»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
It's getting to be that time
| The Alley |
|
It's getting to be that time |
|
|
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-25
Posts 63354Listening to every heart 
|
Many of us are going to go out in a few days and make the most of what power is left to us in this corner of the world. Make a decision. Put forth personal requirements. While private, our decisions will react in a most public manner. This is the alley. I just thought I'd peek in to see who's around, and see what you might be basing your voting decisions on. Medical concerns? Financial concerns? Wiping the slate clean? Starting over? Keeping things status quo? Ron brought this forum back for a reason. To give us the option to voice our opinions, respectfully. So, here's my opinion. I was raised a Democrat. I learned early on that my folks never discussed politics much...not that I ever heard, at least. I do know that their choices on voting was a very private matter. I don't think that was all good, in hindsight. I would think that a lively debate could have unencumbered me in many ways. So for what it's worth, I've learned a lot in the last five decades. And I know I read well, interpret with some accuracy, still remain amazed at what gets by not only me, but even the brighter among us... and still, I am going out to vote on Tuesday. My ticket will most likely not be lopsided. I hope you will be out there, too. |
||
| © Copyright 2010 Karilea Rilling Jungel - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Thanks for asking Karilea! My decision will be based on freedom from big-government over-reaching into our lives, particularly as evidenced in the health care 'reform' legislation, the Stimulus Bill and also based on how our 'representatives' didn't represent us, their constituents, despite our clearly stated opposition to what they were doing. Here is a bit of a shocker found in the so-called Stimulus Bill: "A second board created by the stimulus bill called The National Coordinator for Health Information Technology “will determine treatment at the time and place of care”. They are charged with deciding the course of treatment for the diagnosis given by the doctor. Now it becomes obvious why there has been a big push towards the implementation of universal electronic medical record use. It becomes a tool to completely control the physician and the patient. Those physicians and hospitals that choose to practice individualized patient care in consultation with their patients will be punished because they are not “meaningful users of the system over time.” Beginning January 1, 2013 penalties for doing the right thing for a patient will cost the doctor $100,000 for the first offense and jail for the second offense. This will have a chilling effect and may be the straw that completely breaks the foundation of good medicine – the doctor patient relationship." http://biggovernment.com/egeorge/2010/10/30/obamacare-endgame-doctors-will-be-fined-or-jailed-if-they-put-patients-first/ If that doesn't equate to a Death Panel nothing does. |
||
|
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-25
Posts 63354Listening to every heart |
It's very real to me what is trying to get passed... and also unnerving to see an ad from a Canadian that had to come to the USA for her health care - had she remained in Canada she might have died from her tumor... and she's telling us that she certainly hopes the USA's medical field doesn't go the way of Cananda, i.e., socialistic medicine. Votes count. Just ask Reid.  |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Sadly this stuff has already been passed. It all has to be repealed, not an easy task, but we have to start moving toward that goal. Yes, votes do count. So let's show them how much they count on Tuesday! Maybe our new representatives and those not up for re-election until 2012 get the message to READ the stuff they vote on BEFORE they vote on it, and listen to what their constituents are telling them as well. |
||
Cpat Hair
since 2001-06-05
Posts 11793 |
I am not sure which scares me the most.... apathy, or extremism. the current state of political debate to me is little more than pandering to the fears of so many, and the telling of half truths. Will I vote? lol yes, but there are choices in my area that seem to be trying to decide which is the lesser of two bad choices and I don't know that I have truly been able to discern which is which.... I am not convinced that throwing everyone out is the right thing. Nor, am I convinced that putting a rubber stamp on the sitting candidate a better choice. But, it is easier I suppose to point fingers at the ones in office and take an extreme stand, than it is to truly think through who is best or do we think is best. And, just as easy to vote for those in office today.... mark me in the undecided category and not happy with the bickering and acrimony of politics in general. |
||
|
nakdthoughts Member Laureate
since 2000-10-29
Posts 19200Between the Lines |
Ron, what gets to me most is the negative ads...why can't they tell us what they have done and will do for us rather than what their opponent hasn't. All that money wasted on tv ads when the money could be put to better use. And I am definitely tired of lobbyists and their money and influences rather than meeting the needs of the average citizen who is just trying to make it day to day. No wonder people become apathetic when no matter which way they vote the outcome remains the same! |
||
|
Cpat Hair
since 2001-06-05
Posts 11793 |
Ms M... The business of political ads is just that, business. Somewhere along the way, politicians learned what we all know. It is easier to play on people's fears to manipulate them, than it is to pursuade them through thoughtful discourse. "Go to bed or the boogey man will get you" We're somewhat conditioned it seems to focus on the negatives and the unknown even as children. I don't believe the negative ads will stop... I think with the world so complex and so much smaller than it used to be, we are all to some degree unsure of the future and how events playing out will affect us, our children, our grandchildren. that uncertainty is a wellspring for us to be manipulated through fear and negative ads. It of course is a generalization to talk this way, for there are I am sure exceptions everywhere. Still, it does seem to many that politics and elections have gotten a lot more negative than they once were. I'm not sure if they are, or we are simply more aware because of the many media forums we are exposed to. I know for me, it is more and more difficult to have any confidence that there is a solution that offers more accountability and true public service by elected officals. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
There are good negative ads, which highlight an opponent's voting record, and then there are bad negative ads that are nothing more than personal attacks against an opponent. I think the latter are what angers people. Stick to the issues! |
||
|
Cpat Hair
since 2001-06-05
Posts 11793 |
Denise, I don't personally find factual ads to be negative... unless the voting record is used to mislead the public. A vote for something in politics is often, I believe, like the vote you and I cast. What is the lesser of the evils to choose from. If we waited for perfect...and to satisfy everyone, nothing would be done. So, votes for bills or laws are often in my humble opinion used to skew the view of a candidate in the publics eye. Just because someone voted for a bill or against a bill doesn't tell me why. The reason through the oppositions eyes can often distort the reasons or twist them into something they truly never were. Most bills are compromises and filled with items that individually an official might not vote for, but in some effort to move forward, they compromise and allow the language and or attachments. Is it better to never compromise and do nothing? If so, then it would seem extremism is our future and the results may be ones we find less appealing than the ones we have today. |
||
Mysteria
since 2001-03-07
Posts 18328British Columbia, Canada |
I just hope that everyone does their homework and makes a good choice for the sake of the economy and country, not just vote because they are upset with the speed in which a recovery is being made, etc. I watch American channels up here, and can't believe the advertising to be honest, but I guess that is what makes every country a bit different. I am not a fan of mud-slinging, but agree with Ron, if the advertisement gives some accurate knowledge of the candidate's record in truth, then let it be told. Denise you said, "Stick to the issues!" Couldn't agree more - reminds me of every unhappy ending to each of my marriages these elections.  Good luck everyone, but remember that old saying too, "Be careful what you wish for." I can not wait to hear the results of this important election. |
||
|
Mysteria
since 2001-03-07
Posts 18328British Columbia, Canada |
Karilea? and also unnerving to see an ad from a Canadian that had to come to the USA for her health care - had she remained in Canada she might have died from her tumor... and she's telling us that she certainly hopes the USA's medical field doesn't go the way of Cananda, i.e., socialistic medicine. Can you supply a link please to this advertisement. This person certainly doesn't speak for everyone up here. I ABSOLUTELY LOVE OUR MEDICAL SYSTEM! I could have died last January, but were it not for the swift and expert care I got in isolation and intensive care. Some people here that are not on "urgent" lists do have to wait, and some people just won't wait. If I had to pay for my treatment in January, I would be one of the people I help out,and really know what homeless felt like, instead of imagining it. I found the rate sheet for B.C. Medical: In B.C., premiums are payable for MSP coverage and are based on family size and income, and deducted at source so you hardly even miss it! From January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010 monthly rates are $57.00 for one person, $102.00 for a family of two and $114.00 for a family of three or more. Effective January 1, 2011, monthly rates are $60.50 for one person, $109.00 for a family of two and $121.00 for a family of three or more. Income-tested do not pay premiums. It is a system whereby those that can pay do, those that can't don't. I don't consider it Socialist one bit, only fair. We have premium assistance and those people that are under a certain income and they get the exact same treatment as us who pay. So, we help each other that way. I think that $57.00 a month for a single person, (or let's see, (19 Starbucks Tall-$3.00) is a small price to pay for a procedure to save a life. Private insurance here costs way more. |
