Sandy and the presidential election

Since Smokey has come back to play in the sand box, I’m not going to sling sand.
I early voted, Virgil wasn’t on the ballot in Dogpatch, Arkansas.
I couldn’t vote for Romney because of inability or unwillingness to explain his tax plan. His China bashing would have shackled our economy in this globalised world while weakening the dollar. Great for that energy policy, huh? That’s why the energy sector is not terribly profitable here in the states, not lack of resources.
Wound up not voting for anybody. One libertarian in a lesser race and a handful of other things on the ballot.

{joke}
Since Hurricane Sandy was an act of God, does that mean God intended Obama to win?
{/joke}
I’m as dismayed as everyone else here. It doesn’t really matter who won last night. We’re in deep doo-doo. “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

Doug says:
November 7, 2012 at 6:53 am
The American people spoke. They elected a person who is misguided on global warming, but that is no reason not to respect democracy. If you know of a better system, I’d like to hear about it.
Railing against our constitutional government in action just damages the credibility of this fine site.
____________________________
It is not railing against our constitutional government, it is railing against our media that lies through their teeth to influence the man on the street on behave of the moneyed interests. Most people rely on the supposed unbiased journalists to bring them the truth. The cover-up of the skeptic side of the Global warming debate is just one of many many cover-ups by the media. For another example take the food safety scare used to stampede the public into accepting a law turning over control of US agriculture to the World TRADE Organization. ( the language is right there in the law see: SEC. 404. <> COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS. )
SEE: USDA and food safety. That’s a joke, right? and link and link and link
Do you really think most people would condone what is happening in the US government if they knew the truth? If they knew who was actually controlling our government through $$$$?
Most of what we ‘know’ is propaganda and lies.
Out of all the elected US government reps in 100 years only a very few have addressed the core problem in the USA. President Andrew Johnson highlighted that problem in his State of the Union Address but you will not see any recent president do so, instead they address a trumped up strawmen like “global Warming!

State of the Union Address: Andrew Johnson (December 9, 1868
…It may be safely assumed as an axiom in the government of states that the greatest wrongs inflicted upon a people are caused by unjust and arbitrary legislation, or by the unrelenting decrees of despotic rulers, and that the timely revocation of injurious and oppressive measures is the greatest good that can be conferred upon a nation. The legislator or ruler who has the wisdom and magnanimity to retrace his steps when convinced of error will sooner or later be rewarded with the respect and gratitude of an intelligent and patriotic people.
Our own history, although embracing a period less than a century, affords abundant proof that most, if not all, of our domestic troubles are directly traceable to violations of the organic law
and excessive legislation….
At the beginning of the rebellion the bank-note circulation of the country amounted to not much more than $200,000,000; now the circulation of national-bank notes and those known as “legal-tenders” is nearly seven hundred millions. While it is urged by some that this amount should be increased, others contend that a decided reduction is absolutely essential to the best interests of the country.….
…Government, as early as may be consistent with the principles of sound political economy, to take such measures as will enable the holders of its notes and those of the national banks to convert them, without loss, into specie or its equivalent. A reduction of our paper circulating medium need not necessarily follow. This, however, would depend upon the law of demand and supply, though it should be borne in mind that by making legal-tender and bank notes convertible into coin or its equivalent their present specie value in the hands of their holders would be enhanced 100 per cent.
Legislation for the accomplishment of a result so desirable is demanded by the highest public considerations. The Constitution contemplates that the circulating medium of the country shall be uniform in quality and value. At the time of the formation of that instrument the country had just emerged from the War of the Revolution, and was suffering from the effects of a redundant and worthless paper currency….
…If depreciated paper is to be continued as the permanent currency of the country, and all our coin is to become a mere article of traffic and speculation to the enhancement in price of all that is indispensable to the comfort of the people, it would be wise economy to abolish our mints, thus saving the nation the care and expense incident to such establishments, and let our precious metals be exported in bullion. The time has come, however, when the Government and national banks should be required to take the most efficient steps and make all necessary arrangements for a resumption of specie payments…..
Specie payments having been resumed by the Government and banks, all notes or bills of paper issued by either of a less denomination than $20 should by law be excluded from circulation, so that the people may have the benefit and convenience of a gold and silver currency which in all their business transactions will be uniform in value at home and abroad. Every man of property or industry, every man who desires to preserve what he honestly possesses or to obtain what he can honestly earn, has a direct interest in maintaining a safe circulating medium–such a medium as shall be real and substantial, not liable to vibrate with opinions, not subject to be blown up or blown down by the breath of speculation, but to be made stable and secure. A disordered currency is one of the greatest political evils. It undermines the virtues necessary for the support of the social system and encourages propensities destructive of its happiness; it wars against industry, frugality, and economy, and it fosters the evil spirits of extravagance and speculation. It has been asserted by one of our profound and most gifted statesmen that–Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none has been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man’s fields by the sweat of the poor man’s brow. Ordinary tyranny, oppression, excessive taxation–these bear lightly on the happiness of the mass of the community compared with a fraudulent currency and the robberies committed by depreciated paper. Our own history has recorded for our instruction enough, and more than enough, of the demoralizing tendency, the injustice, and the intolerable oppression on the virtuous and well-disposed of a degraded paper currency authorized by law or in any way countenanced by government. It is one of the most successful devices, in times of peace or war, of expansions or revulsions, to accomplish the transfer of all the precious metals from the great mass of the people into the hands of the few, where they are hoarded in secret places or deposited under bolts and bars, while the people are left to endure all the inconvenience, sacrifice, and demoralization resulting from the use of depreciated and worthless paper.….

