So what are we to make of the events of Tuesday last? Tidal wave? Failed revolution? Split decision?

Nationally, there was no question. The congressional turnover we just witnessed was epoch-making. No doubt about it. When the United States last saw a turnover of this magnitude, Harry Truman was in the White House. Sixty-three seats in the House and six in the Senate – with perhaps one more to come. Even president Obama called it a “shellacking,” and he knew whereof he spoke.

Too bad he didn’t seem to understand what the American people were trying to tell him. No, the electoral rejection wasn’t triggered by concern that the administration wasn’t making enough “progress.” It was instead fueled by the sense that Washington was spending too much, borrowing too much and plunging ahead toward a future that liberal Democrats regarded as foreordained, but which a large part of the country saw as threatening and as further evidence that those who see themselves as our political betters and masters will prosper their own goals and desires before those of the people, whose interests they putatively serve.

Sorry, Mr. President. There was overwhelming support for “The Party of No” because people realize that, when one is headed for a cliff at eyeball-popping speed, stomping on the brake with both feet is the only logical response. Get it through your head that reasonable people might regard the orgy of borrowing and spending that passes for your administration’s economic policy not only as foolish and ineffective, but as dangerous as well. “Compromise” may happen, but that will require you to move toward your political adversaries, whose day it was.

In Colorado, our two marquee elections brought an uncomfortable truth to the forefront: When it comes to politics, we’re for sale to the highest bidder. And those whining about spending by “business groups” should consider this: The only thing the recent Supreme Court decision on this topic did was redress the previous imbalance, which saw unions and other liberal “special interests” funded by the likes of Tim Gill, Pat Stryker and our very own Jared Polis spending money like drunken congressmen to buy elections. If there was nothing wrong with that, there’s nothing wrong with the current situation. It’s only “fair.”

Still, the implications of Colorado’s state employees buying their next boss are troubling. The ‘Looper is going to have to pick a lot of pockets to keep the SEIU and the teachers’ unions happy.

For example, consider the funding recommendations of Governor Ritter’s Higher Education Strategic Planning Steering Committee. It’s no mystery why they waited two days after the election to release their findings, which are as follows: raise the state income tax; raise sales taxes; raise taxes on extractive industries; institute new statewide taxes and implement additional taxes in districts which are home to colleges and universities. Anyone see a pattern here?

And the senatorial election? Well, I for one am certain that no one in the state will mind being represented by the senator from Obama. His interests are absolutely one and the same as our own, aren’t they? Raise taxes until the payers choke, and use the money to buy the votes of those who see only the bright shiny benefit, without caring about the poison it’s pouring into our economy behind the scenes.

As to his campaign, filled with such gut-wrenching lies that it actually turned the stomach of the Denver Post: We must like that sort of thing, since we endorsed him. So look forward to much more of the same, and when searching for someone to blame when the mute button breaks, check the mirror first.

Locally at least – in races where out-of-state money didn’t distort the expressions of the people’s will – Colorado turned a much redder shade of purple. The GOP took back half of the state Legislature, and shaved back Democrat control in the state Senate to a razor-thin majority. This will be important when a far-left governor presses the Legislature for a budget that mirrors Obama’s, with higher taxation replacing borrowing. Remember, Colorado can’t run a deficit, so all the new money is going to have to come out of your pocket right now. Unless we issue bonds to cover a greater portion of spending, and assume the position of California: one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel …

One thing is clear: The people voted for far more prudence in government, a truth which will cause loathing and disdain among the petulant partisans of profligacy, regardless of party. There is going to be much foot-stamping and twaddle about “bipartisanship.” As long as the right people do the compromising, of course. How long this willful failure to understand will continue, remains to be seen.

Interesting times.

Summit County resident Morgan Liddick pens a Tuesday column. E-mail him at mcliddick@hotmail.com. Also, comment on this column at http://www.summitdaily.com.