PDA

View Full Version : General Politics How many Dems will jump off the healthcare ship?


thecoffeeguy
01-19-2010, 08:58 PM
Like rats fleeing a sinking ship, anyone wanna guess?

This could get really interesting.

Wonder how many will get voted out in November. :)

Way to go people of Massachusetts. :clap::clap:

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 08:59 PM
lol @ you guys.

Things are never as good as you think they are or bad as you think they are.

Saul Good
01-19-2010, 09:01 PM
lol @ you guys.

Things are never as good as you think they are or bad as you think they are.

This is true. There are two huge positives for Democrats and Obama that are coming out of this.

1. This is going to counterbalance Obama's ridiculous agenda and push him towards the middle. See Clinton, Bill.

2. If Coakley would have won, she'd have been there for the rest of her life. Brown's probably out in 2 years. They may get a candidate they like more in 2012 who will be there for 30 years.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:04 PM
This is true. There are two huge positives for Democrats and Obama that are coming out of this.

1. This is going to counterbalance Obama's ridiculous agenda and push him towards the middle. See Clinton, Bill.

2. If Coakley would have won, she'd have been there for the rest of her life. Brown's probably out in 2 years. They may get a candidate they like more in 2012 who will be there for 30 years.

I really agree with this.

Here is why I don't particularly think this is as much momentum as some around here think it is. Or in shyspryrs case be so happy that he\she "feels like they are on acid"

It seems as though the Republicans just want to emote. They don't really have much to stand behind when one asks why they should be supported. And so much energy was spent on this being the home run. Things change fast.

The pendulum is quite short. It will be interesting to see what comes of this.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:07 PM
This is also the billioneth time I have heard health care is dead. I will just wait and see. There are just not a lot of absolutes in this game. Alot of committed parties.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:07 PM
This is true. There are two huge positives for Democrats and Obama that are coming out of this.

1. This is going to counterbalance Obama's ridiculous agenda and push him towards the middle. See Clinton, Bill.

2. If Coakley would have won, she'd have been there for the rest of her life. Brown's probably out in 2 years. They may get a candidate they like more in 2012 who will be there for 30 years.

Good post Saul. It really depends on how Obama handles this if this becomes a positive or negative.

But IMO it all really comes down to the economy and jobs. If they neither approves Obama is done.

petegz28
01-19-2010, 09:07 PM
This is also the billioneth time I have heard health care is dead. I will just wait and see. There are just not a lot of absolutes in this game. Alot of committed parties.

I just posted a thread where several House Dems are already backing off and talking about starting over.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:09 PM
If they neither approves Obama is done.

Because (blank) will run on the GOP foundation of (blank).

I am not sure what the blanks are. I don't think the GOP does either. What is to stop them from rolling out another looney tunes gaffe machine. A ticket where they don't vet the VP?

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:09 PM
I just posted a thread where several House Dems are already backing off and talking about starting over.

Cool a billion and one times. So if I post more people saying they are going to get it through no matter what are we even?

We will see how it shakes out.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:20 PM
Because (blank) will run on the GOP foundation of (blank).

I am not sure what the blanks are. I don't think the GOP does either. What is to stop them from rolling out another looney tunes gaffe machine. A ticket where they don't vet the VP?

Obviously 3 years is a long time but if the economy and jobs don't come back I am pretty confidant he is 1 and done unless they run Palin then he is a mortal lock to win.

Taco John
01-19-2010, 09:22 PM
If this loss isn't an indictment of Pelosi, Reid, and Obama, I don't know what is. If I was Hillary, I'd be lacing up my running shoes to save the 2012 election for my party.

Taco John
01-19-2010, 09:23 PM
Obviously 3 years is a long time but if the economy and jobs don't come back I am pretty confidant he is 1 and done unless they run Palin then he is a mortal lock to win.

Palin could beat Obama right now.

Yeah, I said it.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:23 PM
Obviously 3 years is a long time but if the economy and jobs don't come back I am pretty confidant he is 1 and done unless they run Palin then he is a mortal lock to win.

All I am saying is...I find it interesting so many people assume the Republicans can roll out a sure fire winner even in the face of these circumstances.

Do they know what they want to do after they are done being angry?

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:24 PM
Palin could beat Obama right now.

Yeah, I said it.

No.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:25 PM
Palin could beat Obama right now.

Yeah, I said it.

Yeah that is why the latest poll yesterday said 71% of Americans don't want her to run and 60% republicans agreed.

Good luck with that.

Mr. Flopnuts
01-19-2010, 09:25 PM
Palin could beat Obama right now.

Yeah, I said it.

Wow.

Donger
01-19-2010, 09:26 PM
Do they know what they want to do after they are done being angry?

Sure. http://www.gop.gov/

That's not new information, BTW. It's just been ignored.

Are the Democrats going to listen and attempt bipartisanship now, or not?

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:27 PM
All I am saying is...I find it interesting so many people assume the Republicans can roll out a sure fire winner even in the face of these circumstances.

Do they know what they want to do after they are done being angry?

Doesn't matter if the electorate is equally mad. A little interesting tidbit I found out and that was Romney's inner circle ran Brown's campaign. My bet he is the Republican nominee.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:28 PM
Sure. http://www.gop.gov/

That's not new information, BTW. It's just been ignored.

Are the Democrats going to listen and attempt bipartisanship now, or not?

Oh, their talking points? Thats what they are going to be running on?

Let me guess. Is fiscal conservatism one of them? They are better at being angry.

