Friday, November 05, 2010
A word about the Election
Optical Scanners - made the decision to go vote with my folks and an elderly neighbor and so we go in the place and the first thing I notice is where the hell are all the voting booths?!? Then ya got these DMV-type workers (liberal cousin: are you trying to say they were all black?) who hand you the sheet and a black marker with no verbal instructions whatsoever from Uniqua and Pumpkin and so everyone is helping everyone else and my Mom's sheet got crumpled in the machine somehow and so the lady takes it and scribbles VOID over the top and sets it aside and the thought occured WHERE THE HELL IS THE PRIVACY? Back in the day, yesterday in fact you went in the booth and closed the curtain and you didn't have to tell a soul about it afterwards if you didn't want to, could've left some jizm in there now everyone including the janitor knows how you voted. Well I hope the NY Post is proud of themselves, Andy Cuomo is now the Governor here in NY - WTG!!! I mean I get it that they didn't endorse Paladino although I disagree with it but to push for a liberal Dem from the only purportedly conservatve rag in Town? It's clear State Editor Fred Dicker has a thing about social conservatives, I think that's what animated his reporting if you could call it that all along but anyway so the Repubs took back the House which just goes to show the ancient wisdom of the old Z-man Rule that no political party has permanent power although to hear the liberal chattering classes in Washington talk about it after Obama's Rise to Power. It's like the American Voter is schizo or something, no firm political identity they just make one chamber into Republican and the other chamber stays Democrat. It's clear though Obama doesn't see his Agenda as being at fault and I really wasn't that jazzed up about it all 'cept glad to see Nancy Pelosi having her gavel taken away. What's your take? I just think everyone is on drugs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Seriously, Z-man, you're perplexed over why the Post endorsed Cuomo over Paladino?
ReplyDeleteYou approve of his tough guy persona and his "batty" talk during his concession speech?
Paladino may appeal to a certain segment of the population, but I believe most voters do not want thuggish behavior in the person leading their state nor would they want a leader who engages in passing around smut and racist emails.
There was no way that Paladino would win. Why didn't the GOP run a normal candidate who could debate the issues rationally. Paladino was in way over his head and deserved to be defeated.
I'm very happy Cuomo is the governor. I have close family living in NY, and I have an interest in seeing that state act rationally--and it did.
To understand where I'm coming from you have to read my blog backaways where I explain it. Of late political pragmatism shapes my decisions more and more and if Palladino is a true conservative I don't much care about his temper tantrums per se just that he can run the State. #2 the NY Post purports to be the only conservative journalistic organ in Town and so since they apparently don't share my same political pragmatism here's what they should have done - ENDORSE NOBODY. As for some of Palladino's batty talk only outside the liberal precincts of NY would his so-called "gay" talk be seen in the proper temperate perspective. My God the Gay Pride Parade, even comic Dennis Miller used to joke that the thing turned people off with displays such as The Testicle Twins. Andrew Cuomo as NY AG didn't go after Eliot Spitezer OR Charlie Rangel so it makes his talk about cleaning up Albany ring hollow. Why should we believe what politicians say anyway?
ReplyDeleteI'm also not looking to put a living Saint in office and I daresay Andrew hardly qualifies for sainthood. Fred Dicker's woeful political reporting was so slanted it hurt. It's clear he has a problem with social conservatives within the party and I might add why was Palladino's love child ok to talk about but Cuomo's alleged serial affairs off the table? The Post also had a problem with Palladino calling Assemby Speaker Sheldon Silver a crook yet only a few days later a Post editorial practically called him the same thing!
ReplyDeleteZ-man,
ReplyDeleteThe gay pride parade analogy doesn't work, since as far as I know, none of the participants in the parade were running for the highest office in the state of New York.
You state that it doesn't matter to you if Paladino (I believe his name is spelled with one "l" We had a Boston politician with the same last name and she spelled it with two "l"s.) has a bad temperament or not, just so long as he agrees with your political goals.
But that is not how politics works, and I think you know that.
How Paladino behaves, how he conducts himself is a window into the man's character--and he appears not to have a very good one.
Remember how important that was when the GOP was trying to impeach President Clinton? Clinton's policies were good for the country, but the people out to impeach him said character counts.
If that qualification was applicable to Clinton; it is applicable to Paladino.
