September 25, 2006
Election Politics: Laugh or Cry?
Did he really say that?
The NY Times quote of the day has this:
“I just follow my own common sense. And the hell with the law.” — THOMAS R. BUCKLEY, a longtime justice in Dannemora, N.Y.
Voters want Choice?
Many voters say there isn't much choice. But, the fact is, there are 33 U.S. Senate seats up for election this November with 259 candidates in the race for those seats. There's plenty of choice. But, with incumbents and a few wealthy challengers saturating the media, it is up to the voters to seek out the less well funded candidates - that is, if a choice is what they seek. For many, homework is an excuse sought to just not vote at all. High School habits?
Mid-Term voting is not for the young.
Congressional Quarterly's 9-22 trivia question had to do with voters aged 18-24. They report:
According to U.S. census data compiled by the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement, 52.1 percent of registered voters aged 18-24 voted in the 1972 presidential election, the first election after the 26th Amendment's ratification. Turnout among this group then dropped sharply, including a low of 35.6 percent in 1988. However, turnout has increased in the past two presidential elections, hitting 46.7 percent in 2004. Turnout in midterm election years, however, has historically lagged far behind -- in 2002, only 19.4 percent of 18-24 year old registered voters went to the polls.Perhaps we should take the vote away from them again, to see if it stirs interest in getting it back without a vote!
Goldilocks Economy
CNN's Money page reports the Goldilocks Economy (just right) ended abruptly Thursday
following the release of the September Philadelphia Fed index, which plunged into negative territory for the first time in three years.Appears Iraq will not be the only issue Nov. 7. All those 401K and IRA's invested in stocks could reaffirm voter's suspicions when they get their September earnings reports, that the economy is not all it is cracked up to be by the White House and Congressional incumbents.
Following the report, stocks tanked, bond prices jumped and the dollar tumbled. And the sentiment in the market seemed to switch abruptly.
Analysts say it's not likely to switch back in the week ahead.
Through the Donut Hole
Millions of senior citizens could be looking for some incumbent rear end to kick at the polls in November. The Washington Post reports:
This is the "doughnut hole" in the new Medicare drug benefit that began in January, and advocates for seniors say there is nothing sweet about it. Some seniors knew nothing of the coverage gap until they were hit with a bigger drug bill, advocates say.
"Virtually everyone who calls to say they've been denied coverage, they're shocked," said Robert M. Hayes, president of the Medicare Rights Center, a nonprofit that helps seniors navigate Medicare. "Trying to explain that this is the way the program was created by Congress angers folks who think it makes no sense. Many people feel blindsided."
Election Time Humor?
Confirmed: Bush creates more terrorists than he takes out.
A report was completed in April representing a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government, according to an intelligence official. The National Intelligence Estimate that concluded the war has helped create a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.
The White House's Blair Jones said the published accounts' "characterization of the NIE is not representative of the complete document." But he also said the White House can't tell us what else is in the report so we will just have to take their word for it. Well, his exact words were: "We don't comment on classified documents." That's right after he commented on the classified documents. Or, was it just before? The White House is a bit confused on this very important point but, will look into it.
Awkward Buddies?
CNN reports Pres. Musharaff of Pakistan, Bush's best dictator Muslim buddy, told CBS News that -- immediately following the September 11, 2001, attacks -- the Bush administration threatened to bomb his country "back to the Stone Age" if Pakistan did not help in the U.S. war on terrorism. Upon hearing this news Friday, President Bush standing on the stage with Musharaff, claimed he first heard of the alleged threat "in the newspaper today." [Friday]
Musharaff declined to comment claiming he has written a book and he is bound to the publisher not to discuss the contents of the book until it is published. This appears to be a confirmation by Musharaff that his statement to CBS news is in the book. Those interested may view this exchange of awkwardness at another link embedded in the page of the link above.
Scary Democrats
Democrats warned Venezuelan President Chavez, who called Bush the Devil at the U.N.,: 'Don't bash Pres. Bush'. Think about that for a second.
