Comments about ‘In our opinion: Status quo: A divided House of Representatives, Senate, and White House’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Nov. 7 2012 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
salt lake, UT

I do not understand that logic that if you do not like something stand on the sidelines and pass judgement. A very famous civil rights leader once said "if you see a good fight get in it," what you are choosing to do is stand on the sidelines and let things you consider to be wrong to continue. If you stand on the sidelines and watch how are you any different then those doing the thing you consider so harmful? If neither of the major parties fits your sense of right or wrong look for a third party that does or start your own party, write in a candidate that fits your views but don't stand on the sidelines and watch or you are no better then those you sling the mud at.

Sandy, UT

@Twin Lights: I appreciate the kind words, first of all. But here's how I look at it these days: little if anything comes of voting. Like one person said, "If voting made a difference, they'd make it illegal." I believe that to make a real difference, you have to use persuasion and action. Persuasion should not come from the ballot box or from the barrel of a gun (which is what voting enables). Any real change will take place outside of political parties and outside of the voting booth. I can't help but feel that voting is something granted to us to give us the illusion that we (the people) have some control over what government does. We don't, at least not through the election process. In the big scheme of things, politicians and power elites are not afraid of what happens when we vote. They're more afraid of what happens outside of the voting process. That's where I want to be.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

This is all part of Mitch McDonnell's plan. They hard balled themselves into a real tight corner. From probable majority to isolated obstructionist minority. Brillant!

Salt Lake City, UT

I think what SEY and CLM would really like is to see the current partisan landscape devolve into an "Austrian School Party" vs "Keynesian Party" political environment.

Honestly though, I'm surprised that SEY doesn't just vote for Libertarians (or write in Ron Paul) instead of being a passive spectator. To each their own, I guess . . .

@one vote
I totally agree with your post (though I think you meant McConnell instead of McDonnell). I would also spread a significant share of that blame to Grover Norquist.

Mad Hatter
Provo, UT

The Senate minority leader and House majority leader anticipate a continued effort to derail any legislation the Obama administration might pursue in a second term. This is nothing new. Republicans are sore that they lost and will do what they can to show how angry they are. Cooperation has already been taken off the table. They want to show the American people that they do not respect the choice of the American people and will essentially shut the government down in protest. Nothing will come forward. Nothing will get through.

After making their primary political objective to restrict Barack Obama to a single term, they will continue with Rush Limbaugh's edict to make him a "failed" president. It's not certain how many hundreds of millions of dollars they'll spend generating anti-Obama propaganda, but the needs of the American people are not high on the priority list.

Hopefully, moderate voices in the Republican Party will emerge and the Tea Party extremists will be sidelined. Otherwise, Republicans will continue to do harm by doing nothing. The question always was, who do Republicans legislators serve, the Party or the American people?

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY


Elected leaders (hence voting) is described as the ideal in the Book of Mormon unless you can ensure yourself of truly great kings. Also, if the Constitution is inspired (not perfect, but inspired) then the voting process is something we can believe in.

I would have no problem with change coming from outside the parties – they are not part of the constitution. But what constitutional change can come from outside of the voting booth?

If political change is not via the vote, where does it come from and what is its authority? How can political change come from any source other than voting and still be constitutional? Are you talking about folks taking matters into their own hands? If so, that is clearly not constitutional.

Obviously encouraging personal change (teaching folks what is good) is fine but that is not direct political change.


Government is the problem? Then is NO govt. the solution? I think you might want to rethink that concept.


A quick search shows you seem to always agree strongly with SEY and are usually complimentary of him/her. Are you the same person or related persons?

Tooele, UT

Re: "Then is NO govt. the solution?"

No, but, as we all know, LESS government certainly is.

No re-thinking is necessary at this point -- it has been proven over and over and over again.

Even liberals know it, down deep. But it gets in the way of their deranged, vote-buying Santa Claus act, so they disingenuously dismiss the idea.

Draper, UT

Twin Lights: A clever conclusion to some tricky detective work! I'm humored by your focus. Had I regularly disagreed with SEY as you do, you'd simply chalk it up to right thinking. Yet you seem to find enthusiastic agreement with SEY so inconceivable that doing so would make me a relative or even SEY himself/herself. This conclusion speaks volumes. Sorry to disprove your theory, but as far as I know, I am neither related to SEY nor am I his/her alter ego.

SG in SLC: For at least the last five decades, the partisan landscape has been "Keynesian Party" vs "Keynesian Party" and therefore ultimately have little difference between them. Considering the state of the economy after such Keynesian tactics as QE "infinity", we continue to head toward collapse. The one candidate to offer a more sound approach, Dr. Ron Paul, was unfortunately not in the final race. However, I'm grateful Dr. Paul continues to bring his ideas, including Austrian School economics, to the public. He continues to have a large following who champion his policies and encourage the Austrian vs Keynesian debate.

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY


It is not that you agree but the enthusiasm of your agreement that spurred my question.

I hardly think that disagreement with SEY is evidence of right thinking. I do not always agree but I would not engage him/her so often if I thought him/her to be an idiot.

It was specifically because I do respect SEY that I was so shocked at his/her lack of voting. It seemed (to me) out of character with his/her otherwise engaged persona.

Cedar Hills, UT

re:Y Ask Y


to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments