Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

ELECTIONS: Now Congress will have to work

Letter by Mike Peluso, Puyallup on Nov. 4, 2010 at 11:09 am with 23 Comments »
November 4, 2010 2:09 pm

After the elections, the federal government is finally in an excellent position to enact meaningful solutions to our economic and social ills. With a conservative-leaning Supreme Court, a Democratic president, a Republican House and a slightly Democratic Senate, Democrats and Republicans are going to have to do the unthinkable: They’ll have to abandon the cram-it-down-your-throat tactics enjoyed by a majority House, Senate and president, such as the Republicans did after 2000 and the Democrats did after 2008.

They’ll now have to work together, hammer out compromises and find a common vision that’s best for all. They’ll have to listen more closely to the pulse of their constituents of both parties, rather than enact legislation with a smug “our party is right, your party is wrong” attitude. They’ll have to face up to the fact that the differences between Republicans and Democrats are ideological, rather than conflicts between good and evil, right and wrong, moral and immoral.

Sorry, Democrats. Sorry, Republicans. You both blew it with that kind of attitude when you were each given the chance after the last two presidential elections. All you succeeded in doing was alienating the members of your own parties.

Yes, the elections are a mandate, but not a partisan mandate. They’re a mandate to both parties to actually work together to solve our problems. They weren’t – and never should be – a mandate for one party to foist its ideologies on everybody.

Congress and Mr. President: Get to work!

Tags:
Leave a comment Comments → 23
  1. aislander says:

    The Republicans, for the brief times they held the executive and legislative branches in toto, didn’t have political capital to spend on reforming government. Would that they had! They got the tax cuts through, but all the rest of their energy was spent, for better or worse, on the war on terror. Meanwhile, the Dems fought a very effective holding action until the 2006 elections…

  2. maybe if the Republicans had spent less time collecting bribes (campaign donations) form every tom, dick, and harry lobbyist there would have been time for government reform.

  3. First_Lefty says:

    The infamous war on terror, combine with the infamous tax cuts (better known as borrowing from future generations) is the cause of our economic problems today.

    Neither are leaving soon. Vietnam showed us what a war can do to the economy and as to “tax cuts” – well, how do you cut revenue while your cost of business is increasing? That sounds like George Bush’s method of deep sixing businesses with Daddy’s money prior to his glorious political career.

    I feel lucky to have a good job, medical insurance and my bills intact because you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. The GOP hasn’t been sworn in yet and they’re already laying the plans for the banks to go back to playing roulette with our money. I have no need for any major purchases, so inflation…..take over! I need my house value to increase 10% a year for the next 5 years. (remember the good old 1970s?) By the time inflation is over (of course, there will be no new building) my little house on a golf course with a peekaboo view of the lake and Mt. Rainier should move me right into retirement. All I’ll need to do is find hackers that want to live on a course.

    If the Republicans don’t get away with delaying my Social Security another 3 to 5 years, I’ll be able to take the money and head to Mexico where I can live like a King.

    I’m practicing a special version of “Margaritaville”.

  4. First_Lefty says:

    Oh….and as to President Obama.

    Cash in your chips early. Don’t run for office in 2012.

    Who in the heck wants to wake up every morning to find out what the new racial slur will be directed at you.

    You’re a young man. Take the retirement, the security, your beautiful family and head home to Hawaii and enjoy life. You can’t change this country on your own and it will be a waste of your life trying.

  5. I don’t want any work done with liberals and prefer gridlock. Their love for tyranny is absolute.

  6. JungleBoy says:

    The election was a mandate to stop Obama from acting like a tyrant. I find it amusing that he showed up at the news conference wearing an American flag lapel pin. Once again, it seems, Obama is all about bipartisanship and “working together.” This is in stark contrast to the last two years. Does anyone remember how he refused to entertain any Republican ideas during the healthcare debate because “HE” (Joe Biden is chopped liver in Obama’s opinion) won the election. Time to swallow a dose of your own medicine, Mr. “Community Organizer in Chief.” It’s also time for him to stop admiring himself in the mirror.

    Obama’s agenda was smacked down by freedom loving Americans. This election should make it abundantly clear to all you lefties that most Americans don’t like living under a socialist regime.

  7. Actually, I sort of hope the radical right does stick to their ‘no compromise’ belief. The back flow that wflushes them out in 2012 will make 2010 look like ripples in a bathtub.

    JB – the real tyrant was G.W. Bush, and now is Bonehead and MacMouth.

  8. J.B. – please explain how Obama has been “acting like a tyrant”.

  9. bobcat1a says:

    If you’ve been listening to the Republican leadership in the last few days, you know that they have no intention of trying to work with Democrats.

  10. JungleBoy says:

    BB- Come on! Are you so blinded by your leftist ideology that you are unable to recognize that our government is becoming more and more intrusive?

    I could give you a laundry list of ways our government, under the leadership of Obama, is extending its influence into the lives of all Americans. For example, take health care. With the enactment of the healthcare bill, the federal government has basically taken over 1/6 of the American economy. Do you seriously believe that you have not lost some of your individual freedom as a result of this power grab.

    I could go on and on. Suffice it to say, however, Obama has been acting as a tyrant because he has presided over the oppressive growth of government at the expense of your personal freedom, and the freedom of every other American living in this country.

    I know you’re all about books. How about expanding your reading list by taking a look at “Liberty and Tyranny” (by Mark Levin). Here’s another idea, read some of the writings of the Frenchman, Alexis De Tocqueville and his views on America. Maybe then you’ll start to appreciate your freedom, and be wary of those who seem to be taking it away.

  11. Roncella says:

    jungleboy, Most liberals would never be caught reading Liberty and Tyranny.

    If they did have the courage to read it many would not understand what they were reading anyway.

    FirstLefty, I think its great your moving to Mexico, and I wish President Obama takes your advice not to run again in 2012, thats two positive moves for America.

  12. Ron & JB

    I’ve read L&T. To keep it quick and simple.

    1. Levins idea of liberty is reserved for the wealth.

    2. Liberals do not believe in big government.

  13. beerBoy says:

    JB. if you could go on with a laundry list then how come you can only come up with one example which is easily dismissed:

    The Health Care reform went through significant debate and vote – someone acting as a tyrant would have skipped both the debate and the vote and just imposed the change (without the various compromise measures included to try to entice the less conservative Republicans to sign on)

    If you maintain that the Bill itself is tyrannical then you need to support it with citations of how it is such. However, that wouldn’t bolster your claim that Obama himself is acting like a tyrant.

    Your claim that I am blinded by ideology seems to be an attempt to dirty me with your own sins. The fact that you cite a book by a right wing talk show radio pundit only serves to support a conclusion that you are the one blinded by ideology.

    You seem to think that your circular logic “my premise is true, your questioning my support for my question demonstrates that you are unable to see the truth” is logical. The fact that you cannot support your assertion – and resort to ad hominem attack and citation of a known ideologue – supports a conclusion that your belief in the assertion is based only in ideological bias.

  14. beerBoy says:

    But JB, it may be accurate to state that the US Government and ALL Presidents have been functioning in a tyrannical fashion since the rise of the Inverted Totalitarianism favored by neo-conservative military policy and neo-liberal economic policy initiated by Reagan.

    Perhaps even earlier – IKE’s farewell speech warning about the military/industrial complex can be seen as a recognition of the change to American government in reaction to the Cold War.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism

    Though I still feel that – as a general rule – most Dems are less abhorrent then most Repubs, it is evident that both Parties are under sway of the logic of inverted totalitarianism. This is why I could not bring myself to vote for Obama and, in fact, feel that voting for either of the two Parties only serves to legitimate the continued erosion of our liberties.

  15. Sumner401 says:

    the Republicans, for the brief times they held the executive and legislative branches in toto, didn’t have political capital to spend on reforming government.

    If that were the case then explain how, with less of a majority, the evil Democrats that you hate so much and give all credit for everything bad in the since the big bang, DID have the political capitol to reform not only Govt but every single aspect of human life?

    You do know that both times in history that the republicans have had total control of the Govt, we ended up in a depression…right?

  16. Sumner401 says:

    If you’ve been listening to the Republican leadership in the last few days, you know that they have no intention of trying to work with Democrats.

    Or doing a single thing that they promised to do.
    It’s the same thing with them time and time again.

  17. Sumner401 says:

    JB, the HCR bill doesn’t do the things you have been told it does.
    Once you get the truth and stop swallowing the far right lies, you will be laughing at you the way the rest of us are.

  18. JungleBoy says:

    BB- Here is a partial laundry list:

    February/March 2009: The Obama administration announced its intention to do away with the “Conscience” rule – a move which would force healthcare workers to abandon their religious beliefs and perform controversial medical procedures.

    July/August 2009: The Obama administration created a snitch-line where citizens are encouraged to rat on neighbors if they hear anything controversial or “fishy” about Obama and his healthcare plan.

    Sept/October 2009: Senator Russ Feingold (a Democrat) holds Senate hearings about the need for congressional oversight of all of Obama’s czars. The Obama administration refuses to send even one czar, or representative, to the hearing.

    October 2009: The president declares he is going to boycott Fox News, and refuse to grant the network any interviews. The uproar from the public, and other networks, forces the administration to backpedal on this policy.