(And I don't want to get into a rehash of the impeachment of Bill Clinton--the Senate acquitted him of the charges. Not guilty.
I'm still amazed that of all the politicians in the huge state of New York, the best they could run against Cuomo was a crank like Paladino.
glad we the People made the RNC-GOP NRSC aware that we are tired of the aisle reachers- the RINOS- the elites - in our Party-we'll see in the two years leading to 2012 - if the R "insiders' REALLY GOT the message-if not- well.....
ReplyDeleteCarol-CS
We are Still Stuck Between Carol's Comment and the Suggestion that Dave Miller Made that I have Written Above.
ReplyDeleteI Sort of Thought that the Message we Sent on Election day is that we Want Obama to Behave in a more Bipartisan Way, rather than just Cramming all his Policies Down our Throats.
LISTA wrote: "Our Elective Governor is no Good either and that would be Jerry Brown. Lord Help California."
ReplyDeleteThis is Jerry Brown's record as former Governor of California. It is verifiable on the interent.
Please tell me, Lista, what is it about Gov.-elect Jerry Brown's past record as governor that makes you write that he is "no good."
"As Governor, Jerry Brown helped create one-point-nine million new jobs. The LA Times calls Brown's record on jobs "the strongest of any recent Governor". Time Magazine said Brown "honored his pledge to hold the line on taxes". Brown got rid of the governor's jet and limo and built up the largest budget surplus in state history. Long before it was popular, Brown helped make California a leader in solar and wind energy."
If you believe holding the line on taxes, creating 1.9 million jobs, and building up the LARGEST BUDGET SURPLUS IN STATE HISTORY is no good, then tell me exactly what you think a governor's record should be in order for you to think he or she is "good."
I'm kidding, of course. Because no rational person would look at Brown's record and call it no good.
This is the problem with our political culture. Brown represents acutal CONSERVATIVE values--holding the line on taxes, creating jobs, and budget surpluses, but Lista say he's no good.
Why? I'm guessing it's because Jerry Brown has a "D" after his name.
If I'm wrong, I'd appreciate it if Lista could explain why she thinks Brown's record is "no good."
(I'm interested in California politics, since I have close family living in SoCal.)
Glad the Pauls prevailed and that the elder is going to completely R3volutionize the House Monetary Policy Panel.
ReplyDeleteAs for anything else....
John Boehner as House speaker? Nuff said....
Perhaps they can just stomp out the opposition, eh soap?
ReplyDeleteI'm not laughing. I fully expect more right wing fanatic violence, and for it to expand, with the silent acquiescence of the leadership.
If you think it's merely a right wing Republican sort of tactic Saty then I regret to inform you that you simply aren't paying attention.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/434315b2-8ea6-11df-8a67-00144feab49a.html#axzz14ifQJWoN
Obama faces growing credibility crisis
By Edward Luce in Washington
"..says Rob Shapiro, another former Clinton official and a supporter of Mr Obama. “He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”
Keep in mind, the train of intentionally staged abuses by the United States government and its minions for geo-political gain are a plenty.
The point being Shaw are Palladino's deficits so overwhelming that he is unfit for the office? That's in the eye of the beholder and you and the Post obviously think so, I however do not so that's where we differ. Now you can debate the wisdom of him bringing up the gay stuff but even on that level alot of folks would agree with him but to get to the NY Post again as Pam has said why should newspapers endorse anybody?
ReplyDeleteLet me put it in terms you can understand Shaw. Let's say a real good lib in your view was running for whatever office, you felt he or she had all the right public policy prescriptions, in fact he or she would be great except he or she had the same personal character deficits Paladino has. To further muddy the waters here let's say the other major candidate was a real bad conservative in your view who would do bad things once in office according to you. In fact the Old Gray Lady endorses the bad guy because of the liberal's temper tantrums, batty language etc. I'm merely saying in such a case let's hear it for pragmatism.
ReplyDeleteKeep in mind, the train of intentionally staged abuses by the United States government and its minions for geo-political gain are a plenty.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. That aside, there has been a huge increase in right-wing violence in the last two years, and it's well documented. I don't see this ending. I also don't see much of a backlash against it from the right-wing powers that be. This goes all the way back to the election rhetoric that Palin was pushing.
Literally stomping on the opposition's head whilst identifying oneself as a supporter of a particular candidate should bring at least some remonstrance from said candidate. None was forthcoming or did I miss it?
Either way the tacit approval of this kind of thing is just opening the floodgates for more.
Z-man wrote: Let me put it in terms you can understand Shaw. Let's say a real good lib in your view was running for whatever office, you felt he or she had all the right public policy prescriptions, in fact he or she would be great except he or she had the same personal character deficits Paladino has. To further muddy the waters here let's say the other major candidate was a real bad conservative in your view who would do bad things once in office according to you. In fact the Old Gray Lady endorses the bad guy because of the liberal's temper tantrums, batty language etc. I'm merely saying in such a case let's hear it for pragmatism."
ReplyDeleteProblem with your premise is that you're presenting the opposition as a "bad" candidate--presumably this is an allegory for the Cuomo/Paladino campaign.
You characterize the liberal in your example as "bad" [meaning Cuomo] but you give not example of why the candidate is "bad."
See, this is where the problem with this country is. Conservatives see all liberals as "bad," and liberals see all conservatives as "bad."
We'll become a second-rate country with that attitude--if we're not already there.
I think the woman who won the governorship in, was it So. Carolin?,-- Halley something or other? She appears to be an intelligent and very likable--a person who could work with the Dems in her state to achieve what is best for So. Carolina.
Unfortunately, most of the people elected last week are so partisan-blind and truculent that their allegiance is to their party and not the country.
I've actually lived long enough to have seen Republicans and Democrats have differences but also have the capacity to work together for the benefit of all Americans.
I'm sorry to have lived this long to see that all destroyed.
If you and others believe all liberals are evil [or as I've read on blogs--liberalism is a disease--liberals are vermin] you are surely contributing to this country's long slow slide into.
We are an evenly divided country.
Only 30% of the eligible voters in the US voted in last Tuesday's election.
President Obama has repeated again and again and again that he wants to work with the GOP.
Every gain that this country has made has been made through COMPROMISE.
If people don't understand that, they understand nothing.
Z,
ReplyDeleteI'm Still Thinking about Dave Miller's Suggestion that Tea Party Candidates may have Cost the GOP Control of the Senate and because of this, I say that we Need to Nominate Politicians that have a Chance at Being Elected.
Unfortunately, California will not Vote for anything Short of a RINO. I'm not Sure, though, that that is True of the Nation as a Whole.
The Reason I am Bringing this Up again, though, is because this is the Reason, Z, that we Need to Nominate Politicians that at Least Appear to have some Level of Good Character, since there are a lot of Voters for which Character Matters and for which Party Affiliation does not.
I Agree with both Pam and Z, that it would be Better if the Newspapers did not Endorse anyone.
Shaw,
I may Write more Later, but for now, I just want to Respond to your Comment from 11/07/2010, at 7:23 PM.
One of the Issues that Republicans have with Jerry Brown is that he is too Friendly with the Unions. Aside from the Fact that the High Wages and Benefits are Hard on the Economy, Union Dues were Used to Buy Democratic Legislators.
Brown also Expropriated Highway Funds for his Own Personal Uses, much in the same way that Federal Politicians Expropriated Social Security Funds for other Uses. The quality of the Highway System, Water Supply and Low-Cost College Education Suffered Under Jerry Brown.
The California Energy Supply System that Jerry Brown Created is Costly and has not Produced much Energy. They also Repeatedly Get in the way of new Energy Projects and Impose Extensive and Invasive Energy Conservation Rules and Regulations.
There are Lots of Rational People, Shaw that do not Like Jerry Brown.
Another Thing, Shaw, because of the Liberal Bias in Most News Papers, I don't put much Trust in what they say.
Soap and Satyavati,
Both Parties can be Irrational at Times. Generally the ones who are the Most Obnoxious are the Ones who are not Currently in Power.
"Their allegiance is to their party and not the country."
ReplyDeleteI Agree with you, Shaw. In Fact, I Agree with your Last Comment in it's Entirety, but Unfortunately, things such as "Compromise" have become Emotionally Charged Words. This is Irrational to me, but that is the Way a Lot of People Think and I guess it is because the Government Keeps Growing and Growing and Growing and Many Republicans Believe that this is because of too much Compromise and so they Hold on to their Extremes and Refuse to Compromise.
