Yes, the MSM is trying to spend their time covering a house race in NY that they say represents a Republican party split instead of the HUGE losses the dems suffered in New Jersey and Virginia last night. They're HUGE losses because obama personally campaigned for these people. They're also HUGE because it shows that obamamania is starting to unravel less than a year into his first (and only) term. I (and many others) predict that support for obama's socialist programs will now begin to dry up in congress as more conservative "blue dog" democrats start to slink away. The 2010 congressional elections will follow this trend, resulting in obama effectively being a lame duck president with 2 years left on his (only) term.

After several years of Republicans in office, voters tend to forget why they voted them in in the first place, and some fall for the "change" campaign slogan. After less than a year of obama, pelosi and reid, they're saying to themselves, "Now I remember why we vote for Republicans".

The liberal high water mark has passed, with nothing accomplished except further bankrupting this country. If we can thank the dems for anything, it will be for reminding us all why we don't need or want them running (ruining) the country.

Originally posted by Seiko


That said Obama is not a socialist, he said he was a progressive socialist, but he is not. He's another pandering moderate.

Uh, what campaign and election did you observe?

Obama, as is the norm for the far left, tried to portay himself as a moderate centrist like Bill Clinton did. Remember the promise of "change" with no specifics that you all bought into?

Pay attention now, the agenda obama, pelosi and reid are pushing is pretty far to the left - socialist - which is the point of the OP, that the real socialists like moveon.org are not upset with the "gang of three" I just mentioned. No, they're after getting moderate dems defeated.

Originally posted by Seiko
I'm entirely for this on both sides of the aisle. Split both parties in twain.

I am, too. We need more choices in this country. The wide views of so-called Republicans or Democrats are too varied to fit under one umbrella. I see this as good news.

This is what I want, the destruction of both main elite parties in the nation by us the people, that is what I want, so we can truly have choices.

The far left progressives, Obama, and his ilk... why would moderate and blue dog democrats worry about a very tiny percentage of fringed lunatics? Riding in to 2010 and 2012 these progressives are going to be all alone and out in the streets where they belong(well not streets in the US, somewhere else). Sane democrats ought to be worried about keeping their titles and listening to America.

All we have to fear currently is the damage(more of) Obama can do up until 2010/12. Progressives pfttt..



[edit on 4-11-2009 by Tyr Sog]

Originally posted by Seiko

How very kind of you to tell me how I vote, and what I buy into. Please allow me to state what I believe in my own words, and not yours. I see obama as another party democrat, and I've already stated I wish to see them split.

They are pandering to their base, and that I will never vote for.

Please show me where I said anything about how you voted. Only you know that for sure. However, it is pretty obvious where your support lies. Will you try to deny that now as the plans of the far left start to unravel? Real strength in your convictions if so ...

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Seiko


That said Obama is not a socialist, he said he was a progressive socialist, but he is not. He's another pandering moderate.

Uh, what campaign and election did you observe?

Obama, as is the norm for the far left, tried to portay himself as a moderate centrist like Bill Clinton did. Remember the promise of "change" with no specifics that you all bought into?

Pay attention now, the agenda obama, pelosi and reid are pushing is pretty far to the left - socialist - which is the point of the OP, that the real socialists like moveon.org are not upset with the "gang of three" I just mentioned. No, they're after getting moderate dems defeated.

You were directly quoting and replying to me, and you said what you all bought into. That would be where you said it.

To the mods, I apologize for the long quote, but it was needed to illustrate the answer.

[
Double post again!

[edit on 4-11-2009 by OldDragger]