GOP's Brown wins Massachusetts Senate race in blow to Obama

Massachusettes is only 11% Republican and has been dominated by the Democrat party for decades. If Republican Scott Brown is able to win Teddy Kennedy's seat in the Senate - in the most Liberal state in the America - it would represent a direct rebuke of President Obama and his scary socialist political agenda. Brown has specifically nationalized the election focusing on ObamaCare. The fact that a Repbublican is even close is nothing short of amazing! In the most recent polls following Obama's campaign stops in the state on Coakley's behalf, Brown has gained even more ground on the Democrat. After losing Governorships in Virginia and the liberal state of New Jersey last November, things are not looking good for Obama's party this Fall.

Regardless of who wins tonight, President Obama and his party have been warned by the public, move to the center or get wiped out this November.

Massachusettes is only 11% Republican and has been dominated by the Democrat party for decades.

More false information. If the Repubicans are so weak there, how did folks like William Weld and Mitt Romney attain the governorship?

Regardless of who wins tonight, President Obama and his party have been warned by the public, move to the center or get wiped out this November.

The main reason the public is against the main incumbent party is due to the high unemployment rate. If it would put millions back to decent-paying jobs, people would march wearing the image of Che on their shirts.

That this race is even a race is the real story here. The fact that democrats have held that seat for 46 years and it's now in jeapordy speaks volumes about the discontent with the Obama administration.

Massachusettes is only 11% Republican and has been dominated by the Democrat party for decades.

Not this night. Its temporally 51% republican.

Ted Kennedy has left Obama, alone, in a car, drowning.

More false information. If the Repubicans are so weak there, how did folks like William Weld and Mitt Romney attain the governorship?

Currently, there are no Republicans that hold any statewide office in Massachusettes. Only a smallish minority of the state legislature is Republican. Any win or even a close finish to take over "Teddys" seat in the US Senate would be flat-out amazing by any standard. No one can deny that Massachusettes is a very Liberal state.

Massachusetts should not be labled as a liberal state, far from it, although they do tend to vote Dem. The only reason this is so groundbreaking is the fact that the seat that's been held by Kennedy since 1962 and that the man who served as a driving force behind the far-left shift of the dem party may be replaced by a center-right (keeping in mind that Brown did vote for Massachusetts's progressive healthcare system)...who drives a truck.

If it would put millions back to decent-paying jobs, people would march wearing the image of Che on their shirts.

If it came to that I would need to dust off my ass kicking boots and get to work.

Ted Kennedy has left Obama, alone, in a car, drowning.

Lets have some respect for the dead both for Kennedy who served for many years and for Kopechne who really doesn't deserve being brought up for the sole purpose of defaming a politician. I didn't like Kennedy much either but damnation man, know when to stop.

More false information. If the Repubicans are so weak there, how did folks like William Weld and Mitt Romney attain the governorship?

I can understand you don't want to believe it, but its fact. Republicans are heavily outnumbered by Dems. The reason why an occasional Republican can get elected is due to the number of independents, and the number of disaffected Democrats. Whether or not Brown wins today, it is a stunning slap at Obama and his policies. Thats the only reason why someone like Brown could get elected. His obvious charisma helps, her lack of charisma helps, but even still, it wouldn't be enough to get a Republican elected normally. By making it a national referendum, the disaffection that people feel throughout the country, indeed the anger over Dem policies being implemented, is what brought Brown to where he is.

The Massachusetts race is a referendum on Obama's presidency to date.

Lets have some respect for the dead both for Kennedy who served for many years and for Kopechne who really doesn't deserve being brought up for the sole purpose of defaming a politician. I didn't like Kennedy much either but damnation man, know when to stop.

I Agree. Hate his politics if you like, but have some respect for the dead. Enough is enough.

The main reason the public is against the main incumbent party is due to the high unemployment rate. If it would put millions back to decent-paying jobs, people would march wearing the image of Che on their shirts

And the Massachusetts state is known for the highest health and Medicare costs. People's anger and frustration with the health care debate could swing the votes from the Democrats to the Republic.

Ok, call me surprised. While I hoped to see Brown elected, I really didn't think it would happen. Not in Massachusetts. I honestly thought that people would go to the polls and think, I like Brown, but I can't vote for a Republican. That however didn't happen. The voters in Massachusetts sent a message to Washington, that they are not happy with Obamas policies and politics.

The election has been projected for Brown, according to both Fox and CNN.

Scott Brown. Good solid name for a good solid man.

Lesson for Coakley - diss the Red Sox in Boston and get pwned by voters.

Wow - it's official, Brown takes the Liberal Lions seat in the leftist state of Massachusettes! Unbelievable! I am so grateful that ObamaCare can now be defeated. If you had asked me a week ago that something would happen to save America from socialized medicine I would have thought you were crazy.

The only way that the Democrats can get their health care monstrosity through Congress is to have Speaker Pelosi to accept the Senates bill as is. It is going to be so interesting to see how the left-wing deals with this - it's going to be fun.

I honestly saw a close Dem win comming out of this but...dang Massachusetts you never cease to astound. Hope you enjoy your new senator.

Lesson for Coakley - diss the Red Sox in Boston and get pwned by voters.

Yeah, not a good strategy there.

With Teddy gone, I think Massachusetts voters realized they finally had a voice. But do Pelosi and company realize how unwanted their Chavez-like healthcare "reform" actually is? Apparently not.

According to CNN:

Precincts Reporting: 1,994 of 2,168 (92%)

Scott Brown (R) – 1,062,322 (52.3%)

Martha Coakley (D) – 949,660 (46.7%)

Joe Kennedy (I) – 20,410 (1.0%)

So it didn't go exactly as The Boston Globe predicted...

Hopefully this will be a wake up call for Obama.Just ordered a few more medical insurance company, Pfizer and Roche shares LOL

I'm having a party and with a nice glass of tea right now.

Hey Obama and the Democrats.....CAN YOU FINALLY HEAR US NOW.

Folks, let me be clear:

This, this is unprecedented.

A special electiondealing a rebuke to the party in power is actually quite precedented.

Well, now what happens? Sure we know Brown will vote against the health care bill if he gets the chance.

Now the republicans can stall a lot with filibusters.

I guess people might have to start working together. < :-)

Boston.

Where American patriots held the first Tea Party and went on to make history.

Well, now what happens? Sure we know Brown will vote against the health care bill if he gets the chance.

You mean if senate Democrats aren't successful in delaying Brown from being sworn in?

Mark Steyn:

Harry Reid’s reluctance to seat Senator Brown (R- Mass) – boy, I enjoyed typing that – until “the proper paperwork has been received” seems awfully finicky for a man who famously declared he wanted to bring “twelve million undocumented Americans out of the shadows”.

Why not start by bringing the undocumented Senator out of the shadows? Given the unelected Dems sitting as replacements for Obama and his cabinet appointees, it would demonstrate a particular contempt for the people’s voice to hold up the one guy who fought and won an election to get in there.

This may work in Obama's favor. If he allows the dems to withhold Brown's seat, it won't. But by allowing Brown his proper "elected" seat, unlike the guy he's replacing and that Burris guy, it will. It would bring a lot of his opponents to their knees.

It would bring a lot of his opponents to their knees.

And all will be forgiven? All of Obama's Chavez tendencies will be allowed? I don't think so.

No Whitehawk, there are still 4 different strategies that can be used to get the bill through. I'm sure you've heard all 4 so I won't bore you. Brown may not effect it at all. < :-)

No Whitehawk, there are still 4 different strategies that can be used to get the bill through. I'm sure you've heard all 4 so I won't bore you.

Are you proud of your party now?

Checking around for interviews and reactions it looks like Indiana Senator Evan Bayh is first to admit his party has been commandeered by a group of partisan ideologues far to the left of the traditional Democratic Party base. The party faithful and independents are dissatisfied. Bush lost it for his party in 06 and 08 for similar reasons.

There are really only 3 options here.

Try to pass it as it stands.

Redo it from scratch

The first one is extremely unlikely. Particularly after the defeat in Massachusetts. Dems in vulnerable districts are going to ask themselves, is this worth it. With the Republicans currently looking at picking up potentially 40 seats in the house, all of those endangered Dems are going to be more then a little hesitant to agree to a bill they feel is fundamentally flawed anyway. They'll have to ask, which is worse, passing this disaster, and saying, hey at least we got something, or backing away and trying to claim they were wrong. Its a tough sell either way. And regardless, the GOP will likely regain the house after the next election.

The second is both less and more likely. Its less likely because if they work with the GOP they'll get most of what they want, but not all of it. And because it will cost a lot of political capital. Capital many Dems are thinking they just don't have. And it won't really help them come November. Republicans too have to question whether its in their interest to help Obama at all. On the other hand, they don't want to get the obstructionist only tag. Its more likely, because all they need is 1 vote from the Republicans. And Snow and Collins can be bought.

Third Possibility is extremely remote. Its very doubtful that Dems will try reconciliation. Republicans will be able to strip the bill to tatters, and then that tattered bill would still have to pass the House again. Its exceedingly unlikely that will occur.

I suspect, that when it comes down to it, the Health Care Bill is dead. The only real way forward is option number 2, and I don't believe the Dems have the political will to go back, and redo it from the start.

Read above the opinion that there are four strategies left.

I predict there will be more than four senators who will soon lose interest in pursuing even one of them.

Checking around for interviews and reactions it looks like Indiana Senator Evan Bayh is first to admit his party has been commandeered by a group of partisan ideologues far to the left of the traditional Democratic Party base. The party faithful and independents are dissatisfied. Bush lost it for his party in 06 and 08 for similar reasons.

Bush lost it, because he was a RINO. He was a Democrat wearing a Republican tag. Fiscal liberal, social conservative. That is a bad combination, and it destroyed the Republican coalition. The coalition that got him elected, pushed fiscal conservatism, alongside social conservatism. With that gone, the party in disarray, a deeply unpopular war, and a lot of people who felt McCain was another fiscal liberal social conservative, its no surprise that Republicans lost power in 06 and 08. What is surprising is how quickly things turned around.

And all will be forgiven? All of Obama's Chavez tendencies will be allowed? I don't think so." Come on man.. we don't hve to go that far.

"Are you proud of your party now?"

For doing everything in its power to promote the general Welfare, in line with the Coonstitution of the United States? Rather than maintaining a status quo that only benefits corporate CEOs and the bloodsucking stockholders that give them leave to screw average Americans for a profit? Damned right we're proud of our party.

Although I can understand how hard it might be for Republicans to feel proud about anything, much less their party, considering there's been a painful lack of anything to be proud of during 30 years of raping and pillaging the nation and Constitution.

Back to our regularly scheduled program . . .

USA! USA! USA!

Next on the list should be Nancy Pelosi, we have to get that woman out of power for the sake of the USA!!

Whitehawk

Are you proud of your party now?

Pride has nothing to do with it. It's politics. It's like abortion. Even if 95% of the population thought it should be illegal I'd still assist a young lady who wanted an abortion. Because I believe it's the right thing to do.

Where it comes to health care reform, I believe it's the right thing to do. So if the democratic party pushes it through, so be it.

It's like when the republicans pushed through their prescription drug plan. Right or wrong, the republicans rammed it through. So-o-o health care reform, here we come. < :-)

"Bush lost it, because he was . . . Democrat wearing a Republican tag."

LOL! Is THIS what conservative's view of Bush had metamorphized into now? He's was your hero when he was in office, but now anything goes in order to distance the bad joke that is the GOP from the pit Bush spent eight years dragging the nation into, while people with conveniently short memories seem all too willing to blame the disaster on the Democratic Pary, and Obama in particular. You people absolutely disgust me with your morphing loyalies and half-assed justifications. But then again, you're either "with us or against us," eh? Pathetic.

Oops...

USA! USA! USA!

LFRAgain,

How tone deaf can you be. The people of Massachusetts just sent you a message loud and clear......They rejected Obama your agenda wholesale either dump the far left nanny state and get to the center or get booted out.

What message did you think they said for goodness sakes?

LFRAgain:

For doing everything in its power to promote the general Welfare, in line with the Coonstitution of the United States?

That's an interesting (and inaccurate) interpretation of "the general welfare". But that's the Left for you: If you don't like what the Constitution or the Bill of Rights says and you can't re-write it, just reinterpret it to fit your agenda. (See: Second Amendment)

adaydream:

Pride has nothing to do with it.

Apparently, neither does shame. Nor the electoral process. Nor the concept of representation.

Where it comes to health care reform, I believe it's the right thing to do.

Even though it's unnecessary, unwanted, and unaffordable? Should I send you the bill for my increased premiums?

And yes, unnecessary. Yabits was shocked in disbelief on another thread when I informed him that I had bought a very good policy from a major provider for less than US$100/month. He had bought into the Left's propaganda about private health care being unaffordable and unattainable, he refused to believe actual facts when confronted with them. As I suspect you will (again) as well.

It's like when the republicans pushed through their prescription drug plan. Right or wrong, the republicans rammed it through.

As I recall, it was either the Republican's plan or the Democrat's plan (and guess which cost more) that was going to pass. You can't compare that to Pelosi claiming they were going to pass this takeover whether the voters wanted it or not. Well, you have, but not legitimately.

I do believe Fox News analyst Sarah Palin said it best, with a tweet her many Democrat fans are sure to remember long after all of this has passed:

"Mr. Brown Goes to Washington... In a Pick-up Truck, No Less!"

You betcha!

LOL! Is THIS what conservative's view of Bush had metamorphized into now? He's was your hero when he was in office, but now anything goes in order to distance the bad joke that is the GOP from the pit Bush spent eight years dragging the nation into, while people with conveniently short memories seem all too willing to blame the disaster on the Democratic Pary, and Obama in particular.

Are you a complete idiot? Conservatives were questioning Bush when he first got elected. They were happy when he passed his tax cuts, but when he turned around and did NCLB, and the prescription drug plan, he lost a lot of support. Add that his excessive spending that many conservatives questioned, and by the time 2006 rolled around, only the most die hard Republicans were still his fans. And then only out of misplaced sense of party loyalty.

I realize you're disappointed at the results, tonight, but at least try to keep it on an even keel eh.

Next on the list should be Nancy Pelosi, we have to get that woman out of power for the sake of the USA!!

Well, theres not a chance in hell she'll lose her seat. She's from San Francisco of all places. But its starting to look very likely that next January, she'll be wearing the title, former Speaker of the House.

Scotty Brown, toast of the town!

By the way folks, I called this one on Jan 12th no less. Am I good or what.

What a day!

sailwind at 03:42 PM JST - 12th January

The support of her few remaining fans who are vainly clinging to whatever shred of a reason they can find to support her shows just how desparate the GOP's predicament has become.

Scott Brown is going to take Kennedy's Senate seat Jan 19th, I can feel it in my bones and that is how 'desperate the GOP's predicament has become. Sushi, mark my words you ain't seen nothing yet at the backlash for this arrogant Administration and its far left Liberal agenda being shoved down America's throat. New Jersey and Virginia were just a start. Mass is going to be the bombshell. As we say in the Navy "Stand-By for Heavy Rolls" if your a Liberal Democrat and who would have believed the self-destruction in less then one year.

See you on the 19th after the election there.

Now where is Sushi?

Blah, blah. Only the GOP would be celebrating this victory 1 year after an utter route in the 2008 election.

Long and short, the people are unhappy and neither party has shown much in the way of answers. What will the repubs deliver now that they couldn't 18 months ago? What a mess...

He's was your hero when he was in office,

To add to Molenir's response to LFRAgain's above... eh... analysis...

The ever-myopic Leftists can't see beyond Iraq. There were several issues were conservatives (or right-wingers, if you prefer, since we were more progressive on the Middle East than the self-titled progressives) were at odds with Bush 43. And LFRAgain has provided another classic example of this shallow worldview. For me, it wasn't just the prescription drug plan (Rush Limbaugh opposed it too, or did you forget that?) and the domestic spending, it was also his support of amnesty for illegal aliens and his inability to go after Iran for its meddling in Iraq and nuclear weapons program. And it doesn't stop there. But since all the Left can see, hear, and talk about is Iraq, they refused to see the Right's criticism of Bush 43 when it happened.

Unfortunately, the national primaries are held in "blue" states first, and most of those states have open primaries, where Democrats, who will be happy with whoever they get on their ticket, vote for the biggest RINO in the GOP primaries. So once the primaries get around to the "red" states, staunch conservatives like Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter are already out of the race, and RINO's like McCain and Giuliani are what's left. Fred didn't even hang around for Tennessee.

This is in direct contrast to what we saw tonight. The unaffiliated voters outnumber Democrats and Republicans combined in this district of Massachusetts and tonight we saw them speak up, unfiltered. Clearly, LFRAgain (not to mention Pelosi) still can't hear the message. Scott Brown campaigned against Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the Democrat's health care takeover as much as he campaigned against Coakely. And the voters listened, and answered. Finally, now that Teddy Kennedy is finally out of the way, Massachusetts has representation.

You would think the Left learned something from New Tork, where an unknown (and forgettable) independent candidate came out of nowhere to force uber-RINO Dede Scozzafava out of the race. But that's elitism for you.

Molenir,

“Are you an idiot?”

Depends. Are you senile?

They were happy when he passed his tax cuts, but when he turned around and did NCLB, and the prescription drug plan, he lost a lot of support.

Bush won the 2002 election with almost exactly half the popular vote, in fact losing the popular vote by half a million. Yet paradoxically despite, as you claim, alienating supporters with NCLB and the prescription drug plan, both pieces of legislation that were signed into law long before the 2004 election, Bush went on to win his second presidency, with more than half of the popular vote.

Methinks you view Bush and his legacy with no small amount of fair-weather flexibility.

What will the repubs deliver now that they couldn't 18 months ago?

Stronger candidates instead of more RINOs? Just guessing.

Just guessing.

More like "Just Hoping"...

More like "Just Hoping"...

I see the fact that a Republican just took Ted's Kennedy seat you remember that guy "The Liberal Lion" of the Senate, in the bluest of the blue states and the message that sends is somehow lost on you also.

LFRA

Methinks you view Bush and his legacy with no small amount of fair-weather flexibility.

Methinks the sooner you catch up with the people of Massachusetts, they could have cared less about Bush and his legacy in this election, the sooner you might be able to actually salvage at least something out of Obama's agenda.

WhiteHawk,

"That's an interesting (and inaccurate) interpretation of "the general welfare"

Oh, really? For your consideration, please take some time to read the notes regarding the Preamble of the Constitution provided courtesy of some folks who might know a bit about the constitution at US Constitution.net

I understand that unless it's convenient, it's just a "damned piece of paper" to you folks, but you might find something enlightening there. And while you're at it, continue down to the part about securing “the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

Opposition to health care reform in America has never been about fighting socialism or protecting our children's economic future (my personal favorite gratuitous slathering of hypocrisy).

It is and has always been about those who have already secured their American dream making sure they don’t have to share even the smallest bit of that success with anyone else, hence this near-hysterical reaction to anything with even the slightest tint of "Socialism" to it -- despite the fact that the U.S. has thrived under widely institutionalized socialism for 7 decades.

Opposition all comes down to unbridled, unmitigated, entirely unabashed selfishness and greed. “I’ve got mine. Go get yours somewhere else.”

Ah, the Blessings of Liberty...

I'm proud of Massachusetts voters!

WhiteHawk,

You do see the irony in that I haven't made a single mention of the Iraq War anywhere in this thread? Just checking.

"they refused to see the Right's criticism of Bush 43 when it happened."

Perhaps that has something to do with Bush supporters inexplicably voting him into a second term in even greater numbers, despite supposedly being angered by your admittedly impressive list of Bush's supposed failings.

Junnama:

More like "Just Hoping"...

We'll see. The GOP establishment didn't capitalize on Palin's popularity (the only bump McCain's campaign ever got) and her record of successes in Alaska because she wasn't part of the inner circle, and one part of the GOP even nominated Scozzafava in New York. So there's a message being sent to them too. We'll have to wait to see if they get it.

LFRAgain:

Bush went on to win his second presidency, with more than half of the popular vote.

And suddenly you forget Iraq. We were in a war (you do remember 9/11/01, right?) and the alternative was John Kerry. No wonder Bush won handily.

I understand that unless it's convenient, it's just a "damned piece of paper" to you folks,

Wow, projecting. Never thought I'd see that in a Leftist. /sarcasm

As I said before, if government-provided healthcare was what the Founding Fathers intended, they would have instituted it from the outset.

It is and has always been about those who have already secured their American dream making sure they don’t have to share even the smallest bit of that success with anyone else, hence this near-hysterical reaction to anything with even the slightest tint of "Socialism" to it -- despite the fact that the U.S. has thrived under widely institutionalized socialism for 7 decades.

Sharing is done through charity. You know, the true sense of giving, done out of free will and generosity. Not the confiscation and ineffective redistribution done practically at gunpoint by a bureaucracy. It's little wonder you and other Leftists never understand that, since every study published shows that right-wingers give more to charities than Leftists.

And we've thrived in spite of our institutionalized entitlement programs.

Ah, there's the magic word: Entitlement. Which is what this legislation is, another entitlement program. One we don't have the money to pay for.

Opposition all comes down to unbridled, unmitigated, entirely unabashed selfishness and greed.

Greed? You want to lecture about greed? Greed is not opposition to unconstitutional confiscation. Greed is not earning something, but demanding it anyway. "Take his, and give it to me." That's greed.

As I've mentioned before, I have my own health insurance. It's not provided by an employer, I bought it myself. It doesn't have a limit, just a deductible. So if I get in another motorcycle accident, it won't matter if the bills are US$50,000, US$100,000, or millions. I'm covered. And I've got this plan for less than US$100/month. I found it easily, on the internet, on a free website set up to list and compare health insurance plans. It wasn't a government website, I didn't have to visit a government office, and I didn't have to file any government paperwork (whew!). It was easy to find, easy to pick, good coverage, and affordable. Everything Leftist fear-mongers say private health insurance is not. So the entire premise that we're having any kind of crisis is a myth. The only thing that needs reform in the health insurance realm is cutting off the illegal aliens that visit emergency rooms for non-emergency attention and then skip out on the bill.

Sarah Palin on Scott Brown's election: "This is a step for taking our country back."

You betcha!

It's interesting that in new Sen Brown's celebration speech, he said "this is a victory for independents." He could be a RINO. It is still Massachusetts after all. (Remember Bloomberg in NYC.)

Heh, Obama just experienced another "Chicago Olympics" moment.

Massachusetts starts the revolution against oppressive government!

Now, this is "Change We Can Believe In".

lostrune2:

It's interesting that in new Sen Brown's celebration speech, he said "this is a victory for independents." He could be a RINO. It is still Massachusetts after all. (Remember Bloomberg in NYC.)

A good point, and one I considered myself. He might go all Souter on us once in office.

One of the TV pundits pointed out that Obama never refers to Democrats as Democrats. At a speech, he'll say a welcome to the Republicans, and then a welcome to his "fellow progressives". He's certainly to the left of where the DNC stood prior to what I call the "Haight-Ashbury Takeover".

It's worse than a blow. It's a stinging rebuke, a slap in the face.

Whitehawk,

" . . . if government-provided healthcare was what the Founding Fathers intended, they would have instituted it from the outset."

Oh, you mean like how the Founding Fathers drew up a blueprint for the establishment of the Department of Transportation to govern trillions of dollars in road construction spending? Or the establishment of the Department of Education? Or the National Parks and Recreation Service? Or how the Founding Father mandated that a Census Bureau be created to keep tabs on population growth?

Hmm . . . Perhaps you're right. Maybe I need to take another look at the Constitution. I seem to have missed entire paragraphs outlining how the Founding Fathers instituted those and other numerous federal departments, agencies, commissions, and laws that we take for granted every day.

"Wow, projecting. Never thought I'd see that in a Leftist."

