Best
36 Comments
Post
  • #24
    !
    I selected Brown, but he won't win. That state is a socialist hole. It'll be like Maryland in 5 years, not a single Republican around.
  • #23
    !
    Anyone other than Scott Brown! Vote for the non-Scott Brown candidate no matter who it is. Scott Brown is a tea bagger lunatic who voted for the NDAA.
  • #19
    !
    Liberals can relax. Deval Patrick will appoint another Dem, not a Republican to replace John Kerry. It's much ado about nothing here people...
  • #17
    !
    I see absolutely nothing wrong with Scott Brown returning to the Senate. In their fervor to elect the most liberal seat they could buy, the Dems unseated Brown. That was a mistake. Brown was the most moderate Senator of all the GOP. You will NEVER control all 100 seats for a single party in the Senate and the best you can hope for is that the opposition elects moderates you can work with. Scott Brown is a moderate and I hope he goes back to the Senate
  • #12
    !
    "Senator Ted Kennedy... has sent a letter to Massachusetts lawmakers requesting a change in the state law that determines how his Senate seat would be filled if it became vacant before his eighth full term ends in 2012..."

    "I therefore am writing to urge you to work together to amend the law through the normal legislative process to provide for a temporary gubernatorial appointment until the special election occurs," writes the Senator."

    "What Mr. Kennedy doesn't volunteer is that he orchestrated the 2004 succession law revision that now requires a special election, and for similarly partisan reasons."
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297...
  • #6
    !
    Anyone other than a Democrat should be elected. They have brought our nation to the brink of fiscal and moral collapse. It was the party of Democrats who separated God from our schools and public lands. It has been the party of Democrats who have raised income limits for social aid to such a level that is truly bankrupting our nation. Millions of people are refusing jobs so they can stay on the public assistance roles. There is absolutely no accountability required to keep people from sponging off the tax payers.
  • #7
    !
    It is the supreme ct that has interpretted the establishment clause, not a political party. And I thought is was the repub administration of W Bush that needed tarp to bail us out, whereas clinton, a dem, left a buget surplus. I'm no dem, don't favor public assistance over jobs, but would you support a jobs bill? I haven't sen a good one put fourth yet, but if obama did it repubs would say no, I seem to recall a rather tepid one he put forward that was rejected. If you don't favor public assistance, and I do only in rare corcumstances , then the govt must provide jobs if the private sector can not, and repubs seem to oppose that. Just sayin'
  • #25
    !
    @PoliticalSpice If you truly only support public assistance in rare cases, then you are truly barking up the wrong tree when you attack the GOP. Sure the GOP is not perfect and Bush did some stupid things like no child left behind, but to even bring up the GOP when the Democrats have refused to cut the growth of social programs every single time the GOP has tried to do so, makes you either terribly ignorant or a Democrat which you say you are not. How many thousand times will I hear the same old rhetoric about Clinton balancing the budget. FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME HE HAD A GOP CONTROLLED CONGRESS and they forced him to come to the center fiscally. They forced him to pass work fare after he vetoed it twice. Why are you so quick to judge the GOP when the Democrats are clearly much more responsible for our bloated welfare roles. it is their voting block.
  • #26
    !
    @commonsense51 I support jobs, not welfare, and not workfare, which is designed to basically force people off the roles by putting them into crappy and demeaning jobs, rather then jobs designed to train and equip them to enter the work force or useful jobs that need being done.

    Here is what you won't like about the solution, why I blame gop more then the dems. Gop would never support the idea of useful govt jobs, except for military jobs. I'd like to see high speed rail. Interest rates are dirt cheap. Lets sell bonds, put people to work across the country, manufacturing rail, laying rail, building engines and rail cars. That is just one example, repair of infastructure is as far as obama is willing to go, necessary, but a liberal half measure in my opinion. We arespending a fortune on unemployment checks, do I like it? No. I'd rather see the money spent on jobs, but gop would never support that, and the dems don't have the guts to push for it .
  • R Load more replies

Post