Pammy Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html?mod=rss_opinion_main Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiCO Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 This is the main reason I might vote Republican this election, even though I am not a fan of McCain and I'm even less a fan of Palin. However, I don't really think the worst will happen- as I recall Clinton didn't have a Democrat majority in Congress for long. Many democrats were replaced with Republicans at the first opportunity. I also think McCain will be a lame duck president if he's elected, because of the Democrat majority in the house and senate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelda Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 This is the main reason I might vote Republican this election, even though I am not a fan of McCain and I'm even less a fan of Palin. However, I don't really think the worst will happen- as I recall Clinton didn't have a Democrat majority in Congress for long. Many democrats were replaced with Republicans at the first opportunity. I also think McCain will be a lame duck president if he's elected, because of the Democrat majority in the house and senate. But, Obama will also likely fill 3 seats on the bench and, IMO, has the backing of the MSM. That's a lot of just one voice. I get that in a system with free elections whichever philosophy wins the elections earns the right to set the agenda, I'm just not sure this will be the best thing for everyone. Not as in, "I'm totally sure and just saying I'm not sure", but as in, "I can't predict the future but I'm not sure this is a good idea and it makes me uneasy." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daisy Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 This is my concern also. It isn't just "The One" we have to worry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melinda in VT Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 I never like it when one party has that much control, and I have factored that in to my voting in the past. This time? It's further down on the list. The Republicans have not fielded a ticket for which I can vote. But I agree that the super majority (if it occurs) will probably only last until the midterm election. And I think that's probably a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mama Lynx Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 But, Obama will also likely fill 3 seats on the bench and, IMO, has the backing of the MSM. That's a lot of just one voice. I get that in a system with free elections whichever philosophy wins the elections earns the right to set the agenda, I'm just not sure this will be the best thing for everyone. Not as in, "I'm totally sure and just saying I'm not sure", but as in, "I can't predict the future but I'm not sure this is a good idea and it makes me uneasy." Me, too. But in general, I think it's better for the country when the Presidency and the Congress are not run by the same parties. I don't think any one party that represents only about half the nation should have that much power, the power to run through all their ideas and programs. We NEED that balance to keep the other about half the nation represented and viable. Yes, less gets done that way, but I'm okay with that ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laylamcb Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 In general, though we bark and gripe about the "gridlock" in Washington, Americans prefer the President and the majorities in Congress to be different parties. We're just ornery that way. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrothead Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Me, too. But in general, I think it's better for the country when the Presidency and the Congress are not run by the same parties. I don't think any one party that represents only about half the nation should have that much power, the power to run through all their ideas and programs. We NEED that balance to keep the other about half the nation represented and viable. Yes, less gets done that way, but I'm okay with that ;-) :iagree: I feel the same way. Of course if my party was ever to control all three branches I'd not have much to say in the negative. :tongue_smilie: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaNY Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Me, too. But in general, I think it's better for the country when the Presidency and the Congress are not run by the same parties. I don't think any one party that represents only about half the nation should have that much power, the power to run through all their ideas and programs. We NEED that balance to keep the other about half the nation represented and viable. Yes, less gets done that way, but I'm okay with that ;-) Yes, and if the dang Republicans in the congress had *acted* like Republicans, there WOULD be more balance right now. :glare: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pam "SFSOM" in TN Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 (edited) Yes, and if the dang Republicans in the congress had *acted* like Republicans, there WOULD be more balance right now. :glare: They held the dual majority for what, six years? ETA: I'm sorry I provoked strong emotion or even to seemed to disagree with Lisa. That was not my intention. At. All. Edited October 18, 2008 by Pam "SFSOM" in TN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaNY Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 They held the dual majority for what, six years? In my post, I stated that there would be more balance, not that they would still hold a majority. :001_smile: The fact that there was such a swing in the other direction is an indication to me that true Republican views were no longer being represented, among other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom to Aly Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Yeah, finally!!!!! Bush had his turn, and look at all the damage he did!! Hopefully the dems can fix it, although I think it will take a lot longer than 4-8 to clean up the nightmares he caused--although Clinton did amazingly well in the 8 years he was there. But, again, Bush not only spent the amazing amount of money Clinton made up for (he reversed our huge deficit, putting us in the black for the first time since Reagan had taken office), he put us into this extreme fiasco, so, we can only hope, now. We have a long, long way to go, even longer than after the Reagan/Bush years, and that was a loooonnnngggg way!