Archive for 5 Nov 2008

The Aftermath

Posted: 5 Nov 2008 in Comarade Obama, Politics

The aftermath of the election is one that will haunt me, probably for the rest of my life, unless the Republican Party moves its collective ass back to the right and into conservatism where it belongs.

I blame George Bush for fucking everything up on the domestic side with his social liberalism. He was great on defense, but a complete boob on everything else.

Wall Street and the banking industry are also to blame for handing the Democrats the only issue that they have ever been able to ride into the White House, the economy.

Here’s a great take on that over at Alphecca (we’re on the same page):

Congratulations are due to most of the Main Stream Media for electing an unqualified, ultra-left-wing socialist to the White House.

Congratulations are also due to President George W. Bush for being one of the most incompetent, overspending, uncommunicative, clueless politicians. He has single-handedly reduced the Republican Party to “also ran” status by pissing-off almost everybody. Granted, a lot of Republican senators and congressmen aided and abetted him.


Nation. Strength. Unity. Liberty. Prosperity. These five words are rather well defined by the Emprorer over at the Rott:

Well good. You earned it. Now back to work, unless you feel more like crawling into a corner in the fetal position, in which case you’re on your own. At least until you brush the sand out of your va-jay-jays, ruck up and decide to rejoin the fight.

It’s fine. I understand. I’m kinda shell shocked myself. Well, at least partially so. You take a hit to the gut, you need a few to get your shit back together. Nothing wrong with that. You’re all brothers and sisters and we all understand. Been there, done that, got the damn T-shirt.

So now that we’re all done hyperventilating, where do we go from here?

Well, remember how we all talked about in the past how if that sumbitch commie, terrorist-sympathizing usurper really managed to pull it off and buy/cheat/steal his way to the White House, we’d all buck up, assess the situation on the ground and transition into the decidedly disloyal opposition?


Also at the Rott, we have this nice piece to come along afterwards:

Fortunately the Emperor has already made his statement on this site, and in accordance with his style he did it with eloquence and panache. That allows me to play the role of “bad cop” much more suited to my personal preferences.

To my former fellow citizens, you pansy-ass, welfare-loving, sit-on-your-ass and wait for the gubmint to send you a few alms in a check, you got what you wanted and a hearty fuck-you very much from the rest of us, simply trying to get by on our own, sans any help from limp-dicks in D.C.

You made your choice and guess what ass-hats? You now get to share the misery with the rest of us, that is until REAL Americans and adults take the country back.

You refused to pay attention or if you did, you bought the socialist, nanny-state line of utter bullshit that if you vote for the Magic NegroTM he would make life a bowl of chocolate ice cream with cherries on top for everyone. You’re in for a big surprise and decidedly NOT what you expect.


Kim Du Toit puts it succinctly:

The American people have spoken, and, in overwhelming numbers, they’ve said they want change.

Very well.

Just so we all know, here’s a partial list of the changes we’re likely to get more of:

  • High Taxes
  • Gun Control
  • State ownership of capital
  • Constitutional reconstructionism through the courts
  • Nanny government and oppressive regulation
  • A weak, impotent military
  • Inept foreign policy
  • Trial lawyers and liberal judges
  • Socialism
  • Internationalist subservience to the United Nations
  • Socialized medical care
  • Stronger labor unions
  • Racism (hiring- and college enrolment quotas)
  • Class warfare
  • Voter fraud
  • Lax immigration controls
  • Wealth redistributionism
  • Hostility towards business, and capitalism in general
  • Over-aggressive environmentalism
  • Support for failed social programs
  • Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Tom Daschle, Pat Leahy, Maxine Waters, Jim McDermott, John Kerry, Charles Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, and Dick Durbin running Congress.

So we’re going to get the changes we asked for, and we’re going to get them good and hard.

And this nugget from WSJ:

We Could Be In for a Lurch to the Left

A President Obama would not face the same constraints as his Democratic predecessors.

A sharp lurch to the left and enactment of a liberal agenda, or major parts of it, are all but inevitable. The centrist limits in earlier eras of Democratic control are gone. In the short run, Democrats may be constrained by the weak economy and a large budget deficit. Tax hikes and massive spending programs, except those billed as job creation, may have to be delayed.

But much of their agenda — the “card check” proposal to end secret ballots in union elections, the Fairness Doctrine to stifle conservative talk radio, liberal judicial nominees, trade restrictions, retreat from Iraq, talks with Iran — doesn’t require spending. And after 14 years of Republican control of Congress, the presidency, or both, Democrats are impatient. They want to move quickly.

Democrats had large majorities when Jimmy Carter became president in 1977 (61-38 in the Senate, 292-143 in the House) and when Bill Clinton took office in 1993 (56-44, 258-176). So why are their prospects for legislative success so much better now?

The most significant change is in the ideological makeup of the Democratic majorities. In the Carter and Clinton eras, there were dozens of moderate and conservative Democrats in Congress, a disproportionate number of them committee chairs. Now the Democratic majorities in both houses are composed almost uniformly of liberals. Those few who aren’t, including the tiny but heralded gang of moderates elected to the House in 2006, usually knuckle under on liberal issues. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi bosses them around like hired help.


Over at Sister Toldjah:

First, while many will be focusing on the historic aspect of Obama’s win, the question that begs is: At what cost did America just make history? Two years ago, Democrats swept into the majority in Congress on vague promises of “change” and it was a generic buzzword that resonated with enough voters to given them control of the House and Senate. For the last two years, we’ve seen how that’s worked out, and it hasn’t been good. And again this election cycle, the same thing has happened, except this time they’ve rewarded the big chair to another Democrat who made promises of change that, while they haven’t always been vague, are indicators of how Barack Obama will govern with a solid Democrat majority, and it ain’t “center right” or “center left” – it’s “left.” For all the promises of “bipartisanship” that came from Pelosi and Co. back in 2006, it’s something we saw very little of in reality. I suspect the same will hold true for a President Obama, who – as I’ve pointed out before – will not have the need to be “bipartisan” on most issues. Just how big will our government get? Just how more dependent on government will the people become? Just how many dictators will Obama meet face to face with unconditionally?

Simply put, it is not worth “making history” if you think that the person poised to make that history is the wrong person for the job. So while I can appreciate the historical significance of this election, that doesn’t mean I have to believe it was the right thing to happen. And more importantly, it doesn’t mean that I should feel guilty about not being one who supported that person. Nor should you. Over half of America is rejoicing, but just under half feel like they have no voice anymore, thanks to the large majority Obama will enjoy in the House and Senate.


And this gem over at National Review Online:

Mooning Over Obama [Kevin D. Williamson]

Is it possible that we are overestimating the significance of Barack Obama’s racial background? Yes, it is probably an important thing that we’ve elected a black president. But is it a moon shot?