Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Staff Contacts | Affiliates | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Taking on challenges of the next two years

March 12, 2013

WASHINGTON — I have decided not to run for re-election in 2014. This decision was extremely difficult because I love representing the people of Michigan in the U.....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(31)

Vauche

Mar-19-13 2:37 PM

Cute frog! Bet you were all smiles with that.

I'm guessing I hit a little too close to home with my opinions.

Definitetly part of the problem.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Mar-19-13 10:11 AM

Vauche,

Yawn, yawn…

Yawn . . . . ... . ......

Snooze snooze…

Snore, SNORE, snore!

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Mar-17-13 5:23 PM

We love you UNTIL you are successful. Is that a good message to pass along? Will this improve the fortunes of anybody?

No, I'm not niave. I know our governement ***** and the people in it blow smoke up are butts. I know the republicans have their agenda just as the democrats and neither fits perfectly with my agenda. I know special interests rule the roost. And I know money talks.

You see, you can be independent and not hate the rich. It doesn't mean you've been "fed" anything by anybody. It doesn't mean you're niave or uneducated. It doesn't mean you think everything is perfect. For me it means I understand why I am where I am in life. Why I have what I have and not what Bill Gates has. I would love what he has but that doesn't mean I deserve what he has.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Mar-17-13 4:54 PM

So you see, blaming the rich is not courageous. It's SIMPLE, EASY, and CONENIENT. It's a means to an end. It feeds the desire of everyone to be "successful" measured solely by possessions.

What would you say if I said all poor people are lazy? I'm guessing I would get lambasted. Isn't the current trend implying ALL wealthy business people are evil? Does this not spit in the face of the American Dream? We love you, UNTIL

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Mar-17-13 4:47 PM

So spouting off about how the rich and big corporations are conspiring to take over and subjugate this country is in fact en vogue now, not revolutionary. It is the current stance from the administration and the "free" bought for press. It is being fed to the masses daily who are eating it up.

Why do it? Control. Control through dependency. It's a power grab by the progressive movement mostly plain and simple.

Who is going to vote themselves out of free benefits? They already think they deserve them. The rich guy has them. Nevermind he may work 70-80hrs/wk and they work 40 or less. Never mind that he went to school for 7-10 years while they stopped at high school or less. Never mind that he is responsible for billions of dollars of investors money (not his money, my money, joe shmoes money with the 401K) while their only worry is if the hamburg is cooked or if it is the first of the month so they can collect their check.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Mar-17-13 4:27 PM

Whiz, I'm not trying to subscribe to your rant. Understand a little sure. I don't know everything and I haven't lived everyones lives. I've lived my own and I to have my experiences that shape what I believe.

What we suffer in this country is jealousy. We want what everyone else has. We believe we should all be equal in terms of possession. We think we DESERVE it. All this despite whatever effort we did or did not put in to achieving these goals.

Human nature is a funny beast really. The less fortunate have always blamed the rich for their troubles. The have nots have always blamed the haves. Fairly or not! However, we know through living it is always easier to put blame anywhere other than ourselves.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Mar-17-13 3:46 PM

I'm not really sure what the heck you want whiz. What is the solution?

I agree that corporate and private funding of campaigns is way out of control. Many of the big businesses, the rich favor the left despite what many believe. In the end it doesn't matter, there are players on both sides of this fence so it should, if thinking honestly, be a wash.

It's very true that government under any control is becoming intrusive, yet under one of the most intrusive presidents ever people blame one side, one group of people. We have the EPA, Education department, we have CZARS, and a president that choose to bypass the system through executive orders and under the guise of regulations. They are in essence creating laws when they do NOT have and should not have the authority to do so.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-17-13 2:57 PM

V,

I don’t invite you, or anyone else, to subscribe to my rant, in any fashion or form.

I have pontificated on what I have learned,

as opposed to what I have been ‘fed’,

or led,

or expected to believe by the media,

our legislator’s and their backers and bankers.

Say what you will…

It matters little that you choose to ‘disagree’, regarding who is in “control” of this nation.

The same strife has been rampant between the rich, the aristocrat’s, the plutocrat’s, the oligarch’s and the poor from time -day one.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-17-13 2:55 PM

But from the day Dwight D. Eisenhower, in his farewell address on January 17, 1961,

where he chose to warn Americans of the intense structured integration between policy, regulations, legislation, legislator’s, the national armed forces, and the military industrial base that supports, all of these entities,

the struggle for deeper penetration and inroads to the control of OUR government has been relentless by the powerful and the rich.

Your decision, is yours,

be that as it may,

and flies directly contrary to the adage that the world was flat, when in reality, it has been proven to be anything but flat.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-17-13 2:53 PM

As dated as the 1961 speech is, when Eisenhower made that speech about collusion, etc.,

the intensity with which the change from the military-industrial-complex,

has changed to include nearly all of the business empires, the rich, their investor’s, and supposedly, OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES,

the situation has evolved to where it is much worse than IKE posited in 1961.

Rather than debate with you about the world being flat or round…

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-17-13 2:51 PM

Research the facts as almost every retired congressman, legislator, or public affairs historians, intellectuals, have charged,

that corruption, and misrepresentation, and the media, has failed most Americans,

and is all-consuming and intrusive into all facets of life of every American.

As a token, remember that in the 2008 election cycle, just/only thirteen (13) states ultimately decided who would be president of this country,

think gerrymandering and electoral college.

What, say you, of the so-called ‘responsibility’ and the collective ‘responsibility’ of the rest of this nation’s voters?

It was conspired that such would not exist by our own legislators, and the heads and tails of the two-party system.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-17-13 2:49 PM

Through gerrymandering, republicans had hoped that the number of consequential states that would elect the next president could be reduced to ten (10).

When the democrats are at the helm, the same is also true of their adherence to their forms of bogus politicking.

Not much has been written in this regard, when voters gave the republicans their come-uppance in the last presidential election.

Good or Bad?

There is no sense in repeating what I’ve offered thus far.

It behooves you to take the time and perform due diligence with research on your part.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-17-13 2:47 PM

Wiser thinking, might then, indicate a willingness to debate,

when you substantiate your understanding of the entities and concepts of freedom of the press, plutocracy, oligarchy, aristocracy, unions, masons, religions, powerful churches, the rich, robber barons, electoral college, gerrymandering, political payoffs, extortion, blackmail, and taxation codes for the rich vs the rest of us….

and, how the control of these entities, ideas, and concepts moved from the realm and control by the many (the people),

to the realm and control by the few (the rich, the corporations, their investors).

To list just a few basic concepts.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-17-13 2:45 PM

To deny this shift and change or existence in fact,

is adhering to the idea that the world is flat.

To deny that the rich, their corporations, their investor’s, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the American Legislative Exchange Council

is benign and to dismiss them as insignificant...

is to believe the world is flat...

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Mar-17-13 9:03 AM

Well whiz, you put me in a bit a conundrum. I really disagree with your ultra contempt of the rich and big business yet I find I have much the same opinion concerning our election process.

I differ in that I would also hold the common folk to the fire too. Todays society doesn't put the time or effort into determining which canidate stands for what. It seems most don't vote, vote party lines, or vote the incumbent without thought. The problem is people won't kick out an incumbent if they are of "their" party even if the incumbent is not doing the job they were put there for.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Cheesehead

Mar-16-13 4:00 PM

Wheezie,

You didn’t mention the similarities between the Russian slate of candidates and the U.S. slate of candidates!

In Russia, the candidates were hand-picked by the Russian Government.

In the U.S., the candidates are hand-picked by the RICH, BIG BUSINESS, and THE INVESTOR’S.

Therefore, the lack of choice for our votes!

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-16-13 12:52 PM

Voauche,

I must, again,

preface my remarks, as a reminder to all…

I am

NOT,

a republican

a democrat

a liberal

OR

a conservative...

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-16-13 12:50 PM

My political bend, is to support the person or idea,

that leads to the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

There is nothing hard to understand about this philosophical bent.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-16-13 12:50 PM

Unfortunately,

our country has devolved into just the opposite of a REPRESENTATIVE democracy…

but rather has become, a representative ‘democracy’

for the rich,

by the rich, and

for their corporations,

their investors, and

self-serving interests.

Choice, of candidates, is just an illusion.

The amount of money that it takes to wage and win an elected public seat,

is beyond the means of mere working men and women,

UNLESS,

They are able to entice the money people to finance their election bid.

Once OUR elections are over,

the elected are beholden to their bankers.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-16-13 12:46 PM

TO ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION …

Because there has been NO real campaign finance reform,

from, or since it was last bandied about in the 1970’’s…

As you said in effect…

We now are left with a

COMPLETE LACK OF meaningful and different CHOICES,

representative by people who would change events or the status quo,

but are left

dead in the water,

without power,

sabotaged by,

THEIR LACK OF ACCESS TO

THE MONEY

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-16-13 12:44 PM

“In All Seriousness”…?

I have never been MORE SERIOUS, in my entire life.

Again,

you have hit the nail on the proverbial ‘head’,

in answer to your own question.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-16-13 12:43 PM

IN

The former Soviet Union,

A slate of ‘candidates’ was presented for people to vote for…

No real difference in candidate,

just one of the many that supported the status quo.

IN

The United States,

Today, a slate of ‘candidates’ are presented for people to vote for…

again,

NO REAL DIFFERENCE,

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-16-13 12:41 PM

Just the same slate of characters who have access to

MONEY,

supplied by

the rich,

their corporations,

and,

their investor’s.

Because,

elected officials are beholden to enact preferential legislation,

that in the main, grows the wealth and asset accumulation of the rich.

This is the way it is…

TODAY.

Not,

Rather,

How it should be...

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-16-13 12:39 PM

IF

WE

HAD

THE ABILITY

TO SUPPORT,

AND ENACT

THE IDEAS/IDEALS

OF A

TRULY

DEMOCRATIC

SYSTEM

of

REPRESENTATION.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Mar-16-13 12:37 PM

Again, Vouche,

You are correct, and have answered your own question:

We, the voters, are not provided with slates of ‘candidates’ who have the financial resources to become elected and

‘make a difference’, as it were….

This is the way it is…

TODAY…

NOT

THE WAY IT SHOULD BE…

Money talks,

does the campaigning,

and the 'elector's'

listen to the the 'sound-bites' that come out of the mouth's written by the best 'script-writers',

money can buy.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 31 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web