“Republican Scott Brown could save us”

[Ricechex]

Allan, please stop bullying Brian. He does not get it.

[Arraya]

[quote=sd_matt]I wonder why Rush and Hannity are continuing to paint Obama as an ideologue when he is first and foremost a bankster crony.

Are they trying to prevent us from seeing the pattern lest we apply our lessons to the Repubs too? Either way it is indoctrination radio. It kills me that audiences give their ears to these pieces of crap and not more to people like Bill Handel.

Just thinking.[/quote]

Corporate cronyism, as a negative, does not play well with the GOP base. Because, really, that is the platform they usually run on. Fighting for the rights of the poor downtrodden multi-nationals who have been victimized by super powerful environmentalist and union lobbies.

If anybody should be pissed about Obama, it’s the progressives because he is as “BAU” as you can get. Really, to the right of Nixon, when you think about it. Americans in their superficiality are easily tricked by words. Obama’s flowery populist talk has much of the left feeling good and the right thinking that he is leading “green” factory worker revolts.

Really, if there is one factor that gives Obama so much support. It’s the asinine talking points coming out of right wing radio.

[Arraya]

[quote=sd_matt]I wonder why Rush and Hannity are continuing to paint Obama as an ideologue when he is first and foremost a bankster crony.

Are they trying to prevent us from seeing the pattern lest we apply our lessons to the Repubs too? Either way it is indoctrination radio. It kills me that audiences give their ears to these pieces of crap and not more to people like Bill Handel.

Just thinking.[/quote]

Corporate cronyism, as a negative, does not play well with the GOP base. Because, really, that is the platform they usually run on. Fighting for the rights of the poor downtrodden multi-nationals who have been victimized by super powerful environmentalist and union lobbies.

If anybody should be pissed about Obama, it’s the progressives because he is as “BAU” as you can get. Really, to the right of Nixon, when you think about it. Americans in their superficiality are easily tricked by words. Obama’s flowery populist talk has much of the left feeling good and the right thinking that he is leading “green” factory worker revolts.

Really, if there is one factor that gives Obama so much support. It’s the asinine talking points coming out of right wing radio.

[Arraya]

[quote=sd_matt]I wonder why Rush and Hannity are continuing to paint Obama as an ideologue when he is first and foremost a bankster crony.

Are they trying to prevent us from seeing the pattern lest we apply our lessons to the Repubs too? Either way it is indoctrination radio. It kills me that audiences give their ears to these pieces of crap and not more to people like Bill Handel.

Just thinking.[/quote]

Corporate cronyism, as a negative, does not play well with the GOP base. Because, really, that is the platform they usually run on. Fighting for the rights of the poor downtrodden multi-nationals who have been victimized by super powerful environmentalist and union lobbies.

If anybody should be pissed about Obama, it’s the progressives because he is as “BAU” as you can get. Really, to the right of Nixon, when you think about it. Americans in their superficiality are easily tricked by words. Obama’s flowery populist talk has much of the left feeling good and the right thinking that he is leading “green” factory worker revolts.

Really, if there is one factor that gives Obama so much support. It’s the asinine talking points coming out of right wing radio.

[Arraya]

[quote=sd_matt]I wonder why Rush and Hannity are continuing to paint Obama as an ideologue when he is first and foremost a bankster crony.

Are they trying to prevent us from seeing the pattern lest we apply our lessons to the Repubs too? Either way it is indoctrination radio. It kills me that audiences give their ears to these pieces of crap and not more to people like Bill Handel.

Just thinking.[/quote]

Corporate cronyism, as a negative, does not play well with the GOP base. Because, really, that is the platform they usually run on. Fighting for the rights of the poor downtrodden multi-nationals who have been victimized by super powerful environmentalist and union lobbies.

If anybody should be pissed about Obama, it’s the progressives because he is as “BAU” as you can get. Really, to the right of Nixon, when you think about it. Americans in their superficiality are easily tricked by words. Obama’s flowery populist talk has much of the left feeling good and the right thinking that he is leading “green” factory worker revolts.

Really, if there is one factor that gives Obama so much support. It’s the asinine talking points coming out of right wing radio.

[Arraya]

[quote=sd_matt]I wonder why Rush and Hannity are continuing to paint Obama as an ideologue when he is first and foremost a bankster crony.

