We sure could use Pat Paulsen right now (look it up)

Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you a man with no heart.  Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you a man with no brains. ~~Winston Churchill

Whoa!  Last night Eric Cantor, the House Majority Leader, the #2 guy in the House of Representatives, was defeated in his Virginia district primary race.  This is both good news and bad news.

Cantor was one of the Republican "Young Guns" along with Paul Ryan and Kevin McCarthy, a small group of virtually inflexible super conservatives who, IMO, were preventing our government from "governing".  Think "government shutdown".  He'll be gone after the first of the new year.  That's the good news.

The bad news is that the guy who defeated him is even MORE inflexible, as in absolutely rigid.  He's a Tea Party fave and one of those "my way or the highway" kinda people.  If enough people like him are elected our political polarization, our gridlock, will get even worse.  Sales of pitchforks and torches will surge.

While the Tea Party has been swatted down in many primary races so far this year, this was a BIG win for them.  As a student of politics (among other things) this intrigues me.  It's going to make for a fascinating fall election.

I'm tickled by all the fuss over whether Hillary Clinton will run for President in 2016.  My first prediction: She might run, but she won't even get her party's nomination.

She'll be in the headlines all right, and might win some early primaries, but her party will eventually realize she's a lightning rod.  

Her fans love her, but her foes are reviled by her.  That's not a recipe for winning an election.  She comes with a lot of baggage....I'm guessing even more than most politicians.  There's gonna be lots of mud (shit?) slinging.

Get one of her bumper stickers and buttons as soon as you can 'cause they will some day be political novelties.

I'll add Hillary's to my collection.  :)

S

Last minute election thoughts

I feel like I'm watching a really interesting football game, with every offensive thrust countered with a defensive parry.  Momentum has changed, subtle adjustments have been made, and a bit of luck has been thrown in, too.  It will likely be a field goal as the clock expires that will give us a winner.  Except this isn't a game.  This is much more serious.  This could conceivably change the way our country is governed for decades to come.  I'm talking about tomorrow's presidential and congressional elections.

Here's what has been bugging me for months now:  Mitt Romney's choice of running mate.  I've always thought of Romney as a moderate, but in the primaries he recited loud and often the Tea Party line, which scared the bejeebers out of me.  At the first debate Mitt did a complete 180, coming across as a moderate, and his fortunes improved immediately afterwards.  I'm hoping the "new" Mitt is the "real" Mitt, but in the background he's still there....his running mate, Paul Ryan, and I wonder. 

Be very afraid...the Young Gun leadership (L-R, Reps. Kevin McCarthy, Eric Cantor, and Paul Ryan)

Ryan is a proud member...a leader, even...of the Young Guns, a group of extremist, ultra-conservative Republicans who want to gain control of, first, their party, and then the country.  They have demonstrated they are willing to throw the entire country under the bus* as long as it will hasten their power grab.  (Suggested reading:  Do Not Ask What Good We Do:  Inside the US House of Representatives by Robert Draper.)  

They practice the concept of the more they can do to paralyze the country (by their obstruction) and discredit their opponents, the worse things will get and the sooner The People will turn to them to fix things.  The pain the rest of us must endure in the process is of apparently no concern to them.  To them the end justifies the means.  I agree there are lots of things that need changing, but IMO the changes need to be made thoughtfully with a scalpel, not with an ulterior motive and a meat cleaver.  All these guys have are meat cleavers.

Now I read that Paul Ryan, "quiet for now, is planning for an active role" as Romney's VP.  "...if the Republican ticket prevails, Mr. Ryan plans to come back roaring, establishing an activist vice presidency that he said would look like Dick Cheney's under President George W. Bush."  (There are to this day many loyal, moderate Republicans who cringe at that thought!)  He says he will "reach out" (to Democrats) across the aisle.  (Riiight...and pigs will fly south for the winter.  It's just not the way the Young Guns do business.)

I just hope that if Mitt Romney should win he governs like the responsible moderate our country needs, and not like a "slash and burn" Young Gun.  And as for Paul Ryan, "Vice Presidents should be seen (at funerals of foreign dignitaries) and not heard."

If you disagree, that's fine.  Just be glad we live in America where we're all free to express ourselves however we like.  :)

S

*The current budget "sequestration" mess and past (and future?) budget impasses...the work of the Young Guns.

My two bits.....

The first Presidential Debate is in the can.  Time to compare notes:

IMO, Mitt Romney came across as cool, collected, and very well prepared.  It was like he knew the questions before they were asked, which of course he didn't.  Kudos.  He was aggressive, didn't have any odd mannerisms, didn't twitch, sigh, roll his eyes, etc.  He addressed his remarks towards the President.

IMO, President Obama seemed to have been caught flat-footed and often fumbled with how to respond to Romney's jabs.  He was definitely on the defensive.  He didn't seem to be as well prepared.  He looked down or nervously towards someone (Michelle?) in the audience.  He had way too many long pauses and "Ahhhh's".

But the curve ball I noticed most was, who REALLY is Mitt Romney?  I've said for months he was making a BIG mistake by pandering to ultra-right-wing Tea Party conservatives.  He had their votes automatically by default.  It will be the moderates who will be the deciding factor in this election. THEY are the ones he has to win over.

Tonight he talked straight to those moderates.  Very smart politics....but very much at odds with what he's been saying before now.  Example?  He said he would give everyone a tax deduction basket with a specific dollar amount cap.  Taxpayers could fill it with anything they wanted from a list of possible choices UP TO THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT.  He specifically said the wealthy would top off their deduction basket early, and that's it.  They would lose almost all of their current deductions.  There's no way in hell the Tea Party would have smiled on that idea! 

In other words they (the rich) would see their taxes go WAY up.  That is NOT what he's been saying for the last year.  If he had offered that before now Obama would have jumped all over it enthusiastically!

Another example?  In his closing remarks he said as Massachusetts's governor he worked well with a legislature made up 80% by Democrats.  As President he would sit down with Democrats in Congress and find common ground with them for the good of the American people.

That is definitely NOT what he's been intimating to the Tea Party crowd.  If he really felt that way, why would he choose Paul Ryan as his running mate?  Ryan, along with congressional Republican Young Gun leaders like Eric Cantor and Kevin McCarthy, have been notoriously uncompromising.  They are the main reason this Congress is gridlocked.  It's "their way or the highway".  I'm sure Paul Ryan cringed when he heard his potential boss say he would sit and sing Kum-ba-yah with the Democrats.

So was the Mitt Romney that I saw tonight, the moderate, the REAL Mitt Romney, or was tonight's Mitt Romney just a poser?

It's gonna be an interesting finish.

That's my two bits.

S

Talk about "mixed signals"!

I thought I understood where both parties stood on the state of our economy:  Both agreed job creation was #1.  Both were for lowering taxes, for the middle class at least, in order to spur consumer spending.  This would create demand, production, hiring, and eventually MORE tax revenue.  We would "grow" our economy out of the mess we're in.  Textbook simple.

But now I read that neither party is too keen on extending the Bush tax cuts set to expire January 1st.

"Independent analysts say that the expiration of the tax cut could shave as much as a percentage point off economic output in 2013, and cost the economy as many as one million jobs."  NYT, Oct. 1, 2012

Now we're being told that our economy can take the hit.  One hundred sixty million Americans would see their taxes go up an average of around $1,000 next year.  But....I thought....??

I understand why the whack-o ultra-right / Tea Party wants to stir the pot.  Their style since they got to Washington is to follow, ironically, the old Leninist credo, "Worse is Better".  The worse things get on their opponents watch, the more "the people" will demand their leadership (and I use the term leadership loosely).  But now the Democrats are throwing us under the bus, too?

We, you and I, the middle class, are being played for chumps this election year.  Where are our responsible REAL leaders?  Ronald Reagan, the darling of the Tea Party, I'm sure would be the first to slap down his party's Young Guns today.  

He and his responsible opponents across the aisle would be working night and day* to get our economy back on track, not sabotaging the entire country in order to make themselves look good.  Why do I think that?  Because that's exactly what they did.  They got RESULTS.  All we're getting today is SCREWED!

S

*BTW...Did you know the House of Representatives has been in session only three (3) days since August 1st?  Or that their salary is $174,000 a year?  Are ya feelin' the love?  

I believe I hear the fat woman singing....

....and I don't think Mitt Romney likes what he's hearing.

Various polls are now saying Willard "the Mitt" Romney is losing ground in the few critical up-for-grab states that are going to decide who will be our next President.  Sure, there are numerous things that could turn his campaign around, but as I see it, they are all outside his control.

Brick Obama could have a brain fart during the debates, but I think he's too smart for that.  Israel could turn Tehran into a smoking hole, causing them to close the Strait of Hormuz.  Gas goes up to $8 a gallon, and Obama could be sending out resumes.  Who knows?  Unemployment could take a huge leap up, but with holiday hiring now kicking off, that doesn't seem likely. 

So where did Romney go wrong?  As I've said for months, most Americans don't want an "extreme" candidate from either end of the spectrum.  Remember the extremely liberal Democratic Party of the 1980's?  The Republican's ultra-conservative Tea Party of today is that far to the right.  Many middle-class mature voters are turned off by those types.  Why didn't Mitt move towards the center?  

Instead he picked lightning rod Paul Ryan for a running mate, IMO a bad mistake.  Seniors see him as the guy who's gonna mess with their Medicare and Social Security.  Even though Ryan said nothing for them would change, seniors don't believe him.  It's sort of like how, when one company buys another, they always say, "No operational changes are expected."  

Yeah, right.  Six months later divisions have been sold-off, pensions and health care have been overhauled for the worse, and a few more pink slips are passed out every Friday.  That's how many seniors see Paul Ryan.  And just coincidentally, battle-ground states Ohio and Florida are loaded with seniors.

And the "47%" quip, the "my wife has two Cadillacs", and the "I don't know anything about NASCAR but several of my friends own teams" hasn't exactly made folks want to invite Mitt and Ann over for hot dogs and a friendly game of backyard horse shoes.  There's just no "warm fuzzy".

Nope, I don't think Mitt Romney has enough time left to distance himself from the Tea Party "Young Guns" and reinvent himself as a moderate (that he probably really is).  I guess we can read the expert's election post mortem three months from now and see if my analysis was on target or not.  One thing no one can argue with is this has been a ridiculously expensive, nasty election.  Can you imagine the free-for-all in 2016?

S

The "Pelosi-Ryan" connection

Yesterday on the news I saw GOP Veep candidate Paul Ryan trying to explain why Mitt Romney won't divulge any specific tax loopholes he would close or what tax rates he would set if he's elected.  They're being vague, he said, "....because we want to get it done."  He went on to say, "We don't want to presume to say, 'Here's exactly our way or the highway, take it or leave it Congress.'"  Huh?

Ummm, Paul....that's exactly what the Tea Party "Young Guns" have been saying since they got to Congress:  "Here's what we demand, take it or leave it."  No compromise, no way.

And didn't the Republicans lambaste then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi for her quip during the debate over health care reform when she said, "We'll just have to pass this bill so you can see what's in it"? 

Aren't Romney and Ryan doing the same thing, in essence saying, "You'll just have to vote for us so you can see what were going to do with your taxes"? 

One of my favorite old sayings is, "If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem."  Looking around Washington today I see lot's of "problems" and very few "solutions".  

Even though you might have some potential solutions, unless you're willing to work with others, you have nothing.  Therefore you're still a "problem".

Whenever politicians, any politicians, try to fluff me off by just saying "trust me and I'll fix everything",  I immediately grab my wallet and back myself into a corner, 'cause I'm fixin' to either get robbed or screwed....quite likely both.

S