For many of us who voted to make a change during the midterm elections, we are once again left with the question of whether our votes will create a change? The Senate power hangs in limbo as we look to see if Senator Johnson will emerge from his brain surgery unscathed. What are the repercussions of his illness?
Part of me knows that now is not the time to discuss this, but to think and hope for the best for a human being who is suffering. Everyone wants him to get better regardless of our party affiliations. That being said, I however cannot and will not dismiss the bigger picture and the baggage that could possibly come with it.
When I went to the polls this mid-term election, my mind was clear; I knew what I wanted and hoped to get what I wanted: change. Each choice I made was aimed to make a difference, to create a change, to put in place a more competent Senate and House (in my opinion). When we succeeded I was overjoyed, albeit that we won with a narrow margin.
Since Senator Johnson (D-South Dakota) had a brain surgery, there are questions on how well he would recover, if at all he does? And if he does, will be ok to take control of the office, or would he resign? If he does not take control, then Mike Rounds (Republican Governor, South Dakota) will appoint a replacement. It does not take a genius to realize that a Republican Senator will be brought into power. This would give us a tie, which Dick Cheney (yes, of all people, this idiot) would break.
What does this mean for us? Basically, no change. We are back at square one. We will still have idiots making decisions, wielding power, despite the fact that the message during the elections was clear: change. I really don’t think we as a country can afford to have someone like Dick Cheney at the helm for two more years. Senator Johnson is showing signs of recovery and there are many precedents for Senators to continue to hold office while incapacitated.
I really do not think we can afford to take a step back. Consider this post as a rant of a politically disillusioned American…
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
24 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Just when you thought that the GOP had a stake through its heart, the GOP zombie machine is showing signs of life!
Actually, the 2006 elections did the Republican party a favor in that they can now spend time on the sides and harshly criticize the Democrats as the Democrats attempt to correct the mess that the Republicans made in the last several years. It’s much easier to throw bombs on the side rather than actually and constructively govern.
On the other hand, the Democrats have an opportunity to show that they can govern and do so in a responsible manner. They will have the advantages of redistricting (the Supreme Court said that redistricting done by the states where the Democrats now have a majority in governor positions is acceptable at any time instead of after the ten year census — something the Republicans did in Texas thanks to DeLay) and incumbency.
I leave aside to you the provocative quote by Winston Churchill –
“Any 20 year-old who isn’t a liberal doesn’t have a heart, and any 40 year-old who isn’t a conservative doesn’t have a brain.”
Oh, and by the way, Our Lady of Perpetual Triangulation is not the answer to our problems. She may bring more problems in the first place.
I don’t think we can afford to have Pelosi to run the country either. Nor Hillary Clinton . . . do we really want Bill Clinton back in the White House? Give me a decisive President who has a long-term view - such as Rudy Guiliani.
The Democratic Congress won’t even take reins until January, and there are already post-mortems being done on it? Give me a break.
For a provocative look at the 2008 presidential elections, look at this –
* Asked to choose between Hillary Clinton and John McCain, Clinton enjoyed a seven-point lead in the Newsweek poll, 50% to 43%. (Among self-identified independents, with whom McCain is supposed to excel, the two were tied at 45% each.)
* Asked to choose between Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani, Clinton led 48% to 47%.
* Asked to choose between Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney, Clinton is ahead 58% to 32%.
* Asked to choose between Barack Obama and John McCain, McCain’s lead was only two points, 45% to 43%, despite the fact that a far larger percentage of respondents said they weren’t very familiar with Obama.
* Obama trailed Giuliani by a similar margin (47% to 44%), and led Romney, 55% to 25%.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerrepo.....l#comments
It’s all name recognition at this point, so those polls mean nothing until primary season when these candidates actually, you know, start competing.
You gotta be kidding me.
Hillary simply isn’t presidential timber. She has no qualifications, period. She was first lady and she had a disastrous take on health care reform. Remember her closed door meetings and spurning of moderate Republican messages of support and compromise on the health care reform issue? She effectively squelched any chance of reform then and there with her self driven egotism and intellectual superiority.
She convinced me that degrees and ambition do not make a genuine leader. She is the poster child of the failure of our supposedly meritocratic system — so bright as to be stupid.
She’s the kind of person that will think of many approaches to solve a problem and totally ignore the one clear-cut answer to the solution.
Her trajectory since Bill’s tenure then not impressed me. Making faces at the first presidential speech right after 9/11 as she calculated just how much head wind Bush had gotten from the terror attacks, effectively derailing any hope for a bid in 2004. Lying low and playing it safe throughout her Senate career — not once did I hear her disagree with the Iraq war until well after it was clear that the whole thing was and is a disaster.
Impressive? No.
And I’m sure that the right wing nutcases will be only too happy to bring up the whole Whitewater issue and Bill’s feckless approach to the truth. We elect her, we have another four years of the same old crap.
This is a democracy and we do not need political dynasties, particularly when it has been shown that the last one (Bush) has been an unmitigated disaster.
What we need is a breath of fresh air which is why I think a lot of people are looking hard at Obama.
I think Obama is great Presidential material, but not just yet. He’s too young and a bit inexperienced. I agree we need fresh blood, but he needs a little more experience under his belt.
