Sandy and the presidential election

On immigration, I will say this: My husband is 1/8th Native American, and he often tells people that his ancestors can tell you what happens when you allow unchecked immigration without demanding that the immigrants both assimilate into your culture and respect your laws.

A great thing about this blog site is that regular readers are respectful of each other, even though the leading consensus across regular readers/commenters may be limited to not much more than the skeptical view of the anthropotomoc global warming scam.
I have views that I know are probably in the minority. These largely concern God, abortion, and a few other issues. When I have brought up these topics, people who have felt driven to make comments have made comments showing opposition, I but and the issues have been treated respectfully. The comment chatter has not decended to name-calling and so on. This is very rare, and is very special.
Bronco Bama’s close cnnections with Goldman Sachs, etc., are very concerning when the issue of carbon tax, etc., come up. I have been active with th edemocratic party to some degree all my life, but these recent years have been very concerning, and I beleive, frankly, the party has been co-opted by socialists/marxists. Am I correct? Maybe, maybe not.
I believe I have figured this out, and others have, too. My final post before the election was centerd on the idea that we American democrats largely have not yet figured this out, and we will keep beleaguring the nation with AGW, Solyndra scams, an opn border, etc., until we American democrats wake up and tell the socialists to go form their own party, and get out of ours.
http://thelastdemocrat.wordpress.com/2012/11/06/lesson-not-yet-learned-four-more-years-needed/
Now, back to the science.

GeoLurking says:
November 7, 2012 at 6:24 am
What can you say. Stupid is as Stupid Does.
Welcome to Venezuela.
CJ says:
November 7, 2012 at 6:25 am
We need to face the facts, it’s not 47% as Romney indicated, it’s over 50%. We’re finished…
SamG says:
November 7, 2012 at 6:25 am
Yep…that’s representative democracy for you.
Populist candidates beget stupid voters.
temp says:
November 7, 2012 at 6:26 am
All meaningless junk. The election was set long before the vote. The only question now is what numbers will they use for obama’s 2016 reelection victory.
aharris says:
November 7, 2012 at 6:28 am
How far have we fallen that what people see in a mere four days completely erases the evidence of four long years? We’re close to the Ministry of Truth territory here.
Jeremy says:
November 7, 2012 at 6:45 am
The way that 30 million were persuaded to vote early and that the incumbent administration was able to rally 10′s of thousands of volunteers to go round knocking on doors and making sure the politically correct people voted is but a small step on the path towards Obama’s version of CHAVEZISM.
Despite the dismal economic track record or perhaps BECAUSE of the dismal economic track record – OBAMUNISM – big government protecting the little people against evil capitalism – is here to say.
Americans can say good bye to freedom and prosperity….
Mark Hladik says:
November 7, 2012 at 6:46 am
Hope everyone enjoyed the last election ever to be held in the United States.

While I do have a quarrel with President Obama regarding climate policy and a few other things, but unlike the geniuses listed above, I don’t believe that Obama is a socialist, or a communist or a Muslim or a foreign-born imposter or any of the other nutty things believed by crackpots.
Its the Fox News pathetic proposition: if the voters vote for Conservatives they are standing tall for America, if not then America is crumbling into a socialist desert. Crap.
Its nonsense. Its gifting some desperately deluded people some easy propaganda that this site is filled with right-wing creationist nut-jobs.
Democracy was supreme in this election when the Republicans held the House of Representatives as much as the Democrats holding the Senate and the Presidency.
I expect a lot of politics when Congress returns. Climate policy is much less likely to have a significant effect because the hot air has drained out of the global warming balloon.
Meanwhile Mitt Romney, unlike some of his supporters, had the grace to commend Obama on his re-election, wish him and his family well and pray that the President succeeds. It is just as important a part of a strong democracy that the loser concedes gracefully. That’s what Romney did.

John A: here is a simple way to look at life for the next four years: govt from the bottom-up is American: individual liberty, with negative rights protected up to the point where you infringe on another’s rights, and where govt is necessary where private industry fails, and private industry is needed where govt fails; top-down / socialism: the govt continues to encroach on all aspects of our lives in various ways, mostly taxation upon most to fund their views, and regulation of what we can and cannot do, and “positive” rights: I am entitled to a “livable wage” job, I am entitled to a college education for free, I am entitled to a single-dwelling home.
I am not the face of FoxNews; I am the Last Democrat. The rest have gone socialist, but don’t know it.

Michael J Alexander says:
November 7, 2012 at 11:34 am
Ron Paul had the advantage of thousands of dedicated college students who were willing to work for free. Everyone else had to hire staff, and nobody else had the money to do that. Romney didn’t need to since he had the use of the state Republican party workers to round up the signatures that he needed.

MarkW says:
November 7, 2012 at 2:42 pm
Your quoting wrong post… you want John A
Phil. says:
November 7, 2012 at 2:19 pm
“Perhaps you see a different version of FoxNews?”
Since you clearly don’t watch foxnews how would you know? Add in the huffing glue post is really whining that foxnews isn’t covering the “global warming” angle of of Sandy not thats its not covering Sandy.
Since other networks have done everything possible to blackout Benghazi its not surprising that fox’s coverage seems “extreme” by leftwing standard. Also foxnews covered alot of the stuff the other networks didn’t want to… like the complete failure of FEMA, government, bloomburg, etc.
Lets not also forget that Benghazi major news… sandy not so major. Watching leftwingers dumpstar dive for food isn’t exactly breaking news to most people. Maybe if they had been rightwing terrorists who have 2 weeks+ of food and water they would be dumpster diving and crying a river.
http://www.naturalnews.com/037822_liberal_media_preppers_survivalists.html
But hey no need to let the truth get in the way of your propaganda…

eworrall1 says:
November 7, 2012 at 1:32 pm
Sometimes the puppy needs its nose rubbed in it, before it learns not to poo on the mat.
Obama has won, the wreckage of the American economy will be his legacy.
___________________________________
I do not think it really matters who won, Romney or Obama, all it does is determine the speed at which US globalization will take place. Both the Republicans and the Democrats support globalization of the USA. Bush senior started the push for the WTO and NAFTA. Clinton finished it. Bush Jr. agreed to the transatlantic economic integration plan with the EU.
Pascal Lamy a transplanted bureaucrat from the EU, now head of the WTO is already giving lots of talks about Global governance,

“Global governance requires localising global issues”
…Yet, with the world becoming ever more interconnected and challenges become truly global, governance remains to a large extent local. The discrepancy between the reality of today’s interdependence, the challenges resulting from it, and the capacity of governments to agree politically on how to deal with them is striking.
For the international system is founded on the principle and politics of national sovereignty: the Wesphalian order of 1648 remains very much alive in the international architecture today. In the absence of a truly global government, global governance results from the action of sovereign States. It is inter-national. Between nations. In other words, global governance is the globalization of local governance.
But it does not suffice to establish informal groupings or specialized international organizations, each of them being “Member driven”, to ensure a coherent and efficient approach to address the global problems of our time. In fact, the Wesphalian order is a challenge in itself. The recent crisis has demonstrated it brutally. Local politics has taken the upper hand over addressing global issues. Governments are too busy dealing with domestic issues to dedicate sufficient attention and energy to multilateral negotiations, be they trade negotiations or climate negotiations.
I see four main challenges for global governance today.
The first one is leadership, i.e. the capacity to embody a vision and inspire action, in order to create momentum. Who is the leader? Should it be a superpower? A group of national leaders? Selected by whom? Or should it be an international organization?
The second one is efficiency, i.e. the capacity to mobilize resources, to solve the problems in the international sphere, to bring about concrete and visible results for the benefit of the people. The main challenge here is that the Westphalian order gives a premium to “naysayers” who can block decisions, thereby impeding results. The ensuing viscosity of international decision-making puts into question the efficiency of the international system.
The third one is coherence, for the international system is based on specialization. Each international organization focuses on a limited number of issues. The World Trade Organisation deals with trade, the International Labour Organisation with labour issues, the World Meteorological Organisation with meteorology and so the list continues. It is a fact: the UN is not really overarching, assuming this was the initial intention.
The last challenge that I see is that of legitimacy — for legitimacy is intrinsically linked to proximity, to a sense of “togetherness”. By togetherness, I mean the shared feeling of belonging to a community. This feeling, which is generally strong at the local level, tends to weaken significantly as distance to power systems grows. It finds its roots in common myths, a common history, and a collective cultural heritage. It is no surprise that taxation and redistribution policies remain mostly local!….

