Althouse: Evan Bayh: "if you lose Massachusetts and that’s not a wake-up call, there’s no hope of waking up."

January 20, 2010

Evan Bayh: "if you lose Massachusetts and that’s not a wake-up call, there’s no hope of waking up."

“[M]oderates and independents even in a state as Democratic as Massachusetts just aren’t buying our message. They just don’t believe the answers we are currently proposing are solving their problems. That’s something that has to be corrected.... Whenever you have just the furthest left elements of the Dem party attempting to impose their will on the rest of the country— that’s not going to work too well.”

In short, the Democrats have gone way left of the American people, and they need to come back.

81 comments:

Peter V. Bella said...: It is not that the voters don't believe the Democrats answers. The Democrats are giving answers to the wrong questions. They are not on the same page as the voters. They are not even reading the same book.; 1/20/10, 8:34 AM
muddimo said...: Obama: "Time to double down!"; 1/20/10, 8:34 AM
SteveR said...: Unlike WJC, I don't sense Obama's got much in the way of a compromise mentality. In theory that's what he should do but he's never actually been anything but very liberal.

I never believed his campaign spin, his version of bipartizanship is when both sides agree with him.; 1/20/10, 8:37 AM
The Drill SGT said...: It will be interesting to see how many Congressional Democrats are willing to ride over that cliff with Bamby now.

I'm still baffled by the fact that he can be resolute and fearless in the face of domestic opposition with his take no prisoners approach, but so gutless and simpering when it comes to facing our real enemies.; 1/20/10, 8:39 AM
traditionalguy said...: Bayh is admitting that Obama's command fascist economy aimed at pretended targets that can never happen anyway is seen as an obvious trick to destroy America's economic and military power.Well, it's back to the drawing board for the Fifth Columnists who are installed in our Presidency until 2012. Now what trick will they pop up with next?; 1/20/10, 8:40 AM
lucid said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 1/20/10, 8:41 AM
AllenS said...: Democrats are still asleep, and they believe it's only a nightmare that they're having.; 1/20/10, 8:41 AM
The Drill SGT said...: SteveR said...
Unlike WJC, I don't sense Obama's got much in the way of a compromise mentality. In theory that's what he should do but he's never actually been anything but very liberal.

Yeah, Clinton governed or failed to govern from the left till Oct 94, then discovered that he had been a pretty successful governor by being a pragmatic triangulator.

That approach made him successful enough to govern and to stave off impeachment.; 1/20/10, 8:42 AM
garage mahal said...: In short, the Democrats have gone way left of the American people, and they need to come back.

If you can't get a health care bill signed off by Bayh (R-Wellpoint) and Lieberman (R-Cygna) through Congress without being called too far to the left, there's no hope. If we had a functioning media in this country Bayh would be asked what in the hell is he talking about.; 1/20/10, 8:42 AM
Moose said...: I think that McCardle's response to Sully's hysteria is pretty apt here: http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archives/2010/01/both_sides_now.php; 1/20/10, 8:43 AM
MikeDC said...: Eat shit Evan. I'd have had a lot of respect for you if you'd said this after voting against cloture on the health care bill. But you voted for it, thereby making yourself one of "the elements of the Dem party attempting to impose their will on the rest of the country".

Gutless, cowardly asshole. You want my vote? You want me to not contribute to and work for whomever your opponent turns out to be? Stop talking and start walking the walk.; 1/20/10, 8:43 AM
lucid said...: The Obamabots and the left are implacable and impervious to the opinions and criticisms of voters. They believe that the voters are simpletons and that they--the Obmami--know better. They are essentially anti-democratic in their deepest instincts, for the same reasons that they are anti-market capitalism. They think they know better than anyone else possibly could.

This imperviousness to democratic process is what has infuriated the voters more than anything--Pelosi and Obama repeatedly act as if the voters don't matter. I will be surprised if they are able to change this about themsleves.; 1/20/10, 8:44 AM
Peter V. Bella said...: Drill Sgt.
It is easy to see. Obama is the kind of guy they name streets after- One Way and Dead End.; 1/20/10, 8:44 AM
TMink said...: I am as confident of the Democrats waking up and moving to the middle as I was of the Republicans waking up and stopping spending all that money back when W was president.

