I Can't Believe I'm Rooting for Harry Reid

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
13,560
Likes
2,355
Location
Land of The Sheep - Home of The Grave
I've got a problem with a Senator funneling $64Mill to such a Pork Project even if it is a "Shooting Mecca". That's simply not what I pay taxes for. So - Since we can't vote in NV anyway, Let's work on our local Senate Races to ensure it becomes Senate MINORITY Leader Schumer...
Cheers

It won't really matter....In fact, I'm pulling for a Democratic sweep in November. I hope they retain control of the House and Senate. Let's give them a chance....to continue to flush this country down the toilet. It's too far gone to save now anyway and Republicans in the majority will not change a thing - more of the same....

People cling to this Republican raft that somehow if they take over, things will change for the better. The real problem is not the Democrats retaining control, it's the idea people actually believe that Republicans will save the day. They won't. We had 8 years of GWB spending like a looter in an electronics store and plenty of Republican majorities with the opportunity to somehow grasp the recognition of the Constitution - they did not.

Obama and his cronies have spent us into the depths of the sewage treatment plant. A Republican takeover anywhere in federal government will just lead to more of the same shit - different day and when things don't improve, the disenfranchised Democrats will rise up against the Republicans and start the process all over again - rinse, lather, repeat, bend over...

People need to wake up and realize that the ship has sailed. Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi or even Mitt AWB Romney, will not keep you from falling off the dock and into the murky depths one way or another.... It's over Johnny....
 
Rating - 100%
31   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
13,371
Likes
3,040
Location
Central NH and Boston Metro West
Theres change coming and soon all the career politicians will be out on their ass.

I really do hope so.

That should include all the Jesus freak southern Republicans as well as the Chaperon State Republicans who voted for the USA Patriot act.

The more I pay attention the more I realize the Dems and Republicans are way way too close together. If you really want change.

As in Change that means more gun rights, lower taxes, less government intrusion, support your local Libertarian candidate.
 
Rating - 100%
17   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
3,518
Likes
545
Location
Marlborough, MA
I really do hope so.

That should include all the Jesus freak southern Republicans as well as the Chaperon State Republicans who voted for the USA Patriot act.

The more I pay attention the more I realize the Dems and Republicans are way way too close together. If you really want change.

As in Change that means more gun rights, lower taxes, less government intrusion, support your local Libertarian candidate.

Or Harry Reid?

Sorry, couldn't resist.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
31   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
13,371
Likes
3,040
Location
Central NH and Boston Metro West
The real problem is not the Democrats retaining control, it's the idea people actually believe that Republicans will save the day. They won't. We had 8 years of GWB spending like a looter in an electronics store and plenty of Republican majorities with the opportunity to somehow grasp the recognition of the Constitution - they did not.
.

Its really true.

Here are a couple of questions:

1) who was the last president to balance the federal budget? Answer: Bill Clinton with a lot of nudging from Newt and the Republican congress that had been voted in along with the Contract with America.

2) Who expanded federal spending more than any other president prior to Barack Obama?? Answer: George W. Bush. Thats right.

This is what really amazes me. The fact that the Republicans have only now re-discovered fiscal responsibility makes their credibility pretty much ZERO.
The fact that the Republicans turned a blind eye to George Bush's massive spending increases makes their credibility ZERO.

The fact that they turned a blind eye as Bush raised government intrusiveness to a level that has Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater rolling over in their respective graves makes their
credibility ZERO.

The amazing thing is that based on today's standards John Kennedy would be considered a Republican and Barry Goldwater would be considered to be a Libertarian.

While the Rs will certainly be better fiscally than the Ds. Mainly because they know that is how they will keep their jobs, Rs bring the risk of increased intrusion into personal issues.

I saw a bumper sticker that sums it up perfectly.

Vote Democrat if want Government to be your Nanny
Vote Republican if you want Government to be your Chaperone
Vote Libertarian if you want Government go stay out of your way.



