PJM Political 11/6/10: The Morning After the Night Before
Tune in each Saturday to Sirus-XM’s POTUS channel (#110 on Sirius, #130 on XM) at (all times eastern) 6:00 am, 12:00 pm, 6:00 pm, and Sunday at midnight (also eastern time zone) for the weekly edition of PJ Media’s PJM Political.
If you missed this week’s show, click below to listen:
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
(Want to download instead of streaming? Click here to download this week’s show. Or click here to download the lo-fi edition.)
Join host Stephen Green of VodkaPundit.com for a special post-election recap:
- Taken from PJTV’s weekly Trifecta show and recorded on Wednesday in the immedate aftermath of the midterms, Steve Green, Scott Ott and Stephen Kruiser discuss the Republicans’ comeback this week, and how the GOP failed in California.
- Steve’s weekly Five Questions for James Lileks segment.
- Taken from his weekly Instavision series on PJTV, Glenn Reynolds interview David Horowitz about his new book, Reforming Our Universities.
- Joe Hicks of PJTV interviews Steven Malanga and Brian Anderson of the Manhattan Institute on the fiscal woes of New York, New Jersey, and California.
- Produced by Ed Driscoll.
If you missed any recent edition of PJM Political, click here and scroll through for hours of audio archives. And tune in to PJ Media’s PJTV.com for video coverage throughout the week. If you like what you see there, please consider subscribing to PJTV. Unlike the effectively state-run legacy media, alternative media needs reader and viewer support to flourish.
“Why did California…?) ”
I’m Californian, I worked this past election (“worked”: I’m a poll worker).
I know what strangers volunteered to me. I know what friends and family said in conversation.
They voted against Meg Whitman, and against Carly Fiorina because they are wealthy, business executives. (They voted against these, not for the others)
I don’t know why being a wealthy/(successful) business executive is a negative.
No one I ask comprehends the question.
In logical process, something is given, from which you reason and conclude something further. If you track the process upstream to its source you get the First Postulate, the “Axiom”, what is “given”.
“Why is success in business a negative?”
is incomprehensible.
is a challenge to an axiom.
is a challenge to reason, itself.
That’s a very interesting observation, Sonar. I believe identifying success and wealth as the enemy is the goal of the “main stream” media, and their repetition of the socialists’ mantras in that regard apparently lodged firmly in the minds of the voters. This, despite the obvious wealth of George Soros and Michael Moore, whom many Californians apparently worship.
I place the cause of this unfortunate mindset largely on the poor educational background that many, if not most, California schools impart to their students. They apparently don’t teach Civics and Economics the way they used to, when the achievements of our system of government, compared to that of other, older, countries were examined, and the wisdom of our Constitution and our free enterprise system were held in high regard. Nowadays, these unique qualities are minimized and even ridiculed, to the point that students have been led to hate and blame America rather than to understand and respect our heritage.
When Nikita Khrushchev declared in 1956 to Western leaders that, “Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will dig you in,” which was translated “We will bury you.” Years later, he elaborated on that, explaining “Of course we will not bury you with a shovel. Your own working class will bury you.” History has proved him correct to a great degree. The years of political correctness have nearly succeeded in destroying our Constitutional Republic, and California is in the vanguard of that effort.
In a year that has much of the country restoring its political sanity, with tremendous strides to reverse the direction toward socialism, it is not really strange that California (and Nevada) are still heating up the vat of water with the frogs. With the consistent persuasion and repetition of the facts, maybe even Governor Moonbeam will catch on. Success in business is usually accompanied by the realization of how similar business and government are, in that supply and demand works in both cases.
I’m a Californian and don’t usually talk politics because it’s explosive. However, from what I observed the Obama voters in my office voted for Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer because they absolutely refuse to give up on their boy and his policies. They think it’s barbaric that we don’t provide free everything to every one, but I’ve never heard them discuss how to pay for it.
The other one who voted for Brown/Boxer says she doesn’t like to discuss politics because “it’s too hard and too complicated”. As evidence of her innocence, she didn’t know that she had to re-register after moving last year, but thought if she just showed up at any polling place with her driver’s license in hand, it would be cool.
I sighest.
I;d say because California is home to the potheads but it doesn’t explain why NY ( my state votes the same way. I guess some people think they’re too cool to be conservative and the unions have us by the b@lls.