Category Archives: Elections

What about the spouses?

We all know about the GOP 2012 presidential hopefuls – but what about their spouses?  This is an interesting little video showing pictures and a brief bio of each couple.  Who knows what the future holds?!

1 Comment

Filed under Elections, Republicans

Middle East Oil -continue to buy or tell them to shove it?

This is an interesting video of T. Boone Pickens and his ideas about our country’s dependence on foreign oil.   I’ve heard alot of criticism against Picken’s push to use natural gas because he has set himself up as the one to profit the most from that idea.  But if you think about it, would I rather pay the Middle East OPEC guys or would I rather pay Pickens for my energy that is coming from our own country.

Pay close attention to Pickens’ assessement of the current field of Republican presidential candidates – but then again, Pickens is right that we’ve heard alot about promises of getting off foreign oil but as of the last few decades – nobody has ever even come up with a plan to do so.

Just why do we continue to buy oil from our enemies who obviously play both sides of the fence?

Comments Off on Middle East Oil -continue to buy or tell them to shove it?

Filed under Economics, Elections, Playing Politics, Political Reform, President Barack Obama, Republicans, Technology

What Are They Thinking…..

Is this really the strategy the New and Improved Republicans  want to go with?   I wonder, just how do these businesses and corporations think their companies have been built without the working class?

I think the Republicans are showing their arrogance and ignorance in a big way and the end result is not going to be pretty.


Filed under Crazy!, Elections, Playing Politics, Republicans, Wingnuts!

Krazee – you talking to me?

Newt Gingrich seems to be working on getting God’s blessing for his upcoming presidential run.


Filed under Crazy!, Elections, Playing Politics, Republicans

That Tide – She is a Turning….

The New and Improved Republicans, led by their Evangelical Tea Party Darlings, may have won this battle in Wisconsin but have they fired the shot heard throughout Middle Class America?


Filed under American Society, Democratic Party, Economics, Elections, Political Reform, Republicans, Tea Party Movement

Jeb Bush: The GOP’s Man in 2012?

Yep!  Read it here.  If you’ve gotten this far and still could stomach more, see ten reasons why someone thinks this should happen here.  🙂


Filed under Elections, Republicans

GOP Has Record Lead Before Elections

A new Gallup poll shows the GOP leading the Democratic Party by 10 points in a “generic ballot” test, which asks whether the voter prefers a Republican or Democratic candidate. That’s the GOP’s largest lead in the 68 years that the generic-ballot question has existed. Should Democrats panic? Well, a Newsweek poll showed voters split evenly 45-45 on the generic ballot. says the average lead according to polls for the GOP is 5.2 percent; still, some experts say a 2-point GOP lead would translate into a pickup of 50 House seats.



Filed under Elections

Primary Races Today

Alaska – Primary
Arizona – Primary
Florida – Primary
Vermont – Primary

Some interesting races!

How effective will the support of Sarah Palin be?  In Alaska Palin’s pick, attorney and political unknown Joe Miller, seems to have gained little traction against Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski.  In Arizona, Palin has backed Sen. John McCain, who faces a challenge from former Rep. J.D. Hayworth.  McCain has said whatever anyone wants to hear, taken whatever stance might garner votes and become much less than the man he once was in his pursuit for reelection.

In Florida there are highly contested primary races for governor and senator, and early voting has already begun to decide which Republican runs for governor, and which Democrat takes on Gov. Charlie Crist, the former Republican, and Marco Rubio, the actual Republican, for a seat in the United States Senate.  Proving money can only go so far, real estate billionaire Jeff Greene and healthcare multimillionaire Rick Scott, held double-digit leads over their opponents in July but slipped steadily as their rivals turned the spotlight on the newcomers’ business dealings and character.

Vermont has a crowded Democratic primary race for governor.   The Democratic voters are in a bind: They like all of them, want one of them to win the November general election against Republican Brian Dubie.  After months of campaigning, no candidate has emerged as the clear favorite. The candidates themselves and political observers agree almost anything can happen as the most extensive and expensive primary race in Vermont history culminates in today’s voting.


Filed under Elections

Run Sarah Run, See Sarah Run

This newly released SarahPAC video has already had almost 400,000 views.  As of June 30, SarahPAC had more than $1 million cash on hand.  It all hints that Palin plans to run for POTUS in 2012.

She stands a good chance of winning the nomination of the GOP.  Can she win the general election?  If she decides to run and doesn’t win the nomination, will her fervent fans support another nominee?  If Palin runs, wins the nomination and then loses the general election, she could leave the Republican brand in pieces.

If Palin is smarter than she is ambitious, she will not run in 2012 — she has fame, fortune, and multiple platforms to leverage for years to come.  Who wants to speculate on whether she is more ambitious than smart?



Filed under Elections, Radical Rightwing groups, Sarah Palin

Do elections reflect the will of ‘the people’?

Going back in our young country’s history we all know only wealthy landowners who happened to be male were allowed to vote.  We recognize and have often discussed the pros and cons of the Electoral College.  Voter apathy has a tremendous impact on whether or not elections actually reflect the will of the majority.  Some voters cast their votes based only on social issues like abortion or gun control.  Money, or lack of, all too often dominates who runs and who is elected.  The candidate who may be nominated for POTUS doesn’t appeal widely enough to win at the national level, while the candidate who is moderate enough to be elected doesn’t ‘pass muster’ in the nomination process.

Earlier this month, California voters approved an open primary for statewide and congressional races starting in 2011. In the current system, each party has a closed primary, with only Democrats deciding who should be the Democratic nominee and only Republicans choosing their nominee. In the new system, all candidates for each office will be listed on a single ballot regardless of party (although candidates can list their party affiliation after their names, if they want to). The top two vote getters will advance to the general election, even if both are Democrats or both are Republicans.

Kansas Republicans hold a closed primary and we know this year the results could be skewed by disgruntled Democrats who desire a voice (even tho limited) in who will be the next Senator from Kansas.

What are the pros and cons you see in today’s elections?  What changes do you think might have a positive impact?  Will elections ever reflect the will of the majority of the people?


Filed under Elections

GOP Losing Another One?

From this article, it sounds like the GOP has picked yet another losing stategy of pushing for repeal of the health care reform bill.  With all the noise coming from the Party of NO, do you think they can survive another losing point like this one?  This group seems determined to bring down Obama.   Perhaps the majority of Americans are getting tired of all their gnashing of teeth when they are yelling NO?



Filed under Democratic Party, Elections, Healthcare, Obama, Playing Politics, Political Reform, Republicans

How much does the Tea Party influence who wins?

I have a message, a message from the Tea Party,” said Rand Paul, a political candidate who made headlines across the United States this week. “We have come to take our government back.”

The Tea Party isn’t really a “party,” in the conventional sense.  They describe themselves as a loose movement of activists who draw their inspiration from the Boston Tea Party — an 18th-century anti-taxation uprising that helped spark the American War of Independence.

Today’s Tea Party wants lower taxes and less government spending, policies it says the Republican Party has promised but not delivered.  So now the Tea Party is supporting candidates who are officially running for office as Republicans, in hope they can change the party from the inside. This week Paul became the most prominent yet to win a Republican nomination, running for the U.S. Senate and sharing credit for his win with the Tea Party.

Paul wasn’t the only anti-establishment candidate to do well this week. Americans nationwide are angry at their elected leaders and several states had a chance to choose both Republican and Democratic nominees for elected office. There were setbacks for well-known candidates in both parties.

It was an anti-incumbency vote across the nation,” said Bill Richardson, a Democratic Party governor. “If you ran against Washington, you did well.”

With President Obama in the White House and his supporters in control of Congress, the Democrats are currently America’s governing party. The Tea Party is unhappy with the government so the conflict with the Democrats is clear.

But Republicans aren’t entirely sure where they stand. Some have embraced the newcomers, while others have politely pushed them away. The party’s leaders refused to support Paul, at least in part because he doesn’t really support them.

Can the Tea Party take hold among Republicans?  Will their chosen candidates win against Republicans and Democrats?  Will the winners come from among candidates who run against Washington with or without support from the Tea Party?  Are the extremes making most of the noise but the moderates will make the most difference?


Filed under Elections, Political Reform, Tea Party Movement

What Rand Paul said…

It was a terrible example that Rand Paul used but his point has merit.  I will use this example to explain what he was really trying to point out and the point he was trying to make.

It is the picnic to celebrate Steven and it has been said that anyone wanting to celebrate knowing Steven and his life is invited to come to the picnic.  As we are joining together, there is a knock at the door.  It is George Walker Bush!  Along with him is a Federal attorney and they have a copy of a federal law that states that you can not refuse G.W. Bush to come in and join you.  You can not refuse to allow him to eat any of the food even.  It is not a matter of Bush being hungry and there is no where else for him to eat.  It is that he simply wants to eat at your house and you have no right to deny him or refuse to allow him to come in.

