Skip to main content

The article mentions that it is now possible that the Democrats could lose the Senate in addition to the House. Americans didn't know what they were getting into with this guy but we figured it out quickly. We can survive anything even Barry Obama.

“If you ask me where the silver lining is for President Obama, I have to say I cannot see one,” says Bill Galston, a former Clinton official, who has been predicting for months the Democrats could lose the House. “Just as BP’s failure to cap the well has been so damaging, Obama’s failure to cap unemployment will be his undoing. There is nothing he can do to affect the jobless rate before November.”

The direction of the data could hardly be worse. According to Democracy Corps, a group headed by Stanley Greenberg, a liberal pollster who is a close friend of Rahm Emanuel, Mr Obama’s chief of staff, a majority of US citizens see Mr Obama as “too liberal”.

Astonishingly, 55 per cent of citizens think Mr Obama is a “socialist” against only 39 per cent who do not share that diagnosis. The same poll shows 48 per cent support for Republicans against just 42 per cent for Democrats. The numbers are eerily similar to 2006, except that it was George W. Bush’s Republicans who were on the receiving end four years ago.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4343...67-00144feab49a.html
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

It's kind of interesting that over...what...the last 15 to 20 years or more "southern democrats" have either left or been kicked out of their party and have joined the republicans...you'd think the trend of our country would be conservative...but yet the country keeps moving left.

We elect democrats...we vote out democrats...we vote in and out republicans...and yet the debt grows, the central government grows and we continue our march to "social democracy".

We might be able to survive Barry Obama...but can we survive ourselves?

I can't remember the exact quote, but Ben Franklin said to the effect...when the people find out they can vote themselves money, the republic is over...
quote:
Originally posted by mad American:

Why doesn't a politician run on a platform of flat tax and term limits?


I personally believe that a good change would be for the president to serve one term of 6 years.
He wouldn't have to worry so much about getting re-elected in his first term, and by the end of a second term, we are pretty much sick and tired of any president.
Six years would , I believe, take a lot of the political worry out of that job, and maybe, just maybe, the president would do more of what is good for the country than what is good for his party.
(at least I can always hope)
quote:
I personally believe that a good change would be for the president to serve one term of 6 years.
He wouldn't have to worry so much about getting re-elected in his first term, and by the end of a second term, we are pretty much sick and tired of any president.
Six years would , I believe, take a lot of the political worry out of that job, and maybe, just maybe, the president would do more of what is good for the country than what is good for his party.
(at least I can always hope)



Or abolish the "party system" and the legal version of bribery we call "lobbying" Until then I'm afraid we are all in for a ride straight to rock bottom.
quote:
Originally posted by dolemitejb:
quote:
Or abolish the "party system" and the legal version of bribery we call "lobbying" Until then I'm afraid we are all in for a ride straight to rock bottom.


This would require repealing the First Amendment, so I don't like it.



Yep, lobbying gets a bad name but...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Instead of "abolish the party system" or monkeying with the 1st amendment, we should strive to return to true federalism and require the 3 branches of the central government to abide by their specific enumerated powers...The less power in Washington...the less impact big money lobbying efforts would have.
quote:
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

quote:
or the right of people anyone with money peaceably to assemble, and to petition bribe the Government for a redress of grievances.

That's more like how it really is.

Do you think that "people" in the 1st amendment meant they could receive campaign money or any other funds for that matter from ANYONE much less sources outside this country like Arab OR Israeli lobbies? If you are going to trust these snakes with the snakes we have elected at least put a checks and balances in for them to. Like or not LOBBYIST run our Government thus affecting us directly. I find it scary as hell we have a capitol FULL to the the brim with leaders (Stinking crooks from municipalities to the top) that vote on issues and sneak legislation in (no line Item Veto) on issues that affect my life personally based on how much some lobby group with Arabs, Israelis Japan's interest or any other special interest that bribes them for it. But of course our forefathers are already rolling in there graves at what this bunch in Washington has done for generations with our constitution.
quote:
we should strive to return to true federalism and require the 3 branches of the central government to abide by their specific enumerated powers...The less power in Washington...the less impact big money lobbying efforts would have.

That is a very true statement buit do you think that can happen with the problems that are present? Not arguing or disagreeing just it's such a mess now it overwhelms me to figure out where we start. I feel if you take the lure of money off the table for an already corrupt broken system a lot of "reform" will naturally evolve. Interested to hear others opinions on reform as ideas not really wanting to debate just throwing my 2 cents out there. It just gets my ire raised to think what these elected officials get away with.
quote:
Do you think that "people" in the 1st amendment meant they could receive campaign money or any other funds for that matter from ANYONE much less sources outside this country like Arab OR Israeli lobbies? If you are going to trust these snakes with the snakes we have elected at least put a checks and balances in for them to. Like or not LOBBYIST run our Government thus affecting us directly. I find it scary as hell we have a capitol FULL to the the brim with leaders (Stinking crooks from municipalities to the top) that vote on issues and sneak legislation in (no line Item Veto) on issues that affect my life personally based on how much some lobby group with Arabs, Israelis Japan's interest or any other special interest that bribes them for it. But of course our forefathers are already rolling in there graves at what this bunch in Washington has done for generations with our constitution.


In the upcoming election we will see if lobbyist money can overcome the anger of the voters.

quote:
Democrats, who control both chambers of Congress, are pulling in more campaign donations from lobbyists than their Republican counterparts, an analysis out today from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics shows.

Twenty-eight federal lawmakers and candidates have taken in at least $100,000 from lobbyists so far in the 2010 election cycle, the group found. Eighteen of the six-figure recipients are Democrats; 10 are Republicans. Virtually all hold leadership positions in the House or Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat facing a tough re-election battle in Nevada, received the most -- nearly $471,000. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., was No. 2 with $305,000.
http://content.usatoday.com/co...ract-lobbyist-cash/1
quote:
Originally posted by MentalFloss:
quote:
we should strive to return to true federalism and require the 3 branches of the central government to abide by their specific enumerated powers...The less power in Washington...the less impact big money lobbying efforts would have.

That is a very true statement buit do you think that can happen with the problems that are present? Not arguing or disagreeing just it's such a mess now it overwhelms me to figure out where we start. I feel if you take the lure of money off the table for an already corrupt broken system a lot of "reform" will naturally evolve. Interested to hear others opinions on reform as ideas not really wanting to debate just throwing my 2 cents out there. It just gets my ire raised to think what these elected officials get away with.


Well there are no easy fixes. It's been a slow steady turning over the last century or so that has turned our "federal" system, into a "national" system. But it is true the more power...the more money.

This is one the big reasons our founding was based on federalism...the spreading of power among local/state and the central government, with the central government being one of specific and limited power and the local/state being "infinite".

But this fight has gone on from the beginning. The Hamiltons & Adams favoring more centralized power and governmental ties to big business vs. the Jeffersons and Madisons favoring decentralized power, small business and individuals.

I say all that just to point out the system we have today is not the system of the true Constitution. The way government acts today is exactly what many founders warned of...

I still say the less power a Nacy Pelosi or Richard Shelby has the less effective big money lobbyist will be.

Some prefer some sort of regulations/limits on spending, etc...which raises a myriad of constitutional questions.

I would prefer a return to federalism...there are no easy fixes...
quote:
Originally posted by Renegade Nation:
Well there are no easy fixes...


There is one "quintessentially American mode of resistance against federal lawlessness"...Nullification.

This idea is making a comeback. And historian Tom Woods has a new book out detailing it's history and relevance today.

Anticipating all the "zombie" like responses from critics and the main stream media, he put together this very clever and funny "Interview With A Zombie"...watch it all the way through...it's a hoot...and informative:

quote:
I still say the less power a Nacy Pelosi or Richard Shelby has the less effective big money lobbyist will be.

Some prefer some sort of regulations/limits on spending, etc...which raises a myriad of constitutional questions.

I would prefer a return to federalism...there are no easy fixes...


No sane person would bribe a powerless individual. Attempting to stop the bribes won't work. Stopping the power will.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×