Or was I mistaken, and a vote for the opposition was supposed to be a vote for more of the same, only harder?
It got turned down. Mr. Scalise and Mr. McCarthy talked against it so it would cripple our hand, because they have to do these things short notice. But to me, that’s a lack of leadership, and that’s the whole reason we have to do what we’re doing in the House—that’s a perfect example. The argument was, well, if the bill came out with language on Tuesday at 9 o’clock at night, [giving representatives 72 hours to read it before voting] would mean we would have to stay here until Friday to vote on it. Why not stay here until next week and give members more than two or three days to read a bill? These things—they’re ridiculous. The American people expect and deserve better from us, and they deserve better, and that’s why we need different leadership.
Funny – when Pelosi said that, the republicans called it ridiculous. Now they’re in charge, and it’s official policy. And their very first official act was to vote that bombthrowing radical Boehner back in as speaker, with 28 nay votes out of 29 necessary to take it to a second ballot, and there’s nothing suspicious about that. What happened to all those new conservative members that were going to save us?
Hope and change, baby. Hope and change.
By a delightfully appropriate coincidence I was shoveling actual horseshit when I heard Limbaugh on the Jeep’s radio this morning, talking about how the Tea Partiers are the republicans’ natural base constituency. And I thought no, no they’re not. Not if they’re serious. The republicans’ base is exactly the same as that of the democrats. And it doesn’t make a damn bit of difference which party sits in which chairs. I’ve given up hoping voters will ever figure that out.
We don’t do a lot of deep politics here at the gulch, and I find that refreshing! Still, I see trouble ahead.
Democracy should be difficult! Our government is designed to make it difficult for it to saddle us with new laws or to take away our freedoms. It’s very difficult to pass a new law without agreement and compromise between three separate branches of government. Always, at least one of those branches should have a different viewpoint from the other two, which will force debate and compromise. Therefore, to give any one political party all three branches at once is to truly hand a very small and organized group of politicians the keys to our kingdom. They will have a free hand for at least two years. If that happens, they can (AND WILL) do incalculable damage to your pocketbook and your freedom.
Whatever political party you prefer, you don’t want to trust them a with totally free ticket. You never want to see any one party controlling all three lawmaking branches.
Yet, looking two years ahead, I would almost bet on it.
I continue to vote when the opportunity presents itself. This usually involves selecting what I hope is the lesser of the available evils, and that’s kinda pathetic, but that’s how it’s going these days.
I really don’t even begin to believe that my single vote has any impact whatsoever on the ultimate outcome, but I’m just doing this because I feel it’s a duty . . . to my conscience, if nothing else.
Claire has pointed out the futility of this approach, and I have to agree with her. Besides, I’ve bought her books and found them not so much encouraging as supportive of my mood and it’s nice to know one isn’t alone. That said, I still retain a little of the “if ya don’t vote ya shouldn’t bitch” outlook, futile though it may be.
Since we can only vote for the candidates that are presented — presented by the same ol’ parties, of course — it’s really kinda moot anyway. Yeah, I know, we can always “write in” somebody, but I can’t believe that has a chance of impacting anything. If it feels good, however, it’s no real loss so suit yourself.
Once again I have to repeat John Derbyshire . . . “We are doomed . . . doomed.”
I have voted, and bitched about the outcomes, nothing changed. I have not voted and bitched about the outcomes and nothing changed. Even the old communist dictatorships allowed people to vote, the best ones just made it easier by removing the charade of multiple candidates. Qhite effiecient of them actually.
Yeah, they won’t.
gfa
Same circus, different clowns.