What Exactly is Voter Anger?
January 21, 2010 by Robert L. Hanafin · 23 Comments
ABC News defines voter anger as: Anti-incumbent, anti-establishment sentiment. Voters are down on Washington. They are deeply divided over the health care plan in Congress and a majority thinks the country is on the wrong track. However ABC fails to explain what it means by voters think the country is on the wrong track. For example, ABC along with most of mainstream media and even the Democratic Party don’t want to talk about the costs of the war in Afghanistan, and continued occupation of Iraq or Democrat support for defense budgets competitive with the Bush administration. Could it be that our country going in the wrong direction means– the Republican direction - in the same direction as got Democrats elected in the first place
Nearly all voters remain anxious about the prolonged recession, and yet the Democrats spend just as much on defense as the last administration adding more to the National debt and further prolonging the recession. Only about half the U.S. electorate approves of Obama’s job performance, while excessive spending (once again the Pentagon comes to mind, George Bush’s Pentagon at that) and big government irk them.
ABC News conveniently fails to explain what it means by excessive spending, though we all know what big government means. Voters have lost faith in institutions. What institutions?
Voters have little trust in the institutions of government, (well the Pentagon an institution of government), major corporations, and financial entities.
Yep, many voters say the country is heading the wrong way, approval rating for Congress and President Obama similar to those during the George W. Bush years. Could it be that it is because the Democrats and Obama administration have taken the country not only in the same direction as Bush and the Republicans but beyond.
Howard Dean defines voter anger as: “Our base is demoralized.” Obama and the Democrats haven’t turned out to be the “change agent” the electorate thought it elected, and voters who supported Democrats in back-to-back elections now are turned off. “Washington is just not in touch,” Dean said. And now, he said, the tables have turned: “Republicans are unified against Democrats the way we were against them when Bush was president.”
What Dean fails to note is exactly why Democrats and Independents were unified against Bush and the Republican Party and now are not? Dean further fails to recognize that a significant part of the Democratic base was the Pro-Peace (anti-war if you will) and independent voters fed up for the money wasted on war that could have gone to promoting jobs in the United States. Yes, independents are leaving Obama. Democrats are subdued. None of it bodes well for the party in power, but that doesn’t mean independents are leaving for the Republican Party that is nothing but a show put on by Republican candidate Brown in Massachusetts. When Republicans talk about independents leaving the Democrats to join the right, they are really talking Tea Baggers, Gun nuts, and home grown militias.
There is of course a liberal and independent voter belief that the Obama administration’s and Democratic party response to the recession has favored the wealthy and powerful over the middle class and average families and that FACT is only one factor leading to DISUNITY.
Just like Brown, a little-known Republican state senator from Massachusetts with a limited record who had never before run statewide, shed his conservative Republican Party markings and downplayed his neocons credentials Democratic candidates must genuinely shed their establishment Democratic Party markings of being almost Republicans and exenterate their liberal and independent credentials such as boldly standing up on health care reform even in the face of angry, gun toting, tea parties, boldly taking a stand on the economy and the national debt that the Republicans are stealing a stand on, and most of all bolding taking a stand on how much the war in Afghanistan, and occupation of Iraq is costing voters and contributing to the national debt something that Republicans and mainstream media do not want Democrats talking about for fear Democrats just might stay in power.
Democrats need to not only cast themselves as candidates of the people, fighting for voters, but actually be able and confident to deliver change come hell or high water. Brown in Massachusetts put on a great act and show of being independent, but can he deliver to his neo-conservative base and buck the Republican Party establishment?
Coakley lost in Massachusetts because she comes right out of the Democratic establishment and arrogantly embraced her stature within the party. When it finally dawned on Coakley’s campaign strategists that arrogantly running as an establishment Democrat could lose the election they tried selling her to an anti-Washington, pro-populism electorate by seizing the fight-for-the-little-guy mantle in hopes of thwarting a Republican victory, but the voters did not buy it and stayed home. That is why the Democrats lost in Massachusetts and will lose the Congress in 2010. Unless the Democrats mend their ways and recapture their base of support, the nation will continue down the same wrong course set by George W. Bush and embraced by Barrack Obama.
The voter’s mood could scare off establishment Democrats considering entering races, such as Beau Biden for Delaware’s open Senate seat, or cause vulnerable Democratic incumbents, including Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, to retire. This would frankly be great for the party, because what it does not need now is establishment Democrats running for dog catcher. Seriously independent candidates willing to challenge the Democratic as well as the Republican establishment is the only thing that will save the Democratic Party come November 2010.
We at Veterans Today have found only one Democrat candidate running for national office that has the political guts and genuine independence to take on not only the Democratic establishment but the Republican one also.
Bob Krause who is running for U.S. Senate from the state of Iowa had this to say about Democrats and what the Massachusetts Election Results Mean. Frankly, Bob is the only Democratic Party candidate we know who’s GOT IT RIGHT!
Democrats Need to Listen, Act for the Grassroots
Bob Krause said that the meaning of the Republican victory in the Massachusetts Senate election is that the Democratic Party needs to listen and act in favor of the grassroots. Bob knows that voters are angry and are looking for someone to blame. Simply put, Bob Krause said, “They [voters] want to take their country back.”
“We cannot select candidates because they are anointed by the party establishment and campaign on an agenda that is too narrow. It is even worse if everyone assumes that the anointed candidate is the best candidate, without consulting with grassroots voters.” Krause said. Unfortunately, Martha Coakley’s candidacy personified all of this and it was the kiss of death for the Democratic candidate in her loss on Tuesday noted Krause.
What is voter anger to Democratic candidate Bob Krause? “Today, people are concerned about jobs. They are also concerned about the cost of the war in Afghanistan and cannot quite figure out how it connects to the war on terror. It is apparent that they want candidates who are not afraid to speak out because special interests or party protocols may be in the background.” Krause said.
At least in this Iowa Democratic primary race for the U. S. Senate, we at Veterans Today found Bob Krause to be the only candidate who has outlined a comprehensive jobs and recovery package. He was and remains the first Democrat to a bold stand and speak out on Afghanistan, and Bob Krause has not been afraid to speak out on monopolies that may affect the Iowa farmers.
And Bob Krause IS and anti-establishment Democrat who is not putting on a show at being independent, the Democratic Party in Iowa and across the nation needs to heed the winds of voter dissatisfaction and focus on those matters that are important to the people whose vote they want. When Democrats do this, they will win a great victory in November noted Bob Krause, and we agree with him.
Posted and Written by: Robert L. Hanafin, Major, U.S. Air Force-Retired Veterans Today Military Veterans and Foreign Affairs Journal
References:
Krause Afghanistan Stance
Krause Jobs Program
ABC News: Analysis: Voter Ire Evident in Mass. Senate Race – Analysis: Sour voters in tight Mass. Senate race show challenges for Obama, in-power Democrats http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wirestory?id=9578863&page=1
|
||||||||
The Obama Brand Implodes by Talor Marsh
“In the special election to replace Edward M. Kennedy, Barack Obama and the Democratic Party leadership were handed their heads in the most stunning, avoidable repudiation of ineptitude in recent political memory.”
“Now we’ve lost Massachusetts to the Republicans, emboldening them further, dreams of defeated Dems dancing across their heads.” [More here →]http://www.taylormarsh.com/2010/01/20/the-obama-brand-implodes/
Sent to Veterans Today via email.
Who, what, when, why, where, and How?
Who’s responsible for loosing Ted Kennedy’s seat?
Martha Coakley!
What caused her to loose?
Her own Complacency! She took it as a given she’d win this election hands down.
When?
From the very first moment she announced her candidacy!
Why?
She sat on her haunches with the mindset, that no way in hell a Republican would EVER win Teddy’s seat.
