Comments on: Why Massachusetts Voters Saw Red

By: TK

TK — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 04:04:29 +0000

Nader for president?

By: LOUDelf

LOUDelf — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:32:18 +0000

You know there are other choices beside the Dems or Reps. You don’t have to settle for junk…

By: Priscilla

Priscilla — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:35:45 +0000

Yep, and every teacher I know (and I know plenty) complains bitterly if they don’t get double digit salary increases each year – yet, at the Fortune 50 cmpany where I worked for the past 20 years, those big increases, without promotion, are simply unheard of, in light of the economic realities of global competition and the responsibility of the corporation to its stockholders (many of whom are employees, so they keep tabs). Public emplyee unions simply do not accept the cyclical business cycle as having any effect on their “ever upward” compensation and benefits, yet, their members, as tax-paying/voting citizens, who bear the burden of this enormous greed and power are beginning to turn on the very beast that supports them. In California, it has already reached a breaking point….

We live in interesting times.

By: Rick Bayan

Rick Bayan — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 03:56:52 +0000

I’m with you there, TK. Given the two lamentable choices, I suppose I’d prefer do-nothing navel-gazers (like Obama) to “idiot vigilantes” (like GW Bush). It’s ironic that “minimal government” Republicans tend to make more decisions that directly impact our lives (like the Iraq war, empire-building, the Patriot Act and over-the-top defense spending).

By: Rick Bayan

Rick Bayan — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 03:48:42 +0000

That article was enlightening, Priscilla. (Or should I call you “Anonymous”?) I really hadn’t thought much about the public unions and their draining effect on public treasuries. In Philly they get away with murder; certain city employees can quit their job for a day, qualify for a full pension, then go back to work and earn a regular salary while still collecting the pension. (And guess who pays the pensions?)

By: TK

TK — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 23:50:25 +0000

Ah, Democrats, when they win, they don’t know what to do, and when they lose, they don’t know what hit them. The Republicans may be wrong most of the time, but they still get stuff done, maybe it has to do with the party being run by Darth Cheney??? The Democrats are relegated to the roll of Jar-Jar, the unfunny, vaguely racist, incompetent comic-relief character. Is it better to make things worse by doing nothing, or doing the wrong thing? Who’s wosre, the gutless Democrats, often no different than Republicans, or stupid, greedy, insane Republicans? In my admitedly biased opinion, I prefer lazy to stupid, because you can work around it. (sometimes) Lazy theives steal little, but an idiot vigilante is a large inconvienence. (an understatment of the patriot-act, and why I can’t get through an airport with shoes on.)

By: Priscilla

Priscilla — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:14:32 +0000

Haha – I’m not sure why that comment came up as anonymous, but it was me – surprise!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:13:11 +0000

Good post, Rick…if you haven’t read Daniel Henninger’s editorial in the Wall Street Journal today, I think you would like the way it looks at the historical background that has led us to this political crossroads: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704320104575015010515688120.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_BelowLEFTSecond