Scott Brown is owning the dems in the commonwealth state

This is unadulterated, 100% USDA prime crap.

I am no huge fan of the Dems, look how large government (and spending) grew during Republican rule. Oh, and by spending, I mean discretionary, non military spending.

The days of small government Republicans are long gone.

 

Someone on TV tonight made the comment that when people bring up the cost of healthcare as a concern of reform democrats should say "who cares about the cost?"

Democrats should do like Republicans and just pass the bill; costs be damned. Just do what republicans do.

 

I hate to criticize the good voters of Mass but those seem like pretty dumb reasons to vote for Brown, a guy who campaigned on taking down (not strengthening) the health care bill and who has a record of being business friendly.

This strikes me as deciding to complain about how slow the fire department is by pouring gasoline on a house fire.

 

That's exactly what it seems to be. But the history of the country is that voters aren't terribly rational. They are driven by anger or excitement more than anything else, and right now, they are angry.

I'm hoping the Dems will learn the right lesson from this - to actually come together and enact the agenda they ran on - but instead, I think they may learn the wrong lesson and basically accomplish nothing and then ask voters to re-elect them without any good reason.

 

I agree voters aren't always very rational but this seems like an egregious case. If voters are pissed that Democrats aren't accomplishing enough I'm not sure how electing Republicans is going to help that.

My own feeling is that its not so much that voters are frustrated with how little Democrats are getting done but are more confused about what Democrats are doing.

 

I'm glad she lost. ****ing pansies can't get **** done and that 60 vote supermajority myth was hurting them more than helping them.

If they had any resemblance of balls, the Dem leadership would seize the offensive and actually compromise rather than let their internal factions continue to eat each other while thinking the Republicans are weak or easily blamed.

Pushing healthcare reform was a noble lose-lose situation, but Democrats have been lacking empathy for average Americans and they didn't use their populist rage as a pulpit against $pecial interests that made Bush unpopular. Carbon credits, for one, was another case of bitter medicine that did nothing to address what was on everyone's minds. The 60 vote non-majority appeared to be golden opportunity (that did not occur through mandate) but without a mandate it was an open invitation not to pass any agenda. Even if the stimulus package passed uncompromised, the economy would have required constant attention and emphasis with the people. Maybe that was Obama's job that he failed in handling. While global warming was pressing, I don't see how reductions that would take effect 4-5 years from now had to be placed on top of the list. They strategized themselves into failure. The whole stimulus package itself was a p***y footed abomination.

Reforming Wall Street should take time if done right. Meanwhile, it looked like Washington was getting reamed hard without even a whimper. Then again, are they even bothering to pass something worthwhile and iron tight? The taxpayer was responsible for last year's growth and bailing out banks. Still the government acted like offending businesses would doom our recovery and kill the "green shoots". Well guess what. The money is beginning to run out, and we're headed for a double dip. There isn't any focus and there isn't any initiative. Corruption isn't a partisan trait.

 

Chris Matthews interviews Howard Dean about meaning of Scott Brown's victory in the Massachusetts Senate race:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9p-9hkdZSEE&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9p-9hkdZSEE&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

This is a very well done interview by Chris Matthews. He is right on the money with his line of questioning.

 

Here is a YouTube video of Chris Matthews interviewing Howard Dean about meaning of Scott Brown's victory in the Massachusetts Senate race:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9p-9hkdZSEE

This is a very well done interview by Chris Matthews. He is right on the money with his line of questioning.

 

Here is a YouTube video of Chris Matthews interviewing Howard Dean about meaning of Scott Brown's victory in the Massachusetts Senate race:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9p-9hkdZSEE

This is a very well done interview by Chris Matthews. He is right on the money with his line of questioning.

 

Here is a YouTube video of Chris Matthews interviewing Howard Dean about meaning of Scott Brown's victory in the Massachusetts Senate race:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9p-9hkdZSEE

This is a very well done interview by Chris Matthews. He is right on the money with his line of questioning.

 

Thanks to both of you for helping me to make sure this was posted enough times. We wouldn't want anyone to miss this, now would we?



What would I do without you guys?