{She failed to know the history of that seat: JFK knocked another sure bet right outta his political life, by defeating Henry Cabot Lodge, a Republican back in 1952}
Where? Here’s where it kinda gets interesting!
Ye see, Coakley, well she WON EVERYWHERE the votes were HAND COUNTED!
But she LOST in every Bay State city or town that used those Optical Scanning, Diebold and E.S.& S. electronic voting machines.
HOW?
Ted Kennedy NEVER, EVER, took any of his elections for granted. NEVER!
Had Martha Coakley followed Ted Kennedy’s Forty-Eight year policy, and took this election as serious as Ted always did, THEN and Only then, would she have more than a leg to stand on to challenge these electronic tallies, however her complacency foiled any such challenge.
In other words, Brown scared the bejesus out of every Disabled Veteran, Military Dependent and Retiree, by telling them they’d have to pay the no-health care insurance excise tax.
Despite the fact, that those protections “WERE” included in both versions of the Bill.
By receiving VA and or Tricare Health care coverage, these citizens had been considered as “meeting their health care OBLIGATIONS.”
Why did Brown’s out right lies STAND?
Martha Coakley didn’t take this election seriously until its waning days.
SO, why would ANY voter take Martha Coakley herself seriously?
To put it bluntly, Martha screwed-up big-time!
Nothing more, nothin less!
Marc K.
Englewood, Fl.
Massachusetts native
MoveOn.org Poll On Brown Victory
A poll was conducted immediately after the election last night of 1000 registered Massachusetts voters who voted for Obama in 2008. Half of the respondents voted in the MA special election for Republican candidate Scott Brown; half of the respondents did not vote at all. The poll definitively shows that voters who stayed home and voters who switched party allegiance share very common frustration and anger at an economy that continues to work better for Wall Street than Main Street.
There’s a real populist anger out there. Voters worry that Democrats in power have not done enough to combat the policies of the Bush era. Both sets of voters wanted stronger, more progressive action on health care reform, as well. In summary, the poll shows that the party who fights corporate interests—especially on making the economy work for most Americans—will win the confidence of the voters. [More here →]http://pol.moveon.org/brownpoll/
Frankly, fighting corporate interests means of course fighting the Pentagon and Defense Industry.
39% said that the Democrats did not fight hard enough to combat the policies of the Bush administration. They sure as heck were not going to vote Republican.
35% said the Democrats were about right in their emphasis on health care but still did not VOTE. They sure as heck were not going to vote Republican.
12% said the Democrats tried too hard on health care, and did not turn out to VOTE Democrat. Though a narrow margin, I believe these folks got it right. Bobby Hanafin
24% were not sure what to do, but were not going to VOTE Democrat or Republican.
Finally, A article written with some sense; instead of fear,and simple minded hate mongering that only promotes doubt about what this great nation we have stands for and is worth putting our best efforts forth to preserve the safety of this and future generations.
Sure, sure Move-on! The people stayed home rather than vote for a Republican or the weak Democrat! Nice try for a reverse spin! Never mind the RECORD voter turnout – yeah, they stayed home alright! Better drink some more Cool-aid.
When Republicans talk about independents leaving the Democrats to join the right, they are really talking Tea Baggers, Gun nuts, and home grown militias.
you left out true patriots.
The 2 Corporate parties have been bouncing the American public back and forth like a ping pong ball for decades. There is really no hope with either. 3rd parties are almost completely blocked out by unfair registration processes and the American “free” press. For what it’s worth:
http://www.gp.org/index.php
http://www.lp.org/
Charlie O says:
“Finally, A article written with some sense.”
That about says it all.
Thank you blood soul from Morgan State in Maryland my original home state.
Bobby Hanafin
“When Republicans talk about independents leaving the Democrats to join the right, they are really talking Tea Baggers, Gun nuts, and home grown militias. You left out true patriots.”
Tea Braggers are about as Independent as Karl Rove, and their patriotism as exploited as patriotism can be. Can you spell NATIONALIST!