Trey; 1/20/10, 8:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Bayh and other moderate Democrats in the Senate saw this coming back in March. Why they didn't follow through and do something to stop this train wreck is really puzzling.; 1/20/10, 8:45 AM
froggyprager said...: I kind of agree with Bayh but the problem is the economy which is not really a Dem or GOP problem and there is not really a good government solution to turn it around. The people in Mass don't think the Dems are doing enough to turn the economy around but Dems don't want to admit that there is little government can do.; 1/20/10, 8:47 AM
AllenS said...: garage said... "If we had a functioning media in this country Bayh would be asked what in the hell is he talking about".

Try Fox News.; 1/20/10, 8:50 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: Its not just Health Care .. When Brown mentioned the T word (Terrorism) there was a big USA USA chant.; 1/20/10, 8:52 AM
MikeDC said...: Froggy,
The good government solution to the economy is to have the government quit causing problems.

There is a lot the government could do to improve things, but they mostly revolve around relinquishing power in its many and varied forms rather than accruing it.; 1/20/10, 8:54 AM
Steve M. Galbraith said...: Obama will go to the center.

He wants to be re-elected (among other concerns).

Yes, he's a man of the left but a smart one.; 1/20/10, 8:55 AM
TMink said...: Peter, good one.

Trey; 1/20/10, 9:02 AM
MikeDC said...: Obama wants to get re-elected by institutionalizing so much government control of the economy they effectively become the patrons of large and stable constituencies of supplicants. Their reelection plan is transformation of the polity to the sort of nearly single party rent-seeking fest that's been so successful for them in places like Chicago and Detroit.

This obviously has to happen before the next election though, because otherwise they get thrown out on their ass. It's a bit late for a move to the center after you've laid out the cards the President has played.; 1/20/10, 9:02 AM
knox said...: Why they didn't follow through and do something to stop this train wreck is really puzzling.

I have always assumed that Pelosi* pretty much told them: "You might not like it, but you better vote for it. Because if you don't, we'll make your life a living hell. Even if it gets re-elected, you'll wish you hadn't, because we're gonna cut you off at the knees."

You've got some really power-hungry people who've been waiting for their chance for a long time. They're going to do everything they can to scare (or bribe) anyone or everyone into voting for their power-grab. And does anyone believe Pelosi's too gentile to do things the Chicago Way?

*"Axelrod" and/or "Emanuel" are interchangable with "Pelosi" in this scenario.; 1/20/10, 9:03 AM
mccullough said...: Evan Bayh up for re-election this November. Voted for the Senate bill.

Dan Quayle ousted Old Man Bayh in the 1980 election for U.S. Senate.; 1/20/10, 9:05 AM
Palladian said...: "Obama will go to the center.

He wants to be re-elected (among other concerns).

Yes, he's a man of the left but a smart one."

I have seen absolutely zero evidence of this so-called smartness.; 1/20/10, 9:08 AM
Anonymous said...: But Knox,

Bayh supposedly had 15 other moderate Democrat Senators in his group. Pelosi had no control over them, and a group that size (almost a third of
Dem. Senate caucus), is also beyond retribution from Reid (and Obama). They could have had a real impact if they followed through and held together.; 1/20/10, 9:09 AM
The Drill SGT said...: froggyprager said...
The people in Mass don't think the Dems are doing enough to turn the economy around but Dems don't want to admit that there is little government can do.

I'm with MikeDC.

The DJ hit a high yesterday. Health stocks surged. Why?

The market saw that a Brown win was going to reduce their uncertainity.

Killing HC, Cap and Trade, Cardcheck, confistatory punative taxes, and cutting off spending on the out years of Porkulus would do a lot to stimulate job creation

Bambi can't simulateously do that populist rant against both Wall Street and the small business entrepenurs who create wealth and hire people then turn around and complain that banks aren't loaning and businesses aren't hiring.

uncertain business regulatory climate is a job killer.; 1/20/10, 9:09 AM
KCFleming said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 1/20/10, 9:10 AM
KCFleming said...: Clearly, the Democrats need to dissolve the people and elect another.; 1/20/10, 9:10 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: I agree with Palladian. Must be the phantom brand of smartness. I'm seeing more of a Carter-ness.; 1/20/10, 9:10 AM
Bart Hall (Kansas, USA) said...: "Way left of the American people..."

Do you mean like Louise Slaughter (D-NY28, Rochester-Buffalo), who amongst other things has recently said,

"[T]he most important thing is we know we will never get this economy under any kind of control until we get health care under control." Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY)

The same Louise Slaughter who in 2005 attempted to legislate re-introduction of the "Fairness Doctrine" abandoned by the FCC 20 years earlier because of legitimate grave concerns about its unconstitutionality.

