Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2007 > November > 07 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USHold the election, get ‘em out
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Sierra Leone, a West African country wracked by a 10-year civil war that ended in 2002 held its first elections in September since UN peacekeepers left in 2005.
The opposition party won. Within hours after returns were declared official, a new president, Ernest Bai Koroma, was sworn in.
There’s a lesson here for us.
An archiac horse-and-buggy system of elections dictates that newly-elected officials take office two months or more after results are known. Presumably the time is needed to allow office-holders who are defeated or retiring to finish up the affairs of the office while allowing the newcomer time to settle-up business affairs, hitch up the mules, and make the long arduous journey to Atlanta — or to the county seat.
And yet we have the example here of a nation so divided that a 10-year civil war ensued. To guard against futher bloodshed, three years of international peacekeepers were required. And yet within hours of the official results, the newly-elected president takes the oath of office.
It’s time for a change here. If a nation two years removed from peacekeepers and major American corporations are able to promptly install new leaders, Georgians can too.
In a number of local elections around Metro Atlanta, mayors lost or are in runoffs. In Avondale Estates, Jonesboro, Kennesaw and Lithonia, mayors were turned out. In three others — Norcross, Riverdale and Doraville — mayors were forced into runoffs. Doraville Mayor Ray Jenkins, most will recall, stirred controversy when he attempted to fire popular police chief and Iraqi veteran John King.
In Macon, a city of 94,000 located 90 minutes south of Atlanta, former State Rep. Robert Reichert, a Democrat, defeated a Republican challenger with 96 percent of the vote. He replaces Jack Ellis, who gained national attention for cozying up to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and for divisive long-running disputes with city council.
Election results that leave departing office-holders in place for months at the time serve no good purpose. The Constitution and local election law in Georgia should be brought into the new century. Defeated or retiring office-holders, including governors and others who hold statewide constitutional offices, should depart promptly after election results are declared official. Add a provision, if deemed useful, to pay them as consultants for up to 30 days, if they agree to cooperate on transition with their successors. Changing the timetable for Constitutional offices would, obviously, require a constitutional amendment. Others could be updated by general and local law.
Companies change CEOs overnight with no apparent difficulties. State and local governments should too.
Comments
By jbmlaw
November 7, 2007 9:10 AM | Link to this
Good morning all. Perhaps our friend TFTT could enlighten us on the timetable in Britain, but I perceive that a change in either government or leadership there occurs nearly overnight. If one thinks back to the last change of national government in the US, there would certainly be benefits from an immediate changeover. You may recall the huge volume of economy-crushing new regulations promulgated just before George W. Bush took office, this at a time the economy was sliding into recession. (I know our friend jm always disputes me on that argument, as there had not been two consecutive quarters of economic decline at the moment of changeover, but I think that magnifies definition over substance.) I know I recall the democrats’ litigious efforts to retain the horrible regulations when W suspended their enactment.
Perhaps we can talk about the similar misuse of the power of pardon after all accountability is abolished. Rather than raise Marc Rich or a couple of the more egregious cases, perhaps we should flip the argument: perhaps our leftist friends would agree that the widely- and reasonably-anticipated pardon of the innocent-but-convicted Scooter Libby should occur before the election, to ensure the population has an opportunity to register either support or opposition to the action.
Our analysis need not be entirely negative. The election season itself generates a great energy that could be harnessed after election. The obligation to govern may suspend some of the wasteful celebrations, and compel our leaders to focus on the duty rather than the party.
I disagree with only one element of Jim’s argument: “Companies change CEOs overnight with no apparent difficulties. State and local governments should too.” The argument is inapposite. Corporations are far more complex entities than Leviathan, and require a level of management sophistication far above those who wield the blunt instrument of police power. (Otherwise how could any typical democrat, with no acquaintance with management skills, ever be even a marginally-competent leader?) The need for rapid change in the corporate office is far greater than in entities with no need to observe markets.
By Mid-South Philosopher
November 7, 2007 9:11 AM | Link to this
Good morning, Jim,
I agree 100%. The lame duck status, especially after the election, keeps most offices, especially those of an executive nature, in limbo. Additionally, it gives the outgoing officeholder an inordinate opportunity to be obnoxious.
By IN THE NEWS
November 7, 2007 9:14 AM | Link to this
SUPPORT THE IMPEACHMENT OF DICK CHENEY You can Email Speaker Pelosi and all of the Judiciary Committee Members for whom we have identified good Email addresses all at once by signing this petition.
By Redneck Convert
November 7, 2007 9:16 AM | Link to this
Well now, hold on there, Wooten. If you make it quick for a elected person to take office, the person holding the office won’t have time to do a number on the other party before he leaves. Just think about it. It probly took 3 months for the Clinton people to remove all the “W” keys from all the computers before My President took office.
And if the godless librul Democrats get the White House back next year, My President and his people will need lots of time to fix things up so the Democrats is in a real spot when they take over. For example, a good time for My President to bomb Iran back to the stone age would be between the time the Democrat was elected and My President left office. That would stick the Democrats with a war they couldn’t get out of. We could blame the Democrats for being war mongers and all us godly Republicans would be out picketing and saying we should cut off the war funds and all. I could just see Sister Dusty and jbmlaw and @@ and tftt writing on this blog and saying “Stop this useless war.” And that weasel getalife and his librul friends would be writing to support the war and calling the people that oppose it traders and America haters.
The same goes for GA. It will probly take old Sonny years to come up with a way to deal with the water shortage here. He will probly need the 3 mos. between the time old Casey is elected and takes office. Course, by that time we will probly all be dead of thirst or maybe very dirty. That’s OK with me. I hate them baths.
Anyway, I want a godly Republican in office as long as he can be. It looks like we are going to get blamed for stuff and the voters won’t reelect us. Just because the country accidently went trillions of dollars in debt and shipped all the good jobs overseas and attacked a country that didn’t have nothing to do with 9/11. Well, anybody can make that kind of mistake, but no, the libruls got to act like we are at fault. Anyway, when that Hillary woman gets elected, I want My President holding power long as he can and having to be pryed away with a bulldozer and maybe even declare a state of emergency and say the election don’t count because he got to suspend the constitution. Like the guy in Pakistan.
Have a good day everybody.
By jbmlaw
November 7, 2007 9:28 AM | Link to this
Dear In the News @ 9:14, I hope you are successful. You surely note that Kucinich was getting more votes from Republicans than Democrats yesterday. Wonder why Republicans would wish to give such a public platform to the Kucinich wing of the Democrats?
By Shark Sammich
November 7, 2007 9:30 AM | Link to this
Redneck Convert is a national treasure.
Oh, and I generally agree with Wooten on this one. Stopped clocks, blind squirrels and all that.
By getalife
November 7, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this
It’s time for a change here.
Change is liberal. All Americans should want change and be liberal.
GFY (good for you) Jim.
BTW, Is there a water plan yet?
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 9:40 AM | Link to this
Could we make this a federal law, and retroactive? That way the country could get back Clinton’s last month’s salary, in view of his skunking of W’s transition, and maybe some White House furnishings could be returned to their rightful owners, us.
By Shark Sammich
November 7, 2007 9:43 AM | Link to this
J’s poopie law gave us:
Wonder why Republicans would wish to give such a public platform to the Kucinich wing of the Democrats?
Because they’re not as clever as they think they are.
By Say it is SO
November 7, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this
Glenn check your facts at 9:40.
You’ve been punked.
By time for the truth
November 7, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this
jbm
The transition in the UK is always pretty swift after a general election as we call it. The outgoing PM resigns as a matter of honour and does nothing to delay matters. The new PM gets to visit with Brenda usually in a matter of hours once the outcome is clear - the audience with Brenda is usually at Buckingham Palace - to be “invited” to form a new govt. Its essentially a ceremonial/traditional thang - and Brenda (HM the Queen) has NO power whatever to refuse this. The new govt takes shape pretty quickly with a new cabinet plus junior ministers announced a little later and then - depending on the time of year a new Queen’s speech to parliament - outlining the major new bills/legislation/policies etc to be pursued. The PM alone has the power to call an election which can be after a few months as Harold Wislon did in the 1970’s or 1/2/3/4/5 years. A massive political advantage - but there is a maximum time limit to prevent very unpopular govts grimly hanging on with a five year maximum - plus a month or so for an election campaign. The campaign is also limited to about 4/5 weeks. Our elections have always been on a Thursday for some reason I don’t recall.
