Election Comments
- Thread starter oddfellow4870
- Start date
It makes great theater. It stretches the acting ability of the talking heads and the Democratic pundits. They were so wrong (always have been, but that is another issue). It's like watching the crew of a political galleon suddenly trying to paddle backward as the ship heads downstream toward the waterfall.
I found exceptional humor in watching Paul Begala and James Carville (who Maureen Dowd called "brilliant men") on CNN make excuses for the Republican slam-dunk. I never thought Carville could look more sour than his normal self. (Carville said "The blacks let the Democratic Party down". Oh, really? You mean the Democratic Party never let the blacks down? Like for the last 40 years?)
Note to Bill and Hill and Al and Tom and Richard: no need to hold up your finger to see which way the wind is blowing; there's a hurricane out there.
I found exceptional humor in watching Paul Begala and James Carville (who Maureen Dowd called "brilliant men") on CNN make excuses for the Republican slam-dunk. I never thought Carville could look more sour than his normal self. (Carville said "The blacks let the Democratic Party down". Oh, really? You mean the Democratic Party never let the blacks down? Like for the last 40 years?)
Note to Bill and Hill and Al and Tom and Richard: no need to hold up your finger to see which way the wind is blowing; there's a hurricane out there.
Just trying to get some conversation going. With the baseball season over, I'm trying to stretch the political season a bit as a form of entertainment.
I welcome opposite opinions, but look forward to the day when the news is less agenda driven. I usually count the number of news pieces that push an agenda and the ones that just report. It's amazing how little reporting there is.
I welcome opposite opinions, but look forward to the day when the news is less agenda driven. I usually count the number of news pieces that push an agenda and the ones that just report. It's amazing how little reporting there is.
I would have loved to hear the pitch the Dems tossed to Lautenburg to convince him to take Toricelli's spot. Maybe it went something like this,
Dems: Hey Frank we would like you to take Toricelli's spot in the upcoming elections.
Lautenburg: I dunno. Being a senator is an awlful lot of work. what can you offer me?
Dems: Well Frank it looks real good that we'll mantain control of the senate. How does being a chairman of a commitee sound?
Lautenburg: Sounds pretty good, you can count me in.
Dems: Hey Frank we would like you to take Toricelli's spot in the upcoming elections.
Lautenburg: I dunno. Being a senator is an awlful lot of work. what can you offer me?
Dems: Well Frank it looks real good that we'll mantain control of the senate. How does being a chairman of a commitee sound?
Lautenburg: Sounds pretty good, you can count me in.
A little more seriously: I think the biggest thing keeping good people from public office these days is all the bullshit that they have to go through in a protracted campaign. I think this is one of the reasons we end up with such poor choices available to us in any Presidential Election. OTOH, I think that given the opportunity to jump in with only a few weeks left and not have to go through all the BS, that there would be a much larger pool of guys who would take the chance/opportunity. If they told Lautenburg 5 months before the election, he might have said "no". But this was a "no lose" proposition for him ( if he loses, he simply says "what did you expect ? I only had a few weeks to run" ).
It's worse than that. What happens is that you get the dullest person who just happens to be "clean", rather that anyone who has ever actually had any original/controversial thoughts. And even if someone is "clean", if they have a brain they don't want to go through "procto-character exam" and or have a bunch of BS manufactured about them, and most "good" people won't stand for that in return for doing "public service".