Your inability to recognize the quote just demonstrates your selective memory on a variety of subjects, not the least of which was the Bush administration's clearly expressed disdain for the legal restrictions imposed by the Constitution.

"Greed is not opposition to unconstitutional confiscation. Greed is not earning something, but demanding it anyway. "Take his, and give it to me." That's greed.

There's nothing unconstitutional about it if a law is enacted according to the rules of the Constitution. If the House and Senate both okay a bill, the president signs it, and the judiciary doesn't object, then there's nothing unconstitutional about it one bit. I defy you to demonstrate precisely how the healthcare bill is unconstitutional.

In the meantime, I certainly hope you aren’t taking advantage of any tax write-offs, deductions, or loopholes this April. It would pain me to see you impugn your integrity by accepting any sort of unearned entitlement like a tax break.

"The only thing that needs reform in the health insurance realm is cutting off the illegal aliens that visit emergency rooms for non-emergency attention and then skip out on the bill."

If you genuinely believe that this is the only thing wrong with the healthcare system today, then you are seriously out of touch with reality.

WillB,

"Massachusetts starts the revolution against oppressive government!"

Oh, please. Could you possibly sound like more like Hugo Chavez? How exactly have you been oppressed over the past 12 months? And no, the painful trauma of not getting winning the last election doesn't quite constitute oppression. That's called the Democratic Process.

OMG democracy still does exist in the Age of Obama!!!

This is good for democracy, America and the world. Perhaps there can be some less hyperventilation (on both sides) and more elbow grease (from both sides) in solving the nation's ills.

Sarah Palin on Scott Brown's election: "This is a step for taking our country back." You betcha!

Ahhh Sarge, Sarah, and all liked minded folk, the vote demonstrated that the country was and remains where it should be... a democracy. Now, where are you thinking of taking it, if democracy isn't to your liking?

Democrats called the 2006 Congressional and 2008 Presidential elections kinda like a revolution against oppressive government, particularly due to laws like the controversial wide-encompassing Big-Brother-is-watching-you Patriot Act, which coincidentally enough was also rushed thru Congress just a month after 9/11 with hardly anyone reading through the bill.

Anyways, Massachusetts is kinda the punching-bag state. When John Kerry was running for prez 2004, many were chiding Mass. voters for electing him Senator (he's still the other Mass. Senator). I wouldn't be surprised if Mass. voters elect a blue-state Democrat again to replace Sen. Brown in 2012. Imagine what people would say about Mass. voters then.

Sarah Palin on Scott Brown's election: "This is a step for taking our country back."

You betcha!

And send it into the dark ages once more. Yipee.

Senator Brown. He will go to Washington, in a pickup truck. People are talkin about Palin but I think this is Limbaugh's big day more than hers.

Two governors and now Teddy K's seat. It is no longer a fluke by any standard. It is a referendum on both the Obama and democrats.

Good times.

Some of the bigtime media got real surprised about this. I think they mistakenly believed the Republicans couldn't organize like people did for Obama. Some humorist called it the Boston Tweet Party. And MSNBC has a new show: Keith Olbermann, Meltdown.

It's Bush's fault!!! :-)

The US government is like the credit card account of the people it claims to represent: maxed out. Where did all the money go? To Haliburton and the rest of the military-industrial complex.

It seems like MA has taken the "reins" of the nation once again. -The shot heard around the World 2.

Eeeek eeeeek.....my party is better than yours!!

Heh, tea-bagging victory cries or I hate Bush. What a sorry state the two party system is.

Anywhere Obama went to help (N.J, MA) it turned out to be a burial ground for the democrats. Next time, don't go. He needs to stop wasting our tax dollars flying around on Air Force One.

Hardly Lemming Day '06, was it ramen?

Heh.

There's nothing unconstitutional about it if a law is enacted according to the rules of the Constitution. If the House and Senate both okay a bill, the president signs it, and the judiciary doesn't object, then there's nothing unconstitutional about it one bit. I defy you to demonstrate precisely how the healthcare bill is unconstitutional.

How is it constitutional? Thats really the question you need to ask. Pelosi looked shocked that anyone would even consider it when questioned about this. Or don't you remember when she had one of her little moments? The commerce clause is what is used to allow this almost all the legislation to pass. However regulation of commerce has nothing to do with mandating every American to purchase healthcare. That is without question stepping over into states rights. And using a big boot to do it.

Mandating people to buy something is essentially nothing more then a tax, but calling it by some other name. Whats amusing is, that congress could pass a tax, without difficulty, provided it was a fair tax. They could then pass the money directly to a government insurance agency, essentially doing the same thing. However they won't do that, because they have pledged not to raise "taxes". So instead they mandate it, and do the same thing.

Anywhere Obama went to help it turned out to be a burial ground for the democrats...

That's what a lack of leadership will get you. Obama is all talk and no action and the US is starting to figure that out.

Heh, how times have changed.

If only John McCain were president......or was it Al Gore?

The US government is like the credit card account of the people it claims to represent: maxed out.

The money came from China and Japan. Its free money, a blank check, with almost zero interest. America has this power because republican presidents understood that the more America imports, the more free money the government gets from the exporting nations. Dont buy our paper bonds, NO PROBLEM. America wont allow you to sell your products in its markets.

Where did all the money go? To Haliburton and the rest of the military-industrial complex.

That money stayed in America, and is spent, in America. Propping up the American economy, trickling down, enriching and employing everyone. Whats your point?

Obama and his health care plans will make America sick, like Europe, teetering on the edge of bankrupt, with no good doctors to treat us. Its a fact, anyone with money living in countries with socialized medicine, who gets sick and wants the best care, comes to America and pays cash.

guest,

"Its a fact, anyone with money living in countries with socialized medicine, who gets sick and wants the best care, comes to America and pays cash."

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

Gee, the US were number 37. I daren't mention who was numéro un..... Perhaps if you're not stinking rich then it truly sucks to be ill in the US?

I wondering if this socialst loving, freedom-hating dictator Obama has a point...

Palin-Brown in '12!

sarge are you Predicting again?

I always knew you were a latent democrat.

LFRAgain:

Oh, please. Could you possibly sound like more like Hugo Chavez? How exactly have you been oppressed over the past 12 months?

Does something have to happen to you, directly, in order to exist? How narcissistic.

Forcing out a private-sector CEO would be enough for me, but there's also the forcing out of the inspector general who was investigating one of the president's friends. That doesn't sound like Hugo Chavez to you? Never mind, of course, that Obama promised during his presidential campaign that he would never do anything that smacked of cronyism or corruption such as, say, fire an inspector general.

Oh, you mean like how the Founding Fathers drew up a blueprint for the establishment of the Department of Transportation to govern trillions of dollars in road construction spending?

The Founding Fathers had cars?!? Who knew?

Your inability to recognize the quote just demonstrates your selective memory on a variety of subjects,

Meh, I just forgot. You want someone who claims to be perfect, find a liberal/Leftist/progressive/Democrat.

There's nothing unconstitutional about it if a law is enacted according to the rules of the Constitution. If the House and Senate both okay a bill, the president signs it, and the judiciary doesn't object, then there's nothing unconstitutional about it one bit.

Slavery was seen as constitutional at one time by the system you describe above, now it's not. Restrictions on the Second Amendment are still being argued. The Kelo decision is another example. Only through a skewed, agenda-driven mindset could it not be considered unconstitutional. But it passed.

In the meantime, I certainly hope you aren’t taking advantage of any tax write-offs, deductions, or loopholes this April. It would pain me to see you impugn your integrity by accepting any sort of unearned entitlement like a tax break.

Tax breaks aren't entitlements, that's MY money I get to keep, not someone else's money being given to me. Again, your re-interpretations are skewed towards your agenda. Now if you're one of those "tax the rich" liberals and then take advantage of every tax break and shelter you can find...

If you genuinely believe that this is the only thing wrong with the healthcare system today, then you are seriously out of touch with reality.

No, I also believe that tort reform is vital, and that some government meddling has only made things worse.

I've been considering this further in light of what occurred last night. It is my considered opinion, that health care is dead. It will not pass. If the Dems force it through, over the will of the voters, come November, they will react, and even the Senate, with 9 votes insulating them will be in play. The house will have one of the biggest political swings in American History as the voters revolt against Obama. I simply don't believe that enough Dems are willing to commit political suicide in order to pass this legislation. Don't kid yourself, thats what this is.

I simply don't believe that enough Dems are willing to commit political suicide in order to pass this legislation.

If they do, it will prove they care more about what's right for the vast majority of Americans than they do about a key percentage of angry white voters.

The important thing is that the Republicans have no plan and no ideas except going back to what has already proven to fail. If things turn out the way you predict, it will just show that God had not finished exacting His punishment on the United States.

If they do, it will prove they care more about what's right for the vast majority of Americans than they do about a key percentage of angry white voters.

Yabits, thats more spin then reality. The majority of Americans oppose the Dems health care reform. So what you're saying, is that they know whats better for Americans, then Americans do. And that even though Americans oppose it, they should do it anyway.

The important thing is that the Republicans have no plan and no ideas except going back to what has already proven to fail. If things turn out the way you predict, it will just show that God had not finished exacting His punishment on the United States.

Proven to fail? The centerpiece of the Republican plan is Tort Reform. That has never been tried, much less 'proven to fail'. Again, spin, not reality.

“There is a lot of anxiety in the country right now. Americans are understandably impatient.

Robert Hernandez is right, no matter how you look at it. High unemployment rate, excessive spending on War in Afghanistan, Health Care Reform, bank bailouts. The list goes on and on. But what makes people more impatient is the political culture in Washington. One side blaming the previous administration for current problems, and the other side who seems to be unwilling to find what is the possible solution for the people over legislation. When do both parties become seriously in changing political culture in Washington?

Obama and his health care plans will make America sick, like Europe, teetering on the edge of bankrupt, with no good doctors to treat us.

America was already sick even before the Obama administration, due to horrible health care system that leaves the country far behind the rest of the nations.

The majority of Americans oppose the Dems health care reform

That "majority" -- if it truly is such -- represents a narrow cross-section. The Republicans' lies about death panels (et. al.) were helpful in scaring off a large percentage of eldery -- who want the government's hands off of their Medicare. And then there's the angry whites, who resent the concept that they might have to help pay for someone else's care.

That's the kind of spirit that's driving America today. Courtesy of the Tea Bag Party.

This guy will lose in 2012 for sure when the presidential vote is on the ballot. However another example of how demos snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. For sure will encourage the tea-baggers to destroy the republican party now, not that it will take much to do that.

Let's get this straight. This was not a national referendum, it was a state's vote. < :-)

Sen. Brown will fly to Wash DC on Thursday, not on a pickup truck.

Hip Hip Hurray ! My "Cadillac" health insurance is saved ! It is a Great Day for the USA

Yabits still talking in circles !

"That "majority" -- if it truly is such -- represents a narrow cross-section.2

nonsense ! The "majority" is "the majority" !

"And then there's the angry whites, who resent the concept that they might have to help pay for someone else's care."

Americans have been paying for free health care, education, and housing for millions of illegals for decades now. Where exactly in America has Yabits been holed up to not know this ? Ha-ha !

Let's get this straight. This was not a national referendum, it was a state's vote. < :-)

You're right, it was a state vote, but it was a state vote that had successfully been nationalized. This was at its core a national referendum on Obamacare, and on Obama himself. And even in Massachusetts they came up short.

This guy will lose in 2012 for sure when the presidential vote is on the ballot. However another example of how demos snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. For sure will encourage the tea-baggers to destroy the republican party now, not that it will take much to do that.

And once again we hear about the destruction of the Republican party. I love this. Republicans led by those revolting against Obamas socialist policies seized control of a Senate seat in of all places, Massachusetts. How fitting that is by the way. All indications are they will follow through on this, and depending on the way things play out over then next 11 months, will quite possibly seize control of the House. The Senate is in all probability out of reach this election cycle, but will almost undoubtedly fall in 2012. Yes, Republicans are on the eve of their destruction. Or wait, wasn't 2008 when they were destroyed? With all the paranoid, nonsensical rambling I hear, I sometimes have a hard time keeping this destruction timetable straight.

