Two Words: Nuclear Option

[LibocalypseNow]

Back to the drawing board with their debacle. Looks like Mr. Brown will have to swoop in and save the Democrats' a*ses on health care. Man,Pelosi & Reid really did f*ck things up.

 

[CMike]

No. Liberman is an independent becuase he lost the democrat primary. He caucases with the democrats.

Everything he does is Republican.

He caucuses with the Democrats so he can spy on them.

The sooner the Democrats come to terms with this and remove him from their caucus, the better off they will be.

He supported Obama's health care takeover.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

No. Liberman is an independent becuase he lost the democrat primary. He caucases with the democrats.

Everything he does is Republican.

He caucuses with the Democrats so he can spy on them.

The sooner the Democrats come to terms with this and remove him from their caucus, the better off they will be.

He supported Obama's health care takeover.

Case closed...Lieberman is a Democrat.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

No. Liberman is an independent becuase he lost the democrat primary. He caucases with the democrats.

Everything he does is Republican.

He caucuses with the Democrats so he can spy on them.

The sooner the Democrats come to terms with this and remove him from their caucus, the better off they will be.

He supported Obama's health care takeover.

Someone from this forum told me Liberman was the Sith Lord

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Everything he does is Republican.

He caucuses with the Democrats so he can spy on them.

The sooner the Democrats come to terms with this and remove him from their caucus, the better off they will be.

He supported Obama's health care takeover.

Case closed...Lieberman is a Democrat.

actually he is a Self-Described Independant Democrat....much like Scott Brown is an independant Repbulican.

I wouldn't expect Brown to fight the dems on every issue and I dont expect him to go along with the republicans on every issue. That is if he behaves in the US senate like he did in our state senate.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

The thing is...Lieberman was thrown out of his party for supporting Republicans on the war issue and supporting McCain.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

The thing is...Lieberman was thrown out of his party for supporting Republicans on the war issue and supporting McCain.

Thats what happens when you go against the progressives in either party, the other progressives turn on you.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Exactly...they are like political cannibals...they eat their own when one steps out of line with the party rhetoric. See how quickly Coakley was thrown under the bus?

 

[saveliberty]

He supported Obama's health care takeover.

Case closed...Lieberman is a Democrat.

actually he is a Self-Described Independant Democrat....much like Scott Brown is an independant Repbulican.

I wouldn't expect Brown to fight the dems on every issue and I dont expect him to go along with the republicans on every issue. That is if he behaves in the US senate like he did in our state senate.

This could prove very important to the country. I suspect he will do exactly as he has in the past.

 

[Nonelitist]

I really hope they do.
The lesson of MA is that the people aren't happy with a power-mad central gov't shoving legislation through despite low popularity. Using the nuclear option would just cement that impression and guarantee every Democrat in Congress up for election will either lose or switch parties.
As for the 25% figure, the Senate is based on state, not population. That was deliberate. So population is irrelevant.

The lesson of MA is that Democrats shouldn't put up shitty candidates and then not give them any support until the last minute.

It has NADA to do with the health care bill.

Massachusetts wouldn't have even been affected by most of the health care bill, as most of their state health care policies go further than it does.

You guys are forgetting about the recent lessons of New Jersey and Virginia (or west viginia.. i forget)

Independents have left the democrats in unbelievable numbers the last few months.

 

[drsmith1072]

Just an angry public that is seeing no transparency, just closed door talks, hoodwinks, lies.

That's funny but the majority of this same "angry public" form the right side of the spectrum didn't seem to care about lack of transparency, closed doors, hoodwinks and lies when W was in charge. In fact there were several on the right defending W claiming he had a right to secrecy. My how the times have changed.

By secrecy the right meant keeping critical intelligence away from Al Qaida terrorists.

We weren't referring to what was in Obama's health care plan and his back room crony deals.

Really?? Then why were republicans defending the bush administration for keeping the info from the behind closed door energy meetings a secret?? Why don't we know what went on in those meetings right now??

Sorry but your spin means NOTHING in the face of the fact that the bush administration and republicans did plenty of things behind closed doors and the right defended it. So it's funny to see all of the righties demanding transparency from obama when they refused to do the same where W was concerned.

 

[Meister]

That's funny but the majority of this same "angry public" form the right side of the spectrum didn't seem to care about lack of transparency, closed doors, hoodwinks and lies when W was in charge. In fact there were several on the right defending W claiming he had a right to secrecy. My how the times have changed.

By secrecy the right meant keeping critical intelligence away from Al Qaida terrorists.