Taco John
01-19-2010, 09:30 PM
Yeah that is why the latest poll yesterday said 71% of Americans don't want her to run and 60% republicans agreed.

Good luck with that.

What does that have anything to do with Obama losing to her?

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:31 PM
Wow.

TJ predictions always come true...

1. Priest lost his burst
2. Plummer is better than Trent Green
3. Denver midget RB = Barry Sanders
4. Shanahan will never be fired
5. Ron Paul will be POTUS

Donger
01-19-2010, 09:32 PM
Oh, their talking points? Thats what they are going to be running on?

Let me guess. Is fiscal conservatism one of them? They are better at being angry.

You asked. I provided. You're welcome. Are you upset about something?

The real question is, will the Democrats (who still control both the WH and Congress ((for now)) actually engage with the Republicans? Or will they continue their drunken-like pursuit of their agenda?

Or will they wake up tomorrow with a really nasty hang over?

stevieray
01-19-2010, 09:32 PM
keep focusing on the right when the left chokes.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:34 PM
You asked. I provided. You're welcome. Are you upset about something?

The real question is, will the Democrats (who still control both the WH and Congress ((for now)) actually engage with the Republicans? Or will they continue their drunken-like pursuit of their agenda?

Or will they wake up tomorrow with a really nasty hang over?

I think they will be forced to move more to the center. Which I welcome.

Taco John
01-19-2010, 09:34 PM
TJ predictions always come true...

1. Priest lost his burst
2. Plummer is better than Trent Green
3. Denver midget RB = Barry Sanders
4. Shanahan will never be fired
5. Ron Paul will be POTUS


You don't know what a prediction is you dope.

Saul Good
01-19-2010, 09:34 PM
All I am saying is...I find it interesting so many people assume the Republicans can roll out a sure fire winner even in the face of these circumstances.

Do they know what they want to do after they are done being angry?

Elections are 75% about the incumbent when he's running for re-election (and probably 60% even when he's not.)

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:35 PM
keep focusing on the right when the left chokes.

More so, if this really is setting the stage for the right coming back to power down the line...what does that even mean? Because I don't think they even know.

Saul Good
01-19-2010, 09:37 PM
There's one huge downside for Republicans. It's possible that the Democrats get their shit together after seeing what just went down. I'd much rather they realized it after losing a full election cycle's worth of seats than just 1.

On the plus side, I don't see Nancy and Harry getting wiser any time soon.

Donger
01-19-2010, 09:38 PM
More so, if this really is setting the stage for the right coming back to power down the line...what does that even mean? Because I don't think they even know.

"Don't be a Socialist" sounds like a peachy start, doesn't it?

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:39 PM
"Don't be a Socialist" sounds like a peachy start, doesn't it?

I don't think a lot of the right has a lot to run on when you get past bumper sticker stuff like this.

Donger
01-19-2010, 09:40 PM
I don't think a lot of the right has a lot to run on when you get past bumper sticker stuff like this.

Well, that's where you are wrong. "Leave me the f*ck alone" has a nice ring to it to a LOT of people. Pretty amusing that you don't realize that.

Taco John
01-19-2010, 09:40 PM
More so, if this really is setting the stage for the right coming back to power down the line...what does that even mean? Because I don't think they even know.

It only has to mean simple concepts such as "Hope" and "Change."

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:41 PM
You don't know what a prediction is you dope.

LMAO Sure TJ. If you think that people would elect Palin as POTUS if the vote was today well I really don't know what to say other than your dumb.

71% of Americans don't want her to run
56% Republicans say no
65% of Independents say no

She also has a 26% favorable rating

But yeah she would win in a landslide. LMAO

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:42 PM
It only has to mean simple concepts such as "Hope" and "Change."

Actually a lot more promises were made during that campaign and those exact things have been what they have been getting hammered on left and right.

The Mad Crapper
01-19-2010, 09:42 PM
LMAO Sure TJ. If you think that people would elect Palin as POTUS if the vote was today well I really don't know what to say other than your dumb.

I agree with him and so do alot of other people. B.O. sucks that bad. You're just in denial.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:43 PM
Well, that's where you are wrong. "Leave me the f*ck alone" has a nice ring to it to a LOT of people. Pretty amusing that you don't realize that.

Yes, leave me alone.

It is fun to write on a BB and makes a cute bumper sticker.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:43 PM
You asked. I provided. You're welcome. Are you upset about something?

The real question is, will the Democrats (who still control both the WH and Congress ((for now)) actually engage with the Republicans? Or will they continue their drunken-like pursuit of their agenda?

Or will they wake up tomorrow with a really nasty hang over?

I am hoping they will engage but I am also hoping the Republicans are willing as well. Both sides have to come to the table.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:44 PM
I agree with him and so do alot of other people. B.O. sucks that bad. You're just in denial.

Color me shocked that you are dumb too

Bwana
01-19-2010, 09:45 PM
I'm sure this will be a wakeup call for many of them.

Donger
01-19-2010, 09:45 PM
Yes, leave me alone.

It is fun to write on a BB and makes a cute bumper sticker.

If you want to call it that, fine. Personally, the less government intrusion in my life, the better. You actually want more government intrusion in your life?

The Mad Crapper
01-19-2010, 09:45 PM
Color me shocked that you are dumb too

Yep. All the TEE HEE HEE teabaggers GIGGLE are dumb too. Keep saying that and continue to watch dems go down like bowling pins.

Donger
01-19-2010, 09:46 PM
I am hoping they will engage but I am also hoping the Republicans are willing as well. Both sides have to come to the table.

