Jump to content

Brown def Coakley in Mass


KipWellsFan

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 01:46 PM)
This doesn't sound like fear at all....

 

In Scott Brown we have an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, teabagging supporter of violence against woman and against politicians with whom he disagrees," MSNBC host Keith Olbermann said

 

I'm bitter about this special election and am left wondering if a left of center President can get much of anything accomplished in the current environment, but these comments by Olbermann are complete nonsense. I haven't paid close attention to Scott Brown but upon glancing over his wikipedia page, the only one of those comments that seem true is the "ex-nude model." Olbermann is just angry and bitter and in this instance the argument that MSNBC is just as bad as Fox News is correct.

 

If Brown is elected, hopefully he will turn out to be an independent and moderate conservative. Not sure he could last if he became a predictable and reliable conservative vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Jon Stewart on the race:

"If this lady loses, the health care reform bill that the beloved late senator considered his legacy, will die. And the reason it will die... is because if Coakley loses, Democrats will only have an 18 vote majority in the Senate, which is more than George W. Bush ever had in the Senate when did whatever the f*** he wanted to."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supposedly, Coakley just conceded.

 

I gots one thing to say.

 

HELL YES.

 

Go die in a fire, health care bill.

 

BUT... if that's the way it goes, LEAD on this, and get something done instead of nothing. "Nothing" is not an option anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure, also, as Rex was alluding to, this wasn't about Obama and his policies, this was simply about a dumb woman who couldn't run her campaign, right? Wrong. Even in Massachusetts, this was about Obama.

 

That's all I'm going to say on this whole thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 09:30 PM)
I'm sure, also, as Rex was alluding to, this wasn't about Obama and his policies, this was simply about a dumb woman who couldn't run her campaign, right? Wrong. Even in Massachusetts, this was about Obama.

 

That's all I'm going to say on this whole thing.

I'll agree on that. Between getting every Dem disappointed in the Health Care bill by not really fighting for a good bill, pissing off every Republican by attempting to do anything at all, and 10% unemployment, yeah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 09:27 PM)
I'll agree on that. Between getting every Dem disappointed in the Health Care bill by not really fighting for a good bill, pissing off every Republican by attempting to do anything at all, and 10% unemployment, yeah.

 

They shot themselves in the foot by letting a few people hold health care hostage for too long in their own party. I really wonder if the window might be gone now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 10:32 PM)
They shot themselves in the foot by letting a few people hold health care hostage for too long in their own party. I really wonder if the window might be gone now.

There's 2 possibilities. They could easily double down and actually decide to create a better bill, after realizing that it's their own people who are turned off completely right now. Or this could just as easily kill the President's agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 09:36 PM)
There's 2 possibilities. They could easily double down and actually decide to create a better bill, after realizing that it's their own people who are turned off completely right now. Or this could just as easily kill the President's agenda.

 

Which is amazing. They own the white house and the Congress, and they are afraid to use it to do anything they want. They seem to be perfectly content to just sit back and blame republicans instead of actually using their position of power to actually do anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 10:38 PM)
Which is amazing. They own the white house and the Congress, and they are afraid to use it to do anything they want. They seem to be perfectly content to just sit back and blame republicans instead of actually using their position of power to actually do anything.

Yup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know this is the Republican thread so I have to accept that the media is a bunch of crazy liberals, but it really says something about either the people running the party or the people running the media, or both, that GWB gets a 51-50 minority in the Senate in 2000 and is able to ram through NCLB, 3 batches of tax cuts, the Medicare insurance company bailout bill, the Iraq war, and so on, and is able to every time peel away significant numbers of Dems, and the Dems 6 years later have a much, much stronger majority and are totally unable to do anything, and the moment anyone says anything mean to them they run away screaming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 09:53 PM)
I know this is the Republican thread so I have to accept that the media is a bunch of crazy liberals, but it really says something about either the people running the party or the people running the media, or both, that GWB gets a 51-50 minority in the Senate in 2000 and is able to ram through NCLB, 3 batches of tax cuts, the Medicare insurance company bailout bill, the Iraq war, and so on, and is able to every time peel away significant numbers of Dems, and the Dems 6 years later have a much, much stronger majority and are totally unable to do anything, and the moment anyone says anything mean to them they run away screaming.

 

 

In my opinion (of course) it's because the Democrats don't really stand for anything.

 

Welcome to the dark side... :D

 

Seriously, though, it does say that the country is more conservative then you would like to admit - again, that's my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 10:59 PM)
Seriously, though, it does say that the country is more conservative then you would like to admit - again, that's my opinion.

Replace the word "Country" with the word "Media" and I'd be happy to agree, but as I said, wrong thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 09:59 PM)
In my opinion (of course) it's because the Democrats don't really stand for anything.

 

Welcome to the dark side... :D

 

Seriously, though, it does say that the country is more conservative then you would like to admit - again, that's my opinion.

 

Which the Dems know, and it is why they aren't pushing their agenda harder to risk the inevitable backlash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 19, 2010 -> 10:01 PM)
Replace the word "Country" with the word "Media" and I'd be happy to agree, but as I said, wrong thread.

 

 

LMAO. Yea. The MSM is sooooooooooooooooooooo conservative. They are going to be pissing all over themselves tomorrow morning.

 

No, sir, the COUNTRY is more conservative then you want to admit. We don't want to become western Europe-like.

 

I get your point, but you're wrong.

 

 

::::::

 

 

By the way, seriously (again) please don't miss my question in the other thread about the 1 senator holding up things and how that works, because I didn't think that could happen. I'd like to know more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope that massachussetts realizes that from now on 1/2 half of it's votes will be what the f*** ups of oklahoma find prudent, and not what they have shown to care about. But it's okay, i'm sure he's a real nice guy that's just like you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...