Monday, May 2, 2011

Time to Get Busy

Time for Tea Partiers to practice what we preach.

Picked this up off of Drudge. The article was by Michael Levenson of the Boston Globe entitled House votes to restrict unions
When it comes to a matter of survival politicians are after all human just like you and me. Faced with an election coming up which will be in large part about jobs and the economy even the Dems are seeing the writing on the wall.

The Massachusetts House overwhelmingly Democrat, voted overwhelmingly (111/42) “to broadly eliminate collective bargaining rights for public employees in Ohio, Wisconsin, and other states.”

What are we to think of that? Wow de Dow de. I quote this line from the article. “After the vote, labor leaders accused House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo and other Democrats of turning their backs on public employees.”
Perhaps upon reflection the Speaker thought that turning his back on the unions was better than turning his back upon the people of Massachusetts. Perhaps he thought that was his only choice.

That’s what rhetoric does. Kudos’s to him.

What I got from this is that the lawmakers in the Mass. State House may have sensed that the rank and file along with the rest of the people of the state have Had Enough of the Union leadership who seemingly would rather force layoffs than compromise.

The rest of the article tells of all the pressure the Union lobbyists’ will put on them and about the already balking Mass. State Senate. We will see. Either way big fun in my eyes.

There seems a ground swell reminiscent of the beginnings of the Reagan Revolution.

The Tea Party needs to practice the words they preach about being non partisan by letting in and reaching out to these disillusioned Democrats.

Without altering our principles.

As we do this it is vital we remember what one of those principles is.


We also must realize why the Dems for the most part who voted the way they did, did so because it was the only way to cut back on expenses and still be able to afford to provide the “Big Government” they have come to expect.

This is however a step along our path of less government because pensions and wages make up the biggest share of the cost of government. If we want to limit government we must first limit the public unions which have made it so easy for the politicians to slip from the surly bonds of the Constitution which has held them in check for so long.

Then we can progress on our mantra of self-reliance and personal freedom.
As with all things if we do this at the local Tea Party level, one on one it is easier and more honest; the rest will follow.

Now if only we had a Reagan instead of a Romney, or a Trump running things would look rosy indeed. But then again that leaves it up to us – I mean who better to change things than “We the People”.

I would suggest a draft Chris Christie movement. I'm still a big Palin fan also.

If we don’t watch it, the Dems will find a way to take back all the votes they lost in 2010 while we fight over which middle of the road milktoast candidate head our ticket.

Haley Barbour didn't run because he knew he didn't have enough "fire in the Belly", compared to the rest of the Republicans he was a redhot fire. We need someone with some guts and straight talk.

Just thinking and drinking coffee.

Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative


Here is a link to an article which shows leaderships inability to grasp common sense principles.
The cost of the trash cans and chairs et al is to us obvious. But this quote seems to make me think the leader is pretty far removed from reality.
{Edward Thomas, chairman of the library commission, said he hasn't seen the trash cans but isn't concerned as long as they are heavy duty.
"You want it to be something that will last as opposed to something that will break down," Thomas said.

He said the library's financial problems stem from a drop in property taxes — not the South Wing project. In addition to closing branches, the system is considering laying off as many as 191 of 333 workers.
"If I was in a position to be laid off, I would be upset, too," Thomas said. "I would be looking for someone to blame, too."}

I would think that those being laid off would be upset at a leader whose best way to cut costs due to diminished income is to lay off workers rather that do battle with those responsible for these cost overruns. If I was being laid off I would be looking at corruption and I would blame those in charge for not doing their duty if not being the actual ringleaders.

No comments: