Election November 2006: What Americans want

Posted By on November 8, 2006

Election 2006 GraphicAmericans have spoken … and from the looks of things it was clear that we were not happy with the status-quo. Although the change was not quite as large as the 1994 shake up of Congress, it had the same effect in creating a direction change of the same magnitude. Democrats soundly have taken the House and look to be the majority in the Senate as well. (recounts could go into December according to the morning news)

Here are three things I’ve learned from yesterday’s election:

  • 1) Americans are unhappy with the situation in the middle east and the seemingly unchanging policies by the Bush Administration; they want a clear plan for success and the Iraqis to step forward ‘now’ in securing their country so our troops can come home.
  • 2) We are disgusted by corruption from our elected officials; Republicans had more than their share of questionable characters. Voters wanted a clean house.
  • 3) The Republican control legislator were elected to be the party of smaller government and of fiscal responsibility when it comes to spending tax dollars; they failed in their fiscal conservative practices. Even the GOP faithful can be heard criticizing their own party on their record of pork barrel spending.
  • The new cast of characters (and in my opinion there are some ‘real’ characters) are now leading the legislator. The ball is in their court and the opportunity is with the new majority leading our law making and judicial confirming body. Let’s see if they make the most of it or squander it as they have in the past. Personally … I’m not overconfident; perhaps my bias is showing through?

    Comments

    • mike

      Yeah, we had lost the check and balance that our system was supposed to have.

      I wish government would stop trying to legislate morality. It’s hypocritical to despise gays, yet not despise divorcees. The Bible supposedly says both are bad. Yet, I doubt jesus would hate anyone..

      I have been thinking lately that it would be nice to do away with party designations. They are labels and they are trivial. It causes people to pre-judge. I’ve seen myself doing it many times.

      Our government has also put the environment way behind economics as evidenced by kyoto. It’s good that evangelicals have reminded themselves recently of some passage that says they should protect the planet, but it apparently hasn’t changed the actions much. Australia is like the U.S. in that they are anti-kyoto and they’re suffering the worst drought in a 1000 years.

      They gave themselves raises? 165,000$ 100 days worked?

      I refuse to live in a state of fear. Gov’t has been peddling fear at every turn for the last several years. It’s over-hyped and egregious that we allowed them to edit out habeas corpus.

      The fear factor will change significantly when we run out of oil. Oil is what makes the middle east relevant. And the lack of oil will make terrorism much less relevant. No one in government seems to be concerned about peak oil at this point. That’s a huge shame, in my opinion. Right now, we’re consuming 50% of canada’s natural gas and Mexico is running out and struggling with the decision to privatize their oil company.

      We won’t act until the crisis is happening… not when it’s simply “looming ahead.” Politicians have been trumping energy independence for how many decades?

    • mike

      Yeah, we had lost the check and balance that our system was supposed to have.

      I wish government would stop trying to legislate morality. It’s hypocritical to despise gays, yet not despise divorcees. The Bible supposedly says both are bad. Yet, I doubt jesus would hate anyone..

      I have been thinking lately that it would be nice to do away with party designations. They are labels and they are trivial. It causes people to pre-judge. I’ve seen myself doing it many times.

      Our government has also put the environment way behind economics as evidenced by kyoto. It’s good that evangelicals have reminded themselves recently of some passage that says they should protect the planet, but it apparently hasn’t changed the actions much. Australia is like the U.S. in that they are anti-kyoto and they’re suffering the worst drought in a 1000 years.

      They gave themselves raises? 165,000$ 100 days worked?

      I refuse to live in a state of fear. Gov’t has been peddling fear at every turn for the last several years. It’s over-hyped and egregious that we allowed them to edit out habeas corpus.

      The fear factor will change significantly when we run out of oil. Oil is what makes the middle east relevant. And the lack of oil will make terrorism much less relevant. No one in government seems to be concerned about peak oil at this point. That’s a huge shame, in my opinion. Right now, we’re consuming 50% of canada’s natural gas and Mexico is running out and struggling with the decision to privatize their oil company.

      We won’t act until the crisis is happening… not when it’s simply “looming ahead.” Politicians have been trumping energy independence for how many decades?

    • mike

      By the way, I don’t see how the supreme court fits within the confines of ‘democracy’ …… non-elected judges, appointed for life. ..

    • mike

      By the way, I don’t see how the supreme court fits within the confines of ‘democracy’ …… non-elected judges, appointed for life. ..

