I wish like hell the Democrats had done more victory laps. The Republican congressional candidates mostly ran not against their opponents, but against a debt-increasing, job-killing, big-spending Obama that was a completely fictional construct. The Democrats were so busy running against Obama that no one called the Republicans on their lies.

Considering that Republicans were largely responsible for stripping away the regulations that would have prevented the financial meltdown, do you really think they would have done more, Typo? The Obama administration has at least put some regulation back in place.

Also, quantative easing is not "printing money." Increasing the monetary supply to the banks is the last weapon the central bank has to shore up the economy when interest rates are as low as they can go. There is no mechanism to print money and hand it out to ordinary people. Doing anything like that would have to go through Congress, and you can imagine how that would go.

The biggest problems with the economy are that the banks are swimming in money, but, against their own interests, aren't lending it, and corporations are swimming in money, yet aren't hiring or raising salaries. What would you suggest the President do about that?

t hits the like button for Ginger

I hate the word seminal.

So many of the candidates completely blew it by trying to have the Republicans not notice they were Democrats rather than embracing the values and policies that people agree with.

I've had to dig into the archives to copy and paste the words of Nilly the Wise since she brought me back from the abyss in 2004. Today I have not gone into Facebook and have worked really hard on my business. Tonight I will go to the gym then go home and either read or watch recorded comedy. Can't yet deal.

So I didn't seek permission to repeat her post, but I am going to assume that her gracious nature would permit this. I hope that her words will sooth others as they sooth me on this day after election.

Nilly - Nov 3, 2004 2:10:10 am PST #4269 of 4692 Marked

I've skimmed some. I'm not sure I'm going to be able to say this right, but I'm going to try, anyway. I'm definitely not trying to preach or anything, just state my opinion, the way things look through my glasses, which are the only ones I have. I live in a country in which each local election is considered a matter of life and death. Not any matter of principle, of any sort, no matter how important and crucial. Not a matter of quality of life or following your moral principles. Literally life and death. The country is pretty much divided in half, and each side thinks the other will bring us to our bloody ruin. There is actual hatred, I can't think of any other word that may describe the situation, between the two sides. The hatred was so vast, so deep and poisonous, that a prime minister was murdered by a political fanatic, with the excuse that he thought that this PM had been, in his actions, an immediate danger to the lives of the citizens. In the last few years, in this chaotic political situation, we had more elections than we usually do. Governments fell, due to various reasons, and re-elections had to be run in spans shorter than the usual 4 years. The winners are of one side and then of the other (lately, more of one of them, if we count down the numbers, but still). And despite both sides having their share of victories and losses, we are still here, the country is still here, and we are still alive. There are dark prophecies of bloodshed and war, after each election, from the losing side, each time a different one. And none of them came true. Yes, there are innocent people being killed here in the streets, the last 3 of them only a few days ago. But I don't think the murderers care one bit who is in charge and which party won the largest number of votes. The issues are bigger than the attempts to pocket them in political campaigns. Here's the thing, though: life is stronger than anything. No matter who sits at some office and passes laws, life is stronger than anything. It takes a really extreme situation for those things to affect the friendships between people, the relationships within families, the little everyday details that combine our routine. I think I may even mean the economical laws, the job market, the prices of needed supplies, the taxes we pay. Sure, it affects our lives, it can make them much harder. But life is stronger than nearly anything. It's hard for me to realize the way the life of people in Israel may seem to people from the outside. The situation is extreme, both due to the terrorists' attacks, but also in terms of the economy, which is strongly affected by the political situation. In fact, only through seeing things through the eyes of people who don't live here, could I realize how serious the situation is. Because here, in the heart of this, what people do is live their lives. Life is stronger than nearly anything. People keep being invited for holidays, keep arguing with their parents, making a fabulous new recipe, shed a tear over a good book, get a good word from their boss, enjoy a sunset - whatever. Life goes on. There may be darker shades to some things, more annoyed looks at the news, sharper arguments about the topics there's a disagreement about. There may be harder times, in more than one way. There may be (continued...)

( continues...) horrible times. None of these things is mutually exclusive. I'm looking at my mom, with one son in active mandatory military service and the other in reserve duty, and I know that I can't even imagine how hard it may be. But when my baby brother has a weekend home, he learns to play a new song on his guitar (he is very much into "Pink Floyd" right now), he watches the FotR EE, he is still the hardest person in the world to wake up in the morning. Life is stronger than anything. I'm still not sure I'm able to express what I mean. Other than that I am the sappest of all saps who ever sapped the earth

And one more....

Nilly - Nov 3, 2004 6:43:07 am PST #4313 of 4698 Marked Sometimes I imagine this difference as that between people who love math and people who don't, or people who can carry a tune and people who are tone-deaf. It's like there's a gap that can't be bridged with words, two completely different ways of thinking, politics-wise, and in things that are less sharply divided, in which a person doesn't have to choose between very few limited options, they don't come out into the air this often. A few months ago there was a decision made in the center of the leading party currently in Israel. There were two choices offered, and each side, even inside that same party, could not, no matter how, see how the the people who support the other option do so with a sane mind and a clean heart. And each side, despite wholeheartedly believing they have the correct decision, couldn't explain itself to the other one. It's like two completely different kind of broadcast waves, each coming from the same desire to do good to one's home, each in a completely different language, and there's no Roseta stone found yet

I hate the word seminal.

Should we use "semen filled" instead?

Laura, I looked that up last night, because I posted it in my long-ignored LJ the day after the 2004 election. Bless Nilly.

I just got back from lunch with my mom, where we did indeed grouse loudly about the election and people sitting nearby gave us glances of approval and one "I feel that, man!" Love my neighborhood.

I hate the word seminal.

Should we use "semen filled" instead?

Is the music used in the original broadcast of THe Wonder Years semen filled? Possibly. But when I read that it was "seminal" that's what I think of!

So many of the candidates completely blew it by trying to have the Republicans not notice they were Democrats rather than embracing the values and policies that people agree with.

Weirdly, we had a lot of the opposite dynamic going on. So raging red Republicans talking about how they were all right to choose, and raise the minimum wage etc. So a low info voter watching commercials would see a pretty reasonable sounding guy (of course) and then the Dem ads refuting them sounded like vicious crazy-talk.

I *very* reluctantly voted against it because it was so heavily backed by interests in Las Vegas, IIRC.

That's fair. From what I know, the tribe was going to be hiring some company from Las Vegas to actually run the casino for a share of the profits, hence the backing.

I'm not really invested, I just have the strong suspicion that most voters were knee-jerk voting anti-casino for no reason and that's annoying me.