Brett wrote:

"It wasn't about Iraq. It was about the GOP forgetting what it stood for."

Bingo.

I'm glad you made it to the polls and at least wrote in some names. I didn't even bother doing that. First time since I cast my first vote in 1982. Sad.

My hope is that the next few years will show how messed up the Democrats really are and the Republicans will come back swinging full force. A lot needs to change, though. I'll refer to your post titled "Republican = Dumb; Democrat = Cartoon" as to what those changes would be. Again, I think you hit the nail on the head with that one.

Posted by Kelly, 11/8/2006 11:55:35 AM

You are dead on why the GOP was shown the door. Turn your back on your base and you get what you deserve. I am actually glad it happened as maybe a true conservative will emerge from the rubble for 08. Until then we'll probably get investigation after investigation, an attempt at impeachment, and probably another supreme court battle. Let the fireworks begin.

I was actually listening to Rush the day of the show, but did not see his movements on the dittocam. I thought nothing of him calling out Michael J. Fox, especially after finding out he never read the amendment he was stumping for. Those ads (and they ran more with children) were despicable. Had they spoken of embryonic stem cells and cloning instead of a general stem cell research no problem but they were blatant lies. Reminds me of John Edwards comments that Christopher Reeve would walk again during the 04 election. Disgusting. Hannity has really turned into a pinhead.

Oh well 2 more years of grabbing our ankles and saying "thank you sir may I have another." The new definition of democracy.

Posted by Anonymous, 11/8/2006 1:05:19 PM

Okay, I don't know why I'm wasting my time because y'all are pretty set in your opinion, as I am in mine. It's just that the ghost of my dead Irish Democrat father is poking me in the shoulder and whispering, "Okay, Dolly, your opinion is just as good as theirs...tell 'em what you think." :-)

I agree that it wasn't about Iraq: I think the American people are pissed off about a lot more than Iraq. Even though I don't think we should be in Iraq, for me personally and on a local level, it was about a woman's right to choose. For some folks in other states like Colorado and Missouri, it was about the minimum wage. However, I think even a lot of people who think we should be in Iraq think things are being handled incorrectly. I think the bigger commentary on Iraq isn't necessarily the election so much as Dubya finally accepting Rumsfield's resignation this time.

I think this was bound to happen...anytime the country goes way conservative or way liberal, it bounces back to center. I don't think anybody is going to get anything done, no matter who controls congress until everybody starts to meet in the middle. I hope (against good sense, probably) that the speechifying from both sides we've been hearing about bipartisanship comes to pass, and I believe it has a better chance with Democratic leadership and some sensible Republicans (I know there are some--unfortunately they don't live in the white house)

I think anybody who didn't use their priviledge to vote basically slaps their country in the face. I think we just witnessed the most impressive display of democracy in action that I've seen in my lifetime. Maybe this will serve as a better example to the people of Iraq than soldiers and contractors.

Feel free to fire away at hippie girl. I said my piece. I'm done.

Posted by Bella, 11/8/2006 2:01:58 PM

Bella, I enjoy hearing your opinions. I don't always agree, but, I do give them thought and sometimes you do make some sense. :P

Hmmm, did I slap my country in the face by not voting? I don't think so. There wasn't a single person on the ballot I felt deserved my vote. Not one. So, I didn't vote. I certainly wasn't going to vote the "lesser of two evils" just so I could say I voted. I do agree, voting is a priviladge. So is receiving a vote. Nobody earned it, this time, so, nobody got it.

Posted by Kelly, 11/8/2006 2:49:16 PM

Hey Bella, Your opinion is just as valid as anyone's, so never hesitate to let your voice be heard. Probably the biggest problems between the political parties now (add in the blogosphere) are 1) lack of respectful discussion of ideas and 2) the vicious personal attacks. Lost in the lack of discussion is the will of the people. So last night, for the first time in years, I too sat out the election and said none of the above. My way of exercising my right to give each party a boot in the ass.

Rumsfeld out, Hastert out as leader, Bolton probably gone tomorrow. Makes me wonder if Bush cut a deal to avoid investigation, possible impeachment, and total gridlock in his next 2 years?

Posted by Anonymous, 11/8/2006 3:07:43 PM

Thank you for your support. I must admit that I don't always feel respected by Conservatives for my liberal leanings. But I blame Rush Limbaugh for that...not any of you. :-)

And no offense, but seriously, none of the candidates here shared your view on ANYTHING? ANYTHING?

And even if they didn't, I wish people wouldn't see it as 'voting for a lesser of the evils'. It's very difficult- nay, impossible, to please all the people all of the time. Even if it just means voting for the guy because he's in your party and he's supporting the basic platforms of that party...voting helps the decision get made. And frankly, in this particular election, I think it sent a strong message...the country doesn't like the direction it's going under it's current leadership. I get what you're saying...you aren't voting on principle. I'm voting, even if I don't like all the candidate's views, on principle as well. Yours is a personal principle, mine is a broader principle. Too bad we both have to compromise ourselves to live up to them, but I guess that's life.

Besides, voting also gives you more of a right to bitch about politics, and I think we all agree, that's what it's all about. :-)

Posted by Bella, 11/8/2006 5:17:57 PM

No offense taken.

I fail to see how voting for somebody in my party, just because he/she happens to be in my party, is helping anything. Especially when I feel my party has abandoned what it says it stands for. In this case, it wasn't just about sharing the same view on a few topics. It really was a "wake up" non-vote against my party and the direction it's going. The worst thing about the outcome of this election is for the next two years I'm going to have to listen to Pelosi (note: buy heavy duty mute button for tv...). But I asked for it, didn't I? ;)

Posted by Kelly, 11/8/2006 6:52:45 PM

As for shared ideas hmmmmm. Democrats, I really have no idea what they really stand for other than "not Bush." Too easy for them to say they will fix healthcare, social security, make the country more secure, deal with terrorism better. Someone show me how. Do that and get my vote.

As for the Republicans, they seem to have forgotten most every conservative principle that got them elected. Growing government as they have, earmarks, lack of border security, were just too much for me to give anyone my vote. I wanted to send a message that if you forget conservatism, you can forget my vote.

I'm gonna turn off my tv, put on my coat, and take my dog for a nice walk. Tomorrow is another day, let's see what the Democrats will do with the new responsibility they have been given.

Posted by Anonymous, 11/8/2006 7:18:23 PM

My goodness... that's the most comment that I;ve seen out of this web site in a while. Politics will do that, I guess. Maybe I'll post a religious post next...

Voting: voting for someone is a "Yes" vote. But there is not a "No" vote in elections. I see Kelly's decision (and the other anonymous poster's decision) as a "No" vote. I'm with them - there was no "Yes" for me this year. Dave Bob Jeff Lombardi Lampert Lamberti couldn't even get the President and the Vice-President, both of his own party, to pronounce his name correctly. Jim Nussle, a successful multi-term Representative, only threw negativity around, from what little of the ads I saw.

On the other side, Leonard Boswell is probably the lamest congressperson ever. He does nothing but breathe and collect a paycheck. Wasted space. Ugh. And Culver doesn't want to deport illegal immigrants. Instead, he wants to attack the companies that hire them. Fine to go after the company, but what about the then-jobless wonders that have nothing to do on our streets but crime? They're here illegally. Send them home. His recipe is only good for taxing businesses through fines.

I'm good with their "No" votes. There's a lot of good hammering going on right now in Republican circles. That's healthy. Hopefully, the Iowa GOP organization gets rebooted too. It's not effective.

Posted by Brett Rogers (http://www.beatcanvas.com), 11/9/2006 5:42:38 AM

Whatever guys. I never intended to change anybody's mind. You all have lovely points that I don't agree with, that are, in my opinion, wrong. Just as mine are wrong to you. It's cool.

Brett said: Instead, he wants to attack the companies that hire them. Fine to go after the company, but what about the then-jobless wonders that have nothing to do on our streets but crime? They're here illegally. Send them home. His recipe is only good for taxing businesses through fines.

