Get off your butt

[dclarry]

Mi esposa and I will embark on the biannual trek of futility once she gets home from school.

Wouldn't be so bad if we had actual choices for candidates instead of the overwhelming feeling that we're doing nothing more than voting for the lesser of two evils. Regardless, as I say, if you don't vote, you have no right to b*tch.

Ahhh, politics in Ohio.

YOS,

Greg,

Well, think of me voting in the District next time you feel down. |


Lawrence E. Kingsley
1st PA LT ATTY, BTTY F

[Linda Trent]

Sorry, it was illegal for me to cast my vote today, so I didn't.







Linda.

Who voted several weeks ago, absentee.

[reb64]

and go VOTE!!!

Looks like enough of the wrong people did.

I'm letting this stay as it has been replied to in a polite and cogent manner. However, I've deleted two of your later posts for inflammatory expression. Moderate your tone and your posts will be allowed to stay up.
- Sgt. Pepper

[Graves Mercantile]

"Looks like enough of the wrong people did" Not the wrong people, just different viewpoints from yours.


I'm glad to see the change in power. I'm a registered libertarian and a very conservative person at heart, but this country needs a change. The power has been in too few hands for too long and they have accomplished very little with it. I look forward to seeing what will happen over the next 2 years.

[ThehosGendar]

On the subject of the "wrong people," let me quote George Washington and his prescient and wonderful 1796 Farewell Addres:

"I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield."

From http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/washing.htm .

[Frenchie]

I look forward to seeing what will happen over the next 2 years.

I don't. There are rough times ahead. The only good I can see is the chance for those who've been wasting the opportunities to increase our national security and sovereignty and resist the destruction of our social foundations to learn a lesson - or re-learn it, as the case may be. They've been too interested in securing their own power at the expense of their duties. The elections of 2010 and 2012 will be seismic in their effects.

Fasten your seat belts, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

[huntdaw]

Well, the new power in Congress has been squawking and harping for some time now without offering any solid plans for anything. It's time for them to put up or shut up now. I have a feeling they will do neither.

[MStuart]

IMHO, a little change every now and then is a good thing. One party comes to power, stays a little too long, and starts to "assume" and loses touch with the common folk. Happened in 1994 and probably this year, too. Not that any politician is actually in touch with the common man, anyway.

Mark - Not affiliated with any political party

[Milliron]

Well, the new power in Congress has been squawking and harping for some time now without offering any solid plans for anything. It's time for them to put up or shut up now. I have a feeling they will do neither.

With all due respect, the minority party routinely proposes legislation that never sees the light of day. The majority party controls the committee chairmanships. The committee chairs control what legislation comes to a vote. Quite often, bills proposed by the minority are never even voted on, let alone passed. So, it's not quite fair to say that the minority has never offered solid plans for anything--you just never were aware of it.

My favorite feature of this scheme is where the minority proposes a particularly popular and bi-partisan friendly bill. Routinely, the majority will craft an identical bill, shelve the minority bill, and offer their version for a vote. This way the majority can claim the credit for both originating and passing the bill while claiming that the minority has offered nothing.

This is actually the context for John Kerry's famous "Actually I voted for the war appropriations bill before I voted against it" quote. Kerry proposed the original bill (which was very popular at the time, considering we had just invaded Iraq), it was shelved by the committee, who then offered an identical bill. Kerry voted against it "in protest" (which was foolish, considering he was preparing to run for President), the measure passed, and Kerry was then on record for voting against it. Politics at its finest.

Bob Muehleisen
Cin, O.

[Rob Weaver]

This election got me thinking: The Federal government must have endured at least 1 mid-term election during the Civil War - should have been in 1862. Weren't Senators still appointed by the governors of states then? How about the House and gubernatorial races? (I just love that word "gubernatorial" ) How did Congress go in 1864? And just for kicks, 1866?