By JK
November 7, 2007 10:32 AM | Link to this
Speaking of lame duck boneheaded moves, how about December of 1992? The historically-significant pardon of Caspar Weinberger on Christmas Eve ensured there would be no testimony and no public record of what really happened when our government made secret deals with Iran — the subject of our current fear-mongering campaign.
Oh, and let’s not forget who actually sent our Soldiers to Somalia, inadequately prepared for what they would face there in the coming months. Honest miscalculation? Or deliberate sabotage of the incoming C in C? Hmmm…
By jbmlaw
November 7, 2007 10:41 AM | Link to this
Dear JK @ 10:32, re: Cap, you sound like one unhappy by a frustrated effort to criminalize policy differences. As to Somalia, I recall this was a facilitation of the loudly-proclaimed desire of the incoming administration, not an extension of Bush 41 policies?
By Dennis
November 7, 2007 10:41 AM | Link to this
If I didn’t know better, I’d think Jim Wooten was a Democrat; here’s another example of where he doesn’t get it; “In Macon, a city of 94,000 located 90 minutes south of Atlanta, former State Rep. Robert Reichert, a Democrat, defeated a Republican challenger with 96 percent of the vote. He replaces Jack Ellis, who gained national attention for cozying up to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and for divisive long-running disputes with city council.”
Mr. Reichert won more as a protest against George W. Bush and the Republican party. That’s the same reason(s) Americans voted as they did in the last elections.
But the Democrats still don’t get it either; they too, think they won on their merits.
George W. Bush has been a disaster as president, and the Democrats are currently doing a lousey job protecting the rights of American citizens.
You don’t have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
By getalife
November 7, 2007 10:42 AM | Link to this
It seems we’ve finally come full circle. The pro-choice, gay-rights-backing ‘hero’ of 9/11 (Rudy) endorsed by the TV preacher (Robertson) who said 9/11 was God’s punishment for America’s culture of sin.
—Josh Marshall
By time for the truth
November 7, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this
jabm
one other ‘minor’ point
in the event of a “hung parliament” or one where there is NO clear party winner, or one where the biggest party doesn’t have an overall majority, either to immediately govern, but more importantly a (big enough) majority of seats needed to govern over the lifetime of a parliament - this usually means having sufficient seats to allow for inevitable by election losses, a few deaths of governing party members (and these days even a few party defections) then the literal change over can drag on whilst negotiations with minority parties are undertaken. Although the new PM is swiftly “installed” and starts picking a cabinet etc. For example the Ulster Unionists in the past have been key ‘partners’ for a Tory Govt. Similarly the Lib-Lab pact Liberal - Labour pact meant a Labour govt for a while. Its too convoluted to explain this is in great detail in a blog posting.
By Curious Observer
November 7, 2007 11:04 AM | Link to this
For once, I agree with Wooten. If the will of the people is for a change, let that will be executed as soon as possible after the election. It is absurd to allow a defeated incumbent, or one who does not run for reelection, to hang onto office for months.
I can understand the need for a newly elected president to have a month or so to select cabinet members and staff. But newly elected legislators ought to be able to assume office almost immediately after election. A delay only invites mischief and neglect.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this
Rudy 08
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 11:22 AM | Link to this
Say it Is So, you check your facts, because you’ve been punked.
JK, you’ve got some nerve bringing up presidential pardons.
By Holy Roller
November 7, 2007 11:25 AM | Link to this
As a long-time values voter, I am confused by the Rev. Pat Robertson’s endorsement of Mayor Guiliani. Are the personal morals of the President important, or are they not? A few years ago we learned that almost nothing is more important than the President’s personal private moral behavior, as explained at length by the prevailing Holy Roller leadership faction. Now this turns that upside down. Please help!
By ron
November 7, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this
Jim,Is there anything else about Sierra Leone that is better?Just maybe our system of letting them hang around isn’t so bad after all.Some other countries don’t bother with elections so there’s no transition period.I think a couple of months of realizing they’re no longer needed/wanted is good for deflating their egos.
