Except for one point, a short comment  below, not much for me to pick on.
Just that one incidental question. This is  hardly fair. What am I here for,
anyway ?  Nothing for me to poke a  stick at. May as well 
hang up my keyboard.  :-(
 
Etc
 
Well said.
 
Billy 
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
 
 
message dated 9/26/2011   [email protected]  writes:

For the libertarian Republican, the Republican  Establishment's apparent 
policy of "losing liberty slower" rather than "losing  liberty at the speed of 
light" as found in the Democratic Party is  unacceptable. Why? Because we 
are still LOSING. Compromise is ONLY reached  when a Republican surrenders 
their principles for a bowl of Democratic  Porridge. And I hate Porridge 
anyway. 

This would also find the  "Patriot Act" of George W. Bush as wanting and I 
want to officially thank Ron  Paul for being the only Congressman willing to 
vote against it at its first  appearing and each subsequent renewal. 
Homeland Security, while an erstwhile  nice thing to have, has produced 
literature 
under this administration as  though Republicans are worse than Al Queda 
(see attached DHS report from April  7, 2009). Milhous knows this can't be a 
Muslim problem. With the inception of  DHS and the election of BHO, who 
couldn't see this one coming?? Seig Heil,  Obama!!!  

Republicans gave the Democrats their opening to take  the House in 2006 
with the likes of the Mark Foley scandal and the  peccadilloes of various other 
Republican beltway idiots who were behaving  almost as badly as William 
Satan Clinton. 
 
The "Religious Right" be damned.  
Don't follow you on this one.  
What did the Religious Right  have to do  with Foley ?
Seems to me that the people  concerned  --Dobson, Robertson, etc, 
didn't like this one  bit.
 
 
At least Clinton was heterosexual about it. The  lobbying problem was also 
in full view. It is still in full view, but now on  the Democratic foot and 
the media doesn't much care. Just like they did not  much care in vetting 
their new Messiah during the Campaign of 2008, but were  much more interested 
in using the "Politics of Personal Destruction" on Sarah  Palin. This 
election solidified my personal ban on virtually all news outlets  other than 
FOX 
News. As Bernard Goldberg wrote, it was "A Slobbering Love  Affair" between 
the Media and Milhous for the entire campaign. 

Of  course, where Barack Milhous Obama had the vast majorities in the 
Congress  they could be pretty much steamrolled, and they were. The Democrats 
went  against the will of the people and they got kicked to the curb, at least 
in  the House. Now that they hold the House, the Republicans are still 
involved in  losing less quickly, but they are still losing. For years I have 
said that  they need to grow a pair, and they still need to. I don't know what 
it is  about DC that tends to neuter Republicans and enshrine Democrats, but 
that  process needs to end. 

I actually LIKE the idea of not passing a new  debt ceiling, and I am kind 
of disappointed that it passed. Milhous was  against Bush's "massive 
deficits," but one can see that he just didn't like  the WAY Bush had deficits, 
because Milhous has eclipsed Bush's 8 year deficit  number in only 2 years. And 
we are STILL going to double dip. So much for  Keynesian stimulus working. 
Probably because there reaches a point where the  debt is such an anchor on 
the economy that increasing deficit spending only  increases the problems. I 
think that we are there. The IMF is warning of a  "lost decade," Social 
Security is actually ALREADY taking in less than it is  paying out, and 
Medicare may not make it to my retirement year of 2022 (at age  67). Yet no one 
wants to do anything about it. Republicans are shown as trying  to kill grandma 
(even when they leave current recipients ALONE), no matter  what they do. I 
guess the Democratic operatives want to create another crisis  that they 
won't let go to waste. JUST WHAT WE NEED. 

The Republicans  were also stupid in allowing a primary debate on MSNBC. 
They should have said  no. Democrats are known to have boycotted FOX, so let 
Republicans show some  spine and stay off of the news channel for the 
under-medicated left. In fact,  I could go on for a while detailing the 
escapades 
of the stupid party. Except  that Billy already has. 

The Republicans need to keep after the ATF Gun  Running operation, 
particularly as more US deaths, not to mention Mexican  deaths, are being shown 
through ballistics tests to have originated from guns  "sold" in the program. 
All for the purpose of pushing more Gun Control in this  country. The 
Democratic Party and this administration are incapable of shame.  But there are 
apparently so many questionable deals in this administration  that it makes the 
Republican escapades of 2005-2006 miniscule in comparison.  

David




 
"Anyone  who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than 
people do is a  swine."--P. J.  O’Rourke 


On 9/25/2011 12:09 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])  wrote:  
Excellent analysis /  self-critique of Democratic Party by a Democrat ...
What is equally needed is a  top quality analysis / self -critique 
of the Republican Party by a  Republican.
 
