November 11, 2010

On the Tea Party and the Anti-incumbent Election

Thanks to the Tea Party, this election resulted in the largest number of novice, non-political candidates being sent to Washington:

"...35 incoming members of the House — and four new senators — have never been elected to anything... The new class of lawmakers will contain the highest number of members with no experience of elective office in decades, likely since 1948, when there were 44 such House members elected... above 1952, when there were 34 such members. In 1994, the last big citizen revolution led by Republicans, there were 30 political-novice House members elected."
Sweetcakes. We see once again the wonderful benefits of the Tea Party: throwing out the bums and changing the diaper of politics! Although, to be frank, it puzzles me why liberals aren't as enthusiastic about this. They supposedly hate corruption and nepotism (10 points if your first though was "The Kennedys"). So why the antagonism? Eh, I don't suppose I'll ever know these things.

I for one welcome the flushing out of old blood. Even if people are goodhearted, honest, and capable when they are voted in, all succumb to the allure of power and influence when in a safe political office. Elections exist to keep politicians responsible and on their toes. If a politician thinks his/her seat is safe, they get comfortable, become soft, and end up as a slimy leech that exists only to prolong its stay in Roach Motel, D.C.!

Or something like that.

1 comment:

Kaiser said...

Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/12/us/politics/12freshman.html?ref=politics