By itsme
November 7, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this
Actually, I believe Mayor Jenkins re-hired the police chief.
By TW
November 7, 2007 11:52 AM | Link to this
As if it wasn’t bad enough that Rudi used to married to his own kin, or that he is employed by Hugo Chavez (the man who called W the ‘devil), now he gets on his knees for the guy who said 9/11 was God’s punishment for America’s culture of sin?
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this
Holy Roller, you seem to be calling Mr. Giuliani “immoral”. Why? I believe that you’re new to this site. Word up, anyone here who betrays religious convictions, as with the moniker “Holy Roller”, is not permitted to indulge in obloquy. Such persons are the very ones “living in glass houses.”
getalife, why Josh Marshall’s use of the cliche “It seems we have come full circle”? I don’t get it. What’s the circle? Whither do we return? From whence? Does he mean that something’s ironic? Why doesn’t he just say that? Postmod greenie wit is so lame that it can’t manage more than snide late-night irony.
Rudy 08
By jbmlaw
November 7, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this
Dear TFTT @ various times, thanks for explanation - I thought the Brit example apt for Jim’s essay today, appreciate the confirmation.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this
New members come into the U.S. House of Representatives in the course of almost every Congressional session. It is fairly commonplace for some members incumbent at the beginning of the session to die, resign, or be removed from office before the Congress in session has completed its work. When their replacements come in—usually suddenly—as the result of special election, how goes their transition? The Rules of the House specify that freshmen arriving midstream inherit their predecessor’s staff, which is locked into place* until the next general election for that Congressional seat. Because the freshman is allocated a freshman’s budget, she effectively cannot augment the old staff, some of whom are likely to be loyal exclusively to the previous incumbent whose corruption—in the case of a disgraceful vacancy—they may have shared.
Prisons aren’t the only “schools of crime”.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this
Holy TW, Your frequent implications of incest on Giuliani’s part reminds me of the story of Wm. Jennings Bryan stumping for rural votes. “It is a well established fact,” he is supposed to have told the churchy crowd, “that my opponent lives openly in a state of c-e-l-i-b-a-c-y with his own SISTER!
By Doraville watcher
November 7, 2007 12:32 PM | Link to this
The Doraville City Council fired the Iraqi veteran. Mayor Jenkins hired him back. His reward was the runoff
By TW
November 7, 2007 12:40 PM | Link to this
Glenn - like i’ve said before, his inbreeding is not my business. It’s his being employeed by a terrist that I most have a problem with.
By Dusty
November 7, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw@9:28
It seems that Republicans in Congress decided that Kucinich would pull off another big Democratic dummydo. So they helped him for the laugh. This may be as good as the flying saucer deal.
From what I read, Kucinich wasn’t getting a lot of help from Dems. Pelosi and Hoyer tried to get it “tabled” but failed. Repubs were against it but saw another Dem snafu in the making. They then switched to push it into the Judicial Committee led by Conyers(D).
Of course most loyal Dems voted for it including our Georgians Bishop,Lewis,Johnson and Scott, as you might expect.
Since Congress has not voted for one appropriations bill this year, I guess they need to do something rediculous in the meantime…. like trying to impeach Cheney.
What’s the approval rate of our Democratic led Congress now? 11%?
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 12:50 PM | Link to this
Dusty, doesn’t this Congress seem like kids playing dress-up in the attic with grandma’s trunk?
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this
TW, Amen to that. I’m still trying to learn more about it. One of the things I like best about Giuliani is that he so flawed in a whatcha-see’s-whatcha-get way, but running with the Hugo crowd is off limits, agreed.
P.S. Don’t tell nobody, but FDR married his cousin. Queen Victoria married hers, too. (Lotta that sorta thing in that family.)
By deegee
November 7, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this
Newsflash, while JW is wishing we could be more like Sierra Leone, Broward County schools are in lockdown because a 40 year old convict escaped from, get this, a 76 year old sheriff’s deputy that was transporting him to court. What the hell are 76 year old deputies doing driving convicts around? Okay, maybe 76 is young by comparison in Broward County, but are we that strapped for human resources? Are old people that desperate that they need to take a job driving convicts around with no one else in the van but the old fart and the convict? Who makes these decisions?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21670577/?GT1=10547
By Alan
November 7, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this
Crusty,
The main reason the approval rating of congress is so low, is your beloved repubs marching lock step with the shrub, so that nothing can get accomplished. Dimwits like you, so easily fooled blame it on the dems.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 1:00 PM | Link to this
The Space Trouble’s just now landing.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 1:03 PM | Link to this
Oh Alan, that dog don’t hunt. As my grandfather used to say, “You make good, or you make excuses.”
