Showing posts with label democrat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democrat. Show all posts

Monday, November 9, 2009

Voting and Vetting.

I wanted to take a few minutes to speak quickly to a statement posted on a previous blog post of mine by an anonymous commenter:

A vote for a Democrat or a vote for a Republican doesn't necessarily mean the voter is in support of EVERYTHING that candidate espouses.

Well, yes it is.

We live in a Democratic Republic. Our Founding Fathers knew that We the People did not have time, nor interest, in showing up at the polls every week to vote on every little law, bill, resolution or proclamation that comes up. So they set up a system of government in which We the People would choose those that we feel would best represent our positions to make those decisions on our behalf.

We choose, from a pool of candidates, those that espouse the ideals that we stand behind, believe in, feel is best, etc..... to put up for election to those offices. Just because you know what GOOD that person will do, does not mean you cannot also distance yourself from what kind of BAD that person intends to do on your behalf. If you vote for that person, you are giving them license - you are telling them that if they run on that platform - you agree with that platform - all aspects of it.

This is why getting involved in the pre-primary level is so important, regardless of party. I don't care what letter you have listed on your voter card...but if you do not get involved and look into the entire platform someone is standing on....well... it's the primary that gives you the opportunity to put forth, or prevent, them from being put forward. This is the pool of candidates that you will have to chose from, because after the primaries, it becomes all about the partisanship. D vs. R. (vs. L, G, etc...but let's not kid ourselves here).

Which brings up my second point I plan on making: In electing this person to represent you (that is why it is called the House of REPRESENTATIVES), you must take a look at the good AND the bad in their platform. Why do we have a two party system? Why do we classify ourselves into two basic categories? Because ultimately, (IMHO) there are two ways to decide who to put into office:

The One Who Will Do The Good You Want.

The One Who Will Not Do The Bad You Do Not Want.

When a voter choses to vote for the person who will do the good that the voter wants done, yet ignore the damage that person will also do - and then sit back and say they have no responsibility in the 'bad', it's is foolishness. You elected them in to represent you. You gave them your blessing, with your vote, to make the choices ALL OF THEM that they said they were going to make. To sit back and say "I am pro-life (or pick your topic du-jour) and don't agree with Rep. X on abortion, even though I voted for them" is a failure of you, as a citizen.

It is our duty, our obligation to get involved on some level in the process. It is our duty to vet the candidate of your choice. And then, if they do not pass the primary, to make the next best choice... and to look then at those candidates and ask yourself two very important questions:

"How much good will this person do?"

"How much damage will the person do?"

And then accept what they do, ON YOUR BEHALF, while they are in office, both the good and the bad. You voted for them. You put them in that seat. You gave them the power to do all that they said they were going to do. You take responsibility for your actions, namely, who you voted for. You take responsiblity for the damage those elected officials have done while in office.

This goes for both parties, before you think I am going to do the "all D's are bad and all R's are good".

I vote primarily along Republican lines because as a conservative, (you know, someone who wants to conserve the status quo...i.e. constitutionality, bill of rights, etc) my primary concern is what do I NOT agree on with this candidate. We will never find someone we agree with on 100% of the time. So I look at those items that I consider important, and ignore those that I do not - and when that candidate is elected - accept their votes AS MY OWN on those items.

Anonymous asked why Republicans put so much emphasis on abortion as a topic? Why do Christians put so much emphasis on voting Republican? Because we consider that topic to be very important. Plain and simple. If I choose to elect someone into office that has stated they plan on extending the pro-choice agenda, it means one of two things - I agree with the agenda, and hence choose this person as my representative, or I consider that item to be unimportant to me. So for a Christian to stand up and give credence to a Party that has chosen to stand on the Pro-Choice side of the argument again means one of two things: I agree with the agenda, and hence choose this person as my representative, or I consider that item to be unimportant to me. If you, as a Christian, find abortion to be unimportant - I suggest speaking to your Pastor.

So again, as we move past the local elections, and head full steam to this mid-term election - get involved now. Find your candidate now. Vote in the primaries. Once they are in elected into office, it's too late. (yes, i know you can recall them, but if you have ever looked into the process, it's damn near impossible)

P.S. since it is my blog - and I have the right to at least receive some respect due to the point of commenters - I have changed my settings. No more anonymous. Sorry, but my name goes by my posts. You should have the decency to do as well.

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Right Wing Extremists, EH????

Right Wing Protest:



Left Wing Protest:



Right Wing Protest:



Left Wing Protest:



And they say WE are the extremists!

Friday, July 17, 2009

An Open Letter To The Pima County Democratic Party

Hello.

I am a small business owner.

Last year I hired my first employee.

Last fall I had to fire my first employee, thanks to all the additional costs of hiring and retaining employees.

I made $9,700 dollars last year after expenses - not bad for a start-up company, actually. Most take a couple years to turn a profit.

I am on AHCCCS, because I cannot afford health insurance. I qualify for a lot more government welfare and handouts, but because I have a Church family and good friends to fall back on, I refuse to take anything out of the hands of someone at gunpoint (through the IRS).

In other words, I don't want to be leach on society's ass.

This country was founded on the freedom of political discourse, the freedom to peacefully assemble, and the freedom of speech. With only 2 teaparties held, both of them so peacefully held that TPD officers were sent HOME because the were not needed, (the actual quote being "just a bunch of law-abiding citizens being law-abiding") you come out and label the hardworking men and women who give up their time to re-open political discourse in America and in Tucson as "RWE's"?

Are you really THAT afraid of the Tea Party movement? You must be, to be pulling out the stops already. Thanks! We needed that boost, to know that we are being effective, to know that we are making you worried about your stranglehold on politics in Tucson, Pima County, Arizona, and the USA. This proves to us that we are not merely 'preaching to the choir' when we hand out information, hold a rally, or speak on talk radio. Thanks for giving all our fence-sitters a reason to get off the fence and join us. Thanks for making it easier to bring in the Independent Voter, who merely wants to vote for a candidate that speaks their mind, not attacks their opponent. Thank-you for making our job easier.

Saturday, May 2, 2009

Notice something? I do....

I was checking out the Agenda for the next Pima County Supervisors Meeting (May 5, 2009). I noticed a trend, maybe you will notice it too... Something about tea parties, grass roots efforts, etc.... Think maybe, just maybe 2010 will be a little different when it comes time to the vote?

2. DIVISION OF ELECTIONS
Pursuant to A.R.S. §16-821B, approval of Precinct Committeemen resignations and appointments:

RESIGNATIONS PRECINCT PARTY
Burgess, Patricia H. 010 DEM
Edmunds, James B. 091 REP
Kinsey, Adam D. 103 DEM
Benedict, Ruth L. 345 DEM
Kennedy, Michael M. 395 REP

APPOINTMENTS PRECINCT PARTY
Schmugge, Peter H. 005 REP
Wilcox, Brook E. 005 REP
Wishnick, Yale 008 REP
Hamed, Sami Y. 019 DEM
Kinsey, Adam D. 045 DEM
Fimbres, Mary L. 064 DEM
Fimbres, Richard G. 064 DEM
Davis, Vicki 088 REP
Tumpes, Sandra S. 088 REP
Curtis, George H. 091 REP
Sutton, Katherine L. 100 GRN
Venne, Marilyn R. 100 REP
Martin, Marjory 108 REP
Watts, Michael A. 118 REP
Hutchison, Joyce A. 141 REP
Lowe, Doug 163 REP
Lowe, Penny 163 REP
Donatelli, Esther 171 REP
Donatelli, Jeff 171 REP
Wagner, James R. 188 REP
Pine, Dan L. 193 REP
Nevins, Donald L. 202 REP
Markhart, William T. 203 REP
Holden, Phyliss A. 205 REP
Lee, Linda P. 206 REP
Perry, Glenn M. 214 REP
Perry, Marjorie S. 214 REP
Yee, Marilyn A. 214 REP
Summers, Bret W. 223 REP
Summers, Fabiola A. 223 REP
Fields, Tom W. 224 REP
Scheller, Pat A. 224 REP
Herrell, Emily J. 231 DEM
Strasburg, Jack E. 236 GRN
McLaughlin, Jeff A. 242 REP
Buino, Terrence M. 246 REP
Kelly, Aubrey Y. 261 REP
Peyton, Laura 261 REP
Bengds, Erik E. 269 REP
McDonald, Steven J. 280 REP
Butler, Seth A. 281 REP
Origer, Mara L. 290 DEM
Langione Hillwig, Denise N. 310 REP
Reynolds, Merton D. 318 REP
Blanchard, Jean P. 328 REP
Blanchard, Mark 328 REP
MacInnes, Darlene R. 328 REP
Romanowski, Jolanta 328 REP
Ferrell, Denise A. 359 REP
Hagge, Ruth L. 359 REP
Leslie, Jennifer I. 359 REP
Flowers, Judith A. 376 REP
Flowers, Odis E. 376 REP
Thomas, Steve N. 385 REP
Pickett, Christopher H. 391 REP
Egbert, Kara S. 392 REP
Matthews, Rachel M. 392 REP
Walton, Cade A. 392 REP
Walton, Michelle M. 392 REP
Hann, Gina R. 393 REP
Botsko, Joseph A. 415 REP
Tanberg, Mary E. 417 REP
CC 5-5-09 (3)

Saturday, March 28, 2009

He missed the joke...

Senator Conrad (D-umb) missed the little rip that Senator Grassley (R-ight on top of the set-up) made to him...

Watch the video here.



That's what she said!