Are they trying to prevent us from seeing the pattern lest we apply our lessons to the Repubs too? Either way it is indoctrination radio. It kills me that audiences give their ears to these pieces of crap and not more to people like Bill Handel.

Just thinking.[/quote]

Corporate cronyism, as a negative, does not play well with the GOP base. Because, really, that is the platform they usually run on. Fighting for the rights of the poor downtrodden multi-nationals who have been victimized by super powerful environmentalist and union lobbies.

If anybody should be pissed about Obama, it’s the progressives because he is as “BAU” as you can get. Really, to the right of Nixon, when you think about it. Americans in their superficiality are easily tricked by words. Obama’s flowery populist talk has much of the left feeling good and the right thinking that he is leading “green” factory worker revolts.

Really, if there is one factor that gives Obama so much support. It’s the asinine talking points coming out of right wing radio.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Ricechex]Allan, please stop bullying Brian. He does not get it.[/quote]

Ricechex: I’m going to have to disagree with you on that one. I think he gets it quite well, actually, but is unwilling to be intellectually or philosophically honest.

He’ll freely accuse others of hypocrisy and bigotry, while practicing it himself. He seeks cover with words like “pragmatism” and “reality”, but then throws out how Democratic “ideas” and “ideals” are meaningful, but never explains what those ideas and ideals are, or how they will be achieved.

I get sick and tired of Leftists tying up that tired old post-structuralist nonsense with a term that does have considerable meaning and resonance, like “liberal”. Think Daniel Patrick Moynihan versus Teddy Kennedy. One was a truly liberal thinker and possessed of a social conscience and the other was a fat, drunk philanderer who rode the family name into oblivion.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Ricechex]Allan, please stop bullying Brian. He does not get it.[/quote]

Ricechex: I’m going to have to disagree with you on that one. I think he gets it quite well, actually, but is unwilling to be intellectually or philosophically honest.

He’ll freely accuse others of hypocrisy and bigotry, while practicing it himself. He seeks cover with words like “pragmatism” and “reality”, but then throws out how Democratic “ideas” and “ideals” are meaningful, but never explains what those ideas and ideals are, or how they will be achieved.

I get sick and tired of Leftists tying up that tired old post-structuralist nonsense with a term that does have considerable meaning and resonance, like “liberal”. Think Daniel Patrick Moynihan versus Teddy Kennedy. One was a truly liberal thinker and possessed of a social conscience and the other was a fat, drunk philanderer who rode the family name into oblivion.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Ricechex]Allan, please stop bullying Brian. He does not get it.[/quote]

Ricechex: I’m going to have to disagree with you on that one. I think he gets it quite well, actually, but is unwilling to be intellectually or philosophically honest.

He’ll freely accuse others of hypocrisy and bigotry, while practicing it himself. He seeks cover with words like “pragmatism” and “reality”, but then throws out how Democratic “ideas” and “ideals” are meaningful, but never explains what those ideas and ideals are, or how they will be achieved.

I get sick and tired of Leftists tying up that tired old post-structuralist nonsense with a term that does have considerable meaning and resonance, like “liberal”. Think Daniel Patrick Moynihan versus Teddy Kennedy. One was a truly liberal thinker and possessed of a social conscience and the other was a fat, drunk philanderer who rode the family name into oblivion.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Ricechex]Allan, please stop bullying Brian. He does not get it.[/quote]

Ricechex: I’m going to have to disagree with you on that one. I think he gets it quite well, actually, but is unwilling to be intellectually or philosophically honest.

He’ll freely accuse others of hypocrisy and bigotry, while practicing it himself. He seeks cover with words like “pragmatism” and “reality”, but then throws out how Democratic “ideas” and “ideals” are meaningful, but never explains what those ideas and ideals are, or how they will be achieved.

I get sick and tired of Leftists tying up that tired old post-structuralist nonsense with a term that does have considerable meaning and resonance, like “liberal”. Think Daniel Patrick Moynihan versus Teddy Kennedy. One was a truly liberal thinker and possessed of a social conscience and the other was a fat, drunk philanderer who rode the family name into oblivion.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Ricechex]Allan, please stop bullying Brian. He does not get it.[/quote]

Ricechex: I’m going to have to disagree with you on that one. I think he gets it quite well, actually, but is unwilling to be intellectually or philosophically honest.

He’ll freely accuse others of hypocrisy and bigotry, while practicing it himself. He seeks cover with words like “pragmatism” and “reality”, but then throws out how Democratic “ideas” and “ideals” are meaningful, but never explains what those ideas and ideals are, or how they will be achieved.

I get sick and tired of Leftists tying up that tired old post-structuralist nonsense with a term that does have considerable meaning and resonance, like “liberal”. Think Daniel Patrick Moynihan versus Teddy Kennedy. One was a truly liberal thinker and possessed of a social conscience and the other was a fat, drunk philanderer who rode the family name into oblivion.

[poorgradstudent]

[quote=afx114]Incumbents not seeking re-election:
House – GOP: 14 / Dem: 10
Senate – GOP: 6 / Dem: 2

src

Who again are dropping like flies?[/quote]
Senate:
Retiring Dems: Dodd (CT) Kaufman (DE) (Appointed when Joe Biden took over as VP) Burris (IL) (Appointed to Obama’s vacant seat) Kirk (MA) (Appointed to temporarily fill Ted Kennedy’s seat) and Dorgan (ND). I can see the arguement that only 2 Democrats who actually won an election are not seeking re-election.

Republicans: LeMieux (FL) (Appointed) Brownback (KS) (Supports term limits) Bunning (KY) Bond (MO) Gregg (NH) Voinovich (OH)

So, to split hairs, you can either put your counts at GOP: 5 DEM: 2 or GOP: 6 DEM: 5.

[poorgradstudent]

[quote=afx114]Incumbents not seeking re-election:
House – GOP: 14 / Dem: 10
Senate – GOP: 6 / Dem: 2

src

Who again are dropping like flies?[/quote]
Senate:
Retiring Dems: Dodd (CT) Kaufman (DE) (Appointed when Joe Biden took over as VP) Burris (IL) (Appointed to Obama’s vacant seat) Kirk (MA) (Appointed to temporarily fill Ted Kennedy’s seat) and Dorgan (ND). I can see the arguement that only 2 Democrats who actually won an election are not seeking re-election.

Republicans: LeMieux (FL) (Appointed) Brownback (KS) (Supports term limits) Bunning (KY) Bond (MO) Gregg (NH) Voinovich (OH)

So, to split hairs, you can either put your counts at GOP: 5 DEM: 2 or GOP: 6 DEM: 5.

[poorgradstudent]

[quote=afx114]Incumbents not seeking re-election:
House – GOP: 14 / Dem: 10
Senate – GOP: 6 / Dem: 2

src

Who again are dropping like flies?[/quote]
Senate:
Retiring Dems: Dodd (CT) Kaufman (DE) (Appointed when Joe Biden took over as VP) Burris (IL) (Appointed to Obama’s vacant seat) Kirk (MA) (Appointed to temporarily fill Ted Kennedy’s seat) and Dorgan (ND). I can see the arguement that only 2 Democrats who actually won an election are not seeking re-election.

Republicans: LeMieux (FL) (Appointed) Brownback (KS) (Supports term limits) Bunning (KY) Bond (MO) Gregg (NH) Voinovich (OH)

So, to split hairs, you can either put your counts at GOP: 5 DEM: 2 or GOP: 6 DEM: 5.

[poorgradstudent]

[quote=afx114]Incumbents not seeking re-election:
House – GOP: 14 / Dem: 10
Senate – GOP: 6 / Dem: 2

src

Who again are dropping like flies?[/quote]
Senate:
Retiring Dems: Dodd (CT) Kaufman (DE) (Appointed when Joe Biden took over as VP) Burris (IL) (Appointed to Obama’s vacant seat) Kirk (MA) (Appointed to temporarily fill Ted Kennedy’s seat) and Dorgan (ND). I can see the arguement that only 2 Democrats who actually won an election are not seeking re-election.

Republicans: LeMieux (FL) (Appointed) Brownback (KS) (Supports term limits) Bunning (KY) Bond (MO) Gregg (NH) Voinovich (OH)

So, to split hairs, you can either put your counts at GOP: 5 DEM: 2 or GOP: 6 DEM: 5.

[Author]

Posts