We weren't referring to what was in Obama's health care plan and his back room crony deals.

Really?? Then why were republicans defending the bush administration for keeping the info from the behind closed door energy meetings a secret?? Why don't we know what went on in those meetings right now??

Sorry but your spin means NOTHING in the face of the fact that the bush administration and republicans did plenty of things behind closed doors and the right defended it. So it's funny to see all of the righties demanding transparency from obama when they refused to do the same where W was concerned.

obama shouldn't have campaigned for transparency.
bush never did

 

[drsmith1072]

Joe Lieberman is self-described Independent/Democrat. He caucuses with the Democrats. Super Majority = No Obstruction. Pelosi & Reid f*cked everything up. End of story.

and he voted with republicans and was mccain's best buddy. Face it, he is not a democrat, so the democrats as a party did NOT have sixty votes. Does he have an "I" or a "D" before his name??

But I do agree that they f*cked up because they shouldn't have wasted time and talked about it. They should have just "rammed it down your throat" since that is what they are being accused of despite the FACT that they did not do so.

 

[The Rabbi]

I'm sorry.
"But BOOSSHH" has been declared a non-argument in the court of public opinion.
Further, Bush never pledged to have every gov't meeting open to the public. Obama explicitly promised that negotiations on health care would be in front of CSPAN. There are plenty of things that the gov't needs to do in secret because of security concerns etc. Negotiating 1/6th of our economy isn't one of them though.

 

[Meister]

Joe Lieberman is self-described Independent/Democrat. He caucuses with the Democrats. Super Majority = No Obstruction. Pelosi & Reid f*cked everything up. End of story.

and he voted with republicans and was mccain's best buddy. Face it, he is not a democrat, so the democrats as a party did NOT have sixty votes. Does he have an "I" or a "D" before his name??

But I do agree that they f*cked up because they shouldn't have wasted time and talked about it. They should have just "rammed it down your throat" since that is what they are being accused of despite the FACT that they did not do so.

Your right, they should have just voted on it and rammed it down our throats, but they didn't have the democrat votes to do that.
I always say that politics is a business of first getting reelected, and the democrats listened to their constituants at the townhall meetings. There they saw the writing on the wall.

 

[drsmith1072]

This wasn't about Coakley and her gaffs. This was about one of the bluest states in the union sending a message to DC. You can spin and dance all you want Vast, but Ma. didn't turn republican, they are still one of the bluest states in the union, they just had a message to send. I hope this is simple enough for you to understand.

So you are actually trying to claim that the candidate and her continued screw ups had NOTHING to do with it?? LOL

Furthermore, what was that message?? Were the ones that swung the vote against healthcare because it went too far or were they against the current plan because it didn't go far enough??
Brown only won by 4.8% and a little over 100,000 votes, so what message was sent?

I'm say yeah, the screw ups and gaffs didn't have that big of an influence as you must suspect.
Message was that the majority of Independents, and 22% of democrats really didn't like the back door dealings, healthcare reform and the direction that obama was taking this country.
Brown should have lost by 20% in the state of Ma. That is a huge message being sent from that state. And your take on the victory for Brown is.....?

Please learn to keep up. The quote and question based on that quote referred to have NO AFFECT at all. If you are going to answer "yeah" to a question please try to comprehend what the question is asking so you don't make yourself look completely ridiculous. LOL

LOL that's the message that you take from it?? Got any proof of that or is this your lame attempt to spread the propaganda spewed out by foxnews?? LOL

As for my take, all politics is local. Isn't that what a lot of righties were saying about the election?? I think that was the message and that message is that they didn't like coakley because she seemed "out of touch" as she distanced herself from mere thought of campaigning to the "little people" with her "i am going to win anyway" and "let them eat cake" mentality. IMO they felt that she wouldn't represent them based on her inactions and her attitude where as brown campaigned well and gave them the message that he would. You wish to read into it a bigger message because that suits your partisan needs but I don't see it that way and I am willing to bet that anyone who said anything about how "all politics is local" would tend to agree with me.

 

[drsmith1072]

Vast has really had a meltdown from this election.
By the way, Dr. Lunz was doing the interviews....a middle of the road person.
I just don't want to interrupt your meltdown, I find it very interesting.

Frank luntz is NOT a middle of the road person. He is a righty and has been working for foxnews and republicans for years. They obviously handpicked people to give the opinions that they wanted represented and that was obvious based on how they all seemed to parrot right wing talking points almost word for word.

Funny how you fail to mention the interviews were done on foxnews which basically campaigned for brown. LOL So much for that whole honesty thing.

