<

Liberalism is a Mental Disorder (AKA Politics Suck)

A blog dedicated to holding our politicians accountable to We The People.

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Ok....so what happened?

After I got over my initial horror at waking up to the sound of, Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the house, and actually had the time to reflect and listen to the news, one point became very stark and very clear in the results:

Dhimmicats ran on a platform of conservatism, Republicans ran on a platform of well...Nothing. THEY DID EXACTLY WHAT WE HAVE BEEN ACCUSING LIBERALS OF DOING FOR THE PAST 12 YEARS!

And you know what? THEY got SPANKED! And you know what else? THEY deserved it.

Unfortunately, WE pay the price.

The loss of the house and most likely the Senate can be tied to and blamed on 1 person, and one person alone. George Bush.

Am I saying that I agree now the liberals? NO...I, unlike some moonbats in this country, can differentiate between me being pissed off at 1 issue of the President and not letting that form my entire view of the man. He is still DEAD ON about the War on Terror.

The Republicans in this campaign should have VERY simply pushed the good economy, a promise to get the borders secured and a promise that they were not about big government.

Instead, the campaigns reeked of "lets see how bad we can smeer the other guy"

The Dhimmicats, very wisely, kept their liberal leadership quiet and in the background. You didnt hear from Pelosi at all. Kennedy? MIA. Kerry? Kept in a sealed bunker for a week prior to the election. The american people got a taste of what is in store when Kerry opened his big stupid mouth, and had the leadership not put a gag is his mouth and move him underground, the results could have been VERY different.

But Americans, as a whole, all suffer from short term memory loss and as soon as another issue is dangled in their face, they salivate and follow that issue, leaving the other one behind. This is where the Republicans FAILED to step up and be counted. They kept quiet instead of stepping in and stepping up, hoping the media would stay on top of it.

Republicans, like Fox News, have forgotten what values got them to number 1, they have lost site of what is important to the American people. And they ALWAYS forget.

This election pissed me off...I know where we are headed, but I am in the minority in the conservative community, because most people have the attitude of "Politics? Only when I can act like I am making an informed choice" On the other hand, I follow politics, I know what time it is, I know the records, I know the REAL stances.

Dont kid yourself...the next 2 years will be hell. But let that mobilise us for a fight in 08. Let the issues build. Get out your notebooks, jot everything down. We have a chance to regain Congress and the white house in 08. Lets not get caught with our thumbs up our collective butts.

Support the troops, love America, defend our values, and keep getting the message out.

My weekly issue of Lets See What others are saying will come in a few hours

6 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I notice you've picked up a new title for the democrats with the title "dhimmicrats". That's a new one, may I ask what it means, and why you're using it?

I am confused. You say that Bush is the one man responsible (though many voters said this was a referendum of Iraq and the WOT, which you say he's dead on about), then you blame it on the republican party for not campaigning on a message. Those seem to conflict eachohter.

I also disagree about republicans not running on a message. In Northern California (yes, I'm a california liberal, but from Sacramento, not San Francisco :P), two incumbent republicans from "safe" districts were in for the fights of their lives. Rep. Pombo and Rep. Doolittle were both challenged by very strong democrats in close races; Pombo was beat by his rival, McNeary, and Doolittle scraped a victory against his rival, Charlie Brown. I was watching both races closely, and republicans in both districts were heavy on message. Both incumbents hit hard about foreign policy and support for Iraq. Both also ran strongly on socially conservative issues. Both were full of "message" from both parties. I don't know about everywhere else, but at least in California you're wrong.

Oh, why do you say Democrats ran on conservatism?

08 November, 2006 20:17  
Blogger LiberalismIsAMentalDisorder said...

Get back to you in the morning, right now I am working on my what others are saying and then I am off to bed.

