MadelynIris
Refugee
balance in all things
Go Scott Brown!
- Thread starter Dreadsox
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
diamond
ONE love, blood, life
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Expect to hear variations on that theme leading up to Nov. It resonates.
I most sincerely hope that our "good Republicans" remember that their total lack of civility will likely be returned sevenfold should they eventually retake the Presidency. You have most certainly reset the gold standard of obstructionism--is a "bravo" in order?--which was set before by the GOP during the Clinton administration.
And to think...these were the people upset when every Democrat didn't adore Bush as President, ready to call each of them "treasonous" for daring to criticize "our President." Now that the Democrats are in power, the GOP, rather than issuing calls for "solidarity" as they wanted their fellow Democrats to do during the Bush era, is standing ready to lead an insurgency.
"Bravo," our dear patriots. Benedict Arnold should have taken his notes from you.
And to think...these were the people upset when every Democrat didn't adore Bush as President, ready to call each of them "treasonous" for daring to criticize "our President." Now that the Democrats are in power, the GOP, rather than issuing calls for "solidarity" as they wanted their fellow Democrats to do during the Bush era, is standing ready to lead an insurgency.
"Bravo," our dear patriots. Benedict Arnold should have taken his notes from you.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
it does, especially with a new season of "24" coming up.
i also expect to see lots of white identity politics.
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
Jesus fucking Christ.
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
And now the truth.
With a huge majority in the House and a filibuster proof 60 votes in the Senate the Democrats could have passed any-damn-thing they wanted, anytime they wanted. Republicans could have called in sick all year or gone down to Crawford, Texas to help clear brush and the government could have carried on without a hitch.
Republicans couldn't obstruct jack by roll call alone. And since Republicans and conservatives are by definition hayseed doofuses, it couldn't have been their rhetorical skill holding things up.
Maybe, just maybe, Democrats overplayed their hand in trying to pass a far-left agenda when the people just wanted jobs and a sense the country was back on the right track fiscally and economically.
Wonder if they've gotten the message yet? Or will they just blame Coakley and Drudge and Rush and Foxnews and ignore the light coming down the track.
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Exactly why it resonates. It's guaranteed to piss off the pundits and scolds that insist on telling us it's our fault they hate us.
Yes, it shows how much of an idiot Scott Brown is.
You people never cease to amaze me with how quick the talking points get from Hannity or Limbaugh to your heads to this forum without any apparent thought put into it.
You do realize that Bush did the same thing with the guy who attempted to shoe bomb a plane from Paris to Florida diverted to Boston? He was prosecuted in federal court, and is in federal prison. So are the 1993 WTC bombers, Zaccarias Moussawi and numerous other captured terrorists- captured under Clinton, Bush and Obama. Any trial of a terrorist through Bush's legally and practically problematic military tribunals has been a mess.
Do you realize that Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks has been tried in such a tribunal and it so far has been a boondoogle? Meanwhile, other terrorists who are much lower on the totem pole than he is are going to federal prison for life or facing the death penalty?
Scott Brown is saying that because it sounds good. Only reason.
Since he is an attorney, he is or should be, well aware of what the US Constitution says. "No person shall be denied due process of the law." Read carefully, not "citizen" , "person." Its not about them, it is about who we are. Read some history. The Nazis were put on trial, the Boston massacre perpetrators were put on trial. Democratic and Republican administrations have non controversially put people on trial in US courts, yes, terrorists too, until these radical nuts on the right looking for a reason to attack Obama came along.
So we have on one side, the Constitution of the United States and years of precedent saying "this is how we handle things," that the accused have the right to their day in court. If the bastards are guilty, why the hell are we worried? We can prove it in the open, in federal court, security sensitive information redacted and there will be no room for Al Qaeda or their ilk to claim we are manipulating, conducting in secret, their usual shit. Remember Bush put Richard Reid in court, a case that factually looks just like the Detroit bomber case.