Obviously he hand picked democrats that voted for obama, and of those he hand picked those that voted for both Coakley, and Brown.....obviously.

So if you disagree that they hand picked them, then in your opinion how else did they pick them?? Do you honestly think that they would allow just anyone into their studios and on the air?? Or do you believe that they would interview them before hand to know who and what they are putting on the air??
I just thought it was interesting that of the ones he asked all gave the same word for word talking points the right was trying to spread.
You may choose to believe everything foxnews plasters on it's screens despite their past dishonesty but I am not that gullible.

Oh and thanks for not even trying to defend your false claim that luntz is a middle of the road person. LOL

 

[Meister]

So you are actually trying to claim that the candidate and her continued screw ups had NOTHING to do with it?? LOL

Furthermore, what was that message?? Were the ones that swung the vote against healthcare because it went too far or were they against the current plan because it didn't go far enough??
Brown only won by 4.8% and a little over 100,000 votes, so what message was sent?

I'm say yeah, the screw ups and gaffs didn't have that big of an influence as you must suspect.
Message was that the majority of Independents, and 22% of democrats really didn't like the back door dealings, healthcare reform and the direction that obama was taking this country.
Brown should have lost by 20% in the state of Ma. That is a huge message being sent from that state. And your take on the victory for Brown is.....?

Please learn to keep up. The quote and question based on that quote referred to have NO AFFECT at all. If you are going to answer "yeah" to a question please try to comprehend what the question is asking so you don't make yourself look completely ridiculous. LOL

LOL that's the message that you take from it?? Got any proof of that or is this your lame attempt to spread the propaganda spewed out by foxnews?? LOL

As for my take, all politics is local. Isn't that what a lot of righties were saying about the election?? I think that was the message and that message is that they didn't like coakley because she seemed "out of touch" as she distanced herself from mere thought of campaigning to the "little people" with her "i am going to win anyway" and "let them eat cake" mentality. IMO they felt that she wouldn't represent them based on her inactions and her attitude where as brown campaigned well and gave them the message that he would. You wish to read into it a bigger message because that suits your partisan needs but I don't see it that way and I am willing to bet that anyone who said anything about how "all politics is local" would tend to agree with me.

You do have a right to your own opinion, smitty. But with the interviews of the democrats state a different one than your own. It was bigger than just a local election, you really do need to get up to speed, hell this is old news. lol

 

[Meister]

Frank luntz is NOT a middle of the road person. He is a righty and has been working for foxnews and republicans for years. They obviously handpicked people to give the opinions that they wanted represented and that was obvious based on how they all seemed to parrot right wing talking points almost word for word.

Funny how you fail to mention the interviews were done on foxnews which basically campaigned for brown. LOL So much for that whole honesty thing.

Obviously he hand picked democrats that voted for obama, and of those he hand picked those that voted for both Coakley, and Brown.....obviously.

So if you disagree that they hand picked them, then in your opinion how else did they pick them?? Do you honestly think that they would allow just anyone into their studios and on the air?? Or do you believe that they would interview them before hand to know who and what they are putting on the air??
I just thought it was interesting that of the ones he asked all gave the same word for word talking points the right was trying to spread.
You may choose to believe everything foxnews plasters on it's screens despite their past dishonesty but I am not that gullible.

Oh and thanks for not even trying to defend your false claim that luntz is a middle of the road person. LOL

McCain would not have liked the Luntz polls during the campaigning, and obama would have liked them. I don't know where your going but, feel free to stroke your ego as much as you like.
Don't let the actual facts get in the way of YOUR opinion. Why not try to give all of us a link to support your opinion? Hmmmm?

 

[drsmith1072]

It would be much more environmentally responsible to nuke the heavily democratic population centers .

WOW, so no one on the right is willing to condemn this poster for wishing death upon fellow Americans. How sad is that? Oh, well it's just more of the "end justifies the means" attitude from the right.

Unlike you, and your butt buddy edthecynic, people on this board can do enough thought process to figure out when one is joking. You on the other hand........

ok moron, I know you are slow but once again PLEASE do learn to follow along. It's obvious that it was a "joke" but I don't think it's funny to make "jokes" about millions of Americans being murdered. Whether it was a joke or not is not the point. The point is that it was in poor taste and sad that none of you alleged patriots would even dare comdemning one of your own for attempting to make a joke out of something like that.

BTW did you feel the same when obama made his "joke" about the special olympics or were you one of the many from the right who attacked him over his "joke?"