Democrats & Liberals Archives

I'm Celebrating!

I feel good. I feel great. I feel like a winner! Although I recently turned 87, the week or so before the election was the first time I actually worked to elect Democrats. I made phone calls, which is hard work. I did it because I was thoroughly upset with the way Republicans have degraded our society and our government. Now that the Democrats have gained a majority in the House and the Senate, I am celebrating!

I am celebrating not merely because my side won, but because I believe that this election marks the beginning of a new era. Nancy Pelosi will probably be the first woman ever to be speaker of the House. It's true she is a liberal, but she pledged to be

the speaker of the House, not of the Democrats.

Furthermore, Pelosi said:

The campaign is over. Democrats are ready to lead. We are prepared to govern. We will do so working together with the administration and the Republicans in Congress in partnership, not in partisanship.

I am celebrating

the beginning of DE-POLARIZATION. Karl Rove's strategy of working only with his base and demonizing Democrats has led to the implosion of the Republican Party. The revived Democrats, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, will work hard to to bring Americans together.

I am celebrating

the beginning of REPUBLICAN-DEMOCRATIC COOPERATION in Congress for the purpose of solving problems the people are concerned with. We were able to do this in previous Congresses. Why not now?

I am celebrating

the beginning of SECURITY NONPARTISANSHIP. There is absolutely no reason why Democrats or Republicans should make the security of America a political issue. All of us want to follow the best way to keep us safe and to terminate terrorism.

I am celebrating

the beginning of greater GOVERNMENT INTEGRITY. I expect to see a greater emphasis on ethical behavior, and more checks by the Congress to balance Executive power.

I am celebrating

the beginning of a greater emphasis on CIVIL RIGHTS, something that has been relegated to second or third place.

I am celebrating

the beginning of government serving ALL THE PEOPLE, and not merely the elite and the rich.

I am celebrating beginnings, not accomplishments. There are no accomplishments yet. But this is the way of democracy. We work hard to be able to begin on a new path. Opponents try their best to block us. This is why democracy work never ends. It requires constant vigilance and diligence.

Yes, I'm celebrating a beginning, but what a beginning!

Posted by Paul Siegel at November 8, 2006 5:36 PM
Comment #194141

Happy Belated Birthday!!!!

I join you in your celebration! And believe it or not Bush actually confessed to telling a lie!!!!

Rummey is gone, and it’s a brand new day in politics. ‘fraid we both need to be cautious about expecting too much too soon. But I can dream!!!!!

Just last week Bush told reporters that he expected Rumsfeld, 74, to remain until the end of the administration’s term. And although Bush said Wednesday that his decision to replace Rumsfeld was not based on politics, the announcement of a Pentagon shake-up came on the heels of Tuesday’s voting.

The president said his denial to reporters last week that he would replace Rumseld was a deliberate effort to avoid injecting a major decision on the war during the final days of the campaign.

Posted by: Linda H. at November 8, 2006 7:57 PM
Comment #194154


How about this for celebrating

Democrats won enough seats to take control of the U.S. Senate from President George W. Bush’s Republican Party and hold both houses of Congress for the first time in 12 years, according to media reports on Wednesday.

NBC Television and the Associated Press reported that Democrat James Webb defeated Republican Sen. George Allen (news, bio, voting record) in the closely contested Virginia Senate race.

Posted by: Chris2x at November 8, 2006 9:17 PM
Comment #194156

—Paul Segel— The past six years has had my comfort zone like an itch on my back, which was
impossible to reach. I would like to thank
WatchBlog, at this time for your help getting so
many different views put forward, an contributing,(in my view) towards changing of the
Congress, an Senate hopefully for the better.
Thanks to you, an all your other colleagues
an all those who make posts here. Even those I may disagree with. My itch is gone an I feel great! —DAVID-

Posted by: DAVID at November 8, 2006 9:46 PM
Comment #194183

Happy Birthday Paul…I might not share your optimism but I share in your joy, hope, and enthusiasm.

Posted by: Dave1-20-09 at November 8, 2006 11:29 PM
Comment #194184

Paul, you can celebrate if you like, as if this were some kind of competitive team sport, but, nothing of substance was won for the American people. All that has been gained is an opportunity for Democrats to control the legislative agenda.

The nation has not solved any of its major and looming problems. I personally will reserve celebration until I see evidence that Democrats can and will achieve substantial progress in resolving and fixing the many problems workers, parents, children, seniors, and business owners face.

