Comments on: The blame game…

By: KLSmith

KLSmith — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 05:51:02 +0000

Neo: you are right about Scott Brown. note, though that I said 4 out of 6 were winnable. just making a list of the non-TPers that lost.
I’ve really enjoyed your blog (and plan to keep reading) but, I feel the need for some perspective in my life. I’ve neglected my house and yard too much these last 5yrs. A long, slow American train wreck I couldn’t take my eyes off. Being a changer myself, I felt like I woke up a bit on the late side. It felt like waking up just in time to see the light from a train barreling through a tunnel at our great nation and it’s ideals.
I agree with rickl on his concept of this election being like game 7 of the World Series. (and I’ll add we were in the 9th with 2 strikes against us).
The Republican party seems to want to abandon their base – that will not work out well.
I admire all of those who have not given up hope. I always thought that people that felt there was no difference between the two parties were crazy. Now I wonder if they were right and we’re just watching the political equivalent of professional wrestling. Plus, the American public just proved how profoundly stupid they are.
This is my too long way of saying that, I really don’t want to rain on other people’s parade, be the ants at their picnic. I’ll vote but, I think we are now on the same path as the Europeans and we won’t be going back.
And I don’t want to stink up your blog with my gloomy attitude.

By: rickl

rickl — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 01:21:24 +0000

texexec Says:
November 9th, 2012 at 2:09 pm

With all due respect, you have GOT to be f*cking kidding me.

We need another political dynasty like the Kennedys? F*CK THAT.

Besides which, I frankly think he looks a little creepy.

By: expat

expat — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 00:55:43 +0000

How about finding some chick lit that challenges the received wisdom of the young unmarried women? It couldn’t be too overtly political, but perhaps have an admirable character who can defy PC.

By: kcom

kcom — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 00:32:27 +0000

Quoting myself above:

There’s only so much you can do.

Meaning, there’s only so much you can do within the current set of rules governing elections and voting. If the rules stay the same and enough people discover, a la Ben Franklin, that they can vote themselves other people’s money with no personal penalty, and there’s no legal mechanism to stop them, society as a whole (or at least a prosperous society as a whole) is screwed. How long that takes, I’m not certain, but the outcome is certain.

Of course, there is more you can do, but it would require changing the rules – or ignoring them. Rebellion, secession, civil war, a crash and re-organization, etc. I guess now I do understand how the Roman Empire (and perhaps more importantly, the Roman Republic before it) fell. A little bit at a time, at first, almost innocuously, and then faster and faster until it was too late and too hard to climb back up that slippery slope.

By: kolnai

kolnai — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 00:13:24 +0000

With respect to Occam’s suggestion, and the growing consensus among us – the “base” – that it’s a good idea, here’s a piece that should be read:

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2012/11/cowards-lose.html

Playtime is over. Let’s see what we’re made of.

By: kcom

kcom — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 00:10:46 +0000

There’s only so much you can do. Once people in sufficient numbers start voting themselves big gobs of other people’s money you are on the slipperly slope and heading downhill. It will only speed up in the future as, borg-like, more people are assimilated. (“Hey, as long as they’re handing out free money I’m going to get my share.”)

There used to be enough personal and social integrity in the country that it was understood there is no free lunch and others don’t owe you a living (or health care or contraceptives or cash for your clunker). But since that idea now seems to be lost for a determinative fraction of the population it’s hard for me to conceive it being regained. The snowball will continue until the crash comes because there is no incentive for people to become more responsible, only incentive to become less. Lacking something? Just vote to force someone else to give it to you. That’s the behavior that’s being rewarded (and will be until the money finally gives out). And the problem will be not just that there are no more golden eggs, but the goose will be dead, too.

We really are heading into an Ayn Rand world, where an increasing fraction of the population believes other people owe them free goods and services by virtue of their existence. It’s hard to see how we can climb back up the slope to change this dynamic when the numbers with this belief have ballooned so dramatically over the last few decades.

Ben Franklin said it all:
When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.

How could it not?

By: Curtis

Curtis — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 23:41:14 +0000

The clear eyed mastery of Mark Steyn:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/333116/edge-abyss-mark-steyn

Excerpt:

Americans as a whole have joined the rest of the Western world in voting themselves a lifestyle they are not willing to earn. The longer any course correction is postponed the more convulsive it will be. Alas, on Tuesday, the electorate opted to defer it for another four years. I doubt they’ll get that long.

By: Papa Dan

Papa Dan — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 22:32:04 +0000

texexec-That is why I advocate 30 second buys on the established networks with a smart rebuttal of the approved MSM narrative of the day, placed during shows like Leno. Make them realize that there is another side to the story, and sometimes that may be the only news they get of a story.

By: texexec

texexec — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 22:26:09 +0000

Scott Brown was helped when he won by the fact that it was an off-year election also. Didn’t have to buck the straight Dem vote in a presidential election year.

By: texexec

texexec — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 22:24:30 +0000

For those advocating a new conservative oriented network, that sounds fine, but it better provide non-news programs that people want to see…especially those before and after the news hour…highly entertaining non-political programs. Then slip in conservative leaning news programs.