_ _ _ _ happens! Post is not Head-Fi friendly :)

[Grand Enigma]

Republican Voters Stay Home Anti-Incumbency Wins?

By J.B. Williams

If I could get a dollar for every time we are going to hear the word ?mandate? in the next 72 hours, I could get out of Dodge and retire to a Caribbean island in style, where I wouldn?t have to endure this?

Speaker Elect Pelosi and Senate Leader Elect Reid are two of the most anti-American socialist members of Congress - now in control of Congress. They can thank Republican voters for their new-found power, but they won?t. They will jam it up their bumm instead?

Five of nine registered voters are registered Republican, making it a numerical impossibility for socialist Democrats to win power in this country without the help of Republican voters. They had been threatening to stay home for months leading up to the 2006 mid-term election. It was not an idle threat! According to early numbers, the nation-wide voter turnout was only 40% of registered voters. This morning, we know which 40%. Iraqis did better - braving a gauntlet of gunfire to hoof it to the polls. Republicans must be ashamed!

As my good friend and favorite conservative, Paul Weyrich points out, ?Some at the grassroots level have argued that we should send the Republicans a message of disapproval by voting for Democrats. Interesting. That would be like a mother who has an unruly child spanking herself to improve the child.? (It turns out - all they had to do was stay home and do nothing.)

Finally, Republican voters have adopted the emotion-driven logic of the left, and shot themselves in the foot (or maybe the head), just as Democrats did in the '90s. They removed themselves from power in a fit of rage against a Republican Congress that was not conservative enough, and replaced them with socialist Democrats who are not conservative at all, or even American. Brilliant! This move qualifies them as ?enlightened?? just like their leftist counterparts. Though I would call it ?mentally touched?.

There was no getting around the overwhelming anti-incumbency sentiment coming into this mid-term election. Change of direction is what the people have called for, and change they will get.

They didn?t just elect the first female Speaker of the House - they elected the first Socialist anti-America Speaker of the House, and when they see who sits at the helm of every key committee in Washington a few days from now, they will see that they elected an entire Socialist regime in Washington DC, though it will take a few months to calculate the cost of such a move.

They voted against the war on terror, specifically, our efforts in the central front in the war on terror in Iraq. But they didn?t vote for any new policy in Iraq, because Democrats never offered one, other than their call to cut-n-run from Iraq. If Democrats keep their word to their core constituency, they will make official their claim that Iraq is just another Vietnam, by once again bringing our troops home in defeat and leaving Iraq (like Vietnam) in a vacuum of real death and destruction.

In the days leading up to the election, terror networks around the world called upon American voters to vote for Democrats, and the American people have now answered that call. Terror leaders? choice for American leadership just won control of Congress and the terrorists? tactics have been fully vindicated. But Democrats didn?t stop there. A short five years after Muslim terrorists brutally attacked America, killing thousands of innocent civilians and wrecking U.S. economic stability, they elected the nation's first Muslim to Congress!

To no shock or awe, newly elected Muslim House Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota, called for an immediate troop pull-out and retreat from the war on terror in Iraq. Is this what Republicans had in mind, when they planned to teach Republican politicians a lesson?

It is exactly what Democrats have had in mind, ever since the day they voted to authorize military action in Iraq. What about the Republicans who just handed national power over to Democrats? Is this what they had in mind?

Whether Republican voters intended to elect socialist Democrats who are eager to retreat from the war on terror or not - that?s what they have done. They gave two primary reasons for doing it? political corruption in Washington, and Iraq.

These were the two socialist lies that stuck, both with idiot liberal voters who don?t know any better, and with many Republican voters who once did know better, but who let their emotions, not their knowledge, drive their decision.

The problem is ? both reasons were outright lies!

Democrats voted to support military action in Iraq, and immediately thereafter, began undermining that effort with great success. They then ran in 2006 on ?not staying the course in Iraq?, without ever having to define exactly what new course they had planned. The few willing to identify a plan at all, called for retreat and defeat (code named redeploy) in Iraq. The balance of Democrats simply refused to answer the question, repeating the campaign mantra of ?changing course? over and over, without ever identifying ?how? they would change course.

As for the corruption in Washington DC, Republican leaders allowed themselves to be seduced into the same Washington power-games that Democrats perfected decades ago, becoming just as corrupt as Democrats, and thereby giving Republican voters nothing to feel good about preserving.

It isn?t a lie to say that Washington Republicans have become corrupt. The lie is to suggest that Democrats had not beaten them at this game for years, or to imply that Washington Democrats are not the experts at political corruption. The notion that Democrats will, in any way, improve this situation, and reduce political corruption in Washington, is laughable. But few thought about that at election time.

Republican voters, angered by lack-luster border security under Republican leadership, will not like the Democrats they have just elected at all, once they figure out that there is no such thing as an ?illegal immigrant? in the mind of today?s Democrats. What we think of as ?illegal aliens?, Democrats think of as future federal aid recipients and therefore, solid Democrat constituents.

As much as I?d like to blame Democrats for this disastrous shift of political power to the extreme left, I can?t. It would not have been possible without the help of Republican voters who are now officially, just as stupid as the average Democrat voter.

The process of dumbing America down to a level unable to govern itself is complete. The nanny state is here to stay until it is one day forced to file bankruptcy. The leftist propaganda promoted by the press and college campuses has finally succeeded in replacing American principles with socialist drivel and the average American, now to include many Republicans, is none the wiser.

Hurray for the great Democratic victory! The Communist Party USA, the Socialist Party USA and terror regimes all over the world, celebrate their great victory today. But don?t expect them to show any favor to those who put them all in power. They hate Republicans, conservatives and all traditional American values more than ever.

The American ?silent majority? was silent one last time. Now they must remain silent forever. They have given up their right to complain.

I hope that Republican leaders too weak to lead while they had the chance, at least took notes from their Democrat friends in the new majority Party across the aisle looking to run them over, beginning today. Since they couldn?t lead, they have to be perpetual spoilers to the New Leftist agenda.

Bush better sharpen up his Veto! It?s the only line of defense left to preserve American ideals, before taking up arms? That day is now inevitable.

[granodemostasa]

wow... that was bad. you're arguements are nearly as bad as your sennheiser cables. now, i tend to lean to the right on many issues.. but i certainly don't want to as my spokesman.

[Yikes]

Wow! That was astonishing. The author?s amazingly vitriolic opinions are extremely myopic. The manner in which he throws around the word ?socialist? calls into question if he truly understands its meaning. The author confuses Socialism with Liberalism.

Pure socialism has largely been discredited and proven to be an ineffective ideology. To a large extent it attempts to go against human nature (Greed), and therefore pisses into the wind. I believe that pure capitalism will also prove to be just as ineffectual. At least laissez-faire capitalism will be. Laissez-faire capitalism embraces greed, somehow forgetting that greed is a cardinal sin. As if the character Gordon Gekko was some sort of prophet.

The current Democratic Party is liberal to the extent that they are to the left of the current Republican Party that is seemingly controlled by the Neo-Cons and the Religious Right. I can tell you that I am Liberal and that most of the Democratic Party does not represent my views. If we had a multi-party system the current Democratic Party would not get the liberal vote. They do get the liberal vote because they are more ?liberal? than the alternative.

Capitalism and liberalism are not mutually exclusive. Capitalism needs a firm underpinning of government regulations to be successful, basically keeping the honest people honest.

[grawk]

Whether the membership of the democrat party these days is liberal or socialist in nature or leanings has nothing really to do with whether or not the current democrat party leadership meets these standards. I'd personally say that the belief that the government should provide cradle to grave services for the citizenry is pretty close to socialism.

[Yikes]

Yes certain aspects of our existence should be socialized. The big one is healthcare.

The US spends significantly more per capita than any other industrialized country in the world, yet our results are (Life Expectancy) nowhere near the top (close to 50th).

Some interesting facts.

Medicare is by far the most efficient healthcare system in the US. Medicare?s administrative costs are around 3% whereas the HMOs average around 30% administrative cost.

Universal healthcare could be provided without spending a single extra dime. Just by making the system efficient.

Under our current healthcare system (Employer provided) well over 10% of the population has no healthcare plan. There are also arguments that having an employer based system is putting the US at a competitive disadvantage with all of our western competitors that have universal coverage.

Enough fun. I have to go to work.

[tyrion]

Yes certain aspects of our existence should be socialized. The big one is healthcare.

The US spends significantly more per capita than any other industrialized country in the world, yet our results are (Life Expectancy) nowhere near the top (close to 50th).

Some interesting facts.

Medicare is by far the most efficient healthcare system in the US. Medicare?s administrative costs are around 3% whereas the HMOs average around 30% administrative cost.

Universal healthcare could be provided without spending a single extra dime. Just by making the system efficient.

Under our current healthcare system (Employer provided) well over 10% of the population has no healthcare plan. There are also arguments that having an employer based system is putting the US at a competitive disadvantage with all of our western competitors that have universal coverage.

Enough fun. I have to go to work.

What he said.

I haven't heard a single dem say that we have a "mandate". Unlike Bush, when he won in '04 by some percentage points. If he had a mandate, look what it got us. Record deficit, almost 3,000 men killed in a war that never should have happened. Countless thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens dead. I wonder if you asked their families whether it was worth it, what they would say. Small job growth and where there is job growth, the jobs pay less than before. Just a few examples. If Republicans helped win this election for the Dems, thank you (it was the independents that did it). I will take it any way I can get it.

Given the choice between a Socialist Democratic Party and a Facist Republican Party, I will take the Dems. However, neither is true. Each party is made up of elements that lean in those directions. There are some things that just can't be left to private industry. One thing is healthcare. People in this country should not be without healthcare no matter what their socio-economic condition is. It's reprehensible that there are children who are not covered by some type of healthcare other than going to the Emergency room for their prmary care. The same is true for adults. Health insurance companies have not been able to provide efficient health care for it's insureds. As Yikes stated, medicaid is the most efficient source of healthcare coverage. More of each dollar paid in goes to payment of benefits.

[Filburt]

wow... that was bad. you're arguements are nearly as bad as your sennheiser cables. now, i tend to lean to the right on many issues.. but i certainly don't want to as my spokesman.

I think he's quoting this pundit: http://jb-williams.com/11-08-06.htm

Though, maybe he's JB Williams? I didn't see any cable ads on the page

[Yikes]

The fucked up thing is that the wonderful Republican administration passed a heinous prescription drug law that makes it illegal for the government (Medicare/Medicaid) to negotiate lower prescription drug prices with the pharmaceutical industry. Talk about a corporate give-away. The Republicans talk about ?Free market? but when it comes down to it they make it illegal for the worlds largest pharmaceuticals customer from negotiating lower prices.

The only thing that Bush and the republicans in congress care about is making their fat cat friends richer. Fuck them!!!!! The Bush presidency will go down in history as the worst ever.

[tyrion]

The VA is permitted to negotiate with the drug companies and as a result medication is less expensive through he VA than Medicare/Medicaid. This administration is an embarrassment for so many reason it's scary to think about it. I don't believe there is any question that he will go down as probably the worst president this country has ever seen.

[aerius]

Ah yes, the standard Republitard ravings. It's so full of shit it makes my head hurt.

Let's have a quick rundown of the Republitard "accomplishments" of the past 6 years.

-Tax cuts for rich assholes and corporations

-Trillions of dollars of new debt, and the largest deficits in history

-Starting a war on false pretenses and completely fucking over Iraq

-Stirring up more hatred and terrorism against America than ever before

-Blowing more money on the military than at any point during the Cold War

-Fucking up Afghanistan and then making other countries fix it

-Ridiculous kickbacks to oil, energy and pharmaceutical companies, John D. Rockefeller would laugh himself silly if he were still alive to see how much influence oil companies have these days.

-Fucking over science & education

-Katrina, New Orleans, do I really need to say more?

Seriously, they've done nothing but fuck up the country along with the rest of the world while padding their pockets and those of their cronies. There's nothing good I can say about them other than that they haven't started a nuclear war yet.

[hungrych]

In the days leading up to the election, terror networks around the world called upon American voters to vote for Democrats, and the American people have now answered that call. Terror leaders? choice for American leadership just won control of Congress and the terrorists? tactics have been fully vindicated. But Democrats didn?t stop there. A short five years after Muslim terrorists brutally attacked America, killing thousands of innocent civilians and wrecking U.S. economic stability, they elected the nation's first Muslim to Congress!

Do people actually believe this ridiculousness? Not only are all Muslims terrorists, but they want the Democrats to win? Why, because the Republicans did such a great job stopping them?

GE I really hope you don't actually agree with this nut, pretty much everything in that article is bullshit. Anti-american socialists?

[Chrysanthemum]

They are all up to no damn good, irregardless of which party they hail from.

[Yikes]

They are all up to no damn good, irregardless of which party they hail from.

To a certain degree I?d have to agree with you, but it?s a matter of how fucked up and dishonest they are. Under the republican congress for the first time in history specific industries were allowed to actually write the legislation that covered their own industries. The proverbial foxes are guarding the hen house. It?s definitely a choice between the much lesser of evils. I?m not a fan of most Democrats, but I fucking loathe the plutocratic oligarchical neo-conservative religious right corporatists that make up the power base of the Republican Party.

[Yikes]

They are all up to no damn good, irregardless of which party they hail from.

By the way, regardless works better.

Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.

[Dusty Chalk]

By the way, regardless works better.

Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.

Regardless, I will continue to use the word whenever appropriate, irrespective of its condemnation by the vocabulary police.

[Yikes]

Regardless, I will continue to use the word whenever appropriate, irrespective of its condemnation by the vocabulary police.

Fucking Anarchist!