked up. It could be 1994 all over again, and The Republicans may take The House once more.
No tags for this post.
If the Hope turns into disappoinment. You will find people voting
the other way. Money is just one of the factors now in winning
elections. The Information Technology in the form of: Web Blogs,
Text Messages, Cell Phones, Emails, the Internet, etc…makes a
difference now. People now are more informed. You cannot
monopolize the media, opinions, or ideas anymore.
Politicians who are hoping to win because of being celebrities, or
using celebrities will have major dissapointments. Young people are
more opinionated than our generation.
Bloomberg is the registered Republican and has been such since 2000.
Amadeo, some slight corrections,
Mayor Bloomberg is an Independent and switched party affiliation from Republican Party back in 2007 at the height of speculation that he was making way for a Presidential Bid in 2008. Of course, he didn’t run for President, but he still remains an Independent.
He was a lifelong Democrat however, until 2001 when he switched to the Republican party, and then only a Republican until 2007. I think however, he leans more liberal than anything else in terms of social issues, and has tendencies to agree on conservative economic policies. He has been mostly a good Mayor as seen by New Yorkers, but this last election, voters may have been turned off when he pressured Council with regards to Term Extension. He wasn’t actually supposed to be allowed to run and subsequent injections of his own money to fund his campaign that reached record levels (around $100 million may have also contributed to his small margin of victory). Mayor Bloomberg, was, according to polls supposed to win by a margin of 10-15%. Again, that begs the question did he know something that many analysts didn’t know, when he saw it fit to inject so much of his own money into his campaign..
It was an interesting race, to say the least.
I see. Goes to show politicians play musical chairs faster than we can follow. While “registered” as Republican nobody doubted his liberal creds.
Hard to accept him as being one of us, belonging to the Independent sector.
Bloomberg is inspiration to many (except SW3913- and G26-enthusiasts and others who are for CCW) — his enthralled constituents approved a constitutional amendment so that Bloomberg becomes eligible for another term. That is really the way to do it!!!!!
—————-
[Actually, Bloomberg did not go to the citizens to get approval for the constitutional amendment. Other mechanisms were available.]
UP n grad,
I am not to fond of any political official(s) when it comes to infringing the Constitutional Rights. And Micheal Bloomberg is no exception. Also, does not inspire at all. I believe an elected official(s) should be the care taker of our Constitutional Rights. To stand for what is right and to uphold what our fore fathers have written for the people. Our rights.
“Bloom is off Bloomberg’s Vigilante Gun Shop Sting”
By Alan Gottlieb and Dave Workman, 3/18/2007
Almost from the outset, something smelled rotten about a “sting” mounted last year by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in an effort to target alleged rogue gun shops in five different states for selling guns illegally.
Bloomberg dispatched private investigators to conduct this vigilante operation, apparently neglecting to advise the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) what they were up to. These “investigators” had no law enforcement authority to engage in what may have been illegal “straw man” purchases to entrap some 15 different dealers.
The odor ripened when Bloomberg filed civil lawsuits against these gun shops, rather than turn over evidence to the proper authorities for criminal prosecution. Bloomberg’s office refused to turn over that evidence, and instead the billionaire mayor launched a high-profile media campaign demonizing the targeted gun shop operators.
When he announced the sting, and associated lawsuits, he took a cheap shot at ATF, declaring the agency asleep at the wheel.
And then Bloomberg, with the partnership of another anti-gun municipal politician, Boston Mayor Tom Menino, launched Mayors Against Illegal Guns. This coalition’s purpose was purportedly to campaign for laws that crack down on gun shops selling guns that found their way into criminal hands.
But now it turns out there is more than one fly in the ointment. Flies are attracted by foul odors. The anti-gun Joyce Foundation provided $175,000 to Bloomberg’s group. And recently, Anchorage, Alaska Mayor Mark Begich, Rio Rancho, New Mexico Mayor Kevin Jackson and Idaho Falls, Idaho Mayor Jared Fuhriman have bailed out. All essentially explained that – surprise of surprises – there is more to the coalition agenda than they had initially understood.