As for Hilary Clinton not being Presidential material, that is just untrue. We all knew that she contributed largely to President Clinton’s tenure and we all know how good his reign was..
then Abraham Lincoln would never have made it for President today due to his ‘lack’ of executive experience.
I never said that Obama would not make a good president or make a president at all, but I personally think he would make more of an impact after getting a few years under his belt..
Also, we are taking about completely different times..
The electability meme is getting old. We used that when selecting Kerry to be our Democratic presidential candidate, and look where that got us today! Zip.
Oh, it is depressing that Kerry didn’t make it after Gore and each time, it was Bush who got elected. Look at where it has gotten our country into!
Who knows that if I had the courage and make bumper stickers of, “It is time to shave and bobbittize Bush and Dick respectively in 2004,” we’ll have a better election result. :-)
I’m against dynasties … they have no place in a democracy. But I’d still be against Hillary, even if her last name weren’t Clinton. She’s ten times the triangulator that her husband was. It’s taken her four long bloody wasteful years to even come anywhere near realizing that Iraq is and always has been wrong, on many levels. Is this the kind of *courageous leadership* we’re looking for? Really? The best we can do? If so, I’m afraid we (the party and the nation) really are doomed. Might as well freely hand it all over to the corporations which continue to appear to run things in this once-great democracy.
Moreover, now that I think about it, what’s Hillary’s reason for running? A Clinton Restoration? Sorry, we’re not a ******* hereditary monarchy. I apologize for the pottymouth, but this is a point that can’t be made too strongly or too often. Breaking the gender barrier? No sale here, at least: identity politics did too much to get us in this mess. Some radical policy change? Remember, this is the Senator who was more conservative on reauthorizing welfare reform than many Republicans.
This is related to DeafDc.com how?
What? Deaf people can’t talk about politics now?
Politics involves everybody since we’re electing people who lead the country. I’d say that the appointment of Bush in 2000 by the Supreme Court shows how important it is that everybody vote. We simply cannot afford another hanging election with a large majority of our citizens sitting on their hands.
I am with you about Hillary Clinton what a political opporuntist and illogical leader she is all about.
I am very skeptical about Obama in many ways. Let’s see and wait what he will do next.
Honorable Robert C. Byrd (my home state’s U.S. Senator) was gusty correct to tell Obama that he was hurried to rush his presidential ambition.
What accomplishments of his U.S. Senate regin we have seen from Obama?
I never forgave Hillary Clinton for squashing the real opporunity to revamp the American health care system. Many physicians and other health care workers wanted to be part of the discussions which greatly affect the health care system. The First Lady Hillary Clinton chose to shut them down. Unbelievable!
Physicans and health care workers deal with healh care issues on daily basis. Why in the world they were excluded from the meaningful discussion to reform the American health care system?
I was very disappointed about Russ Feinfold and Evan Bayh’s decision not to run for the 2008 Democratic primaries. Why????
We really need more moderate leadership with pragmatism and accountability.
The former White House counsel, John Dean wrote the latest book in urging all of us not to elect Hillary Clinton, because she represent the model of “authoritive” leadership - real danger for our country and the entire world. Dean’s famous quips for President Nixon - “cancer in the presidency”.
I have the uttermost respect for Kevin Phillips and John Dean which they deeply care about our country. They often go against their own political party affilation in the best interests of our country’s future.
I am no fan of John McCain. I would not mind Rudolph Gilluani as the 2008 Republican nominee. Gilluani probably will stumble and fall down from the tough primaries.
Mitt Romnney is a real hyprocrite in many ways.
Romney frequently contradicted himself on many issues. Romney did tell the gay constitutency back in ‘88 that he will fight very hard for their rights during his U.S. Senate run.
Mitt Romney is a political opporuntist to portray himself as a real conservative. *stifled laughters*
I rather have Orrin Hatch as a presidential candidate, instead of Mitt Romney. Hatch is much better choice with real intergity and human decency. Hatch is neither perfect anyway.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
Orrin Hatch is anti-gay.
Do you still support him, RLM?!
Orrin Hatch is one of lesser evil than Mitt Romney. I know where Hatch stand on his issues.
Many Republicans feel real comfortable with most liberal member of the U.S. Congress, Honorable Dennis Kuntich, because they know the real Dennis! They eventually trust Dennis. Tom DeLay have a real respect for Kuntich!
RLM
It’s Kucinich, not Kuntich, unless there’s a Freudian slip somewhere….
Thanks for correcting me on the spelling of Rep. Dennis Kucinich. Nothing to do with the Freudian slip.
I sometimes mispell the name of person. No big deal!
Orrin Hatch is really a pragmatic and fair-minded and decent person. He ever pair up with the liberal U.S. Senator, Edward Kennedy on several legislation bills. I choose Orrin Hatch, because of the same religion Mitt Romney engage in.
Of course, Orrin Hatch got real digusted with Edward Kennedy for being a bigot on the Mormon religion while Kennedy unjustifly lambasted Mitt Romney ’s organized religion during the U.S Senate race in ‘88.
I don’t know if Hatch and Kennedy are still close friends or not.
RLM
I do hang around with homophobic individuals which I eventually win over their hearts and minds in time. I could put up with homophobic jokes which I usually turn the tables on people, who spew such homophobic remarks or anti-gay jokes without knowing what hit them.
I am really good at making people squirm or wince or make self-doubt about themselves.
RLM