|
November 09, 2006
Will the government get smaller now?
Should I continue to hold my nose? I feel like a real party pooper not weighing in and inveighing about the election results more than I have. But this damned cold is one of the worst I have ever had, and between the medicines and the cold I just can't think clearly, and when I can't think I can't write. While I think the Republicans had grown fat and corrupt and lost sight of what they once were (principles and ethics stand out), I don't think this election was lost because of any one overarching cause, because if you total up CNN's numbers -- "42 percent said corruption and ethics; 40 percent, terrorism; 39 percent, the economy; 37 percent, Iraq; 36 percent, values; and 29 percent, illegal immigration" -- any one of them could have made the difference. If I did have to go with one cause, Mark Tapscott put it quite well: "When Republicans worry more about staying in government than about limiting government, they get thrown out of government."Via Glenn Reynolds. "Small government" were once two words which described the Republican Party. So what accounts for the metasized monster they've been feeding all these years? I suppose it says a lot about the arrogance of power, and human nature. But like I say, there were a lot of things on voters' minds. More than any other cause, the moribund Republican Party lost because the Democrats for once ran solid, genuinely moderate candidates. James Webb and Joe Sestak are two good examples. For the first time in recent history, the Republicans could no longer rely on the opposition acting like a bunch of loonies in in some ZombieTime post. They had to show something tangible, and all they did was to try to distance themselves from an unpopular president, while running on a record of supporting him. Everyone could see through the lip service that was paid to "small government" and "fiscal restraint" too. As to "values," I'm not the right guy to ask (because the word places me in a bit of a conflict of interest). We're all human, and we all have things we call values. Some wear their values on their sleeves while others keep them in the closet. While I can't imagine any rational person judging the Republican Party because a single congressman talked dirty to teens, that and the Haggard affair hardly endeared the party to people who've long wanted to give Falwell and company Barry Goldwater's long promised kick in the ass. Whether the Republicans are viewed from a libertarian perspective, an economic conservative perspective, or a social conservative perspective, they failed. I mean, the best I could come up with was "Hold your nose and vote Republican!" While that can hardly be called a winning slogan, as it turned out, I had such a terrible cold that I didn't need to hold my nose. But I thought about the Republicans when I was forced to stand in a long line in the drugstore, which no longer sells my favorite sudafed-containing combination cold medicines. There were too many of them, and now that the pharmacists have to keep Sudafed behind the counter, the only sudafed product they want to stock is Sudafed itself. And that they give only after you stand in line, show ID, watch them waste time filling out a form for you to sign. All the regular cold medicines which used to work now don't. They have a product called phenylephrine -- and it sucks: Bad news for allergy and cold sufferers - researchers in Florida say the over-the-counter nasal decongestant that's replacing Sudafed on many drugstore shelves is ineffective.Phenylephrine does not work (it didn't for me), but it's in all those once-reliable products like Theraflu, Nyquil, Robitussin, etc. as well as the store generic versions. Obviously because these places are in business and want to make money with the OTC stuff, they don't want to hire more staff to deal with the forms, nor do they want to waste valuable space in their prescription pharmacy shelves for the innumerable products that once contained Sudafed. I even spotted a Robitussin CF with sudafed behind the counter -- but they wouldn't sell it to me, saying that it was "no longer to be offered" and could not be rung up for sale. The ordinary consumers are the ones being screwed by this nonsense; you can rest assured the meth cookers will find another way. The federal government continues to make the lives of ordinary citizens harder with bureaucratic laws which reach out and touch everyone. It's easy to blame Republicans, as they've been in power for so long. But does anyone think the Democrats won't do the same thing? The Talent-Feinstein Combat Meth Act was passed by a overwhelming majority, and the last time I looked, Dianne Feinstein wasn't a Republican. I know, it's just a little thing. But the founders of this country envisioned a federal government with limited powers, which wouldn't get involved with these "little things." Ordinary people were never supposed to encounter the federal government in the daily lives. Now it regulates their cars, their toilets, their schools, their land, and even their runny noses. I wonder how many voters would have just liked to vote to cut the whole federal government down to size. We won't know, because that wasn't on CNN's list of voter concerns. But if we assume that cutting government was a concern to at least some voters, what were they supposed to do? I held my nose, and a lot of good that did me. (Besides, thanks to the Republican and Democratic sudafedayeen, I'm too stopped up to care.) posted by Eric on 11.09.06 at 08:16 AM
Comments
Be thankful you don't live in the People's Republic of Oregon. The Gov campaigned on meth production reduction from putting Sudafed behind the counter. He did not run on his evilness - it requires a prescription now. Always a good idea when legislators tell doctors how to do their job. This from a state that offers drive thru suicide. Ric in Oregon · November 9, 2006 06:50 PM Noi ti forniamo una facile e versatile visione d'insieme del tuo portafoglio - questo rende piú facile seguire il tuo rendimento. Milf Crusier · November 18, 2006 10:36 PM Twistys Presents: Zdenka zdenka · November 21, 2006 01:28 PM Twistys Presents: Jana Cova jana cova · November 22, 2006 01:09 AM Twistys Presents: Eva Shine eva shine · November 22, 2006 03:15 AM Twistys Presents: Erica Campbell erica campbell · November 22, 2006 05:29 AM Twistys Presents: Devon devon · November 22, 2006 07:36 AM Twistys Presents: Gauge gauge · November 22, 2006 09:42 AM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
War For Profit
How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight Wind Boom Isaiah Washington, victim Hippie Shirts A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists PETA agrees -- with me! The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Small government will return (as a platform, anyway). It will take an outsider, such as Gingrich or Toomey, to have credibility on the issue at this point.
Maybe two years of Republicans telling us that they learned their lesson will be enough, but I doubt it. It all depends on how much the nanny state grows under the Bush/Pelosi regime.
A key to watch will be the minimum wage. It will be one of the first things the Democrats want to pass, and it will be very hard for this President to veto, under the circumstances.