BTW the link to your right-wing nut video is disapproved. This is not a neocon website or forum. As progressives, we welcome your disagreement but not your links or videos.
Democrats and Independents stayed home period. That is a fact. It is more important that the Democratic establishment believe it not anyone outside that establishment.
Tea Braggers have voted Republican and are going to vote Republican regardless what I believe or say.
Patriotic my butt, Tea Braggers are about as patriotic as Storm Troopers and just as NATIONALISTIC. First you wrap yourselves with the flag and bible then you hide behind it or use it to yell and act the fool at Town Hall Meetings.
Tea Braggers are in fact shock troops for the Republican Party just as Hard Hats were shock troops for the Nixon administration against the Vietnam Pro-Peace movement.
How many ‘Republican politician’s’ town hall meetings did you crazy people crash compared to Democrat – COME ON NOW. Frankly the best defense for such an offensive attack on democracy and civil debate is a good OFFENSE.
Maybe it is way past time for the real angry voters to do as the Tea Braggers did and crash every Town Hall Meeting both Republicans and Democrats hold during the rest of 2010 leading up to November instead of hitting the streets of Washington, D.C. in protest?
Tea Braggers are a front for the Republican Party pissed off that your candidate(s) did not win in 2008. Yep, just because Ron Paul didn’t get the Republican nomination you are ticked that heavens forbid a black man (well mixed black) became President of the United States. Now, you are out for revenge and got it in Massachusetts that’s not spin that’s the real INCONVENIENT TRUTH.
Frankly, it was not the Democrats or Obama that won the election in 2008, although they arrogantly believe they did.
It was the fact that Bush screwed up his administration so bad that it allowed the first man of color to be elected Commander-In-Chief and that really fired up you racists Tea Baggers.
Bull crap racism hiding behind patriotism that is really NATIONALISM.
What you think everyone in America is ignorant enough to buy that scam?
Yep, it is time for ‘out with the Tea Braggers’ and ‘in with the real Angry Voters’ at Town Hall Meetings this spring, summer, and fall.
If WE meet you there then things will really get interesting for our politicians, and mainstream media.
“Never mind the RECORD voter turnout,” what you mean the record Republican turn out?
You got one thing right about Massachusetts, Republicans and disgruntled Independents, who did not vote Democrat or for Obama in the first place did not stay home. They came out in droves as disenchanted Obama and Democrat voters sit this one out.
We know the drill. The far-right extremists of the Republican Party were ticked that John McCain got the Republican nomination. Palin was a last minute joke (with a dysfunctional family) to appease the religious right.
Republicans were so DISUNITED that Ron Paul put a hurting to McCain’s chances of winning the Presidency more so than Ralph Nader put a dent in Obama’s.
The domestic terrorist on the religious right combined with out of control Tea Braggers tore the Republican Party apart and now they want to put it back together again with a vengeance in their radical image of a fascist revolution.
Frankly, what Republicans really don’t want to see happen is Democrats in Congress and the White House embracing their base and independents.
They know that if Democrats do, Republican dreams of a fascist nation run by gun toting right-wing militias will be put on hold better yet neutralized.
Yep, the Dems wasted all their energy on health care reform that I can agree with Republicans on, but I for one would much rather prefer a SOCIALIST American Republic over a FASCISTS Nationalist America any day or at least during my lifetime.
After I’m dead and gone, you can have your right-wing FASCISTS revolution and nation.
Patriots, my a–, the founding fathers never had in mind MOB RULE, people showing up at town hall meetings shaking their fists, toting guns to threaten elected political leaders of any party, and acting the fool. Go ahead continue acting the fool, but please leave your automatic weapons at home.
Lord forbid if anyone who disagrees with you has to one day take up arms to protect themselves from YOU. No it is not the fact the others disagree with me or those who think like me that is UNPATRIOTIC. It is shoving your fascists, nationalistic, views down our throats that is. That’s not patriotism, call it what it is arrogant nationalism combined with scare tactics and shock troops. The right-wing in Germany used it quite well to rally the angry and disgruntled to their cause and scape goats.
