Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Red Dawn (not the 80's movie)

Why the title?  These maps of the House, Senate, and Governor races explain why (nod to Mike's America for lots of links)

As I predicted, the GOP swept up control of the House in a historic 60+ win in terms of seats, the largest gain for either party since 1938, and trumping the 53-seat gain of the 1994 Republican revolution.  And in the Senate, despite the gains, the Democrats (including the surviving Majority Leader Harry Reid) still retain a slight margin, although far enough now fro the 60-vote filibuster-proof majority that the RINO's (like McCain) can't screw us.  And that wave carried forth into Ohio, carrying most of the state races into GOP control.  On the Governor's race, I was wrong on my prediction.  But my error meant that the GOP has total control of the state again.  In short, it was a Grand Old Day for the Grand Old Party.

More or less.

To his credit, likely Speaker John Boehner recognized this in his speech last night.  Because rather than an affirmation of the GOP and their *cough* rightness, this election was driven nationally by two things: the repudiation of Obama and the Democrats' policies over the last four years (two of which the GOP was complicit in perpetrating) which can be represented and summed up in the monolith of Obamacare, and the principles of the Tea Party movement, which is in short: less government, lower taxes, and increased freedom.  Had they gone, in large part, along the third party route rather than trying to steer the GOP toward some actual principles, there would not have been such a wave as there was yesterday. 

Even where the Tea Party candidates lost, it was closer and harder for the Democrats to win.  Ask Harry Reid, as well as many other traditionally safe politicians who found themselves having to run harder than they expected.

And where the politicians were unabashedly liberal (such as the idiot Alan Grayson), they got their ass handed to them.  Okay, Grayson's not the average unabashed liberal.  But I just wanted to mention him so I can laugh.  I'll miss having him as a punchline, but not enough to not rejoice on his hopefully political death.  On the plus, I guess he'd make a good zombie.

But  *clearing throat for trite phrasing* the election was not the end.  It wasn't even the beginning of the end.  It was, of course, the end of the beginning.

I've written on what the GOP must do to set things right.  And much will be said over the next few weeks by people who spend inordinate amounts of time on these subjects (and probably get paid for doing it, the bastards).  And as long as they remember that the Tea Party is still pissed off enough to vote them out in two years, then they might remember that opposing the Democrat agenda (still alive in the Senate and White House), then perhaps we'll see the first steps of really decreasing the size and scope of the government for the first time since Woodrow Wilson.  It may not be during the remaining years of Obama.  But as long as there is a clear difference, then perhaps we'll see some actual change we can believe in.


Shaw Kenawe said...

More like a "red tide," which we get from time to time here on the east coast during the summer months and which is toxic and kills much of the marine life.

The GOP will own whatever happens over the next two years. And what happens will no longer be just President Obama's doing.

It's one thing to stand on the side lines and bitch about the coaching; it's quite another thing to actually play the game.

PS. Where the hell have you been? Afraid to come and visit me?

Toad734 said...

"less government, lower taxes, and increased freedo"

Wait, I thought you were talking about Republicans??? Those statements don't refer to any Republicans I have seen in the government over the last 30 years....I don't know, was Nixon for those things??

The repeal of Obama care means less freedom and liberty for the people, and I notice that you didn't put the phrase "fiscal responsibility" in there either because the one Republican who really did cut taxes was not a fan of either freedom or fiscal responsibility.

Again, if you want lower taxes (for 98% of the rest of us), fiscal responsibility, true freedom and less government controlling who you sleep with, what birth control methods you use, who you can marry, what you can smoke, what women can do with their body, the insurance you can choose, what doctors you can see, whether or not you can join the army, etc. and a smaller government that doesn't spend trillions of Nation Building and our Empire, then clearly you need to be voting for Democrats.

Ha ha, Republican and small government...Good one!

Toad734 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patrick M said...

Shaw: Actually, I've not been getting to most of my usual haunts. But I'll try better. The problem is that once you get behind, it's a bitch getting caught back up.

Toad: You really just like to retread the same shit, even though the votes say people disagree with you. And at this point, it's the voting public that matters, just like they do every two years.

And yes, I deleted your last comment, because there was no substance, just the standard sexist ravings of the bitter.

dmarks said...

Toad said: "The repeal of Obama care means less freedom and liberty for the people"

How so? Back this up. You tend to lob a lot of stuff out there that is so untrue.

dmarks said...

Toad's definition of "liberty" means a lot less freedom. I just remembered one of the nastier fascistic bits of the health care legislation that had nothing to do with health care; the part that abolished choice in student loans and established a monopoly ruled by an unaccountable elite. How does this help health care? How does it help anyone except the greedy and the power-hungry? One significant way this legislation does meet the definition of fascism/socialism: a total power grab by the ruling elites.

Laugh of the day: Toad said of Republicans that they "less government controlling who you sleep with"

I suggest you check to find out the party of the man who signed into law both DADT and DOMA. And realize that Pres. Obama campaigned on opposition to gay marriage (a stand very similar to that in California's "Proposition 8"). He also has urged the courts to keep DADT in place, using a flimsly weasely excuse.

Sure, the Republicans would probably enact anti-gay legislation. The problem is those dang Democrats keep beating them to it.