Voter anger is a good start

Sen. Arlen Specter: Don't let the door hit you on the way out (AP)

Voters in primaries across America made several things very clear Tuesday.

They don’t like Washington.

They don’t like incumbents.

They don’t like the political establishment.

They’re tired of partisan posturing.

They want results, not promises.

Voter anger cut across party lines, rejecting both Democrats and Republicans, bitch-slapping the leaders of both political establishments and sent a strongly-worded warning to President Barack Obama: Get your act together or you’ll be a one-term President.

Tea Party poster child Rand Paul destroyed the one-time powerful political machine of Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell. Support from Pennsylvania Democratic powerhouse Gov. Ed Rendell couldn’t save Arlen Specter. Obama hid in the White House, cowering in cowardice rather than risk what little is left of his political capital with an electorate that no longer listens to him.

Republicans lost a chance to pick up a house seat in the Pennsylvania special election to replace the late John Murtha but the winner distanced himself from both Obama and the failed Democratic leadership of Congress.

Voter anger is real and it is so intense that party lines don’t matter. Job one is throw the bums out and voters see the bums as members of both parties who are the problem.

A positive sign? Damn right it is. The compost heap of discarded incumbents is growing and it could be huge by the time the last votes are counted in the November mid-term elections.

Six years of working on Capitol Hill taught me that you can’t change the system by replacing one corrupt party with another. You can’t regain control of government by listening to the mantra of Democratic or Republican leaders. Partisans put party agendas above the best interests of the country.

Tuesday’s primary results are a good start but it will take more than just tossing out incumbents. The system that controls our government is so ingrained that it too must be thrown out.  Our government must be gutted to cut out the cancer of big-money and the dominating control of special interests.

Both parties and Obama are lost causes. They have sold out. The purge must continue beyond the November mid-term elections and extend into the 2012 Presidential campaigns.

Tuesday’s primaries were a start but it is just another bloody battle in what will be a long war.

Lock and load.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

8 Responses to "Voter anger is a good start"

  1. AustinRanter (AKA Gregg)  May 19, 2010 at 9:16 pm

    “Voter Anger A Good Start”

    “Tuesday’s primary results are a good start but it will take more than just tossing out incumbents. The system that controls our government is so ingrained that it too must be thrown out. Our government must be gutted to cut out the cancer of big-money and the dominating control of special interests.

    Both parties and Obama are lost causes. They have sold out. The purge must continue beyond the November mid-term elections and extend into the 2012 Presidential campaigns.

    Tuesday’s primaries were a start but it is just another bloody battle in what will be a long war.

    Lock and load.” – Doug Thompson

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

    To the above paragraphs repectively…

    Yep…exactly – The most important content in this column.

    Yep…exactly – Out on their asses

    Yep…exactly – If anybody thinks that a change in the guard is the ultimate message…thing again. A long War, Indeed.

    And Hell Yeah! Nice ending, Doug. I love good endings. I especially love happy endings, but we’ll not have one till all of the above is carried out by the American people.

    I dig all of the above!

  2. woody188  May 20, 2010 at 2:21 pm

    These are just a couple of the reasons why Specter lost. Listen to the applause when the man refers to Specter and his “cronies up on the Hill,” or how they boo when he says we must “Do This Fast” concerning health care insurance reform. Don’t let the mainstream media marginalize these things. Clearly people are fed up with the “representatives” in Washington.

    Yes Arlen, we just had another demonstration of Democracy. Don’t let the door hit you where the dog should have bit you!

  3. dvl666  May 20, 2010 at 4:52 pm

    The only problem is that bums were replacing them with are the idelouges from each Party’s wing( is Rand Paul really a solution?). Result no consensus building or shared responsibility. Dems want to tax the”rich” and spend. GOP wants to not tax anyone but keep spending. Neither side will work with the other or make any compromise. Neither will cut any of their sides programs etc. We need to change the whole ******* system.

    • griff  May 20, 2010 at 5:23 pm

      Hmmm…So you spell out the problems we face with continuing the two-party shuffle, but suggest that some thing different isn’t the solution either. So what, pray tell, is the solution in your mind?

