November 13 — 5 days post 2016 election

Tuesday, November 8, I could only think about how happy I was.  I could not believe what had happened or how happy I was that it had happened.   As you can only guess it was the final numbers, states, votes of the 2016 presidential election that was the source of my elation.  I was alone when  my daughter in Anchorage who was following along with me as each Florida county reported in said, “aw gee, I wish there was a election return party I could go to”.  About that time, I got a text from the District Chairman that read “Are you coming over?”.  I texted back, “Am on my way will be there shortly”. — And I was there to celebrate with other joyous Republicans in the after math of almost the greatest happening since the election of Ronald Regan.

When I awoke on Wednesday November 9,  my first thought was to recall how I had felt first thing every morning since this day in 2008.  That morning I could not believe who or what had been elected as president.  And every day since has been the same way.  I relied daily on Matt Drudge to reveal  what kind of dog pile had been dropped by the White House from a group of academicians with no consideration for other parts of the world, least of all for the many Americans living outside the beltway, or even whether there were Americans living outside the beltway

This past week has further clarified that election in 2008.  All of those days since 2008, I felt all those thing we are hearing from college students and protesters, but I never took signs to the street demanding the electoral college concept be ended or beat up on people who voted for the winner.  There were many people around me who could not believe this individual had been elected.  Again, there were no protests or supporters beaten around where I live.  But I will admit that I was derogatory toward the person elected in 2008, and I refused to acknowledge him as my president. My refusal to recognize him as president was based solely on my determination of his shortcomings.  Those shortcomings had nothing to do with the color or his skin.

Each passing week since November 9, 2008, there have been actions on the part of the elite Washington establishment that have been devised solely toward the destruction of this country, and with each week the destructive nature of the “change of 2008” has become more and more evident.  The change I wanted to see, if it was going to happen, was not racist, xenophobic, or anything else; it truly was a change to the restoration of traditional family value and patriotic values of our founding fathers.

So I was surprised and disappointed to hear and see acted out the accusations of these current protestors and college students.  They talk of feelings of abandonment, homelessness and fear;  and at the same time they are unilaterally accepting of dishonesty, corruption and continual deceit by the candidate representing  the democratic party.

Advertisements

“Republicans Eat Their Young”

There is a challenge in understanding this statement.  Just a hint – it has nothing to do with age.  It starts with defining the word “young” in the political sense of the word.  What this means, is rather than encouraging and nurturing those “young in experience” people interested in serving in elected government, Republicans chew them up and spit them out, essentially eating them.

Those folks “young in experience” are those people who have been willing to learn and study the issues and the procedures at more grass root levels before they jump into the deep end of the pool.  Several of our local politicians have been touted as serving on this local committee and that city commission.  These politicians are also touted as having served on city councils and as city mayors before they ventured out into races covering larger geographical areas and serving greater responsibilities.

Well, as these politicians learned and practiced at the city and borough levels; and networks and word of mouth a valuable commodities, one might expect with all this local experience and “on the job” training, they could count on a “leg up” from those politicians who have previously traveled this route of education and experience.

However, with the Republican Party this is not the case.  It is the practice of Republicans to discount and negate the efforts of those people coming up behind them; essentially destroying the possibilities and potential of those “young in experience” following along behind.   I have been told, the Democratic party does not do this to their up and comers. But might actually support and encourage them.  Could this true??

It could be imagined that at a minium the more experienced politican would vote for  the “young, new in experience” community servant.  But to openly profess to others an unwillingness to support another person working on  behalf of the same political platform.  Well, folks, that is in a nutshell the Republican Party Eating Their Young.

Then comes the Spin!!   The excuse – well those grass-roots contests are non-partisan so whoever is supported is of no consequence.  Having a designation of non-partisan for local Borough elections is definitely true at this point in time.  I, for one, would like to know the why and wherefore of that practice.  Keeping the local contests as non-partisan, without being able to identify the motives and values of these public servants, does not serve the local voter.

Therefore, the local voter  is left to past history (years in the legislature) and voting record (supporting $2.4M in bed tax) and open assembly statements (increasing tax on seniors) to recognize the blue color of the ethics of the local politican.  So when one partisan politican openly expresses an intention to vote in a non-partisan race for someone of the other party, the ethics of that partisan politican are severely called into questions and that partisan politican can be considered as having “eaten his young.”