Well, at least my family and I have government health care. Good luck to the rest of you.

Proven to fail? The centerpiece of the Republican plan is Tort Reform. That has never been tried, much less 'proven to fail'. Again, spin, not reality.

The people pushing this healthcare plan never mention this, Molenir, because people would see that by doing so it would lower the cost of malpractice insurance and change the way that healthcare organizations operate thereby lowering costs. It's not the health insurance plan that should be the priority, it's the legal system that needs fixing first.

If they do, it will prove they care more about what's right for the vast majority of Americans than they do about a key percentage of angry white voters.

Yabits, it's rhetoric like this that's makes me want to run out and vote Democrat. BTW, angry white voters are often angry because they're thinking white voters who can recognize BS when they see it, but of course diehard Democrats will label anyone that disagrees with what they say as "angry" or just "stupid".

BTW, angry white voters are often angry because they're thinking white voters who can recognize BS when they see it

Anger is one of those emotions that really leads to dumb decisions.

It is not a matter of party, but ideas to apply to the problems we face as a nation. I hear very, very few good ideas from the Republicans these days and many disastrous ones. Democratic ideas currently range from very bad to promising.

So, for the sake of the future of my country, I have to cast a vote against more Republican disaster.

Character is also critical, especially the integrity to own up to bad decisions. The Republican push for deregulation of just about everything has proven disastrous. But did they own up to it? No. They looked to the then-minority party to cast blame.

And so, for the sake of my country, I have to cast a vote against the Republicans' lack of integrity.

"Well at least my family and I have government health care. Good luck to the rest of you."

Your taxpayer-paid military health care is far better than what everyone else would get with Obama care. Nice attitude, dude.

My attitude is far better than those who would allow fellow Americans to either go bankrupt or die (perhaps both) than have nationalized health care. Oh well; at least my conscience is clear.

As a non-American, I didn't follow this election and only heard a few bits of information on the news. But what I did hear is that the winner has done some previous work in what seems to me to be to be a very non-conservative and non-Christian values field (and nobody seems to care), and the loser made a statement that appears to show a massive hole in her knowledge of baseball (in Massachusetts!!!), and American cultural history in general. It all seems a bit too weird to me, and really makes me wonder about the caliber of candidate who runs for Congress, from both parties. Wonder even more I should say.

But then maybe it is me who is weird. I don't get the "You gotta fight. For your right. To pay for private health insurance" mentality either.

If the Democrats truly wanted health care reform America would have had it by now.

They could have had it months ago.

Only days ago I read about Nancy Pelosi saying a reconciliation manoeuvre in the Senate was still an option, and that the result of the race for the late Ted Kennedy's seat was not important.

Democrats failed their party and the America which they claim to believe in.

Hey, USAFdude, why the heck is nationalized healthcare such a horrible option that the nation should be go bankrupt but nationalized roads, water, sewers, the army, post office, schools are just A-OK? What the hell is the difference? Remember during Reagan, or perhaps you were not born yet, that old fart tried to privatized the post office and boy that just didn't quite work out, and he had to seriously backtrack on it. Rural routes, (read redneck and REPUBLICAN) places were not profitable anymore. Too far away, and too much gas. Plus the price of stamps rose. And let's see....privatized army, oh yes, Blackwater. A "shiny" success that was in Iraq. So, I don't see Brown's candidacy going very far as this whole capitalist gig is going to end. I mean the US is bankrupt from all of the corporate socialism giveaways, but funding healthcare--what we pay for the troops in Iraq in ONE FREAKIN MONTH is unforgiveable. What the hell is your problem? Hate to have the poor treated?

Rat -

Hate to have the poor treated?

I suggest you read a few more of my posts; you're WAY off-base, kid.

Let's not forget the other part of Obama's agenda that also got trashed in this electiion besides his healthcare boondoogle.

It sure resonated with the good people of Massachusetts also.

He said in his VICTORY speech:

And let me say this with respect to the people who wish to harm us. I believe and I know all of you believe that our constitution and laws exist to protect this nation. Let me make it very, very, very clear… they do not grant rights and privileges to enemies in wartime.

And the message we need to send in dealing with terrorists is that our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them and not lawyers to defend them."

-Sen Scott Brown

Amen to that Senator Brown.

yabits:

If they do, it will prove they care more about what's right for the vast majority of Americans than they do about a key percentage of angry white voters.

What about the angry Asian voters? The angry Hispanic voters? The angry black voters? The angry Jewish voters?

The important thing is that the Republicans have no plan and no ideas except going back to what has already proven to fail.

That's not true. The congressional Republicans have tried to submit plans and legislation, only to be stonewalled by the congressional Democrats (led by Pelosi and Reid).

amerijap:

America was already sick even before the Obama administration, due to horrible health care system that leaves the country far behind the rest of the nations.

Again, that's a myth. Even when I've been unemployed, I never lacked for quality health care when I needed it.

yabits:

That "majority" -- if it truly is such -- represents a narrow cross-section.

Wow, did you get dizzy from that spin?

And then there's the angry whites, who resent the concept that they might have to help pay for someone else's care.

Could you be a bigger racist?

adaydream:

Let's get this straight. This was not a national referendum, it was a state's vote.

Except that Obama has called congress to scale back its aggressive takeover- er, I mean "reform" of the health care system. And, according to exit polling, 52% of voters were opposed to the federal takeover, and 42% were voting to stop it from passing.

USAFdude:

Well, at least my family and I have government health care. Good luck to the rest of you.

I have my own, it was easy to find and obtain, and it is affordable. In fact, it might even cost me less per month than your health coverage is costing me per month. My parents are both veterans, so they have the choice of using the VA hospitals and system, but they don't. Instead, they use the same private-sector health care system that I use. Now why do you think that is?

My attitude is far better than those who would allow fellow Americans to either go bankrupt or die (perhaps both) than have nationalized health care. Oh well; at least my conscience is clear.

How clear would your conscience be if you bankrupted the entire country and caused more people to die?

yabits:

Anger is one of those emotions that really leads to dumb decisions.

You mean like the anger that even president Obama admits got him elected? Fascinating.

TheRat:

Hey, USAFdude, why the heck is nationalized healthcare such a horrible option that the nation should be go bankrupt but nationalized roads, water, sewers, the army, post office, schools are just A-OK?

Roads are paid for with sales taxes on cars, taxes on fuel, vehicle registrations and tolls. Sewers are billed to the customer. The army is a necessity, otherwise there wouldn't be a country. The post office could pay for itself, but has management issues (Ever heard that about a government program before?). Schools are paid for through property taxes (I don't have kids, but I still have to pay for the public schools) and other means. Where would the trillions for PelosiCare come from, exactly?

Where would the trillions for PelosiCare come from, exactly? Uh, tax those who buy or sell stocks. Did it back in the 30s, and it worked out so well that the government had TOO much money. Could also close ALL of those nice tax havens, and loopholes and start going after, seriously this time, tax dodgers, starting with Cheney. Tax evasion, in their book, it is just called "being smart." Either way, right now, you have health care rationing. Just the poor do not get treated.

Yes, Republicans are on the eve of their destruction

Yes Molenir, they are, and unfortunately they are going to take the nation with it. With 1/3 of high school students dropping out and then really, really "identifying" with the likes of Palin (Who is your favorite founding father? 'Oh, ALL of them.' and What kind of newspapers do you read? 'Oh, this and that. Everything.') and with racist, nationalistic, sarcastic slogans and comments from Rush, how could it be anything different? All empires come to an end and this one, like all the rest will end with the "war party" in charge, as this is the ONLY thing the republicans like to spend money on, and it is the only industry left in the US besides spam, porn, and alcohol. They still make good whiskey, at least! Funny though Molenir, you seem to be just like one of these clowns. Really, really indoctrinated. Koolaid was tasty?

TheRat,

More interested in why you think a conservative took over Kennedy's Senate seat in Massachusetts, the bluest of the blue states myself. I think it wqas because they rejected Obama's policies and Agenda myself, what do you think?

Never heard of this Brown fellow before, but seems like just another republican jock with no common sense. Too bad so sad for USA.

Funny though Molenir, you seem to be just like one of these clowns. Really, really indoctrinated. Koolaid was tasty?

After reading your post which expresses much of the standard liberal hating points about Palin and Rush, as well as your moronic statement about how to pay for Obamacare. I was left wondering the same thing. Did you enjoy the koolaid? Out of curiosity who poured it for you. Was it your parents, your teachers, or a combination of the 2 that indoctrinated you in your hatred?

Never heard of this Brown fellow before, but seems like just another republican jock with no common sense. Too bad so sad for USA.

The majority of Americans are quite pleased at his election. There are even quite a few Dems happy to see their party's stranglehold on congress broken. This, is a good day for Americans. I'm hopeful that like Clinton, Obama will wise up and steer a more moderate course. If he does, he could wind up a being thought of as a decent President, if he continues on his present course though, he'll go down as another Carter.

If the GOP can win a hard-line liberal state (in whcih a republican hasn't held a senate seat in 57 and 31 years respectively), makes one wonder about the rest of the country. And its fitting that this election result should happen a year removed from President Obama's inaugeration. From listening to Pelosi and her friends in the House, sounds like they may tryto ramrod the helath care thing through. If they do, the Democrat party will get whitewashed in 10, and Good-bye Obama in12....

SebastianFlyte - it is unimportant asd to wehter you know who Senator Brown is or was before the election. The fact is, now you DO know him, and go ahead and make fun: President O. did, as sdid Coakley, and look what happened? A regular guy comes around, stands on his primciples, drives a pick-up around to visit with people and defeats TWO elitists (the count for President O. and campaigning for other DEMs stands at 0-3). If the Democrats in both houses don't wise up, they are all done January 3rd, 2011...

(the count for President O. and campaigning for other DEMs stands at 0-3)

Heh, even Obama has to recognize that he's political poison.

Well,my friends, I just came across this, and I can not express my anger,and my fear,and the horror it fills me with,and I really think the scientists who tend to the Doomsday Clock need to move it FORWARD to about 1 minute before midnight,aka ARMAGEDDON:

"I'm Scott Brown. I drive a truck."

WhiteHawk - Your parents have a choice in medical care; they would have retained that choice under Obama's health care reform. The issues of paying for it have already been addressed. Hence, my conscience would have remained clear. But thanks for asking.

I think it wqas because they rejected Obama's policies and Agenda myself, what do you think?

The 25% hike in the Mass. state sales tax a month before the election during a recession and 10% unemployment did nothing to mitigate the fear, anger and disgust felt by a lot of voters. Regarding the health care plan, everyone in Mass. is covered, courtesy of the state, and so overweening self-interest played a part as well.

Regarding the health care plan, everyone in Mass. is covered, courtesy of the state, and so overweening self-interest played a part as well.

Self-interest!!!! Those bastards!!!!

who wins now is greed and corruption and who loses are 45,000 more americans that die due to lack of healthcare in the richest country in the world. Makes you all proud, eh republicans.

Really none of you know what you are talking about when it comes to policies to help the USA recover from the bush failures. Its just more of the same anger and spin and hatred of things you all do not understand. Brown is the perfect example of the empty politician that republicans love like bush and palin. And exactly the people when in power that makes middle class americans lives miserable.

Another republican WMD was elected to attack the USA core and let China take over.

Regarding the health care plan, everyone in Mass. is covered, courtesy of the state, and so overweening self-interest played a part as well.

And most Massachusetts voters aren't happy about that either. Which makes me laugh when I consider it. Especially when you consider it was Romney that signed it into law. Though he had little choice, with the legislature poised and anxious to override him if he dared veto it.

who wins now is greed and corruption and who loses are 45,000 more americans that die due to lack of healthcare in the richest country in the world. Makes you all proud, eh republicans.

Yes, greed, corruption, and rescission, a.k.a. insurance fraud by health care industries and lobbyists, investors in Washington and Wall Street. Too bad those bad guys have been thriving for so many years, and treating uninsured(and potentially uninsured) Americans like trash. I'm afraid most people and politicians- regardless of political party are blind to those who are falling into the crack and who will be the next, possibly due to their obsession with self-interests.

