Election Thoughts

It occurred to me last night that the faithful reader of the Gazette is probably itching to get my take on last Tuesday's national elections, and so I spent a good twenty minutes or so (during commercial breaks in ER, which I find myself inexplicably drawn back into after a few years of apathy) to draft a pithy post of political punditry in which the implications of said elections were dissected and splayed open for all to see and marvel upon.

After re-reading the post, I admitted to myself that my only purpose was to create a semi-plausible context for using the phrase "not ignoring the elephant that's not in the room," and that hardly seemed sufficient justification, so I deleted it.

However, lest some people read into my relative silence on the issues more than is appropriate, I'll throw out my $0.02 in the matter, and then return to the more pressing matters of tracking the squirrel-related issues in my backyard.

I congratulate the Democrats for an impressive overall victory, and suggest that they use this granting of temporary majority status by the American electorate to learn the distinction between statesmanship and political hackitry. Their Republican predecessors couldn't figure it out, and while they were busy designing a monument to their decades-to-come dynasty, the electorate took things into their own hands.

Which, of course, they'll do again. Neither party appears to be able to absorb the truth that the majority of Americans desire a centrist type of leadership in their government. Deviation too far to either end of the spectrum will eventually be punished at the polls. Tuesday's results appear to offer a fresh opportunity to learn this lesson. I, for one, will do my best to curb my cynicism while waiting to see if it happens.

In conclusion, my favorite summation of the elections comes from my fellow Midland blogger over at Sleepless in Midland when he characterizes the election outcome by quoting Jane's Law: The devotees of the party in power are smug and arrogant. The devotees of the party out of power are insane.

I, myself, intend to remain smugly insane. I draw the line, however, at arrogance, and I heartily recommend to you that same philosophy.

Comments

Neither party appears to be able to absorb the truth that the majority of Americans desire a centrist type of leadership in their government. Deviation too far to either end of the spectrum will eventually be punished at the polls.

Quite true. But I guess I'm not in the majority (actually, I've known that all along). I think we need a "third way" if I may coopt an ancient phrase. Ah, well.

See any baby squirrels today?

Posted by: Jim at November 10, 2006 03:43 PM

What I wanna know is, since the prez replaced Rummy with Bob Gates, The Top Aggie, does that mean that John Kerry will now have to say: "If you're uneducated -- or go to A&M -- you could get stuck in Iraq.

Now now now, it's A JOKE!

Posted by: jimmy at November 10, 2006 03:46 PM

Jim, I have a hard time believing that you identify with either the Far Left or the Far Right to the extent that you'd like one of them to exercise complete power over our government. That's really the point I was trying to make. (But if you do, please don't tell me. There are some things better left unspoken. ;-)

Jimmy, I'm not one of those Aggei, Aggey, um...A&M grads who can't take a joke.

By the way, are you still starting your own car in the mornings? ;-)

Posted by: Eric at November 10, 2006 03:56 PM

No... the problem for me is, at least politically speaking, I believe very strongly in what turns out to be a mix of things from both "sides." And, of course, I think everyone else should too!

Posted by: Jim at November 10, 2006 04:37 PM

See, I think you just agreed with my point (at least, with the way it rattles around in my head, even if it tumbles out differently in the written word). Both sides have ideas and values worth considering and adopting. It's the "my way or the highway" crap on every single issue that I think most voters get tired of.

Well, I do, anyway.

Posted by: Eric at November 10, 2006 04:44 PM

Yes, I did agree with you. Right?

Posted by: Jim at November 11, 2006 10:07 AM

I tend to agree with what Jim said, which I think has been been decided to be in agreement with what you were on about. However, I'd like to put a finer point on it by suggesting that there's a fine distinction between selecting from both left and right sides of the menu and riding the fence.

The latter is simply fine tuning the our government to match our personal belief system.

The former accomplishes nothing, as we've seen. As polititicians from both sides become desperate to disguise what they really stand for, they strive to give the appearance of standing in the middle, while in fact standing for nothing.

If you'll forgive my taking His words somewhat out of context, "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." And instead vote... oh, wait. We don't have a viable third party, do we?*

And speaking of the reverse peristalsis shuffle, I swear every time I hear Nancy Pelosi open her mouth I become nauseated. Spirit of cooperation, my eye. Cox & Forkum have got it right, I think.


* Sure, I used to think it was cute to vote a straight Libertarian ticket as a means of protest, but in the end there's a lot of lunacy on their menu that I'm not willing to spoon on to my own plate.

Posted by: Foo at November 13, 2006 06:39 AM

...and I'd like to put a finer point on my finer point by pointing out that my statement "there's a fine distinction between selecting from both left and right sides of the menu and riding the fence" is exactly the reverse of what I meant to write, thus rendering the rest of my commentary nonsense. Fence riding should have been the former (bad); menu selections should have been the latter (good).

I really have got to start making use of that Preview button...

Posted by: Foo at November 13, 2006 06:43 AM

The scary thing is that I knew what you meant, even if your typing fingers didn't.

Previews are overrated.

Posted by: Eric at November 13, 2006 09:14 AM

Huh?

I'm channeling Destry: "my thinkin' machine works kinda slow." Love the scripture quote though, Foo. That's it exactly!

I'm sure there's a reason why we have no viable third party in our country, but I'm not politically astute enough (not that lack of astuteness is a good excuse) to understand why.

Posted by: Jim at November 13, 2006 08:38 PM

"Neither party appears to be able to absorb the truth that the majority of Americans desire a centrist type of leadership in their government."

I think you may be right there. Not that I follow these things. I'm smugly oblivious except for when the NZ newspapers splatter your mid-terms all over their pages - unheard of usually but not this year. Something to do witha game of rummy or something.

Posted by: Catez at November 14, 2006 08:00 PM
Post a comment [Take your time...we're in no hurry.]









Remember personal info?