||
|
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-25
Posts 63354Listening to every heart |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT6YuNN4h8g&feature=related Well, Mys, this is one side, her side. Of course there are the detractors who is saying she is lying, too. The stories on both sides are easy enough to Google, but this was the gist of the ONE commercial I saw just this week. I'm glad to hear your side, too, Mys. Who knows what to link, anymore, when you get both pro and con so vehemently from others? One just wants to turn the TV off...and listen to their own gut, and hoping that what they're listening to isn't gas pangs. |
||
|
Mysteria
since 2001-03-07
Posts 18328British Columbia, Canada |
I thought that was who it was - and the station that would pay her to air it. Urgent surgery gets top priority here with no exceptions. She wanted it faster, so she went across the line. I am sure what she was paid from Faux will help her with that huge bill eventually. Here is one back for you to see, we don't all feel the same. Sadly, during a political climate there are always two sides to the same story told with more "gusto." Response to Shona Homes Video I think going with your own gut instinct, and what you truly believe is going to serve you well will work way better than listening to all the trash on t.v. or internet sources. The best source is always you.  Thanks for the link though Kari. |
||
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
This year, and every subsequent election cycle from here on out, I'm voting my heart, plain and simple. To be brutally honest, my vote was generally heavily influenced by fear in the past. The 2004 presidential election certainly was. I was led to believe the only sensible mode of voting was by the "lesser of two evils" mindset, even though I believed a secondary candidate from another party reflected my values and vision for this country better. Fear took me hostage and my ballot was cast toward who I perceived as the "lesser of two evils" that cycle. No more. I believe always abiding by a lesser-than-two-evils outcome is only somewhat less counterproductive than not voting. In our everyday dialogue we don't say "Who'd you vote against?". We don't wear buttons that says "Don't Vote ____". I want my vote to be predicated on what I'm FOR and what I believe in, not who or what I'm against. Voting under "the lesser of two evils" mentality does nothing but invite a defensive posturing each subsequent election season, and the end result is a Congress inundated with representatives that don't reflect our desires and values that we inevitably fret about afterward. Not until we get past that "lesser of two evils" paranoia and vote our hearts will we ever have a Congress that is true to what hard-working Americans and their families far and wide dream and live for. Sometimes, the recipient of that vote may be from either of the two dominant parties, but sometimes it won't, and it doesn't matter. When you vote your heart, you can't go wrong. * I also want my vote to reflect my limbic instincts as opposed to my triune ones. There was a major rally over the weekend devoted to "Restoring Sanity". It's a relative term, and "Restoring Sanity", to me, is about thinking of the political and social modes of discourse as a marketplace or bazaar of ideas and exchange, where we are all dependent on each other but not in the form of "compromise" either, necessarily..........where we can also look each other in the eyes without the preconceived notion of fear or exoticism, and be able to speak and breathe easier without addressing each other solely as the "other". It has gotten to the point where neighbors can hardly look each other in the eyes just because their political views are at odds. "Restoring sanity", to me, is about recognizing and valuing that we are human, and it is okay to get angry, but it is a whole other thing when we're spraying nothing but anger like some sort of water sprinkler system meets automatic rifle. "Restoring sanity", to me, is about relieving the filibuster-proof majority of our triune brains of their unchecked and unbalanced authority over the rest of our minds, and investing more in our limbic brains, where mutual reciprocity flourishes, as well as our nurturing capacities. This is something that obviously transcends ideology. This is about each and every one of us, as individuals. Restoring sanity truly begins with ourselves. That's where my individual vote comes in, and I want it to be cast out of my positive vision for myself and the world we inhabit, not out of spite and blind rage. * Finally, I want my vote to represent who I believe would be best at providing a more sustainable society that will be either as good or better than the one we inhabit now, while also taking heart to and fostering the democratic cornerstones we hold dear. Often I think we predicate our votes on short-term instant gratification, first and foremost, and long-term prospects and vision always seem to be relegated to the attics of public consciousness. I want my vote to reflect my hope for the future just as much as I want it to reflect a genuine consideration for our fundamental values and principles, as well as present-day problem-solving. * I'm not interested in bumper sticker sloganeering, and I believe voting a straight party ticket by default is counterintuitive to our democratic ideals, as I believe it's who we believe the best individual in the race that matters. After all, we can go on and on all day coming up with (R) and (D) stick shift analogies, but the bottom line is no automobile can start without (I)gnition. Our nation is one built and which flourishes to this day because of our individualism and independent spirit, and the best way to pay homage to that is by voting by individual with an individualistic conscience. * So please, I encourage everyone who hasn't done so already to please vote. A vote not cast is like a hoarse, one-winged sparrow. Namaste, Lisping Hibiscus "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
s1nfully_1nn0c3nt Senior Member
since 2003-10-26
Posts 1105Watertown, NY |
Has voted.  -Trina. |
||
|
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-25
Posts 63354Listening to every heart |
Me, too. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Yes! I can see REAL hope and change from my house! Congratulations to all the winners from the great States of FL, ILL, KY, OH, PA, SC, WI and so many others! Now do what you promised and faithfully represent the will of the people. We will hold your feet to the fire. CA and DE -- Seriously? |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
quote: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/11/03/michael-goodwin-power-people-nancy-pelosi-fired-obama-rebuke-republican-tea/ |
||
|
Cpat Hair
since 2001-06-05
Posts 11793 |
hmmmm... I suppose it is always contingent on your viewpoint, as well as the faith you put in your sources. I truly hope I am wrong and that you enthusiasm is warranted. However, I don't hold much confidence or faith that the election is going to suddenly turn around the fear mongering, the day to day politics, or the finger pointing and truly get something done about jobs and the economy. I also have doubts as to whether or not, the newly elected officials will be any more accountable than the ones turned out of office. IN a previous post, you say will hold their feet to the fire. I'm curious how we are going to do that now and going forward. I'm glad you are pleased with the results... and for the record, my opinion as well as my questions woud be the same had the results been different. Mark me down in the doubtful column... doubtful we will see much real change or real solutions... but simply a different set of arguments produced and a partisan environment. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Time will tell how well they do, whether they actually represent our will and do what we sent them there to do, or decide to play ball with the political machine, of either party, the lobbyists and the special interests instead. Hopefully they will push legislation immediately after they are sworn in to cut the out of control government spending, reduce taxes and reduce the overbearing, counter-productive, over-regulation of small businesses and work toward defunding and repealing Obamacare. We'll hold their feet to the fire by voting them out when they are up for re-election if they betray the trust we placed in them. |
||
|
Cpat Hair
since 2001-06-05
Posts 11793 |
yes, time will tell.... trutfully, I have as little faith in the electors, and I do the elected. Two years from now, I wonder how our hot buttons will hae changed and how resolved we will be. all it usually takes it for things to get a little bit better and we tend to forget our zeal and passion. As for the elected... if those are your agenda items that must be addressed, there is still a long road ahead for them to be able to get changes through. What happens if they compromise? what if Jobs and unemployment are more important to them than the items you listed, and they tackle those? are you then going to think they have failed to govern by the will of the people? |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
I don't view this election, according to the percentages and exit polling, as either a referendum on any particular politician or a repudiation of any particular agenda. And I respectfully disagree with Mr. Goldwin that this was an exercise in "American Exceptionalism". * Where I do agree with Goldwin is that many voters, especially Independents who favored the GOP candidate by 18 percentage points, felt the Democrats made the same mistake as the GOP essentially in having an unchecked, unbalanced trifecta, and while the GOP is viewed even slightly more unfavorably as a national party than the Democratic Party according to exit polling, both well-mobilized GOTV efforts by the GOP, as well as a perceived disenchantment with the Democrats' job performance and failing to tackle a breadth of economic policies in particular, lead to their hemorrhaging