MA election

[Darrin 3]

MA what a beautiful State i smell freedom again almost like a cool breeze on a hot day.congrats Mr.Brown

[Ruggbutt 45]

I've wondered if Mass. voters were truly stupid or truly brainwashed to have kept voting in the Chappaquiddick scuba diver. I think that maybe even the lefties aren't happy about the financial hurt the bailout has done to the economy and that they're telling Barry that it's just not prudent at this juncture (Bush Sr. reference) to spend that kind of money at this time in our nation's history. Let's hope that common sense will prevail in this next decade and that this country can get back on track.

 

I also predict that in 2012 (should the right field someone more competent than McCain and Palin) that the voters will tell Barack that "4 years is enuf".

[+whiteknight06604 932]

I'm so happy,It's only a first step but the revolution has to start somewhere.

[OvS 8]

I'm so happy,It's only a first step but the revolution has to start somewhere.

 

 

The 2nd Shot heard 'round the world....

 

The Borg Menace formally known as The Democratic National Party just took a major hit. Amazing that all it needed was one hit to take it down.

 

Goes to show you how biased and corrupted the Congress is/was. 1 man, 1 vote and now the Dems are giving quotes to the press that we should 'rethink' the whole Healthcare revamp. I'm sure this would not have been the case if Coakly had won.

 

What I don't understand, is what the hell the big push was to ram it down our throats in the first place. I can't even imagine the chaos that would have been in place had we really changed our system.... paperwork, computer system, insuranse cards... phone calls... good God. The Dems made it sound like it would be as easy as starting a new car.

 

OvS

[+Dave 2,319]

Eat it Democrats! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JediMaster 451]

Calling the Democrats the Borg is like calling Kenny G a modern-day Mozart.

 

The Borg are monolithic, of one mind, unstoppable, convinced they are always right, assimilate all they can and destroy what they can't.

The Democrats basically are incapable of doing any of that. Pretty much their party for the last 10 years has been defined as "opposite of what the Republicans stand for."

 

If they WERE the Borg, a far more ridiculous healthcare bill would've been passed 10 months ago with no problems because they had a sufficient majority in both houses to do it. The fact that they couldn't and now seem to acknowledge they can't (despite STILL having a larger majority than the Reps had when W was in office and he was able to get his stuff passed repeatedly) goes to show that they are ridiculously inept.

[OvS 8]

Calling the Democrats the Borg is like calling Kenny G a modern-day Mozart.

 

The Borg are monolithic, of one mind, unstoppable, convinced they are always right, assimilate all they can and destroy what they can't.

The Democrats basically are incapable of doing any of that. Pretty much their party for the last 10 years has been defined as "opposite of what the Republicans stand for."

 

If they WERE the Borg, a far more ridiculous healthcare bill would've been passed 10 months ago with no problems because they had a sufficient majority in both houses to do it. The fact that they couldn't and now seem to acknowledge they can't (despite STILL having a larger majority than the Reps had when W was in office and he was able to get his stuff passed repeatedly) goes to show that they are ridiculously inept.

 

You're right... at least the Borg would have fought back... spineless Lefties..

 

I can't wait to hear all the Dem campaign promises and empty speeches leading to 11 2010... now they'll all claim they were the first to 'rethink' the plan, and stand behind the new Senator.... etc.. etc...

 

I read a column about what Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) wants at all airports to beef-up security... and laughed... what he listed has already been in place for years... what rock has he been living under... even the writer picked that up.

 

OvS

[FastCargo 412]

There are several factors in play here before anyone gets TOO excited in either direction.

 

First, the economy is still in the tank more or less. There's been debate for a long time over who's fault it is...but honestly, both parties had a hand in it. You can go back and forth and still not come up with a clear answer. Anyway, a sputtering economy almost always hurts the party in power at election time.