    November 7th, 2009: The Universal Healthcare Bill passed through the House of Reps by a vote of 220 to 215, with one Republican voting “yes” and 39 Democrats voting “no.” Nancy Pelosi is famously quoted as saying, “We have to pass the bill so that we can find out what’s in it.”

    I could go on and on…

    By the way, your argument that “Liberty and Tyranny” is an insignificant piece of literature because it was written by a radio show pundit is weak. Allow me to analyze a few of the authors you, yourself, listed as significant only a short time ago (in another of your blog postings).

    Mein Kampf – written by a prison inmate

    Bible – written by a number of authors, some of whom were fisherman

    Qur’an- written by a merchant/shepherd who came up with the Islamic religion during the time he spent meditating in a cave

    Book of Mormon – written by a polygamist

    Again, I could go on and on. I am curious,though, how you would rank Harriet Beecher Stowe’s “Uncle Tom’s Cabin.” After all, her father was a minister and she was nothing more than a housewife with 7 children. Similarly, how do you rank Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”? Isn’t he nothing more than a politician? How is he qualified to write about the topic of global warming?

  19. beerBoy says:

    Seriously??!!!! You are comparing Levin’s polemic to the Bible, the Qu’ran, the Book of Mormon, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, and Mein Kampf.

    That is perhaps one of the most hysterical things I have ever seen written here. And…..to what “blog post” that you claim I have written are you referring to? That wasn’t me, dude.

    Levin’s Absolutism

    Levin reduces the American political system to ideological absolutism. Claiming “conservatism is the antidote to tyranny” (11) he provides an outline for proper conservative thought. Any political thought that does not perfectly agree with Levin’s outline, however, is deemed tyrannical. He sweeps through America’s past, picking and choosing historical events to support his thesis. In the process, he omits at least a third of American history, particularly anything that demonstrates conservatism’s weaknesses. With rhetorical eloquence, Levin reveres conservatism as the protector of liberty but never adequately clarifies liberty’s abuses in American history.

    Levin’s Statism

    Another theme in Levin’s work is the tyranny of statism. He characterizes the Modern Liberal as a statist who believes in the supremacy of the state over the individual. In doing so, he creates an illusion. In fact, varying degrees of statism have existed since the nation’s founding. Even the founders exhibited characteristics of Levin’s “statist.” They understood the dangers of democratic excess and limited the powers of the individual while paying lip service to liberty. They strengthened the federal government in light of weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation and reluctantly included a bill of rights. In essence, Levin collectively mischaracterizes the founding fathers and their relationship to modern conservatism.

    Levin’s Escapism

    Levin’s manifesto also promotes conservative escapism. In many ways, the presidency of George W. Bush complicates Levin’s assertions because it reflects Levin’s characterization of statism, particularly with the Patriot Act and bank bailouts. Levin effectively criticizes Republican statists, however, and identifies their shortcomings, implying that modern Republicans are not true conservatives. He also fails to demonstrate that his brand of conservatism can actually work as his premises for the manifesto are largely unsupported by history. Levin further excuses conservatives from their own statist past by distracting the reader with an enemy of liberty, the Modern Liberal. Twisting historical memory, Levin reinforces historical illusions and pushes for the recovery of a past that never existed.

    http://www.suite101.com/content/review-of-mark-levins-liberty-and-tyranny-a108130#ixzz14eiqRqf0

  20. JungleBoy says:

    BB- You clearly missed the point of my argument. I was challenging your assumption that a writer, such as Mark Levine, is insignificant merely because he is a talk radio pundit. The list that I provided supplies ample evidence that many of the most significant writings in history were written by people who were not academics – and could therefore be considered insignificant according to your standards of literary excellence. The blog that I referred to was written by you on October 24th at 12:24PM. Although you did not specifically refer to the various literary works as “significant,” the context of your other blog postings (written about the same time) suggests that your little list is viewed by you as being composed of significant works.

    Thanks, by the way, for your leftist analysis of Mark Levine’s book. Again, it appears you are trying to deflect the conversation away from the original argument of the current blog thread that Obama has acted in much the same way as a tyrant.

  21. beerBoy says:

    jb – where is the quote of Oct 24 at 12:24PM? I have no recollection of this.

  22. beerBoy says:

    JB – you cited Levin, I responded. If anyone deflected the conversation it was you……who was the first person to bring up the Obama as tyrant meme.

    It seems you feel that you have the right to control a thread and get annoyed when someone challenges any of your talking points or “Scripture”.

  23. JungleBoy says:

    BB- For your list of books you’ve read, look at “Obama: Rossi Supporters Allowed In.” As for continuing this debate at this time, I’m done. May we meet again on another topic.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0