Election Results

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. Originally Posted by dirty dog

How well has Obama's strategy of attempting to work along side and compromise with the opposing party worked? Not well.

Do you think the Republicans are the only ones allowed to play defense? It seems like you give them a free pass to use any kind of dirty trick that they want to play defense, but won't allow Obama to use his Constitutional power of veto.

Conservatives are also fine when the Republicans run wild on offense. Do you remember Republicans making Democrats hold an election investigation in the basement, and then turning the lights off on them? When Democrats have the audacity to push legislation that protects citizens from Wall Street they get blasted as being too progressive. Even now, when Democrats offered to extend tax cuts for the lower 98% they got blasted for raising taxes.

Low information voters piss me off.

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. Originally Posted by Longermonger

You know Monger your a serious dick, but the reality is there is a difference between her public speaking and a hurried post on a board, but then any chance you can get to start shit you do, seconding I never said anything about tea parties leading to a more moderate congress, apparently you never learned to freakin read, futhermore I said "if" a lot which does not mean "is", if you need me to break that down for you further I will. But here is the quote and I will underline and put the key words in red for you.

"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."

Now maybe you will at least read the post before you post one of your comments. Some jackass once told me something I will quote it for you "When you call somebody stupid...don't be stupid yourself. It undercuts your argument."

How well has Obama's strategy of attempting to work along side and compromise with the opposing party worked? Not well.

Do you think the Republicans are the only ones allowed to play defense? It seems like you give them a free pass to use any kind of dirty trick that they want to play defense, but won't allow Obama to use his Constitutional power of veto.

Conservatives are also fine when the Republicans run wild on offense. Do you remember Republicans making Democrats hold an election investigation in the basement, and then turning the lights off on them? When Democrats have the audacity to push legislation that protects citizens from Wall Street they get blasted as being too progressive. Even now, when Democrats offered to extend tax cuts for the lower 98% they got blasted for raising taxes.

Low information voters piss me off. Originally Posted by Longermonger

Once again reading is not fundemental for you. My comments has nothing to do with any of this rant. Its a simple comment, you can justify it all you want but the reality is you did not think the actions were wrong, you were just pissed they were used against you.

"Low information voters piss me off."

You might not be so pissed if you didnt put words in my mouth, because I have never said any of the crap you spewed out above.

Free pass, how the fuck can I stop them from doing it, do I think its right no, but I can stop them, and I never came out in support of it either, if so quote it. But the fact is its a little Hypocritical to complain about it and then to endorce it when you side wants to use it. How am I stopping him for using it, and when did I ever say he shouldn't. But if it was wrong for the republicans then its wrong for the democrats. Thats my only point, just simply pointing out your hypocrisy. You can justify it all you want makes no difference to me. So are you going to call yourself the party of NO?

"Come to my adult video store. I'll kick your ass. Hulk smash!"
LOL

The title of this thread is 'Election Results'. Today is the day after the election. Right now the 'new blood' replacing the 'old blood' that you mentioned are far-Right Tea Party backed Republicans. If you want to realize a more moderate Republican Party in the far away future, then you'll need to replace all of those freshly elected wingnuts to do it. You should view the results of this election as a move AWAY FROM your goal, not towards it.

Free pass, how the fuck can I stop them from doing it, do I think its right no, but I can stop them, and I never came out in support of it either, if so quote it. Originally Posted by dirty dog

The obvious way to stop Republicans from fucking up the government and doing what they do is to not vote them into office. You didn't vote Republicans into office in the last decade, did you?

On paper, I am a highly educated professional in the medical field. That doesn't necessarily make me smarter than any dude you might run into on the street. But it does put me in a position to have some degree of knowledge about "Obama Care." There is so much crap hidden in that bill that most of you would be astounded, amazed,. . . no, disgusted at the direction your medical care will go if all aspects of this bill are implemented. There are page after page of details that can be changed at the whim of the "medical czar" who has already stated that he is a strong proponent of single payer, government managed health care. While I concur that the present health insurance situation we're presently dealing with is very imperfect, anyone who thinks that a government run plan would somehow be better is simply living in a fantasy world. My main fear is that the practice of medicine will become unfulfilling - from both a monetary and "satisfaction of career" viewpoint. I'm old enough that the future of my own practice is not really an issue but many doctors who are presently in practice will retire early and the allure of "becoming a doctor" will become so unpromising that our medical schools will no longer be attracting the more talented persons in our society. For this issue alone, I'm glad that there has been such a change in our legislature. I just hope the new Congress has the balls to correct the aspects of the health care bill that will prove so onerous to the delivery of quality medical care.

"Come to my adult video store. I'll kick your ass. Hulk smash!"
LOL

The title of this thread is 'Election Results'. Today is the day after the election. Right now the 'new blood' replacing the 'old blood' that you mentioned are far-Right Tea Party backed Republicans. If you want to realize a more moderate Republican Party in the far away future, then you'll need to replace all of those freshly elected wingnuts to do it. You should view the results of this election as a move AWAY FROM your goal, not towards it. Originally Posted by Longermonger

The individuals I mentioned were not tea party members, there were black members of the GOP. I also like that they elected more women. If you have a problem with Blacks and Women being elected thats your problem. You want to come to my video and kick my ass? I mean is that really necessary, I mean I am sure you just want to be around me, but I dont believe I invited you to come over, there are some people I just dont want around me for any reason and Monger your one of them.

