Massachusetts

The election last week of Scott Brown to serve out the term of Ted Kennedy as a Senator from Massachusets is sending shock waves through the political community, especially on the Democratic side.

Now, no one should have been surprised that during a major economic downturn, the incumbants are going to be viewed negatively, but truth be told, Obama very much brought this down on himself, but NOT for the reasons that too many pundits appear ready to claim.

This was not a failure of Obama to be more conservative, or more centrist or to fail to work (or attempt so) in a "bi-partisan way." In my opinion, frankly, I think it is exactly the opposite.

The fundamental thing that Obama missed, and the Republicans simply never accept, is that the people are tired, tired of watching their savings dissappear to pay for gasoline, for rising daycare costs, and for rising health care costs. We've had a decade of flat wages, of lost jobs going overseas to supposedly create better jobs which never appeared. Instead, what we've seen is a decade of business controlling the government's agenda. The United States, said a member of the British Parliament (and by the way, a member of their Conservative Party) is different from England chiefly in one way, and that way is that "the United States is government is controlled by business."

When the recent decision by the Supreme Court, striking down a decade of precedent, something which it generally avoids with great intent and reason (the doctrine of Stare Decisis rests on the idea that changing things radically results in chaos, and an unpredictable and unstable ground on which to operate the government and law) - AND despite DECADES of complaints that unions were the cause of corruption in politics, and despite the fact that this decision enables unions to spend MORE, guess what??!! The Republicans are four-square in support of the decision, and Democrats are four-square against it. Why? How can this be? you might ask?? Well simply because the Republicans know full well that this is likely to massively benefit them FAR more than any benefit for Democrats because BUSINESS is MUCH more likely to spend a lot more on Republicans than Unions will spend on Democrats.

It seems clear the Republican party embraces the idea that by making the wealthy prosperous, we will all subsequently prosper, but this has not transpired. Since 1981, the income of the upper 5% has quadruppled, while the wages of the middle class have fallen on an hourly evaluation - by 7%, and if adjusted for the increasing age (and therefore experience) of the workforce, by 17%, those are massive numbers. We've moved roughly 8 Million technology jobs offshore since 1992 - and this was the the supposed salvation as the 'next sector of prosperity' after manufacturing dissappeared in the 1980's.

In that same period (since 1992), health care expenses have more than trippled, day care has doubled, and energy costs, just since 2001, have increased by THOUSANDS of dollars per average family per year.

In Texas, one of the most conservative states in the country, fully 66% of the people believe that the government simply is out for the benefit of, and works at the behest of large companies. The country frankly is quite aware, quite tired, and quite angry with the leadership of BOTH parties for being for sale. Obama's lesson to take out of Massechusettes is simply this, show that you are different, show that you will stand up for the common man, show that you are NOT corrupt, as corrupt as Bush so abley proved himself to be, and you will have the people with you. If you instead appear to be helping health insurance carriers, helping banks, helping push MORE jobs offshore, not doing anything to fix the state of hiring or wages, then you are little better than the man you replaced, a man who was the worst President of the modern era, and you will rightly be judges as harshly as a failure, for YOU WILL HAVE FAILED. Do what you said you would do, be different, defend the individuals and the people from the powerful who control government, to do less, is to abbrogate your duty.