Are you even aware of what the GOP proposed with regard to health care reform?

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:46 PM
If you want to call it that, fine. Personally, the less government intrusion in my life, the better. You actually want more government intrusion in your life?

No, I don't.

But the only person I see supporting that and not actually saying it is TJ.

I don't know how supporting Republicans means less government.

TEX
01-19-2010, 09:46 PM
Like rats fleeing a sinking ship, anyone wanna guess?

This could get really interesting.

Wonder how many will get voted out in November. :)

Way to go people of Massachusetts. :clap::clap:

I'm looking forward to watching the show...ROFL

KC Dan
01-19-2010, 09:47 PM
The dems really need to slow down, open up debate for all to see and chop their health care dreams into manageable bills where they can get right-wing help. If they fail to wake up and head down this route or kill it outright, they will be in just as much trouble in November. This loss really could be a blesing for them as it was for Clinton and more so FOR AMERICA.

Donger
01-19-2010, 09:48 PM
No, I don't.

But the only person I see supporting that and not actually saying it is TJ.

I don't know how supporting Republicans means less government.

It means less than Democrats want. That's not even arguable. IMO, Ron Paulians seem to live in a dream world where the rest of the world doesn't exist.

TEX
01-19-2010, 09:49 PM
I'm sure this will be a wakeup call for many of them.

One would think, but their arrogance seems to have no limits.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:49 PM
Yep. All the TEE HEE HEE teabaggers GIGGLE are dumb too. Keep saying that and continue to watch dems go down like bowling pins.

A huge majority of people think she is dumber than a box of rocks. If you want to hang your hat on her go for it but you will be disappointed.

Right now it looks like Romney is the leader in the clubhouse.

The Mad Crapper
01-19-2010, 09:49 PM
I'm looking forward to watching the show...ROFL

You're watching it right now. Listen to the denial in the O-bots posts. It's amazing just how lost in space these moonbats really are.

ROFL

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:49 PM
Are you even aware of what the GOP proposed with regard to health care reform?

I think they simply invited all the top insurance CEOs into a room and let them write it.

The Mad Crapper
01-19-2010, 09:50 PM
A huge majority of people think she is dumber than a box of rocks. If you want to hang your hat on her go for it but you will be disappointed.

Right now it looks like Romney is the leader in the clubhouse.

I'm not hangin my hat on her, just saying if the two choices are Jughead and Jugs, I'm voting for Jugs, and I think most Americans would too.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:50 PM
Are you even aware of what the GOP proposed with regard to health care reform?

yes and I even supported some of it like tort reform and opening up private insurance across state lines even though very smart people like Velvet said he didn't think that would work or be viable.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:50 PM
It means less than Democrats want.

That is all they are shooting for. That is why I do not believe in them in the least.

Donger
01-19-2010, 09:51 PM
I think they simply invited all the top insurance CEOs into a room and let them write it.

Obama talking points?

:spock:

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:51 PM
I'm not hangin my hat on her, just saying if the two choices are Jughead and Jugs, I'm voting for Jugs, and I think most Americans would too.

who wouldn't vote for huge jugs? :p

KC Dan
01-19-2010, 09:53 PM
I think they simply invited all the top insurance CEOs into a room and let them write it.Bad, yes. BO's approach - let the unions, drug companies, and community organizing groups write it all in private. Much better......

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 09:53 PM
Obama talking points?

:spock:

The leading rep spokesperson for their new plan Boehner has pocketed nearly a million dollars from the insurance special interests.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 09:53 PM
I think they simply invited all the top insurance CEOs into a room and let them write it.

Yeah but Obama let the pharms come in and write a large portion of the current bill.

That is why there is no provision in the bill to allow meds from Canada which are alot cheaper than here.

Bearcat2005
01-19-2010, 09:53 PM
yes and I even supported some of it like tort reform and opening up private insurance across state lines even though very smart people like Velvet said he didn't think that would work or be viable.

Competition is a wonderful thing, lets get rid of the government REGULATIONS that don't allow such. It would be true health care reform with an increase of quality and decrease to costs. No back room deals or bribes or trillions of dollars and taxes.

Donger
01-19-2010, 09:54 PM
That is all they are shooting for. That is why I do not believe in them in the least.

So, you are suggesting that the GOP wants as much intrusion into your life as the DNC? You think the GOP is going to force you to have health insurance or face a fine?

Are you thinking clearly?

Bwana
01-19-2010, 10:00 PM
One would think, but their arrogance seems to have no limits.

True enough.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 10:00 PM
Competition is a wonderful thing, lets get rid of the government REGULATIONS that don't allow such. It would be true health care reform with an increase of quality and decrease to costs. No back room deals or bribes or trillions of dollars and taxes.

Velvet gave a good answer to this.

This is tricky but the job of the Federal government. The states would have to agree to following extraterritorial law, which most do not want to. There is no federal law that restricts buying across state lines but the states would have to abide by the laws that the certificate was issued in not the state of residency or state the heath care service was performed in. Some states require first dollar benefits for a lot of things - mostly preventative services. Some states don't. The ones that require these benefits would naturally have a higher premium.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 10:02 PM
So, you are suggesting that the GOP wants as much intrusion into your life as the DNC? You think the GOP is going to force you to have health insurance or face a fine?

Are you thinking clearly?

I don't think they are that much different fiscally. Neither party has any idea about cutting things down.

