The stunning, total defeat of GOP

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cancel4
  • Start date Start date
sarah_palin.jpg
 
Maybe someone should tell him that his party is losing power every single day.:clink:

Don't say anything.
Just sit back, laugh at their antics, and let them dig their own hole.
When they start losing elections, then you can laugh at their accusations of being cheated.
Of course, this will all come as a big surprise to them; which will even be more amusing.
 
lol....Al Franken in Congress.....if there was anything that would demonstrate the total depravity of the Democrats, it has to be Al Franken in Congress......I recall that you folks had to brag about his ability to draw a map of the US just to belay your fears that he was a total fuckup......."it's okay, it can't be all bad, he knows what shape the country's SUPPOSED to be in".......
 
So the expressed will of the electorate has no place in your priorities? Interesting.
 
see....threads like this prove you're nothing but a stupid troll....it is factually false that the GOP has been "totally" defeated....further, you often whine that gop is obstructionist....if they have been "totally" defeated they can't obstruct you stupid troll

ob·struc·tion·ist (əb-strŭk'shə-nĭst, ŏb-)
n. One who systematically blocks or interrupts a process, especially one who attempts to impede passage of legislation by the use of delaying tactics, such as a filibuster.

Looks to me like obstructionist is the perfect description for the GOP's tactics, according to the dictionary's definition. Also, it is not "factually false" that the GOP has been totally defeated. It may very well be true that the party's self-inflicted wounds are mortal, and the next couple of elections will tell us if they are or not, but at t his point it is a matter of opinion whether the GOP has been totally defeated, and certainly not "factually false." The total defeat of an adversary does not require that you wipe him out to the last man, only that you end his ability to ever defeat you in the future. If the GOP falls from a national party to a regional one, and never again holds a majority in either house of congress, i can be fairly said to have been totally defeated as a national party, and I see nothing from the GOP at this point to indicate that they have the wherewithal to re-emerge as a national party, either in terms of fresh ideas ("no" is hardly an idea), or visionary leadership, or even a statesman like Howard Baker or Barry Goldwater, both of whom could be depended upon to put country ahead of party. As long as they continue to cater to the right wing, I think the voters will stay away from them. I could be wrong, and only time will tell, but I don't see anything positive in the GOP that convinces me they will ever be back to their prior power, because their core philosophy was an utter failure in its application.

DNC may have jumped the gun with his opinion, but his opinion certainly isn't stupid or factually false, and neither is his usage of "obstructionist."
 
ob·struc·tion·ist (əb-strŭk'shə-nĭst, ŏb-)
n. One who systematically blocks or interrupts a process, especially one who attempts to impede passage of legislation by the use of delaying tactics, such as a filibuster.

Looks to me like obstructionist is the perfect description for the GOP's tactics, according to the dictionary's definition. Also, it is not "factually false" that the GOP has been totally defeated. It may very well be true that the party's self-inflicted wounds are mortal, and the next couple of elections will tell us if they are or not, but at t his point it is a matter of opinion whether the GOP has been totally defeated, and certainly not "factually false." The total defeat of an adversary does not require that you wipe him out to the last man, only that you end his ability to ever defeat you in the future. If the GOP falls from a national party to a regional one, and never again holds a majority in either house of congress, i can be fairly said to have been totally defeated as a national party, and I see nothing from the GOP at this point to indicate that they have the wherewithal to re-emerge as a national party, either in terms of fresh ideas ("no" is hardly an idea), or visionary leadership, or even a statesman like Howard Baker or Barry Goldwater, both of whom could be depended upon to put country ahead of party. As long as they continue to cater to the right wing, I think the voters will stay away from them. I could be wrong, and only time will tell, but I don't see anything positive in the GOP that convinces me they will ever be back to their prior power, because their core philosophy was an utter failure in its application.

DNC may have jumped the gun with his opinion, but his opinion certainly isn't stupid or factually false, and neither is his usage of "obstructionist."

Obstructionism is part of our political process. *shrug*.
 
For an example of GOP obstructionism, read this:

Sept. 19 (Bloomberg) -- A leading Massachusetts Republican said his party’s efforts to stall a bill allowing for a temporary successor to the late U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy will probably be exhausted by Sept. 23.

“I think the odds favor the middle of the week” for the stalling tactics to play out, said Bruce Tarr, 45, assistant Senate Republican leader. “I wouldn’t deny that.”

If that proves to be the case, the measure to empower Governor Deval Patrick to make the appointment could then quickly be sent to his desk. Patrick, a Democrat, has said he would sign and could immediately choose an interim senator to serve until a Jan. 19 special election.

State Republican leaders, their ranks heavily outnumbered by Democrats in the Massachusetts legislature, oppose the bill. They say delaying buys them time on the slim chance they can garner enough support from Democrats to kill the measure in the state Senate, where it is pending.

Democratic leaders are not commenting on whom Patrick might pick should the bill pass.

Paul Kirk, a close Kennedy friend and former national party official, has been cited as a possibility, Tarr said yesterday. Kirk led a memorial service at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum on Aug. 28, three days after Kennedy, 77, died. A call to Kirk was not immediately returned.

Michael Dukakis, former governor and presidential candidate; Peter Meade, former insurance executive, and James Roosevelt Jr., a grandson of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, round out the list of potential candidates Tarr has heard mentioned, he said.

House Vote

The Massachusetts House late Sept. 17 passed the measure that would change state law and give Patrick the appointment power.

Republicans have said the push by state Democrats for the bill is hypocritical. The Democrats acted successfully to block such gubernatorial appointments five years ago when then- Republican Governor Mitt Romney was posed to possibly send a Republican to serve in the U.S. Senate.

Republican stalling in the state Senate, which Democrats control 35 to 5, has involved parliamentary maneuvers. To thwart action immediately after House passage, Tarr invoked a rule that any item must first be listed in advance on the Senate calendar before it can be deliberated. Yesterday, he and his colleagues filed four amendments to the bill and then moved to table discussion for the day because the lawmakers needed time to study the amendments.

He said he would probably do the same Monday. Historically, senators have been able to table action for three days without objection. Republicans will caucus early next week to decide on further action, he said.

“Having a couple more days to hear from constituents isn’t a bad thing,” Tarr said.

Washington Pressure

The extra time also will give Republicans the chance to focus more attention on how much pressure to pass the bill is coming from Democrats in Washington eager to act on President Barack Obama’s drive to overhaul the U.S. health-care system, Tarr said.

A Massachusetts Democrat filling in for Kennedy until the special election would provide the party with 60 votes in the U.S. Senate, enough to keep Republicans from blocking such legislation.

Obama talked with Patrick about the bill’s status when the president attended Kennedy’s funeral, Kyle Sullivan, a spokesman for the governor, confirmed yesterday. Obama’s chief strategist, David Axelrod, called Massachusetts Senate President Therese Murray, a Democrat, earlier this week to discuss the matter.

In the special election campaign, U.S. Representative Michael Capuano, a Democrat, officially announced his candidacy yesterday. Other Democrats who have filed for the Dec. 8 primary include Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley and Boston Celtics co-owner Stephen Pagliuca.

Scott Brown, a Massachusetts state senator, and Bob Burr, a selectman from Canton, are seeking the Republican Party nomination in the primary.

-- With assistance from Michael McDonald in Boston.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aznmRs92oFTo
 
So the expressed will of the electorate has no place in your priorities? Interesting.
I have no problem with the express will of voters....I have problem with counting ballots which didn't have marks for Franken as Franken votes.......that's election by the "unexpressed" will.....same tactic Gore tried to use to steal the 2000 election......
 
Back
Top