  4. Mightymo  May 20, 2010 at 6:49 pm

    This is really nothing more than Idiocracy! You have to ask yourself the question, what exactly do I expect as a goal to acheive, and who is going to go to Washington to acheive it for me???

    There is no one or no group that will acheive the goals of the entire US! There is no one or group that can acheive all the goals for a single person! So what’s that mean, compromise on the part of what we expect as goals and on what legislatures try to acheive.

    We’ve backed outselves so completely into a corner in the US, there is no place left to go but back in the direction from which we came. Right and Left, two polar opposites with apparently no common ground! I say the idiots aren’t doing their jobs, or aren’t intelligent enough to know what they must do in order to be productive.

    But lets be honest with ourselves, I don’t think the majority want to be productive for us, we’re just a necessary burden that they must provide lip service to. Their true goals are self importance and wealth, and they get that by catering to a select few individuals with money, and not by catering to principles.

    Funny thing is though, that when someone is elected that simply wants to do the right thing for the people, then they are ridiculed and thrown out. Carter comes to mind, a simple guy with a distinguished military career that simply wanted to do good for America. No one can say anything bad about how Carter conducted himself in office, and to this day still can’t.

    But he wasn’t radical enough for the right, didn’t promote fiscal ineptitude, didn’t want to change the world, didn’t want to rise one group higher than another.

    • Almandine  May 20, 2010 at 9:43 pm

      OK Mo, I’ll play. Interesting set of ideas you expound – in order.

      “There is no one or no group that will acheive the goals of the entire US! There is no one or group that can acheive all the goals for a single person!”

      The point, of course, is that to compromise on goals means that none of the goals get accomplished… merely watered down. Hardly a win-win. I’ll work on my goals, you work on yours. You’re right, they’re clearly different.

      “We’ve backed ouRselves so completely into a corner in the US, there is no place left to go but back in the direction from which we came. ”

      If only you believed that I’d rejoice, as the point from which we came is that given us by the founders, with whom you have disagreed openly again and again. Their vision was for equal opportunity, not the quagmire of equal outcomes. What is the driver of excellence and productivity if the outcomes achieved by the hard workers and the successful are distributed by govt force to the lazy and expectant?

      “I say the idiots aren’t doing their jobs, or aren’t intelligent enough to know what they must do in order to be productive.”

      I agree on both points.

      “I don’t think the majority want to be productive for us, we’re just a necessary burden that they must provide lip service to.”

      Who is this collective WE of whom you speak? What MAJORITY is letting US down? Why does any majority bear responsibility for US? Why don’t WE take care of ourselves? What principles are the majority violating?

      “Funny thing is though, that when someone is elected that simply wants to do the right thing for the people, then they are ridiculed and thrown out. Carter comes to mind, a simple guy with a distinguished military career that simply wanted to do good for America. No one can say anything bad about how Carter conducted himself in office, and to this day still can’t.

      But he wasn’t radical enough for the right, didn’t promote fiscal ineptitude, didn’t want to change the world, didn’t want to rise one group higher than another.”

      First, I agree, Jimmy Carter was /is an honorable man. After that you’re wrong on all counts. His fiscal policies were atrocious – look up stagflation – and while he distinguished himself militarily, there’s a blackhawk down in the desert somewhere with his name on it. He did want to change the world, his Trilateral Commission and Council on Foreign Relations links clearly attest to that, and he was in fact more than radical enough for any conservative. Note that the term “radical” has been used historically to describe how far out on the LEFT someone is.

      Come on back, MO, let’s sort it out.

  5. b mcclellan  May 20, 2010 at 10:22 pm

    By all means gentlemen, continue.

    Quagmire of equal outcomes.
    Now that bears considerable consternation in it’s entire obviousness.
    Dang it Al, ya made me thunk..

  6. Bill  May 24, 2010 at 10:01 pm

    It’s about time. This is a good first step to my plan to improve government by only allowing anyone to serve ONE TIME, and then for only three years. This includes members of all the courts, all of Congress, and the entire Executive Branch.

    One Three Year Term for all government officials who are elected to or appointed to office.

    Yeah!!!!

Comments are closed.