So we have been talking about the GOP. You said it yourself...instead of actually pushing for less government they will push themselves as simply being "less than the democrats want"

I see so little different between then and don't align with the GOP on social issues.

You see a huge difference in them that I just don't really see.

Bearcat2005
01-19-2010, 10:03 PM
Velvet gave a good answer to this.

Thats great.

http://www.heritage.org/research/healthcare/cda05-07.cfm

www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa527.pdf

Donger
01-19-2010, 10:05 PM
I don't think they are that much different fiscally. Neither party has any idea about cutting things down.

So we have been talking about the GOP. You said it yourself...instead of actually pushing for less government they will push themselves as simply being "less than the democrats want"

I see so little different between then and don't align with the GOP on social issues.

You see a huge difference in them that I just don't really see.

Not as much as I would like, no. I'd like to see a GOP leadership that cuts federal spending by 20%, across the board, with no decreases in taxation. Apply that to paying down the debt.

But, I do see a difference between the two parties in general with regard to overall government intrusion into the lives of Americans. If you don't, you are operating in reality. Sorry.

Bearcat2005
01-19-2010, 10:07 PM
I don't think they are that much different fiscally. Neither party has any idea about cutting things down.

So we have been talking about the GOP. You said it yourself...instead of actually pushing for less government they will push themselves as simply being "less than the democrats want"

I see so little different between then and don't align with the GOP on social issues.

You see a huge difference in them that I just don't really see.

My attitude is that the GOP needs to earn this perception that they are the party of limited government. Fooled me once shame on them, they will not fool me twice. They are talking the talk, lets see if/when they get power back that they walk it.

Brock
01-19-2010, 10:07 PM
I don't think they are that much different fiscally. Neither party has any idea about cutting things down.

So we have been talking about the GOP. You said it yourself...instead of actually pushing for less government they will push themselves as simply being "less than the democrats want"

I see so little different between then and don't align with the GOP on social issues.

You see a huge difference in them that I just don't really see.

I don't see any difference between most of them at all, but as long as they're evenly divided, they can't try and "help" us.

ROYC75
01-19-2010, 10:08 PM
So, you are suggesting that the GOP wants as much intrusion into your life as the DNC? You think the GOP is going to force you to have health insurance or face a fine?

Are you thinking clearly?


He's like any other Liberal Loon, doesn't want to take the time to listen to a Republican proposal. It's not even thinkable to them, they just toe the party line to a T, same as before, still the same.

Yes the GOP has been guilty of this same crap, as I said in another thread, the last 40 years of this crap is enough. Time for some new blood that will be true conservative and 1st, a strong defense, 2nd peoples jobs, 3rd health care. Other than that get the hell out of the peoples way and let the free market take care of itself.

Bearcat2005
01-19-2010, 10:09 PM
I don't see any difference between most of them at all, but as long as they're evenly divided, they can't try and "help" us.

Thats the attitude to have, anything that limits their collective power helps the individual.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 10:12 PM
Thats great.

http://www.heritage.org/research/healthcare/cda05-07.cfm

www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa527.pdf (http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa527.pdf)

I agree with you and Velvet who works in the insurance industry is just pointing out why it hasn't been done.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 10:14 PM
Not as much as I would like, no. I'd like to see a GOP leadership that cuts federal spending by 20%, across the board, with no decreases in taxation. Apply that to paying down the debt.

But, I do see a difference between the two parties in general with regard to overall government intrusion into the lives of Americans. If you don't, you are operating in reality. Sorry.

You actually believe that is possible? You are telling me the same leaders in the Republican Congress that passed the $1.2 trillion dollar Medicare bill is now going to come in and cut spending by 20%.

People claim Obots live in fantasy land but JFC.

ROYC75
01-19-2010, 10:16 PM
You actually believe that is possible? You are telling me the same leaders in the Republican Congress that passed the $1.2 trillion dollar Medicare bill is now going to come in and cut spending by 20%.

People claim Obots live in fantasy land but JFC.

Like I said, time to clean house, all of it, start over fresh with people who will !

Donger
01-19-2010, 10:17 PM
You actually believe that is possible? You are telling me the same leaders in the Republican Congress that passed the $1.2 trillion dollar Medicare bill is now going to come in and cut spending by 20%.

People claim Obots live in fantasy land but JFC.

Try reading. I wrote that is what I'd like to see happen, not what I think what would happen. Thanks to people like you who voted in people like Obama, I doubt that any elected official would gain a seat if he came out and proposed anything like that.

I'd vote for him in a heartbeat, however.

As I've said many times before, I hope that FDR is rotting in Hell right now.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 10:18 PM
Not as much as I would like, no. I'd like to see a GOP leadership that cuts federal spending by 20%, across the board, with no decreases in taxation. Apply that to paying down the debt.

But, I do see a difference between the two parties in general with regard to overall government intrusion into the lives of Americans. If you don't, you are operating in reality. Sorry.

Agreed.

morphius
01-19-2010, 10:19 PM
If this loss isn't an indictment of Pelosi, Reid, and Obama, I don't know what is. If I was Hillary, I'd be lacing up my running shoes to save the 2012 election for my party.
MSNBC was saying that it wasn't an indictment on the Democrats ideals as much as it was their inability to get anything done, lol!

Donger
01-19-2010, 10:20 PM
Agreed.

Meh. Weak. But, not surprising.

ROYC75
01-19-2010, 10:21 PM
MSNBC was saying that it wasn't an indictment on the Democrats ideals as much as it was their inability to get anything done, lol!