I've been wanting to say this a long time when seeing your opinions on the 'brilliance' of the increased border patrol/fence. We have to go after the businesses because frankly, the economy, especially Ag economy, would collapse without illegal workers because they do the work a lot of US jobless wonders won't for a helluva lot less money. That's why the businesses are where you start.

And as for the whole not voting thing, let me ask y'all this, at the risk of going even further off topic: If you go to a restaraunt and get really awful service, which tip makes the stronger statement--leaving nothing, which could be interpreted as cheapness, indifference or just not having an small bills on you OR leaving a penny, which says, "i had the means to give you a tip, but you sucked so bad, I'm leaving you the least amount I can." Voting is the least you can do, in my opinion, and even a bogus write in is better than nothing.

Posted by Bella, 11/9/2006 9:24:03 AM

I never leave less than 10% - even if they suck, they live on their tips and they're taxed on 8% of their sales. I leave between 20% and 30% if they're good.

The difference between the example of the server and the politician is that I have a direct relationship with the server. The server knows what my vote is quite directly. The politician doesn't know me at all. My vote is private and unknown to them, unless I talk about it as I've done on my web site. And even then, they don't care and most likely won't read it. We the people speak en masse. Less voters voting for them is simply less tip, if you will. But they're still getting something in the votes of others who choose to vote for them.

As for illegals, you're right - the farm economy relies on those folks. So wonderful... let's just admit the obvious and document these folks and after vetting them, let them come work here as non-citizens, if they're that essential. Let's give the businesses a way out. But providing blanket amnesty and allowing porous borders for just anyone only invites an opportunity for more terrorists. That's non-negotiable.

Posted by Brett Rogers (http://www.beatcanvas.com), 11/9/2006 9:38:05 AM

Bella, I don't know if I'd go as far as to say you were wrong, these are our opinions. I think what is most important is that we respect each others views and do so in a way that everyone feels comfortable being heard. Both parties have forgotten that which is part of why I sat out Tuesday. Hard to say if time will even show any of us to be right or wrong as our government isn't doing anything the way either side believes will solve the problem. That is what happens when politicians try to do things the politically correct way, common sense goes out the window and it makes the issue worse.

Religion is a fun topic! Got a great idea for some cards Brett. How about a nice line of jihad cards with images of the prophet Muhammed? Just remember to start wearing kevlar. Ahhh the religion of peace. OK I just could not resist. My brother always said I liked to instigate ;).

Posted by Anonymous, 11/9/2006 10:06:04 AM

I can respect you and think you're wrong. I can even like you and think you're wrong. I love lots of people that I think are wrong a lot of the time. I am just that good. :-)

And whoa baby...given that freedom of religion is one of those things that our country was founded on, that would be a way to get the comments going. Whoever you are, Anonymous, I give you a big old kiss of brother/sisterhood, despite your trashing of a religion that really isn't any worse than Christianity---they're just killing in the age of automatic weapons and media, instead of the age of broadswords and racks. MMMmmmm--wah!!

Posted by Bella, 11/9/2006 10:21:21 AM

I agree Bella. I think many are wrong, I am just careful with my words when sharing opinions. I don't like telling someone they are wrong as it usually puts them on the defensive and you lose that free flow of ideas. Of course this approach has really bitten me in the ass this week as every democrat/liberal friend I know is sure having fun gloating. I really did not need the reminder this morning that Nancy Pelosi is 2 steps from the presidency.

Yikes the religious door has been opened, hold on tight. Yeah I have a HUGE problem with Islam and taking a look at where things are today, 11/9/2006, Christianity has come a long way from it's brutal past, but I don't see that with Islam. The face of Islam today, its leaders, the media representation show no respect and tolerance of other religions, basically the enslavement of women, killing people for creating a picture of Muhammed, etc.. It wasn't right when the Christians did it and it sure isn't right now. So I call it like I see it.

Trash them, speak out against it, let you know what I think, yeah I'll accept that. You said it well "they're just killing in the age of automatic weapons and media, instead of the age of broadswords and racks." No way I will just sit here and stay quiet thinking that is acceptable. Never.