The International corporations want global governance for the simple reason that dealing with lots of local laws and politicians is a pain in the rump. The Socialist/Progressive/Fabian/Communist or what ever the current politically correct term is, also want globalization to promote their brand of ‘Social Justice’ ‘Sustainability’ ‘Environmentalism’ or what ever the latest cause du jour is. The only one left out of this unholy mating is the poor individualists who gets trampled and taxed. Worse most of the regular Joes do not even have a clue as to what is really going on. So they vote democrat or vote republican but the piecemeal sale of our country continues under the guise of ‘harmonization’ and the like as more and more control of our country is turned over to international bureaucrats.
Think I am a wing nut? Try something real close to home -food. FDA: International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) Guidance Documents

FDA: Harmonization and Multilateral Relations
FDA’s role in harmonization and multilateral relations is to coordinate and collaborate on activities with various international organizations and governments on international standards and harmonization of regulatory requirements.
Recognizing the considerable synergy between its domestic policy and its international policy priorities, FDA is sharpening and focusing its planning for enhanced alignment of FDA and international standards….

If you want to know why the food borne disease rate jumped to double the rate after WTO was signed you do not have to look any further than the revamping of the US food safety system to align with that of international standards. The International HACCP Alliance was developed on March 25, 1994, to provide a uniform program to assure safer meat and poultry products John Munsell after attending the government’s informational meetings on implementing HACCP identifed flaws in USDA’s HACCP food-safety system His saga is here: Jolley: Five Minutes With John Munsell & A Trip To The Woodshed With The USDA (I have discussed quality issues with Big John and that just scratches the surface.)

Mark said:
Ron Paul had the advantage of thousands of dedicated college students who were willing to work for free. Everyone else had to hire staff, and nobody else had the money to do that. Romney didn’t need to since he had the use of the state Republican party workers to round up the signatures that he needed.
Are you saying that Gingrich couldn’t have done something similar. This is his home state after all. You would think if he was a viable candidate, he would certainly have had the resources and have addressed this before it became a problem. Again, if you can’t take care of things in your own home state, even if it’s hard (God forbid) then you have no business trying to run for national office.

Gail Combs says:
November 7, 2012 at 3:18 pm
I think generally though it was better for obama to win. He for push far to hard and far to fast to make his socialists dreams reality. People will quickly be woken to the facts reality doesn’t fit into socialism nor does socialism fit into reality. Thus as with all socialism the end will be more of the same… more taxes, more government, more oppression. However if done to quickly the peasants tend to revolt and fight back. Romney would take a far slower approach then obama will and because of that a small chance exists that people will revolt and reality will be restored.

Olavi: . . . . Either you participate in or you have become a victim of chararcter assassination. Romney is a very generous individual — giving over 50% of his income either in taxes or charity. He has provided good wages and tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of jobs. True, he could not save every job in the troubled companies that he took over, but his success record is phenomenal. The ugliness and lies of the character assissination undertaken by the Obama campaign will have long lasting negative consequences. How can you expect the other side to be eager to work with you when you are nasty?