Do your research on the OKC bombing Shaw. And by that I mean not this dog and pony show bullshit propagated by the government and its MSM lackys.
ReplyDeleteThe government stages the vast majority of these events only to pin them on unwilling suspects. The long train of abuses is well documented.
I said nothing about the OKC bombing. You meant to direct that comment to Saty.
ReplyDeleteBut your claim that the government stages "these events" sounds exactly like what the "Truthers" say about the 9/11 attacks.
Do you believe the US government staged those as well.
Lista,
I was living in California when Schwartenegger was elected, and the GOP was THRILLED over his election, so much so that there was a lot of talk about changing the Constitution so that a non-native American could run for president.
Not once did I hear anyone refer to Arnold as a RINO.
I don't claim to know who staged the event. But I do know that there's much much more to the story than what was sold by the media and the (ahem) "independent" government commission that failed to include any mention of secondary explosions in their report.
ReplyDeleteNewly released NIST videos from that very day attest to this fact.
"But your claim that the government stages "these events" sounds exactly like what the "Truthers" say about the 9/11 attacks."
ReplyDeleteThey're not "claims". They are facts.
Lusitania
Gulf of Tonkin
You can go right down the list.
Hey... is the single inclusion of the word 'jizm' enough to get this post labeled 'sex/sexuality'???
ReplyDeleteOr did I miss the juicy bits?
You Know what, Shaw? I didn't even Know what RINO Meant until I Started Interacting on the Internet. I Never Heard anyone Referred to as a RINO. I had Never Heard the Term. Sometimes it Appears to be a Term Used Mostly by Third Party People who have been Upset with the Republican Party for a Really Long Time.
ReplyDeleteNot all Republicans Dislike RINOs, yet there are many that do. Also, Just as People who Like Democrats Celebrate when Democrats are Elected, in the same way, People who Like RINOs Celebrate when RINOs get Elected.
By the Way, though, Shaw, I Liked your Comments about Compromise so much that I Actually Quoted you else where in the Blogosphere. I Gave you the Proper Credit for it. I Hope you don't Mind.
Lista,
ReplyDeleteYou, Pam, and I agree that using other people's words is perfectly fine so long as one gives attribution. Or at least puts the words in quotations. I'm okay with that.
Apparently Mr. Obama just compromised with the GOP vis-a-vis the Bush tax cuts, and now the Left is super angry.
Is the Right happy with Obama's compromise on this issue?
Just wondering.
Soapster,
You forgot to mention the blowing up of the Maine--which precipitated the Spanish/American War.
But I don't believe the US Government was involved in 9/11. I do believe it knew that something was going to happen, and decided not to take action, thus giving the neocons fuel to ignite a war with Iraq.
I believe the government was involved in 9/11 (in nothing else than in simply covering up what really happened). The simple fact that on that very day Al CIAeda's #3 man on the kill or capture list a one Anwar Al Awlaki dined with top brass at the Pentagon just two months later and then later on after that was the #1 man behind the underwear bomb plot, Times Square bomb plot, Fort Hood shooting, and this most recent toner cartridge nonsense makes me feel pretty confident in that assessment.
ReplyDeleteCouple that stuff with the Neo-Con PNAC "Rebuilding America's Defenses" document and the puzzle pieces begin to fit together pretty well.
Shaw,
ReplyDeleteSeems that someone is Always Angry, Huh? I'm Happy with the Compromise. I'm a Moderate, though, so I can't Speak for the Rest of the Party.
It Seems that we had to Force that Issue by Electing Republicans to the House, though. Otherwise, I do not think that that Compromise would have Happened.
Soap,
Did you ever do the Post that you were going to do on that Subject? I meant to Check, but didn't get around to it.
Nah never did the post. There's enough information out there for anyone that cares to challenge themselves on what's been propagated regarding 9/11. Me doing a post merely rehashes what's already been said. We've got other things going on. Check the new posts from today and see for yourself.
ReplyDeleteShaw the example I was using was a theoretical example only and doesn't presuppose that most liberals are evil. To put it out for you again if a Paladino-ish liberal were running for an important post like Governor would you vote for him? That's all.
ReplyDelete