The hysteria on The Hill from the democrats and their liberal familiars is truly a delight to witness. Even though The One descended from the heavens aboard AF-1 to save the day, they're stunned by Brown's upset victory and are bewildered as to how the voters could possibly turn their backs on Obama and his party of Endless Entitlements.

Obama's gone from hero to zero in less than 12 months.

Obama's gone from hero to zero in less than 12 months.

Not really. He's approval rate has been declining in a year, but it's not the worst in the history of US presidency. Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan had a very low approval rate in their first year, too.

"Another republican WMD was elected to attack the USA core and let China take over."

Anyone posting such nonsense doesn't know US politics. The last Republican senator to represent the people of Massachusetts was Edward W. Brooke, who lost to Democrat Paul E. Tsongas in the 1978 election. The Republican Brooke, by the way, was the first African American elected to the US Senate.

China to take over the US?

Please. Get real. Rush Limbaugh, off his meds and on his worst day, is not that far out.

zurcronium:

who wins now is greed and corruption and who loses are 45,000 more americans that die due to lack of healthcare in the richest country in the world.

Oh look, another Leftist who believes myths without questioning them.

Really none of you know what you are talking about when it comes to policies to help the USA recover from the bush failures.

For people who "don't know what we're talking about", we certainly seem to have no trouble defeating the arguments of those with your mindset.

RomeoRamenII:

Obama and his party of Endless Entitlements.

Very appropriate. Could be a band name, but instead it describes this administration very accurately. How about Obama and the Government Takeovers? They're playing a street corner near Yoyogi Park this weekend. ;)

GOP's Brown wins Massachusetts Senate race in blow to Obama

Bush, Cheney, Palin and Rush will all pay dearly for this sleight aganist Obama.

Gombei: "I just came across this, and I cannot express my anger, and my fear, and the horror it fills me with"

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Whitehawk,

“No, I also believe that tort reform is vital, and that some government meddling has only made things worse.”

You “also believe” . . . I see.

At 04:22 PM JST - 20th January, you wrote:

“The only thing that needs reform in the health insurance realm is cutting off the illegal aliens . . . “

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. It’ll save a lot of frustration on both sides.

Re: Being oppressed

“Does something have to happen to you, directly, in order to exist? How narcissistic.”

When channeling MLK with cries of, “Free at last! Free at last!” yeah, it sort of does. But beyond WillB’s apparent lack of having been actually oppressed, I’m left wondering who exactly in America is being oppressed right now. Moreover, I’m wondering if you and I are even working from the same definition of the word. I found three with a quick glance at a dictionary.

1) inflict stress on: to be a source of worry, stress, or trouble to somebody Perhaps this is what was meant. But this pretty much describes a rough day at work or a rush hour commute.

2) suppress: to hold something in check or put an end to it (archaic) Well, this usage isn’t even around anymore, so it can’t be this.

3) dominate harshly: to subject a person or a people to a harsh or cruel form of domination Obviously, this must be what WillB meant. It’s what comes to mind when people think of Saddam Hussein, Josef Stalin, or Benito Mussolini. But Barrack Obama? Like I said to WillB, oh, please. Cut the melodrama.

Yes, Obama fired Gerald Walpin without much ceremony or fanfare. Was it right of Obama to fire him the way he did? Probably not. But then again, I wasn’t the one in the position of having to deal with an IG who was essentially holding the city of Sacramento and its half-million citizens hostage to a demand to see that no federal funds whatsoever pass through Sacramento Mayor Johnson’s hands, including stimulus money, a revenue injection most if not all major municipalities across the nation desperately need, even now.

Walpin got fired. He didn’t get arrested. His family wasn’t threatened. He wasn’t jailed. He wasn’t beaten. He didn’t disappear, a la Jimmy Hoffa. He got fired. That’s not oppression. That’s a really, really crappy day at work.

“Forcing out a private-sector CEO . . .”

You mean the Rick Wagoner who helmed GM’s steady decline towards bankruptcy for the past 8 years? The Rick Wagoner who came to Washington begging for taxpayer (you and me) handouts, via a $20,000 round-trip private jet? Who then, when asked by Congress if he would be willing to set aside his $15 million annual salary and work for $1 a year to help his embattle company, he replied, "I don't have a position on that today"? The Rick Wagoner who, after being told to come up with a viable business plan that would show how GM planned to use our tax dollars, couldn’t come up with anything better than the commercial sound-bite, "We have products that are winning car and truck of the year regularly”? The Rick Wagner who left GM with a $21 million golden parachute? You mean THAT private-sector failed CEO who was asked to resign and sensibly complied? Oppressed? Wagoner’s lucky shareholders didn’t call for his head on a pike.

And as usual, I find yet another of your arguments dripping with hypocrisy. In particular, I didn’t hear a peep about “oppression” from Conservatives, yourself included, when President Bush authorized spying on U.S. citizens without warrant, when he had seven U.S. Attorneys fired by Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez – firings that were as politically motivated as some claim the Walpin firing to be.

Re: Your spurious argument that the Founding Fathers wrote into the Constitution provisions to legally mandate only specific social needs:

“The Founding Fathers had cars?!? Who knew?

I’m sorry. I just presumed you were aware of horses and carriages. My bad.

“Meh, I just forgot.

Which just makes me wonder what else you’ve “Meh. Just forgotten” while formulating your various opinions. Facts matter. History matters. Not that that appears to mean anything to you, judging by your cavalier attitude towards the oath-bound POTUS dismissing the most important legal document of our nation.

“Slavery was seen as constitutional at one time by the system you describe above, now it's not.

Was it your subconscious intent to undermine your own argument about constitutionality by pointing out that things change based on society’s needs?

Re: Your tax argument:

“Tax breaks aren't entitlements, that's MY money I get to keep, not someone else's money being given to me.”

Yeah, but the various projects that taxes pay for, by your definition (“My money paying for goods and services that will be used by someone else”), are entitlements. So what you’re saying here is that the money that comes back to you in the form of exemptions and deductions is YOUR money, but the money that doesn’t come back, e.g., the taxes you pay that are subsequently used for a host of federal projects, departments, and agencies, like roads, parks, fire departments, and police, may be fairly used by people you don’t even know. So, when I drive down the road tomorrow on roads built with your tax dollars, you’re okay with that?

I can only draw two conclusions from what you’ve said so far:

1) You’re against taxation, yet paradoxically pay them every year, so are therefore an enabler of the very Socialist system you claim to oppose.

Or . . .

2) You’ve chosen to take the wishy-washy path in your “Rage Against Socialism”™, wherein some Socialism is bad, but some is good, based on some as-yet unfathomable criteria. In which case, you opposition to Nationalized Health Care becomes considerably less compelling.

So, which is it? Ambivalence or “dropping trou’ and taking it”?

Moderator: Back on topic please.

It's interesting to watch how so many people are so excited to see their president fail. Says a lot about their character.

And before anyone spouts off nonsense about other people wishing bush would fail, let me set the record straight. No one wanted bush to fail. We wanted him to quit doing it so often.

HUGE difference.

Taka

"It's interesting to watch how so many people are so excited to see their president fail."

Yes, it's gratifying to see so many people waking up.

"It's interesting to watch how so many people are so excited to see their president fail."

Good point. What's really interesting is that a year ago, when Obama took office, solid blue Massachusetts would have been the last place any American would have looked for them :)

Taka,

No one wanted bush to fail. We wanted him to quit doing it so often.

Your posting his name every time with the small "b" sure did not help.

Again, that's a myth. Even when I've been unemployed, I never lacked for quality health care when I needed it.

who wins now is greed and corruption and who loses are 45,000 more americans that die due to lack of healthcare in the richest country in the world.

Oh look, another Leftist who believes myths without questioning them.

It's exactly what YOU ARE DOING right here. What you call myth is actually what is actually happening now in American society today. It is greedy health care industries, corporations, and lobbyists in Washington and the Wall Street who are creating myth that American health care system is just doing fine. Hell no. It's far left behind most developed countries. It’s no match to Japan where almost all people have the coverage. 47 million people uninsured, people losing health insurance after being fired, and those self-employed who cannot afford to pay insurance facing a serious consequence for buying private insurance without knowing their own medical history. The list goes on and on. But, most people and corporations do not really care what is happening for those who are having a hard time right now. A sad story.

Shonan -

What's really interesting is that a year ago, when Obama took office, solid blue Massachusetts would have been the last place any American would have looked for them

Sarge -

Yes, it's gratifying to see so many people waking up.

Actually, Sarge and Shonan raise a rather interesting point, although it's not a point that they intended to raise. Up to now, the only "criticisms" raised against Obama by neo-cons were irrational; they hate him for simply being a Democrat, or a liberal, or black, or they try (in vain) to slap with with ridiculous monikers like "socialist". But now, the people of a historically Democratic state have elected a Republican; I'd like to hear from those same people why they did so, without the vitriolic spin that would inevitably come from the mouths of Limbaugh, Palin, or Beck. No more need to hear Sarge and his ilk; let's hear from the people of Massachusetts themselves.

Let rational debate among Americans finally begin, unencumbered by Republican greed and propaganda. It's about time!

"But now, the people of a historically Democratic state have elected a Republican; I'd like to hear from those same people why they did so"

because Coakley stated on national radio that Curt Schilling, a long time Boston Red Sox pitcher and local hero, was an avid admirer and fan of.... The New York Yankees ! 'nough said, election OVER !

Messagechusetts spoke.

That the Democrats are tin-eared is not the fault of Palin, Limbaugh, or Beck, or Sarge.

Keep swinging, slugger.

Shonan - Let's hear more from the people of Massachusetts. I value their input whereas your neo-con garbage disinterests me.

Keep dodging, distracting, and deflecting, li'l guy!

The far left within the Democratic Party will make their majority implode either by feeling betrayed or by not understanding that they are the minority.

In either case, the country as a whole got a very big win this week. The Massachusetts smackdown of the democrats proves the tide is turning against Obama and his socialist regime.

This week, Scott Brown (R-Mass.) successfully pinned the "Lame Duck" badge on Obama one day shy of his first year in office. Now, that's historic.

amerijap:

It is greedy health care industries, corporations, and lobbyists in Washington and the Wall Street who are creating myth that American health care system is just doing fine.

Are you arguing that Pelosi, Reid and Obama aren't greedy?

It’s no match to Japan where almost all people have the coverage.

It's better. In Japan, people are routinely turned away from hospitals, even when they need care. In America, that doesn't happen.

47 million people uninsured,

Thank you for proving my point about believing myths without questioning them. You're still quoting a talking point that hasn't changed despite the fact that unemployment has gone from below 5% to over 10% (and some studies show even higher), and thousands, perhaps millions of illegal aliens have returned to their home countries in the economic collapse. Have you ever seen a breakdown of this infamous "47 million" number?

and those self-employed who cannot afford to pay insurance

I got laid off in the collapse, am now self-employed, and I have health insurance. Less than $100/month.

facing a serious consequence for buying private insurance without knowing their own medical history.

My insurance company has said they will cover the removal of the metal implants that were installed due to my broken leg (motorcycle accident) last year. The doctor wants to remove the metal in another year or so, and it will be covered. No problem.

Got any more myths?

Still can't see why most Americans don't want the proposed legislation? Independent and even Democrat voters in Massachusetss voted in a Republican mainly to prevent a 60-vote majority. There are fixes needed, but this $1,000,000,000,000 bureaucratic nightmare simply isn't.

USAFdude:

Up to now, the only "criticisms" raised against Obama by neo-cons were irrational; they hate him for simply being a Democrat, or a liberal, or black, or they try (in vain) to slap with with ridiculous monikers like "socialist".

You're right, "socialist" is a ridiculous moniker. "Marxist" is much more appropriate. So is "Alinskyite".

By the way, have any proof about that often-claimed, never substantiated, racism allegation?