Begich, Jackson and Fuhriman wisely turned their backs on what amounts to a political lynch mob, out more for headline-grabbing junk lawsuits and legislation targeting everything from gun shows to types of firearms law-abiding citizens may own, claiming that eroding the rights of good people will somehow prevent crimes committed by bad people.
And now the Justice Department has essentially cooled Bloomberg’s jets. W. Larry Ford, ATF Director for Public and Governmental Affairs, revealed that the agency is investigating Bloomberg’s rogue sting operation “in order to determine if violations of federal firearms laws occurred.” Just days later, Michael Battle, director of the executive office for United States Attorneys at the Department of Justice, sent a letter warning Bloomberg’s administration that it could face “potential legal liabilities” if such sting operations continue. Battle also said the Justice Department will not be filing criminal charges against any of the 15 gun dealers targeted by Bloomberg’s 2006 lawsuits over alleged “straw man” purchases. Such operations lack “proper law enforcement authority,” Battle’s letter warned.
Though criminal charges may never be filed against Bloomberg or his agents provocateur in the gun shop sting, two shots have been fired across Bloomberg’s bow, and he really ought to lower his sails. Likewise, so should the more than 150 other mayors who were beguiled by headlines to join Bloomberg’s anti-gun crusade.
Going after suspected illegal gun dealers, especially outside of one’s jurisdiction, is not a job for mayors or private investigators they hire. That’s a job for the ATF and federal prosecutors. Bloomberg now stands cautioned that his antics are under scrutiny. Other mayors, lulled into joining with Bloomberg, might take this as a signal they need to reconsider that affiliation.
In politics, opportunities to change course and do something smart come along rarely, but opportunities to do something stupid come knocking every day. Bloomberg, and his contemporaries, have been handed a chance to wise up. Let’s see if they are smart enough to take the hint.
(Alan Gottlieb is founder of the Second Amendment Foundation)
(and chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms)
Speaking of lists . . .
The three things I like least about America: (1) partisan politics played for sound-bites and re-election, not public good, (2) an infestation by millions of narrow-minded people who think that you are unpatriotic or heathen if you disagree with them (idiot RNC Chairman Steele, whom you photo included), and (3) Rush Limbaugh, a cartoon of a human being who unifies (1) and (2).
I think it is important to note the dysfunctions that are widespread in America, its dark drug underculture, its gangs that are Filipino death squads without the underpinning of good intent, its filthy political ethic, its obsession with sex, its consumer madness (bigger televisions and 3 or 4 in each house), its selfish sucking of the world’s resources with little inclination for global well-being, and its self-sated patriotic arrogance that leads most Americans to believe their ways are the best for everyone.
Switching to the Philippines, well, I’d offer bluntly that the Philippines is the Philippines, not the US, with a history that is over, so get it out of your head. Get over it.
You don’t control the market on dysfunction, you are just good at it.
If I were the Philippine President, I would urge Filipinos not to emulate any other country, toss history into the Pasig River along with the other detritus flowing there, and certainly NOT follow American footsteps; indeed, I would wear long hair and a sari and work real hard to get people unstuck from their Catholic, tribal and Edsa boxes. I’d nationalize mining and Smart and throw out treasonous aristocratic leeches who daily suck off the nation’s vitality, one gigantic blow job. Up with REAL independence, from America, from any church, from greed, from bureaucratic bullshit, from half-assed cultural limits! Up with intelligence, with productivity, with values that have real meaning to the advancement of Filipino mankind.
Enough with the pretty yellow ribbons already, the sugar-coated, brain-numbing platitudes, the showboat politicians posturing for the lights. Up with candor, with honesty, and more than anything, up with the satisfaction of achievement.
Oh, you weren’t speaking of lists? Well, never mind then . . .
Joe
“an infestation by millions of narrow-minded people who think that you are unpatriotic or heathen if you disagree with them”
Just like all the idiots against socialized health care right? don’t let Rush Limbaugh bother you. You got Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, and you even got Whoopi Goldberg.