On the other side, we have a band of idiots, who have never been involved in anything besides running their mouths, never prosecuted, obviously do not read or think of anything beyond the talking points, who are claiming this is wrong. And by the way, taxpayers should not pay for their defense, they stomp and scream!! Well, who the hell do you think is paying to defend them now in the military tribunals? Get ready here: TAXPAYERS! I might add, we also paid $12 million to build the facility they are being tried in, and more to get the judges, lawyers, other personnel down to Cuba.
People do not think.
Now Brown the clown is on his way to DC, with a STRONG,STRONG,STRONG ASSIST FROM MARTHA COAKLEY. This woman should be ashamed, and if you knew her pre 2009, you would be shocked that she ran a race like this.
Obviously, I am no fan of Brown, but my hat is off to him tonight! He ran the better race, against the odds, worked his ass off and it showed. Independents and Democrats who would have gone for Ted Kennedy and do go for John Kerry HAD TO HAVE GONE BROWN IN SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS for him to have won.
No, no one outside of a few nuts are saying that it is our fault they hate us.
This is not what any TV pundits are suggesting, that's for sure. It is not what anyone here on this forum, that I have seen, is suggesting.
Philsfan saying "jesus christ" is just him acknowledging how stupid it is for you even to bring this up as something that should resonate with voters.
Again, we are defending terrorists with taxpayer money right now, the only difference between that and federal court is federal court is efficient and proven to produce results.
All this is is a stupid talking point that made its way into the speech of a lightweight Senator elect who is increasingly more controlled by the tea party crowd every day.
Has nothing to do with defending terrorist attacks as right, or something that we brought on ourselves.
Tell me one person in politics, Democratic, Republican or otherwise, who has even come close to doing this. The closest anyone has come is Ron Paul in a late 2007 debate. He said something to the effect of "and we wonder why they attack us!" If it was official Democratic Party policy to defend terrorists as having just motives, then you would have a point here. But its not, so you don't!
This is an illogical leap that you make with nothing at all to back it up.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
The guy is tall good looking, gives a great stump speech. He can relate to the common man (and woman) and they relate to him.
If Palin belonged on the ticket in 2008 and if a freshman Senator from Illinois was qualified to run for President in 2008.
Then I say Scott Brown is the person to watch in 2012.
If Palin belonged on the ticket in 2008 and if a freshman Senator from Illinois was qualified to run for President in 2008.
Then I say Scott Brown is the person to watch in 2012.
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
First, I disagree, but thanks for explaining your reasons beyond a line or two. I know, as do some others, it takes some time. Some good points but I would remind you that military law is different than civil law. Foreign born enemy combatants captured on the battlefield or in the act of espionage do not enjoy the rights of civil law.
Richard Reid was caught just a few months after 9/11. Well before, I believe, the military tribunal system for terrorists was up and running. Zaccarias Moussawi was indeed tried in federal court and what a circus that turned out to be. Should have been a teachable moment but I guess not. As for treating the Blind Sheik and the 1993 WTC bombers as criminals rather than terrorists, all that got us was 9/11.
Bush doesn't get a pass in my eyes. KSM wanted to plead guilty and be executed and why we didn't accommodate him I don't know.
Finally, as for Nazis put on trial after the war. Yes, but are you aware FDR used military commissions to try and execute German saboteurs who were caught in the United States during WWII?
As for Scott Brown. May be the next breakout star of the GOP or the next Rino. I only know him because he edged me out in 1982 as America’s Sexiest Man according to Cosmopolitan magazine.
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Could of swore I heard someone from time to time say Gitmo was no less than a terrorist recruiting tool.
And the anti-war Left tells us that all terrorists come with a laundry lists of complaints, grievances and fatwas which we need to be sensitive to.
Well, they could not have passed anything they wanted. They had to get Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson, of their own caucus on board. Which required bribes, not a good thing. Now, the fact that the Dems can not get party unity, the reasons can be argued 1000 ways. Maybe, instead of a bribe, Harry Reid should have gone to these 2, grabbed them by the balls and said you vote for this, or watch your state go down the tubes. Like LBJ and Tom Delay did in their days. However, they did not have 60 until April anyway, so after the stimulus, which they needed Specter(then R) and Snowe(R) to get passed. Maybe this is a new concept to you Republicans, but the Democrats are not an ideologically pure, party line slam dunk 100% unified party. We actually have differences and debate, unlike the Republicans, who are apparently ready to use 41 to keep anything at all from even coming to the floor for debate! Go ahead and vote against the health care bill til your heart is content, but to stop it from even coming to a vote. Melon is right- the Democrats never did that to the Republicans, and now the Republicans are ready to do it to the Democrats, without even offering alternatives. Just screaming knuckle dragging, tea bagging nuts calling their shots.
What Melon is saying is that the Republicans have promised to deliver on obstruction promises as soon as they get to 41, and he is contrasting that with the Democratic record when Republicans were in charge. The Democrats only threatened filibuster once, on judicial nominees, and Republicans cried and bitched and tried to eliminate the filibuster until finally the Gang of 14 moderate adults got them to play nice. So he is not wrong.
Where you are wrong is in saying that the Democrats have pursued a far left agenda. Lets look at the facts, and I want you to respond to all of the following with what you think. This is the "agenda" that has dominated since the Democrats took over :
1.)Issue:The economy and fiscal responsibility
What Obama inherited: $1.2 trillion dollar deficit, $10 trillion debt. Economy in the tank, stock market plunging, losing 500K jobs per month.
What they did about it: The economic stimulus package, which economists from liberal, conservative and moderate circles agree was needed. In fact, McCain adviser Mark Zandi of Moody's economy was quoted saying we would have 12-14% unemployment if the stimulus was not passed. No left wing agenda here, just doing what he regrettably had to do when faced with what he inherited.
What you need to understand as you obviously do not: GDP=Consumption +Investment (in capital)+Government spending + Net exports as represented by D=C+I+G+(X-M) where x is exports and m is imports.
If the private sector is not investing, the consumer is not consuming, and the products of the non existent investment are not being exported, then the only thing left to put money into the economy is government spending.
Obama knew this, economists knew this, and hence the stimulus. Obama is on record saying he did not come in fired up and ready to spend $787 billion, he had to to prevent a depression. If the economy got worse, than revenues would have fallen even more and we would be in more debt today. Do nothing Republicans would have preferred this approach.
Look at the rest of his record on spending: the health care plan is deficit neutral and reduces costs of medicare and medicaid in the long run, he has proposed to cut farm subsidies, has ordered over 100 programs ended and ordered all federal agencies to make cuts. He has taken on defense contractors and their allies in Congress, many of whom are Democrats, on insisting on wasteful programs that the military does not want or need.
You do not have a leg to stand on here, Obama has been the clear, consistent supporter of pay as you go, of getting entitlements under control, of taking on spending even when it has constituencies, etc. Where were you the whole time Bush was spending us into record deficits? Where was the tea party? This movement is not one calling for fiscal responsibility, if that were the case, it would have started a long time ago. Its a group of right wing nuts bent on personal destruction of Obama.
As for people being fed up with not having jobs and strong growth back, its not Obama's fault. No economist would claim, and Obama certainly did not claim, that the unemployment rate would be 5% this year and jobs would come gushing back. The unemployment rate ALWAYS PEAKS AFTER A RECESSION HAS OFFICIALLY ENDED AND WAS BOUND TO GO UP NO MATTER WHAT POLICIES OBAMA PURSUED. Voters looking to send a message that they want a perfect economy in only 1 year are either ignorant or in need of going back and watching what Obama said to them in January. The recession he inherited made it economically impossible for things to be great by now, but they have improved. We are now losing less jobs per month, real growth has returned(the recession is over) and the stock market has improved dramatically.
2.)Issue: The environment/global warming
What Obama inherited: A Bush administration and Republicans in denial that the situation exists, left wing nuts insisting we get rid of cars, have a harmful carbon tax, etc.