(My neighbor is a staunch, life-long Democrat. His wife is a Berkeley liberal. She voted for Obama, but he sat out this election. Just couldn't bring himself to vote for even a partially black man. Me, I'd vote for Thomas Sowell in a heartbeat if someone could convince him to run. So much for your right-wingers-are-racists myth.)

But now, the people of a historically Democratic state have elected a Republican; I'd like to hear from those same people why they did so, without the vitriolic spin that would inevitably come from the mouths of Limbaugh, Palin, or Beck. No more need to hear Sarge and his ilk; let's hear from the people of Massachusetts themselves.

You already have. It's called exit polling. Try to pay attention, please.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31708.html

Let rational debate among Americans finally begin, unencumbered by Republican greed and propaganda.

In order for it to be rational debate, it would have to be unencumbered by Democrat fear-mongering and power-grabbing and yes, propaganda.

LFRAgain:

But then again, I wasn’t the one in the position of having to deal with an IG who was essentially holding the city of Sacramento and its half-million citizens hostage to a demand to see that no federal funds whatsoever pass through Sacramento Mayor Johnson’s hands, including stimulus money, a revenue injection most if not all major municipalities across the nation desperately need, even now.

You mean the investigation into the criminal misappropriation of said stimulus money? (The stimulus money that is so "needed", yet doesn't appear to be having much effect?) Again, you have an interesting way of looking at the world. Inaccurate, agenda-based, and disturbingly defensive, but interesting.

Walpin was fired for investigating the misappropriation of government funds by one of Obama's friends. Period. Also, Obama promised while campaigning that he wouldn't fire any IGs. Perhaps such blatant corruption and cronyism was also on the minds of Massachusetts' voters.

The Rick Wagoner who came to Washington begging for taxpayer (you and me) handouts, via a $20,000 round-trip private jet?

Maybe he should have flown to Geneva on a private jet to receive a Nobel prize for being an environmentalist? (Or was it Oslo? Meh, I forget.)

Who then, when asked by Congress if he would be willing to set aside his $15 million annual salary and work for $1 a year to help his embattle company, he replied, "I don't have a position on that today"?

Were you critical of the AIG employees who did work for a $1 a year, only to call their deferred salaries "bonuses"? I'll wager you did.

Wagoner’s lucky shareholders didn’t call for his head on a pike.

Then why didn't the shareholders remove him?

And as usual, I find yet another of your arguments dripping with hypocrisy. In particular, I didn’t hear a peep about “oppression” from Conservatives, yourself included, when President Bush authorized spying on U.S. citizens without warrant, when he had seven U.S. Attorneys fired by Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez – firings that were as politically motivated as some claim the Walpin firing to be.

I'll see your seven and raise you ninety-three. The firings under Bush were for political reasons, but not your misrepresentation of them. When a judge is not a judge, but rather a political activist, they shouldn't be surprised when they get fired. Especially when it's legal to fire them for any reason, even none at all. How much did you complain when co-presidents Clinton fired all federal judges and replaced them with ones from their own mob family? You think that wasn't political? If your previous observations are any indication, you probably do.

(Before you get your undies in a bunch, "mob family" was an example of tongue-in-cheek humor.)

Which just makes me wonder what else you’ve “Meh. Just forgotten” while formulating your various opinions.

So you're claiming to be perfect then? Fine, I'll hold you to that standard.

Was it your subconscious intent to undermine your own argument about constitutionality by pointing out that things change based on society’s needs?

Is that your rebuttal? That society needs this $1,000,000,000,000 bureaucratic nightmare just to cover 3% of the population? Are you saying society needs to be threatened with fines and jail time for not buying health insurance or signing onto the government plan? Are you saying that society needs political corruption infused into their health-care system? Is that your argument? I believe the voters in one district of Massachusetts have answered your argument. So have many national polls.

Equating freedom from slavery with getting someone else to pay your medical bills... priceless Leftist intellectualism.

So, when I drive down the road tomorrow on roads built with your tax dollars, you’re okay with that?

With the way you drive? No. ;)

You’re against taxation, yet paradoxically pay them every year, so are therefore an enabler of the very Socialist system you claim to oppose.

Ah yes, the absolutist argument. I'm against excessive taxation. I'm also against excess spending. Does that mean I want everything to come to screeching halt? No, only an idiot would suggest that.

In my own life, I don't stop all of my spending when my budget gets stretched, I just cut out the frivolous stuff. Why this didn't occur to you but your ridiculous absolutist argument did says a lot about you, frankly.

By the way, if I don't pay my taxes, I get fined or jailed. So it's not like I can just refuse. Instead, I vote. Just like the people in Massachusetts voted the other night.

Funny, the mentality they voted against is remarkably similar to yours. No wonder you're taking it so personally.

My insurance company has said they will cover the removal of the metal implants that were installed due to my broken leg (motorcycle accident) last year. The doctor wants to remove the metal in another year or so, and it will be covered. No problem.

I just want to clarify something before it gets taken out of context or misrepresented by one of my debate partners: I did not request that my insurance cover my subsequent surgery. I was merely going over my medical history and existing conditions with their representative, and she said it would be covered.

Further, I would not request an insurance company to cover a pre-existing condition and find the concept ridiculous on its face. But this is exactly what Obama, Pelosi, and their blogging, posting sycophants expect - no, demand - of insurance companies. It's like wrecking your car (or in my case, motorcycle), or buying a wrecked car, and then buying an insurance policy after the fact and expecting them to repair the car. But such is the entitlement mindset of the far-Left.

It's the mentality that voters in one district of Massachusetts were voting against the other day. For one of the most liberal, "progressive" parts of the country, the far-Left is just too far for them.

WhiteHawk:

Are you arguing that Pelosi, Reid and Obama aren't greedy?

For what purpose??? To involve in which is better/worse/greedy/evil kind of like debate, and prove "I'm right, your wrong"???? Ha. Forget it. You're asking the wrong person for that game. It's a waste of time.

It's better.

OK, then prove it. I don't see any news reports suggesting that current health care system in this country has helped curbing the uninsured people in the last few years. Most of what I hear in the US is that people are getting sick, losing insurance, and/or filing for bankruptcy.

In Japan, people are routinely turned away from hospitals, even when they need care. In America, that doesn't happen. In America, that doesn't happen.

Red herring. You're making an unconvincing argument on people's willingness/unwillingness to take medication/surgery when they need. And you're generalizing how people in a different country behave when they're facing a life crisis.

Thank you for proving my point about believing myths without questioning them.

Oh, you're welcome. Again, you call it a myth, but you don't provide any reason/evidence for that. You're simply begging the question.

You're still quoting a talking point that hasn't changed despite the fact that unemployment has gone from below 5% to over 10% (and some studies show even higher), and thousands, perhaps millions of illegal aliens have returned to their home countries in the economic collapse.

These people are uninsured because they cannot afford to pay the insurance due to their socio-economic status. They are struggling-- not recently but for many years before Obama became the president. I gave you a rough number, but it doesn't really matter whether it includes immigrants or not. And it doesn't matter how many immigrants represent those uninsured. I don't have to break down of those statistics further because it's pointless. We all know it is people of lower income class and working poor who are affected most, including some mid-income class. This is not about Republicans' or Democrats' view.

I got laid off in the collapse, am now self-employed, and I have health insurance. Less than $100/month.My insurance company has said they will cover the removal of the metal implants that were installed due to my broken leg (motorcycle accident) last year. The doctor wants to remove the metal in another year or so, and it will be covered. No problem.

You're just one of those lucky employees. Good for you! Not all of those are fortunate enough like you. Insurance companies generally judge your eligibility based on your financial ability to pay the insurance and your medical history. Most insured folks-- especially those who have been uninsured for a long period do not necessarily know their health status. That's why uninsured folks often get into trouble when they take surgeries and claim the insurance: insurance companies kick them out by notifying the termination of coverage for the failure to report their medical history precisely. That's how a half of million people get bankrupt every year.

Got any more myths?

Thanks for your story. Yeah, you're creating the myth by making a hasty generalization on the problems with health care system in this country. This is America. You're NOT living in a small world like Japan or South Korea. And not all Americans are living in a developed, huge, urbanized city like Tokyo, New York, or Seoul.

WhiteHawk -

By the way, have any proof about that often-claimed, never substantiated, racism allegation?

There is so much substantiation for the relentless racism against Obama (simply Google "racism against Obama") that you would have to be aware of it. Stop with your boldfaced lying, WhiteHawk.

Scott Brown is a Republican, the first Republican to represent Massachusetts since Senator Brooke, who was the first black American to be elected to the US Senate, back in 1966.

There is no racism against Obama. To argue that America has become more racist since 1966 would redefine the word absurd.

Shonan, do your research. Once again, the facts prove you wrong.

Facts prove me all wrong and stuff, and the absentee military vote in Massachusetts was like, totally behind Coakley.

American politics have been broken for a long long time, why complain? You can't fix it, just enough the ride to oblivion, which ever coffin you prefer, Democrat or Republican. soon the Chinese will be tolling the bell. R.I.P misguided capitalist giant... it was fun.

American politics have been broken for a long long time, why complain? You can't fix it, just enough the ride to oblivion, which ever coffin you prefer, Democrat or Republican.

Yeah. It's "Broken, Beat, and Scarred." Just like Metallica's song. LOL. People need to think seriously over the lingering problems with the core of its democratic system, but we're not sure when it will happen. I'll just have to wait and see what's coming next.

The hysterics from the left at this election on this board are mild compared to the conniption fit this guy had.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4aQCiRjvZY&feature=player_embedded

"soon the Chinese will be tolling the bell. R.I.P misguided capitalist giant... it was fun."

How soon, exactly? Cuz I am old enough to remember being told the Soviets would bury us, and then it was the Japanese who were gonna pass us by and buy up our country, or that the EU was gonna replace America as the engine that drove world economies...

have any proof about that often-claimed, never substantiated, racism allegation?

Sure, WhiteHawk. The racism directed at Obama has come from within the ranks of the Democratic Party elite; aka, the party of tolerance (Clinton, Biden, Reid). Even Obama has played the racism card on himself with his, "I don't look like all the others on the one dollar bill" comment.

It is just a minor setback for Democrats. Locals can not find the suitable candidate for senate. It is totally about local issue. Not about the nation. I do not like the elected senator either. He was a male model and stripped bare when he was young. It is so embarrassing for seeing the senator in his naked photos.

Obama has admitted he has out of touch with voters for some issues. He will reinvented and energized himself for becoming the second term re elected president of USA. God bless Barack Hussein Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Democrat party and Massachusetts. Remember GOP broke the nation and economy. Democrats is fixing their mess and it will take sometime for making the progress.

Looks like some Massachusetts voters are already regretting electing Brown.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/22/king.sotu.mass/index.html

sailwind,

That video has got to be one of the funniest I've ever seen. So not right, but hilarious at the same time.

amerijap:

For what purpose???

To show you that greed applies to more than one thing. In the case of Pelosi, Reid and Obama, it's greed for votes and power. The Democrats do this through dependency. Getting as many people as they can dependent on government programs.

You're asking the wrong person for that game. It's a waste of time.

You're obstinate. Duly noted.

Most of what I hear in the US is that people are getting sick, losing insurance, and/or filing for bankruptcy.

And you hear that the ice caps are melting because wealthy people drive SUVs. What you don't hear (and apparently aren't interested in) are the specifics. Many people don't have money for health insurance because they've spent money on cars that are more expensive than they need, flat-screen TVs, etc. Their priorities are elsewhere. It's not like I'm immune to such thinking myself. I don't have a flat-screen tele, but if I didn't exercise some self-control, I would have more motorcycles and not be able to afford health insurance. There are people in America who are truly needy, but there aren't 47,000,000 of them, and it won't take $1,000,000,000,000 to cover them.

Red herring.

No, you said Japan's system is better. That means that Japan's system doesn't fail it's citizens. In Japan, people needing care are turned away from hospitals, in America they're not. In Japan, people are denied health care. In America, they are treated, and then pay for the treatment with 0% interest loans. Therefore, the system in Japan is not better than the system in America. Got it?

