Forty-One

YES WE CAN!

Sorry if this wasn't that clear, but Republican gets voted as a Massachusetts Senator, taking Ted Kennedy' old seat... great in two ways, one breaks that mystical 60 senator count that allows the Dems to push anything through... second, its the first Repub in Mass in over 30 years (and T. K. had that seat for almost 50 years).

The Dem superiority at the voting booth from last year has crumbled apart already.

Obama will now have to alter his socialist views to something a bit more American.

Now where is that tumbleweed smiley?....

so the aeroplane crashing to the earth is to represent this decline in standards? I see.

I'm glad you explained it Edel, I thought I was the only one that didn't get it!

EdelBrock wrote: Obama will now have to alter his socialist views to something a bit more American.

Socialist?

:\party:

YES WE CAN!

Socialist??

Every democrat president since FDR has been accused of this. Nixon's health plan was more socialistic than this one and we all know he was a flaming liberal.

EdelBrock wrote:

second, its the first Repub in Mass in over 30 years

Thought the place was full of good oirish cafflicks.

Buck Hill wrote: Socialist??

Every democrat president since FDR has been accused of this. Nixon's health plan was more socialistic than this one and we all know he was a flaming liberal.

Quite - my point entirely!

Buck Hill wrote: Socialist??

Every democrat president since FDR has been accused of this. Nixon's health plan was more socialistic than this one and we all know he was a flaming liberal.

Obama isn't a socialist, as much as a media whore. I said "socialistic views" because that's what he uses to get the attention of his party. Does he actually believe in them? I think he only cares what gets and keeps him at the top.

It really amazes me how fast the Dems lost favor. The Repubs really screwed things up with Bush and pushing so many things through Congress... people were quite upset. Amazing the Dems couldn't keep the squabbling behind closed doors and actually settle for a Health Care bill.

No surprise the right thinks we here in Mass all of the sudden find Obama out of favor. This isn't about wanting the country to move back to the right but the fact that Obama hasn't done what he promised including: Guantanamo, still open; Wall Street, unpunished; health care - what exactly are they claiming is reform now with no public option to be seen? Bush wasn't even lawfully elected the first time (nor the second time if you understand what happened in Ohio) and he did whatever the fuck he wanted. Obama is swept in with a huge mandate and all we hear about is everyone falling over themselves to kowtow to Ben Nelson and Olympia Snowe.

My take, here in the state with an actual working health care program.

If that was directed to what I said, then, I never mentioned Obama falling out of favor. He is part of the Dem party, but the Dem Senators and Representatives really stabbed him in the back. This really isn't much a surprise however, since the Dems have always been a fractured party.

They had the overwhelming support of the public a year ago, and they really screwed the pooch. The Dems could have done quite a bit and held onto it for awhile... at least a year ago I was certain it would be years before the Republicans even had a chance in politics again.

Honestly, I hate when one party has all the control, its not good for the US. At least this puts more balance on things .And who knows, maybe they'll be more Republicans and they'll probably play nicer to Obama than his own party does (i.e. the Clinton years).

But its no surprise Obama didn't do what he said he would. He's a media whore, and that's what they do to get attention.

Don't you forget, the Republicans impeached Clinton - that was hardly playing nice, and certainly wasn't in the best interest of the country. Give the Republicans credit too - saying no to everything looks to have been a sound strategy. A shame saying no actually isn't a viable strategy for governing.

Shakin' Baker wrote: Don't you forget, the Republicans impeached Clinton - that was hardly playing nice, and certainly wasn't in the best interest of the country. Give the Republicans credit too - saying no to everything looks to have been a sound strategy. A shame saying no actually isn't a viable strategy for governing.

My reference is that Clinton was able to pass far more policies and bills without a Democratic majority. (mentioning the partisan bickerings really doesn't impress me, it happens on both sides of the fence).

El Jarvo wrote:

Nick King wrote:

EdelBrock wrote: Obama will now have to alter his socialist views to something a bit more American.

Socialist?

He raised the question of a National Health Service, didn't he?

How very un-American.