Ski,
Oh, my fourth dislike would be Rachel Maddow. So kindly don’t attach her and entertainers (not newscasters) such as Keith Olberman or Michael Moore to me by saying “You got” as if I have a liberal agenda to promote. Whoopie Goldberg is weird. On the other hand, Ben Afleck is a very bright dude, and Bill Maher is disgustingly funny. Michael Moore is an irresponsible flake, a blowhard, who occasionally makes a useful point. Jesse Ventura, on the other hand, is strikingly direct and refreshing. So you see, even liberals are individuals who deserve to be listened to for the merits or demerits of their individual thinking. Rush Limbaugh is mainly pathetic. I know because I listen to him now and then and try to sort out the meat from the huge bad-tasting potato that is his sense of self importance.
You are, with your “you got” comment, doing what “you conservatives” do. Trying to put other people into little boxes and label them badly. Other people in this instance being me.
Focus on issues and we can have a useful debate, person to person. Try to put me in a box of your making, slapping labels on me, and we are likely to have an unhappy fight.
Joe
joe,
wait a minute. nobody said that there was an american dysfunction when the same electorate voted for Obama but they are dysfunctional now when they voted for Republican Governors.
the controversial democratic health care bill resonates on the electorate of the local states. they showed there disappointment by voting republicans. the same electorate voting for Obama for President are now dysfunctional because they opted for Republican policos. hahahahahah!!!!!
Just because people are out of work and angry does not make Obama a bad president. (1) Set the health care issue aside for proper debate as an issue. (2) Tell me what Obama should have done differently regarding the economy, which was in free-fall collapse when he took over. (3) Line up the good things he has done against the bad, and give me an objective opinion about those, not easy innuendo.
I didn’t say he was Jesus. I said he was capable, forthright, personable, has good values, and works hard. He has worked diligently to follow through on the platform he set before the people during election.
And, yes, many American voters vote with their emotions, and there is an ebb and flow of favoritism. It is one of the many checks and balances that make the American style of government fundamentally good. The descent into bitter partisan ethics is undermining this foundation, making the emotionalism of electoral checks and balances more volatile.
Joe
erratum
cvj, correctly attach this note as response to yours, following; the link to the liberal site, rejection of Obama.
ahahahaha,
erratum erratum old brain here, I call my son by his big sister’s name, btw
jcc
Joe,
I am not sure which constitutional history you were reading. The federalist and the anti-federalist in year 1787 are two groups of people across the aisle. Madison and Hamilton headed the federalist bright with the concept that the Articles of Confederation of the Second Continental Congress of of 1776 was flawed and weak and therefore must be amended by one with strong central authority should residing in the Federation. The Confederation of 13 original states was weak for lack of taxing authority of the central government and had to beg funds from different States. The 1787 U.S. Constitution was proposed to give more power to the Confederation and in that constitution the right of the Federal government to tax was carried out in its “commerce clause”. At the other end of this political debate was the quintessential Patrick Henry who thought that a strong central government would derogate State’s sovereignty. Henry “smells a rat” in this effort to create a strong central government which would surrender not only State power to the central government but even the people’s civil liberties.
Those who opposed a strong central government were called “narrow-minded politicians” while those in favor of a strong central government appended their own title to themselves as patriots. There were acrimonious debate across the aisle. Rhode Island did not participate in this debate and refused to send delegation to the Continental Congress.
A compromise was made that civil liberties be enshrined in the Constitution, which explains the several amendments in that constitution now known as the “Bill of Rights” and that powers not delegated by the State to the central government resides with the State. (10th Amendment)
The same debate now obtains in this “national health care bill”. Opponents see the overpowering reach of the Federal Government in matters concerning their health. They claimed that the State should be able to provide their own health care system and the central government should be out of it.
Some people are wary how Washington mismanaged several federal agencies and doubt very much the ability of the central government to oversee a national health care program which they think is better left to the private sector. They think that this “national health care program”, like one of those already run by the Federal government, i.e., USPS, Medicare/Medicade would also go bankrupt. The cost also of the program is a concern of so many.
Joe, you were no different than Madison and Hamilton who can easily ascribe ill-motive to those who disagree with them and would conveniently those in disagreement “narrow-minded” and “destructive”. Patrick Henry by the way, is the guy who give us the enduring cry of “Give me liberty or Give me death”.
I am not even anti-Obama. I am only pro JCC.
jcc,
I appreciate the historical brief. And you are right, sometimes I am what I condemn.
If you are pro jcc, I have no complaints at all.
Joe
joe,
here is a liberal media outlet (meaning pro-democrat) which ut it more succintly that the election of Republican politicos is part rejection of OBAMA.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33597807/ns/politics-more_politics/
Jcc,
Always good to argue with you.
“nobody said that there was an american dysfunction when the same electorate voted for Obama but they are dysfunctional now when they voted for Republican Governors “
Actually, I was saying it long before the Obama election, but you weren’t around to hear it. You meld and therefore confuse four issues in your comment: (1) dysfunctional politics, (2) Obama’s election, (3) Republican governor elections, and (4) health care. Your political bias is showing through.
Here’s my take on the separate issues:
(1) It is dysfunctional when either democrats or republicans are not honest and put party allegiance ahead of public interest and truth, (2) Obama is a great president, (3) Republican governors may be better or worse than democrats; I frankly have no idea about the specific races; I presume the best man or woman won; California Republican Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger, who I do understand, is a great governor, and (4) health care is a very difficult issue as so many Americans cannot afford health care; I dislike mandatory insurance; it is easy to carp and throw out slurs (“socialism”); it is not so easy to find a solution.
One of the solutions to the health care problem is to somehow control runaway litigation that loads costs on doctors, hospitals, and drug companies. So you see, my good friend, you really are a part of the problem, not the solution.
Ahahahahahahahaha
By the way, nice work in defending the fan installer and nailing the dysfunctional hotel. The Philippines needs such righting of the wrongs of negligence.
Joe
i am showing my bias against the democrat because i am pro-republican. i am not recoiling from my position. it is the democracts who always claim that they are objective, not bias and had the grandest agenda that their party is pro-America and pro-people. my only question is that if the health care bill is that really good and would help so many people, why is it that the democrats despite their control of both houses find it hard to pass the bill?
i will tell you Joe. some democrat politicos have some misgivings about the bill itself and they had been rewriting it to address some legit concerns of the Republicans. some even considered their signature on the bill equivalent to a political suicide. and quite frankly joe, i do not understand this health bill like most people do. i wonder if you yourself had read the more than 3,000 pages of the bill to be able to competently comment about its judiciousness.
Jcc,
You continue to confuse and conflict issues. When have I ever argued in favor or the health care bill? I said I like (respect) Obama as president. I said “set the bill aside and we can debate it as an issue”. The two are separate. I don’t believe Obama has to do things 100% MY way to be a good president. Why does he have to do it 100% YOUR way to be considered a good president, worthy of your respect?
I have not read the health bill, and a lot of what I hear scares me.
Joe
joe,
you posture yourself as a pro-democrat, hence i assume that you are pro-Nancy Pelosi health care bill. if you are against it then you were one of many democrats who have misgivings about the health care bill in Congress.
Jcc,
Headline: OBAMA DECRIED AS LAMB AMONGST WOLVES
Your assumptions are all wrong, so your conclusions are wrong. Nancy Pelosi is no Barak Obama . . .
It seems to me you are loyal to your party and therefore adjust your thinking to what your party says you should think. Opposing positions, and those who espouse them, earn your condemnation. I am loyal to my personal principles and am free to adopt positions different than my party; I can respect people who sort things out differently, as issues.
Therein lies the difference between partisan political gamesmanship and earnest, forthright intent. One is territorial and reactive and engages in name-calling and the destruction of competing people and ideas, the other is interested in the well-being of man, respect for process and participants, and solving of problems.
The political party system, the way it is gamed in the US today, is destructive, not constructive. Alas, the world’s various problems call for constructive intent. Therefore, I align with J_ag, who sees the US as a fat blubbering over-sated slob one step from stroke and destined for the scrap heap of history under military pressure from Muslim extremists, financial and commercial pressure from China, resource pressure from the Middle East, social pressure from Europe, and ecological pressure from Mama Nature.
