Bob McDonnell - Guinea Pig?

In your own dimwitted way you outlined what conceptually is happening but you get lost at the end.

"I think that in the short term you might be right, but anger is really an evanescent resource to be trading in.
.
There will eventually have to be something of substance to contrast with what Obama and the Democrats are offering, not just hot air."

Obama and the Demos were swept in on a wave of anger and the substance, if I may be so bold as to use that term, that the American public is seeing is radical liberal claptrap and they are RUNNING. After the porkulus and auto takeover and the failing HR takeover Obama is left with voting present. All that remains is for him and the liberals is hot air and to stamp their feet and cry that Fox, Rush, Beck et all are saying mean things about him.

The fact that Corzine will get less than 50% of legal votes in one of the bluest states tells that even liberals eventually get tired of the same old liberal nonsense. So the Demos are doing robocalls to get voters to vote for Daggett to try and eke out a pathetic win.

Well, freetopeeinyourpants, there's always the fact that the DOW is flirting with 10k again, and "porkulus" or no, the economy grew by 3.6% - the first increase since 2007.
.
facts
.
And of course, with the exception of yourself (who invariably thinks it was Clinton), we all know who was ruling the roost then.
.
I fail to see how "NRC is scarier than terrorism" offers much in the way of solutions other than to try and freeze things in the hands of the HCICs, whose death panels you support.
.
Smoke and mirrors, freetopee...

oops. "HCR is scarier than terrorism".
.
BTW, of course, aside from my other comment about how totally pointless that statement is, your peers have little credibility as the terrorists among your ranks are ahead 11 - 0 in the race with Al-Queda in deaths on American soil.
.
In other words, only a terrorist sympathizer would venture that particular opinion...

[Obama and the Demos were swept in on a wave of anger and the substance, if I may be so bold as to use that term, that the American public is seeing is radical liberal claptrap and they are RUNNING]

Anger? Perhaps at the Tea Party mobs, but not at the campaign rallies I observed.

Obama was swept into office on a wave of hope and earnest wish for change - don't take my word for it, just watch any recording of Obama's speeches or rallies during the 09' race. Hell, I'll even say that even though the 09' race was highly contentious, it became as huge as it did because in most people's opinions, ANY change from Bush was a positive one.

As a British immigrant, I see it as a shining example of American optimism - something that sets it apart from my perpetually pessimistic home country - that even in a time of great economic uncertainty, the people stood firm, and celebrated the election of the first African-American to office - a huge achievement in a country that still bears scars from its ongoing struggle with racism.

[After the porkulus and auto takeover and the failing HR takeover Obama is left with voting present. All that remains is for him and the liberals is hot air and to stamp their feet and cry that Fox, Rush, Beck et all are saying mean things about him.]

"Porkulus'? 'auto takeover"? Do you really have any idea what would have happened had we *not* done either of those? To be frank, the domino effect as pillars of our economy crumbled would have *legitimately* wiped out a huge portion of our economy, and the jobless situation now would be much, much worse (as would... well, everything else, really). And I guarantee that if, for example, the packages hadn't been signed, you and Rustyboy would *still* be griping and moaning about how Obama didn't save American jobs over money concerns. Perhaps instead of grumbling, you could instead be glad that the money saved our economy, and our loans to the banks are even turning a nice profit? We've hardly even spent the stimulus money, and yet it's already paying off.

Regarding why not much has gotten done: a lot of the reason Obama hasn't gotten things done is not because his administration's incompetent, but mostly due to his attempts at fulfilling his (perhaps rather naieve) campaign promise to work towards bipartisanship. He's now had to learn the hard way that the other side of the aisle would rather put politics above policy than offer anything more than a single vote - even when the bill in question is in line with their principals and demands, it doesn't mean a damn thing when it's Democratic in origin (see the Baucus Bill for a perfect example).

I'll be real honest with you - As a bit of a political history nerd, I have never seen the Dems bend over backwards so much to try and get the other party to sign on, sometimes even virtually gutting their bills (see the green energy bill) only to be rewarded with not a single vote. It's frustrating as a citizen to similarly see claims of "affordability" from the same party that burned the Clnton-era surplus by letting Bush spend us into debt - not requiring a budget, any kind of affordability or affordability to pay for the huge amounts of pork and war-related spending - nothing. Where the heck were these guys then? Where do they get the gall to criticize a President and Congress who've gone out of their way to make every bill deficit neutral?