Call me weird. But, I don’t view one party’s election wins over another as anything in particular to celebrate. It just means the last batch of unseated politicians failed our nation and her people, pointing to the potential of the new politicians also failing the Great American experiment as a democratic republic. The Republocrats history since 1960 seem to be one long progression of taking our country 1.75 steps forward followed by 2 steps back.

My father, a Ford Motors Co. welder, on his wages alone, provided health care, a modest 5 bedroom home, a car, modest eats, clothing and education for a wife and seven kids. We have gone so far backwards since then. Getting even 1/2 of the way back to that definition of Middle Class, would be cause for celebration. One party or candidate winning over another? I just don’t see cause for celebration. Renewed hope, perhaps.

Show Me! (Sorry, I spent a couple years in Missouri).

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 8, 2006 11:34 PM
Comment #194185

Happy Birthday! And I mean it.

But now down to business.

In 2004 when Bush won by a margin of 3.5 million votes, we heard from every side—the airwaves were filled with it—about how closely and bitterly divided the country was.

But now, in 2006, with a Democratic victory, we’re hearing about a “brand new day” and how the country is aching for a new direction.

The fact is, though, that despite the number of Democratic gains, these races were INCREDIBLY close. 22 of 28 races were won by 2% of the vote or less, and if you add the numbers, it turns out that the Republicans lost Congress by less than 50,000 votes. That’s all of Congress, by the razor thin margin of 50,000, when Bush won by 3.5 million just two years ago.

My point is that if the Democrats think that by running and winning with arguably the most conservative bunch of candidates they’ve ever fielded and squeaking out victories like these, there’s suddenly some popular outcry for liberal governance, they’re in for some nasty suprises.

Another thing: this is the sixth year of a two-term president’s administration, when it’s entirely typical for the governing party to lose seats, and the next two years are, quite frankly, more about jockeying for 08 than advancing any bold new agenda—for any party. Bush wasn’t able to accomplish anything for the last two years, and the current Congress is going to be just as much a lame duck as he already was.

The Democrats hold one branch of government— that’s all. There’s very little “governing” they can actually accomplish, and there’s a very good chance that for all their efforts they’ve just set them up like bowling pins for 08.

With Bush a lame duck, I look for his approval ratings to dip around 30 as a result of conservative backlash for losing the election, and to then climb around 60 as the 08 presidential campaigns begin—it will be meaningless, but it will be typical for a lame duck president at a time when voters will be able to displace their anger, as they have historically done, on a “do-nothing Congress.”

The big winner here: whatever Republican presidential candidate now gets to run not only against Hillary but Congress in 08. Book it.

Posted by: Neo-Con Pilsner at November 8, 2006 11:36 PM
Comment #194191
The big winner here: whatever Republican presidential candidate now gets to run not only against Hillary but Congress in 08. Book it.

You want to book a bet? How about putting your money where your mouth is on Bush ever hitting a 60 approval rating in his lifetime. I’ll give you 5 to 1.

Posted by: Burt at November 9, 2006 12:04 AM
Comment #194193


If I were you, I’d be looking for a new pseudonym.

As for Democrats running conservative candidates, well so much for the lefty liberal rants of the past about the Dems then, Huh?

Lessee, Bush screws up about every 3 months thats eight more quarters of Bush nonsense for the Dems to run on, by the way, it won’t be Hillary.

Posted by: gergle at November 9, 2006 12:12 AM
Comment #194201

Pseudonym, gergle? Neo-Con is the name my parents gave me, and I come from a long and proud line of Pilsners—not changing a thing.

Burt, without the burden of association with Congress, and because he’ll be late in a second term and not running, by the end of 2007 Bush will easily be in the high 50s in his approval ratings, and at least one poll somewhere will show him at 60. I’m 100% sure of it, but I don’t expect anybody to believe me now—especially since his ratings are about to take a pretty significant dip.

Thanks to the ill-fated Frist, however, internet gambling of the type you propose is now illegal, so I’ll sadly have to decline this chance to take your money. You already lost, anyway, because “in his lifetime” Bush has already had an approval rating of 92%.

Posted by: Neo-Con Pilsner at November 9, 2006 12:34 AM
Comment #194202

The good news is the 50K votes came from young people(under 30) who were out in record numbers.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 9, 2006 12:46 AM
Comment #194206

D.Remer: Do not underestimate the power of renewed hope.

