Elections

[_Baker]

Wow. The Dems are the PR machine? I think the Dems are a bunch of weaklings who eat their own young. As demonstrated during the Bush era, the Fox-fueled Republican machine is far more effective at pushing forward a unified agenda. The trouble is that, when it comes to spending, they are ultimately just as bad and sometimes worse. Split government can be a very good thing for accomplishing what each side promises but rarely delivers, and that is controlled spending.

[_bcspace]

Wow. The Dems are the PR machine? I think the Dems are a bunch of weaklings who eat their own young. As demonstrated during the Bush era, the Fox-fueled Republican machine is far more effective at pushing forward a unified agenda.

No. For example, it was the Dem controlled mainstream media that predicted a larger tidal wave of Republican victories than actually occured or was realistic. This has paved the way for Dems to claim that they held the line. In addition, the mainstream media is now beginning to help Obama make the spin that they just didn't communicate the policies well enough rather than acknowledge that the policies themselves were the problem.

Another thing has occurred that has worked in Obama's favor and this was the Marxist (a.k.a. progressive) game plan all along. The Democratic party has now shifted to an even more extreme left-wing position with the elimination of many "moderate" Democrats. The base of the party, about 80 Congressional Progressive Caucus (a resurrected Communist Party) house members were hardly scratched, losing only three of their members. The next head of this caucus may well be Muslim Democrat and terrorist supporter Keith Ellison.

So even if Obama never wanted to, he will be forced by his party to stay hard left because what remains are essentially allies from his Chicago days who know everything about him that the mainstream media wouldn't dare publicize about their darling. So this is the gambit; that the Republicans can now be blamed for any faliures or gridlock and that will pave the way for an even broader "progressive" movement the next time. Anyone who has studied Marxist revolutions (as I have) of the past century can see this for what it is. They have become more careful about their subversion so it's happening at a slower pace than usual, but it is happening.

And that is why the Republicans must continue to hold the Dem's feet to the fire these next two years and sell the truth that the Dems have been responsible for all the faliures and gridlock. While the last two election results went exactly as the Progressives planned, it does indeed remain a gambit because the Republicans now have the opportunity to bury them. The Marxists are banking on the ignorance and gullibility of the American public. True Conservatives understand that is a real weakness but they also know that Americans are not yet Europeans and that there is real power left in the people gained from the ideals that brought forth this nation.

The trouble is that, when it comes to spending, they are ultimately just as bad and sometimes worse. Split government can be a very good thing for accomplishing what each side promises but rarely delivers, and that is controlled spending.

Gridlock is the bread and butter of those who desire limited government. A Republican majority is the only hope of maintaining a limited government AND undoing the Progressive/Marxist agenda. But again, has has been mentioned, the Republicans have not been as pure in this ideal as necessary to accomplish it. That is where the Tea party has come in. Just as Dem "moderates" have been swept away, so have the Rinos. There never has been any middle ground that was tenable, not by a long shot. It's a fantasy that leads to socialism. The nation has been further polarized and the war between good and evil has become clearer and will become more literal and widespread very shortly.

The war may even become more visible world wide in the next two years as Obama, stymied on national policy, begins to take it out on Israel internationally by not vetoing any UN resolutions or recognizing a Hamas-led two state solution. I think you can almost take it to the bank that Obama will look to force Israel into a regional war of self preservation though he will label it agression or some sort of captiulation that will lead to a bloodbath.

[_Baker]

I think your views are a bit extreme. I did not find the mainstream media making apologies for the Democrats. They didn't hold the line and few voices are asserting that they did. They are wimps and they lost. Good riddance Pelosi! The Republicans are busy deflecting criticisms of their assertions that they will both maintain tax cuts and cut spending with outlandish claims about the cost of the President's trip to India. They are quick to remind voters that they can't do much with Obama as President. And so on. It's all a game. Some of us wish for a true center. The current system is a mess.

[_EAllusion]

That's because no politician can be elected if he dares cut any of the big expenses: defense, Social Security, Medicare, unemployment, and other welfare.

It's not just that, though. The Bush administration saw the largest increase in domestic spending as % of GDP since the Johnson administration. And that doesn't take into account the trillion dollar wars that will cost us money for decades. The Republicans aren't failing to aggressively cut expenses and just holding the line on what is there. When given power, they run up the debt in new expenses with abandon. Their difference with Democrats isn't over fiscal responsibility so much as it is with what they want to spend money on. There's a boatload of evidence that any talk of fiscal responsibility and debt reduction since the mid 90's or so is completely empty. One significant piece of that evidence is that when most Republicans are asked what they'll cut, they can't name anything that would remotely touch the budget deficit while simultaneously advocating policies that would run it up further.

I do think this government arrangement is more likely to produce gridlock, but split government doesn't necessary do that. Bipartisan compromise usually involves group a getting most of the funding for the program they wanted in exchange for group b getting most of the funding for the program they wanted. It's a golden floor, not ceiling when two parties disagree on what to spend money on. Gridlock is likely here because the Republicans have been a united block vote trying to frustrate any Democrat agenda for the past two years. With actual power and similar leadership in place, it stands to reason they might just try to shut down any legislative agenda whatsoever.

[_The Dude]

One significant piece of that evidence is that when most Republicans are asked what they'll cut, they can't name anything that would remotely touch the budget deficit...

So you don't think they can save the budget by cutting NPR? Wow EA, why so cynical? ;)

[_bcspace]

I think your views are a bit extreme. I did not find the mainstream media making apologies for the Democrats. They didn't hold the line and few voices are asserting that they did. They are wimps and they lost. Good riddance Pelosi! The Republicans are busy deflecting criticisms of their assertions that they will both maintain tax cuts and cut spending with outlandish claims about the cost of the President's trip to India. They are quick to remind voters that they can't do much with Obama as President. And so on.

That means you have been uable to identify right and wrong.

It's all a game.

It's a deadly serious game.

Some of us wish for a true center. The current system is a mess.

The mess starts at the center and radiates towards the left. Always has.

Now since no one has been brave enough to come forth with a reasonable figure for the number of poor people in the US that I can see, how about anyone dare to guess or find out how much of the fiscal 2009 budget ($3.518 trillion spent vs. $2.105 trillion comming in) went to social programs including social security? For this exercise, I'm going to estimate 40 million poor. Does anyone have a problem with that?

by the way, in 2009, $678 billion in SS was given out and $891 billion in SS came in. None of the difference went into a "lock box".

[_Yoda]

BC, how do you feel about Colonel West? I think he would make a viable Republican candidate for 2012.

I really like his stance on foreign policy and economics.

[_RockSlider]

KA, the peacock thing needs to go

[_KimberlyAnn]

KA, the peacock thing needs to go

I kinda like my peacock feathered mask, but, for you, I'll let that avatar go.

Have a great weekend, RockSlider.

KA

[_RockSlider]

KA, the peacock thing needs to go

I kinda like my peacock feathered mask, but, for you, I'll let that avatar go.

Have a great weekend, RockSlider.

KA

that is so much nicer ... what a beautiful woman you are! Best to you and yours as well!