Regarding the rising populist anger; a lot of the rage that's being directed at Obama is over the job situation. Jobs are always the last thing to come back during a recession (barring a sudden need for workers, such as when WWII kicked off), and this time is no exception. They'll come back once there's a need for businesses to expand, but as is this won't be for a while.

Those that are complaining about government spending don't quite understand how macro-economics work - reducing the national debt is not like paying off your credit card. It will take a long time, and a lot of necessary adjustments to fix a wasteful system to close the gap. Failing that argument, they let Bush get away with spending away our surplus without so much as a whimper. Since they didn't seem to care much then, they ought to perhaps consider the Obama administration's policies of keeping bills deficit neutral and reducing wasteful spending before they open their mouths to bleat talking points.

Oh, and let's not forget the administration that removed market protections that were put in place at the end of the Great Depression to prevent epic-scale gambling by banks from occuring again - which, surprise surprise, it did - guess a market system built on *greed* can't run itself responsibly after all. Thanks a lot, George. (And before you accuse me of blaming too much on Bush, that's because.. well, a lot of the current economic crisis is genuinely due to his adminstration's faults and lack of oversight. Go figure.)

The White House's sniping back and forth with FOX is somewhat unnecessary I'll admit, but even I, a registered Republican, know the degree to which FOX lambasts their every move is ridiculous enough that it does warrant a degree of retaliation. If FOX - or any source for that matter - willingly spreads lies and fear, intentionally breeding anti-government sentient without factual basis, they need to be called out on their BS. The first Amendment was created on the assumption that honesty and integrity would take precedence in reporting over spin, but balanced coverage, unfortunately, doesn't bring in the ratings.

Our government - and our country - were built on compromise, freedom, and the idea of national unity. The Founding Fathers, although reluctant, put aside their differences and made concessions towards certain States in the Declaration of Independence - for the greater good, the sake of presenting a solid, united front against the British.

To that extent, in order for our Government to work properly, we must all set aside our differences and affiliations to work towards a common goal. This is impossible when people are terrified of their government without factual basis, in part due to the idealogically skewed nature of one network's reporting.

Now to be fair, the FFs were also very suspicious of Government, and put failsafes in the Constitution allowing for the people the means to rise up in revolt should the government fall to tyranny (see first, second amendments). There need to be people who scrutinize the government's every action to keep them on their toes - but when people stop trusting their government because all they're told is presented as bad news, it weakens us as a whole by sowing distrust between us and our kin.

[The fact that Corzine will get less than 50% of legal votes in one of the bluest states tells that even liberals eventually get tired of the same old liberal nonsense. So the Demos are doing robocalls to get voters to vote for Daggett to try and eke out a pathetic win.]

Er... AFIK, the Republicans are doing robocalls too, including big names like Palin - As a guy who's done volunteer work for campaigns both big and small, I can tell you it's a standard method for getting out the vote, even if you're miles ahead in polls.

Perhaps you should focus less on your attempts to demonize the administration and instead do some good at the local level if you feel so strongly. Contribute positive criticism grounded in facts to your local officials - do some volunteer work that would actively help our country live up to it's greatness instead (such as helping recovering veterans find work, organizing debate clubs, taking part in local politics, etc.).

PS: "Liberal" is not a word with negative connotations, and using it as such speaks only of your own ignorant contempt for those with opposing views. I'm a registered Republican, but unlike most I value the criticism my more left-minded friends have of my views, and use our debates to recognize the weaknesses of my positions, and grow stronger. Compromise is not a sign of weakness - it's what this nation was built upon.

"As a British immigrant"....
.
That should be enough said, but I cannot resist not to respond to you shurashin.
.

".American optimism - something that sets it apart from my perpetually pessimistic home country - that even in a time of great economic uncertainty, the people stood firm, and celebrated the election of the first African-American to office - a huge achievement in a country that still bears scars from its ongoing struggle with racism."

.
1. You forgot American ingenunity and hard work as well. You also forgot to mention the tyranny that our fore-fathers fought so that you could eventually immigrate here yourself one day. Please do not preach your "racism" rant when your own country is so full of racism that I am surprised you even open up with this rant. Suffice it to say, Obama was elected, it is time for you and the rest of the liberal loons to get over it already and move on. Your excuse for racism is simply that, an excuse and nothing more.
.

"To be frank, the domino effect as pillars of our economy crumbled would have *legitimately* wiped out a huge portion of our economy, and the jobless situation now would be much, much worse (as would... well, everything else, really). And I guarantee that if, for example, the packages hadn't been signed, you and Rustyboy would *still* be griping and moaning about how Obama didn't save American jobs over money concerns. "

.
2. Damn skippy I am holding Obama accountable. Accountable for each and every decision he makes. Again as you cite the founding fathers, I shall do so too. My fore-fathers. They demanded from the citizens of this country to question those in government. To be suspect of deception and corruption.
.
For one thing, we are not making money hand over fist from the bailouts. As a matter of fact when the real truth comes out we shall see that all of our tax dollars spent saving Wall Street and the Banks, the bailouts of the Auto Industry and the Labor Unions was the biggest mistake ever made. We have now mortgaged our future, our children's future and our children's children's future. I can only hope that this great country does not go bankrupt and the dollar falls to near nothing in the next few years. But, time will tell. The free market / Capitalist country that has made us as great as we are, can also bite us back and we stand to lose everything gained over the past 230+ years because of what Obama has done. You can go to the bank on that one bucko.
.
And to your allegations, as untrue as they are. I do volunteer and I am part of my local political process. Very active as a matter of fact. So much so that we shall see a total overhaul of our elected officials and a complete replacement of those who were in seats of power before today. They are gone, and replaced with others who will do what the majority asks them to do.
.
So blast that out from where the sun doesn't shine, Mr Tory.
.
Republican my a$$. More of the same is all you are. LIberal loons from Europe, just like George Soros before you.

As a British immigrant"....
.
"That should be enough said"

Why Rusty? Because he is an immigrant he is not entitled to voice on opinion? Are you 100% Native American? How can you wax poetic about the Constitution and then criticize someone for exercising one of their rights under that same Constitution?

["As a British immigrant"....
.
That should be enough said, but I cannot resist not to respond to you shurashin.]
.
And yet, you do, insulting my heritage and labeling my opinions invalid, whilst providing no rebuttal, factual or otherwise, to the meat of my post. But, I didn't expect any better from one who gets his kicks from trolling others so persistently...
.
If you feel that my status as an immigrant invalidates my opinion, then you've already proved yourself xenophobic, arrogant, and disrespectful to both my country and the very first immigrants to arrive at Plymouth - you know, the ones this country owes it's entire system of government to? Show some respect, it's common courtesy.
.
[".American optimism - something that sets it apart from my perpetually pessimistic home country - that even in a time of great economic uncertainty, the people stood firm, and celebrated the election of the first African-American to office - a huge achievement in a country that still bears scars from its ongoing struggle with racism."

.
1. You forgot American ingenunity and hard work as well. You also forgot to mention the tyranny that our fore-fathers fought so that you could eventually immigrate here yourself one day. Please do not preach your "racism" rant when your own country is so full of racism that I am surprised you even open up with this rant. Suffice it to say, Obama was elected, it is time for you and the rest of the liberal loons to get over it already and move on. Your excuse for racism is simply that, an excuse and nothing more.]
.
...But I wasn't talking about ingenuity and hard work, I was making an observation on cultural differences and praising what I see as a more optimistic culture. It's not a rant without purpose, it was used to support a point. I've also been here long enough that I was practically raised here, so don't assume I just stepped right off the boat with my attitudes intact.
.
The subject of racism would warrant an entire other topic, but that would simply detract from my point. Rather than attempt to offrail my arguments or change the topic, please offer any factual rebukes you might have. Unless you don't have them? That would be terribly embarrasing.
.
I also see now that you don't actually understand what "Liberal" means as well, so that's funny too. Here's a hint: It's not a curse word, or a slur, despite what Rove and Friends made it out to be.

.
[2. Damn skippy I am holding Obama accountable. Accountable for each and every decision he makes. Again as you cite the founding fathers, I shall do so too. My fore-fathers. They demanded from the citizens of this country to question those in government. To be suspect of deception and corruption.]
.
Suspect, not paranoid to the point they couldn't recognize the value in one another's viewpoints. Big difference.
.
For one thing, we are not making money hand over fist from the bailouts. As a matter of fact when the real truth comes out we shall see that all of our tax dollars spent saving Wall Street and the Banks, the bailouts of the Auto Industry and the Labor Unions was the biggest mistake ever made. We have now mortgaged our future, our children's future and our children's children's future. I can only hope that this great country does not go bankrupt and the dollar falls to near nothing in the next few years. But, time will tell. The free market / Capitalist country that has made us as great as we are, can also bite us back and we stand to lose everything gained over the past 230+ years because of what Obama has done. You can go to the bank on that one bucko.]
.
Good grief, do you sleep with Glenn Beck's Greatest Hits playing in the background? This is not the apocalypse, as caused by one man and his party of scheming ne'er do wells. Everything, from our cultural addiction to credit, to obesity problems, have been generations in the making. Scapegoating Obama is just looking for someone to blame.
.
The free market certainly helped us become a strong country, but it almost destroyed us as well on many occasions. Our market, also, is not a true "Free Market" - rather it is a uniquely American blend of socialist and capitalist ideas, similar to the one created due to emerging ideaological differences in China.
.
I never mentioned that we were making a mint off the bank loans, simply that as it was, we might end up making a degree of profit if they contiue paying us back as they are.
.
True numbers? Are these the "true numbers" that exist in your imaginary doom-and-gloom ridden future? Here's a tip: Don't believe everything you hear, especially if it's coming from the mouths of gibbering morons like Glen Beck. Predicting future economic states is a crapshoot - there's simply too many factors, to the point you're honestly better off not worrying about it at all, seeing as it could go either way.
.
Yes, the free market can bite us in the ass. That's exactly what happened. A capitalist market is like riding a horse. You can tighten its harnesses, secure the bit, and make sure you're as safe as possible, but it probably isn't comfortable for the Horse, and they won't be able to get up to full speed. Conversely, you can loosen the restraints, or even ride bareback, which allows the horse more speed, but offers you less safety.
.
Look. It's nothing short of two-faced of you to chide me for not extolling the glories of American Ingenuity, then turn around and plunge into a vivid description of a post- apocalyptic United States. Where's your patriotism? Where's your faith in the people? We've survived the bloody Cold War, the Great Depression, the Civil War - and always come back bigger, better, stronger, and wiser for it. America always bounces back, so act like you've got a pair, and put your trust in the system and the rights that so many fought and died to preserve.
.
Have faith in the American people. Trust them. You have the gall to ask others "Why don't you love America?", so I ask you, "Why don't you trust America?"
.
[And to your allegations, as untrue as they are. I do volunteer and I am part of my local political process. Very active as a matter of fact. So much so that we shall see a total overhaul of our elected officials and a complete replacement of those who were in seats of power before today. They are gone, and replaced with others who will do what the majority asks them to do.]
.
Given your stellar track record of swerving around and/or twisting facts, I don't believe a word of this, especially considering how deeply entrenched some officials can get.
.
Also, keep in mind that the best official is not necessarily the one who always does as his constituents will. I would rather have one with a backbone who would be willing to tell his voters when they were wrong (but be willing to debate with them over the details), and what they could do about it... as opposed to a sock puppet scared into acting as an arm for a small, yet vocal minority.
.
[So blast that out from where the sun doesn't shine, Mr Tory.
.
If you really can't think of anything better to say, you're out of your league, friend.
.
[Republican my a$$. More of the same is all you are. LIberal loons from Europe, just like George Soros before you.]
.
Feel free to write me off as such if it makes you feel any better, but the fact remains that so far, you're all flash and no substance. You might be able to intimidate others, but when it comes to making a factual argument, you haven't got a leg to stand on.

Yeah and Christie has Obama in his ads so much you would have thought he got the endorsement. Oh yeah, another one who demanded that Palin and her brood stay out of his race.

Same with Corzine and Deeds. So your point is???? Y

My point is if, as JNS says, the GOP leadership is increasingly looking at McDonnell as the prime example of how to harness this energy then it is interesting that their example doesn't use the party name on his homepage.

I repeat, what is the poin?. Obama is the messiah, the Republican party is going extinct (according to folks here) and yet the Demos running for Governor don't have Democrat on their web page.

Seems to be more of a campaign trend then the typical derogatory nonsense you dream up about Republicans

You ask what my point is. I tell you what my point is. You choose to not understand my point.
.
Not much more I can add.

I agree nothing you can add

Time to take your medications for delusions, Dee!!

Jay Newton-Small:
.
The real question would be are there any similarities of elections held in 1993, that would be like what we are witnessing in 2009?
.
Now that would make for interesting reading, if so.

Thank you so very much for responding with that clarification, Jay Newton-Small.

I think putting Obama's mug in the political ads makes perfect sense. Perhaps it is a reminder to the voters how out of control the Obama Administration has become.
.
I know Dee, it is hard now that George Bush II is gone, and you can no longer blame things on him anymore.
.
It is now Obama's Presidency, and reminding people in political ads that their life sucks so bad, that the economy is in such shambles, putting Obama's ugly face in the ads makes total sense. I would do the same thing.
.
10% Unemployment in NJ and pretty much across the country. This is Obama's gift to America. Obama's "Change we can believe in"!!!
.
Christie is simply reminding the idiots who voted for Obama, that "change is indeed needed", but not the change that Obama represents.

Oh did I mention that these weren't negative ads. He's running as the heir apparent to Obama's change message. he is saying that he's better to bring about the kind of change that Obama talked about than Corzine he will continue to do business as usual. Nice try, but you can't spin this in your favor when Christie is busy running away from everything the conservatives stand for. He's not even anti stimulus okay and he's not attacking Obama he's praising him trying to get Obama voters on his side..

"10% Unemployment in NJ and pretty much across the country. This is Obama's gift to America. Obama's "Change we can believe in"!!!"

What would you have done differently Rusty, and what would the unemployment rate be now, if Obama had followed your plan?

Yes Dee, not unlike the Democrats did for the 2008 election when they ran as conservatives touting religion, gun-loving family value kind of folks.

Not one ran on higher spending, economic takeover, higher taxes and government meddling in every aspect of your life. Guess what? The secret is out and folks are running not for change but improvement.

Republicans don't want to meddle in every aspects of our lives! Except for banning gay marriage and abortion, instituting school prayer, teaching creationism and abstinence only education....Oh and TARP 1, George H.W. Bush "read my lips no new taxes".....

…and thus, while one half of R's try to intrude into our personal lives as much as possible, the other half proclaims to keep govt. small / out of our businesses. Then they let cos. screw insurance customers, sell toxic mortgages, and create / trade derivatives to their hearts' delight …and then accept Fed bailouts, but I digress.

Bottom line freepa, is yes. There were Democrats that ran on being gun friendly -- in Montana. And yes gun control hasn't been the thrust of the Democratic agenda but so what, it didn't stop you fools from going out there and buying every gun and bullet you can get your hands on. Frankly I say so what we need folks spending in this economy. However, does that mean anything for Democrats not really. It's much more salient that conservatives have noting affirmative to offer voters. Now did the Democrats campaign on health care you bet they did, did they campaign on the environment you bet they did, did they campaign on everything that Obama is doing you bet they did. Now are voters worried that we can't pull it off, of course they are. We have a lot at stake, we were teetering on the edge of the cliff and its a long way down so of course they are nervous. but after 40 years of Conservative orthodoxy they know that experiment was an utter failure so most are not going to follow that rhetoric again so thank you for doubling down on your worst instincts. It will take voters some time before they build confidence in the Democrats ability to run things better. Don't worry, once health care is done and the media stops running Obama down, this too will all pass. So conservative enjoy your meaningless victories today because long term doesn't look so good for you. Democrats on the hand have a shot at a future.

"Now did the Democrats campaign on health care you bet they did, did they campaign on the environment you bet they did, did they campaign on everything that Obama is doing you bet they did. Now are voters worried that we can't pull it off, of course they are."

Yes on health care reform and bending the cost curve. They are getting if it passes, higher taxes, higher premiums and lower services along with help warnings on the vending machines. On the environment they campaigned on creating green jobs. No jobs created but crap and tax.

Voters are worried they will pull it off, hence the showing of Republican candidates

"What would you have done differently, Rusty, and what woud the unemployment rate be now" - silly questions, really. A) Tax cuts, B) zero.

"Also, your last paragraph (Sabato quote) drives home a familiar point here: the R's have to choose between trying to win impure or staying intellectually pure and lose."

Ripping a page from the Demos book. Obama ran as a moderate. When he acts and can't present -- people run

…so are you saying the R's should campaign like Obama, or at least like moderates?

Not at all. If they want mealy mouth politicians there are none better than Democrats. Republicans lose when they listen to the imbecilic rhetoric of the left about how there are no moderates in the party or they are too conservative and they try to please that faction. It is always good news when the left says the party is going extinct. They win elections when the they run as conservatives. The country is right of center and the Democratic party continues to believe that the nit-wit left is moderate.

Nice rhetoric but you do not point to a single instance of your accusations other than your accusations. You could enter Martians wherever you wrote Republican and you would be as accurate. Coincidentally, you would be as accurate writing in Democrat.

Coincidentally, you would be as accurate writing in Democrat.

That's not a coincidence.

" .. that believe free enterprise and the private sector is the key to economic prosperity." .."

We are not out of the woods - yet some seem to have forgotten the abyss we stared in less than 12 months ago. And that we were brought to that abyss by the free-wheeling Republican bellicose wastrels, their madoff-style, risky free enterprise and the ungodly banking/insurance/health-care private sector.

And that bold socialism early this year saved us from the final cataclysmic collapse of capitalism (which had been foretold by the sages of yore)...

We are not out of the woods yet - and more socialist/communist intervention may be called for ..

Rewarding cronies: Blackwater, Haliburton Telecoms, Medicare Advantage et al ad nauseum

Not free enterprise, but oligopoly: telecoms, meatpackers, timber industry,oil companies, health "insurers," defense contractors et al ad nauseum

Not fiscal responsibility, but drunken sailor deficit spending. What planet are you on?

Not free markets, but markets rigged for the big players. And
certainly not small business. Do you recall the bailout?

Anybody interested in free markets, entrepeneurship and competition would provide universal health care, not massive subsidies to insurance oligopolies

" may be called for" ... or else ....

stuart would be absolutely correct. Not a coincidence, but a FACT
.
So far as the other garbage that jayack spews forth like the Obama fountain of "ACK!!! IT'S ALL BUSH'S FAULT!!!! ACK!!!".
.
Ahhhh, duh. The recession hit hard. The economy sank. Times are tough. It is a cycle that has gone on now for hundreds of years. It is Capitalism.
.
Now Obama, he has a different way to manage things. Create a quasi-Capitalist / quasi-Socialist system and abandon what has worked for the United States for over 230+ years.
.
The whole problem is that Socialism has been proven to not work, ever.
.
Those ladies and gentlemen ARE FACTS

" .. stuart would be absolutely correct. Not a coincidence, but a FACT .."

No worry worthy gentlemen and fair ladies (and others), bear in mind that to Rusty, the Bible is a book of FACTS and nothing but FACTS ...

"Rewarding cronies: Blackwater, Haliburton Telecoms, Medicare Advantage et al ad nauseum

Not free enterprise, but oligopoly: telecoms, meatpackers, timber industry,oil companies, health "insurers," defense contractors et al ad nauseum"

You missed drug companies and finacial services companies for the usual list that liberals make into boogey men..

You do well at repeating the liberal line but do not provide an ounce of substance to your allegations.
Quite frankly your argument is ad nauseum

Case in point:
When Ford Motor Company posts a healthy profit in Obama administration's first year - after many years of none - most media hardly mentions, let alone credit, "the Obama Administration" and its innovative "Cash-for-Clunkers" 'socialist' program - as if the voters in NJ, Virginia and NY should not hear such news that may sway their sentiments and expectations for the future.

Apparently, according to someone who was watching, Scarborough said just that, that if Christie wins, it's huge win for the GOP,but if Corzine wins, it is just a tie.

You fail to mention that Ford did not take the socialist route and continues to strike out on their own while taxpayers will never see a dime back from the other Big 2. Yes, Ford gained by cash for clunkers but Chrysler and GM still losing market share and money. Big gainers Japanese automakers. Outstanding economic policy!!

freeinpa

" .. You fail to mention that Ford did not take the socialist route and continues to strike out on their own .."

There is a lot I didn't mention - like the word "liberal". Go ahead and mention it on my behalf.

Ford continues to push Germany and Canada for "Cash-for-Clunkers"-type programs. Somehow, you view that pursuit - of actively seeking big government assistance, albeit indirect - as the best in free enterprise or a good example of the old capitalist "strike out on their own" approach.

" .. Outstanding economic policy!! .."
Thank you for the insight. [What took so long!]
Now, just sit back and watch your betters get the job done.

I await the next bright light observation from "my betters", you and IQ 53 -- Dumb and Dumber

I love it. The same arrogance that has Obama accomplishing-- well NOTHING. Maybe the liberals ought to get out of their own delusional world.

"trying to give the Sleeping White"

How ironic one of the Dwarfs- Dopey referring to Snow White

"How ironic one of the Dwarfs- Dopey referring to Snow White"
.

freep-that's not what fifty was referring to, ask Rusty. He'll clue you in. If he has the stones.

Freepee:
.
Havn't you been buttsniffing with Rusty long enough to know where is coming from?
.
Believe me, I have no doubt you could swap dogwhistles with Rusty and never know the diff...

Oh jay, yes George Bush II was a bad bad boy. He spent way to much of our tax dollars.
.
However, Obama has not only surpassed him to date (less than 11 months), but he has surpassed ALL OTHER PRESIDENTS BEFORE HIM in spending.
.
This is not about a trillion or 2 of deficits. This is about the total destruction of our entire system with the Obama policies and plans so that Socialism is the only alternative.
.
Rahm Emmanuel "never waste a good crisis". Sal Alinsky "build up your forces from within, if you want to destroy your enemy".
.
Obama is an Alnsky pupil. Obama is attempting to bring about the Alinsky, Ayers et al plan to destroy this country, and set up China II.

Also might point out that Bernanke handed out 7,500,000,000,000 (yes, that is correct, 7.5 x 10^12) dollars under Bush before Obama took office.
.
Just a tweetie bird with a fact or two...

There you go again, 53, citing all those...those...FACTS!

...technically, it's NOT a gop win since Hoffman is a NY Conservative Party member instead of an official R – he didn't make the cut with them. Of course, Dede's own R party turned on her and endorsed Hoff.

It was a district Obama won.

"Dede's own R party turned on her and endorsed Hoff"

Maybe the Repubs finally learned a lesson from Specter. He was losing to Toomey, all the National Repubs pushed Specter and he thumbed his nose at the party. He joined the Democrats (IQs of both parties increased) and now he will lose probably in the Demo primary.

The party pre-empted Dede from pulling a Specter.

Here is a poll with a different take and even the Huff&Pubb can't put a shine on this.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/if-the-election-were-held-today-obama-would-lose/

But as to your question, I doubt if anyone can enlighten you.

Knew I couldnt count on you. Rasmussen, as a poll of one.........

All of my "frothing" at the mouth for the past year has contained the liberal agenda to destroy the US of A as we have known it for most of our lives. The Constitution is under attack by the liberals in this country and they want nothing more than to see its total destruction. Thankfully today we are not witnessing more Republican losses, but a resurgence back to more conservative representation, and return to more sane conservative practices within our Government.
.
PS: You will see more in 2010.
.
Evidence, see Barack Obama and his liberal side-kicks recent proposals and policies. The voters today are saying clearly, "we do not want the change you propose, Obama". Move on!!
.
Enough said.

Knew I couldnt count on you either. Will Christie and the guy in ol' Virginie give back the stim money back?

I do love the liberals on this site. If you don't like the message character assassinate the messenger. Don't like the facts, belittle the source.

Doesn't change the facts or the reality something liberals are not keen. Like the wondrous Progressive mandate is circling the drain day by day.

What a sad pathetic lot!

I'll take ideology over party loyalty any day of the week.

Amen to that!!

I won't take on a defense of the "traditionally liberal position" that our Second Amendment rights should be eroded, because, in my opinion, that's a rightfully unpopular and politically idiotic stance. Telling folks that they don't have a right and the ability in practice to defend themselves and their families when "right to bear arms" is up there next to "freedom of speech or of the press" is a profoundly counterproductive notion that needs total abandonment, in my opinion, so I'm happy as hell that neo-liberals like Markos Moulitsas agree with me ( link ):

So in practical terms, what does a Libertarian Dem look like? A Libertarian Dem rejects government efforts to intrude in our bedrooms and churches. A Libertarian Dem rejects government "Big Brother" efforts, such as the NSA spying of tens of millions of Americans. A Libertarian Dem rejects efforts to strip away rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights -- from the First Amendment to the 10th. And yes, that includes the 2nd Amendment and the right to bear arms.
.
Kos, DailyKos, Wed Jun 07, 2006 at 01:15:50 PM EST

That said, looking into Gallup's numbers about government involvement, their analysis is important to note:

The fact that Americans are more likely now than a year ago to say there is too much regulation of business is notable, given all that has happened over the last 12 months.
.
The White House has shifted from a Republican to a Democratic administration, and President Obama has pushed aggressive stimulus packages and government involvement in industry and healthcare. The government has spent huge amounts of money investing in two business sectors -- the automobile and banking industries -- under the assumption that large companies in these industries would have failed without government intervention. These actions, and the recognition that some failed businesses, particularly those in the investment banking sector, have previously operated without much government oversight, could in theory have caused an increased appreciation for governmental regulation. That has not occurred.
.
Instead, the current findings underscore that the average American is less appreciative of increased government control over business during the past year, rather than more so.

We didn't actually get any "regulation" of the banksters, we got a wholesale, Halliburton-esque, pallets-of-shrink-wrapped-thousand-dollar-bills-sitting-in-Baghdad-warehouses, looting of our treasury, completed during Obama's and the Dem Congress' watch.
.
What Gallup calls "liberal" isn't actually liberal at all, it's just being blamed on liberals, since we didn't put up enough of a fight when it was happening...although we did reject the Democratic leadership's bailouts at the net and grass roots.
.
Here's Jane Hamsher in a widely praised piece up at FireDogLake ( link ):

When the White House met with bankers after the AIG scandal and they said they didn't want to be criticized for getting huge bonuses paid for by taxpayers, the White House complied and "cooled their rhetoric." The President told the public that Timothy Geithner had been instructed to do everything in his power to claw back those bonuses, and the House passed a bill doing just that. But it died in the Senate.
.
You remember all those campaigns by the unions, by the online groups, by liberal economics and finance organizations pushing the Senate to take it up?
.
Yeah, me either.
.
Which means that the teabaggers were in perfect position to harvest all of the discontent over the bank bailout, and no coherent liberal critique was offered. I heard it over and over again — if you wanted to criticize the White House on financial issues, your institutional funding would dry up instantly. The Obama campaign successfully telegraphed to donors that they should cut off Fund for America, which famously led to its demise. It wasn't the last time something like that happened — just ask those who were receiving institutional money who criticized the White House and saw their funding cut, at the specific request of liberal institutional leaders who now principally occupy their time by brown nosing friends and former co-workers in the White House.
.
And so the groups in the DC veal pen stay silent. They leadership gets gets bought off by cocktail parties at the White House while the interests of their members get sold out.

The centrist congressional Dems and Obama White House are doing a neat bit of jiu jitsu, in which they kneecap any real liberal net-and-grass roots opposition to the bank bailouts (and even netroots opposition to the way that the giant automakers' management were given mostly unaccountable-for monies), war spending bonanza, and pork-esque stimulus industry subsidy giveaways.
.
Yet these slippery f*cks step aside neatly into "fiscal restraint" mode as a bogus argument against more liberal policies --such as a real liberal health care reform package (which none of the current bills are) --and quietly pass another $600-plus billion DOD pork package on top of hundreds of billions in war spending and more bailout moneys, thus handing off all blame for the government's current profligacy to us. Liberals are being set up to take the fall for how badly things are turning out and are going to turn out for regular Americans because of the awful centrist policies enacted and conducted during this first year, while Democratic leadership works to ensure that their coffers are still brimming with corporate cash.
.
(Let's see how well Obama and the Democratic leadership pull in from Goldman in 2010 and 2012, shall we?)
.
What we're seeing in terms of negative public reaction to the Democratic state "controlling" business is obviously inextricable, as Gallup obliviously puts it from the idea that "The government has spent huge amounts of money investing in two business sectors", i.e. is wasting huge amounts of tax-payer moneys while ordinary people don't see any help (or practically expressed concern) at all from their government.
.
Leadership Democrats are in no position to criticize that Financial-sector Katrina on their watch --Obama chief financial adviser Larry Summers' policy during the Clinton administration is responsible in large part for regulatory failures that cause the collapse-- or to push back effectively on the (reasonable, actually) notion that they're in bed with the corporate interests that are paying the Democratic party to reimburse them out of Treasury's Chinese-credit card statement-filled coffers, but the Democratic Leadership aren't liberals, you just don't know that from listening to the Liberal Media. Neither do huge segments of the American people (especially low--information, low-engagement "Independents"), who only know that, once again, they're getting screwed.

Shorter: Wall Street (i.e., corporatist "conservatives") runs Washington, not the other way 'round.

"Democratic Leadership aren't liberals"
.
"Shorter: Wall Street (i.e., corporatist 'conservatives') runs Washington, not the other way 'round."
.
Yes, for all the talk of centrism and moderates, IMO our democratic leadership is essentially conservative. Per Britannica:
.
"Political attitude or ideology denoting a preference for institutions and practices that have evolved historically and are thus manifestations of continuity and stability."
.
Is there a better description of the Obama presidency thus far, or Congress' preference for the status quo? From Wall St. to the MIC to the HIC, they are no threat to establishment interests that own DC and prey on hardworking Americans.

Wow stuart. Very good! Very good indeed.

Well let's take a look at that insight. Palin according to you all is dumber than a bag of rocks. If you credit her with the victories, what does that make all you and the losers??

The Biggest whining losers!!

Maybe you can blame George Bush for the losses

Actually, we had a "stealth" Pat Robertson type in Susan Huthinson loose to Dal Constantine here as King County Executive here in Washington.
.
I'm guessing that what they might in fact be doing is wrapping the old ideology in new giftwrap.
.
Susan Hutchinson has complained that Dal unfairly used here stands on other issues unfairly against her, but I can say that when push comes to shove, I really do want to know just what belief systems my elected officials ascribe to!