Democrats Cave In, Will Seat Scott Brown
February 4, 2010
It’s time for Teddy’s seat warmer to fing a new place to sit.
Sen.-elect Scott Brown of Massachusetts on Wednesday demanded to be seated immediately, saying that while he was set to be sworn in Feb. 11, there are a number of votes scheduled prior to that date — votes that, once he is seated, Republicans can defeat.
Democrats, seeking to avoid a prolonged battle over seating a duly elected senator, quickly assented.
In a letter from Mr. Brown’s attorney to Gov. Deval Patrick and Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin — both Democrats — Mr. Brown argued that the results of the special election in Massachusetts on Jan. 19 are not in doubt. While Senator-elect Brown had tentatively planned to be sworn into office February 11, he has been advised that there are a number of votes scheduled prior to that date, For that reason, he wants certification to occur immediately, wrote his attorney, Daniel B. Winslow. As he is the duly elected United States Senator from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, he is entitled to be seated now.
The lawyer asked that the results of the Jan. 19 special election be certified without delay and no later than 11 a.m. Thursday, in time to allow Senator-elect Brown to be administered the oath of office by the Vice President tomorrow afternoon. Hours before Mr. Brown’s demand, Mr. Galvin delivered official copies of the election results to the Governor’s Council. Mr. Patrick’s staff announced that the governor would sign Mr. Brown’s election certificate in the council’s presence — as is required by law — during a ceremony at 9:30 a.m. Thursday.
Scott Brown Is Elected, Not Allowed To Vote In The Senate
January 31, 2010
In the past few days, the Senate has voted on three major pieces of legislation:
Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke’s confirmation.
Establishing spending caps.
Raising the federal debt ceiling.
In these and other matters that have been voted on in the Senate since Brown’s election, the Senator from Massachusetts casting a vote has been Paul Kirk.
Former Massachusetts Senator Paul Kirk.
This is after numerous Democrat leaders claiming that Brown would be seated immediately, in accordance with Massachusetts state law.
Where is the outcry, not only from the citizens of the Bay State, but from the leadership of the GOP?
Calling Michael Steele.
Obama’s Answer For America Is: More Obama
January 28, 2010
President Obama must be a firm believer in the old saying “If at first you don’t succeed, try try again.”
I guess he never heard the one about what defines doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
There’s a story of an ex hausted tenor at La Scala who, facing repeated cries of “Encore,” responded that he couldn’t go on. A man rose in the audience to say, “You’ll keep singing until you get it right.”
That seems to be the defining principle of the Obama administration — whose response to every problem, every setback, every hiccup and challenge has been, simply, “more Obama.”
Indeed, for people who aren’t sticklers for political jargon, it will be a shock that last night was Obama’s first State of the Union Address, since it was his third formal address to a joint session of Congress. Yet for all of the political déjà vu, what was most surprising last night was the degree to which Obama delivered even more of the same.
Washington graybeards and pundits have been insisting that Obama needs to “start over,” “reboot” and “tack to the middle” after Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts. But Obama’s response last night was to recommit himself to the agenda that has gotten him in so much trouble.
In fairness, the president took a French-bath of Clintonism before he took to his beloved TelePrompTer. He doused himself with the scent of the deficit-fighter and trade-promoter. He unveiled a slew of small, easy, applause-gathering proposals and populist appeals that he knows will go nowhere.
He also indulged in a lot of feel-your-pain pathos, trying to connect with the real Americans suffering from the recession and the misdeeds of a “Washington” that Obama seems to think is run by someone other than him.
A New Declaration Of Independence
January 28, 2010
This time, it’s a Declaration Of Independence from Obamacare.
The only thing missing was quills and powdered wigs.
Eleven House conservatives on Wednesday signed a “Declaration of Health Care Independence” at an event staged by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), and there was no shortage of Revolutionary War rhetoric and tea party references.
Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) compared Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts last Tuesday to the battle of Lexington in April 1775. The congressmen signed their names at the bottom of the so-called declaration, which had been printed in a small font to mirror Thomas Jefferson’s calligraphy.
Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) noted that the signers of the original Declaration of Independence put their lives and property at stake. The Republicans who signed Wednesday afternoon appeared to be in no grave political danger, since they all have fairly safe seats.
“Last week Massachusetts fired another shot that was heard round the world,” Akin said. “Each of those shots were followed by various declarations. … The shot has been fired now twice in Massachusetts, and this is a declaration.”
I’m Better At Math And Puzzles Than The President
January 26, 2010
I understand what numbers and statistics mean, and I can “connect the dots.”
It’s becoming obvious that President Obama can’t.
Forget any hope you may have had about President Obama reducing the size of the federal deficit.
