Jump to content

2014 Midterms


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 724
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I reported several comments on President Obama's press conference over in the "President of No " Thread,

 

but I can capsulize it in three lines.

 

 

Government, government, government,

 

Spending, spending, spending,

 

Confiscating and giving, sharing and controlling.

 

 

He is incapable of change.

 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I reported several comments on President Obama's press conference over in the "President of No " Thread,

 

but I can capsulize it in three lines.

 

 

Government, government, government,

 

Spending, spending, spending,

 

Confiscating and giving, sharing and controlling.

 

 

He is incapable of change.

 

 

 

.

 

I heard one quote from it on the radio, where he basically implied that "bipartisanship" meant Congress rubber-stamping everything he wants.

 

Even the announcers were chuckling at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I reported several comments on President Obama's press conference over in the "President of No " Thread,

 

but I can capsulize it in three lines.

 

 

Government, government, government,

 

Spending, spending, spending,

 

Confiscating and giving, sharing and controlling.

 

 

He is incapable of change.

 

 

 

.

 

That might inspire an Obama Haiku thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8a65a1a4a7df91a4ab7145d1add83cf4_bigger.jpegPat SajakVerified account @patsajak

 

So, you run against someone's policies & you win, and that's a sign the voters want cooperation & compromise? Uh, OK.

 

 

 

Can you believe this former LA Times reporter’s delusional take on Obama presser?

 

jbioycasuuzyh45nej06_bigger.jpegSteve Weinstein@steveweinstein

 

Shorter Press Conference: Nearly every Reporter proud to act like a total dick. Then Pres Obama replies with calm, generous dignity.

 

 

 

OBAMA’S PRESS CONFERENCE A REMINDER: Oh, This Is Why Republicans Won.

President Obama is a singularly ungracious and non-self-reflective person. In his press conference today he refused yet again to acknowledge reality. . . .

 

If ever there was a display justifying more robust congressional stewardship of national security, this was it.

In Hillaryland, you wonder what they make of this. Will they be forced to defend a clueless president still unmoved by voters’ resounding anti-Obama message? The more antagonistic he becomes toward the majorities in both houses, the more dangerous it will become for Hillary Clinton to remain aligned with him and his policies. She cannot run and win offering a third Obama term.

 

All in all it did not bode well for the next two years, but it does provide an attractive target for Republicans to run against in 2016. (We can’t take this anymore!) It also suggests that the voters were right to hamstring him and send minders to keep things from getting far worse internationally and more lawless at home. It was, most of all, a reminder of why he is unpopular.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited by B-Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So after losing between 7 - 10 Senate seats, control of the Senate, at least a dozen House seats, and 3 Governorships, do the Democrats declare their own War on Women and oust Debbie Wasserman-Schultz from her job as the #1 reason that people change the channel on Sunday morning?

Edited by /dev/null
Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.jpg

Given the press conference today? I believe DOPE is better. Obama has learned nothing from either defeat. He is literally going to do as I predicted so many years ago: eat the Democratic party and **** out chaos.

Obama is the worst kind of failure...the kind that refuses to admit he's a failure, and to prove it, takes everyone in his party down with him in a blaze of glory until there's nothing left but Howard Dean asking Rachel Maddow for a date.

:) That's some good writing right there.

I really and truly don't know what channels Fox, CNN, and MSNBC are so I had to search them out last night to see the differences in election coverage. I couldn't turn away from MSNBC. Their coverage was unbelievable. It was like watching the skits on SNL that aren't about politics.

MSNBC can be mesmerizing at times. Fascinating really. It's like a cross between free association and Madlibs. The Madlibs serve as the formula they generally stick with, with random words thrown in. Then, they break the formula and someone goes into this sort of free association/stream of consciousness for 30 seconds. There's always an awkward, 2 second silence, and then they go back to the formulaic Madlibs again.

 

It's weird, because it's almost like they are doing impersonations of someone else? Perhaps their executive producer? News director? Perhaps another way to say it is: they aren't actually doing themselves, they are doing an impression of themselves.

 

In all cases, I have to be careful, or I will sit there and watch, and giggle for hours. These aren't people to get angry at, even though that's seems to be what they are going for. These people are hilarious.

Thank you for that real world example of the psychological theory: Projection. Everything in that post is what the Democrats, not the Republicans, are challenged by thanks to this election. I'm dead serious.