08 November, 2006 21:09  
Blogger LiberalismIsAMentalDisorder said...

Dhimmicats is something I picked up off another blog. Dhimmi is a play on words as it relates to islam and the cats part...well you figure it out

"I am confused. You say that Bush is the one man responsible (though many voters said this was a referendum of Iraq and the WOT, which you say he's dead on about), then you blame it on the republican party for not campaigning on a message. Those seem to conflict eachohter."

Its quite simple. Bush is the leader of the Republican party, he holds the responsibility for directing the politicians in how to campaign and what issues to campain on. He failed them. The Politicians though didnt pick up the ball, they sat there just as lame duck as Bush was. When the boss doesnt pick up the phone...someone in the office should..right?

"I also disagree about republicans not running on a message. In Northern California (yes, I'm a california liberal, but from Sacramento, not San Francisco :P), two incumbent republicans from "safe" districts were in for the fights of their lives. Rep. Pombo and Rep. Doolittle were both challenged by very strong democrats in close races; Pombo was beat by his rival, McNeary, and Doolittle scraped a victory against his rival, Charlie Brown."

That suprises me that Pombo got booted, he has been strong in Sacramento area politics, even back when I was living in the area in the early to mid 90's

"Both also ran strongly on socially conservative issues. Both were full of "message" from both parties. I don't know about everywhere else, but at least in California you're wrong."

California for the most part is changing in demographics. One of the reasons why I moved. The liberals ideas run rampant there and its no surprise that Sacramento is experiencing the phenomonom. After all...look at how many people live there and commute to the bay area every day because there is no more affordable housing. Liberalism is spreading in California and it doesnt really surprise me (though I am still trying to get over Pombo losing) that conservative messages are having a hard time there. Truly, the only places that conservatives have a fighting chance is in the rural areas and places such as Redding and Bakersfield. Modesto, Stockton, Lodi, Tracy...all overran by bay area transplants. Even Bakersfield to a certain degree is changing in its demographics...seen housing prices there lately?

09 November, 2006 05:26  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I disagree that Pombo lost and Doolittle almost lost because their districts became so liberal. Pombo beat McNeary by 22 percent last election. That would make it heavily republican. And i forgot how much Doolittle won last election by, but his district is 45% registered republican, according to the Sacramento Bee. Both of them got hit, in my opinion by one of the biggest issues in this election: corruption. Both were seen as corrupt insiders. Corruption was a big factor, I've been led to understand, in many people's decisions. You have Delay, and Abramoff, and Foley, and Ney, and so many others. Sure, we did have Jefferson, but look how we handled it. As soon as he was even charged with something, Democratic house leadership stripped him of all his comittee assignments. Republicans didn't do that for their boys. Many other factors were in play, but corruption was a big one.

09 November, 2006 11:55  
Blogger LiberalismIsAMentalDisorder said...

"Pombo beat McNeary by 22 percent last election. That would make it heavily republican. "

No...that would make it HEAVILY conservative.

"Corruption was a big factor, I've been led to understand, in many people's decisions. You have Delay, and Abramoff, and Foley, and Ney, and so many others"

I suggest you check and see where these scandals went. There were some convictions, but the scandals were not NEARLY as bad as the MSM would have you believe.

"Sure, we did have Jefferson, but look how we handled it. As soon as he was even charged with something, Democratic house leadership stripped him of all his comittee assignments. "

Yes, and look what happened to Foley, he was treated in a more harsh manner than the dhimmicats handled William Jefferson, Democrat, Louisiana. While Jefferson only lost his committees, Foley lost his job, as well as others that have been accused of wrong doing. You convieniently forget that you had a Democrat congressman who was APPLAUDED for having sex with a 17 year old minor boy.

"Many other factors were in play, but corruption was a big one"

I think a more correct term would be "PERCEIVED corruption" But no more corrupt than the Dhimmicats were when ousted from power in 94.

Its balance man.

09 November, 2006 16:51  
Blogger LiberalismIsAMentalDisorder said...

BTW Nick...is the Capital Aquarium still open? I used to LOVE going there and feeding the coy and just relaxing

09 November, 2006 16:52  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home