    • http://www.myarchive.us RichC

      Thanks for your insight Mike … although we disagree. :-)

      As for the disgruntled view of democracy “American Style,” we haven’t seen better options? For the most part the balance of power moves back and forth over time, the check and balance eventually works and our government represents the majority.

      As for the supreme court justices, they offer a longer term balance in a ‘representative democracy’ that counter the short term elected officials which has work well for over 200 years. What oversight group has worked better in the history of governments? Their role is to protect constitutional rights from those ‘short term-ers’ passing laws that are not in keeping with our ‘citizens’ rights. (key point … ‘citizens’)

      As for the kyoto and environmental concerns … there needs to be a proper balance. Restrictions must be implemented in a way not to adversely impact a nations economy. A busted economy will sink any short term gains a few years of overly restrictive regulation will achieve. Implementation of environmental policies need to be balanced. (in my lifetime I’ve seen tremendous advances in carrying for the environment … we are heading in the right direction) As I recall reading above … “I refuse to live in a state of fear. ”
      :-)
      And as for the “oil” issue, it is something I read and write on often. We are no where near running out of oil. Its a matter of how much we are willing to pay and if better choices can supplant petroleum? My views is that yes we will move away from oil and hopefully ‘gentle’ encouragement from our government will help in this endeavor, but doing it entirely by legislation is not the best way. Again, the economics must make sense. One important way for economics to play a part in this would be to price imported petroleum correctly at the pump. That means our price should reflect the true cost of acquiring imported oil. A good read on this PAA (Petroleum Acquisition Adjustment) can be found here (perhaps you’ve seen this before?).
      http://www.thebrigg.net/?p=2

      As for the ‘fear’ of Islamic Fascism, I think you are wrong not to have concern about that. You might be correct that politicians have and are using it to try and get elected, but personally it is something to take seriously. When you look at the history of how Nazi Germany expanded, how communism spread and at the growth of radical elements of Islam … we either deal with it now or later when they use WMDs instead of passenger airplanes.

      Thanks again for your thoughtful comments … an open exchange of ideas, opinions and views is what makes American democracy something to be optimistic about.

    • http://www.myarchive.us RichC

      Thanks for your insight Mike … although we disagree. :-)

      As for the disgruntled view of democracy \”American Style,\” we haven\’t seen better options? For the most part the balance of power moves back and forth over time, the check and balance eventually works and our government represents the majority.

      As for the supreme court justices, they offer a longer term balance in a \’representative democracy\’ that counter the short term elected officials which has work well for over 200 years. What oversight group has worked better in the history of governments? Their role is to protect constitutional rights from those \’short term-ers\’ passing laws that are not in keeping with our \’citizens\’ rights. (key point … \’citizens\’)

      As for the kyoto and environmental concerns … there needs to be a proper balance. Restrictions must be implemented in a way not to adversely impact a nations economy. A busted economy will sink any short term gains a few years of overly restrictive regulation will achieve. Implementation of environmental policies need to be balanced. (in my lifetime I\’ve seen tremendous advances in carrying for the environment … we are heading in the right direction) As I recall reading above … \”I refuse to live in a state of fear. \”
      :-)
      And as for the \”oil\” issue, it is something I read and write on often. We are no where near running out of oil. Its a matter of how much we are willing to pay and if better choices can supplant petroleum? My views is that yes we will move away from oil and hopefully \’gentle\’ encouragement from our government will help in this endeavor, but doing it entirely by legislation is not the best way. Again, the economics must make sense. One important way for economics to play a part in this would be to price imported petroleum correctly at the pump. That means our price should reflect the true cost of acquiring imported oil. A good read on this PAA (Petroleum Acquisition Adjustment) can be found here (perhaps you\’ve seen this before?).
      http://www.thebrigg.net/?p=2

      As for the \’fear\’ of Islamic Fascism, I think you are wrong not to have concern about that. You might be correct that politicians have and are using it to try and get elected, but personally it is something to take seriously. When you look at the history of how Nazi Germany expanded, how communism spread and at the growth of radical elements of Islam … we either deal with it now or later when they use WMDs instead of passenger airplanes.

      Thanks again for your thoughtful comments … an open exchange of ideas, opinions and views is what makes American democracy something to be optimistic about.

    Desultory - des-uhl-tawr-ee, -tohr-ee

    1. lacking in consistency, constancy, or visible order, disconnected; fitful: desultory conversation.
    2. digressing from or unconnected with the main subject; random: a desultory remark.