You want another American civil war, and you are armed to the teeth for one.
Fine have at it, but the Union will be preserved as it was from 1861 to 1865, and guess who the Rebels will be this time. The
citizens of the Confederate States of America also called themselves patriots and look where it got them.
Sent to Veterans Today via email from Independent Barbara Christian
Bob, I kept nodding my head as I agreed with everything you wrote.
I totally agree with you when you talk about the holdovers from the Bush legacy as one of the main reasons for the disillusionment, the continuing hawk mentality with continuing wars.
You know my feelings about the Pentagon and Neo-Con’s essentially controlling Obama because he was so naive that he felt there could be bi-partisanship and kept on all of Bush’s hawks and neoconservatives and then has let Hilary Hawk influence his thinking as well.
I have had difficulty getting my head around the health reform bill, perhaps because I didn’t really pay attention. LOL I did, however, suspect what you confirmed, that the health care industry had a win and that there were no real cost controls.
As a former military spouse, I got a chuckle out of the gent who said that Brown and the Republicans scared the bejesus out of every Disabled Veteran, Military Dependent and Retiree, by telling them they’d have to pay the no-health care insurance excise tax.
If only the Democrats could stay on message like that and not be wimps.
I agree with you that the only decent health care reform would be if the fed govt controlled the health insurance and Pharmaceutical companies.
It’s great having you give these opinions as a former neo-con, because I feel you’re spot on.
And you are also spot on in terms of the failure to listen to the liberal Demo’s and liberal Independents, and how important it is to start listening and mobilizing before there is a fascist backlash.
Like you, I am losing hope, it’s not the change I hoped for either. Democrats Abroad had a meeting several days ago. I decided not to go. I told Lisa it was a waste of time because the Demo’s in power weren’t listening to any of us abroad. It’s a shame the meeting wasn’t after the loss in Mass. , as they might listen now.
I plan on sending your article to Lisa, who is the organiser for Democrats Abroad in the Brisbane area? It might help explain to her why I was so disappointed, disappointed enough that I couldn’t be bothered just going to a talk-fest where our ideas wouldn’t be heeded.
Bobbie Christian
I agree with Barrie W. Robert. It’s going to be worse in November. So someone like Barrie who doesn’t agree with you can’t be a patriot. Your logic is good, but your premises are screwed up.
Tom, Grunt, Houston, Texas
Sent to Veterans Today via Facebook by Jay D Alexander
“January 21, 2010 statement from Doris “Granny D” Haddock in response to the Supreme Court’s decision today to kill campaign finance reform.
Ten years ago, I walked from California to Washington, D.C. to help gather support for campaign finance reform. I used the novelty of my age (I was 90), to garner attention to the fact that our democracy, for which so many people have given their lives, is being subverted to the needs of wealthy interests, and that we must do something about it. I talked to thousands of people and gave hundreds of speeches and interviews, and, in every section of the nation, I was deeply moved by how heartsick Americans are by the current state of our politics.
Well, we got some reform bills passed, but things seem worse now than ever. Our good government reform groups are trying to staunch the flow of special-interest money into our political campaigns, but they are mostly whistling in a wind that has become a gale force of corrupting cash. Conditions are so bad that people now assume that nothing useful can pass Congress due to the vote-buying power of powerful financial interests. The health care reform debacle is but the most recent example.
The Supreme Court, representing a radical fringe that does not share the despair of the grand majority of Americans, has today made things considerably worse by undoing the modest reforms I walked for and went to jail for, and that tens of thousands of other Americans fought very hard to see enacted. So now, thanks to this Court, corporations can fund their candidates without limits and they can run mudslinging campaigns against everyone else, right up to and including election day.