 

Second, for all the flack GWB administration got for backroom dealing, not listening to 'the people', etc., the Obama administration has really shown that they aren't any better at avoiding this. In some ways, it's been even more blatent with regards to the healthcare overhaul (Nebraska's sweetheart deal, unions' healthcare non-taxation, rushing a HUGE bill through the legislature).

 

Third, government expansion in general. The United States population more or less has always had a mild distrust of the government. Part of it of course goes back to our roots. You can also look at more recent histories of government overstepping it's bounds. All of these make people leery. What's especially damning is seeing numbers showing government jobs actually increasing in pay and numbers while the private sector takes it on the chin.

 

I wouldn't consider this a revolution. What I would say however, is that BOTH parties need to start paying attention. In this day and age where more and more people can get their information from non-traditional news services, the 'throw the bums out' attitude continues to spread.

 

The biggest thing that would shake both parties up would be a third party (like Libertarians) to start having a stronger influence in the political arena. Hopefully, that would cause both parties to stop trying to be monolithic (Since I believe A, I have to believe B because that's how we roll in our party) and maybe listen a bit more.

 

People want leaders, not lawyers. Unfortunately, that's all they've got in Washington right now are lawyers.

 

FC

[shotdown 8]

I've wondered if Mass. voters were truly stupid or truly brainwashed to have kept voting in the Chappaquiddick scuba diver.

 

Who is (or was if my gess is right) the Chappaquiddick scuba diver?

[+Dave 2,319]

What do you call 800 lawyers on the bottom of the sea?

 

A good start.

 

Who is (or was if my gess is right) the Chappaquiddick scuba diver?

 

 

Ted Kennedy

[UnknownPilot 33]

I've wondered if Mass. voters were truly stupid or truly brainwashed to have kept voting in the Chappaquiddick scuba diver.

 

Or... a known and unrepentant traitor (Kerry) [giving aid and comfort to the enemy during a time of war is treason - that bastard technically should have been put to the squad, but at the very least, should be denied ANY public office - EVER]

[UnknownPilot 33]

First, the economy is still in the tank more or less. There's been debate for a long time over who's fault it is...but honestly, both parties had a hand in it. You can go back and forth and still not come up with a clear answer.

 

Actually, you can. In the first place, all the boom that happened under Bubba had nothing to do with him at all, it was all the tech sector, and previous foundations laid by Regan. He spent 8 long years slowly working to damage that boom, who's effects were really felt once the dot com crash happened.... WHICH, conveniently enough, was right when W took office, and then of course we were attacked, then Katrina hit... and through it all, the economy was fairly strong and unemployment was low.

 

During that time, ACORN actually used threats of violence (terrorism, if we are to be blunt) to coerce banks into giving out loans to unqualified people. The banks then sold those loans to Freddy and Fannie. Who ran those orgs? House Dems. Barny and co were rubbing each others backs (well, he and his boyfriend were doing some nasty things I don't even want to contemplate) and getting well and truly indignant whenever the Republicans (including McCain [twice] and Bush himself) tried to put more oversight on those orgs and the process as a whole. Just 2 or 3 months prior to the meltdown Barny was on camera telling the press and American public how sound an investment they were right now (at that time) and how good things were looking.

 

Then the election looms.

 

After 1 disputed, hard fought loss, and one devestating loss that they ALL think they should have won without even trying, suddenly the economy explodes after Congress changes the way homes are valued and Mortgages instantly become seriously toxic and foreclosures start happening like the latest fad.

 

Who do the masses associate with economic growth despite the facts of reality? Democrats.

 

Who will look more favorable when the economy is in the tank? Democrats.

 

Who had the reigns over setting up and controlling all that? Democrats.

 

Who had been branded "unelectable" and were a laughing stock but absolutely DESPERATE to win an election, clearly at ANY cost (remember "Anybody but Bush"?)? Democrats.

 

.....who stood to gain from a damaged economy? Democrats.

 

.....who had national security issues to fear? Democrats.

 

You know, there are some downright amazing coincidences in the universe, but then there are some things that simply aren't, no matter how much some (those who are happy with the outcome) want everyone else to ignore.

 

 

 

Anyway, a sputtering economy almost always hurts the party in power at election time.

 

Not always. Promise people enough handouts and they will fall for it, refernce FDR (the first major Socialst bastard enemy from within)

 

 

 

Third, government expansion in general. The United States population more or less has always had a mild distrust of the government. Part of it of course goes back to our roots.

 

Roots that the vocal wingnuts drowing everyone out are only too proud to reject and call all sorts of nasty names.

 

No, I wish what you say was true. But more and more it really looks like there are precious few of us true Americans left. Far too many are spineless liberals that are afraid of any danger, or any actual self direction and thinking, and want the gov't to care and provide for all aspects of their lives from cradle to grave, all while preventing anyone from having any freedom or fun in the name of "safety".

 

The schools are indoctrination camps. Have been for several generations now. Sadly, far too many stop their personal growth at kindergarten and can't accept reality, so they try to vote themselves handouts, and take all of our rights away.

 

And if you beleive in the Constitution and the principles of The Founders, then you are a right-wing maniac and a threat to society, as far as they are concerned, and they will do anything to silence and shut you down, no matter how hypocritical they themselves will be in the process.

 

But.... this is one case where I truly hope I am wrong. And that we are just too quiet to be heard over the barking moonbats. But if that's true, we need to freakin' step it up... it's WAAAAAAYYY past time already.

 

 

 

Hopefully, that would cause both parties to stop trying to be monolithic (Since I believe A, I have to believe B because that's how we roll in our party) and maybe listen a bit more.

 

On a philosphic point, I think parties should consist of people who agree on policy issues. And that party, if it's going to exist, should act in accordance with those beleifs. Afterall, that's the whole point of elections - so and so believes what I beleive, so I want him to represent me. If he then checks the political wind and takes polls always listening to the loudest, then he's going to change and actually WON'T be representing me, and I might as well have voted for the other guy anyway, as the outcome is the same.

 

The real problem, IMO, is only having 2 parties. There should either be none at all, or a great many more. (or really, in a perfect world, we'd all be the true decendants of The Founders and all be Libertarians by default [these days - I know they used different names then, I'm referring to current political stance though])

[JediMaster 451]

I always find it amusing how both sides claim the simultaneous danger and lack of intelligence and capability by the other side.

 

"The other guys are running a conspiracy...and they're dumb!" Mutually exclusive, but whatever fits the needs of their specious argument at the time...

 

The truth is for every passionate "believer" on one side, there's 9 others that claim to believe but are only in it for the money or power or both, and if saying XYZ will get them that, that's what they'll espouse, regardless of what they truly believe. Since politicians spend 99% of their time lying anyway, I'd just as soon believe that half of both parties are actually closet supporters of the other side!

Just look at all the gay-bashing politicians that are caught in gay scandals! All this talk of containing the cost of healthcare, but no talk about holding down a major cause of costs--high insurance rates caused by large payouts in lawsuits!

Talk about "defending marriage" from a so-called threat of gay marriage, when the REAL enemy of marriage gets NO talk at all...divorce! Want to "preserve marriage"? Outlaw divorce! Then you'll see how many people want to get married if they think they can't just see a lawyer and reverse it. I don't see how 2 gay people getting married affects my life at all, but if I ask someone to marry me and they're thinking "well, if it doesn't work I'll just get a divorce and take half his stuff, it's easy"...that DOES. Sure you'll see the number of people getting married dropping, but frankly the "sanctity of marriage" was already destroyed 20 years ago by divorce attorneys, no gays needed. Well, unless they were gay divorce attorneys I guess.

[UnknownPilot 33]

I always find it amusing how both sides claim the simultaneous danger and lack of intelligence and capability by the other side.

 

"The other guys are running a conspiracy...and they're dumb!" Mutually exclusive, but whatever fits the needs of their specious argument at the time...

 

The obvious retort. How did being a fence rider come to be seen as a virtue anymore?

 

While you are right to a point, the thing is, the facts are there, and it's not a leap of faith to put them together.

 

As for their intelligence, I didn't really make a claim to what they know, only what "they" (and bear in mind, there are 3 different "they"s here - the politicians, the people that vote for them, and the collective of the previous 2) are willing to accept (with regard to reality). Also, most things aren't a conspiracy, but rather pure luck of the draw which someone then recognizes and capitalizes on. I would never suggest that the groundwork for the whole process was intentionally laid and orchestrated specifically to be a bomb to be set off in case of emergency. But when you are looking for any tool at your disposal to get the job done..... it doesn't take a genius to do it.

[shotdown 8]

Ted Kennedy

 

My gess was right then. And I think his lastname is what made him win ellections. Dems were not ready to run for Massachussets without a Kennedy.

 

 

The real problem, IMO, is only having 2 parties. There should either be none at all, or a great many more.

 

Many parties sole nothing. Trust me on that.

Better having no parties. Each elected officer should be responsible for his/her own decisions.

Edited January 20, 2010 by shotdown

[JediMaster 451]

So not agreeing with the extremists that now control both "sides" is fence riding now? It used to be called "the center," but oh no, you're not allowed that anymore. In America, you're either on the left or the right, NO EXCEPTIONS!! Sorry, you're not allowed to be against abortion and for gay marriage. You can't be pro-gun and also pro-universal health care. You can't despise the hold religion has while also despising those who crusade against it.

Nope. The sides have been predetermined long before and you must pick one set of stupid ideals or the other, you're not allowed to pick and choose. If you do, you'll be accused of being "wishy washy" or basically have your opinion dismissed because you aren't on the side that they agree with or the side they can happily demonize. It's not "honorable" or some such crap to not throw your lot totally in with one of these ready-to-bake parties. It has been decided that since there are 2 parties, the world can be black or white and to hell with those that think it's in shades of gray...oh, except during the elections when you have to appeal to them since they constitute over a THIRD of the population. After that, though, to hell with them.

 

See, it's really easy to "ride the fence" when you'd happily see everyone who supports either party drop dead for their stupidity and let the intelligent ones who realize that things aren't black and white take over. Donkeys and elephants are animals and I don't think either one is capable of running a country of PEOPLE.

[Ruggbutt 45]

There's a huge lack of common sense in government today. Anyone who has ever been to the DMV, the court system (even to pay a ticket) or used the free clinic knows how bogged down and fecked up government run anything is. The Fed can't run the Post Office and make a profit. They've stolen all the money put away for Social Security. They want to rape Medicare (and those are the people who need insurance the most). Sorry, I can't trust my government to do any of those things. Heck, they put this country in a recession and gave billions to the entities (banks) that were one of the root problems. Now they want more taxes and another system that will be bogged down even worse. No thanks.

 

If they wanna help the people regarding health care how about regulating insurance and drug companies? Insurance companies are out of hand and they're one of the biggest problems regarding health care costs. Universal health care just isn't very good in any of the countries that have it for "free", so why not forward think and do something with our privatized system that will benefit everyone? I can't help but think that the billions given to AIG and the others couldn't have been better spent given to the states (individually) to create state health care coverage for all. I mean if we're gonna do it let the states run it and even then it's not an optimal solution.

 

I'm conservative on many issues, but I believe a woman should be able to have an abortion. We shouldn't clearcut timber. We should save the whales. We shouldn't pollute our water. I'm also pro-gun. It's all about common sense and at this point in our country's history both parties need to get a grip and get some. The DNC needs to take this loss for what the taxpayers/voters says it's about. No universal health care. And since Massachusetts has state run health care why would they want to pay for the rest of the country's health care? The states should do this, not the Fed.

 

Less Federal government, not more.

[Darrin 3]

im still young and theres been alot of us and them chatter,the biggest swing i remember was dems bouncing checks yet this goes on as they trash republican ran govt if memory serves i believe republicans won because of this coruption.

