Redstate

For me is that Rhode Island, despite its tiny size, was once a very proud and prosperous State in the U.S. and now all that its vestigial Republican Senators can do is suck money from the government. The micrometer and the vernier caliper were invented in Rhode Island and now what's left? Lincoln Chafee. The man who talks about Hurricane Awareness in Rhode Island.

Rhode Island gets hit by a hurricane once every 22.5 years on the average. But it has been a prominent feature of Lincoln Chafee's website for the past year or so.

The dirty little secret that nobody is telling you about the liberal northeast strongholds is that they're all going to implode economically within the next ten years unless they can either revitalize their economies from within or suck more money from the federal government. Chafee is strongly in the latter camp.

I took the train from Boston to Bridgeport, CT a couple of years ago for the christening of one of Alaska's fast ferries built there; that was $80MM in State and federal dollars we contributed to the Northeast economy. I could not believe how rundown things were. Now I know railroads don't run thru the best parts of town, but the rot, rust, and ruin were amazing. The railroad is electrified and runs on what I think was once the right of way of the permanently bankrupt New Haven. The catenary supports are all wrought iron or steel lattice from the early 20th Century and would cost billions to replace. Likewise, the bridges, tunnels, and overpasses date from that era and would cost billions to replace, and they sure wouldn't be in that beautiful 19th Century stonework. The rural South that I grew up in had more than just an "air of mild decay," but I'd never seen anything like that area.

In Vino Veritas

To start a business here and so far it's not going so badly but then again, we have just elected Deval Patrick to the governorship here in Massachusetts. And I live in a heavily Republican district where people still believe in working hard and *constructing* things instead of *deconstructing* them and living in a worker's collective.

About 15 miles to my Northwest is Amherst and aside from the State building things and the State paying for the University and the State paying for the roads and the State propping up the businesses, there's not much going on there as far as I can tell.

The general pattern seems to me at least that all these liberal northeastern states have a tremendous problem breaking out of the continued metastasis of the welfare state. The only thing that is going to stop them is the hard place of running out of money. And then all of the property values are going to decrease, the rich liberals will keep on keepin' on, and the place will start over again from basically scratch.

It's going to happen in a slightly different way in New York City -- their budgetary crisis is looming. And the entitlement program crisis for the country in general is only about 10 years away, if that. At that point all the money for keeping these vestigial organs alive is going to dry up like a puddle in the Arizona sun and people are going to either get real poor real quick or try to start businesses again.

Massachusetts is an exception because the Kennedy family is so powerful in Washington that this state gets whatever it wants. So it "looks" relatively prosperous. The rest of the region is falling apart.

When I talk about Deval Patrick, I know that he's going to hasten the trend. He is as big a supporter of giving social welfare benefits to illegals as anyone in the world. You can read his bio. on Wikipedia.

Frankly I don't expect him to do anything except hasten the implosion.

anymore.

I often joke that Kerry and Kennedy have received lifetime appointments to the US senate-but a little part of me realizes that isn't really all that big a joke. Are there any republicans who even want to try to beat them anymore?

had that air of the former Soviet Union. Lots of stuff that needed repair or cleaning. I caught the subway one night and the driver, himself a useless featherbedder on automated trains, was sound asleep. It is also unique in being the only place I've ever seen slovenly looking Cops.

One of my companions on the trip and I were in a bar one evening just off Harvard Square. It was clearly the domain of one of the local Irish politico/mafiosi types. We were sitting there drinking our beer and talking between ourselves about all the police force patches on the wall. A woman at the bar turns to us and says, "You two are from one of those "effing" Red States; what the "****" were you people thinking?" I have a Southern accent and he is a Wyoming cowboy. Neither of us being reticent to get in a fight, verbal or otherwise, we told her exactly what we were thinking and it got hot and vile. Soon we were surrounded by ugly guys with lumpy suit jackets. The the "Don" appeared and told the woman she was to "be nice to our guests" and told the bartender to give us a round. Truly strange place!
In Vino Veritas

Cambridge/Harvard Square is a little like downtown Leningrad except with worse street repair and a bunch of historic Colonial and Pre-Revolutionary War architecture that is now inhabited by a crowd of lefty intellectuals and postmodernist brahmins.

I'll have to go and take some pictures and post them on Flickr so that everyone can take a look. They also have a fleet of Environmental Police trucks cruising the streets to make sure nobody spills any of that red paint on the ground:

Continuing public input is also essential to the work of the Environmental Strike Team, which seeks to identify incidents of illegal toxic material storage, disposal, and dumping. Tips from concerned citizens, via an Environmental Crimes Hotline, are crucial in identifying possible sources of these materials-which can be dangerous if mishandled. Using this information, specially trained Boston Police officers have worked closely with other City and state inspectors, local Fire Departments, and federal investigators from the Environmental Protection Agency to inspect, investigate and vigorously prosecute environmental code violations wherever they are discovered in the City of Boston.

And wait until you see U. Mass./Amherst!

If you listen closely, especially on Public Radio stations. Odds are good recently that whenever someone is talking about New Hampshire, Upstate New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, etc., what they're talking about is the exodus of young workers and the increasing and ultimately insurmountable pressures that are going to overwhelm these states on the budgetary level and force serious austerity programs within the next ten years.

University Presidents are talking about how to retain people here with federal grant money and seed money to start businesses, etc., but the demographics I think are shifting away from this region. They may be very strong right now but my guess is that they will not be very economically powerful for too much longer. New Jersey is a bit of an exception because it's such a crucial area that there will always be money there. But the rest of these Northeastern states are going to go increasingly Socialist because their legislators just cannot stop themselves from spending money and because ideologically they can't bring themselves to become entrepreneurs again on a large enough scale to save themselves.

I've never lived anywhere except Massachusetts where I have heard radio advertisements asking people who shouldn't need to get on the government dole to check out the programs that are available. Literally in Massachusetts there are public service announcements funded by the State that tell people: "Try to sign up, even if you think you make too much money."

It's like nothing I've ever seen before, and I think these liberal northeastern strongholds that everyone talks about are very hollow oaks indeed.

_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?

It was good while it lasted but now it's deactivated. The quote was:

"This may very well be the stupidest person in the world."

It was missing the:

"Perhaps we should shoot him." part.

Speaking metaphorically, of course, I would be very much in favor of not allowing Lincoln Chafee the liberty of deciding which party he is in, ever again.

No. Aside from the fact that shooting politicians is bad form, it would be a waste of perfectly good ammunition. Chafee isn't worth the trouble or the cost.

It will be interesting watching him try to find something to do.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?

...Chafee + Unemployed/Unemployable = Democrat.

Hmm, I see a synergistic trend here.

--
"I will guarantee you that John Kerry will be president of the United States." - Nancy Pelosi

That would be interesting. Chaffee could write an opinion, then write a dissent to it because he changed his mind.

Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, and Chafee for the majority vs. Ginsburg, Souter, Breyer, and .......Chafee dissenting
Just Say No To Amnesty: http://www.fairus.org

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"?

preview comment must remember previee

That could be worked into a good reform idea. How can the rules be changed to prevent this? Maybe a candidate who voted against the party 20% loses funding from the Republican party?

That's one reason I usually shy away from giving money to party organizations during primary season, and even sometimes the general elections, because I don't know where it is going.

It seems better to give directly to the candidates, but the idea of giving to the party is that theoretically they should be able to give to the most needy candidates.

If you don't support Linc and every other Republican no matter what, you are just a cut and run Republican!

I would like to have a dime for every time over the last four years I and others, have been insulted by leaders in my own party for daring to have an opinion. I was called a xenophobe about immigration, a sexist about Harriet Meirs, and not sufficiently loyal when I criticized the administration.

Now, some here are complaining because we are not being positive enough!

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

I mean rally how can you defend someone as conservative when they have brought about the largest new entitlement program in decades ? The greatest expansion of the government in history ?

But I am still damn positive.

Heres Why
1. Don't have to make lame excuse that i don't really believe to liberals

2. Republicans lost conservativism didn't. Look at the ballot initiatives. Overwhelmingly conservative. Look at the dem candidates overwhelmingly conservative.

3. Even though I didn't I was one of those republicans seriously considering sitting this one out. I was hoping that the GOP would get a wake up call. In the end I came home, but I am not entirely unhappy about this. The dems have razor thin margins and a divided party thats more polarized than the country. At best the dems will unite behind greed.

4. Now the dems actually have to come up with solutions.

But as I said elsewhere, I will never again vote for any candidate the is not a firm fiscal conservative, for any reason.

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

We are still AT WAR!!!

The GOP should give the Dems enough rope to hang themselves with on this and no more.

Meanwhile, we need to constantly point out that we need a focused executive in these times.

So let the dems impeach bush and let the generals run the war. With any luck the dems will be hoist on their own petard and we will have the Iraq the world needs.

I think Iraq will work itself out in 3 or 4 years if we can keep the lid on.
Tom Ud

If you understood the international/information operations (IO) implications of this statement on the War on Terror in Iraq and Afghanistan you would never say that.

That would be an IO disaster in the Middle East.

www.fairtax.org
Sick of Government Expansion? Liberty-Minded Republican? Check This Out... Republican Liberty Caucus!!!
www.rlc.org http://www.republicanliberty.org/
Support Congressional Republicans
www.nrcc.org

The risk is what will bush discover is a journey stone* if the house comes after him.

But on the other hand the President will be at best useless and at worst seriously detrimental.

*journey stone: A rock you take with you on a long hike. When you feel you can no longer carry it you throw it away to feel better

What does comprehensive immigration reform and the minimum wage have to do with the War? He is giving into the talking and negotiation crowd. He has been unable to articulate to the American people how serious the threat we face. I am sorry to say, it is goin to take another attack. Hopefully it is not as bad as 911.
Tom Ud

If we had a sane immigration policy, instead of an open-borders disaster, the 9/11 hijackers would never have gotten into this country. If local police would detain illegals and people on expired visas, one of the hijackers would have been arrested when he was pulled over for speeding. And finally, let's address the statement of Bush/Mehlman/Weekly Standard that amnesty is vital to homeland security. These open-borders fanatics tell us that we need amnesty, so that illegal immigrants will come forward and tell us who they are, so we can find out if they are terrorists or not. Yeah, because Al-Qaeda members are going to come forward and identify themselves. Also, one of the masterminds of the original World Trade Center bombing got to stay in this country, and plan that attack because he got amnestied and received citizenship during the 1986 Amnesty. So much for that argument. Amnesty has killed innocent Americans in the past, border security never has.
Just Say No To Amnesty: http://www.fairus.org

I joined. I think we need to start a grass roots effort to stop this. There has been some under reported stories about the border and the drug cartels and chavez's involvment with terrorist. It would be uniquet to run a bipartisan ad with the faces Pelosi, Reed, MaCain, and Bush. I think we could do this from a grass roots level without depending on either party.
Tom Ud

Atta came in as a Tourist, but did come in through legit channels. Then he and Jarrah applied for a Student VIsa. Others cleared Customs, as well. Ramzi Bilashibh could not directly participate, b/c he could not get a Visa. It was a quick glance, but I've read it before, and I don't remember any of the hijackers getting in to the U.S. without going through improper channels. If you can find it, please let me know. If your point is that we should've been tracking them. Without going Communist, I'm not sure how that is possible with every possible terrorist. The chapter on their Arrivals begins on page 217.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

www.fairtax.org
Sick of Government Expansion? Liberty-Minded Republican? Check This Out... Republican Liberty Caucus!!!
www.rlc.org http://www.republicanliberty.org/
Support Congressional Republicans
www.nrcc.org

Pelosi swears she won't impeach Bush. It's actually logical for her to say that because they are going to be investigating and trashing Bush in every way possible. So she will wait to see if she has enough dirt and gets enough people angry that they want to impeach Bush before she tries.

