59 replies to this topic

[DoctorShumway]

Sorry guys, I tried! Honestly, she is a shitty choice and the only reason I voted for her was to get this shit passed.

[The Real Jeffrey Lebowski]

[chalupacabra]

You know, after the last 8 years I thought people had maybe wised up a little. Yesterday showed that maybe things truly need to get so unbearably shitty, 30's style depression + Sarah Palin as president and Pat Robertson as some newly created Minister of Faith cabinet position before we can actually see any kind of substantive changes.

[Rial]

As god tries to pound the overwhelmingly predominate black island of Haiti into the ground, dick faces like Palin become potential world leaders, MASS. shits on Ted Kennedys "legacy", I am beginning to think i am on the wrong side, the signs are all around, I need to run out and buy a bible, vote for white old dudes that aren't Ralph Nader and move to Fountain Hills or some other "the only non whites are day laborers" kinda place...maybe idaho.

[DoctorShumway]

You know, after the last 8 years I thought people had maybe wised up a little. Yesterday showed that maybe things truly need to get so unbearably shitty, 30's style depression + Sarah Palin as president and Pat Robertson as some newly created Minister of Faith cabinet position before we can actually see any kind of substantive changes.

I don't understand it at all. Everyone around here was like "FINALLY! CHANGE IS HERE! DUDE'S GOING TO HOLD WASHINGTON ACCOUNTABLE!" What the fuck are you talking about? 8 years of leadership got us to where we were a year ago. There's been ONE YEAR of something different and all of a sudden we have to go back to the way things were? It's completely ridiculous.

Edit: This misguided attitude is why he got elected: “We have to protect the United States of America,’’ Sinclair shouted as car horns beeped approval and a frigid rain fell. She explained that she was offended by Martha Coakley’s support for civilian trials for terrorism suspects and disenchanted by her support of health care reform. “Scott Brown would rather support the military than pay for all the lawyers of the Taliban,’’ she said.

One more thing: the worst part of this election is that all the Democratic senators are going to be total pussies so they can get re-elected. On a grander scale, Brown winning does negatively effect the Democratic majority.

[chalupacabra]

I know. Democrats are going to take the wrong lesson from this, again, and try to move to the right. People stayed home because she was a shitty candidate who ran an arrogant, entitled campaign who didn't inspire anyone to vote "for" her instead of "against" Brown.

I thought 2008 was the death blow to the DLC types. Instead we get Rahm in the White House, Dean replaced with a useless Kaine at the DNC, people like Lieberman and Nelson holding way to much power in a super majority. Its all pretty awful

[raubhimself]

This Mass. election is pretty much representative of why I couldn't care less about politics sometimes. Either option was bad, no matter who wins there will be a lot of bitching, and in the end neither option is good for the people.

The only reason the Democratic choice was good is because it helped push Democrat agenda. Not really a good reason to vote IMO. I wouldn't want a party-line Republican voted in so why would that be acceptable for a Democrat? But if she had won, is that really good in the long run? We might have gotten a guarantee on the health care bill but it just, once again, says "Yes, you can be shitty and we will vote for you because we vaguely agree with the things you say."

Fuck it, there was no winning situation. These people don't give a shit about me or you, so why get so worked up about them getting a new job or keeping their old one?

[The Real Jeffrey Lebowski]

I wouldn't want a party-line Republican voted in

I hate to disappoint you, but...

I will gladly eat my words if I'm proven wrong.

[raubhimself]

I'm not saying he's not party-line. I'm just saying it's hypocritical to be angry when a party-line Republican is voted in but be upset when a party-line Democrat ISN'T voted in. That shit's bad regardless of what party it is and at the end of the day it's not good to get super worked up about it.

[chalupacabra]

I'm not saying he's not party-line. I'm just saying it's hypocritical to be angry when a party-line Republican is voted in but be upset when a party-line Democrat ISN'T voted in. That shit's bad regardless of what party it is and at the end of the day it's not good to get super worked up about it.

The thing is, and I've said this before, Republicans are wrong about EVERYTHING. They have no actually redeeming value whatsoever. There are plenty of shitty Democrats but I'd take a party line Dem any day of the week.

[Jacki O.]

I'm not saying he's not party-line. I'm just saying it's hypocritical to be angry when a party-line Republican is voted in but be upset when a party-line Democrat ISN'T voted in. That shit's bad regardless of what party it is and at the end of the day it's not good to get super worked up about it.

The thing is, and I've said this before, Republicans are wrong about EVERYTHING. They have no actually redeeming value whatsoever. There are plenty of shitty Democrats but I'd take a party line Dem any day of the week.

word. but i also agree with Raub. Neither party gives a shit about the public until it's election time. Then when they lose they cry about how the other dude who got elected is totally going to fuck us over.

we're already fucked over. We've been fucked over since the 20s.

fuck it. let the health care bill die. it's got so many fucked up amendments in it anyways, it's not really a reform bill anymore.

im in a defeatist mood today

[The Real Jeffrey Lebowski]

I'm not saying he's not party-line. I'm just saying it's hypocritical to be angry when a party-line Republican is voted in but be upset when a party-line Democrat ISN'T voted in.

Gotcha.

I understand the objection towards party-line voting in theory, but today's political reality kind of dictates that's what democrats need now (well, before yesterday) - party discipline (if you want to get anything done).

Lord knows the democrats wasted months trying to work through securing HCR with bipartisan support, but the republicans (generally) are united in their own selfish interest of making this "Obama's Waterloo" instead of actually helping (although, at least they're holding true to their belief that government shouldn't do anything except bomb brown people and tell women what they can or can't do with their bodies. Oh, and protect marriage from the gays - all generally speaking).

The Senate is completely fucked as a governing institution. Diminish the filibuster...Until that happens, nothing of any value will get done and we can look forward to these cycles of decades of suck followed by decades of suck (but less so!).

[raubhimself]

I'm not saying he's not party-line. I'm just saying it's hypocritical to be angry when a party-line Republican is voted in but be upset when a party-line Democrat ISN'T voted in. That shit's bad regardless of what party it is and at the end of the day it's not good to get super worked up about it.

The thing is, and I've said this before, Republicans are wrong about EVERYTHING. They have no actually redeeming value whatsoever. There are plenty of shitty Democrats but I'd take a party line Dem any day of the week.

Well gee that doesn't at all sound like what the right says about the left.

Kind of odd that we accept less from Democrats than we do Republicans.

[chalupacabra]

Well gee that doesn't at all sound like what the right says about the left

Thats totally a fair point but the facts are what they are. Democrats are on the right side of history. Republicans are on the wrong side. Why do you think they still try to claim Lincoln? That was the last time a Republican changed history in any kind of positive way and everyone knows the parties essentially traded rolls since then.

[The Real Jeffrey Lebowski]

Oh! It was a miracle! Thanks again, God!

From TPM (http://tpmdc.talking...deo.php?ref=fpb):

Rep. Steve King (R-IA), one of the most outspoken conservatives in Congress, took to the House floor last night to celebrate the victory of Sen.-elect Scott Brown (R-MA) as a populist uprising against what he called the Democrats' socialist agenda.

"How could you possibly take away, spend enough money, and take away enough liberty, that the three-and-a-half to one Democrats to Republicans in Massachusetts would elect the Republican to come down to the United States Senate and vote against cloture, so that the Harry Reid bill could be killed in the Senate?" King asked rhetorically. "How could you ever spend that much money? I didn't believe it was possible, Mr. Speaker. But I -- some would say a miracle has taken place tonight, and I wouldn't disagree with that. I believe there has been intervention, and I'm grateful for it."

I say the house should pass the Senate bill for no other reason than to see the Republicans' heads collectively explode.