Neo-con: Ah,cruel parents. That explains much.

FYI. Speaker Pelosi is a 66 yo Italian Catholic Grandmother. She comes from a safe district that only gave GWB 15% of the vote. They will not be able to Daschle her and will have a hard time demonizeing her.
As to being a “liberal”. American Heritage Dictionary under “liberalism ,A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties,government by law with the consent of the governed,and protection from arbitrary authority.”God, I hope she is a liberal.

Posted by: BillS at November 9, 2006 1:00 AM
Comment #194207

It’s fun to watch Rush, who after making a complete ass of himself on the subject of Michael Fox, now admits to his audeince that he’s really been lying to them for the past fours years, because he didn’t really like the Republicans.

Well, at least he admits he’s a liar. Today.

I guess that explains why his Nov 7th pronouncments about a Republican comeback were so wrong.

It amazes me how people do not see through his and Rove’s rather thin veneer. Perhaps that is changing.

Posted by: gergle at November 9, 2006 1:04 AM
Comment #194211

Why we lost:

First, let me say that it had nothing whatsoever to do with fraud, cheating, or rigged machines the way it always does when the democrats lose. We lost this election because we first lost ourselves. We lost sight of who we are and what we are founded upon. We lost because we ignored our true principles in favor of trying to hold on to power by pork barrel deficit spending, trying to bring home the bacon so our cushy seats in congress would remain protected. We lost because we tried going the PC route on immigration instead of putting the interests of American citizens first. We lost our conservative soul long before we lost this election, and if we don’t get it back, we can pretty much give up on regaining power ever again. The Republican party was taken out to the woodshed by the American people. I hope the pain is felt for a long time and we learn our lesson, so we can get back on track.

Why the Democrats won:

The Democrats won because they were the only alternative to a party that had veered wildly off course. They won because many of their candidates touted their conservative credentials. I hope for the sake of the Republican party’s future that they don’t continue such a strategy. The Democrats won because the Republicans finally became the party the Democrats said we were. The Democrats won because the Republicans lost, and the next two years will be a time of soul searching for both parties, as the Dems now have to define themselves, and the Reps must rediscover themselves.

Posted by: Duane-o at November 9, 2006 1:19 AM
Comment #194214

…and the truth shall set you free.

Posted by: Diogenes at November 9, 2006 1:33 AM
Comment #194215

To quote Henry Higgins (played by Rex Harrison in My Fair Lady), “Throw the baggage out!” Now that is what I call a MANDATE! Somebody alter Vice President Checanery that the electorate (not the Supreme Court) has spoken!

Dumbsfeld is OUT! One down, two to go, as the asses of evil shrinks!

Posted by: Kim-Sue at November 9, 2006 1:45 AM
Comment #194216

Oops, I meant to post “alter the VP.” If someone should happen to “alter” him, let’s hope it will be for the better!

Posted by: Kim-Sue at November 9, 2006 1:47 AM
Comment #194217

OMG! I am so giddy from this wonderful election news that I can’t spell. ALERT the VP about the electorate’s mandate!

Posted by: Kim-Sue at November 9, 2006 1:49 AM
Comment #194223

—Neo- Con Pilsner— I think one of us must have blinked when President Bush had a 92% Rating an I
think his 3.5 million + 50.000 voters must have
changed their minds, an gave the house and the Senate back to the Democrats. Perhaps the Democrats
will work five days a week instead of three an
show the American People an the rest of the World
that we are still a Great Nation.

Posted by: -DAVID- at November 9, 2006 5:23 AM
Comment #194225

” by the way, it won’t be Hillary.

Posted by: gergle at November 9, 2006 12:12 AM”

By the way, yes it will.

Posted by: Duane-o at November 9, 2006 6:39 AM
Comment #194228


Go ahead and gloat. You’ve won your day and deserve it. If you think the Dems can do anything but run an opposition party, you are sadly deceived. You celebrate upcoming Rep-Dem cooperation. That would be constructive if only the Dems would cooperate. Pelosi’s policy of strict and unyielding obstructionism will have to change. It’s easy being the opposition party. You don’t have to stand for anything. It’s much harder being the governing party. Let’s see if the Dems do better. History tells us that the party of Abscam, Post Office, and (four of the) Keating Five scandals probably won’t.