The saddest thing about the whole story is that the Democrats really think that Kenneth Starr was a partisan hack who was trying to bring Clinton down, so the Democrats need "revenge". They don't understand that he was just following the law.

Dellums will do it for her

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

He was replaced by the only person (Barbara Lee) D Berkeley, to vote against taking out Al qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Dellums was always cutting the military. The one you are thinking of is John Conyers of Michigan, he will head the house Judiciary committee and two years ago held mock impeachment hearing in the basement of the Congress.

"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle

If he does, we get Cheney, who would be a heck of a lot more conservative than George H. W. Bush's kid.
Just Say No To Amnesty: http://www.fairus.org

Maybe we could pull a fast one and put a competent VP in there prior to his removal to be available for 2008. Hell, Ford almost got re-elected.
Tom Ud

Not to say Cheney isn't competent.
Tom Ud

The scary thing is that now Nancy Pelosi will be third in line to be president. It's not only for his sake that I hope Cheney's heart is ok.

That said, there is no reason for the Dems to impeach. They will use the "death by a thousand cuts" approach. Start investigations and pull out one-sided damaging "evidence" whenever they need it. In two years, they will review thousands of documents and cherry pick sections and words to use against Republicans in 2008. No reason to go nuclear when conventional is a viable option.

--
Evil men hide from the truth, but good men stand upon it.

Lets face it he discarded principle for personal success and showed no compunction at betraying those that aided him.

> Chuck Schumer... ate her lunch

That in my opinion is the root cause of losing the election, that the Democratic politicians simply outplayed the Republicans, blowing them right off the court. It's not that the Democrats are great at what they do, but the Republican pols are just awful.

And the reason for the root cause, the root root cause, is that the Democrats passionately wanted to win, while the Republican leadership never seemed to give a care. It was like they were asleep while the Titanic headed towards the iceburg.

Well, I think the passion will come. Joe Biden has already said that he is going to start hearings on the first day Congress starts, modeled on the Vietnam war hearings in 1971. Eventually the Republican leadership will get mad and show a little passion. There must be at least one of them that isn't a robot.

Maybe even one of the conservative columnists will show a little passion. I can't believe how many columns I read that said "I feel exhilirated", or something like it. When we lost they were either all giggly or reported it mechanically like a roll call vote on the John Smith memorial postage stamp.

And Emanuel did a much better job recruiting candidates, fundraising, and staying on message than Reynolds. We got out-politic'd this cycle. That doesn't even begin to describe that RINO loser Mehlman. Good thing his legendary GOTV machine saved us this cycle. Oh wait....it didn't....probably because you can't get conservatives to vote for a liberal national party no matter how much money you spend. I think Mehlman should switch parties like good old Linc.
Just Say No To Amnesty: http://www.fairus.org

You're suggesting, that in a 50-50 Senate, Mr. Chafee would, if properly appreciated, be a true-blue Republican. That is, the man who's averred he might switch parties following the present election, and whose allegiance to the Republicans of late has been in large measure to collect spoils for his home state, would steel his heart against the blandishments of the Democrats which induced his fellow New England Republican, Jim Jeffords, to jump ship in just the same situation. All I can say is that if this represent the extent of your strategic thinking, it is not precisely a wonder that you're an endangered species.

The Republicans just lost chairmanship of all of the Senate committees. They just lost all control of the legislative agenda. Sorry that my sad still-control-more-wealth-and contribute-more-brand-of-Republican-mind doesn't understand why that's good. Maybe that's why the "endangered species" of the Northeast still run the economy.

carrying my point in its talons, sails over your head. Before the election, Chafee had already screwed over his party on critical issues. Now he's revealed that his political alignment is largely opportunistic: whatever will get Rhode Island the biggest slab of pork. Your scenario, wherein Chafee's steadfast support allows us to maintain control of a 50-50 Senate, requires that this high-souled and pure-minded man resist whatever plums the Democrats offer him to change sides. That is why, frankly, you are full of it.