What they did: Proposed cap and trade, the same plan that the 2008 version of John McCain supported, along with numerous Republicans. Cap and Trade is an efficient, sensible system that is the middle ground between doing nothing and taxing industries to their death. It allows those who can most efficiently reduce pollution to do so, and lets others buy and trade pollution credits if that is more efficient. All market based, and incentives focused. This will create many jobs, bring in revenue, and was originally proposed in the US by McCain and Lieberman. Neither of those guys can be accused of having a left wing agenda.
3.)Issue:Health Care
What Obama inherited: A mess, double digit percentage increases in costs every year, insurance companies and lobbyists allowed to do as they please, squeezing small businesses, workers, etc.
What they did
roposed a middle way, building on what works in the current system, changing what does not, expanding coverage, regulating unfair insurance company practices and making Medicare and providers who depend on it better. Increased competition. Listen closely: Not single payer, not government take over, not death panels, a down the middle, deficit neutral bill that is not perfect, but the biggest step forward in 45 years.4.)Issue:Terrorism
Continued the war on terror, record drone strikes in Pakistan, a new strategy with reinforcements in Afghanistan, shifting out of Iraq and arresting terrorist suspects at a faster rate than Bush ever dreamed of. The kid out in CO who was arrested was quite possibly an Obama administration prevention of an attack.
So if you really look at what the agenda items have been, and what they have done, there is no extreme left wing agenda to be had. Unless you want to argue that the Democrats have pursued different priorities than the ones mentioned above or argue that what they have done somehow represents a left wing agenda. An attempt at either would be laughable.
The extreme left wing agenda is another product of the right wing spin machine that is still(despite being out of power) very effective at reaching voters, Republicans, moderates and Democrats. It falls apart when examined objectively.
If you are looking for a reason here in MA, it is simple: Coakley sucked. If you want to make it a national referendum, its safe to say this: most people are incapable of understanding that recovery would take time, they think that things are supposed to be automatically better because we elected someone different, and they harbor some illusions that Obama promised it would be A OK by now. Where he has had influence, he has made things better, and the numbers show that. But again, there is absolutely no economically feasible way in which we would have low unemployment and jobs coming out the ear by now.
Voters, especially the vast majority who do are not tied to one party, have no patience or long term view at all, and will just change based on what they hear on the news. They no longer remember what he inherited, just that things are not back to normal NOW. Obama leveled with them, treated them like adults and told them to get ready for more inevitable bad news, and is paying the price for it now.
And saying that is somehow justifying or defending terrorist attacks?
It is a recruiting tool, Al Qaeda has used it to cast America in some kind of bad, secret light. Pointing this out is not making excuses for why they attack us, it is just pointing out that it hurts our cause with the Muslims who are making a decision between progress, freedom and capitalism on one hand and backward, violent AQ thugs on the other hand.
Bush supported closing Gitmo. is he a terrorist defender?
The Marines, The CIA, the State Department are all concerned with what terrorists use or may use as recruiting tools, and they seek to counter them. They must be terrorist defenders as well, right?
You clearly do not understand the difference here.
As for the complaints, grievances and fatwas, I do not know of anyone who is of any consequence that has said these are things we need to be sensitive to. As I said, maybe a few crazy nuts, but they are the minority. Don't confuse people who think Iraq was a bad idea and a recruiting tool with people who would sit there and defend the indefensible tactics that terrorists use. Maybe a few left wing nuts like that Professor in Colorado would, but they have no policymaking role whatsoever, just people who can say whatever they want and use tenure as a defense. Besides, wasn't it Pat Robertson who defended 9/11 as punishment to a nation that has turned from God? So Pat Robertson and Ron Paul so far for prominent pundits/politicians. Anyone else you can name?
Certainly no Democrat in office making policy today holds this view, so the fact that you would feel the need to point it out in defending Scott Brown's idiocy is a little strange.
Again, address what I was saying about the actual quote by Brown. Notice you did not do that!
The fact remains:
1.)We are spending taxpayer money on defending terrorists right now.
2.)We have an inefficient, ineffective military tribunal system set up now at Gitmo that has botched at every turn the trial of the 9/11 mastermind.
3.)We have a federal court system, used by every President from both parties including Bush and Obama, that has proven very effective at locking these guys up and keeping them there.