Again, you call it a myth, but you don't provide any reason/evidence for that.

Direct personal experience doesn't qualify as evidence? Wow, no wonder you can't change your mind.

I gave you a rough number, but it doesn't really matter whether it includes immigrants or not. And it doesn't matter how many immigrants represent those uninsured. I don't have to break down of those statistics further because it's pointless.

It doesn't matter? It's pointless? Just through a trillion dollars or so at the problem, specifics don't matter!

You're just one of those lucky employees.

No, I'm an individual who took responsibility for himself instead of crying to the government. If someone who is over 40, struggling with a new business venture, has metal in his leg from a motorcycle accident last year, and a cardiac arrest in his medical history file can buy a good policy for less than $100/month, what's holding millions of other Americans back?

Why are you lecturing me about the availability of health insurance? Have you bought your own? I have, so where do you get your expertise?

USAFdude:

There is so much substantiation for the relentless racism against Obama (simply Google "racism against Obama") that you would have to be aware of it.

Okay, I did. And all I got was more claims of racism without examples (Ironically, one involved statements made by Bob Dylan, the famous Leftist hippie). The first item on the list contained: "Socialist, Nazi, Muslim, Anti-Christ, Non-Christian, Hitler, Baby Killer." Except none of those terms are racist, and all but two of them were used by Leftist critics and George W. Bush. And no, "Muslim" is not a race. It's a religion.

I asked you for proof, and instead of providing any, you told me to look for it myself (imagine that, a Leftist wanting someone else to do his work for them). I tried it your way and didn't get the results you said I would. And you accuse me of lying?

*RomeoRamennII:

Sure, WhiteHawk. The racism directed at Obama has come from within the ranks of the Democratic Party elite; aka, the party of tolerance (Clinton, Biden, Reid). Even Obama has played the racism card on himself with his, "I don't look like all the others on the one dollar bill" comment.

RR for the win.

Athletes:

It is just a minor setback for Democrats. Locals can not find the suitable candidate for senate. It is totally about local issue. Not about the nation.

Wow, I thought the spinning had already stopped. There was more passion in this election than that district has seen seen Chappaquiddick. Even long-time Democrats voted for Brown. And they did so because of a national issue. Not because he promised to fix potholes in the local streets, but because he promised to vote against a piece of national legislation.

Obama has admitted he has out of touch with voters for some issues. He will reinvented and energized himself for becoming the second term re elected president of USA.

Yes, he might, but only for the election itself. Remember, Obama has already re-vented himself - he's a very different person from the one who made all of his campaign promises.

WhiteHawk

All right. Go on. Keep going. No matter what you say, believe, and think "you are right they are wrong" doesn't make any sense to me at all. The biggest mistake you make is that you assume that those who point out the uninsured people are the leftists, democrats, and anti-Republicans. Absolutely ridiculous! Do some research, and get the facts before you bulldoze your pet-theory to all of us in this board. Even if I was a dye-in-the wool republican,(and I'm not an ultra liberal either), I don't see any of your point compelling. All I can see in your postings is an idiocy which is of a kind.

WhiteHawk -

I tried it your way and didn't get the results you said I would. And you accuse me of lying?

I just tried it "my way" again and got plenty of results. Yep, I accuse you of lying; now, I've proven you're a liar.

Amerijap certainly has an accurate idea of you (see above). Not much point in continuing to write your thesis-length posts only to have me crush them in a few lines, now is there?

WhiteHawk -

imagine that, a Leftist wanting someone else to do his work for them

I'll remember that the next time I deploy. Imagine that - a rightie wanting someone else to risk his life for them.

All right. Go on. Keep going. No matter what you say, believe, and think "you are right they are wrong" doesn't make any sense to me at all.

Sounds like someone giving up the argument. I'm right, I know I'm right, I can't prove it, all the evidence is against me but I'm still right and you're wrong.

I don't see any of your point compelling. All I can see in your postings is an idiocy which is of a kind.

I found his posts and arguments to be both compelling and logical. They were very well written. Of course it probably doesn't hurt that I agree with him. But then it would be true even if I didn't.

I'll remember that the next time I deploy. Imagine that - a rightie wanting someone else to risk his life for them.

You're calling Obama a rightie? How far out in left field are you?

You're calling Obama a rightie? How far out in left field are you?

Disappontingly immature response from you, Molenir; normally, you're the one I can count on for a rational response, even when I disagree with you. Hope you get over your "bad spell" soon.

Disappontingly immature response from you, Molenir; normally, you're the one I can count on for a rational response, even when I disagree with you. Hope you get over your "bad spell" soon.

Did I misquote, or misrepresent you? Yes, I realize you probably didn't intend it the way it sounded. But to me, it seemed like you were saying, next time you deploy, you would blame the "rightie" for risking your life. Since the person deploying you, is about as far left as I can imagine, either you misstated what you meant, or you were implying that Obama is far to your right. Alternatively, I could have simply misread what you intended. I grant that as option number 3, and given your response, the most likely candidate.

Disappointing attempt to "dodge, distract, and deflect" from you, Molenir. But, no problem; it was easy for me to catch.

USAFdude:

I just tried it "my way" again and got plenty of results. Yep, I accuse you of lying; now, I've proven you're a liar.

Until you post those results, you have proven anything.

haven't

amerijap:

The biggest mistake you make is that you assume that those who point out the uninsured people are the leftists, democrats, and anti-Republicans.

Is that what I said? Perhaps you missed my summation on another thread:

"It's not that Americans - even "evil Republicans" - don't want to provide care for those who genuinely need it. But it's how to go about it that's the argument. Democrat voters (not all, but many) want health care of the same quality we have now, they just want the bill sent to someone else. Preferably a Republican. Democrat leaders want the power to say who gets what, and use that power to build their unquestioning voting block. Republican (and independent, if the last three elections are any indication) voters don't want corrupt, inept idiots like Pelosi, Murtha, Obama, etc., having any more control over their lives and money than they do already. They don't want another system that is going to be bursting the budget with fraud and abuse, as so many other government social programs are now. Republican leaders want tort reform in order to bring down the cost of health insurance, so more people can afford it on their own.

Most Americans (and statically that has to include some Democrats) don't want the program that has been proposed by the current Democrat leadership. Instead of a $1,000,000,000,000+ bureaucratic nightmare, how just giving each American citizen who can't get health insurance a $1,000,000 medical savings account and be done with it? Why not? Because it's too simple, it doesn't involve enough lawyers or paperwork, it doesn't give Democrat leaders more control over the lives of nearly all Americans, and it doesn't put more leverage money into a system of corruption and political influence (just imagine Murtha having a health-care paradise in his district of Pennsylvania while the rest of the country makes do with less)."

Even if I was a dye-in-the wool republican,(and I'm not an ultra liberal either), I don't see any of your point compelling.

Really? Not even:

"There are people in America who are truly needy, but there aren't 47,000,000 of them, and it won't take $1,000,000,000,000 to cover them."

Wow, that surprised even me. Fine, be close-minded and intolerant of any information that challenges your prejudicial worldview. It will hurt you worse than it will hurt me.

WhiteHawk - First, you give us:

Until you post those results, you [haven't] proven anything.

Then, it's:

Fine, be close-minded and intolerant of any information that challenges your prejudicial worldview. It will hurt you worse than it will hurt me.

Typical conservative hypocrisy. Do your own homework, even if you lack the guts to admit that what you'll find (and have already seen) backs up my argument. Later.

None of my business this is an internal matter of the Americans. I do admire the American Republic when this happens. Not the overturn but the fact it can happen or not happen. The "safe" Kennedy seat was turned over to the opposing party and did not become "heredity".

Typical conservative hypocrisy. Do your own homework, even if you lack the guts to admit that what you'll find (and have already seen) backs up my argument.

Yeah, it's back to the same-old-same-old with you. You can't counter my arguments, you can't give any proof to your claims, and yet you still try to put all the fault on me. Just what do you do in the Air Force?

Since you can't provide an example of racism against Obama, I guess I'll have to do it for you:

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/01/iranian-official-on-obama-the-only-change-is-that-this-ner-talks-about-regime-change/

Oh wait, that's an Iranian politician. So much for Obama improving America's standing in the world, eh? Oh and look, he went to Berkeley, that haven of tolerance and progressive post-racialism (or whatever it's called).

WhiteHawk

Sounds like it's YOU who are truly obstinate. I can imagine you want to pull me in the bitching contest. Again, you're completely clueless.

Is that what I said?

Sigh. Read my response carefully. I didn't say "WHAT YOU SAID." I said, "YOU ASSUME." Don't be ridiculous.

But it's how to go about it that's the argument. Democrat voters (not all, but many) want health care of the same quality we have now, they just want the bill sent to someone else. Preferably a Republican. Democrat leaders want the power to say who gets what, and use that power to build their unquestioning voting block. Republican (and independent, if the last three elections are any indication) voters don't want corrupt, inept idiots like Pelosi, Murtha, Obama, etc., having any more control over their lives and money than they do already. They don't want another system that is going to be bursting the budget with fraud and abuse, as so many other government social programs are now. Republican leaders want tort reform in order to bring down the cost of health insurance, so more people can afford it on their own.

I'm not interested in power struggles between Republicans and Democrats in the first place. I don't care how much you criticize and demonize Obama, Nanci Pelosi, or any other democrats for being greedy or hypocritical, because it is NONE OF MY BUSSINESS. You are simply mixing up with political strategies and the current problems with health care system. Most republicans are NOT happy with the current health care system, either. They are rational-- unlike you, and are well aware that it’s way behind the other nations.

Look at your previous postings. You made a response to me in parallel with your main opponents in a single thread. You know why? Because you think I am in the same group with the rest of your opponents. That means, you fail to tell the difference between me and the other opponents by antagonizing me as one of your menacing opponents in this thread. That's what you did in your responses.

"There are people in America who are truly needy, but there aren't 47,000,000 of them, and it won't take $1,000,000,000,000 to cover them."

Not even close. Because it's specious. First, I don't know your definition of needy(or poverty) in this sentence. And Second, where's your evidence to prove your point that uninsured people are far less than what the most media project??? And, thirdly, you don't have to be Republicans to disagree with Democrats' plan. Besides, people in this country are neither happy with the Democrats nor the Republicans now. The folks are very angry with Obama and the Democrats, but they are NOT trusting the Republicans right now, either.

One has to wonder why conservatives seem so able to excuse the failures of W in his first years, think 9-11, while seemingly able to write off Obama as a failure in the same period?

Could it be that the conservatives never left campaign mode. They have been gunning for his defeat from day one. They chose to sit on the sidelines and look for "waterloo" events while excusing themselves from any culpability for why the US economy is in the state that it is in.

If conservatives show us anything it is not about leadership, getting results or solving problems but rather that it is all partisan politics all the time and the truth be damned. You need neither logic nor the ability to prove anything. All you need is a loud voice and the ability to keep your fellow party members in goosestep with each other.

Of course I am a firm believer that the US gets what it deserves, and if the people of the USA are so fickle that they will hand back power to the goons that caused the majority of the nation’s problems then the people deserve to live in the conservative wonder land that will be created. Let their children cry for what might have been, I for one feel no sorrow to the hourly worker who votes GOP.

amerijap:

Sigh. Read my response carefully. I didn't say "WHAT YOU SAID." I said, "YOU ASSUME." Don't be ridiculous.

Ah, so you're reading my thoughts now.

I'm not interested in power struggles between Republicans and Democrats in the first place. I don't care how much you criticize and demonize Obama, Nanci Pelosi, or any other democrats for being greedy or hypocritical, because it is NONE OF MY BUSSINESS.

So you complain about the private sector being "greedy" (01:46 AM JST - 22nd January and 12:56 AM JST - 23rd January), but when it's time to hear about the greed of those running the government, it's none of your business?

This isn't just about the power struggles between the Republicans and the Democrats, it's also about the power struggles between the government (currently run by the Democrats), the private sector and the citizens. Why can't you see that?

Most republicans are NOT happy with the current health care system, either.