And they even went as far as blaming Bush at one time too !ROFL

notorious
01-19-2010, 10:21 PM
Good post Saul. It really depends on how Obama handles this if this becomes a positive or negative.

But IMO it all really comes down to the economy and jobs. If they neither approves Obama is done.

If the President does the right thing, starts from scratch, and trys to put a bill through based on it's own merits and not bribes and trickery, he will be just fine.

If they proceed the way they have been, it will be a disaster for them.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 10:22 PM
Try reading. I wrote that is what I'd like to see happen, not what I think what would happen. Thanks to people like you who voted in people like Obama, I doubt that any elected official would gain a seat if he came out and proposed anything like that.

I'd vote for him in a heartbeat, however.

As I've said many times before, I hope that FDR is rotting in Hell right now.

Sure Donger blame the people who voted for Obama ignoring the fact your stupid ass voted for Bush and all the Republican leadership that voted for a 1.2 trillion dollar Medicare bill that is bigger than the current health care bill right now.

Bwana
01-19-2010, 10:22 PM
MSNBC was saying that it wasn't an indictment on the Democrats ideals as much as it was their inability to get anything done, lol!

Seriously? Even for that hardcore group of Moonbats, that's out there.

http://img.hobowars.com/fn_photos/m_16366_msnbc[1].jpg

ROYC75
01-19-2010, 10:22 PM
If the President does the right thing, starts from scratch, and trys to put a bill through based on it's own merits and not bribes and trickery, he will be just fine.

If they proceed the way they have been, it will be a disaster for them, even if the Republicans are just as bad for the country.

Bingo,Obo can survive if he moves to the center and works with both parties. If not, he is toast in 2012.

notorious
01-19-2010, 10:23 PM
And they even went as far as blaming Bush at one time too !ROFL

No kidding, is MSNBC really that far off when it comes to the pulse of the nation?


They lost because of how they are going about the process.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 10:24 PM
He's like any other Liberal Loon, doesn't want to take the time to listen to a Republican proposal.

Roy, you simply don't know what you are talking about. You have created this ultra liberal character in your head from very specific issues we go back and forth on that is simply not true.

There are examples of you just making up and assuming things about me...so feel free to go on and on about things you know little about. I really can't stop you.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=6372888&postcount=31
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=6372950&postcount=37

Donger
01-19-2010, 10:24 PM
Sure Donger blame the people who voted for Obama ignoring the fact your stupid ass voted for Bush and all the Republican leadership that voted for a 1.2 trillion dollar Medicare bill that is bigger than the current health care bill right now.

Sure, once you have an entitlement, you've got to fund it, right? Same with SS. "You want to cut SS?!!! WHY DO YOU HATE OLD PEOPLE!!!!!?"

ROYC75
01-19-2010, 10:24 PM
Sure Donger blame the people who voted for Obama ignoring the fact your stupid ass voted for Bush and all the Republican leadership that voted for a 1.2 trillion dollar Medicare bill that is bigger than the current health care bill right now.


You do recall that the Dems and their crooks controlled the house when Fannie & Freddie went wacko with their agenda ?

Like I said, I can make a case for the last 40 years. It's time for some new blood and no more career politicians.

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 10:26 PM
Great, now we are going to have to listen to all these guys who blast democrats with every thread but then claim they mean it for both parties.

ROYC75
01-19-2010, 10:27 PM
No kidding, is MSNBC really that far off when it comes to the pulse of the nation?


They lost because of how they are going about the process.

Howard Dean was on there blaming this lost election by Coakley on Bush. My wife and I both looked at each other and laughed our butts off . Funny part, Ole Maddcow kinda went along with it.

notorious
01-19-2010, 10:27 PM
Roy, you simply don't know what you are talking about. You have created this ultra liberal character in your head from very specific issues we go back and forth on that is simply not true.

There are examples of you just making up and assuming things about me...so feel free to go on and on about things you know little about. I really can't stop you.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=6372888&postcount=31
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=6372950&postcount=37

Both sides have their share of the delusional.

Liberals, Conservatives, etc. all have one goal in mind: Keep this country as the best in the world.

I just wished each side would try to do it the right way. What happened to working together for compromise? Why do bills have parts added that have nothing to do with the actual bill?

It's time to clean house on both sides.

ROYC75
01-19-2010, 10:28 PM
Roy, you simply don't know what you are talking about. You have created this ultra liberal character in your head from very specific issues we go back and forth on that is simply not true.

There are examples of you just making up and assuming things about me...so feel free to go on and on about things you know little about. I really can't stop you.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=6372888&postcount=31
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=6372950&postcount=37

What's this, you jumping ship on your elected POTUS ?

notorious
01-19-2010, 10:29 PM
Great, now we are going to have to listen to all these guys who blast democrats with every thread but then claim they mean it for both parties.

Both parties suck. The democrats are in the spotlight right now, fucking up just like the republicans did, so they will get the most attention.

ROYC75
01-19-2010, 10:31 PM
Great, now we are going to have to listen to all these guys who blast democrats with every thread but then claim they mean it for both parties.

Could it be that most Dems see nothing wrong with the POTUS and CH ?

Any chance at all ?

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 10:33 PM
Could it be that most Dems see nothing wrong with the POTUS and CH ?

Any chance at all ?

That is bullshit.

You are the king of rejecting reality and inserting your own.

A lot of dems see a lot of things that are wrong. How could numbers be low with most dems that voted for the guy seeing nothing wrong with him?

|Zach|
01-19-2010, 10:34 PM
What's this, you jumping ship on your elected POTUS ?

