The People’s Revolution

I’ve spent the last 8 years pissed off and very angry at an administration who held their own agenda above everything else, the same administration that contracted out our government so they could say, look we make government run smaller and my friends are getting filthy rich off this jihad. See we’re not big and scary! What really had me more upset though, even over the administration, was the motherfucker’s who elected the ignorant dumb ass. I could go on, but thankfully that’s in the past. One solution, I have is since our population has grown so much, it’s time to abandon the whole electoral college and reevaluate how we elect those who work for us.

On the bright side, the people’s revolution has begun, through a landmark election, but more importantly that the true voice of the people was heard. Not just by who was elected, but by the issues that are on the forefront of the minds of millions. Education, healthcare and the environment. By working to solve those issues we will also help to solve the current economic woes. The ideology of a liberal, even a fuzzy one, like myself, falls on a basic concept of take care of community and the community will take care of you. The whole selfish concept of I’ll take care of myself and those that I care about, hasn’t worked. In fact, it’s put us where we are, and the mere fact that through education, maybe we can raise a more intellectual generation, who is selfless. When looking at healthcare according to the World Health Organization the United States ranks 37th out of 190 countries for healthcare. Upon closer inspection though there are only two industrialized nations that don’t provide health insurance to their people, the United State and South Africa. It’s only those two countries that make it’s citizens work for insurance. Luckily, the evolution of a Zeitgeist is upon us and the people are taking back control of the country and those who work for them.

I feel a renewed sense of vitality and vigor and the revolution will continue. The other side of the isle is scrambling right now, they are like a bunch of headless chickens in a Tyson factory on their way to slaughter. The best part is, what do they have to say for themselves as they act so critical of President Obama’s administration. Let’s not forget that on Nov. 2, 2000 just 2 days before W. was sworn in our national deficit ( was $5.7 trillion, and exactly 8 years later to the day, and just prior to the current administration our national debt was $10.57 trillion. The W. administration, who believes in fiscal responsibility, doubled our debt. Thanks. So when these republican assholes bitch about Obama burdening our children with debt, just remember that they DOUBLED our debt. So shut the fuck up!

I feel better, now that I’ve said this.

Viva la Revolucion!


Posted on April 3, 2009, in Rant. Bookmark the permalink. 2 Comments.

  1. The major shortcoming of the current system of electing the President is that presidential candidates concentrate their attention on a handful of closely divided “battleground” states. 98% of the 2008 campaign events involving a presidential or vice-presidential candidate occurred in just 15 closely divided “battleground” states. Over half (57%) of the events were in just four states (Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and Virginia). Similarly, 98% of ad spending took place in these 15 “battleground” states. Similarly, in 2004, candidates concentrated over two-thirds of their money and campaign visits in five states and over 99% of their money in 16 states.
    Two-thirds of the states and people have been merely spectators to the presidential elections. Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or worry about the voter concerns in states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. The reason for this is the winner-take-all rule enacted by 48 states, under which all of a state’s electoral votes are awarded to the candidate who gets the most votes in each separate state.

    Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide. This has occurred in one of every 14 presidential elections.

    In the past six decades, there have been six presidential elections in which a shift of a relatively small number of votes in one or two states would have elected (and, of course, in 2000, did elect) a presidential candidate who lost the popular vote nationwide.

  2. The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

    Every vote would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections.

    The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes–that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).

    The Constitution gives every state the power to allocate its electoral votes for president, as well as to change state law on how those votes are awarded.

    The bill is currently endorsed by 1,512 state legislators in 48 states.

    In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). The recent Washington Post, Kaiser Family Foundation, and Harvard University poll shows 72% support for direct nationwide election of the President. This national result is similar to recent polls in closely divided battleground states: Colorado– 68%, Iowa –75%, Michigan– 73%, Missouri– 70%, New Hampshire– 69%, Nevada– 72%, New Mexico– 76%, North Carolina– 74%, Ohio– 70%, Pennsylvania — 78%, Virginia — 74%, and Wisconsin — 71%; in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): Delaware –75%, Maine — 71%, Nebraska — 74%, New Hampshire –69%, Nevada — 72%, New Mexico — 76%, Rhode Island — 74%, and Vermont — 75%; in Southern and border states: Arkansas –80%, Kentucky — 80%, Mississippi –77%, Missouri — 70%, North Carolina — 74%, and Virginia — 74%; and in other states polled: California — 70%, Connecticut — 73% , Massachusetts — 73%, New York — 79%, and Washington — 77%.

    The National Popular Vote bill has passed 25 state legislative chambers, including one house in Arkansas, Maine, Michigan, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, and Washington, and both houses in California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The bill has been enacted by Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These four states possess 50 electoral votes — 19% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: