Monday, December 1, 2008

Shadow Government

No, he didn't say that, did he? "Shadow Government?" Now if a Democrat had said those words in the last 8 years they'd have been accused of sedition.

Moron.

7 comments:

North Dallas Thirty said...

The worst part is that dumb statement about “recruiting candidates that look like the population we are trying to attract to our cause”.

Try standing on principle rather than skin color and gender, and you'll be amazed at how much farther you get with people.

John said...

I actually thought Governor Bush made a good point there. Merely mentioning that demographic shifts matter doesn't make one dumb. The GOP brand doesn't inspire much confidence among minorities. And the party's viability in the future may depend on ditching the perception that Republicans serve only one master.

After all, if only that particular race and gender was enfranchised in 2008, as was the case throughout most of the 18th and 19th centuries, then we'd be getting ready for the inauguration of President John McCain. According to the exit polls, that particular race and gender voted for McCain by a margin of 57-62% in the raw count. With a difference like that, McCain would've crushed Obama like a bug in the electoral college (winning practically all of the Bush states, plus the "blue" states of Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and yes, even Illinois).

Just a few months ago (during the Jeremiah Wright fun), everyone in this country was apparently ready to have a serious discussion about race. But then, as usual, we quickly went back to the "lets not and say we did" mentality. I wonder how long after Obama enters the White House will the post-racial honeymoon come to an end. Identity politics isn't going to go away just because we had one historic election folks.

Kevin said...

As far as a "shadow" government, I believe he was speaking of the parliamentary custom of the largest opposition party being ready to form a government in the event of a no confidence vote which brings early elections. That doesn't translate well into our system since our governments are far more mixed by party at any given moment and they cannot "fall" in the parliamentary sense. Blah blah blah... you knew this already...

In the US a "shadow government" could be a very useful means for the non-majority parties to communicate their message to the voters. Perhaps it's something we should consider making a custom. After all the Democrats seem to have all but turned the "President Elect" into an official government office.

Jamie said...

Kev, your partisan colors are showing again. It was a stupid statement to make, and if McCain had won and Hillary Clinton made that statement you'd be having a shit-fit about now. So let's keep it real, shall we? ;)

Kevin said...

Actually I see it as a total non-issue. There's plenty of actual leftist duplicity to have shit-fits about :-)

Jamie said...

Indeed there are, but you have a proven record of (rightly) calling out liberals and/or democrats when they make completely retarded statements, and if this had been made by a dem, I think you'd be saying the same thing I'm saying now. No way to prove a hypothetical, I guess, but if your posting history is any indication . . .

Kevin said...

I guess we'll agree to disagree, but as I said - I actually think the idea of a "shadow government" could be a useful means of communicating a party's message when they aren't in power. It's something I think smaller parties should definitely consider.