Chavez bashes the most powerful man in the world in control of the most lethal military machine in the world, and Democrats who control nothing are warning Chavez to stop it? S_C_A_R_Y !!!
Posted by David R. Remer at September 25, 2006 08:18 AMDavid,
The White House’s Blair Jones said the published accounts’ “characterization of the NIE is not representative of the complete document.” But he also said the White House can’t tell us what else is in the report so we will just have to take their word for it. Well, his exact words were: “We don’t comment on classified documents.” That’s right after he commented on the classified documents.
Who wants to bet next time the White House will just say “Sorry, our comments [too] are classified.”?
Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at September 25, 2006 09:38 AMNow THAT’s a Libertarian if I ever heard one.
I may have to add that to my signature!
I want choice. There is no choice, until the money gets out of politics until then there can be no fair choice. Its the choice between one rich asshole and another rich asshole from a different party. I want a poor candidate to run. I would vote for him or her. Can anyone tell me the last unrich person who has been able to run for office? Why should the rich only be able to run for office? Why should the rich be the only ones deciding policy for all? Everyone is not rich and it doesn’t make sense that they are the only ones deciding policy. Its not a fair representation. Until the money is out of politics, and everyone can run for office regardless of whether they have money of not, there can be no choice.
Posted by: dee at September 25, 2006 02:00 PMThrough the Donut Hole
“Millions of senior citizens could be looking for some incumbent rear end to kick at the polls in November. “
And, unlike our 18-24 year-olds, seniors vote.
Posted by: Tim Crow at September 25, 2006 02:26 PMdee,
You have a choice:
- Stop repeat offenders.
- Don’t re-elect irresponsible, bought-and-paid-for incumbent politicians.
That’s what voters were supposed to be doing all along, always.
But, sadly, too many voters have been seduced into the distracting, petty partisan warfare, which irresponsible incumbents love to fuel, because that divides the voters and ensures that a majority of voters can never exist to oust the irresponsible incumbents from their cu$hy, coveted seats of power.
We need to help newcomers to Congress, because they are always vastly outnumbered by irresponsible incumbent politicians that like things just the way they have perverted them.
Help newcomers to congress finally pass some badly-needed, common-sense, no-brainer reforms that existing, irresponsibile incumbent politicians will never pass (not if it even remote threatens their opportunities for self-gain, or reduces the security of their cu$hy, coveted incumbencies).
It is less important who we vote to congress as it is that the newcomers and incumbents lucky enough to retain their cu$hy, coveted seat, understand that their career will be very short if they don’t start doing something other than filling their own pockets, votin’ themselves raises, and carrying the water for their big money-donor puppeteers. 83% of all federal campaign donations come from a tiny 0.1% of the U.S. population; the other 99.9% of the U.S. population can not compete against that use of money to control government. A mere 1% of the U.S. population has 40% (and growing) of all wealth in the U.S., which has never been worse since the Great Depression of 1929. That growing g_a_p is worsening as median wages continue to fall, as they have for the last 6 years (and that is with more workers per household).
Unfortunately, the health of our economy depends on an educated and responsible electorate. We don’t have that. Voters are too easily bribed with the voters’ own money. Voters are too easily seduced into the petty partisan warfare that is eagerly fueled by irresponsible politicians. Many voters are too lazy, uncaring, or complacent to even get out to vote. Many voters have resigned to the futility and despair of even trying. The voters are culpable too. If voters want to improve their own lot in life, there is one simple thing that has been right there under their very own noses, all along. Don’t re-elect irresponsible, bought-and-paid-for incumbent politicians, because there is a direct correlation between a 90% re-election rate in congress and this nations increasingly irresponsible, corrupt, and FOR-SALE government, and our pressing problems growing in number and severity.
Posted by: d.a.n at September 26, 2006 02:22 PMHTML Formatting Tips:
<strong>bold text</strong>
<em>italicize text</em>
<u>underline text</u>
<strike>strike text</strike>
<a href="http://domain.com/link">link text</a>
<blockquote>quote text</blockquote>
By clicking the "Post" button you agree to abide by the Rules For Participation.