Repu
 

Garys

NES Member
Rating - 100%
92   0   0
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
20,364
Likes
5,599
Location
Stoughton
I hope Chuck Schumer gets the nod and proves to be the most anti-gun Senate majority leader in history....

It won't matter if UpChuck is the majority leader or not. The most likely scenario right now is a 51/49 split for the Democrats. Given that there are a few Pro 2A Democrats and that the Republicans are going to take back the House, gun control will continue to be a non starter. There are about a half dozen toss ups in the Senate race, including Reid's seat. If the Republicans take just a couple of those, they get control of the Senate. Reid, Murray (WA), the open WV seat, are all pretty close. McMahon could still win in CT as Fiorina could still win in CA, although right now the Democrats are ahead in those states.

There is very little doubt that the Republicans are going to take back the House. Pelosi will be lucky if they let her be Minority Leader, although I think Hoyer is going to make a move to oust her, especially if this is the disaster for the Democrats that everyone seems to be predicting.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
7,080
Likes
6,976
I'm with MassMark on this let the train wreck hard going full speed, rather then chug along smoking the brakes.
 
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
13,560
Likes
2,355
Location
Land of The Sheep - Home of The Grave
I'm with MassMark on this let the train wreck hard going full speed, rather then chug along smoking the brakes.

That....

tf_trainwreck.jpg
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
267
Likes
30
Its really true.

Here are a couple of questions:

1) who was the last president to balance the federal budget? Answer: Bill Clinton with a lot of nudging from Newt and the Republican congress that had been voted in along with the Contract with America.

2) Who expanded federal spending more than any other president prior to Barack Obama?? Answer: George W. Bush. Thats right.

This is what really amazes me. The fact that the Republicans have only now re-discovered fiscal responsibility makes their credibility pretty much ZERO.
The fact that the Republicans turned a blind eye to George Bush's massive spending increases makes their credibility ZERO.

The fact that they turned a blind eye as Bush raised government intrusiveness to a level that has Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater rolling over in their respective graves makes their
credibility ZERO.

The amazing thing is that based on today's standards John Kennedy would be considered a Republican and Barry Goldwater would be considered to be a Libertarian.

While the Rs will certainly be better fiscally than the Ds. Mainly because they know that is how they will keep their jobs, Rs bring the risk of increased intrusion into personal issues.

I saw a bumper sticker that sums it up perfectly.

Vote Democrat if want Government to be your Nanny
Vote Republican if you want Government to be your Chaperone
Vote Libertarian if you want Government go stay out of your way.



Repu
The problem is not Dem or Rep, it's Liberals. Liberal Dems and Liberal Reps have killed this country. I can tell by your posts here that you have strong convictions [rolleyes], or maybe it's that you are being disingenuous.

If it walks like a liberal and talks like a liberal...guess what, it's a liberal. Party tags mean nothing.

Might I suggest the DU's gun boards, I have a feeling you would fit in well over there.
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
3,815
Likes
683
Location
The Free State of New Hampshire!!
I really do hope so.

That should include all the Jesus freak southern Republicans as well as the Chaperon State Republicans who voted for the USA Patriot act.

The more I pay attention the more I realize the Dems and Republicans are way way too close together. If you really want change.

As in Change that means more gun rights, lower taxes, less government intrusion, support your local Libertarian candidate.

First sensible thing you have said in this whole [troll] thread..

The only way I would root for Reid if it was a fish bone eating contest.
 
Rating - 100%
31   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
13,371
Likes
3,040
Location
Central NH and Boston Metro West
The problem is not Dem or Rep, it's Liberals. Liberal Dems and Liberal Reps have killed this country. I can tell by your posts here that you have strong convictions [rolleyes], or maybe it's that you are being disingenuous.

If it walks like a liberal and talks like a liberal...guess what, it's a liberal. Party tags mean nothing.

Might I suggest the DU's gun boards, I have a feeling you would fit in well over there.