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLHCO Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 ... true Republican views were no longer being represented... Now that is a statement I can agree with. :banghead: Of course, going to the other side isn't an option here. You don't swim go further up stream when you're desire is to head back to camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom to Aly Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 A Liberal Supermajority... now this is really frightening http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html?mod=rss_opinion_main My, my! As you all LOVE to say to me, you just couldn't help yourself, could you? Great way to IMPARTIALLY present an article, don't you think? Had to get your dig in, huh? Not at all an attack??? Let's see, what else do you guys normally say when I post an article, even when I don't make derogatory remarks, but you assume I think them? Can't think of it now, but I'm sure you guys can think of the rest! Oh, and you can blast away--I had major pms last time and it bugged me. I really don't care anymore, don't check back anymore, know I'm in the right, and can't wait for Obama to win, win, win!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laylamcb Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 (edited) My, my! As you all LOVE to say to me, you just couldn't help yourself, could you? Great way to IMPARTIALLY present an article, don't you think? Had to get your dig in, huh? Not at all an attack??? Let's see, what else do you guys normally say when I post an article, even when I don't make derogatory remarks, but you assume I think them? Can't think of it now, but I'm sure you guys can think of the rest! Oh, and you can blast away--I had major pms last time and it bugged me. I really don't care anymore, don't check back anymore, know I'm in the right, and can't wait for Obama to win, win, win!!!! Wow. I've got nothin' beyond :chillpill:. ETA, now that I've calmed down: Most folks recognize the WSJ as a respected if conservative newspaper. There's nothing wrong with posting an article from the WSJ. There's also nothing extremist about worrying about a liberal--or a conservative--supermajority. As I posted earlier, Americans tend not to like to put too much power into the hands of one party. We giveth in the presidential elections, and then we taketh away in the midterms. What's so wacked about that? And finally...what does this thread have to do with you or anyone's previous comments to you, Mom to Aly? Nothing, as far as I can tell. So please--keep it civil, okay? The sarcasm and ugliness are just exhausting. Edited October 18, 2008 by laylamcb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLHCO Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 (edited) Yeah, finally!!!!! Bush had his turn, and look at all the damage he did!! Hopefully the dems can fix it, although I think it will take a lot longer than 4-8 to clean up the nightmares he caused--although Clinton did amazingly well in the 8 years he was there. But, again, Bush not only spent the amazing amount of money Clinton made up for (he reversed our huge deficit, putting us in the black for the first time since Reagan had taken office), he put us into this extreme fiasco, so, we can only hope, now. We have a long, long way to go, even longer than after the Reagan/Bush years, and that was a loooonnnngggg way!!!! Cough, cough, sputter... I am amazed at the Obamaphobes I see running around but I must say I am equally amazed when people can honestly look at the housing crisis and pretend the democrates have to do some "cleaning up after Bush". Their further meddling from congress is about the last thing we need right now. Now, so you don't assume I'm a Bush fan, the man has me hopping mad lately with his flirtation with socialism and McCain's promises about his "propping up of the housing market" is a flirtation with it as well. I'm an equal opportunity basher. I would love to see more people, even those I have disagreements with, do the same. Either please defend how the democrates have no responsibility in the economic crisis, or hold them accountable too. Edited October 18, 2008 by CLHCO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeacherZee Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Wow. I've got nothin' beyond :chillpill:. ETA, now that I've calmed down: Most folks recognize the WSJ as a respected if conservative newspaper. There's nothing wrong with posting an article from the WSJ. There's also nothing extremist about worrying about a liberal--or a conservative--supermajority. As I posted earlier, Americans tend not to like to put too much power into the hands of one party. We giveth in the presidential elections, and then we taketh away in the midterms. What's so wacked about that? Not just Americans. My very very very liberal friend wasn't to happy when the Swedish version of the conservatives (probably the left of the republicans or possibly the right wings of the dems in the states:D) but she realised that the left had been in power for two long and needed to be reminded of what their voters thought was important. :001_smile: This is by way of me saying I think it is a good thing that power changes hands between the parties. Keeps them honest-ish:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamturner Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Cough, cough, sputter... I am amazed at the Obamaphobes I see running around but I must say I am equally amazed when people can honestly look at the housing crisis and pretend the democrates have to do some "cleaning up after Bush". Their further meddling from congress is about the last thing we need right now. Now, so you don't assume I'm a Bush fan, the man has me hopping mad lately with his flirtation with socialism and McCain's promises about his "propping up of the housing markent" is a flirtation with it as well. I'm an equal opportunity basher. I would love to see more people, even those I have disagreements with, do the same. Either please defend how the democrates have no responsibility in the economic crisis, or hold them accountable too. No kidding! Didn't anyone watch the SNL skit about the housing crisis? It was spot on accurate! And who did they say was to blame? Now don't get me wrong, Bush ran around boasting about home ownership being up by double digits when we ran for re-elections etc. However, Bush and McCain both tried to bring up the issue of Fannie Mae/Mac and the Dems put a stop to it. I'm just tired of people running around blaming Bush for the crisis we are in. If it weren't for this housing crisis and gas crisis (how long have Republicans been pushing for domestic drilling? At least a decade?) our economy would be doing fine. Now I'm not totally happy with everything Bush has done (or not done) but we cannot lay this housing crisis all at his feet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaNY Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Now that is a statement I can agree with. :banghead: Of course, going to the other side isn't an option here. You don't swim go further up stream when you're desire is to head back to camp. True! :001_smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Here's my thought. I understand the inclination of Americans to like divided government, and why we might like to keep the Congress and the Executive in different hands. The constraints this imposes can be a good check on power. But I also believe we are going into extraordinary times. A time when the ability to get things done may trump the sometimes desirable ability to prevent things from being done. Unless I'm wrong, "grid-lock" is not going to get us out of the mess we are in. We will need positive action. Should Obama win, and the Democrats control the House and Senate, I think there is a logic to giving them the ball and letting them run with it. Let the Democrats take ownership of their decisions, and then reward them or punish them in the next election if we don't like the job they have done. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaNY Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Here's my thought. I understand the inclination of Americans to like divided government, and why we might like to keep the Congress and the Executive in different hands. The constraints this imposes can be a good check on power. But I also believe we are going into extraordinary times. A time when the ability to get things done may trump the sometimes desirable ability to prevent things from being done. Unless I'm wrong, "grid-lock" is not going to get us out of the mess we are in. We will need positive action. Should Obama win, and the Democrats control the House and Senate, I think there is a logic to giving them the ball and letting them run with it. Let the Democrats take ownership of their decisions, and then reward them or punish them in the next election if we don't like the job they have done. Bill Okay, then, if Obama gets in, I'm not going to pay any taxes. Now, where did I come up with that idea? (Tapping my head) Oh yeah! "No taxation without representation!" :D Seriously, nobody from the other side is going to be happy when their party is not adequately represented in congress. You may think it's logical, but it's certainly not fair to this conservative. (Nor would it be fair to a liberal if there was a conservative majority.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Cough, cough, sputter... I am amazed at the Obamaphobes I see running around but I must say I am equally amazed when people can honestly look at the housing crisis and pretend the democrates have to do some "cleaning up after Bush". Their further meddling from congress is about the last thing we need right now. Now, so you don't assume I'm a Bush fan, the man has me hopping mad lately with his flirtation with socialism and McCain's promises about his "propping up of the housing markent" is a flirtation with it as well. I'm an equal opportunity basher. I would love to see more people, even those I have disagreements with, do the same. Either please defend how the democrates have no responsibility in the economic crisis, or hold them accountable too. :iagree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiguirre Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 (edited) Okay, then, if Obama gets in, I'm not going to pay any taxes. Now, where did I come up with that idea? (Tapping my head) Oh yeah! "No taxation without representation!" :D Seriously, nobody from the other side is going to be happy when their party is not adequately represented in congress. You may think it's logical, but it's certainly not fair to this conservative. (Nor would it be fair to a liberal if there was a conservative majority.) As a true blue liberal in the heart of deep red Texas, I have to say I totally disagree. I vote every election and then sit back and shake my head when my fellow citizens select fine, upstanding statesmen like Tom Delay to represent us. Each of us gets a vote, not necessarily a representative who reflects our views. Be grateful you don't live in DC. They have to pay their taxes and don't even get to vote for a real senator or representative, let alone for president. That's really lame! Edited October 18, 2008 by chiguirre grammar oops! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laylamcb Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Not just Americans. My very very very liberal friend wasn't to happy when the Swedish version of the conservatives (probably the left of the republicans or possibly the right wings of the dems in the states:D) but she realised that the left had been in power for two long and needed to be reminded of what their voters thought was important. :001_smile: This is by way of me saying I think it is a good thing that power changes hands between the parties. Keeps them honest-ish:) Honest-ish. I think you've captured politics in a single word, Zee. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfbrenda Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 No kidding! Didn't anyone watch the SNL skit about the housing crisis? It was spot on accurate! And who did they say was to blame? Now don't get me wrong, Bush ran around boasting about home ownership being up by double digits when we ran for re-elections etc. However, Bush and McCain both tried to bring up the issue of Fannie Mae/Mac and the Dems put a stop to it. I'm just tired of people running around blaming Bush for the crisis we are in. If it weren't for this housing crisis and gas crisis (how long have Republicans been pushing for domestic drilling? At least a decade?) our economy would be doing fine. Now I'm not totally happy with everything Bush has done (or not done) but we cannot lay this housing crisis all at his feet! :iagree: Thank you for this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melinda in VT Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 As a true blue liberal in the heart of deep red Texas, I have to say I totally disagree. I vote every election and then sit back and shake my head when my fellow citizens select fine, upstanding statesmen like Tom Delay to represent us. Each of us gets a vote, not necessarily a representative who reflects our views. Be grateful you don't live in DC. They have to pay their taxes and don't even get to vote for a real senator or representative, let alone for president. That's really lame! According to wikipedia, DC gets 3 electoral colleges delegates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeacherZee Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Honest-ish. I think you've captured politics in a single word, Zee. :D Thank you. One can but try :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laylamcb Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Here's my thought. I understand the inclination of Americans to like divided government, and why we might like to keep the Congress and the Executive in different hands. The constraints this imposes can be a good check on power. But I also believe we are going into extraordinary times. A time when the ability to get things done may trump the sometimes desirable ability to prevent things from being done. Unless I'm wrong, "grid-lock" is not going to get us out of the mess we are in. We will need positive action. Should Obama win, and the Democrats control the House and Senate, I think there is a logic to giving them the ball and letting them run with it. Let the Democrats take ownership of their decisions, and then reward them or punish them in the next election if we don't like the job they have done. Bill And now I'm gonna scare you, Bill: I agree with you. :D I won't be voting for Obama. (I probably won't be voting for McCain either.) But he will win, and the Dems will solidify their majorities in Congress. They will probably pass a bunch of legislation that I disagree with (why not? The republicans did). Meanwhile, the Republican party will begin to ask itself hard questions--like, who are we? what do we believe, anyway??--and emerge from all of this stronger and ready to offer a real alternative to the Dems. That's all good. I mean, if we're caught in this two-party juggernaut, we might as well have two viable parties, right? :001_smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laylamcb Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 According to wikipedia, DC gets 3 electoral colleges delegates. True; DC residents are represented in the electoral college. But they have no (real) representation in the House or Senate (only nonvoting representation). It's hard to believe that this is true within the US, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaNY Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 And now I'm gonna scare you, Bill: I agree with you. :D I won't be voting for Obama. (I probably won't be voting for McCain either.) But he will win, and the Dems will solidify their majorities in Congress. They will probably pass a bunch of legislation that I disagree with (why not? The republicans did). Meanwhile, the Republican party will begin to ask itself hard questions--like, who are we? what do we believe, anyway??--and emerge from all of this stronger and ready to offer a real alternative to the Dems. That's all good. I mean, if we're caught in this two-party juggernaut, we might as well have two viable parties, right? :001_smile: You're right! I would even say that it's time for a legitimate third party. Conservatives with Libertarian leanings, unite! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NevadaRabbit Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Should Obama win, and the Democrats control the House and Senate, I think there is a logic to giving them the ball and letting them run with it. Let the Democrats take ownership of their decisions, and then reward them or punish them in the next election if we don't like the job they have done. Bill I think you're absolutely right, Bill. While I'd love to see the candidates I just voted for win, my party has really let me down in recent years. Let the Dems have a go at the mess that both sides have helped create, and in 2 and 4 years we'll be keeping 'em or voting 'em out. In the meantime, i hope the Republicans will be galvanized to actually take a firm stand and rally around it. The pendulum will swing again. Or as my husband says, "we put up with Carter and got rewarded with Reagan!" :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiguirre Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 According to wikipedia, DC gets 3 electoral colleges delegates. Whoops, guess I misremembered my high school civics. But, DC didn't get to vote in presidential elections until 1961. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laylamcb Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 I think you're absolutely right, Bill. While I'd love to see the candidates I just voted for win, my party has really let me down in recent years. Let the Dems have a go at the mess that both sides have helped create, and in 2 and 4 years we'll be keeping 'em or voting 'em out. In the meantime, i hope the Republicans will be galvanized to actually take a firm stand and rally around it. The pendulum will swing again. Or as my husband says, "we put up with Carter and got rewarded with Reagan!" :D ITA, Jill. :001_smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laylamcb Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Whoops, guess I misremembered my high school civics. But, DC didn't get to vote in presidential elections until 1961. Well, but again, chiguirre, you remembered two-thirds of it correctly. ;) No voting representation in the House or Senate. It rankles every time I think of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenny in Atl Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 No kidding! Didn't anyone watch the SNL skit about the housing crisis? It was spot on accurate! And who did they say was to blame? Now don't get me wrong, Bush ran around boasting about home ownership being up by double digits when we ran for re-elections etc. However, Bush and McCain both tried to bring up the issue of Fannie Mae/Mac and the Dems put a stop to it. I'm just tired of people running around blaming Bush for the crisis we are in. If it weren't for this housing crisis and gas crisis (how long have Republicans been pushing for domestic drilling? At least a decade?) our economy would be doing fine. Now I'm not totally happy with everything Bush has done (or not done) but we cannot lay this housing crisis all at his feet! I hate to burst your bubble but even conservative economist are saying it wasn't just Fannie and Freddy that caused all this... it went far beyond, into the shadow markets and investing banking, which was so over leveraged. It was not a dems or reps issue, but all the whole system which paid no attention to the fact real world wages were either going down or stagnating. That did not stop the whole system from going further out on a limb and borrowing/printing more money. There were just as many republicans with their fingers in the pie as dems. We can waste all day pointing fingers and saying if we had only drilled... but in the end oil is going to be phased out within the next 10-15 years, and we have to move on. Big oil has known this for years. Looking back will not solve any of our problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLHCO Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 There were just as many republicans with their fingers in the pie as dems. Well, yes. That's the point. The finger pointing keeps going one way. On this board I keep hearing about Bush's policies being the problem by the more liberal minded and the conservatives are saying it's both, which may be why they have trouble getting behind McCain like the liberals do behind Obama. I do think the most conservative news outlets are not admitting a combination, but I'm only discussing the average comments I have been hearing here and my personal IRL experiences. There does not seem to be a willingness to self-analyze on both ends. You cannot fix what you will not admit is broken. McCain, though I admit don't think he offers much new, has referred to a need to break with Bush where he went wrong, but Obama is the biggest one yelling that the fault lies only with Bush's administration, though he is in the democratic majority that holds at least half of the blame. As for oil, I do think we are going to have to have alternatives soon, but I'm not optimistic that there will be NO need for it so drilling should be on the table. When you really look at how many things use oil, getting off of it will be a very long and slow process. It goes far deeper than an air compression or hydrogen car, which I'm all for moving towards ASAP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nancy in MI Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Looking back will not solve any of our problems. But unless we figure out what caused this mess we're in, we may be doomed to repeat it. :001_smile: Nancy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts