Democrats Between Barack And A Hard Place
Jan 20, 2010 Political
The Democrats suffered a huge defeat last night, a defeat that could spell disaster for them because it leaves them between Barack and a hard place. Their leader, Barack Obama, is determined to press on with his health care takeover plan. Fortunately for him he does not have to worry about being reelected for nearly three years unlike every Democrat in the House and many in the Senate who will face the public in ten short months.
Some Democrats have expressed that maybe, just maybe, they need to slow down on this health care issue. Maybe they need to scale it back, involve some Republicans and work things out rather than just ramming through a poor bill.
This is because they know what happened in Massachusetts can happen in any state in the union. They are aware that they can be defeated and lose their cushy, all expense paid jobs.
The problem the Democrats now have is that they forced a vote before Christmas which means it was before the election in Massachusetts. In their haste to pass something, anything, before Obama’s State of the Union Address they shot themselves in the foot. Why would they have had anything to worry about? Massachusetts is considered a very blue state and an easy win. Looks like they took Massachusetts and its people for granted.
The Senate Democrats rammed this through in the dead of night and forced it upon us. The people saw this and decided that electing a Republican would take away the filibuster proof majority and put some checks in place. That is how Scott Brown, a virtual unknown, came out of nowhere to beat the name recognition candidate on the left.
Democrats have spent quite some time telling us how wonderful this bill is and that they are looking out for us and they would not vote for it if it were bad blah, blah. Now they might have to decide if they really want to vote for it. Those who did then but don’t now will lose credibility because the public will see that they were lying about how wonderful it was. The public will see that when they said they were willing to lose their jobs to pass it they really did not mean it. And if they do not pass the bill it will be perceived as a failure by the left wing base.
If they decide to pass it with no regard for what took place in Massachusetts then they will be siging their own political death warrants.
Make no mistake, this was about health care. A lot of things can be said to have played in on this such as Coakley being a poor candidate or running a poor campaign but the reality is that Brown campaigned on being anti this legislation. He signed autographs with the number 41 indicating he would be the 41st vote and would end this mess.
Barack Obama flew up to Massachusetts like Mighty Mouse to save the day and he did not once mention health care in the speech he gave (neither did Coakley). If the health care was so wonderful and Obama wanted it passed and people loved it so much, why did they not mention it?
They did not mention it because people are not in favor of it. People do not want the mess they are peddling and Obama knows this and that is why he did not mention it. Any other time he is talking about it and the need for it. He did not discuss it here because it was the defining issue in the campaign.
Perhaps the voters of Massachusetts noticed that he failed to speak about his signature legislation and figured that there was a reason.
Whatever they felt, the people of Massachusetts did a wonderful thing for this country by driving a stake through the hearts of the blood suckers in the Democrat machine.
Hey Washington, can you hear us now?
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: brown, coakley, health care, Massachusetts, Obama
Today Is The Big Day In Massachusetts
Jan 19, 2010 Political
Well folks the polls will open soon and the voters in the state of Massachusetts will go to them to elect a senator who will complete the term of the late Ted Kennedy. This election has national implications and is being watched closely across the country.
The pundits will be burning up the airways later today but I want all of you involved. Just for fun, comment here with who you think will win and by how much (as a percentage of the vote).
It is time to take a break from all the name calling and sniping that goes on and have a little fun so this post is designed to do just that.
Please keep comments related to the contest and don’t forget to make your prediction.
For those of you who have been living in a cave the candidates are Martha Coakley (D) and Scott Brown (R).
I will start us off.
I predict Brown will win by 4 points.
Now it is your turn.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: brown, coakley, Massachusetts, prediction
Same Old Democrat Tactic, Blame It On Bush
Jan 18, 2010 Political
The race in Massachusetts is getting more and more interesting. Scott Brown is in the lead and has a large group of supporters who want to see him win. There were more of them around than those who showed up to hear Obama stump for Coakley. It is reported that the Brown supporters were able to drown out Obama at times and were heard chanting for Brown while Obama was speaking.
Democrats are privately expressing that they think Coakley will lose the race on Tuesday. They are working on isolating Obama from the blame and will use the same tactic they did with Deeds in Virginia. They are also blaming a usual suspect, George Bush. The former president has not been in office for nearly a year but he keeps getting blamed. Democrats have blamed him for their failures in the housing market and their ignoring his calls for reform and now they want to blame him should Coakley lose.
This race is just absolutely insane. Patrick Kennedy, the substance abusing Congressman and nephew of the substance abusing and now very late Ted Kennedy, spoke on Coakley’s behalf but he kept calling her Marcia Coakley even though her name is Martha. Before we start concluding that it is a bad sign when people do not know the name of the person they are supporting (especially a Kennedy looking to support someone to fill a seat formerly occupied by a Kennedy) let us not forget that it was Kennedy who was all drugged and liquored up when he ran into some car trouble and got a ride home from the police (think they would do that for us). Perhaps Kennedy was just stoned and could not pronounce Martha without slurring it.
Boston.com says Coakley, despite her claims, seems to have vanished during the general election.