Whats a liberal?

Was George Bush a Liberal when he was spending money like a drunken sailor?

Was Bill Clinton a conservative when he balanced the federal budget?

Anybody who thinks for themselves can't generally be categorized as a liberal or a conservative. Well, maybe thats not true entirely, but I hope you get my point.

My positions come from the idea that we should have as little government as possible.

That means I'm
1) pro gun rights
2) pro free speech, meaning the government shouldn't object if you burn a flag for example.
3) pro-gay rights - whats the harm in giving committed gay couples the same rights as the rest of us. I don't care if you call it marriage or not.
4) in favor of decriminalizing marijuana
5) in favor of dismantling the massive defense infrastructure intended to thwart the soviets. It serves little purpose in today's world and has little to do with defense. Do we really need 100,000 troops in italy and Japan?
 

Pilgrim

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
14   0   0
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Messages
16,008
Likes
1,255
Location
RETIRED, at home or wherever I want to be
Was George Bush a Liberal when he was spending money like a drunken sailor?

Was Bill Clinton a conservative when he balanced the federal budget?


No president spends money. It's the Congress that does that.

When Clinton was prez, we had a Repub congress. They were frugal. Clinton gets the credit. :(

When Bush was pres, we had a Dem congress. They spent like crazy. Bush gets the blame :(

Now we have a Dem congress and Prez. Neither gets blamed. :(
 
Rating - 100%
17   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
3,518
Likes
545
Location
Marlborough, MA
No president spends money. It's the Congress that does that.

When Clinton was prez, we had a Repub congress. They were frugal. Clinton gets the credit. :(

When Bush was pres, we had a Dem congress. They spent like crazy. Bush gets the blame :(

Now we have a Dem congress and Prez. Neither gets blamed. :(

Bush spent his first four years with a Republican congress, and spent like crazy. More to the point, every big spending bill passed during Bush's presidency was supported by the White House. Even TARP. He gets blame because he deserves it.
 

terraformer

NES Member
Rating - 100%
32   0   0
Joined
May 17, 2008
Messages
16,938
Likes
2,695
Bush spent his first four years with a Republican congress, and spent like crazy. More to the point, every big spending bill passed during Bush's presidency was supported by the White House. Even TARP. He gets blame because he deserves it.


Yup, he was surrounded by "starve the beast" neocons who wanted to bankrupt the country in order to save it. They were the worst form of manipulative scumbags on the face of the planet.
 
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
12,146
Likes
3,057
Location
SC
Term limits is the first step.

Term limits is a must.

It is too late for term limits.

We are done for. It is no longer a question of IF but WHEN. If the Republicans win in Nov. the collapse will happen later. If the Democrats keep their majority the collapse will happen sooner.

This country was destroyed the moment Thomas Jefferson accepted political parties.
 
Rating - 100%
31   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
13,371
Likes
3,040
Location
Central NH and Boston Metro West
No president spends money. It's the Congress that does that.

When Clinton was prez, we had a Repub congress. They were frugal. Clinton gets the credit. :(

When Bush was pres, we had a Dem congress. They spent like crazy. Bush gets the blame :(

Now we have a Dem congress and Prez. Neither gets blamed. :(

Pilgrim, you must be one of those Republican apologists who doesn't read history.

So lets just lay it out in black and white.

Bush was elected in 2000
The Senate went Democratic in 2005
The House went Democratic in 2007

So your math is off a bit.
Finally, the idea that congress spends money is so naively folksy its almost cute.

While constitutionally the Congress spends money, every year the president is expected to present a budget to congress. This becomes the starting point for debate in the upper and lower house.
Typically there is some give and take. In all administrations and under all Congresses the budget grows as the horse trading necessary to pass any legislation adds pork to the budget.

Bush's budgets, as proposed, even if you exclude spending for the war on terror, represented the largest expansion of the federal government in US History.