By Van
November 7, 2007 1:07 PM | Link to this
I would have to agree with Wooten on this also. The only exception would be for national offices. The swamp is too deep and soggy for a quick transition. Also, the months after the national elections would give the lefties enough time to whine and complain.
At the local level, I think it should move a lot quicker. Say, 2 weeks to clean out your desk and to have the muck mopped up from the floors.
By jbmlaw
November 7, 2007 1:12 PM | Link to this
Dear Dusty @ 12:42 and Glenn @ 12:50, I read it the same way. Sure would like to get the perspective of our leftist friends. Note that Shark’s 9:43 can be read with two diametrically opposed meanings.
By Boxer
November 7, 2007 1:15 PM | Link to this
Today’s blogging is greatly improved over last months or last weeks. The insights seem original, the logic seems to make sense, so that I can safely reinforce my egotistical tendency to take credit for it. I occasionally introduced concepts meant to teach enlightenment, and now will continue into advanced quantum tutoring: The human eye can detect one single photon. What does that mean? It means that we are like an experimental apparatus designed to detect photons. Now a photon entering our cornia suddenly equips us with Schredinger cat-eyes. Inside our minds, the photon may act like a wave, or a particle, or nothing at all, depending on how many emotional filters are screening our sensory intakes. We are what we see. We are what we think we’re seeing. We are what we think we’re supposed to be seeing. We are what we think we’re supposed to be seeing if we’re observing consciously.
. That’s why two people will describe events uniquely. And why two bloggers can hack the same material, and one blogger reads like a dimwit, and the other like a stuntwanker. It’s all quantum magma.
By Holy Roller
November 7, 2007 1:16 PM | Link to this
Holy Roller, you seem to be calling Mr. Giuliani “immoral”. Why?
Glenn, I was referring specifically to the Mayor’s adultery, not so much to putting his mistress up in a tax payer funded apartment and other such discretionary uses of public funds. Scratching the backs of your friends with tax money is not a moral issue, as I understand it, since it is completely acceptable for the current administration to do so with not only our money, but with money we have borrowed from China, et al, — no actual consent from us required. But where a man puts his johnson, well… Did I miss the press conference proclaiming that’s no longer issue #1? As a morality voter, I need to know!!!
By Dusty
November 7, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this
Glenn,12:50
I like your attic comparison.
To me, this Congress is like ghosts in the attic… a lot of thumpin’ and bumpin’ in the night but there’s nothing there in the daylight.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 1:20 PM | Link to this
Holy Roller, If you’re concerned about selling out the country for Chicom favors, look in the Index under “Clinton, William Jefferson, Presidency of”.
By Alan
November 7, 2007 1:24 PM | Link to this
Glenn,
get off it - we all know that the dems have only a slim majority and the repubs will do everything they can to prop up the shrub, so go hunt with gramps and the dog
By Dusty
November 7, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw@1:12
I guess we can get one leftist position by reading Alan’s @ 12:56, i.e. Bush did it!
As to “Shark”, surely he meant that Democrats are not as clever as they think they are…… Oh yes!! Uh huh. You bet!!!
By Disgusted
November 7, 2007 1:28 PM | Link to this
I congratulate Mr. Giuliani upon making a clean break with his family by his latest marriage. When your children no longer speak to you, well, that’s heaven on earth—no demands for allowances, tuition, etc.
And I can recall no law that says you can’t be putting your mistress up in a fancy condo while you’re trying to work out a split with your current wife. Anyway, that’s Family Values! And isn’t that what we conservatives care about?
Of course, that’s entirely different from William Jefferson Clinton’s straying from the path of Moral Righteousness while he was married. He got exactly what he deserved: impeachment. But what do you get if you stray from that path as a Republican? Rudy ‘08, that’s what!
God does indeed act in wondrous ways.
By Holy Roller
November 7, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this
Glenn, way to not answer my question… again. I don’t recall my Morality Leaders Robertson, Falwell, Dobson, Limbaugh, etc. telling me to revile Mr. Clinton because of China. My instructions on whom to hate and why were clear, and now they’re not. Are you deflecting because you don’t understand the fork in the path of righteousness now either?
By jbmlaw
November 7, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this
Dear Alan @ 1:24, if I read your post correctly, although you are a leftist, you perceive no meaningful difference between a Democrat control of Congress and a Republican control?
By getalife
November 7, 2007 1:31 PM | Link to this
“The opposition party won.”
We need one of those.
Geez.
By Alan
November 7, 2007 1:33 PM | Link to this
Crusty,
We all know what your “wrongest” position will be too - oh yeah and keep on e-mailing fakelaw for your responses girl
By paprika q from blasingdale
November 7, 2007 1:39 PM | Link to this
tftt I ‘pert near soiled myself after reading you 10:31 post. I ain’t never read one of your posts when you didn’t use the adjectives, “queeralicious”, “w*******” or (my favourite) “thickaspigshit.”
By jbmlaw
November 7, 2007 1:43 PM | Link to this
Silly Alan @ 1:33, Dusty and I don’t have to exchange emails - since we are mere robotic right-wing types, we received encrypted transmissions directly from Dick Cheney. Or at least I think that’s what Kucinich has been suggesting.
By Jack
November 7, 2007 1:44 PM | Link to this
It would be nice to clean out all of the crooked politicians but the sheeple would have to get together and vote them out. He with the most pork wins. We all lose.
By Dusty
November 7, 2007 1:47 PM | Link to this
Alan @1:33
Dear Alan,sweet BOY,
I like jbmlaw’s responses. They are better than yours which are straight from the Democratic Propaganda Office.
By the way, are you getalife’s identical twin ?
By getalife
November 7, 2007 1:52 PM | Link to this
deegee
Seventy-six seems a little old to be a municipal employee but then in South Florida you just try to find workers that are still breathing.
Wheez.
By deegee
November 7, 2007 1:57 PM | Link to this
getalife, unfortunately for the poor deputy, he’s not breathing anymore.
By getalifeˆ
November 7, 2007 2:13 PM | Link to this
1:52 not mine.
“JERRY FALWELL: The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way—all of them who have tried to secularize America—I point the finger in their face and say “you helped this happen.”
PAT ROBERTSON: Well, I totally concur…”
How about Pat selling out to the liberal rudy.
Geez.
By paprika q - Yoo-hoo
November 7, 2007 2:37 PM | Link to this
getalife
the 1:52 post was wa-a-a-a-a-y too clever for you. The rest of us were already onto to the humble ID-jacker.
By Van
November 7, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this
While Rudy isn’t my first choice for President, I am constantly amazed at the lefts embracing of Hillary, actually her support is dropping.
Can we trust a woman, the smartest woman, who can’t keep track of her billing records from the Rose Law firm? Who either did not know what Bill was doing in the Oval office, or didn’t care. She is going to run this country?
Her failed attempt at the federal governments take over of the health care industry isn’t registering on any lefties radar?
Like Mitt said, she hasn’t any experience at running anything.
So far, I have not seen anyone on the “progressive” side that has the best interest of America at heart. They all seem to think the UN would do a better job than we, the people would.
By LateComer
November 7, 2007 3:00 PM | Link to this
Isn’t some of the time between election and taking office a time for the new person to get a transition team together AND get the new appointees lined up?
Of course if we want to have government services as well run as they obviously are in Sierra Leone(snort snort), it might be a good idea to make it immediately after the election.
By Van
November 7, 2007 3:13 PM | Link to this
French President Nicolas Sarkozy did something that was unheard of among our esteemed Democrat Presidential candidates.
The French President praised America.
By @@
November 7, 2007 4:07 PM | Link to this
Jim, your column today brings to mind the “whiny loser Al Gore” who held up progress on Bush’s cabinet appointments in 2000.
I’m sure my reference to Al Gore as a loser will enrage a segment of the left here. The same leftists who would proclaim that I and other conservatives have been stealing their “hard-earned” cash rewards.
I say Just Do It already.
By Conservatron Dictionary
November 7, 2007 4:20 PM | Link to this
Loser, noun
A person who achieves what you cannot, has friends and admirers who cannot stand you, or who receives recognition and praise beyond what your tiny little mind can ever imagine.
By Boxer
November 7, 2007 4:33 PM | Link to this
I think what @@ meant is that Al Gore is a hoser, not a loser.
By Shark Sammich
November 7, 2007 4:37 PM | Link to this
Dusty asked:
What’s the approval rate of our Democratic led Congress now? 11%?
from http://pollingreport.com/cong2008.htm
“Thinking ahead to November 2008, regardless of your local contest, which party would you like to see in control of Congress after the next congressional elections: the Democrats or the Republicans?”
Democrats 54% Republicans 40%
By HIDT (Humble ID Thief)
November 7, 2007 4:38 PM | Link to this
Paprika, this is my first time to check in today. Glad to see I’m thought of when I’m gone.
By getalife
November 7, 2007 4:39 PM | Link to this
Talk about losers
Yea, run rudy.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 4:40 PM | Link to this
Alan @ 1:24,
A nice reposte I’ll admit, sir, but I wasn’t entirely kidding. The thing I most envy about the British Parliamentary system (the Helen of Troy the Pakistanis are fighting over just now), aside from the efficient transitions described here by jbm and tftt, is the efficacious tradition of a loyal opposition, which it seems to me is to parliamentary governance what the opposing counsel structure is to the Anglo-American system of justice. The GOP is supposed to oppose and obstruct while in the minority, just as the Democrats so did in the previous Congress. The party in power is supposed to overcome this obstacle, just as a trial lawyer would have to overcome opposing counsel. One has to work within the rules, of course, even in the House. (You can still get executed for treason, I suppose, and the LBJ standard—don’t let ‘em catch you in bed with a live boy or a dead girl—still holds in some form; but “moral turpitude”, for example, probably has become by now a will o’ the wisp.)
In the midterm elections, the DNC counseled its incumbent congressional candidates to run, in the safer seats, on the basis of the parade of horribles averted by Democratic resolve. In effect, they boasted of their obstructionism. Meanwhile, the GOP incumbents ran on the record of all the nice things they were able to accomplish over against Democratic obstruction.
Note which side won.
Rudy 08
P.S. How I wish I could take the dog and go hunting with Grandfather, and ask him what he makes of these things. He’d be interested; he was a Vanderbilt historian, and a fine shot.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 5:09 PM | Link to this
Holy Roller, I’m honestly unaware that you’ve here asked any question here which was not classically rhetorical, but if you want me to face some truth claim of yours I imagine I’d be up to it, and I’m rather more convinced that others here would be too. What is it you’re trying to establish?
As for your innuendo that I take my morality from any of the opinion leaders you’ve mentioned, bollocks. And as for former President Clinton’s pimping and indeed whoring for China, I gather the facts from two old friends, both Sinologists: Brian Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute; and the author Roger Canfield. I name them so that you can look up their work, or reviews of it.
By Boxer
November 7, 2007 5:27 PM | Link to this
I bought at the top again, and sold today at the bottom. I lost so much money I turned gay. Now I’m bottom for the bottom, and top for the top. I tip toe and blink, and what do you think I got?
I’m a brokeback broke. I cant even buy a toke. My baby done left me for my broker man, she didn’t say goodbye she just let that door slam. So now I’m cruisin bars wearin’ leather and lace, if my friends could see me now they wouldn’t like my face.
Cause I’m a brokeback broke. I cant even toke. repeat refrain, fade.
In G. 3/4 time…..one two three four!
By Jackie
November 7, 2007 5:37 PM | Link to this
The reason for the lag in being elected and actually taking offfice is to smooth the transition from the heat of the election to getting staff, offices and other functions in place for the newly elected person to assume office. When a new CEO takes office, the former CEO usually stays in place for a period of time to ensure smooth transition.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 5:38 PM | Link to this
Hey getalife, Republicans don’t have a good environmental record compared to your Democrats, but they’re not against “conservation”, as you say. Rather, conservation is what the better GOP electeds are for, as against environmental-ism. As for the rank and file GOP voters, they contribute a good deal of their own earnings to conservation, but not to the environmental groups that are perpetually usurped by extremists, thereby necessitating a steady production of proliferating subspecies of spin-offs formed by apostate environmentalists who, as conservationists, consider themselves the true believers. In that way environmentalism resembles early Methodism. I’m a proud conservationist. I think it goes nicely with my conservative attire, don’t you?