The Washington Times reports that Ed Schultz advocates cheating in order to keep Brown from winning:
I tell you what, if I lived in Massachusetts I’d try to vote 10 times. I don’t know if they’d let me or not, but I’d try to. Yeah, that’s right. I’d cheat to keep these bastards out. I would. ‘Cause that’s exactly what they are.
This should surprise no one since this is how Democrats win. They believe the ends justify the means and that if cheating will get what they want then they should cheat. The dead vote for Democrats.
The New York Daily News reports that if Brown wins it will be full speed ahead to get health care rammed through. Democrats will be running scared if Brown wins but they will still ram this through.
The best way to keep the Democrats from stealing another election is to ensure Brown wins by enough to keep any shenanigans from taking place.
The weather looks like it is cooperating with a chance of snow through Tuesday. That would keep voter turnout down with only the committed making it to the polls.
It won’t be long before we see what happens.
No matter what it will be fun to watch.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
The Salem News Endorses Brown
Jan 15, 2010 Political
When I read this I figured it was the only conservative paper in Massachusetts but this paper endorsed Barack Obama. In this particular instance they are going with Brown because the paper believes he will be the best candidate to stop the bleeding
There’s a need to restore balance to the debate in Washington and bring a contrarian voice to the all-Democratic Massachusetts delegation. Voters can achieve that by electing Republican Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate Tuesday.
Brown, however, would be much more than a “no” vote in the Senate.
A former selectman, state representative and now state senator from Wrentham with a 30-year record of military service, Brown has a keen understanding of the unique challenges facing Massachusetts. His time spent as a Bay State Republican has taught him how to work across the aisle to get things done (a trait for which the late Ted Kennedy was justly praised). That experience would help him become an effective voice for moderation and bipartisanship within the halls of the Capitol.
Brown is the kind of Republican — fiscally conservative, but middle-of-the-road on social issues in the Ed Brooke/Bill Weld mold — that Massachusetts voters have endorsed in the past with good results. The Salem News
The polls have swung in his favor and Coakley’s campaign looks like its wheels are falling off. The people of Massachusetts have had enough and this Tuesday will prove to be very interesting indeed.
Coakley is in such bad shape that Barack Obama is going to go to the state to stump for her. If all goes well this will work out as well as it did in New Jersey and Virginia. The Democrats are desperate so they are sending out the union thugs and the thug in chief to help their lowly candidate.
The Democrats are also in spin mode. The internal feeling is that the bottom has fallen out of the Coakley campaign and operatives are already working on distancing Obama from the impending doom like they did with Deeds in Virginia. The plan is to claim that Coakley ran a poor campaign (which looks to be true) and then deflect blame from Obama should she lose.
Of course, if she wins they will claim he saved the day.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: brown, coakley, endorsement, Obama, Senate, the salem news
Catholics Need Not Apply
Jan 15, 2010 Political
Martha Coakley either does not want the job for which she is running or she is incredibly stupid and does not deserve it. I am betting on the latter rather than the former.
Coakley has had an ad out bashing Scott Brown and saying he voted to deny care to rape victims. This is not true. Brown included a conscience clause that says if a provider is opposed to certain treatment (morning after pill, abortion, etc) then that person does not have to provide that care. The person has to already have the status on file and the victim has to be offered the care from someone not opposed to giving it and at no additional cost.
Coakley was interviewed recently and she was caught by surprise with a question regarding the conscience clause.
Under the conscience clause, workers in health-care environments ranging from doctors to maintenance men can refuse to offer services, information, or advice to patients on issues like contraception, blood transfusions, etc..if the workers are morally against it.
This is how Martha Coakley handled a question about the conscience clause:
Ken Pittman: Right, if you are a Catholic, and believe what the Pope teaches that any form of birth control is a sin. ah you don’t want to do that.
Martha Coakley: No we have a separation of church and state Ken, lets be clear.
Ken Pittman: In the emergency room you still have your religious freedom.
Martha Coakley: (……uh, eh…um..) The law says that people are allowed to have that. You can have religious freedom but you probably shouldn’t work in the emergency room. [emphasis in original]
First of all there is no such thing as separation of church and state. The Constitution says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Secondly, a hospital or other health care facility is NOT the state (maybe it will be under Obamacare) so this is an inane point for her to make.
I wonder if Coakley is aware of the number of Catholic hospitals across this country or that Catholics established some of the earliest ones. Many nuns become nurses to take care of people. Are we to believe that they should not be allowed to work in an ER because of their beliefs?
I wonder if Muslims had an objection to seeing a woman who is not a wife naked would Coakley say they should not work in health care?
It is amazing that the Constitution states that no religious test shall ever be required for any office but Coakley believes that perhaps we should exclude those whose religion forbids certain practices from working in certain venues.
A commenter at the source made a good point. The person wrote something like did Coakley then go to what naturally follows? A Catholic should never vote for a Democrat…
If a religious conviction should keep people from doing certain jobs that have aspects which conflict with their religious views then certainly they should never vote for people whose views do that.
The Democrats are already looking at this as a defeat and are working on ways to shield Obama.
I read that nearly 40% of the people in Massachusetts are Catholic. I do not know what is going to happen but ticking off this large a segment of the population does not seem very smart.
Source:
Washington Times
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: catholics, coakley, conscience clause, election, Massachusetts, scott brown