Whether Hurricane Sandy was caused, intensified, or not affected by AGW, it served a useful purpose, It reminded us of Mother Nature’s power relative you our own. Along with the other time-honored thought that “Science, and not Economics or Politics, is the field that seems to best understand the forces of Mother Nature” probably had some affect on the more thoughtful Americans among us.

Olavi says:
November 7, 2012 at 6:42 am
Not believing that the money of the rich should be stolen so that others can spend it, is the equivalent of thinking the rich should have all the money?

Doug says:
November 7, 2012 at 6:53 am
You have no problem with one group of people voting to steal the earnings of another group?

[snip – original and this comment both off topic -mod]

Roger Knights says:
November 7, 2012 at 8:11 am
So why doesn’t the party institute instant-runoff voting in its primaries (where possible), so the ideological majority can converge on a single candidate?
—
For the same reason they refuse to adopt anything like this for the general election. They want to make sure that only the establisment candidate has a chance.

Michael J Alexander says:
November 7, 2012 at 9:06 am
Do you really believe that America is better off when we force our consumers to buy over priced and poorly made goods, just because they were made by some union stooge?
You are wrong for two reasons.
First, when American consumers save money of foreign goods, that money doesn’t just evaporate. It sits in the consumers pocket until he can spend it on something else. As a result jobs lost in one sector are countered by jobs gained in another. Overall, everyone is better off.
Secondly, when you restrict access of American companies to second rate, over priced goods, you make the output of those companies less successful in international markets. For every job saved, two or more are lost in other industries.
Free trade is what made this country great economically. The kind of protectionism you advocate has been the ruin of many once proud countries.
RE: capital gains. Are you really going to try and argue that restricting investment will have no impact on the number of jubs that are created.
RE: Gingrich. Even the DA of VA admitted that VA’s rules were written to ensure that only the candidate who was supported by the establishment could get on the ballot. You are blaming Gingrich for not being able to navigate rules that were written expressly to keep him out.
The reason why Romney won the nomination was because he outspent his opponents by 5 to 1 or more. Everytime he didn’t, he lost. He also had the support of all the party insiders who greased the wheels for him, changed the rules where necessary, sometimes after voting had taken place.