The right wing blogosphere is in ecstasy about a Republican upset for the Senate seat in Massachusetts.

But the real news is HOW Scott Brown won the Senate seat in “Blue state” Massachusetts. How? Apparantly, he won most of the Independent vote along with the Republican vote. One suspects he also might have garnered some of the “blue dog” Democratic vote: the union workers and blue collar rural voters who wonder if anyone in Washington cares about the economy.

One hopes that the elites running the Democratic party will listen to the people.

This is not a vote for the Republicans per se. Most of the Republican leadership is so out of step with Americans that they are unable to get their act together. Nor it it simply a vote against the Democrats. One doubts that if Hillary Clinton was President there would have been such a swift backlash against the Democratic party during a recession. Why? Because although Hillary is a “left wing” Democrat at heart, she was married long enough to a middle of the road pragmatic Democrat to realize that you just can’t push a far left agenda on an American people without some backlash.

The Brown backlash is a vote against the Obama Democratic elites, the Ivy League types and left wing activists who are running the show in Washington.

This is also a victory for those “tea party” types: not the ones ridiculed in the inbred media of Washington and New York, but the grass roots economic conservatives and libertarians.

A lot of Americans fear a big government running their life. They are cynical enough to know that big shots will cares more about their friends in big business/big banking and special interest groups than they will about the average voter.

That is why the Health care bill is a “Bill too far” (using the analogy of a “bridge too far”). Why? Because it was not a simple bill to help a few million people get insurance who can’t get insured.

Instead, what was passed was a massive bill that included everything but the kitchen sink to cure the problem.

The dirty little secret is that if you have no insurance, you can get medical care in the local doctor or emergency room and most folks know it. Coverage is needed for those who lost their insurance (maybe a “catastrophic health care plan” to cover large bills). But not this monstrosity with lots of small print that no one has read.

I have a lot of medical and ethical problems with the bill, but I think what worried folks was the possibility that they would lose their insurance and find a government run bureaucracy in it’s place, and past experience has taught them how hard it is to fight “city hall”.

The third issue behind the “revolt” is economics. This is not my strong point, but some of the shenanigans in the “bailouts” make people even more skeptical.

Who is watching out for us? Not the Republicans, but not the Democrats either. A lot of people are hurting, and know that the economic policies that allow deficit spending and a spiraling national debt are hurting the economy. So every report about pork barrel spending, reports that in the past would be ignored, are now read and remembered by a public who has trouble meeting their bills and who wonder why a museum or inefficient business or exotic grant to study something is going to someone with links to someone in Congress.

One result of all this worry is that there is hardly anyone out there articulating these fears. In the past, Ross Perot could do so, but now one has to go to a partisan Limbaugh or listen to Coast to CoastAM to hear discussions on economic policy. Why? Why are the headlines full of stories about Tiger Woods and Michael Jackson, or fluff pieces on Michelle Obama’s wardrobe (she’s a lawyer, folks, why treat her as a bimbo) instead of discussing economic issues.

I live on a pension. Will all my savings “disappear” with runaway inflation, as they did under Jimmy Carter? Will my pension and social security be cut back? Will my stocks and bonds shrink so I will lose my retirement savings? If I get sick in the US, will Medicare pay for my bills, or bankrupt the remains of my savings? No one is answering these things.

The rise of Sarah Palin is not due to her intelligence, but because she can articulate the everyday worries of ordinary folks.
She will never win anything, because the elites hate her, including the elites of the Republican party. But there is no one out there who can articulate the concerns of a lot of folks, so as a result she will continue to be a powerful opinion maker, and that will be a problem for Democrats.

But one suspects that there are Democrats who can articulate these things just as well. Is there a “Bill Clinton” clone in the Democratic party,? If they can find one, (there are several governors who come to mind) they might have a chance.

If not, expect a Republican landslide in November.

———————————–

Nancy Reyes is a retired physician living in the rural Philippines. Her website is Finest Kind Clinic and Fishmarket.

Be Sociable, Share!