BF2S Forums Change we can finally believe in!!

lowing wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/19/massachusetts.senate/index.html?hpt=T1

I don't hold Brown to be a true conservative, but shit -least he can block this health care debacle and make the d's show their true colors as to their respect for the legislative process (I mean lack thereof).  I think health care will ultimately pass.  At least amnesty and capn'trade can be bustered'.  I can't recall a more destructive year to the state since this last ass got elected.  Wait, Lincoln had a civil war on his watch... .  Didn't he compare himself to Lincoln?

lowing wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

lowing wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/19/massachusetts.senate/index.html?hpt=T1

Aren't you going to even wait to see what he does in office?

Yeah just as long as everyone waited to see what Obama was going to do in office.

A democrat strong hold like Massachusetts going Republican is a good sign of what is awaiting the socialist, welfare state, entitlement movement this year as well as 2012. A brick wall.

you were already lambasting him before he even took office! pot and kettle...

So, if anyone tells you that Massachusetts is a bastion of liberalism, you now know that they're full of shit.

Boston is pretty liberal, but even Massachusetts has a significant amount of conservatives or right-leaning people.

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Aren't you going to even wait to see what he does in office?

Yeah just as long as everyone waited to see what Obama was going to do in office.

A democrat strong hold like Massachusetts going Republican is a good sign of what is awaiting the socialist, welfare state, entitlement movement this year as well as 2012. A brick wall.

you were already lambasting him before he even took office! pot and kettle...

that would be a fair point except this dude hasnt been raised to god status as far as i can tell.

FEOS wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

So, if anyone tells you that Massachusetts is a bastion of liberalism, you now know that they're full of shit.

Boston is pretty liberal, but even Massachusetts has a significant amount of conservatives or right-leaning people.

First Republican elected to the Senate from Mass since 1974. That's not insignificant.

It was the independent voters that put him over the top, according to what I've read...many of whom voted for Obama, Kerry, and Kennedy in the past. That's not insignificant, either.

Is what I've read correct and Massachusetts has a very, very large independent contingent?

Harmor wrote:

Aren't we celebrating too early?  I mean aren't the Democrats going to contest the Brown's 100,000 vote lead?  I mean the did hire the attorney that got Franken elected.

the bitch conceded already

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

you were already lambasting him before he even took office! pot and kettle...

He already laid out his plan during his campaign, why not? I don't want his welfare state.

well then don't complain when people "don't wait to see what he was going to do in office", seeing as you didn't.

Ya lost me Spark, where have I complained about people not waitng to see ehat he is going to do in office?

by the way, as it is a only a year into Obamamnaia and the Democrats just lost a 33 year old seat in the senate becasue of him, I think my bitching about Obama has substance.

Last edited by lowing (2010-01-20 03:39:33)

Dilbert_X wrote:

Swing politics and a lame duck administration hamstrung by party dogma.
What a system.

(Can a duck be hamstrung?)

lame duck? the democrats still have a 59-41 seat majority! in a simpler world, they would be able to get legislation passed without moving a finger.

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

He already laid out his plan during his campaign, why not? I don't want his welfare state.

well then don't complain when people "don't wait to see what he was going to do in office", seeing as you didn't.

Ya lost me Spark, where have I complained about people not waitng to see ehat he is going to do in office?

by the way, as it is a only a year into Obamamnaia and the Democrats just lost a 33 year old seat in the senate becasue of him, I think my bitching about Obama has substance.

hm, i construed your post as being having a little hint of bitter irony. turns out i was wrong... even after four years it's still difficult to make out subtle emotional conveyances over the interwebz

my mistake.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/20/ … tml?hpt=T1

This was also well predicted. The democrats blame Martha Coakley and  her lackluster campaign for losing the seat in the senate. Of course losing this seat has nothing to do with Obama, his agenda OR Obamacare. It is because Martha Coakley blew it.


On the flip side, IF she had won, it would have been becasue the people have spoken and they want and approve of Obamas direction for the country and his healthcare plan,

Politics is a dirty world. if you fail, then it doesn't matter who was on your side once, everyone'll beat you down.

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

well then don't complain when people "don't wait to see what he was going to do in office", seeing as you didn't.

Ya lost me Spark, where have I complained about people not waitng to see ehat he is going to do in office?

by the way, as it is a only a year into Obamamnaia and the Democrats just lost a 33 year old seat in the senate becasue of him, I think my bitching about Obama has substance.

hm, i construed your post as being having a little hint of bitter irony. turns out i was wrong... even after four years it's still difficult to make out subtle emotional conveyances over the interwebz

my mistake.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/20/ … tml?hpt=T1

This was also well predicted. The democrats blame Martha Coakley and  her lackluster campaign for losing the seat in the senate. Of course losing this seat has nothing to do with Obama, his agenda OR Obamacare. It is because Martha Coakley blew it.


On the flip side, IF she had won, it would have been becasue the people have spoken and they want and approve of Obamas direction for the country and his healthcare plan,

Politics is a dirty world. if you fail, then it doesn't matter who was on your side once, everyone'll beat you down.

agreed, I do enjoy watching democrats eating their own young as they collapse and lose their stranglehold in less than a year. They could only hide behind lies and cover up their actual socialist welfare state agenda for so long. They had to bare their ass to impliment their plans, they did, and now they are being run out on a rail.

Spark wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Swing politics and a lame duck administration hamstrung by party dogma.
What a system.

(Can a duck be hamstrung?)

lame duck? the democrats still have a 59-41 seat majority! in a simpler world, they would be able to get legislation passed without moving a finger.

I thought they needed >60% for some reason.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Spark wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Swing politics and a lame duck administration hamstrung by party dogma.
What a system.

(Can a duck be hamstrung?)

lame duck? the democrats still have a 59-41 seat majority! in a simpler world, they would be able to get legislation passed without moving a finger.

I thought they needed >60% for some reason.

60-40 gives a filibuster-proof majority. Which is irrelevant for the health-care bill, since it has already passed the House and Senate. Unless the Senate still has to vote on the conference bill...