Election Results

Looks like the election when the way everyone had been predicting. House goes red and the senate stays blue. I had kind of thought that if Sharon Angle would have beat Reid(at 11:30 he was in the lead), she would have provided a substantial amount of entertainment in the senate. Not sure if it would have been a benefit to the country.

Bachman has said that when they take control of the House, she will hold non-stop investigations of the White House for every action they've taken in the last two years. I hope saner minds don't give her the power to do that.

Boehner called the election a repudiatin of Washington, big government and politicians who don't listen. He could have said the same thing in 2006 when they lost the house.

My guess is that Washington will continue to do the same thing they've always done, run up the debt, give special favors to lobbyists. Basically, business as usual.

God help us all!!!!!!!!!! Agent Orange has finally mutated from a defoiliant in Vietnam, to a live congressman who is poised to become Speaker, at which time a huge cloud of our favorite defoilinat despenses itself to wipe out America!!!!!! How can you people vote for a party that says as part of its new contract with America that they will not compromise!!!! Good politics is all about the compromise!!!!

KCJoe, if you were wanting pure entertainment value, I don't think Christine O'Donnell could have been beat. But, with Angle, could you imagine the savings to Americans if a heart transplant only cost 4 chickens and a goat. Yes Medicare would have their shipping costs go through the roof, but overall it would be cheaper. Then we would have to spend more on census forms to include the following ethic group: Hispanics that look Asian, but are really Hispanic. On a side note the circus of Reid and Pelosi has been plenty entertaining as well. Entertaining like watching a train wreck. I just hope the Dems do not maintain Pelosi as minority speaker. I don't want to have to look at her anymore.

I don't think it was Angle who proposed trading chickens for medical care. It was the other lady that Angle beat in the primary.

As far as O'Donnell, I think the old boys in the Senate would have stuck her in a closet somewhere and the only time she'd be seen was when they needed her vote.

I guess you all don't like CHANGE

No more political ads for awhile.

The people have spoken and that is the way it works here so we live with it.

I wont miss Pelosi. If there had been a more credible candidate Harry would have gone down also. He better learn to say Muchas Gracias in every sentence.

Find some things that all agree on and pass some good legislation and go from there. Whenever you make a list of things to do you do the simple first and not the hard. Then you build momentum and confidence.

I would move to a blue state but the taxes are too high.

I guess you all don't like CHANGE Originally Posted by john_galt

Sure we do. Just wait until we change the filibuster rules at the start of the next Senate. You talk like the House Republicans are going to get any bill passed that they want. Did you forget about the...

????

No more political ads for awhile.

The people have spoken and that is the way it works here so we live with it.

I wont miss Pelosi. If there had been a more credible candidate Harry would have gone down also. He better learn to say Muchas Gracias in every sentence.

Find some things that all agree on and pass some good legislation and go from there. Whenever you make a list of things to do you do the simple first and not the hard. Then you build momentum and confidence.

I would move to a blue state but the taxes are too high. Originally Posted by catnipdipper

Yep we will get a break from the ads for about a year and then the 2012 shit starts all over again, I agree I hated Pelosi, not because she was a Dem but because she was stupid, I mean her speaches were freaking awful, I mean come on guys, Palin's a twit too but lord, she looks like a freaking Einstien compared to Pelosi, and Reid should have gone, this is what I talk about when I say that the GOP will lose in 2012 because they do not have anyone to run, they could have had a win in NV but they shit that opportunity away. The only real positive to me is that the make up of the GOP seems to be changing a little bit with the election of some young black republicans and more women. Maybe if we keep replacing the old blood in the GOP and the DNC we can get a new generation of leadership that is more representative of the new America and more MODERATE in ideology, if we could get both parties to pull back towards the middle even a little bit, we would be much better off as a nation.

Sure we do. Just wait until we change the filibuster rules at the start of the next Senate. You talk like the House Republicans are going to get any bill passed that they want. Did you forget about the...

???? Originally Posted by Longermonger

Monger weren't you and your progressive/liberal buddies complaining about the party of "NO" which you labled the GOP, now it seems like your promoting the idea.

Einstien Originally Posted by dirty dog

I rest my case.

Monger weren't you and your progressive/liberal buddies complaining about the party of "NO" which you labled the GOP, now it seems like your promoting the idea. Originally Posted by dirty dog

The minority party always plays defense. I didn't label anybody. There IS a difference between using the Presidential veto and abusing the filibuster rules.

Senate Democrats had to make deals with the Independents to reach 60 instead of just a simple majority. Why shouldn't House Republicans have to reach a supermajority to overcome a veto? Good for the goose, good for the gander.

I guess you all don't like CHANGE Originally Posted by john_galt

How did you feel in 2006? I kind of wish that the republicans had stayed in charge. Don't think this economy would have been any better.

The minority party always plays defense. I didn't label anybody. There IS a difference between using the Presidential veto and abusing the filibuster rules.

Senate Democrats had to make deals with the Independents to reach 60 instead of just a simple majority. Why shouldn't House Republicans have to reach a supermajority to overcome a veto? Good for the goose, good for the gander. Originally Posted by Longermonger

But if you enter the conversation with the idea that your going to veto any legislation you are no different than the people you complained about. Simple point and a simple concept.

I rest my case. Originally Posted by Longermonger

Is the the best you can do pointing out a spelling error rather than address the conversation. Seems like you ducked the statement but then again you do that alot and then you say your done and leave, coming back weeks later to the belief that you won the debate.

Is the the best you can do pointing out a spelling error rather than address the conversation. Seems like you ducked the statement but then again you do that alot and then you say your done and leave, coming back weeks later to the belief that you won the debate. Originally Posted by dirty dog

When you call somebody stupid...don't be stupid yourself. It undercuts your argument.

You also used the word 'speaches' while you were criticizing Pelosi's speeches. I think I'll side with the communication ability of the former Speaker, not you.

The rest of you post wasn't worthy of my response, but I'll do it since you requested it. In short, you're dead wrong. The 'Young Guns' from the Tea Parties are not going to lead to a more MODERATE Congress.