Small government Republicans need to get their heads out of their asses and realize that they have been betrayed.

You can either work within the party and try to get back to the ways of Regan or bail out and join the Libertarian party.
But don't pretend there isn't a problem.


*****In Closing**** This is important: If you are a small government republican who thinks that government should stay out of our private lives then you are actually a libertarian (small L) and would probably aggree with the platform of the Libertarian party more than the Republican party.

Here's another example. Do you support gay marriage?? Well, thats a tough one.

The libertarian perspective is so simple and broadly appealing that most NorthEasterners would support it. Simply put, Government should not be in the marriage business. You should simply get a civil union from your government. Regardless of whether the union is hetero or homo.

Marriage is really between you, your spouse, and your god. So priests, rabbis, etc do marriages. Government does civil unions.

Simple and neat and everyones needs are taken into account. Thats the Libertarian position.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
31   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
13,371
Likes
3,040
Location
Central NH and Boston Metro West
Then why on earth would you propose voting for Harry freakin Reid?? Do you think he's going to shrink the size of government? No, he's not.

You people aren't even reading what I write.

I said that BASED SOLELY ON HIS GUN RECORD, I was rooting for him.

I further said that he was a liberal idiot. But if you vote solely based on gun issues you might want to be pulling for him.
That point was pretty well destroyed by one person, and only one person who presented me with a pretty comprehensive list of anti gun stuff Reid supported. I

I then promptly admitted my error.

Since then this has become a more general political discussion. Which is good.
 
Rating - 100%
31   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
13,371
Likes
3,040
Location
Central NH and Boston Metro West
And there you have it folks, the scariest thing of all. People like this not only vote but try to influence others in their ignorant opinions.... We are doomed....

you don't seem to realize that only one single person rebutted me with any facts. I was going off a list of pro gun Reid achievements as well as the fact that he has been rated a B+ to A- by theNRAIlA for most of his carreer.

I also admitted I was wrong.

But again, only ONE person actually rebutted me.

The rest just spouted variations of "hes a dem so he's anti gun" dogma. Which is worse than being wrong, its stupid. It shuts your brain to further analysis.
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Mar 28, 2005
Messages
15,853
Likes
2,559
Location
Here and There
you don't seem to realize that only one single person rebutted me with any facts. I was going off a list of pro gun Reid achievements as well as the fact that he has been rated a B+ to A- by theNRAIlA for most of his carreer.

I also admitted I was wrong.

But again, only ONE person actually rebutted me.

The rest just spouted variations of "hes a dem so he's anti gun" dogma. Which is worse than being wrong, its stupid. It shuts your brain to further analysis.


Seriously? Why bother to rebut things that are common knowledge to the rest of the world? If you came here claiming the moon was made of green cheese, we should put together a factual rebuttal to ease your mind? Here's a suggesion: why not do some research on your own before posting caca. Some things don't deserve the time.
 

RichM

Retired Army Veteran
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
3,669
Likes
447
Location
Western MA
I too am leery of the public's mentality that a change in the majority will "fix" the country to their satisfaction. The politically unaware appear to be frustrated with the rate of progress in meeting their needs / desires. They want the economy to recover faster; they want unemployment to be extended; they claim to want spending limited, but I fear that they'll be very unhappy when their favorite expenditures are cut; they're unhappy with Obama-care, but they still want no changes to their coverage or cost; they complain about the future stability of Medicare, but they're completely unwilling to either accept cuts to the future benefits or to increase contributions to maintain it in its current format. There are many other examples of these dichotomies.

The way to correct our current economic woes is to dramatically reduce expenditures and to use that budget reduction to reduce taxes for those who pay them. The second half of that solution will not have an immediate effect, but it holds the greatest promise for long-term improvement. The first half of this solution will be very painful in the short term, as it requires significant reductions in the Federal, State, and Municipal workforces, and reduction of wage and benefit packages for those that remain on the payroll. There will also be significant pain to private enterprises which are dependent on government payments for the services or products they provide.