BR
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
 

Published on  The New Republic (_http://www.tnr.com_ (http://www.tnr.com/) )

 
____________________________________

 
Left Behind: How Democrats Are  Losing the Political Center 
    *   William Galston   
    *   September 24, 2011  




 
If you don’t think ideological  perceptions matter in American politics, 
you need read no further. If you do  and you’re a Democrat, there’s something 
to worry about. Even as the terms  of the political debate in Washington, 
in the eyes of many Democrats, have  moved steadily to the right, the 
electorate is increasingly likely to see  itself as ideologically closer to the 
Republican Party than to Democrats.  Unless Obama and Democrats can find a 
solution to this riddle—and find one  fast—they will be contesting the 2012 
election on forbidding  terrain. 
In mid-2005, as disaffection with the  Bush administration and the 
Republican Party was gathering momentum, the Pew  Research Center asked 
American to 
place themselves and the political parties  on a standard left-right 
ideological continuum. At that time, average voters  saw themselves as just 
right 
of center and equidistant from the two  political parties. Independents 
considered themselves twice as far away from  the Republican Party as from the 
Democrats, presaging their sharp shift  toward the Democrats in the 2006 
mid-term election. 
In August of this year, Pew posed a very  similar question (note to survey 
wonks: Pew used a five-point scale, versus  six in 2005), but the results 
were very different. Although average voters  continue to see themselves as 
just right of center, they now place  themselves twice as far away from the 
Democratic Party as from the  Republicans. In addition, Independents now see 
themselves as significantly  closer to the Republican Party, reversing their 
perceptions of six years  ago. 
There’s another difference as well. In  2005, Republicans’ and Democrats’ 
views of their own parties dovetailed with  the perceptions of the 
electorate as a whole. Today, while voters as a whole  agree with Republicans’ 
evaluation of their party as conservative, they  disagree with Democrats, who 
on 
average see their party as moderate rather  than liberal. So when 
Independents, who see themselves as modestly right of  center, say that 
Democrats are 
too liberal, average Democrats can’t imagine  what they’re talking about. 
Compounding the problem, the American  people are gradually polarizing. 
According to Gallup, twenty years ago, as  Bill Clinton began his presidential 
campaign, self-described moderates  formed the plurality of the electorate—
43 percent; conservatives were 36  percent, liberals 17 percent. By the 
summer of 2011, the conservative share  had risen to 41 percent and liberals to 
21 percent, while moderates declined  to 36 percent, surrendering their 
plurality status to conservatives. Because  nearly all conservatives now vote 
for 
Republicans and liberals for  Democrats, the share of the shrinking pool of 
moderates that Democrats need  to build a majority is now larger than ever. 
Another Gallup finding that should alert  Democrats is the ongoing collapse 
of public confidence in government. A  survey released earlier this week 
found that Americans now believe that the  federal government wastes 51 cents 
of every dollar it spends, the highest  estimate ever recorded. Twenty-five 
years ago, that figure stood at only 38  cents. While estimates of waste at 
the state and local level remain lower  than for the federal level, they 
have also risen by double digits in recent  decades. 
Overall, it’s hard to avoid concluding  that the ideological playing-field 
heading into 2012 is tilted against  Democrats. This reality only deepens 
the strategic dilemma the White House  now confronts. The conventional 
strategy for an incumbent is to secure the  base before the general public gets 
fully engaged and then reach out to the  swing voters whose decisions spell the 
difference between victory and  defeat. By contrast, the Obama team spent 
most of 2011 in what turned out to  be a failed effort to win over the 
Independent voters who deserted Democrats  in droves last November, in the 
process 
alienating substantial portions of  the base. To rekindle the allegiance 
and enthusiasm of core supporters, the  president now finds himself having to 
draw sharp ideological lines, risking  further erosion among Independents 
and even moderate Democrats. Tellingly, a  number of at-risk Democratic 
senators up for reelection in 2012 have already  refused to go along with key 
elements of the president’s recent  proposals. 
Granted, ideology isn’t everything.  Political scientists have long 
observed that Americans are more liberal on  particulars than they are in 
general—
ideologically conservative but  operationally liberal. (Surveys have shown 
majority support for most  individual elements of the president’s jobs and 
budget packages.) And the  Republicans could undermine their chances by 
nominating a presidential  candidate who is simply too hard-edged conservative 
for 
moderates and  Independents to stomach. 
In the face of widespread skepticism and  disillusion, it will be an uphill 
battle for Democrats to persuade key  voting blocks that government can 
really make their lives better. But if  they fail, the public will continue to 
equate public spending with waste,  the anti-government message will 
continue to resonate, and Democrats will be  in dire straits when heading into 
what 
is shaping up as a pivotal  election. 
William Galston is a senior fellow at  the Brookings Institution and a 
contributing editor for The New  Republic.


-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to