Your counterparts in the US, conservative Republicans, are so narrow in their views that they can’t even raise their concrete-leaden heads far enough up to see that there is handwriting on the wall, much less READ it. Obama, alas, is a lamb (a black sheep, actually, hardy har har har) amongst the slavering wolves. He is being eaten for dinner, one slow, gnawing bite at a time . . .
Enjoy the party . . .
Joe
joe,
a lamb being feasted upon by the slithering wolves… how blasphemous!!! sound like Ophra calling Obama “The One”.
joe,
yes, i agree, republicans are narrow minded and democrats are level-headed if that makes you happy. end of discussion! hahhahahahar.
BTW JOE,
You were seeing the trees for the forest. America despite her imperfections gives you liberty to disagree and the right to pursue your own happiness. You would not appreciate these civil liberties until they had been denied of you. In some countries where women are treated as vassals and public assemblies are banned,and bureaucrats are despotic and tyrannical, the citizens would always dream of going to America so they can breathe the air of freedom and pursue their own dreams. Yes, Joe, try living in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan or in Gaza where sucide bombers would blast themselves in a market place on a daily basis, or in some African countries where most are dying of malnultrition, then you may suddenly change your perspective of frustration over your country to that one of elation for putting you in a situation that is “exceedingly blessed”.
jcc,
Thanks for the link to the site. Those who are “born again” Americans evidently lost their way and are returning to the patriotic fold. I never lost my way, and remain patriotic. I don’t need to belong to any organization to be said patriot. It is just not the kind of patriotism you accept, so you wish to squash it or insult it. Rather like RNC chairman Steele’s fundraising letter that said only Republicans and people giving money to the RNC are “true patriots”.
I find it weird that you claim patriotism, but hold such little respect for the duly elected president of the US. He was elected by the people, fairly. He said he would put health care on the agenda, and he is following through on his commitment. What part of that do you fail to respect? A patriot respects his president, defends him, and argues the issues as issues. Unless the president does something immoral like Clinton, Nixon and Bush . . .
I’m surprised that someone as intelligent as you can’t see the damage being done by partisan politics. When people are called “poor citizens” because they disagree with you, well, you have turned the concept of free expression upside down.
By the way, I really dislike Pelosi, because she is also skilled at the politics of destruction.
Joe
Joe,
I cannot understand why despite the liberal ideas you spouse, you remain a bigot. Disagreement with Obama’s policy is no sign of disrespect. Calling him “The One” or the “Lamb” with “messiahnic” undertones is the start of “cult worship”, which the forefathers had guarded against. This is the reason why during the deliberation of the U.S. Constitution of 1987, on the creation of a strong executive department, a delegate suggested that the U.S. President be addressed “Your Excellency or His Majesty” of which he was instantaneously rebuked that a “Mr. President” will do.
Royall Tyler, a revolutionary war veteran, in his play The Contract, gave his own jaundiced view of the upper classes:
“Exult each patriot heart! this night is shewn
A piece, which we may fairly call our own;
Where the proud titles of “My Lord!” “Your Grace!”
To humble Mr. and plain Sir give place.”
The health care debate is a rehash of the acrimonious debate that plagued the 1787 U.S. Constitution. Strong federal government in derogation of State’s rights. Those who opposed strong federal government are called called “destructive and narrow-minded” politicians and those in favor of Washington arm-twisting tactics are called “messiah”.
Jcc,
Well, you misread a joke as bigotry and attach a name to me as a typical Republican slur that diminishes me, the person . . . as an alternative to discussing an issue. Obama is only a messiah in your mind, and your fears, as his falling popularity ratings and inability to draw consensus on any legislative effort reflect. The point is, you do not respect the president of the country, but reserve for yourself some special patriotic platform that holds those with lesser views are nefarious plunderers of American ideals.
We, together, reflect the damage that partisanship does, with a descent into anger instead of an ability to work on important problems.
If you oppose health care because you are a federalist and wish insurance to remain strictly the domain of the states, you have an argument. Or if you support the Republican legislation that removes the government option and favors insurance companies, you have an argument. If you deny there is a health care problem, I would consider you an idiot (I don’t).
The day when you call President Obama Mr. President, with the respect that such a title intends, is the day when I will agree you are properly respectful of the holder of the office. Rooting for and working for the failure of the president is not patriotic. Arguing the the issues is patriotic.
Joe
joe,
meantime, enjoy this link.
http://www.bornagainamerican.org/index.html
Joe,
No matter how you look at it, Democrats/Republicans/Independence, they are all have the same political issue. What do they presents to the people. More Plunderism.
Just like what you’ve stated joe,“the suga-coated” is enough to rot your brains out rather than your teeth. is a “brain-numbing platitudes”.
Then, we became victims of lawful plunder
Men naturally rebel against the injustice of which they are victims. Thus, when plunder is organized by law for the profit of those who make the law, all the plundered classes try somehow to enter by peaceful or revolutionary means into the making of laws. According to their degree of enlightenment, these plundered classes may propose one of two entirely different purposes when they attempt to attain political power: Either they may wish to stop lawful plunder, or they may wish to share in it.
Woe to the nation when this latter purpose prevails among the mass victims of lawful plunder when they, in turn, seize the power to make laws! Until that happens, the few practice lawful plunder upon the many, a common practice where the right to participate in the making of law is limited to a few persons. But then, participation in the making of law becomes universal. And then, men seek to balance their conflicting interests by universal plunder. Instead of rooting out the injustices found in society, they make these injustices general. As soon as the plundered classes gain political power, they establish a system of reprisals against other classes. They do not abolish legal plunder. (This objective would demand more enlightenment than they possess.) Instead, they emulate their evil predecessors by participating in this legal plunder, even though it is against their own interests.
It is as if it were necessary, before a reign of justice appears, for everyone to suffer a cruel retribution — some for their evilness, and some for their lack of understanding.
Next thing you know, more dumn filipinos voting for actors and actresses. What kind of crap is that!
That means, more Morons being injected into our convoluted system.
Mario,
Yes, makes (unfortunate) sense. One thing that is grossly missing in Philippine politics and government offices is SKILL. Stars, famous people, brothers, cousins . . . they have the key jobs, and they are not skilled at analysis and articulation of issues, solving problems, or forward thinking. It is missing in the US at times, too. I am amused at Rush Limbaugh’s characterization of Barak Obama as “immature and inexperienced”. To an extent it is true, as is true of any new president, as the job is extraordinarily demanding. One can only hope for good intent, good basic organization and analytical tools, and quick study.
In the Philippines, no one cares all that much, I fear . . . Glamor is more important than substance.
Joe
i.e,
correction on my part.
“dumb filipinos”not“dumn filipinos”. Then again, it could be “Dumber filipinos”
i.e,
correction on my part.
“dumb filipinos”not“dumn filipinos”. Then again, it could be “dumber filipinos”.
When one reports on news it pays to be accurate. The Democrats won the Congressional seats. But they lost the in the the state gobernatorial seats.
On national issues like health care reform that is critical. John Garamendi an avid supporter of public health care won in California.
Meanhwhile in NY the Republican Party shot itself in the foot courtesy of the Palinism.
Nick boy it also pays to inform people that the NY seat had been held by the Republican party since 1872.
Now that all the facts are out one can make an informed opinion.
So there go rewrite your post.
Last sentence above should include factor after Palinism.
Jon Corzine, the financial wizard Governor of NJ, applied corporate solutions to NJ’s budgetary problems. He laid off state workers, increase the sales tax, reduce the real estate rebate and increase the toll rates but the the budgetary problem still persists. Enough of that. We will try another solution with Christie.
such hipocrisy….
The U.S. is like an old boxer who does not know when it is time to quit trying to remain heavy weight champion when other younger challengers are lurking.
Naturally in times of great economic distress the angry white man being stoked by fringe populist commentators have grabbed the limelight in the world of 24/7 multi media outlets.