The same Louise Slaughter who vehemently opposed the Stupak Amendment, re-emphasizing her fervent belief in absolutely unrestricted abortion -- any age, any stage of pregnancy, any reason whatever -- and the "right" of women to have the American taxpayer pay for that choice.

THAT kind of way left, eh?; 1/20/10, 9:11 AM
lucid said...: @MikeDC--
I think you have it exactly right. their fundamental appeal is to make people more dependent on them and therefore self-interested in voting for them. Their strongest appeal is to the marginally productive groups in the society--people who don't work, college students, and people who write for The New Republic and The Nation.; 1/20/10, 9:11 AM
Paddy O said...: I'm not sure Bayh is entirely right. I think that the goal itself is okay with a lot of the country. The trouble is that so many on the Left equate the goal with the specifics of this bill.

There's no sense that people do pay attention to the particulars. Which is odd, because I've always been told that Democrats are the party of nuance. Only they don't get nuance. Health care, for them, equals this exact bill.

I think there is a very big openness to health care reform. But, unlike so many of our neighbors to the south, there is in the US an accompanying attention to corruption. Americans put up with a respectable amount of corruption, but when it is so blatant, so over the top, it's fought against.

The trouble with this is that for so many politicians they don't care about health care but about power grabs and padding their own bank account.

I think a strong reform of health care that addresses specific issues of coverage for the uninsured and that has very strong safeguards against corruption would be very popular. I also think that if the Democrats purge their ranks of corruption and strongly discipline those who clearly show ethics violations, the Dems would have a strong recovery.

That's the message to both party these last many years. The People are tired of the corruption and see that all this wasteful spending is less about the country and more about padding the bank accounts of corrupt politicians.

Yes, there are true believers on both sides, but they've been cowed into communing with the corrupt so as to maintain some semblance of party unity.

Screw 'em, even the good ones.

The party that forcefully addresses corruption publicly and privately will be the first one back on track. I don't really see any Congressional leadership about this on either side.; 1/20/10, 9:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Democrats are deluded, they honestly believe they weren't radical enough. Look for Democrats to "double down" not move toward the middle. They are our parents, they know what is best for us. Democrats know we are too stupid to understand socialized medicine is best for the country. But once they make us take our medicine, we will know they were right.; 1/20/10, 9:17 AM
traditionalguy said...: Pogo...Dissolving the people and electing another one is now called Immigration Reform and it will pop up next.; 1/20/10, 9:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Well, this is only common sense. But far left radicals don't possess any common sense. That's why they're radical.
Many good people call themselves Democrats and are not so far left, but few of those people are in the top leadership.
The result just might be a very nasty and ugly fracturing of the party; The common sense moderate Democrats and the New Party Democrats.
Get me an extra large popcorn and a jumbo Cherry Coke. I'm settling in for the show.; 1/20/10, 9:19 AM
Joan said...: I have seen absolutely zero evidence of this so-called smartness.

The only inkling of smartness I've seen in Obama is that summa cum laude degree from Harvard Law School. It takes some intellectual chops to earn that. And many people say he ran a great campaign, but I'm not sure how much of that was him and how much was his handlers.

When he won the election, I held onto the slim chance that he would govern the country the way he ran the Harvard Law Review, the only "executive" experience he had. There, he didn't try to advance any particular viewpoint, he just tried to put out a great law review. He appears to have been pragmatic. I could have lived with pragmatic. We all could have lived with pragmatic.

It's amusing to see the wailing an gnashing of teeth over on the Daily Beast. This quote from Mort Zuckerman struck me:

Let me tell you what a major leader said to me recently. “We are convinced,” he said, “that he is not strong enough to confront his enemy. We are concerned,” he said “that he is not strong to support his friends.”

The political leadership of the world is very, very dismayed.

One unexpected byproduct of Brown's win is that the media appears to realize that the jig is up. Maybe they'll start doing their job properly? Who would have thought that the Daily Beast would be running a piece titled "He's done everything wrong"?; 1/20/10, 9:23 AM
Lynne said...: "Pelosi's too gentile"

*chuckle*

There's comedy gold in there somewhere, but I'll leave it to you guys to mine.; 1/20/10, 9:23 AM
Anonymous said...: The market saw that a Brown win was going to reduce their uncertainity.

Bet you'd like to have that one back, with the broad averages all off over 1% at this hour!

Claiming to know why markets do what they do day-by-day is a mug's game.

VW: utort. What if hiring a lawyer were as easy as renting a trailer?; 1/20/10, 9:23 AM
Peter V. Bella said...: "Dissolving the people and electing another one is now called Immigration Reform and it will pop up next."

Let us not forget that the Administration has changed the terminology. Illegal aliens will now be referred to as undocumented Democrats.; 1/20/10, 9:24 AM
Anonymous said...: Bayh (R-Wellpoint) and Lieberman (R-Cygna)

Hey, we picked up THREE seats yesterday!; 1/20/10, 9:26 AM
MikeDC said...: What if hiring a lawyer were as easy as renting a trailer?

Hiring a lawyer is easier than renting a trailer. The difference is in being done with them. You take the trailer back when you're done with it. The lawyer never lets you be done with him.; 1/20/10, 9:28 AM
AllenS said...: Joan said...

The only inkling of smartness I've seen in Obama is that summa cum laude degree from Harvard Law School. It takes some intellectual chops to earn that.

Since we've never seen his grades, there's just as much of a chance that it was an affirmative action degree. He has never seemed that intelligent to me.; 1/20/10, 9:29 AM
garage mahal said...: Hey, we picked up THREE seats yesterday!

Already had them silly.

60 ≠ 60; 1/20/10, 9:36 AM
Original Mike said...: "In short, the Democrats have gone way left of the American people, "

They know that. The plan is to do it anyway because they know what's best.; 1/20/10, 9:44 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Peter said:

One Way
Dead End
Undocumented Democrats

Good ones!; 1/20/10, 9:46 AM
Unknown said...: garage mahal -- 60 ≠ 60

Well, it is true that despite the commonly repeated Conventional Wisdom, there were never 60 Democrats in the Senate. Joe Lieberman was elected as an independent but seeing as how he was the Democratic Party candidate for Vice President in 2000, I think it is OK to still call him a Democrat.

However, Bernie Sanders, Senator from Vermont has always run as a Socialist so it is really more accurate to say that the Democrat-Socialist coalition in the Senate went from 60 to 59 yesterday.; 1/20/10, 9:59 AM
garage mahal said...: Too far to the left. Interesting. Can't think of thing Obama and Dems have done that's "too far to the left". The left absolutely hates what Obama and the Dems have done so far. Centrist corporate Dems that voted for bank bailouts, watered down mandated insurance giveaway, watered down stimulus packages, blocked drug reimportation -- all of it. They are to blame more than anyone. Why would any voter like that steaming pile of shit?; 1/20/10, 10:01 AM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: Howard Dean was right again.; 1/20/10, 10:02 AM
Phil 314 said...: Bayh (R-Wellpoint) and Lieberman (R-Cygna)
First Garage, don't follow Ms. Coakley's lead; at least spell it correctly, its CIGNA.

Second, isn't it a bit disingenous to suggest they are in the pocket of "Big Insurance", when its clear that this administration for this "reform" has signed a pact with the devil (i.e. "Big Pharma"). Any of those pharmaceutical companies dwarf even the largest health insurance company. (And so much more in campaign contributions, too!)

The sad part of this is that Dems lost sight of their key issue in healthcare reform: access. Their message got soo muddled to the point where any bill called healthcare reform is a victory.

You had the insurance companies agreeing to no pre-existing conditions, but that wasn't enough.; 1/20/10, 10:33 AM
reader_iam said...: The sad part of this is that Dems lost sight of their key issue in healthcare reform: access. Their message got soo muddled to the point where any bill called healthcare reform is a victory.

You had the insurance companies agreeing to no pre-existing conditions, but that wasn't enough.

Yes.

Though I know many people don't believe it or don't like it, I think most Americans are open to some health insurance reform, and specifically are interested in to portability, the pre-existing conditions issue and the dropping of insurance when someone's very sick. I think the Democrats' problem is one of both scope and micromanaging. Throw in some ugly sausage-making and what is hard to describe as anything but an arrogant indifference to the real economic squeeze on, especially, the middle class (who in the end must pay the bills while sucking up the contempt from the rich and poor alike), and no one should be surprised that the people who are the backbone of this country are pretty fed up and *both* distrustful and mistrustful.; 1/20/10, 10:47 AM
Anonymous said...: Are the Bayh and Lieberman we already had the same Bayh and Lieberman who voted for the senate bill in spite of being obstructionist Republicans?; 1/20/10, 10:55 AM
The Drill SGT said...: garage mahal -- 60 ≠ 60

If losing 60 kills the Bambi agenda, how is it that GWB could run the country and pass so much with the 52 or 53 votes he had?

wasn't he supposed to be so dumb and Bambi is you know, so much smarter?; 1/20/10, 11:09 AM
Unknown said...: Barry and all the people around him are Commucrats, Barry especially, as is the leadership in Congress, especially the House. Both parents were Commies and Barry has gravitated to that sort all his life (Ayers, Wright, etc.), so he's a pure ideologue and, worse, one of those people who believes in his own infallibility, largely due to his being given a pass all his life.

They've taken one of the key bromides of academic America, that the New Deal failed (they won't admit it publicly, but they know it) because too little was spent, not too much. They figure if enough money is spent, that will fix things and everybody will worship the quicksand on which Barry treads in the same way as FDR. Thus, Tippytoes Emanuel's Permanent Democrat Majority.

BarryCare, as several have said, is predicated on the idea that, like Social Security, if you get enough people in its thrall, you will own the country and the government. They will fight for it, but their options are shrinking because things are so bad and people are so angry. The people who have to go back to their home districts hear this, but Barry and the safe seat crowd have spent too much time in DC.

WV "autstate" Another of those 10 extra states Barry went to in '08 that got much of the stimulus money. See Massachusettes.; 1/20/10, 11:15 AM
Steve M. Galbraith said...: 'I have seen absolutely zero evidence of this so-called smartness.'

Political smarts/acumen.

E.g., You don't defeat the Clinton machine as a unknown Senator without understanding the political landscape.

As Samuel Johnson said, the thought of being hanged in the morning concentrates the mind wonderfully.; 1/20/10, 11:18 AM
Moose said...: Regarding Obama's smarts - we have an old saying in IT which goes: "I don't care if you have a Phd, don't touch anything!"; 1/20/10, 11:20 AM
Scott M said...: How many people honestly believe that Hillary and Bill were sitting back (likely not under the same roof, though), watching the returns coming in, and laughing their very ample asses off?; 1/20/10, 11:39 AM
rcocean said...: Lets see:

TARP
Bailout for Wall Street
Crony Capitalism
No tax hikes on the rich
Still in Iraq
Escalation in Afghanistan
Support for illegal immigration
No movement on "Free trade"
No Tax Reform
Health-care bill packed with pork and give-aways.

How has Obama been "too far left"? His administration had done nothing for the broad 80 percent of us who aren't Rich or poor. He's just a liberal elitist - not a populist bone in his body.; 1/20/10, 11:52 AM
jeff said...: yeah, that Obama. One step to the right of Reagan. Who knew so many of you would vote conservative?; 1/20/10, 12:01 PM
rcocean said...: I don't think Obama is 'one step to the right of Reagan'

What an odd comment.; 1/20/10, 12:09 PM
jeff said...: Then why list all those things claiming Obama isn't far left? An equally odd comment.

Also, did your sarcasm meter break? Perhaps you threw it to the ground last night while watching the election results?; 1/20/10, 12:18 PM
Scott M said...: How has Obama been "too far left"? His administration had done nothing for the broad 80 percent of us who aren't Rich or poor. He's just a liberal elitist - not a populist bone in his body.

Ah...you seem to assume the more left you go on the spectrum the more populist you get then? I see nothing of the sort because, as Depeche Mode warned us, people are people.

The only way the "people" become populist is through coercion. Coercion requires government. The more government control you have, ie bigger government, the further left you slide. The smaller government you have, the further right.

The opposites are tyranny and anarchy, left to right. The fact that the left tries to play both sides of the fence (bigger government and personal liberties) is just another plank in the illogical deck they all BBQ true liberty on.; 1/20/10, 12:22 PM
Unknown said...: Blue Dog Members Alarmed by Potential Political Suicide Plot http://optoons.blogspot.com/2010/01/blue-dog-members-alarmed-as-full-body.html; 1/20/10, 12:32 PM
traditionalguy said...: Since Soros captured the Democrat party and drove out the real moderates,and carefully replaced them with moderate appearing manchurian candidates who are willing to vote with the far left on anything for some more of Sugar Daddy's money, the few traditional pro-American Liberal Dems still left have been awaiting a moment like this to arise and fight, such as Webb, Bayh and Lieberman. This election may turn out to be the beginning of the end for the Soros controlled fifth columnists in Congress. But we need to wait until January 2013 to escape the King and his Czars still under the direct control of Soros.; 1/20/10, 12:50 PM
Kurt said...: It sounds to me like Bayh realizes he has an election coming up in 2010.

Years ago, I lived in Indiana, and I voted for Bayh when he first ran for the Senate in 1998. I thought he seemed like a sensible, moderate sort of fellow. For the past six years, though, he has tacked further and further to the left, and in the past year, he hasn't dissented from any of the stuff his party has tried to ram through. Although I don't think Bayh's senate seat is in any danger this year, if Brown could win in Massachusetts, Bayh has enough sense to know that he'd better start retreating back to the center or else he's going to face a stronger challenge than he normally would have anticipated.; 1/20/10, 12:51 PM
Anonymous said...: I think the health care "reform" process has really damaged moderate appearing Democrats from winning any more elections in more conservative states, like the Dakotas or Indiana. In the past, it was easier to present yourself as a moderate and then vote differently in D.C. That no longer works, Republican candidates can simply point to Ben Nelson, Byron Dorgan, and Bahy himself and explain that no matter what they say at home, they will vote with Nancy Pelosi in D.C.; 1/20/10, 1:01 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Summa? I'm seeing magna. There's a difference.; 1/20/10, 1:21 PM
Ann Althouse said...: And what's an "affirmative action degree." Affirmative action relates to admissions. Once in, you have to do the work, and most law school classes are blind graded with a required distribution of grades over a curve. You have to compete with all the other students who are there. It's not easy.; 1/20/10, 1:25 PM
Scott M said...: And what's an "affirmative action degree." Affirmative action relates to admissions. Once in, you have to do the work, and most law school classes are blind graded with a required distribution of grades over a curve. You have to compete with all the other students who are there. It's not easy.

Well, that’s probably true, but if I remember correctly, tying a noose around a grown woman’s neck and making her jump out of a high window wasn’t easy, but Damien managed it just fine and he was all of six or so.

lol WV = "tainght"

...insert your own joke...; 1/20/10, 1:32 PM
KCFleming said...: All that book larnin' didn't seem to teach Obama much, though.; 1/20/10, 1:36 PM
garage mahal said...: If losing 60 kills the Bambi agenda, how is it that GWB could run the country and pass so much with the 52 or 53 votes he had?

wasn't he supposed to be so dumb and Bambi is you know, so much smarter?

Because Dub had people like Bayh, Lieberman, etc that voted with him. And when he didn't he used reconciliation -- see the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for example. Ben Nelson broke the 2001 gridlock and gave Bush the 50th vote needed. See a pattern here?; 1/20/10, 2:00 PM
KCFleming said...: I see, it's those whoring centrists, giving in to any handsome face what asks them fer a date.; 1/20/10, 2:28 PM
garage mahal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 1/20/10, 3:02 PM
garage mahal said...: Like Jim Hightower said, the only thing you find in the center of the road is yellow stripes and dead armadillos. Jim Hightower, now there's a true populist from Texas.; 1/20/10, 3:05 PM
Steve M. Galbraith said...: Like Jim Hightower said, the only thing you find in the center of the road is yellow stripes and dead armadillos

And also the people, for good or bad, who will decide which party runs the country.

~40% of Americans call themselves conservatives, ~25% call themselves liberal, the rest moderates.; 1/20/10, 3:31 PM
garage mahal said...: And Democrat have majorities Republicans haven't seen in decades. This of course means Democrats have to implement Republican ideas and Obama must carry out John McCain's campaign promises.; 1/20/10, 4:07 PM
KCFleming said...: I admit being flummoxed myself, garage. Why people voted in a super-majority of Democrats but recoiled at their plans suggests:

1) people are stupid and easily duped
or
2) Democratic candidates lied, only pretending to be centrists for the campaign.

I favor reason #2.; 1/20/10, 4:19 PM
garage mahal said...: 3) They seen a year wasted without any real progress other than bank bailouts and a weak tea health care reform bill that did nothing for them.; 1/20/10, 4:33 PM
KCFleming said...: Ah yes, the Democrats simply didn't go left enough. That explains electing Brown over the Democrat in MAss.; 1/20/10, 4:55 PM
Steve M. Galbraith said...: And Democrat have majorities Republicans haven't seen in decades

And apparently that roadkill is getting mighty upset about it.

We're not a parliamentary system, thankfully.; 1/20/10, 8:03 PM
Steve M. Galbraith said...: a weak tea health care reform bill that did nothing for them.

Created through backroom deals and bribes for Senators and special interests.

From a party and President who said they'd stop such nonsense.

Petard meets hoist.

The populist beast is a fickle animal.; 1/20/10, 8:18 PM