The Supreme Court now opens the floodgates to usher in a new tsunami of corporate money into politics. If we are to retain our democracy, we must go a new direction until a more reasonable Supreme Court is in place. I would propose a one-two punch of the following nature:
A few states have adopted programs where candidates who agree to not accept special-interest donations receive, instead, advertising funds from their state. The programs work, and I would guess that they save their states more money than they cost by reducing corruption. Moving these reforms in the states has been very slow and difficult, but we must keep at it.
But we also need a new approach––something of a roundhouse punch. I would like to propose a flanking move that will help such reforms move faster: We need to dramatically expand the definition of what constitutes an illegal conflict of interest in politics.
If your brother-in-law has a road paving company, it is clear that you, as an elected official, must not vote to give him a contract, as you have a conflict of interest. Do you have any less of an ethical conflict if you are voting for that contract not because he is a brother-in-law, but because he is a major donor to your campaign? Should you ethically vote on health issues if health companies fund a large chunk of your campaign? The success of your campaign, after all, determines your future career and financial condition. You have a conflict.
Let us say, through the enactment of new laws, that a politician can no longer take any action, or arrange any action by another official, if the action, in the opinion of that legislative body’s civil service ethics officer, would cause special gain to a major donor of that official’s campaign. The details of such a program will be daunting, but we need to figure them out and get them into law.
Remarkably, many better corporations have an ethical review process to prevent their executives from making political contributions to officials who decide issues critical to that corporation. Should corporations have a higher standard than the United States Congress? And many state governments have tighter standards, too. Should not Congress be the flagship of our ethical standards? Where is the leadership to make this happen this year?
This kind of reform should also be pushed in the 14 states where citizens have full power to place proposed statutes on the ballot and enact them into law. About 70% of voters would go for a ballot measure to “toughen our conflict of interest law,” I estimate. In the scramble that would follow, either free campaign advertising would be required as a condition of every community’s contract with cable providers (long overdue), or else there would be a mad dash for public campaign financing programs on the model of Maine, Arizona, and Connecticut. Maybe both things would happen, which would be good.
I urge the large reform organizations to consider this strategy. They have never listened to me in the past, but they also have not gotten the job done and need to come alive or now get out of the way.
And to the Supreme Court, you force us to defend our democracy––a democracy of people and not corporations––by going in breathtaking new directions. And so we shall.
Doris “Granny D” Haddock
Dublin, New Hampshire
Posted by Jay D Alexander on Veterans Today Facebook page
Sent to Veterans Today via Facebook
Now a word from our allies in the so-called War on Terror (giggle) I believe this comes either from a NATO allied citizen in Europe or Down Under.
“It would probably be more sensible, if by chance you want to become a democracy one day, to ask for much more debate about policies and hear less exaggeration in your juvenile corporate media about what a star the Presidential candidate is. Less charisma bullshit and more realism would help to clarify the issues. That way people would not be disappointed with Barrack Obama because he would not have promised so much (and delivered so little).
Citizens of the rest of the world, where the bombs are raining down and people are starving, we are very disappointed that our American friends got it so wrong yet again – and we are running out of time, options and patience.
So, what we want is for the USA to end the wars, declared and undeclared, close all the 700 aggression bases around the world (and torture centres), do business the way others do business, playing by the rules, not standing on our necks and behave generally like a good world citizen – not a rogue state.
Get yourselves a President who is not beholden to the war-making industry and everyone will be happier.”
Willy Bach
Sent in to Veterans Today via Facebook from Darlene Mathews
“Put that on CNN or FOX discussion boards. The tea baggers need to know the conservative court upheld corporate interests over the people.”
Sent in to Veterans Today via Facebook from Jim Starowicz
“Think Obstructionism!!! They [Republicans] wouldn’t need to do it if they were exactly the same nor would they need to be Rovian revisionist history writers when that history is readily available to produce to show total hypocrisy. Dems aren’t much better then TEA {once GOP} but exactly the same, give me a break. One thing about being from neither camp you learn the players Real Well!!”
Justin says,
The 2 Corporate parties have been bouncing the American public back and forth like a ping pong ball for decades. There is really no hope with either. 3rd parties are almost completely blocked out by unfair registration processes and the American “free” press. For what it’s worth: http://www.gp.org/index.php AND http://www.lp.org/
Thank you for your links to two truly INDEPENDENT parties, as long as they do not front for the Republican Party like the Tea Braggers do, your links are WELCOME. (though the Libertarian, my party does comes too close to being Republican or Ron Paul would have accepted the Libertarian nomination offered him)
In fact, I welcome links to any multiparty movement as long as it is not a FRONT for either the Democratic or Republican party.
“3rd parties are almost completely blocked out by unfair registration processes and the American “free” press. For what it’s worth: http://www.gp.org/index.php AND http://www.lp.org/”
Oops forgot to mention Justin, this has been the case here in Ohio.
Voter anger may possibly break down these barriers of unfair voter registration that favors two party dominance, however don’t hold your breath waiting for corporate dominated mainstream media to sing the praises of any multiparty political movement. It would make it too difficult for the owners of mainstream media to control our elections with big money.
Independent parties like the Libertarian and Green do half decent at national level but have a long, long, long, way to go at neighborhood, town, city, and state grass roots organizing.
Frankly that is why Ross Perot, Ron Paul, Ralph Nader and such cannot win a national race against either a Democrat or Republican, because Independent parties are not good at organizing at the grassroots level. Even if unfair voter registration were lifted in many states that does not mean that the Greens, Libertarian, Constitutionalists, Socialists, Communists or whomever could raise the money or votes needed to compete with established parties.
That said, and despite attacks on me to the contrary I’m all for a multiparty political system that would include even fascists for such a system would dilute their undue power and influence to bully and scare people.
You say tea baggers are national socialists, far right extreamists. In reality national socialsts, natzies, brown shirts, storm troopers, etc are one step from socialist comunists which you appear to venerate. Comunism ;(the government ownes and controls everything and everyone); ( national socialism you the populous own your property,business,industry, etc,etc,etc. but the government controles it and tells you what, when, and how you can use it). Only a minor distinction, but realy no differance.Both are far left extreamists, one just a little father left than the other. You claim to be a progressive. Progressives, either republican, democrat, or independant, is just code for socialism, national socialism, or comunism, take your pick.
Tea Bragger Oldleatherneck,
Thank you for your service Marine, but Tea Braggers (like you) have voted Republican and are going to vote Republican regardless what I believe or say.
I could care less what color or ethnic origin the comander in chief is as long as he is the right candidate. Obama won because the republicans had no candidate. I also agree that Bush did us no favors, he set the stage for a democrat victory. Its good for the country that Obama won just so the democrats could lay out their idiotic agenda for all to see with their attack on personal freedom and their assault on the constitution and the bill of rights. Now its up to the republicans to form a conservative platform , find a real candidate and have the guts to stick to their core principles. However I don’t intend to hold my breath in expectation that they will. They haven’t shown me any evidence of having a backbone since Reagan. Buy the way I attended no tea bag rallies but I do applaud their effort. If you think you can organise a similar movement from the left, knock yourself out. It’s time we had some passion, and get over this genteel politically correct culture. No one is so special or so privilaged that they can’t be or shouldn’t be offended. Everyone needs to vioce their opinion and let the chips fall where the may. Free speech is everyones right. Everyone has the right to make a fool of themselves. This is America at least for now untill the left passes ledgilation to put a muzzle on whom ever dissagrees with them.
Thank you for your service as well Mr. Hanafin. You say I will vote republican no matter what you say or believe, and you my brother will vote democrat no matter what I say or believe. The reality is I do not vote for any one for what they will do for me, I vote for who will do me the least amount of harm. I am sometimes decieved, but for the most part the republican party has been the best choice for me. However find me a candidate who will get back to the basics of our founding principles of what the American experiment was intended to be and I will definately give him/her consideration. I don’t care what they call themselves, democrat,republican,independent,libertarian,or just American.