Next you know, those damned socialists will be pushing for a 40 hour work week, universal education, a safety net for pensioners...

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Now who's got a hangover with the flavor of last night's balls in their mouth?

EdelBrock wrote: Now who's got a hangover with the flavor of last night's balls in their mouth?

And the American Right's identification with and embrace of teabagging imagery continues unabated..

may I say... you've been served

All this hoopla over one seat. It's not like the Dems don't still have a majority in both houses and the white house for 3 more years.

Gotta celebrate your victories when you can, I suppose.

So what has actually changed with the wishy washy Democrats? The horribly oppressed white men have fought back to take their rights and country back from the "racist" coloured guy? White people saved from Communism? yay. 41 is still the second lowest total in over 80 years. 41 > 59 ... Orwell would love that.

Mr disco wrote: All this hoopla over one seat. It's not like the Dems don't still have a majority in both houses and the white house for 3 more years.

Gotta celebrate your victories when you can, I suppose.

Well that might change with the upcoming elections.

41 stops the ability to bulldoze anything through without a proper debate. Honestly I wouldn't want any majority like that, it defeats the process.

0_o wrote: So what has actually changed with the wishy washy Democrats? The horribly oppressed white men have fought back to take their rights and country back from the "racist" coloured guy? White people saved from Communism? yay. 41 is still the second lowest total in over 80 years. 41 > 59 ... Orwell would love that.

Republicans aren't all white

Socialism and Communism are not the same thing

EdelBrock wrote: 41 stops the ability to bulldoze anything through without a proper debate. Honestly I wouldn't want any majority like that, it defeats the process.

You're not really that much a Pollyanna, are you?

Jim DeMint is on record as saying , back in July, before the Senate had even crafted a health care bill, that if they could stop health care reform, it would be Obama's Waterloo.

Given that the Republicans were implacably opposed to health care reform before the legislation was even drafted, what exactly is it that this endless "proper debate" will contribute to "the process"?

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

EdelBrock wrote: 41 stops the ability to bulldoze anything through without a proper debate. Honestly I wouldn't want any majority like that, it defeats the process.

You're not really that much a Pollyanna, are you?

Jim DeMint is on record as saying , back in July, before the Senate had even crafted a health care bill, that if they could stop health care reform, it would be Obama's Waterloo.

Given that the Republicans were implacably opposed to health care reform before the legislation was even drafted, what exactly is it that this endless "proper debate" will contribute to "the process"?

Honestly, either way of governance is crap. Politics has become overwhelmingly partisan than any other time in the past, other than just before the Civil War. I'm not liking it.

Its like asking me which I would prefer, death by flaming oil or one million killer bees... I would say neither sound good. I think, hopefully, that the American people are getting tired of this crap, and the upcoming election will have surprises in store.

But I don't think killing an entire Health Care bill is on the side of the Republicans. A full public service has died, but I wasn't for that anyways. Hopefully there will be real reforms on litigation and health insurance. There are plenty of States to take in example, no need to reinvent the wheel with this thing.

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

EdelBrock wrote: 41 stops the ability to bulldoze anything through without a proper debate. Honestly I wouldn't want any majority like that, it defeats the process.

You're not really that much a Pollyanna, are you?

Jim DeMint is on record as saying , back in July, before the Senate had even crafted a health care bill, that if they could stop health care reform, it would be Obama's Waterloo.

Given that the Republicans were implacably opposed to health care reform before the legislation was even drafted, what exactly is it that this endless "proper debate" will contribute to "the process"?

Let's clarify, shall we? Any "health care reform" that includes a ridiculous public option or does not include any meaningful tort reform will, and sure seems to be, a coming Waterloo for the President.

But, I think what really has turned "the people's" stomach was having to watch damn near 12 months of political sausage making. Everything from Mary Landrieu being paid 300 million dollars for her vote to Nebraska's special exemption.

The President has been cursed with off putting, weak leadership in the House and Senate, Blue Dog Democrats and Chicago knee breakers as his inner circle. If he wants to salvage his presidency, he needs to make some pretty high level personnel changes.