Thursday, November 09, 2006

what happened tuesday

"I'm obviously disappointed with the outcome of the election," Bush said. "And as the head of the Republican Party, I share a large part of the responsibility."

Ya think?

My personal unresearched unverified analysis is this: Bush and his cohorts, along with many members of the Republican Party, have worked very hard since 9/11 to make this country as divided as possible in order to drum up support for invading Iraq -- all that "if you're not with us, you're against us" malarkey. They also found a temporary sweet spot by pandering to the Religious Right. In the process, they forgot the middle ground. In 2006, the public is getting tired of all the extremism and wants to be centrist again. (Heck, it was earlier than 2006; the Dover, PA school board thought they were following popular opinion when they wedged Intelligent Design into the science curriculum, but all eight of those board members were defeated in 2005.)

But since they've constructed this illusion that each party is one homogeneous unit, the sins and scandals of any one member affect the entire party. Enter Bob Taft, Tom Noe, Mark Foley, Tom DeLay, et al. In Ohio, the voting public was very clearly tired of the scandals surrounding certain members of the Ohio Republican Party, so it affected every race in the state; everything from governor to Second Circuit Municipal Court of Public Domestic Appeals. The only state races they won were for state supreme court, and State Auditor by a narrow margin.

Will the Democrats fare any better? A Congress that's actually capable of passing laws is always a dangerous proposition, so it's hard to say. Power is power and all that. I'm guessing we'll at least see less of the fundamentalist conservative Christian intrusion into our government. The real question is: will The Daily Show ever be the same? :)

As for the smoking issues, I was glad to see Issue 4 defeated by such a large margin, and Issue 5 passed as well. I'll be interested to see how well it's enforced. I've heard it compared to Prohibition, and I'm sure there will still be some rural watering holes where the owner and patrons continue to smoke and agree not to squeal. The difference is that the vast majority of people drink alcohol, whereas the vast majority don't smoke. Drinking is still a fashionable good-ol'-boys-talking-about-life notion; smoking no longer is, except maybe the occasional cigar in one's private home.

For those who are worried about not being able to smoke at work anymore, I'll offer up the wise words a pro-universal-healthcare pro-tax-and-spend pro-union pro-choice anti-smoking-ban socialist once told me: "If ya don't like it, move somewhere else!"

Ouch, too soon?

3 Comments:

At Fri Nov 10, 06:37:00 AM 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

We'll have to see about the Daily Show. Will they attack democrats? If so, will the viewers still watch? Maybe they will attack the moderate democrats, because they aren't liberal enough?

With regard to the election, I think Schwarzenegger has got it right: "I think this is good that we have new blood coming to Washington, that we have new people with new ideas coming to Washington,because Washington was stuck."
Well, stuck may be a bit of a euphemism...but he's got the right idea.
In general, I think it's always a bad idea for onep arty to have control of the White House AND Congress.
-skootch

 
At Sat Nov 11, 01:38:00 PM 2006, Blogger Mike said...

I don't see why the Daily Show won't go after the Dems. Idiots in power are idiots in power, it doesn't matter if they're red or blue.

Michael Moore, and I know this isn't the best source of a quote, said that if the Dems ever got in power he'd go after them as heavy handed as he did the Republicans.

 
At Wed Nov 15, 12:34:00 AM 2006, Blogger Bryan said...

Agreed. Also remember that Jon Stewart barred no holds when Clinton was in office. Jon took over The Daily Show just as the Lewinsky scandal was...... dare I say it? Coming to a head.

{rimshot!}

 

Post a Comment

<< Home