But do you understand why? It's not for the same reasons as the Left. How many times do I have to post that the Republicans (and other center-right Americans) want tort reform?

Look at your previous postings. You made a response to me in parallel with your main opponents in a single thread. You know why? Because you think I am in the same group with the rest of your opponents. That means, you fail to tell the difference between me and the other opponents by antagonizing me as one of your menacing opponents in this thread. That's what you did in your responses.

How am I supposed to tell you apart from the other anti-private-sector Leftists when the ill-informed dogma you spout sounds so much like their ill-informed dogma?

Oops, forgot to respond to this:

Not even close. Because it's specious. First, I don't know your definition of needy(or poverty) in this sentence.

I'm sorry, I thought I made that clear. Which part did you not understand? The part about those who truly cannot help themselves, or the part about those who can but have misplaced priorities?

And Second, where's your evidence to prove your point that uninsured people are far less than what the most media project???

Where's your evidence that it's accurate? 47,000,000 people? There isn't a single state in the U.S. that has that many people.

Besides, over one trillion dollars?!? We would have to have no health care available in the U.S. before it would cost over $1,000,000,000,000 to remedy the situation.

And, thirdly, you don't have to be Republicans to disagree with Democrats' plan.

Yes, I think Boston proved that.

Besides, people in this country are neither happy with the Democrats nor the Republicans now. The folks are very angry with Obama and the Democrats, but they are NOT trusting the Republicans right now, either.

I never said that wasn't the case. Nor did I try to imply it. But do you understand why, or is that none of your business?

WhiteHawk -

Yeah, it's back to the same-old-same-old with you. You can't counter my arguments, you can't give any proof to your claims, and yet you still try to put all the fault on me. Just what do you do in the Air Force?

Even after I've given you the resource (Google) to totally verify my arguments (which you did, but won't admit), your last-ditch, desperate effort is to impugn the USAF? Pathetic.

WhiteHawk:

Well, well, well. Aren't you done with this yet??? I don't know what's your problem is. Most of your "menacing" opponents seem to be walking away. Looks like they are giving up on you.

So you complain about the private sector being "greedy" (01:46 AM JST - 22nd January and 12:56 AM JST - 23rd January), but when it's time to hear about the greed of those running the government, it's none of your business?

NOPE. But, that doesn't mean the Obama Administration has the serious problem. He does actually. And I agree that some of his folks you mention are gaining the powers and trying to control the national market. To some extent, they could be seen greedy. But, you know what? That's exactly what people do when they take the office, regardless of their political party. We have seen this for many years in the US. And, I'm totally different from you in that I don't display overly emotional and irrational behavior shown in your comments.

This isn't just about the power struggles between the Republicans and the Democrats, it's also about the power struggles between the government (currently run by the Democrats), the private sector and the citizens. Why can't you see that?

Read your comments below once again. Where did you touch on the impacts on the privator sector and citizens?

--(qte) But it's how to go about it that's the argument. Democrat voters (not all, but many) want health care of the same quality we have now, they just want the bill sent to someone else. Preferably a Republican. Democrat leaders want the power to say who gets what, and use that power to build their unquestioning voting block. Republican (and independent, if the last three elections are any indication) voters don't want corrupt, inept idiots like Pelosi, Murtha, Obama, etc., having any more control over their lives and money than they do already. They don't want another system that is going to be bursting the budget with fraud and abuse, as so many other government social programs are now. Republican leaders want tort reform in order to bring down the cost of health insurance, so more people can afford it on their own.--(unqte)

But do you understand why? It's not for the same reasons as the Left. How many times do I have to post that the Republicans (and other center-right Americans) want tort reform?

NO. You are totally confused with current health care system and the reform bill both Democrats and Republicans are working on. The US is way behind most of the developed countries because their national health care system has serious flaws.

How am I supposed to tell you apart from the other anti-private-sector Leftists when the ill-informed dogma you spout sounds so much like their ill-informed dogma?

You simply didn't pay attention to the difference between my points and the other opponents'. That's why you put it on the same venue, drawling on your egotistic ideas on this board.

There isn't a single state in the U.S. that has that many people.

Calling the kettles black pots. That's the reason why you didn't realize the seriousness of problem. Like I said, it's a rough number. But, most news media project the uninsured people in an entire nation from 40- 50 million. It's not Japan or South Korea. It's America that has 280 million people in 50 states!

Wow, that surprised even me. Fine, be close-minded and intolerant of any information that challenges your prejudicial worldview. It will hurt you worse than it will hurt me.

It is YOU who has an apparent prejudice on the worldview. Your comment on Japanese health care system-- your bias on Japanese people over the medicare, per se-- is a good example. That has absolutely nothing to do with the system nor the quality of medicare.

I am a rubber and you are glue. Everything you say bounces off from me, and sticks to you. I hope you suffer no one. You'll be dangerous if you have a higher education.

The amount of arguing politics creates in the American culture is incredible. If Americans could harness that amount of thought and bickering to actually pushing forward on something, they would be in a better place.

Debate isn't bad, but when it comes to near pointless argument when neither side will make any concessions and closes their minds to all viewpoints but their own.

Most of your "menacing" opponents seem to be walking away. Looks like they are giving up on you.

They just bounce from thread to thread. Why do you find them so menacing?

And I agree that some of his folks you mention are gaining the powers and trying to control the national market. To some extent, they could be seen greedy. But, you know what? That's exactly what people do when they take the office, regardless of their political party.

Finally. But you're wrong, not all politicians are like that. There have been notable exceptions who return power to states and citizens.

Where did you touch on the impacts on the privator sector and citizens?

Seriously? You can't see it? Okaaaaay...

Democrat voters (not all, but many) want health care of the same quality we have now, they just want the bill sent to someone else. Preferably a Republican. Democrat leaders want the power to say who gets what, and use that power to build their unquestioning voting block.

If this were to play out, the DNC would strengthen its party base. Envy-based tax systems do the same thing, as do other social programs. The more people you have under a government health-care system, the more people you can scare by saying "the Republicans want to take away your health care!" Democrat candidates have been using that line for social security and welfare for years. Also, the private sector would suffer, as they would lose many clients to the "free" government program.

Republican (and independent, if the last three elections are any indication) voters don't want corrupt, inept idiots like Pelosi, Murtha, Obama, etc., having any more control over their lives and money than they do already. They don't want another system that is going to be bursting the budget with fraud and abuse, as so many other government social programs are now. Republican leaders want tort reform in order to bring down the cost of health insurance, so more people can afford it on their own.

You can't see how inept and/or corrupt politicians can have a detrimental effect on citizens? Really?!? Imagine Murtha, congress's "King of Pork", working deals and getting bigger and better hospitals for his district than they need. Would you like to know how he operates? Check out the federal funding for his nearly empty airport. Notice how he pressured Chrysler not to close an unprofitable store in his district when Chrysler was trying to restructure itself under the bailout.

Do you honestly think he would have a change in character when it comes to government health care? Do you really trust this corrupt abuser of the system to not follow his habitual pattern of behavior? Can you genuinely state that you cannot see how this would affect not only those paying for government health care, but those trying to get quality care outside of Murtha's district? And he's only one congressman. There are 435 more, each fighting for protections, exemptions and funding for their districts.

Just look at the special exemptions already promised to congressmen and senators just to get their votes. If the legislation is so good, why do so many exemptions have to be made?

The Democrats already want to spend over $1 trillion on their idea of health care reform. With that kind of money floating around (and the typical lack of accountability), you don't think it will be ripe for fraud and abuse? The current system is already clogged with fraud and abuse.

Tenncare almost bankrupted the state of Tennessee because of fraud and abuse. Not perpetrated by "greedy insurance companies", but perpetrated by the "poor, suffering" folks the system was supposed to be helping. Whenever the subject of investigating fraud and reducing the Tenncare budget came up, idiot Leftists vilified Republicans, conservative Democrats and moderate independents as being cold-hearted, wanting "the poor" to suffer and die painful deaths. But the (conservative Democrat) governor ordered investigations and guess what? The "poor and suffering" were doctor-shopping, getting multiple prescriptions for pain pills at the taxpayers' expense and then selling them on the street. Illegal aliens were applying for Tenncare coverage and getting it because the system was over-worked and under-supervised. Residents in the border states of Tennessee were coming to our hospitals and using Tenncare to pay for their bills. The effect all of this was having on the citizens of Tennessee was substantial. I know, because I live in Tennessee, I know people who investigated the fraud, and I saw abusers get prosecuted.

And then there's hurricane Katrina. Remember the fraudulent claims made by - not "greedy insurance companies" - people who supposedly needed emergency funding?

Just look at all the fraud and abuse in our welfare system. Perfectly able-bodied people whose families haven't worked in generations, because they know what forms to fill out, what lies to tell, and how to play the system. At least in Japan, people have to show receipts on where the money goes. But here, people can waste it on huge flat-screens TVs and "bling" wheels for their cars, because their food and shelter are provided by taxpayers.

And you want me to believe that somehow, magically, an unread 2,000-page piece of trillion-dollar-plus legislation will suddenly provide a system that works, without fraud, abuse, or political corruption? Do you honestly believe that yourself?

Republican leaders want tort reform, as do center-right voters. It has been in every piece of legislation the Republicans have submitted. The same submissions that Democrats (including Obama) have shelved and ignored, and then claimed never existed in the first place. Unmerited (aka baseless, frivolous) lawsuits cost health-care providers billions of dollars every year. Even the most obviously baseless suits can costs tens of thousands of dollars to defend against before they're thrown out. You can't see how this affects the private sector and citizens? Really?!?

Not only does this cost us billions now, but the Democrat leaders' refusal to consider tort reform keeps the cost of health care from being reduced, which in turn provides political leverage for "free" government health care. Which will cost us trillions.

You are totally confused with current health care system and the reform bill both Democrats and Republicans are working on. The US is way behind most of the developed countries because their national health care system has serious flaws.

So you keep saying, but I'm the only one providing specifics or personal experience. Don't tell me I'm confused, provide some evidence to prove me wrong, or at least counter my evidence with something other than your claims.

It's ironic how you're calling me confused. You can't tell the difference between Americans wanting health reform and Americans being opposed to the Democrats' proposed legislation.

That's the reason why you didn't realize the seriousness of problem. Like I said, it's a rough number. But, most news media project the uninsured people in an entire nation from 40- 50 million. It's not Japan or South Korea. It's America that has 280 million people in 50 states!

First, you take the number that has been given for those who don't have health insurance and present it as the number of people who can't get health insurance. Which makes you a contributor to the hysteria, intentionally or not.

Second, how many people live in Japan? South Korea? The U.S.? Does any other nation with the population of the U.S. have government health care? Nations with a larger population? What is the quality of their health care?

Complainers like to say that the U.S. is the only civilized (or industrialized) nation without government health care. But they never mention the population. Yes, Japan has it. Their hospitals also turn people away. Canada has it. And some of their patients come to the U.S. for treatment because they can't afford to wait for a specialist in Canada. Same for the Brits. And still, their systems strain their budgets.

It's one thing to have government health care in a small country with a strong economy. It also helps for it to be homogeneous, so the cries of "racism" can't be politically exploited. We have a large, heavily-populated country with two unsecured borders, and "race profiteers" for (almost) each race. We also have a very powerful trial lawyer lobby, and guess who they support?

Are changes needed in America's health care system? Yes. Can you accurately tell me what they are? Apparently not. (But hey, USAFdude obviously can't provide any examples of racism against Obama, and you don't see that keeping him from repeating his claims either.) Are those changes addressed in the senate's legislation? Evidently not. Is the proposed "reform" practical? No. Is it affordable? Definitely not. The people of Massachusetts have had health care legislation that required people to buy health insurance (like the senate's proposed legislation). Care to guess what they came to regret about that?

Look, if after all of this you can't come back with anything substantive, I'm done. All you've done is whine about how I've treated you like everybody else (it's the internet, get over it), repeated unsubstantiated claims, and either ignore or not comprehend the parts of my argument which you can't refute. You might make a good protester in the streets, waving your sign and chanting your slogans, but you would never win a case in court.