Does the Federal Government, and should it have, the power to tell you who or what you can not refuse to allow into your private property?  Do they have a right to tell you who you have to be tolerant to?

Where does your civil rights ends and those of everyone else start?

It could be argued that your bias toward Bush is not based on real and factual issues, that you hate him enough to deny him access because of your perceptions of what he has done. What kind of person he is and what he may do while on your property.

That is the kind of issue that Paul was trying to point to as being Government intrusion into your property and life.

This is focusing only on one issue but Woolworths was not refusing to feed blacks when they were hungry and there was no where else they could go eat.  If the Federal Government has not funded the lunch counter or the food being served should they have a say on who is served or not served?  Likewise if the Government is not paying for the picnic or the food there do they have the right to tell you that G.W. Bush should be allowed to come?

These issues are a part of the Libertarian believe system and is a reason I am not a Libertarian though have some leaning towards its stances.


Filed under Elections, Political Reform, Radical Rightwing groups, Republicans, Wingnuts!


Have you ever seen the Harlem Globe Trotters?  If so then you also saw the Washington Generals, the basket ball team that plays against the Trotters. The Generals are made up of pro basket ball players, they are not just a bunch of wannabes and they do win sometimes. Nor is the game just a give-a-way for the entertainment of the crowd, both sides are playing to win.  Although often it could be thought that the Generals are there just to make it look like a real contest.  It’s how the Trotters play and how the Generals play that makes the difference. One plays with style and trick shots while the other plays like any NBA team plays.

Often it seem like the Kansas Democratic party are the Generals, they do have the knowledge and skill to play and win, but not the ability to out play the Kansas Republican party.  It is assumed that the other side is going to win so perhaps the feeling is why try the best you can?  There have been examples of Democratic wins.  Like the Generals once in awhile there is the unexpected win and it shows that the end result is not always a sure thing for the Republicans.  It could be that the Republicans are just so sure that they will win that they slack off and do not play the game they know how to play.

Now the obvious problem and differences between the two parties is that the Republicans do walk in lock step. Only on rare occasions does the average Republicans not vote for the R, it is only when the candidate who the party puts up is such a loser that the everyday Republican shakes awake long enough to not vote straight party line.  Otherwise the party is united and it is a foregone conclusion that who ever is the Republican candidate is who the party voter will vote for and support.  The Democratic does not have that luxury, every candidate is a repeat of the duel between Obama and Clinton, the party divides into a out and out fight based on degrees of ideology. And how far each candidate is to the left, a battle between the more centrist and progressive.

Now keep in mind this is Kansas, not known for the majority being left leaning.  Barbara Boxer is exactly where she needs to be to win an election.  If she was in Kansas, she would be standing next to P.P. and T. B. shouting about how evil this State is!  Kansas is at best a center right state, not totally blinded by a hard Right ideology but still Right or center leaning.   Another part of the problem is that with the Republican party it is the higher level of the State party who controls the party and they are for now hard Right.

But the Democrats are more working from the bottom up, saying that it is the most passionate who controls and moves the Kansas Democratic party. Who are the most passionate?  Well just look at the people here and on the other blog, those outnumbered by the more moderate and thoughtful. But are driven by the emotional response who are the passionate.  Who want to go toe to toe and get in the face of the Republicans, dreams of the fight and never give a inch in the debate or decision. Those are the ones who are the day to day movers within the Democratic party.

While it is true that the Republicans here have a battle between the moderate and the extreme on occasions. For us it is a long and drawn out process that it takes a building up a head of stream. And any changes only come after nearly a decade then may remain the same for the next decade or two.

With the Democratic it is a battle fought every year and often it is the one with the most passion that wins.

Why can not the Democratic come up with a candidate that is winnable?

(First Democrat Party Headquarters in Kansas)

Continue reading


Filed under Elections, Political Reform

The Partisan Divide

I hear the terms ‘center-right,’ and ‘center-left’ often.  Without settling the argument of which describes America’s populace, let’s say the common denominator is ‘center.’  Are most Americans political philosophies at the center?  It would seem not!  It would seem Americans are ready for their Party to be truly conservative or liberal — none of this middle of the road stuff.

Are we moving toward an even greater divide?  If we acknowledge the gridlock now and elect members of Congress who are more conservative and / or liberal will less be accomplished?

What did the results of the contests yesterday tell you?


Filed under Elections, Political Reform, Primary Elections