Woohoo! Go, Scott Brown.

[Xiahou]

No evidence of price-paying thus far, or as one blogger put it:

The problem here is that the Republican strategy of holding out for total surrender is working just fine. They had an interesting theory that if you refuse to cooperate with efforts to make the country better, things won’t get better and the out-of-power party will benefit. The theory appears to be true.

It's comical to hear all the 'blame the GOP obstructionists' talk when until too recently the Democrats had unstoppable majorities in both houses. The Democrats had total control over Congress and the White House and still failed to accomplish anything. Why? Because of the Republicans.

Under Bush, the GOP never had a 60 seat majority in the senate and the Democrats still howled about one party rule and how they were powerless to oppose the GOP majority. How is it that the Democrats had 60 seats and still managed to be so feckless? I guess Bush was just more bipartisan than Obama...

[drone]

Under Bush, the GOP never had a 60 seat majority in the senate and the Democrats still howled about one party rule and how they were powerless to oppose the GOP majority. How is it that the Democrats had 60 seats and still managed to be so feckless? I guess Bush was just more bipartisan than Obama...

I've been pondering if the Democratic congressional leadership was (and remains) incompetent, or complicit in allowing the abuses of the Bush years. I'm not sure Occam's razor applies.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

It's comical to hear all the 'blame the GOP obstructionists' talk when until too recently the Democrats had unstoppable majorities in both houses. The Democrats had total control over Congress and the White House and still failed to accomplish anything. Why? Because of the Republicans.

Under Bush, the GOP never had a 60 seat majority in the senate and the Democrats still howled about one party rule and how they were powerless to oppose the GOP majority. How is it that the Democrats had 60 seats and still managed to be so feckless? I guess Bush was just more bipartisan than Obama...

If the democrats haven't done anything, I guess that conservatives who want to keep the status quo should be cheering them on.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

If the democrats haven't done anything, I guess that conservatives who want to keep the status quo should be cheering them on.

Conservatives don't want to keep the status quo, we just don't want that sort of "change."

[Beskar]

Conservatives don't want to keep the status quo, we just don't want that sort of "change."

Correct, they want regression.

That is why they don't want status quo or progression, Sasaki.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Correct, they want regression.

Wrong.

[Beskar]

Wrong.

No it isn't, the oxymoronical "right" who are against progress, want to regress to states such as having a heirarchical monarchy.

I believe even you share this opinion, EMFM, with your want of a Kaiser.

So how is this wrong?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

So how is this wrong?

Because our opinions aren't "regressive", they're just different. The left also wants things that have been tried before in other places, that doesn't make them "regressive" either. I'd remind you that no culture or state has ever tried the system that I have theorized about before.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Conservatives don't want to keep the status quo, we just don't want that sort of "change."

But the democrats are failing to change anything, it is being said.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

But the democrats are failing to change anything, it is being said.

Then the Republicans are opposed to the Democrats not changing anything, and are therefore in favour of change.

Wow, just wow. I know the USA just pretends to be a secular republic, but that's just maleovelent.

It is a secular republic, and that statement in no way negates that fact, as you know.

[KukriKhan]

Yanno... I used to view our Evil_Maniac From Mars as an attention-seeking kinda guy, what with his choice of names and all (no offense, E )

Lately, I've come to regard him as a stentorophonic, while whispering, Voice of Reason.

on-topic: Mr. Scott Brown: interesting to see what he does in the next 90 days, and whether Mass thinks they got their money's worth, or have buyer's remorse.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Yanno... I used to view our Evil_Maniac From Mars as an attention-seeking kinda guy, what with his choice of names and all (no offense, E )

None taken. I chose the name, if I recall correctly, because it was the first thing that came to mind at the time. Nonetheless, you're probably right about how I was in the past. Hopefully that hasn't tainted too many views of me, anonymous though this forum is.

Thank you for the compliment.

[Xiahou]

I say bring back the knock-down, drag-out, bring in the cots filibusters of old. When the senate created the two track rule, they not only took all the fun out of filibusters, but they also made them effortless to maintain.

If you want to have endless debate to delay a bill, you should be expected to debate endlessly. Now days, they can just say they're going to filibuster and the senate moves on to another bill.

[Subotan]

It is a secular republic, and that statement in no way negates that fact, as you know.

OK, so if government and religion are separate, why is there only one atheist congressman? Why would less people vote for a Muslim or a Gay Presidential candidate over an atheist one? Christianity is de facto the state religion.

[Crazed Rabbit]

That proves nothing; people may vote less for Muslim candidates, but they can still vote for them. Gah, why does it seem like I have to spell everything out?!

CR