Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Emmanuel Goldstein Redux

I don't get it. The main thing I like about her is the way she makes Establishment Dems see red; past that, IMO she's still too easily spun, unguarded, unsubtle. But after telling us she's an inconsequential ninny, the oldstream media, WaPo in this case, sure do puff her up:See the highlighted choice, there after "Senate," "House," "Fundraising," "Spending" and "Battleground Races?" Yep, "Palin Tracker." Click on it and there you are, a nifty interactive map of who she's endorsed and how they've done; 35 time out of 46 so far, her picks have won their primaries, an enviable batting average.

It's going to be an interesting election.


Tango Juliet said...

2010- Statism gets a big black eye.

The question is, are the American people truly awake now?

Tam said...

No, they just want a different state.

Poll a Tea Party full of gray heads about ending Social Security of Medicare.

Poll a Tea Party full of people who are skeered of terr'ists and foreigners taking our chicken-plucking and fruit-picking jobs about shutting down the Department of Homeland Security.

Poll the Tea Partiers on such issues as abortion and stem cell research and gay marriage and a thousand and one other issues that have not a damn thing to do with smaller, less-intrusive government, except in a negative way perhaps, and see what the answers are.

Much as I hate to say it, it's going to be "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." We're not voting our way out of this mess.

Stuart the Viking said...


I think you are looking at the Tea Party from the eyes of a Libertarian. While the Tea Party does have it's roots in the Libertarian movement (much more than it does the Republican one), most of the members have joined because they are angry. They didn't join because they found a party that truely shares their views. For many of these people, demanding a smaller government is the fad of the hour and they haven't really thought about the consequences of having a smaller government. Sure, you and me see smaller government as a good thing. Many of the Tea Party supporters that I know have no concept of what it really means, they just want America to be fixed and they know that he Democrats (and the Republicans) aren't doing it.

Remember when Ross Perot was running, then not running, then running (ad infinitum) for President and you could ask 10 differant rabid Ross Perot supporters and get 10 differant answers as to what his platform was about (many of them contradictory) all of them based upon the hopes and dreams of that individual spporter? The Tea Party is sadly much the same.


Crucis said...

I see where they have MO as a tossup state when (R) Roy Blunt is 8 points ahead of (D) Robin Carnahan.

Makes me wonder about the accuracy of the other state races.

Stranger said...

Tam, some of us gray heads do depend on a Social Insecurity Pittance. They will vote D for desperation.

But many take SS because we want the money back that was confiscated from us - and we take Medicare because the system is set up to throw us - and you - off private insurance at 65.

By and large, Seniors pretty much pay their own way, and would pay more if we were allowed to. Talk to a few of us - you will be surprised at how much younger we are than most Gen X's.


Tango Juliet said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tango Juliet said...

I suspect there would be a great number of non-gray heads that would protest the dissolution of the SS ponzi scheme. (My hair is a stunning shade of steel blond btw.)

I would fully support a gradual phase out, even if it meant that the thousands of soon-to-be worthless American dollars I've paid in since nineteen ought seventy-two would be lost to me.

We didn't get in this mess overnight and we won't get out any quicker.

Roberta X said...

I'm figuring it will be gone, bankrupt, by the time "my turn" comes along. I've looked t it for years as he money I was paying to keep my elderly relatives afloat. It started as a horizontal Ponzi scheme as the median age of death increased but the age at which people qualified for benefits stayed at 65. It's one thing when 4 our of every five people paying in is dead (or nearly) by 65. When 4 in 5 are living to 70, 75, 80... Oops.

The Jack said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Jack said...

Pulled comment. Too off topic given Robberta's oppening post

That being said: 1773

Roberta X said...

Oh, I dunno; it wasn't really a "poor Sarah" post and I do like to see pressure on the parties. Hey, they either respond or join the Whigs as another ex-party.

Tango Juliet said...

I hold no real hope of ever collecting anything out of SS either Bobbi.

If and when it's scrapped, it's scrapped for everyone, including pet Dem voting blocs.