Evan Bayh Out!

hey buger boy he isn't a paulin, he actually finishes what he starts you fucking idiot
Seriously potter, ya' need to lay off the :booze: lil'man!

Your boy is watching his party implode all around him. But then, that's what happens when one claims the "worst president in US history" title in record time!
 
Bayh has said he loves being a chief executive, loves serving the people of Indiana, but does not love congress; and that there's a better way to serve. I think he is getting out so as not be stained by Obama and the very likely upcoming loss of his seat to Dan Coats. This will allow him to run for president without a loss, and as a new and a principled man. I've sent him lots of letters (the real thing, not emails) since the Ds took congress, especially since January 09, and I think he's received a lot just like mine, telling him he can't win re-election by going along with the current leadership. I'm sorry that there couldn't have been a Coats/Bayh contest. Coats held the seat before Bayh, and it was theorized at the time that he didn't stand for reelection because he believed he couldn’t beat Bayh back in 1998. If Coats could've beaten Bayh in 10, I had hopes for him against Obama in 2012.

Bayh did become more of a supporter for small business, turning around a pro-small business rating from 80% against to 80% pro during his tenure.

( not that it matters; Bayh has a really beautiful wife)

I too think his goal is a run for the presidency, and retiring will allow him plenty of time to gather the behind-the-scene forces necessary to begin a campaign. But I don't think going against Obama is the reason. I've said before (started a whole thread about it) that I think it's more than a possibility that Obama won't run for a second term. He has made subtle references to that several times, the last time being during his recent interview with Diane Sawyer. Obama may want to go out the way LBJ did. There are a similar set of circumstances, to be sure.

HUH? Would that be Vietnam? War on Poverty? Other than a few leftwing and right wing nutters Obama isn't catching any flack for Iraq or Afghanistan. Indeed, he is trying to claim credit for the Iraq success. It appears the surge in Afghanistan may well be successful, if it is not he'll get credit for trying.

Now if it's reckless spending that is similar, you've got a point. Was that your point? :eek:

I don't consider trying to spend money on domestic priorities that had been dropped into a shithole for a decade as "reckless" for one thing. It's what he campaigned on and why he was elected. Unfortunately, by the end of his campaign, the entire economy came crashing down, so he had to try to balance it all out. As for the two wars, I can almost guarantee that if we aren't out of there by 2011, that problem will just add to his woes.
 
Not if the tea party and GOP have anything to do with it. :lol:
Keep dreaming, ain't gonna happen, Harry Reid is toast, you're mistaking what a handful of people are doing for something that is going to be supported by any significant portion of those of us that have been involved with Nevadan Tea Parties for a long time, trust me job#1 is to get rid of Harry Reid, it'll be either Lowden or Tarkanian in that seat in 2011.
 
In the past two years, Mr. Bayh has been focused on budget and fiscal issues and frustrated some of his colleagues by balking at the Democratic budget proposals. According to analysis by The Times of Mr. Bayh’s voting history, he has voted with a majority of the Democratic caucus roughly 71 percent of the time during the 111th Congress — the lowest percentage of his career. (He has also been the Senate Democrat least likely to vote with the party this Congress.

Bayh Decides Against Re-election Bid - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com

sounds to me like he's tired of fighting with the members of his party who are determined to finish the job of spending us into oblivion that began under bush.

it's almost like he WANTS a republican in his seat, given the timing of his announcement and the disadvantaged position it puts any potential democratic candidate in for fundraising and name recognition.

interesting
 
Your boy is watching his party implode all around him. But then, that's what happens when one claims the "worst president in US history" title in record time!
I love this Wicked Jester
hey libs the truth HURTS don't IT!!!!
 
Another one bites the dust!!!!!! hopefully MANY MORE!!!!! Can't wait for 2012 election Bloodbath!!!!
 
careful what you wish for kee kee, you and your ilk might actually have to learn a new word other than "NO"
 
I too think his goal is a run for the presidency, and retiring will allow him plenty of time to gather the behind-the-scene forces necessary to begin a campaign. But I don't think going against Obama is the reason. I've said before (started a whole thread about it) that I think it's more than a possibility that Obama won't run for a second term. He has made subtle references to that several times, the last time being during his recent interview with Diane Sawyer. Obama may want to go out the way LBJ did. There are a similar set of circumstances, to be sure.

HUH? Would that be Vietnam? War on Poverty? Other than a few leftwing and right wing nutters Obama isn't catching any flack for Iraq or Afghanistan. Indeed, he is trying to claim credit for the Iraq success. It appears the surge in Afghanistan may well be successful, if it is not he'll get credit for trying.

Now if it's reckless spending that is similar, you've got a point. Was that your point? :eek:

I don't consider trying to spend money on domestic priorities that had been dropped into a shithole for a decade as "reckless" for one thing. It's what he campaigned on and why he was elected. Unfortunately, by the end of his campaign, the entire economy came crashing down, so he had to try to balance it all out. As for the two wars, I can almost guarantee that if we aren't out of there by 2011, that problem will just add to his woes.

What balance? He tried to ram it through without any bi-partisanship, forcing the Blue Dogs to go along with an agenda that was political suicide. After Scott win, he tried to appear to hit 'balance' with Congress and opposition party, the public didn't buy it, neither did those right of Obama in his own party. Now he's going for executive fiat, we'll see how the funding on that works out. :doubt:

It's not that he hasn't been warned:

Commentary Blog Archive Barack Millstone Obama

Barack Millstone Obama
PETER WEHNER - 02.15.2010 - 2:40 PM
The news that Democratic Senator Evan Bayh is retiring is another stunning blow for a Democratic party that is already reeling. This development — because of who Bayh is (perceived as a moderate/centrist); because of the state he represents (a traditionally Red one but won by Barack Obama in 2008); and because of his political situation (it was assumed he was in a comfortable position to win re-election) — will have significant ramifications. It will accelerate almost every bad trend for Democrats (more retirements, fewer entries into national races, more intra-party acrimony, and more panic)...

Rep. Marion Berry, yet another retiring Democrat, gave an interview to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette a few weeks ago in which he recounted meetings with White House officials, reminiscent of some during the Clinton years, where he and others urged them not to force Blue Dogs “off into that swamp” of supporting bills that would be unpopular with voters back home. “I’ve been doing that with this White House, and they just don’t seem to give it any credibility at all,” Berry said. “They just kept telling us how good it was going to be. The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’ We’re going to see how much difference that makes now.”

We shall indeed. The big difference between now and 1994 is that Democrats have Obama instead of Clinton as the head of their party. And that may turn out to be very bad news for Democrats. The Democratic party is in worse shape now than it was at a comparable period then. The mistrust of government runs deeper. The anti-incumbent tide is stronger. And the public uprising is greater...
 
Last edited:
How could a Super Majority = Monumental Failure? Only a Democrat could pull that one off. Worst U.S. Congress in history? You bet.
I think we have the power of the People to thank for that. The Tea Party movement is more powerful than what its critics want to admit.

The Democrats are discovering that going along with Obama's hope and change agenda means they are going to be voted out of office. They are too proud to allow themselves to be defeated, so many of them are "retiring" from public life to spend more time with their families.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top