There is no liberal/conservative ideologies being debated. It is simply about stoking anger.
Americans including the new minted Pinoy Americans will have to get used to the new realties in the world.
America has grown fat and ugly and will have to slim down. Otherwise if she goes into a stroke we will be in for really interesting times in a world where a real military power vacuum will exist.
Just look at the latest vote in the U.S. Congress on extending the unemployment benefits and home buyers tax credit. The vote 403-12 in the House. Where are the conservatives? They should be railing against this new deal program.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/05/AR2009110500681.html?hpid%3Dtopnews&sub=AR
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/soros52
In times of severe economic crisis the crazies will always gain ground as democratic solutions – (citizens will always vote their pockets first) like slimming down or losing weight is tough. It is painful and no politician looking for votes will look long term.
Americas enemies know this. The U.S. did not lose a single battle in the Vietnam war. But the American voter changed all that when their sons and daughters started coming home in body bags for a war they did not understand.
The worlds economic problems have been long in creating. The quickest way out is war..
A lesson for all Noynoy fans. Voting for national leaders is mostly driven by the tie up between economic safety nets from local leaders that will support national leaders who are tied into that source of safety net.
People of all stripes and colors will almost always vote their “pockets.”
Do not be surprised by the mass onrush of voters registration. Your voters ID today is your proof of residence for getting your share of safety nets from the government.
The data bank of all our names and addresses available at a click of the mouse.
My mind races when I think of that data with addresses and age brackets.
J_AG,
Wonderful perspectives and pertinent warnings here. An old boxer and potential stroke victim, eh? I agree with that, actually.
Modern media has transformed war, brought the blood and gore into the living room of Americans. And great victories into the living rooms of extremists.
It is a battle ripe for the losing, for sure, for weak-kneed Americans.
Joe
Joe,
Your perorations of American psyche, let it be Exhibit A (as marked).
Of the Filipino psyche, Exhibit B (as marked).
Your worldview, to my mind, has two legs to stand on and it’s amusing to read – sarcasm and all.
On which side of the fulcrum will you rise – given both worlds?
Primer,
Thank you for the kind words. I shall school my young son in the Philippines until he is ready for college, and then we will see who is ready for him. That is the more meaningful question, as I no longer produce much, I consume little, and I concede the caretaking of the world to youth. I reside fully in both camps right now, a neat trick that involves considerable dancing and running back and forth on the ever-shifting cross-bar. But it is intensely amusing, and always enriching . . .
Be well . . .
Joe
Side-topic: A Filipino is in the running, but check out the others and you may find one better. I think the prize-money is for $100,000.00.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cnn.heroes/vote/
UP n,
Who’s the Pinoy? Efren Penaflorida, or George Munoz? I might want to vote. Thanks for the link.
Bert,
It’s Efren Penaflorida. Who’d pursue education, migrated out of the slum. And came back into the slum to educate the less fortunate. Efren should be the one to replace Chiz “Boy Laway” Escudero Atleast, this individual has his priority straight.
His got my vote!
Thank you, Mario. So nice of you to be such a nice guy sometimes, ooops, I mean, most times, heheh.
Social, political and economic problems on evey nation are unique.
They are different like the countenances of our faces. Or the way
we approach life. Yes, I agree in not emulating the cultures of
other nations. Since, we Filipinos have cultures of our own.
We have also to accept that we were colonized for long by the Spaniards. And for a short time by the Americans. There were good
in our process of colonization. There were also bad. We cannot remove
our past. But, we can build our future. If we can elect good leaders
to lead and we can change our way of thinking.
“IF” we can elect good leaders.
That’s a big “IF” to expect from the voters, considering.
Hyden Toro, Mike H,
Here’s something for you to chew on.
Let’s have some forward thinking and venture on Manuel Quezon III. What if, he was presented with a position to run as a candidate for the Senate seat on 2010. Will the filipinos reject his intellectual issues and commentaries, rather than what his capable of. This individual have the prowess capability than any actor or actresses that I can think of. True, we have not heard any platform as of yet, but what “IF”…!