in the House. This wasn't about the voting populace favoring the GOP, it was about the voting populace punishing the incumbents for their inaction, which a vast majority were Democrats this cycle. * However, when you get beyond the House results, I strongly believe the GOP actually had a more lackluster performance in statewide races. They underperformed in gubernatorial races, and slightly underperformed in Senate races as well. True, they won several convincing races in Florida, Maine, Ohio and Pennsylvania, but they were projected to win Illinois and did not, hemorrhaged California away when they all but had it much of the election cycle, botched Colorado when they should have won that, and also winded up losing Minnesota and Oregon despite having led in the polling a majority of this cycle. I'd also argue they slightly underperformed in Senate races despite doing well enough to make a point. The fact tens of millions were spent by outside groups in opposition to Harry Reid in Nevada, yet Reid won by a much more sizable margin than any poll was suggesting, is a huge blow to American Crossroads in particular. They also would have taken the Senate majority by easily winning Colorado, Delaware and Washington had they went with GOP establishment candidates as opposed to Tea Party ones. There's no question the GOP have much to celebrate now, but their struggles in winning many key statewide races in a year that has been howlingly devastating for incumbents (which Democrats made the clear majority of) also suggests there are great limitations to their electability as well, and should they overreach this upcoming congressional cycle (38% of voters in exit polling said it's "very likely" they'll be disappointed with the GOP in Congress this cycle, with another 21% saying "somewhat likely") they will lose it just as quickly as the Democrats lost theirs. It'll be like a volleyball match. * One other point I'd make is that this election had virtually NOTHING to do with a repudiation of Pelosi or Obama or some far-left agenda as has been incessantly termed. There are multiple factors surely, but the dominant one was clearly economic discomfort and the incumbents' perceived failure to create jobs and secure their basic necessities and savings, among other domestic needs. To support this logic, in spite of the hemorrhaging the Democratic Party took with regards to House seats on Tuesday evening, 72 of the 76 Progressive Caucus members, or 95% of them, survived their challenges, including John Yarmuth in Kentucky's third district, which leans only slightly Democratic and amidst a state that Rand Paul conquered by double-digits. In contrast, among its 54 members, only 46% of the Blue Dog Democrats (26) survived their challenges. Doesn't sound like a repudiation of an agenda to me. The fact both the Tea Party-favorite Paul and the progressive favorite Yarmuth won resoundingly in the same state shows that most voters don't give a care about the artificial left-right construct. They (more or less anyway) want candidates who will speak for them, period, where ideology isn't at the top of their list of concerns. Namaste, Lisping Hibiscus "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I beleive that if they take care of reducing taxes and getting out of the way of businesses the job market will take care of itself. Of course it will take time but we should start to see things moving in the right direction once government gets out of the way. Compromise is not an option. They promised to work toward reducing the size and scope of the federal government. Some things may not be able to be fully realized until the current president is replaced in 2012, but we'll know way before then if they are keeping their word or have become typical weasles like the majority that go to DC end up becoming. |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
Awesome graphic of the election results: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy9r6H-czWA&feature=player_embedded But the GOP will be sadly mistaken if they view the election results as a Republican mandate rather than an affirmation of small government/free market principles and a repudiation of the socialist agenda of the past 2 years. |
||
|
Cpat Hair
since 2001-06-05
Posts 11793 |
pencil in a shrug here... With the stated priority of the GOP leaders being to make sure Pres Obama is a one term president, I don't see much hope that there will be a lot accomplished. Regardless of the idiology any of subscribe to, it would seem that putting political gains ahead of solving the issues, might still be the agenda for our elected leaders. I would offer, that the GOP does indeed seem to view it as a republican mandate, voters be hung... but, of course that is only my take on the statements being made. THe proof is yet to be based onthe actions taken. Early posturing and further polarization of the house and senate however, do not seem a redeeming begining |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I'm only aware that Mitch McConnell made that statement, not any of the other leaders. The rest seem focused on an agenda in line with the concerns of the electorate. But time will tell. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