Look, I've lived in the Northeast all my life and I'm not exactly joined at the hip to the Texas wing of the party. I don't think GOP hopefuls should have to take a triune oath to fight ESCR in all its forms, and I think the Republican Party's fall from fiscal conservatism has been an indecent disgrace. But Chafee's played the maverick on things like the judiciary which don't exactly require religious zealotry or massive pork-barreling, and now he's revealed his true colors as a trimmer. Suggesting that all might be well if we'd just put our trust in this man is absurd in the extreme.

A final piece of his advice: if you want fiscal restraint, you'll find a lot of people here with you...not excluding Evangelicals. That, coupled with an overweening sense of entitlement, is the #1 problem with the GOP today (or a few days ago, anyway). If you'd like to prate about the importance of New England with the air of the CBC demanding a chairmanship for Alcee Hastings, I suggest you lay in some T.S. slips.

Best. Comment. Evar.

of this country and this world.

Please get that the "red states" don't have a majority and they need to find common ground with good old fashioned northeast republicans -- and non religious-right republicans in all states -- to form a majority.

There will never be a Republican majority again if this is not understood.

Mainstream America was horrified at the prospect of oily politicians at the deathbed of Terry Schiavo..

...I have some sympathy for your general argument, although you need to throttle back a bit wrt the religious Right; but have you perhaps considered that you are lecturing people who donated the money that the GOP used to bail out Chafee in the primary? They may feel just a touch annoyed and personally involved at his cavalier dismissal of the Republican Party. Whether or not Chafee feels justified or not, it's frankly shabby.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.

i think rsn66 has a good point, and it points to a problem with politics and political discourse at this point in our history. Each faction in the current dogfight thinks it represents majority, mainstream America. Evagelical movement Republicans claim they represent the majority, as do 20-something college graduates in blue, urban enviorenments. To read Hugh Hewitt or Matthew Yglesias is just to see how blindly terms like "mainstream" and "serious" can be used. (For Hewitt, any of his positions is by definition "mainstream," no matter how far to the right or loyal to the president; Yglesias is an expert at attaching adjectives like "rational" and "mainstream" to arguments that are neither.) That's because, I think, the elecorate is clearly somewhere the two parties, which explains the frantic tacking to the center of both parties during an election year.

The average American voter, it seems, doesn't want to pay a lot of taxes, believes in some sort of safety net for the less fortunate, supports the death penalty, is deeply divided about abortion (both in its ethical implications and the very different question of whether it should be legal, and to what extent), doesn't want gay marriage, is very concerned about illegal immigration but unsure of a just and effective solution, thinks the war in Iraq was just, thinks the war in Iraq has been mis-managed, worries about terrorism but is conflicted or unclear on the nature of the GWOT, and generally thinks that both parties are pretty corrupt and that there's not much of a point in getting too involved in politics. Not that necessarily that these are the views of the average American, per se, but the features of the average American voter whom both parties try to lock up.

It's tough for people in one given culture or environment is our vast country to truly understand the perspectives and philosophy from another. I live in a big city, with a lot of friends from liberal backgrounds. Most of them simply can't comprehend how mainstream it is to oppose gay marriage, or to want to limit or end access to abortions. They simply cannot comprehend that most Americans are more conservative on many issues than they are. I imagine the same is true for some people in a largely evangelical, white, upper-middle-class town who find it hard to believe that a majority of Americans find some of their views extreme.

I feel that the Republican Party has done a very good job of maintaining an orderly big tent around the various leanings among conservatives of many stripes, and have managed to understand that for most Americans, the real divide is not between liberalism and conservatives but bewtween moderation and extremsim. The Democrats have not been as successful, partly because part of the nature of the left is to be fractious and unreasonable and partly because the people who would support an extremely left-wing faction based on redistribution of wealth don't vote, leaving the far left with a lot of angry rhetoric but little in the way of popular support..

I think the more the right understands that they can't win Rhode Island with a Rick Santorum, or the left understands that Howard Dean is simply unacceptable to a majority of Americans, the better off our political discourse will be. This, of course, is written in extreme wishful thinking in an avowed advocate of moderation and independence.

two cents,
Ben