Posted by Pale Rider (formerly Anonymous), 11/9/2006 11:15:17 AM

Never ever said it was acceptable. NEVER would. Killing is not acceptable in the name of God, Allah or any other (small g) god. My point is that Islam isn't any worse than any other religion as far as senseless killing and persecuting goes...we're just far enough removed from the Inquisiton,etc. and a bazillion other religious battles to not really think about the others. And really (and I've argued this before so I won't bore anybody with it again) the religion itself is not the culprit, the people interpreting it are.

Posted by Bella, 11/9/2006 11:51:46 AM

By the way, Pale Rider, what on earth did Nancy Pelosi do to you that you hate her so much? :-)

Posted by Bella, 11/9/2006 11:59:47 AM

I don't hate her, I just disagree with her politics. I think she is dangerous for national security, is too idealistic to realize the threat we face (thus not capable of dealing with it) and her social programs would expand government even more (thus costing us more money - we pay too much in taxes as it is). On the other side I am not much happier with the Republicans. They had control of the house, senate, and presidency and did NOTHING to further the conservative agenda. So good riddance to them, America has spoken.

The Democrats now have 2 years to see if they can do a better job. If they can't, America will speak again in 08.

With power comes great responsibility. Is time ALL our leaders remembered that.

Posted by Pale Rider, 11/9/2006 1:41:31 PM

I think this has now become the longest comments thread in the history of my web site. I'm glad to see the discussion be both passionate and polite. Kudos to Kelly, Bella, and Pale Rider.

I second Pale Rider's assertion. I said earlier that I don't see the Dems being at all serious about national security. With Bush saying today that he welcomes all ideas about improving Iraq, the ball is in the court of the blues. Let's stop the constant critique and put forward realistic solutions to bringing secure democracy to the Iraqis. His statement is a put up or shut up strategy. I agree with it.

Criticism? No problem. Americans now have the representation they wanted. How about that gentle revolution called election? What a great example to the world that we're not bogged down in electoral acrobatics to rework the election in courts. 'Nuff said, election over, now let's move forward to defining a framework.

I've come to know the Dems to be anti-[fill-in-the-blank-here]. When it comes to foreign policy, what are the solutions? I expect Hillary to come forward quickly with some solutions. Good, if they're workable. I expect Lieberman to come forward. Let's get ideas on the table, pick the best one, and implement it. It doesn't matter whether it's a red or blue idea. We're all Sneetches, whether you have a star or not. How do we succeed?

Know what I'm saying?

Posted by Brett Rogers (http://www.beatcanvas.com), 11/9/2006 1:56:13 PM

Lieberman is now the most powerful person in the senate. Both sides want him and it will be interesting to see what each side offers, especially the Republicans, if he'll align with them (not totally convinced yet that he will stick with the Dems). Would love to be a fly on the wall when the Dems talk with him, gonna be a whole lot of ass kissing there to try to make up for the screw job they gave him.

Although he has many liberal leanings I've always liked him, he doesn't seem to get into the nasty rhetoric, has a sound mind on national security, and he's one of the few politicians I would have cast a vote for.

An added bonus, Joe sounds like "Marvin the Martian." Now if someone could just get him to say "He's stolen the space modulator!"

Posted by Pale Rider, 11/9/2006 2:57:26 PM

Yes, Brett. I know what you're saying. I know this is all about politics, but, it's time they stop playing the "game" of politics. It's like the only objective to this game it to win the election. Once you've done that, it's the after game party at the tax payers expense, until the next election.

I, too, would like to thank all here for keeping this civil. Too many other boards I read, these "conversations" go to the gutter in no time at all. There's a difference between a)"I don't agree with you" and b)"I don't agree with you. That makes you a @$#%." I'm glad we picked option "a". So much more constructive. Leave the chest pounding to the other sites. :)

Posted by Kelly, 11/9/2006 3:41:14 PM

*sigh* I'm glad we're all playing nice too. Still wish you'd agree with me though, because y'all seem like such nice people. My motto is: Don't hate people for their politics. Hate them for the important stuff like whether they watch TV or their taste in music. :-)

I do wish Brett would get more loud mouthed liberal friends so I'm not out here in the cold and snow all by myself, though. :-)

Posted by Bella, 11/9/2006 5:42:44 PM