Posted by: keith at November 9, 2006 7:36 AM
Comment #194236
That would be constructive if only the Dems would cooperate…Posted by: keith at November 9, 2006 07:36 AM
NOT a promising start.

Posted by: Dave1-20-09 at November 9, 2006 9:40 AM
Comment #194241


Could you have asked for a better present to celebrate being 87 years young?

Here in Kansas, well, this article says it better than I could: “Kansas Democrats make history again”

I quote: “For the first time in 35 years, Kansas will have both a Democratic governor and a Democratic attorney general.”

“It’s only happened once before in the past century, and perhaps twice in the state’s 145-year history.”

Hmmmm, incumbent AG Kline couldn’t even hold on after releasing women’s abortion records to Bill O’Reilly.

And, while Democrat John Doll failed in his challenge of incumbent Representative Jerry Moran, in another Kansas district Democrat Nancy Boyda did defeat five-term incumbent Republican Jim Ryun.

Yep, I’d say a celebration is in order. Even Kansas is turning from a red state to a better shade of purple.

Posted by: KansasDem at November 9, 2006 10:25 AM
Comment #194258

Happy Birthday, Paul!!!
In honor of the Sic Eagle’s poor prognostications, I think a little Democratic Bounce, Bounce, Bounce! is definitely in order! :^D

Posted by: Adrienne at November 9, 2006 11:25 AM
Comment #194310

KansasDem, what do you make of the 6 Democrats running in Kansas who changed party to run? Aren’t they just Republicans donning a new tag, or, Democrats in name only to get elected? Just curious.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 9, 2006 5:02 PM
Comment #194333

“what do you make of the 6 Democrats running in Kansas who changed party to run? Aren’t they just Republicans donning a new tag, or, Democrats in name only to get elected? Just curious.”

David R. Remer,

The simple answer is all of the above, OTOH:

I can’t remember the source but I remember quite well hearing someone quoting a close friend of Ronald Reagan when Reagan decided to change party affiliation from Dem to Republican and, as I recall, the exchange went something like:
Reagan: “We need to go change our voter registration status to republican.”

Freind: “Why, I thought we were Democrats, when did we change?”

Reagan: “We didn’t change, they did!”

No doubt I botched that to some degree but you get the drift. That would be my greatest hope (that is that the Repubs would see they moved too far right, and in some cases almost to the point of theocracy).

Another possibility (hmmm, tempted to say probability) is that those interested in serving (or should I say ruling) will change parties quicker than a trick rider in a circus horse show jumps from horse to horse.

My real hope is that ALL politicians will come to the realization that the answer is somewhere in the middle. As far left as I am on some issues I realize that we must find some middle ground. In the end it actually falls on the shoulders of all Americans, not just our elected officials.

We’ve become a society that desires immediate gratification with little thought for the future. How else can any of us explain the national debt? Or, for that matter, our rising personal debts?

Posted by: KansasDem at November 9, 2006 7:26 PM
Comment #194443

Congrats, Mr. Siegel. Though not as rich in life experience as you - only late 50’s - this was my first foray into working for Dems. The arrogance and corruption of the current ruling party was too much to ignore.

Agree with point Mr. Remer made about not celebrating too much until the new congress can address the issues. Pelosi’s 100 hour plan seems like a good start.

Curiously I voted for more republicans this election than ever before. If there was a more experienced, centrist, independent-minded candidate who had a good record and didn’t adhere to the Rove election playbook and happened to be a republican I voted for them. The country would be better of with a more moderate, traditional republican party.

And yes, here in Kansas, Sebelius, Morrison, Boyda and Neighbour victories were soooo sweet!

Posted by: unclebigd at November 10, 2006 11:47 AM
Comment #194461

The election was something of a disappointment in Illinois, where Tammy Duckworth lost to an NRCC barrage in Henry Hyde’s old district, and Dan Seals lost to Mark Kirk, whose campaign featured brochures of a Mexican guy sitting on top of the border wall, ready to jump down and mow your lawn. They both did very well compared to previous democrats in those districts, and hopefully will run again and win, like Melissa Bean did in Phil Crane’s old district.

Posted by: ohrealy at November 10, 2006 1:01 PM
Comment #194590

Wouldn’t it be something if in a few years both the major parties became so factionalized that it became impossible to tell one party from the other. We would be forced to vote for the individual candidate, not being able to rely on party identification as having any meaning whatsoever. Seems to me, we took a giant step in that direction this election.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 11, 2006 10:06 AM
Post a comment