No. I am saying I was never nearly as liberal as the fictional person you have created in your head.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 10:34 PM
Sure, once you have an entitlement, you've got to fund it, right? Same with SS. "You want to cut SS?!!! WHY DO YOU HATE OLD PEOPLE!!!!!?"

Meh. Weak. But, not surprising.

Donger
01-19-2010, 10:35 PM
Meh. Weak. But, not surprising.

Are you suggesting that wouldn't be the response if Republicans said they were going to cut an entitlement program?

I gave that response to Zachie because my mistake was obvious. But you knew that.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 10:37 PM
You do recall that the Dems and their crooks controlled the house when Fannie & Freddie went wacko with their agenda ?

Like I said, I can make a case for the last 40 years. It's time for some new blood and no more career politicians.

I am all for term limits and have been since the day I could vote. Not going to happen though.

Ironically enough one of the main reasons why I voted for Obama was because I wanted new blood and a fresh face and maybe some fresh ideas.

dirk digler
01-19-2010, 10:41 PM
Are you suggesting that wouldn't be the response if Republicans said they were going to cut an entitlement program?

I gave that response to Zachie because my mistake was obvious. But you knew that.

Sure it would be just like the response from the Republicans would be you are not protecting us and are going to get us killed if you cut that defense program that cost $500 gazillion dollars that isn't being used.

I mean seriously Obama wants to close Gitmo and move it the States and people act like the end of the world is coming and terrorists are going to start attacking us because Gitmo is closed.

ROYC75
01-19-2010, 10:43 PM
Howard Dean was on there blaming this lost election by Coakley on Bush. My wife and I both looked at each other and laughed our butts off . Funny part, Ole Maddcow kinda went along with it.


Ha Ha ....... Others are still blaming Bush.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_massachusetts_senate


In epic upset, GOP's Brown wins Mass. Senate race
AP

BOSTON In an epic upset in liberal Massachusetts, Republican Scott Brown rode a wave of voter anger to win the U.S. Senate seat held by the late Edward M. Kennedy for nearly half a century, leaving President Barack Obama's health care overhaul in doubt and marring the end of his first year in office.

Addressing an exuberant victory celebration Tuesday night, Brown declared he was "ready to go to Washington without delay" as the crowd chanted, "Seat him now." Democrats indicated they would, deflating a budding controversy over whether they would try to block Brown long enough to complete congressional passage of the health care plan he has promised to oppose.

"The people of Massachusetts have spoken. We welcome Scott Brown to the Senate and will move to seat him as soon as the proper paperwork has been received," said Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin said he would notify the Senate on Wednesday that Brown had been elected.

The loss by the once-favored Democrat Martha Coakley in the Democratic stronghold was a stunning embarrassment for the White House after Obama rushed to Boston on Sunday to try to save the foundering candidate. Her defeat on Tuesday signaled big political problems for the president's party this fall when House, Senate and gubernatorial candidates are on the ballot nationwide.

Brown's victory was the third major loss for Democrats in statewide elections since Obama became president. Republicans won governors' seats in Virginia and New Jersey in November.

"I have no interest in sugarcoating what happened in Massachusetts," said Sen. Robert Menendez, the head of the Senate Democrats' campaign committee. "There is a lot of anxiety in the country right now. Americans are understandably impatient."

Brown will become the 41st Republican in the 100-member Senate, which could allow the GOP to block the president's health care legislation. Democrats needed Coakley to win for a 60th vote to thwart Republican filibusters. The trouble may go deeper: Democratic lawmakers could read the results as a vote against Obama's broader agenda, weakening their support for the president. And the results could scare some Democrats from seeking office this fall.

The Republican will finish Kennedy's unexpired term, facing re-election in 2012.

Brown led by 52 per cent to 47 percent with all but 3 percent of precincts counted. Turnout was exceptional for a special election in January, with light snow reported in parts of the state. More voters showed up at the polls Tuesday than in any non-presidential general election in Massachusetts since 1990.

One day shy of the first anniversary of Obama's swearing-in, the election played out amid a backdrop of animosity and resentment from voters over persistently high unemployment, Wall Street bailouts, exploding federal budget deficits and partisan wrangling over health care.

"I voted for Obama because I wanted change. ... I thought he'd bring it to us, but I just don't like the direction that he's heading," said John Triolo, 38, a registered independent who voted in Fitchburg.

He said his frustrations, including what he considered the too-quick pace of health care legislation, led him to vote for Brown.

For weeks considered a long shot, Brown seized on voter discontent to overtake Coakley in the campaign's final stretch. His candidacy energized Republicans, including backers of the "tea party" protest movement, while attracting disappointed Democrats and independents uneasy with where they felt the nation was heading.

A cornerstone of Brown's campaign was his promise to vote against the health care plan.

Though the president wasn't on the ballot, he was on many voters' minds.

Coakley called Brown conceding the race, and Obama talked to both Brown and Coakley, congratulating them on the race.

The Democrat said the president told her: "We can't win them all."

Brown will be the first Republican senator from Massachusetts in 30 years.

Even before the first results were announced, administration officials were privately accusing Coakley of a poorly run campaign and playing down the notion that Obama or a toxic political landscape had much to do with the outcome.

Coakley's supporters, in turn, blamed that very environment, saying her lead dropped significantly after the Senate passed health care reform shortly before Christmas and after the Christmas Day attempted airliner bombing that Obama himself said showed a failure of his administration.