 

The facture is going to be in the Democratic party, especially since every single candidate Hillary campaigned for heavily? Lost. See: #HillarysLosers. I actually heard 2 clowns today saying that a R Senate is what Hillary wanted all along. If that's what she wanted, why the F did she go out and attach her name to losers, and take that hit? :wallbash: Why not just sit home? So she can get credit for helping Ds, and so they will reciprocate later? What good is the help of an ex-elected private citizen, 2 years from now? :wacko: Meawhile, compare that to the good the now-elected R is going to do for the R presidential candidate for th next 2 years.

 

It's hilarious that the Dopey Millbank doesn't realize: all this is going to do is futher embolden Pocahontas (Elizabeth Warren) supporters. Notice how Warren was sitting home this entire election, while Hillary was out campaigning? You think that was an accident? Pocahontas is one of the best Ds to articulate their message, yet she was nowhere to be found. Why? Because she wanted Hillary to go out and fail, just like she did.

 

Everything presumed D nominee Hillary has touched has turned to schit so far, and these clowns are talking about R chaos? :lol: When I say most of what liberals say is based on wishful thinking? Here is yet another prime example.

 

Sooner or later, given all the Hillary FAIL, Warren, whether she wants to or not, is going to be forced to come out of the woodwork and use her ancestral tomahawk on Hillary.

If the GOP plays their cards right they'll have the Democrats playing from behind all the way up to the 2016 election. Especially if Obama tries to enact many of the policies that he has been focusing on. There is going to be very little partisanship and the public will view that as a result of Obama's unwillingness to cooperate. You watch.

Yep. The public elected these people to pass legislation, not to have Obama veto it. If can't control himself, he will take all the blame.

Clinging to anything you can, huh? :lol:

I wonder: who are the bitter clingers now? You know the people who cling to their platitudes and copies of the Communist manifesto? Those bitter clingers. I tell you, they're just going to have wake up and realize the world has changed.

Gerrymandering? Yippido!

 

Wait, there's never been a house majority this big before? Huh?

Yes, gerrymandering. That's your penance for Obamacare....for the next 6 years, at least. That's what happens when you force bad ideas down Americans throats on Christmas eve at 2am: we get pissed, all the state houses turn red, and the Gerrymander raises it's ugly head. Unfortunately for you, the 2010 Gerrymander is a nasty bastard, who has only grown more powerful as of yesterday, and therefore, isn't going to die easily in 2020.

 

So, if I were you: I'd start thinking of Gerry more as a house pet. He's going to be with us for a while, and constantly yelling about him is only to upset him, and make him take another dump in your bed.

 

We've already passed the anti-Harry Truman R House majority. We could be in 1928 range of R majority, and perhaps even tie it, which would be tying the all-time record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't know how Obama looks at that map and thinks this is the time to double down. I read the following in this article on CNN this morning, and it's pretty eye-opening:

 

It should be sobering for the White House that when Obama took office, Democrats had 59 senators and 256 House members; after Tuesday night, they will likely have 45-47 senators and some 190 House members. That is one of the biggest slides in congressional seats of any modern president. Surely, his White House has to take serious responsibility -- and look for ways to leave a better legacy.

 

Maybe Valerie won't show him the map.

 

I'll start:

 

There once was a prez named Obama

An election caused him lots of drama

What should he do?

Make relationships new?

Or spit in their face like a llama?

 

Best haiku ever. You really nailed it. :lol:

Edited by LABillzFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I'll start:

 

There once was a prez named Obama

An election caused him lots of drama

What should he do?

Make relationships new?

Or spit in their face like a llama?

That's a limerick. But nicely done, all the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly!

 

And Eisenhower

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_1954

 

 

The lesson here is that you Conservative morons are caught up in the drive by media hype about this low turn out election.

 

Leaders that had the ability to work with the Senate...and the House, regardless of who controlled them.

 

How many does it take to Tango?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina isn't already on 2016 GOP VP shortlists, perhaps he should be. His appearance on today's Morning Joe could hardly have been a more impressive audition.

 

When Scott expressed his concern for kids growing up in poverty, Roberts equated such concern with supporting a laundry list of liberal agenda items, implictly faulting Scott for his opposition to them. Scott responded by taking Roberts to school in an entirely undefensive manner. He reminded Roberts that 40 years of Dem congressional rule and a bigger-than-ever government, actually led to a significant increase in black poverty. Individual freedom, economic opportunity and education--not more government programs--are the keys to progress, explained Scott.

 

- See video at: http://newsbusters.o...h.JSAt4hMG.dpuf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...