Tell me why we should change it to score political points for Scott Brown or anyone else?
True, but that assumes that Scott Brown will be able to withstand a challenge in 2012, which believe me, has already begun in earnest.
I do not know how familiar you are with figures in Massachusetts, but if Chris Gabrieli or Steve Pagliuca or Congressman Richard Neal run against Brown, then they will clean his clock.
Also, since Brown is going to the far right, looking poised to back off his pro choice views, tying himself to the tea baggers, etc, that does not look good in 2012.
The Republicans will either:
1.)Continue this Sarah Palin anti intellectual, anti fact, fantasy based extreme right wing experiment, turning off moderate voters in the process.
Under this scenario, forget about 2012.
or
2.)Field a true moderate, who rejects the tea party types, acknowledges that Ronald Reagan left office in 1989 and can not be called down for everything, presents a forward looking plan for the future and does not feel the need to resort to outrageous claims of socialism or death panels. This person would have to acknowledge the need to raise taxes and cut spending, that global warming exists, that health care status quo is unacceptable, that right wing nuts aren't the only good Republicans, and that bipartisanship does not mean the Democrats caving to the tea partiers.
Since Brown is on his way into the first group, he could suffer the same fate as the "regular gal" Palin if he tries to run for President. Maybe there will be a job for him at Fox News, though!
You can say that again!
Brown is not my guy, but my hats off to him tonight for the campaign he ran while Coakley sat at home scoffing at everyone!
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Your thoughtful and reasoned response really is not acurate. I am sure it makes perfect sense to you.
But one thing this election tonight and the Democratic Primary in 2008 taught me is that all these elections are about is the independent voters and malcontents. There are quite a few people that voted for Obama that are with the tae bag group now. Look at the precincts that Scott carried that Obama easily won.
Palin will not get the nomination in 2012. I think Obama and the Dems could have a hard time in 2012. This November is looking bleak for the Dems.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Have they perfected the terrorist seeking missile yet, or are you fine as long as it's set for "Arab"?
A few things of note:
The stage was set by a state legislature that kept changing the rules of how the senate seat gets filled to suit the party needs and not the peoples needs. Another example of the people feeling their ability to choose being trampled.
1) I spoke to no less than 8 people who have always voted democrat, who voted for Scott Brown over one issue - health care reform.
2) Scott Brown out campaigned her in every facet of the campaign.
3) She did not prepare for the debate. Her comments on Afghanistan were the second reason many people opened their eyes and scratched their head. That coupled with his "It's the people's seat." distinguished him from her. Then the next day attending a fundraising event in DC with health care lobbyists turned off people even more.
4) The barrage of negativity - that came from her camp at the same time she lost the debate - made her look weak and scared - because people raised and eyebrow after the debate.
5) He was everywhere - relentless - shaking EVERY hand - signing autographs and worked his ass off harder than any candidate in my lifetime. All politics is local - and he made it local. I have NEVER seen so many home made signs for a candidate in my life. They were everywhere. I cannot think of an election where people took the time to make their own signs and put them on their lawns. I take this as a sign of people who wanted to send a message, more than any other time in my life.
6) Many people view this as a two year audition for him. It is not a six year term. If he goes too far to the right, he will not be there in two years.
This is Massachusetts. We have elected republican governors before, but there has never been a movement for a Republican candidate like this. It is definitely a message that people are still looking for change. Not change for the sake of change, but change that makes fiscal sense. They are tired of the back room deals, and this health care bill is on everyones mind as being a back room deal. The people are looking for a candidate, not kissing lobbyists ass. People want to be heard. That illusion was created last night. Maybe it will be a reality, but all politicians...are accountable to someone other than the people.
The stage was set by a state legislature that kept changing the rules of how the senate seat gets filled to suit the party needs and not the peoples needs. Another example of the people feeling their ability to choose being trampled.
1) I spoke to no less than 8 people who have always voted democrat, who voted for Scott Brown over one issue - health care reform.
2) Scott Brown out campaigned her in every facet of the campaign.
3) She did not prepare for the debate. Her comments on Afghanistan were the second reason many people opened their eyes and scratched their head. That coupled with his "It's the people's seat." distinguished him from her. Then the next day attending a fundraising event in DC with health care lobbyists turned off people even more.
4) The barrage of negativity - that came from her camp at the same time she lost the debate - made her look weak and scared - because people raised and eyebrow after the debate.
5) He was everywhere - relentless - shaking EVERY hand - signing autographs and worked his ass off harder than any candidate in my lifetime. All politics is local - and he made it local. I have NEVER seen so many home made signs for a candidate in my life. They were everywhere. I cannot think of an election where people took the time to make their own signs and put them on their lawns. I take this as a sign of people who wanted to send a message, more than any other time in my life.
6) Many people view this as a two year audition for him. It is not a six year term. If he goes too far to the right, he will not be there in two years.
This is Massachusetts. We have elected republican governors before, but there has never been a movement for a Republican candidate like this. It is definitely a message that people are still looking for change. Not change for the sake of change, but change that makes fiscal sense. They are tired of the back room deals, and this health care bill is on everyones mind as being a back room deal. The people are looking for a candidate, not kissing lobbyists ass. People want to be heard. That illusion was created last night. Maybe it will be a reality, but all politicians...are accountable to someone other than the people.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
what is this and what does it look like? or is this just another buzz word to reframe intransigence as common sense?
Really just shows that R's are so much better as a political machine than the D's. Democrat's have no one to blame but themselves really. True the scare tactics of the republicans (or their spokespeople Rush/Beck/Hannity) hasn't helped at all, but democrats really found another way to just fuck all of this up. We could have had a reform of healthcare by now, but no.....
My question is, so what changes now that Brown is in office??? Are people just happy because he can block a fillibuster? And if the republicans do take over in November, what changes again? Is the only reason to elect an official to just make sure Prez agenda doesn't pass?????
I try not to get too involved with everything washington, as it's pretty depressing/angering/etc, but has any bills passed in the past 10-12 years that has actually been beneficial for the people of this country?
right wingers post on here how we must stop Obama, we must get R's seats back, but you offer no solution to the nation's problems. And again, democrats have the majority, and yet nothing gets done.
expell them all
My question is, so what changes now that Brown is in office??? Are people just happy because he can block a fillibuster? And if the republicans do take over in November, what changes again? Is the only reason to elect an official to just make sure Prez agenda doesn't pass?????
I try not to get too involved with everything washington, as it's pretty depressing/angering/etc, but has any bills passed in the past 10-12 years that has actually been beneficial for the people of this country?
right wingers post on here how we must stop Obama, we must get R's seats back, but you offer no solution to the nation's problems. And again, democrats have the majority, and yet nothing gets done.
expell them all
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
Summed up quite well.
I definitely think the outrage started with the temporary fill of the seat when Ted K passed. It opened a lot of peoples' eyes to the Democrats in office thinking they could do as they please to serve their agenda with no input from the public.
Then Martha just took the ball and dropped it...repeatedly.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
Arrogance and taking it completely for granted.
There are other factors-a Democratic governor who has done a terrible job, the excessive taxes in MA and the way they just keep going up, in a recession= backlash against Democrats. But when you have a state that voted for Obama by 26 points and it votes in a Republican Senator to the seat held by a Democrat since 1972 (Ted Kennedy no less) the writing is on the wall Mr. President. If he doesn't read it then he's not the man I thought he was, sorry. Or I wanted to think he was. A man of his word and not just another typical politician. The backroom deal for unions not to pay the tax on Cadillac health care plans to try to get Coakley elected was a very bad move-very bad. People aren't stupid-and where is the "transparency"? There are no exit polls for this election but when you see voters interviewed and just listen to the general mood you know what's going on. There is an element of Republicans who just oppose Obama no matter what-but here we had Democrats who are disenchanted and disappointed. Enough to combine with Independents/unenrolled and 12 percent Republicans to get him a win.
As sad as it is for me to admit, when the President came to MA to campaign for Coakley I just thought bad move. Never thought I'd be saying something like that just one year later. Why do you want that image out there when people are already saying loud and clear that it's an Obama referendum?
The reason this special election happened was that the Democrats stopped Romney from appointing a Republican senator to replace Kerry if he won the presidency. They changed the rules and then it came back to bite them in the butt. Just one of the many ironies that played out yesterday.
It's up to Democrats and the President now-either truly listen or keep doing what you've been doing and see what happens in 2012. And 2010.
If Republicans honestly believe we need universal health care then where is their plan? Why hasn't a Republican President ever done a thing?
That is what upsets me the most and why I voted the way I did-because it's a personal and moral issue for me and I just don't see a Republican ever doing anything about it. Doesn't mean I'm happy about the way Obama and the Democrats are going about it.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
I just don't see it. Not even the Cosmo picture.
He said he used the money to pay for school (school was much less expensive then) and it is what it is. And his speech went on and on and on and on..and talk about "pimping out" your daughters-saying that they're available and one of them appeared to be wearing an engagement ring and the other one said she wasn't and his wife told him to stop. I guess that's supposed to be part of his "awshucks" charm but I didn't get it. Just like the truck. He allegedly owns five properties but he has to always remind us about the truck. Yeehaw. He's going to drive it to DC and live in the military barracks there.
Oh and my wife had to be impartial because she's a tv reporter but I'll let you know a secret-she voted for MEEEE....
I get the feeling that his wife and daughters do some splainin for him on a fairly regular basis.
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
I was under the impression Scotty had a few cocktails prior to his acceptance speech.
It started off fine, but he started sounding a bit too Howard Dean-esque as it wore on. I half expexted him to say his daughter Ayla gave good head. He definitely should have cut it shorter. Chalk it up to exuberrance, and see where he goes from here.
Haha...classic headline!
Scott Brown Wins Mass. Race, Giving GOP 41-59 Majority in the Senate - New York News - Runnin' Scared
And Andrew Sullivan's response resonates with me:
Indeed. I have found myself less-and-less endeared to the Democratic Party certainly since the 2004 election; but, of course, with the GOP becoming more-and-more unhinged, I think many of us who would otherwise be ready to entertain the opposition find ourselves stuck. The U.S. needs its two parties to be engaged in healthy competition again. What we don't need is one party with its head stuck up its ass (the Democrats--and pun intended) and the other having paranoid hallucinations while tilting at windmills (GOP).
I'm not sure what the general public can do to hasten this cooperation--and, indeed, it is up to us, as neither party is about to derail the donor gravy train dominated by special interests--but I do worry that the general public itself is as much at fault for the spectacle as the parties. Is it not possible to create a movement in favour of sanity and healthy policy debates based on logic and reason?
Scott Brown Wins Mass. Race, Giving GOP 41-59 Majority in the Senate - New York News - Runnin' Scared
And Andrew Sullivan's response resonates with me:
Indeed. I have found myself less-and-less endeared to the Democratic Party certainly since the 2004 election; but, of course, with the GOP becoming more-and-more unhinged, I think many of us who would otherwise be ready to entertain the opposition find ourselves stuck. The U.S. needs its two parties to be engaged in healthy competition again. What we don't need is one party with its head stuck up its ass (the Democrats--and pun intended) and the other having paranoid hallucinations while tilting at windmills (GOP).
I'm not sure what the general public can do to hasten this cooperation--and, indeed, it is up to us, as neither party is about to derail the donor gravy train dominated by special interests--but I do worry that the general public itself is as much at fault for the spectacle as the parties. Is it not possible to create a movement in favour of sanity and healthy policy debates based on logic and reason?
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
It resonates with people who like buzzwords. That's it.
I say "Jesus fucking Christ" for two reasons: one, because it pisses me off that someone who actually pays attention still resorts to such blatant lies to try to swing the political balance, and two, because I know there are a lot of stupid people out there who would take that horrendously stupid idea at face value.
- Status
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
U2 Live From Sphere - Final Show SiriusXM stream
- Latest: Headache in a Suitcase
