ok, reps, comments?
in a perennially republican bastion of greater buffalo, ny, a democratic challenger for a traditionally republican seat blew away her competition by pointing out the obvious--that we do not have to decimate our social service programs before, among many other things, requiring the wealthy to pay their fair share in taxes. (for one easy example).
republican dogma is that we allow the wealthy to become even more so rather than ever consider means in how our government is conducted. voters in upstate ny just took a resounding shot across that bow, suggesting that republicans interested in higher office ought to rethink what their electorate feels is the fair way to work ourselves out of our current financial morass.
make no mistake--BOTH parties got us here. the electoral issue remains on whose backs will we attempt to get out of it. at least one district's voters have suggested it's not as cut and dried as tea partiers and other big-money apologists would have it.
republican dogma is that we allow the wealthy to become even more so rather than ever consider means in how our government is conducted. voters in upstate ny just took a resounding shot across that bow, suggesting that republicans interested in higher office ought to rethink what their electorate feels is the fair way to work ourselves out of our current financial morass.
make no mistake--BOTH parties got us here. the electoral issue remains on whose backs will we attempt to get out of it. at least one district's voters have suggested it's not as cut and dried as tea partiers and other big-money apologists would have it.
posted by kad barma at 1:18 PM
2 Comments:
I am not sure "reps" works for calling out Republicans. As I was scanning from top to bottom this AM I thought you were about to lob one to the thee Musketeers, or maybe Niki and the nine boys.
But, as for the New York 26°, the Democratic Party winner wasn't "blowing away" the Republican with 48% of the vote. The "Right" had two candidates, which I think you would favor.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Democrats scored well arguing that the Republicans are going to destroy Medicare as we know it. I think they be be able to win on that nay on to 2026. After that it will pass to the Fascists/Socialists (same difference) when it all collapses.
To avoid that the Republicans are going to have to do an excellent job of articulating an approach to delivering health care that meets the needs of the People without moving us to a British or French like National Health Service, which seems to have good overall numbers, but contains many horror stories and leads to medical tourism (and terribly bad teeth on the part of the British).
Conclusion: If it had been a two party race the Republican might well have won. As it is, a diversity of ideas led to the second most popular idea winning. Isn't that sort of the thesis in A Beautiful Mind?
Regards — Cliff
Just playing on the "dems" title of the previous one... I also thought it was weak, but what the heck.
The irony I see is that slavish devotion to the interests of a fraction of 1% of the electorate (i.e. maintaining tax cuts for people who even during the Reagan years paid many many times more) will cost otherwise better ideas their chance at suitable airing, and many Republicans corresponding offices they might otherwise earn. It's ironic, but we could actually talk about reforming Medicare (something we absolutely have to talk about) if we wouldn't have to be hung up on talking about the preservation of wealth on behalf of of a handful of people.
Party dogma is anathema to actual progress these days, and it's frustrating to those of us in the middle who are being forced to pay the full price for legislative malfeasance.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home