Blog powered by Typepad

« Swinging the lamp - again! | Main | ALERT! ALERT! "The Killing" - re-run tonight! »

Saturday, 20 August 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Nixon was a Mormon.
There may not be a connection but it is something to keep in mind.

Nixon was a Quaker, not a Mormon.

David, David, David. Golly David!

I can understand your reliance on those fine publications - but as you note - it will be the Independents who'll decide the 2012 bloodletting. Much as I'd prefer a change in the Oval Office - somehow I doubt it will occur. But I think it's possible, if not entirely probable, the Republicans will likely win the Senate adding to their current hold in the House.

What I'd prefer actually is both the Senate and House to be dominated with Republicans (I generally prefer divided government which would necessarily mean Obama wins re-election, the House retaining a majority but the Senate not enjoying a clearly veto-proof majority. Something akin to the last years of the Clinton Administration. Keep in mind, a President cannot make legislation.

Hence this link (slow to load even here):

DM: I stand corrected. I knew it was something unhealthy.

Which all goes to support my contention that which ever religion politicians espouse it has virtually no effect on their conduct!

I think the need for America to get rid of Obama grows with each executive order or administrative ukase the current administration imposes.

Congress wouldn't pass cap and Trade, even when the Dems had majorities in both houses, so the EPA uses the Clean Air act to impose it anyway. Too many states have right to work laws so the NRLB imposes union closed shops on employers. Congress wouldn't pass the Dream act, again even when Dems controlled both houses, so Obama stops the authorities from deporting illegal aliens who haven't committed a crime. (Err, slight contradiction there O old chap.)

There are many more examples of this administration flouting the rule of law and becoming an Imperial Presidency. Rebuplican control of both houses will somewhat curb the excesses but I don't trust career politicians to put a stop to it completely when they can be bought off with earmarks.

No, a strong conservative administration in Washington is neccessary to at least halt the rise of the federal juggernaut, if not begin to reverse the momentum.

And why should a Brit worry about this? Surely our energies should be focused on smashing Brussels' power rather than Washington's? Well just for starters, without a strong US economy, our economy is stuffed anyway and without a strong example from the US, Europe will, I fear, once again go the totalitarian route.

So keep a close eye on American politics and let's do our tiny bit to ensure that a real conservative wins.

I suspect it's far too late to worry about which representative of the plutocrats becomes the new Impostor-in-Chief. When the first constitution, the Articles of Confederation, had obviously failed, the politicians adopted the US Constitution. (You might then call the country, in the French style, The Second Republic.) When it failed even more undeniably - the Civil War - under Lincoln the US was centralised even more substantially: let us call that the Third Republic. Under FDR not only was the Constitution substantially violated, but the country was further centralised - call that the Fourth Republic. After WWII, with the rest of the world on its knees the US grew to become an empire, which further expanded after victory in the Cold War. Call it the Fifth Republic if you like, though "Empire" might be more fitting. But now it's failing too. No doubt lip-service will be paid to the Constitution: Augustus paid lip-service to The Roman Republic, did he not?

You are entirely right, Kevin, in insisting that a true conservative is needed to turn back the tide of socialism which has engulfed the USA. That is why, although I recognise the aversion of some Americans to anyone too doctrinaire and therefore the difficulty facing such a candidate, nevertheless, I think they will stand a chance because the feeling of ABO (Anyone But Obama) must be fairly enormous by now and will grow over the next few months when yet more smelly stuff hits the fan.

Also, it is going to need an ideologue with passionate intensity to drive through against the howls of opposition - remember 'that woman' and what she faced. If JK, above, is right and the GOP can win both houses then America is in with chances. But, put a middle-of-the-road wuss in there and the Democrats will run rings round him or her. I understand JK's fears about too much power but NOW is the time when such power is not just needed but is critical for the health of the Republic - whichever Republic it is, according to DM.

And talking of passionate ideologues, that is why I continue to favour Palin and I don't care if she doesn't know Turkestan from Pakistan, other people can take care of that sort of thing, all she needs to do is concentrate on getting Congress to ram through what it takes to set the American economy free again. Everything else will flow, or not, depending on her success, or failure, there. Hopefully in eight years she will be able to hand over a rich , thriving (and therefore powerful) America to her successor.

(Sorry for any typos - in a hurry.)

Ukase: new word for me.
In czarist Russia an edict or order of the czar having the force of law.

You know, somebody was complaining to me a couple of years ago about America being such a super power (well, they were then) and trying to organise the world.
I said, "If not America, then who?"
It's a good question.

It certainly is, Andra, and I wish a few more people would ask it!

Why need it be anyone?

Don't be silly, DM, you know perfectly well why. 'Nature abhors a vacuum' and all that sort of thing. If not America, then China - which would you prefer?


In Australia we are a large empty country of about 23 million people, with 12,000 km. of pretty much deserted coastline.

We feel a little bit safer knowing America is our ally and will, we expect, come to our assistance if we need it. We figure if we do our bit and send our boys to Iraq and Afghanistan, etc. the USA owes us and will reciprocate if required.

Some years ago a Chinese boat sailed right down the coast of Queensland and into Cairns, a city of 150,000 people. They anchored the boat off a popular beach right next to the Cairns airport and about 40 Chinese men dressed in suits and carrying briefcases came ashore and asked directions to the nearest railway station.

I think it was the suits that gave them away. Unless you're a lawyer going to court today, nobody wears suits here.

The point is this boat eluded navy patrol vessels, coast guard, general shipping, planes, etc. and sounded no alarms on anybody's radar.

Had there been a railway station nearby they could have spread out to the whole country.

We are vulnerable and I sleep safer in my bed at night knowing someone in America is watching me, as it were.

"knowing America is our ally and will, we expect, come to our assistance if we need it"

I wouldn't bank on that if I were you, Andra. By and large nations only go to war when their own national interests are severely threatened. You will remember of course, that America did not voluntarily join Britain in either WWI or WWII, they only came in when they were directly attacked.

The comments to this entry are closed.