I know, I know, many of you reading this place some (if not more than some) of the size of the deficit on the shoulders of the Democratic Party’s reckless spending, bailouts, etc.
Regardless of how is at fault for the ballooning amount of debt America is saddled with, one thing is clear.
There is no HOPE of President Obama bringing about any significant CHANGE.
The President will not reduce the deficit, nor will he cut spending, due to the fact that he cannot do the math when it comes to things that affect him on a personal level.
Cosider the following:
In 2008, Obama won in Massachusetts by 26 points.
In last week’s Senate race, Martha Coakley lost to Scott Brown by 5 points.
That’s a 31 point difference.
In 2008, Obama carried New Jersey by 16 points.
In the recent Governor’s race, the Democrat incumbent candidate lost by 4 points.
A 20 point difference.
In 2008, candidate Obama won in Virginia by 6 points.
In 2009, the Democrat candidate for Governor lost by 18 points.
Net loss, 24 points.
However you crunch the numbers, these results are a clear repudiation of President Obama and his agenda.
And the news gets worse.
According to the latest Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll, the data shows that 25% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Forty-one percent (41%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -16.
All of this should be a cause for concern on the part of president Obama.
Yet his arrogance continues to lead him to believe that American’s will still drink the Kool-Aid, and that he and his fellow Democrats can continue to promote their Socialist agenda.
Sorry Mr. President, the numbers just don’t add up.
Senate Win For Brown Is George Bush’s Fault
January 22, 2010
Trying to put a positve spin on Scott Brown’s election victory in Massachusetts, President Obama declared that “the anger that elected Brown is the same anger that elected him, and it goes back eight years.”
Well, I’m glad he cleared that up for us.
I knew that George Bush had to be the reason that one of the most liberal states in America would elect a conservative to the United States Senate.
The Amazing (Senate) Race
January 19, 2010
Even a second or third rate Democrat should easily be able to win an election in Massachusetts.
So why is Martha Coakley facing an uphill battle?
A U.S. Senate race widely labeled a yawner just weeks ago reaches a thunderous finish today as Bay State voters cast ballots that could upend Barack Obama’s health-care plan and change the course of his presidency.
Republican state Sen. Scott Brown, 50, of Wrentham faces off against Democratic Attorney General Martha Coakley, 56, of Medford in the pivotal contest to fill the remaining two-year term of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy.
At stake in their intense battle is President Obama’s health-care reform goal, Democrats’ fillibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and the state’s long-held reputation as a bastion of blue.
Continue reading
Democrats Want To Give Up Control Of Congress
January 19, 2010
Democrats are committing suicide.
It is suicide of the political variety, but they are doing it regardless.
There is no other explanation.
The Democrat Party, up to and including President Barack Obama for months now have been ignoring polls and public opinion that show without a doubt that their approval ratings consistently dropping, and dropping significantly.
The only conclusion that can be drawn is that they want to turn control of Congress over to the Republicans.
Otherwise, why would they continue to pursue an agenda that spells almost certain defeat for many of them this November?
It’s possible that many of them simply didn’t the data that shows that, for many of them, their re-election chances this fall would be an uphill battle.
However, unless they are looking forward to retirement, it should be impossible for them to ignore what will take place today in Massachusetts.
As this is being written, a special election is taking place in Massachusetts to fill the Senate seat of the late Ted Kennedy.
Keep in mind that this is Massachusetts, the state that, year after year, elected Kennedy, the man who was known as the “liberal lion”, and throughout his political career was considered by both Democrats and Republicans alike as one of the most powerful people ever to serve in the U.S. Senate.
It should stand to reason that Kennedy’s replacement would automatically be a Democrat.
Yet the Democrats hand-picked successor for the seat, Martha Coalley, today faces a serious challenge from Republican Scott Brown.
Now think about that for just a moment.
A Republican has a chance, a very good chance, of winning this election.
Scott Brown is not just a Republican sacrificial lamb, he has a real shot at winning this thing.
A conservative winning a seat in the U.S. Senate from the state that not only Ted Kennedy, but also such liberal icons as John Kerry and Barney Frank!
And to hear the various political pundits tell it, the Democrats are in a tither because a victory for Scott Brown will be a death blow for the health care reform bill.
Can’t they hear the alarm bells going off?
The fact that Brown has any chance at all of a victory should be raising warning flags for every incumbent Democrat in the House and Senate, as well as any who may have planned to throw their hats into the ring for the 2010 elections.
Regardless of what happens today in Massachusetts, this should serve as a wake-up call for all Democrats.
Whether Scott Brown should win or lose, the fact that he is in the running simply goes to show how unpopular Democrats and their policies have become.
Recent Comments