Seriously though, Chris Matthews really did do a great job on that interview with Howard Dean. The suggestion that the voters of Massachusetts elected Scott Brown over Martha Coakley is perfectly ridiculous and entirely absurd. In fact, as a result of his devotion to this point during the interview, Howard Dean comes across as if he may be in the early stages of losing his mind.

 

Almost as ridiculous as attaching undue significance to the election, and making BS statements like it was rejection of health care or Obama's presidency.

 

You do realize that Chris Matthews is no right wing zealot, right? He is the leftish host of MSNBC's show "Hardball". Chris Matthews was the one who correctly took issue with the absurd suggestion that Scott Brown won because of the Democrat's failure to make a harder liberal push on the health care bill. This is a bad bill, and the substantial majority of Americans know it. The health care bill is bad, and it has been rejected, along with most of the rest of the Obama/Pelosi/Reid program.

Let's review, shall we? After this election, here id the status of a few of the Democratic left's most important pending initiatives:

1. The Democrat's current health care plan - Dead.
2. Cap and Trade - Dead.
3. Card Check (Banning secret balloting for votes to organize unions) - Dead.
4. The Fairness Doctrine - Dead
5. Amnesty for illegal aliens - Dead.
6. Overreaching financial industry reform - Dead.

Our nation has weathered the storm, and a new day has dawned. The people see what Barack Obama and the Democrats have been trying to do in Washington, and they do not like it. And the Blue Dogs and Moderate Democrats know they do not like it, even if the liberals here on this board have not received the memo yet.

The Obama revolution is over. And the election of Scott Brown as Senator in Massachusetts was the event that served notice of its ending.

Thank God.

 

It appears that Scott Brown has a new mentor in the US Senate:



Birds of a feather, flock together.

I expect Scott Brown will be a moderate leaning conservative in an ideological pattern that is somewhat similar to John McCain. Of course, Scott Brown will have his own quirks and foibles. But at the end of the day, he was elected to represent the people of Massachusetts, just as you said. And his positions on the issues are going to be influenced and affected by that in no uncertain manner.

But it may be happening that after getting a load of Barack Obama, the people of Massachusetts are no longer as liberal as many people have traditionally come to expect. In fact, it appears they are evolving into an increasingly independent lot.

 

Half the crap on that list isn't on any serious agenda of anybody, especially liberals. Instead it's a made up list of the boogeymen that teabaggers have been told the liberals want.

Here is a clue for you, What the teabaggers are told liberals want, and the real agenda put forth by the President or members of congress aren't the same thing.

Again the polling in Scott Brown's election showed that Obama voters who voted for Brown were upset that health care reform didn't go far enough, not that they wanted it "dead" as you put it. Mass Polling also shows Obama to be quite popular there.

You can ignore it if you want.

Or should I adopt your way of thinking. Since the election in NY elected a Democrat to a seat held by the GOP for more than 100 years. The people have spoken and they want Democrats.

 

Ms. Brown, from earlier in her life. i think we can see where her daughters learned to wear seashells.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QLvwc3W_KwM&rel=0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QLvwc3W_KwM&rel=0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

would definitely hit.

 

Who was that polling done by again? Because it sounds like it was done by a bunch of partisan left-wing wankers.

I am calling BS on this poll.

Also, I thought we had posted it enough time earlier in the thread, but it appears that you somehow managed to miss the Chris Matthews interview of Howard Dean on this topic. Hopefully this will be sufficient to penetrate through your self imposed delusions on this point. If not, you might just be irretrievably too far gone on this issue.

[RQUOTER]Here is a YouTube video of Chris Matthews interviewing Howard Dean about meaning of Scott Brown's victory in the Massachusetts Senate race:

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9p-9hkdZSEE&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9p-9hkdZSEE&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

This is a very well done interview by Chris Matthews. He is right on the money with his line of questioning.[/RQUOTER]

 

As per the usual with the Faux "News" accolytes, just keep repeating it over and over again until people accept it as truth.

 

Except Chris Matthews is not on Fox News. He is on MSNBC, which is hardly known as a bastion of conservatism.

 

You need to get some help with reading comprehension. I was talking about you, not Matthews.