Whenever government budgets are cut (or are expanded at a slower level than anticipated), the first response is to threaten to cut services (lay off police, firefighters, teachers, maintenance personnel, reduce road improvement projects, etc.). They very rarely find any way to reduce the waste in their construction projects, because the unions have convinced government that their services are essential. They are locked in to multi-year contracts with guaranteed increases in salary and protection against firing. They have had "prevailing-wage" laws passed that increase the cost of EVERY government expenditure. Their benefit and retirement packages are as obscene as are those of the big-business CEOs that everyone loves to hate.

My biggest concern is that the American public will decide that they're either too impatient with the pace of a Republican recovery to allow it to reach completion, or that they will be displeased with the cuts necessary to achieve the recovery.

"It's a Republic, madam, if we can keep it."
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
2,884
Likes
615
Location
Penacook NH
Dennis Miller had a theory on changing the majority.He said even if some of them are clowns,at least we stopped the bleeding until we can get good people in.
 
Rating - 100%
31   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
13,371
Likes
3,040
Location
Central NH and Boston Metro West
Rich,
Your' post created a tightness in my chest. Its hopeless. We have become a country of complacent fools. At least the people on the two coasts have. People want their entitlements and they don't want to pay taxes. I'm with you.

If the Republican recovery is done properly, it shouldn't take long. Cut taxes in a way that encourages investment. Provide a clear roadmap of future taxation regulation so that people can begin long term projects with some level of confidence. The problem now is that business is afraid to invest, banks are afraid to loan and consumers are afraid to spend. All because there is a lot of uncertainty.

Business can target where to invest much more efficiently than government. That means leaving money in the pockets of businesses with a tax policy that encourages investment (rather than paying dividends) is the quickest way out of recession.
Trickle down economics beats trickle up poverty any day.
 

Garys

NES Member
Rating - 100%
92   0   0
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
20,364
Likes
5,599
Location
Stoughton
Sharon Angle is starting to open up some distance from Reid, the polls have been trending her way for the past couple of weeks. Just as important, not more so, John Raese is starting to open up distance in West Virginia. That's a special election so the winner will be sworn in and seated immediately, not in January. It's starting to look like we might have a 50-50 split in the Senate.
 
Rating - 100%
31   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
13,371
Likes
3,040
Location
Central NH and Boston Metro West
If its a 50 50 split, who runs the committees? Who makes the decisions? Does the VP as President of the Senate then become the 101st and all the committees go to whatever party the VP is a member of?

Don

p.s. Don't count Linda McMahon out in CT. She was down by 30 points 3 months ago. Now its 3 or 4 pts.
 

Garys

NES Member
Rating - 100%
92   0   0
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
20,364
Likes
5,599
Location
Stoughton
If its a 50 50 split, who runs the committees? Who makes the decisions? Does the VP as President of the Senate then become the 101st and all the committees go to whatever party the VP is a member of?

Don

p.s. Don't count Linda McMahon out in CT. She was down by 30 points 3 months ago. Now its 3 or 4 pts.

I'm not sure how that works. The VP is only supposed to vote to break a tie, I don't think he's involved in caucuses and committees. If it seems like a real tie, both parties will start lobbying members of the other party to switch sides. The Dems will probably go after Snowe and Collins from ME, but if they are smart they'll look at what happened to Arlen Spector and say no thanks.

I'm not counting McMahon out at all, it's just that Blumenthal got a bump from the debate. Or at least it seems that way. With a month and a s*** load of money to go, she could certainly win this. Same goes for Fiorina in CA, although Boxer seems to be stabilizing. Reid continues to drop, Russ Feingold is way behind. It's too bad about Delaware, but in large part the Republicans were stupid down there. A close split in the Senate means that a lot of Obama's priorities are going to be DOA and he's going to have to be a lot more careful about his Supreme Court nominees.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom