Pat Caddell: Country's Mood Is "Pre-Revolutionary"

DamnYankee

Loyal to the end
Here is what it all comes down to, as he asks:

"Who is sovereign? The people or the political class?"

Let me suggest that in politics, just as in drama, the intellect steers, but the emotion drives.

We would all be intellectually opposed to Obama's and the Democrats' agenda in all possible worlds.

But the intellect steers, emotion drives.

What has people willing to walk on their naked knees over broken glass is the emotion of it. Not just that we disagreed as pointedly (and at first as respectfully) as we could, but that, having lodged our objections as natural-born Americans with the power, we're told, to shape our own political destinies, our input into our own fates was met with a single dismissive fuck-you:

"We. Don't. Care."

Followed up with:

"We. Will. Do. What. We. Please."
http://minx.cc/?post=304334
 
Things can change after the upcoming mid-terms as long as people vote (unlikely), and then only if the elected candidates keep their campaign promises (also unlikely).

2010 features the most U.S. Senate seats on the November ballot (37) since 1962.

2010 also has the most elections for governor ever on the same ballot (also 37).

2010 has produced one of the highest percentages of Democratic-versus-Republican House line-ups in modern history.

Fully 405 of House races out of 435 have both a Democrat and a Republican running for the seat—the gold standard of basic two-party choice in democracy.

Democrats have nominated 410 candidates for the House and Republicans have an even larger number, 430. For the GOP this is the most congressional districts they have ever contested.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...y_j_sabato/the_record_setting_midterm_of_2010
 
This is an excellent time for the GOP to field some great hard-core conservatives and see some real victories. Just as I predicted when The Obama was elected. :good4u:
 
If only they do, if only people turn out and vote, and if only the candidates stay true to their campaign promises.
 
If only they do, if only people turn out and vote, and if only the candidates stay true to their campaign promises.
When folks get angry they vote, and they are angry. The politician who promises to restore America back to its Constitutional greatness will do very well. These types are unlikely to pander to the country-club Republicans that have let the Democrat Party do what it has done.

I'm optimistic.
 
When folks get angry they vote, and they are angry. The politician who promises to restore America back to its Constitutional greatness will do very well. These types are unlikely to pander to the country-club Republicans that have let the Democrat Party do what it has done.

I'm optimistic.
Yeah, they love us so much they wish to send us back in time, when women couldn't vote and black men were only 2/3rds people! black women, forget it!
 
Yeah, they love us so much they wish to send us back in time, when women couldn't vote and black men were only 2/3rds people! black women, forget it!
Women suffrage and Civil Rights were both GOP initiatives, fought against vehemently by your beloved Democrat Party! :)
 
Women suffrage and Civil Rights were both GOP initiatives, fought against vehemently by your beloved Democrat Party! :)

Why don't you tell the whole story?

Too scared?

Those self same "Republicans" who granted women the right to vote and freed the slaves became disgusted with the narcissistic, self interest of their "Republican party" and took their "civil rights for all" ideology with them to the DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

Why don't you ever want to talk about that part of the story?
 
Why don't you tell the whole story?

Too scared?

Those self same "Republicans" who granted women the right to vote and freed the slaves became disgusted with the narcissistic, self interest of their "Republican party" and took their "civil rights for all" ideology with them to the DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

Why don't you ever want to talk about that part of the story?
Why don't you tell your version? Too scared? :)
 
This is an excellent time for the GOP to field some great hard-core conservatives and see some real victories. Just as I predicted when The Obama was elected. :good4u:
Go ahead. Nominate wingnuts if you want to see Dems dominate.

You're seriously wrong if you think this case of incumbant fever is a stamp of approval for right wing politics.

The Democratic administration has approval ratings around 50%
Congress has historically low approval ratings and......
congressional Republicans have the lowest ratings of all.

If Republicans gain it will be because people are fed up with the partisan grid lock in DC and Democrats, since they have majority in most houses, have the most to lose but if you think that means America will go out and vote right wingnuttery, you need your head examined.

Expect modest gains by Republicans. They may capture the house with a slight majority. That's about it.
 
Go ahead. Nominate wingnuts if you want to see Dems dominate.

You're seriously wrong if you think this case of incumbant fever is a stamp of approval for right wing politics.

The Democratic administration has approval ratings around 50%
Congress has historically low approval ratings and......
congressional Republicans have the lowest ratings of all.

If Republicans gain it will be because people are fed up with the partisan grid lock in DC and Democrats, since they have majority in most houses, have the most to lose but if you think that means America will go out and vote right wingnuttery, you need your head examined.

Expect modest gains by Republicans. They may capture the house with a slight majority. That's about it.

Sure, 15ppMoot. The pendulum will swing the other way, and I'll be pushing is as hard as I can to The Right. The Obama is going to face a GOP majority in both houses and will veto, veto, veto until 2012 when we elect Reagan II. :cof1:
 
Sure, 15ppMoot. The pendulum will swing the other way, and I'll be pushing is as hard as I can to The Right. The Obama is going to face a GOP majority in both houses and will veto, veto, veto until 2012 when we elect Reagan II. :cof1:
adn who will that be? Palin? Hucabee? LOL Go right ahead. That would be high comedy indeed. It's been a long time since there was a land slide in a Presidential election. Not since 84! LOL
 
She's getting a lot of experience "thinking on her feet" at FNC! She's going to be a formidable candidate and she's the only one with the balls to turn this stinking ship around!
 
Question:

I have read that the three fifths provision in the 13th amendment was created not to deny invidual rights, but to limit the representation of Southern States in Congress. Is this true? That only 3/5 ths of a stes slaves could be counted for representation?
 
She's getting a lot of experience "thinking on her feet" at FNC! She's going to be a formidable candidate and she's the only one with the balls to turn this stinking ship around!
No, as soon as something more promising comes along, she will bail! Write another book about it.
 
Things can change after the upcoming mid-terms as long as people vote (unlikely), and then only if the elected candidates keep their campaign promises (also unlikely).

2010 features the most U.S. Senate seats on the November ballot (37) since 1962.

2010 also has the most elections for governor ever on the same ballot (also 37).

2010 has produced one of the highest percentages of Democratic-versus-Republican House line-ups in modern history.

Fully 405 of House races out of 435 have both a Democrat and a Republican running for the seat—the gold standard of basic two-party choice in democracy.

Democrats have nominated 410 candidates for the House and Republicans have an even larger number, 430. For the GOP this is the most congressional districts they have ever contested.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...y_j_sabato/the_record_setting_midterm_of_2010

It would be interesting to live in one of those districts where there's just an independent and no party candidate.
 
Question:

I have read that the three fifths provision in the 13th amendment was created not to deny invidual rights, but to limit the representation of Southern States in Congress. Is this true? That only 3/5 ths of a stes slaves could be counted for representation?

Its not in the 13th, its in Article I, Sec. 2. The North didn't want slaves counted at all, since it would just give the South more representation, but since Southerners are whiny little bitches, the North agreed to counting 3/5 of them. Franklin tried to argue that he should be allowed to count 3/5 of all Pennsylvania cattle.
 
Back
Top