Days before the polls closed, Democrats were fingerpointing and laying blame.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, head of the House Democrats' campaign effort, said Coakley's loss won't deter his colleagues from continuing to blame the previous administration.

"President George W. Bush and House Republicans drove our economy into a ditch and tried to run away from the accident," he said. "President Obama and congressional Democrats have been focused repairing the damage to our economy."

At Boston's Park Plaza Hotel, giddy Republicans cheered, chanted "USA" and waved the "tea party" version of the American flag.

Even before Brown won, the grass-roots network fueled by antiestablishment frustrations, sought credit for the victory, much like the liberal MoveOn.org did in the 2006 midterm elections when Democrats rose to power.

GOP chairman Michael Steele said Brown's "message of lower taxes, smaller government and fiscal responsibility clearly resonated with independent-minded voters in Massachusetts who were looking for a solution to decades of failed Democrat leadership."

Wall Street watched the election closely. The Dow Jones industrial average rose 116 points, and analysts attributed the increase to hopes the election would make it harder for Obama to make his changes to health care. That eased investor concerns that profits at companies such as insurers and drug makers would suffer.

Across Massachusetts, voters who had been bombarded with phone calls and dizzied with nonstop campaign commercials for Coakley and Brown gave a fitting turnout despite intermittent snow and rain statewide.

Galvin, who discounted sporadic reports of voter irregularities throughout the day, predicted turnout ranging from 1.6 million to 2.2 million, 40 percent to 55 percent of registered voters. The Dec. 8 primary had a scant turnout of about 20 percent.

Voters considered national issues including health care and the federal budget deficits.

Fears about spending drove Karla Bunch, 49, to vote for Brown. "It's time for the country, for the taxpayers, to take back their money," she said. And Elizabeth Reddin, 65, voted for Brown because she said she was turned off by the Democrat's negative advertisements, saying: "The Coakley stuff was disgusting."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Still drinking the Kool Aid, Dems can't take any of the blame !

Zach should pay attention to this one!

morphius
01-19-2010, 10:43 PM
Seriously? Even for that hardcore group of Moonbats, that's out there.

http://img.hobowars.com/fn_photos/m_16366_msnbc[1].jpg
I wish I was joking.

Taco John
01-19-2010, 11:56 PM
LMAO Sure TJ. If you think that people would elect Palin as POTUS if the vote was today well I really don't know what to say other than your dumb.

71% of Americans don't want her to run
56% Republicans say no
65% of Independents say no

She also has a 26% favorable rating

But yeah she would win in a landslide. LMAO


None of that means anything. The bluest of blue states just elected a nude male Republican model to take the seat that Teddy Kennedy sat in for the last 45 years.

The fact that you can't see the forest through the trees isn't suprising to me. It's very hard to see clearly when you're looking through two black eyes.

I'm no Sarah Palin fan. But I believe Obama is that lame a duck right now. She'd beat him. It scares the piss out of me, except the fact that Barack seems so out of his depth himself - following up a complete clown.

KCWolfman
01-20-2010, 02:51 AM
Sure it would be just like the response from the Republicans would be you are not protecting us and are going to get us killed if you cut that defense program that cost $500 gazillion dollars that isn't being used.

I mean seriously Obama wants to close Gitmo and move it the States and people act like the end of the world is coming and terrorists are going to start attacking us because Gitmo is closed.

Had nothing to do with terrorists attacking us locally. They could do so if the prisoners were in Cuba or Des Moines. It had to do with the placement locations suggested (not a single site for the liberals crying for the change). SFO would be an ideal location, yet neither the POTUS nor Pelosi offered such an idea. But more importantly it had to deal with treating prisoners of war like American citizens who were going 20 mph over the speed limit with Constitutional rights. It is a slap in the face to every citizen who had a family member die on 9/11.

Your belief is exactly what is wrong with the liberals leading this nation at this time - you are all out of touch with reality and have imposed your own belief structure on us for so long you honestly believe you know what we are thinking and what is best for us without even asking anymore. Thus the uprising in the most liberal of states against factions such as your own. This is truly a liberating day.

The Mad Crapper
01-20-2010, 09:57 AM
Ironically enough one of the main reasons why I voted for Obama was because I wanted new blood and a fresh face and maybe some fresh ideas.

How'd that work out?

ROFL

jettio
01-20-2010, 12:15 PM
Ha Ha ....... Others are still blaming Bush.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_massachusetts_senate


In epic upset, GOP's Brown wins Mass. Senate race
AP

BOSTON In an epic upset in liberal Massachusetts, Republican Scott Brown rode a wave of voter anger to win the U.S. Senate seat held by the late Edward M. Kennedy for nearly half a century, leaving President Barack Obama's health care overhaul in doubt and marring the end of his first year in office.

Addressing an exuberant victory celebration Tuesday night, Brown declared he was "ready to go to Washington without delay" as the crowd chanted, "Seat him now." Democrats indicated they would, deflating a budding controversy over whether they would try to block Brown long enough to complete congressional passage of the health care plan he has promised to oppose.

"The people of Massachusetts have spoken. We welcome Scott Brown to the Senate and will move to seat him as soon as the proper paperwork has been received," said Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin said he would notify the Senate on Wednesday that Brown had been elected.

The loss by the once-favored Democrat Martha Coakley in the Democratic stronghold was a stunning embarrassment for the White House after Obama rushed to Boston on Sunday to try to save the foundering candidate. Her defeat on Tuesday signaled big political problems for the president's party this fall when House, Senate and gubernatorial candidates are on the ballot nationwide.