We're in the tank because of W.(come on)the dems lost these seats and clinton tried his best to keep it together.Dems need to remember we have memories and if they want to keep blaming W.(the past) then this could go oN FOREVER. Web cams in all the offices.(just a thought)could you imagine them getting to work to find a crew installing 24hr web cams.im not saying i need to know everything its just i think now a days we deserve more

 

 

Kansas Coyote -D-

[FastCargo 412]

JM and Ruggbutt,

 

A-friggin-men!

 

FC

[+Dave 2,319]

JM and Rugg you both are right on the money. I am all about a green planet. Its the only one we got. My health care is taken care of. I am very pro gun, anti communist, anti muslim extremist, and if a woman wants to get an abortion then she has to live with it. Not me, and I am not about to tell her what to do. I'm a Republican but I am not such a blind follower as some are. I am very much into common sense. I want our politicians to work for us and use their freakin's heads, and I dont care what party they are. If a plan works then go for it. However they have now inbedded themselves hard core into this 2 party system that nothing is ever going to get accomplished. "I'm not liking your idea because your a Democrat or Republican." doesn't cut it anymore. Its not bad to belong to a party as long as it doesn't blind you.

[Darrin 3]

i dont want this thread to get hijacked but screw killing babies.

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

So not agreeing with the extremists that now control both "sides" is fence riding now? It used to be called "the center," but oh no, you're not allowed that anymore. In America, you're either on the left or the right, NO EXCEPTIONS!! Sorry, you're not allowed to be against abortion and for gay marriage. You can't be pro-gun and also pro-universal health care. You can't despise the hold religion has while also despising those who crusade against it.

Nope. The sides have been predetermined long before and you must pick one set of stupid ideals or the other, you're not allowed to pick and choose. If you do, you'll be accused of being "wishy washy" or basically have your opinion dismissed because you aren't on the side that they agree with or the side they can happily demonize. It's not "honorable" or some such crap to not throw your lot totally in with one of these ready-to-bake parties. It has been decided that since there are 2 parties, the world can be black or white and to hell with those that think it's in shades of gray...oh, except during the elections when you have to appeal to them since they constitute over a THIRD of the population. After that, though, to hell with them.

 

See, it's really easy to "ride the fence" when you'd happily see everyone who supports either party drop dead for their stupidity and let the intelligent ones who realize that things aren't black and white take over. Donkeys and elephants are animals and I don't think either one is capable of running a country of PEOPLE.

 

 

...I'm... I'm speechless. Flabbergasted. I didn't think that kind of sentiment existed in the US any more. Massive thumbs up!

[+Dave 2,319]

i dont want this thread to get hijacked but screw killing babies.

 

Oh I do not condone it but it wont be on my conscious. I do not think anyone has the right to tell a person what to do with their bodies. If they want to stick drugs in them, fine. It isnt my body and they will pay for it eventually. If they want to ho themselves out for money then its on them. They want to have an abortion, they have to live with the guilt. Not me. I will still go home, take care of my 4 kids and press on. Does not affect my life in the least bit.

[FastCargo 412]

There is always going to be a conflict between the rights of the individual and the health of society as a whole.

 

As an example, you can look at smoking. If you say outright that you can smoke anywhere at anytime, because it's your body, it sounds very good on the surface. But then you look at things like secondary smoke, that affects kids later on. Or if your health goes bad, and you rely on public hospitals, that means I have to pay for your bad habit. Or the smell affects public or social spaces. It doesn't sound so good anymore for a blanket rule.

 

Darn near every issue today comes down to finding where the best compromise is. By definition, you are 'sitting on the fence' because you are drawing a line between total anarchy and total control.

 

Name just about any contentious issue, and I'll bet you find exceptions that prove you can't have an easy 'one fits all' solution.

 

FC

[Fubar512 1,350]

I find it ironic, that if JFK had been around today, he'd be labled a conservative.