And are you really saying that all of the members of the GOP elected yesterday are in the tea party. I really dont know because I only concerned myself with candidates from missouri. I did not pay much attention to the Tea Party because I dont really support them and never have.

I also think if you reread my post you will find that my statement was more a plea to both partys to move towards the middle, rather than a comment in individual elections, and if you can really tell me that you think Pelosi is a sharp cookie what little respect I have for you will be lost.

I think the aftermath of the election was not really a victory for the Republican but more so for the American people. Now, I voted for Obama and right now I think he's doing an ok job with a lot of room for improvement. However, I think his first priority should have been jobs then he should have tackled Health Care later.
However, I don't care what party you belong to you must realize that you are in Washington to work for the people- I really wish they had term limits for senators and Representatives, I don't like career politicians.
Nevertheless Obama may have the last laugh and here's the irony:
Let's say hypothetically the Dem's maintained the majority and in the next 2 years there's no real improvement that would surely mean an Obama defeat in 2012.
Ok, let's get to reality- the GOP controls the House and picked up seats in the senate- the GOP is going to have to work with Obama and vice versa they just can't play the games they played the past 2 years- now if the next 2 years the county remains the same- Obama or the Dem's can say hey the GOP is in control and they didn't do squat. Now if the flipside happens-which I think it will and that is the country slowly rebounds and get Americans working again then Obama can ride that to his advanatage and say hey we are heading the right way I am a Bipartisan President we need to continue this for 4 more years. I think 2012 might be 2004 all over when Americans were angry at Bush for Iraq War, but there were a great majority of Americans who wanted Bush to finish what he started.
Overall, this may have been the best thing that had to Obama- time will tell, but at least the American people voices were heard. I wish more incumbents would have lost and I don't care what party they belong to,
P.S: Does anyone know if there's ever been any measures or politicians who tried to enact laws to limit senate or representatives terms?

P.S: Does anyone know if there's ever been any measures or politicians who tried to enact laws to limit senate or representatives terms? Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Contract With America in 1994 had a provision for term limits on House members. It was brought to the floor for a vote but did not pass the House.

We may not agree on much 1911, but I agree with you on term limits. I know the argument against them is "elections are term limits" but the system is so rigged to favor incumbents that I believe the only way to limit the corruption is to have term limits. The good congressmen (like Ron Paul, IMO) would need to start grooming/backing a replacement to support once their terms have expired.

This organization is a little nutty, and I do not agree with everything they stand for (their candidate questionnaire is WAY too intrusive into personal details), but this video series they did about how the system is rigged for incumbents is excellent. It takes a while to watch all of the videos but I found it quite informative:

http://icaucus.us/2009/03/a-tale-of-...men-section-1/

Term limits are to protect you from someone else's representative.

Oh, Obama never tried to compromise with the GOP. Can you cite one example?

I heard Obama in his press conference say something like; and these are not quotes just my interpretations;

Did a lousy job communicating and staying in touch with the people and allowed the things we felt we had to do to be interpreted as my agenda.

I said this before in my feelings about GW Bush. He never got a fair chance for his agenda as he was devastated by the 9/11 events and his Presidency was never allowed to be his own. He had to react to the events.

Obama was faced with a similar situation in terms of the economy and took what steps he felt were necessary to avoid a total meltdown. There has been slow progress but not fast enough to satisfy the electorate and feel comfortable with the results. We live in a time of immediate gratification.

On Health Care I think they took advantage of the one time that it could EVER be passed. It truly diverted time and resources from the economy and jobs but it attempts to also try to stop the upward spiral of health costs and ever increasing deficits.

I have no idea the totality of the provisions of the bill but there are lots of good things there too. Repeal and start over is just plain stupid but Improvement and modification is always valid.

I wish for movement toward the center and progress from both parties. Neither's agenda is any mandate. The mandate is for improvement and progress and if they can't work together then the people will speak even louder in the future.

I agree that this election may be the best thing that could have happened for Obama's chances in 2012. Presidential elections are mostly about the state of the economy. Now, if the economy rebounds (which I think it will) in the next two years Obama can claim credit based on policies now in place. If, however, the economy doesn't improve before the 2012 elections Obama will be able to blame the Republican House for either blocking his initiatives or faulty measures of the own. It's a win-win for Obama in my opinion.

In the meantime, because of the split congress and Obama's power of veto, we will most likely have gridlock for the next two years. Any tea-partiers who have visions of repealing Obama Care are living in a delusional sub-reality, lol.

P.S. Am I the only one who would like to bang Christine O'Donnell? I really think she would be a freak in the sack, lol. Maybe, now that her political career is finished, she'll turn to the hobby for a career!

Big Wayne;

I don't think Christine is in favor of sex in any fashion. No lust in your hard, no hand on your dick and I doubt you would gain entry to any private parts unless it was part of a religious ceremony.

I rate her as 10:00pm. Ya know after 3-4 martinis. At midnite she is Miss American for sure

You guys are being very disrespectful by solely objectifying Christine O'Donnell on the basis of sex. Disrespectful, and unfair.

Now, if you were to dually objectify her, along with Sarah Palin, now we're talking! A threesome with those two would be anything but disrespectful, and might be a lot of fun. You know they've got some repressed urges that desperately need release.

Add to that the babe that won the House seat from North or South Dakota, Kristi something-or-other, and we can turn the Tea Party into a Tea Orgy! This is a movement that would get somewhere!

I call it my "No Booty Left Behind" program.