Brown's victory was the third major loss for Democrats in statewide elections since Obama became president. Republicans won governors' seats in Virginia and New Jersey in November.

"I have no interest in sugarcoating what happened in Massachusetts," said Sen. Robert Menendez, the head of the Senate Democrats' campaign committee. "There is a lot of anxiety in the country right now. Americans are understandably impatient."

Brown will become the 41st Republican in the 100-member Senate, which could allow the GOP to block the president's health care legislation. Democrats needed Coakley to win for a 60th vote to thwart Republican filibusters. The trouble may go deeper: Democratic lawmakers could read the results as a vote against Obama's broader agenda, weakening their support for the president. And the results could scare some Democrats from seeking office this fall.

The Republican will finish Kennedy's unexpired term, facing re-election in 2012.

Brown led by 52 per cent to 47 percent with all but 3 percent of precincts counted. Turnout was exceptional for a special election in January, with light snow reported in parts of the state. More voters showed up at the polls Tuesday than in any non-presidential general election in Massachusetts since 1990.

One day shy of the first anniversary of Obama's swearing-in, the election played out amid a backdrop of animosity and resentment from voters over persistently high unemployment, Wall Street bailouts, exploding federal budget deficits and partisan wrangling over health care.

"I voted for Obama because I wanted change. ... I thought he'd bring it to us, but I just don't like the direction that he's heading," said John Triolo, 38, a registered independent who voted in Fitchburg.

He said his frustrations, including what he considered the too-quick pace of health care legislation, led him to vote for Brown.

For weeks considered a long shot, Brown seized on voter discontent to overtake Coakley in the campaign's final stretch. His candidacy energized Republicans, including backers of the "tea party" protest movement, while attracting disappointed Democrats and independents uneasy with where they felt the nation was heading.

A cornerstone of Brown's campaign was his promise to vote against the health care plan.

Though the president wasn't on the ballot, he was on many voters' minds.

Coakley called Brown conceding the race, and Obama talked to both Brown and Coakley, congratulating them on the race.

The Democrat said the president told her: "We can't win them all."

Brown will be the first Republican senator from Massachusetts in 30 years.

Even before the first results were announced, administration officials were privately accusing Coakley of a poorly run campaign and playing down the notion that Obama or a toxic political landscape had much to do with the outcome.

Coakley's supporters, in turn, blamed that very environment, saying her lead dropped significantly after the Senate passed health care reform shortly before Christmas and after the Christmas Day attempted airliner bombing that Obama himself said showed a failure of his administration.

Days before the polls closed, Democrats were fingerpointing and laying blame.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, head of the House Democrats' campaign effort, said Coakley's loss won't deter his colleagues from continuing to blame the previous administration.

"President George W. Bush and House Republicans drove our economy into a ditch and tried to run away from the accident," he said. "President Obama and congressional Democrats have been focused repairing the damage to our economy."

At Boston's Park Plaza Hotel, giddy Republicans cheered, chanted "USA" and waved the "tea party" version of the American flag.

Even before Brown won, the grass-roots network fueled by antiestablishment frustrations, sought credit for the victory, much like the liberal MoveOn.org did in the 2006 midterm elections when Democrats rose to power.

GOP chairman Michael Steele said Brown's "message of lower taxes, smaller government and fiscal responsibility clearly resonated with independent-minded voters in Massachusetts who were looking for a solution to decades of failed Democrat leadership."

Wall Street watched the election closely. The Dow Jones industrial average rose 116 points, and analysts attributed the increase to hopes the election would make it harder for Obama to make his changes to health care. That eased investor concerns that profits at companies such as insurers and drug makers would suffer.

Across Massachusetts, voters who had been bombarded with phone calls and dizzied with nonstop campaign commercials for Coakley and Brown gave a fitting turnout despite intermittent snow and rain statewide.

Galvin, who discounted sporadic reports of voter irregularities throughout the day, predicted turnout ranging from 1.6 million to 2.2 million, 40 percent to 55 percent of registered voters. The Dec. 8 primary had a scant turnout of about 20 percent.

Voters considered national issues including health care and the federal budget deficits.

Fears about spending drove Karla Bunch, 49, to vote for Brown. "It's time for the country, for the taxpayers, to take back their money," she said. And Elizabeth Reddin, 65, voted for Brown because she said she was turned off by the Democrat's negative advertisements, saying: "The Coakley stuff was disgusting."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Still drinking the Kool Aid, Dems can't take any of the blame !

Zach should pay attention to this one!

That is kind of interesting that Wall Street apparently thinks that the health care reform bill would reduce insurance company and drug company profits, everybody around here was saying that it is a handout to the insurance companies.

I am kind of with the conventional wisdom that it would be a better idea politically to let this health care reform bill die, but if Obama and the democrats really believes that it improves the status quo, it would be pretty courageous to pass it and see if it does improve the status quo or not.

Giving up out of fear of future elections seems like a safe and wise choice, but when it really comes down to it, the GOP has an extended track record of being much more full of sh*t, and are they really going to be able to sell themselves as any kind of alternative.

Again, it is kind of interesting that this article says that Wall Street's response to the apparent end of this health care reform bill is for stock prices to go up for insurance and drug companies.

Cannibal
01-20-2010, 01:39 PM
TJ predictions always come true...

1. Priest lost his burst
2. Plummer is better than Trent Green
3. Denver midget RB = Barry Sanders
4. Shanahan will never be fired
5. Ron Paul will be POTUS

Ouch. ROFL