By Jackiec
November 7, 2007 5:45 PM | Link to this
The country of Pakistan is currently roiling and tottering on the edge of full revolt against Musharaff. The citizens of the country do not like the government because they think Mr. Musharaff is a puppet of Dubya. Osama Bin Laden has an approval rating of more than 40% and the father of the Pakistani nuclear bomb, A.Q. Kahn is revered. The Taliban are becoming stronger and is presenting a major threat to our forces in Afghanistan. The stock market fell more than 360 points and the pundits are concerned about a collapse in housing and credit. It seems Dubya’s swamp is filling with big alligators.
By Dusty
November 7, 2007 5:48 PM | Link to this
Shark@4:37
*If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.”
You are wishfully thinking of a year from now and who knows?? Might be??
I am talking about NOW my friend, not next year. WHAT IS THE APPROVAL RATE OF THE DEMOCRATIC-LED CONGRESS in November 2007??? Around 11%!
By jbmlaw
November 7, 2007 5:51 PM | Link to this
Jackiec @ 5:45 is almost certainly correct, and the only obvious first step to correction of the many problems is to make permanent the 2002 tax cuts, to ensure the economy is not crushed by the largest tax increase in history. Certainly the democrats are smart enough to support the tax cuts, if only we could get the republicans on board.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 5:51 PM | Link to this
Loser (noun) - A world leader widely praised for his gift of prophecy, one whose prescriptions for worldwide governance are recognized as a path to averting global disaster. A great man of peace.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 5:56 PM | Link to this
Jackie, all true, and important.
Dusty, give ‘em hell!
Rudy 08
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 5:59 PM | Link to this
Boxer, what you need is a good woman. You’re just in rebellion, that’s all. S’pose the best tunesmiths usually are.
Sorry about the losses. That’s no laughing matter.
By Boxer
November 7, 2007 5:59 PM | Link to this
WTF?
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 6:07 PM | Link to this
Van, yeah, we heard Mr. Sarkozy too, and like you enjoyed the rare treat of French praise. (The French can be the worst people on Earth, and the best; they are definitely related to the Yanks.) What creeped us out a little was that he said that France was saved in WWII by “America”. We both smiled sadly at that, knowing that the UK, and especially the Canada, is within earshot. But what the hell, when it comes to France I guess the UK would not begrudge us taking whatever we can get.
By Glenn
November 7, 2007 6:09 PM | Link to this
Your 5:27, moron.
By Boomer
November 7, 2007 6:14 PM | Link to this
Liberal RATS: no Fairness Doctrine for PB.S. Now this is just the shock of the new Century!
“These same Democrats have been highly offended at the idea that anyone outside or inside taxpayer-funded broadcasting would monitor PBS content for fairness or balance.”
You don’t say. Why, how dare anyone question the validity of PB.S. and their alleged centrist views. To the pathetic liberal RATS in this nation, PB.S. is truly Fair and Balanced.
Sure it is. Like the New York Slimes. Any time the pathetic ignoramus liberal RATS in this nation have no problem with a media outlet and claim its not biased (especially one tax payer funded), you know there’s a problem.
Well, if you are ever in doubt, do what I do: raise a red flag on any media outlet that liberals don’t bi-tch about, and ignore it. Then pay attention to those outlets that the liberals do bi-tch about and patronize them. Works for me. Whatever liberal RATS are for, be against it, and vice-versa.
More excellent news (sorry Jim): the Urinal-Constipation subscription rate is sinking in the toilet. All you liberal goons who wish for Jim to retire just because you don’t agree with him and want to quell Conservative voices don’t have to worry: the RATs running the AJC will ensure with their disgusting and blatant unapologetic bias that liberal snake oil rag will eventually get flushed down the toilet. Touché, douchebag liberals.