Posted on 10/08/2008 1:53:49 PM PDT by Braak
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In the face of an economy in crisis and a deeply unpopular president, some analysts believe the situation is ripe to give Democrats a 60-seat filibuster-proof majority in the Senate in November. Analysts say Democrats may control the Senate after the November election. Analysts say Democrats may control the Senate after the November election. It's "the perfect storm," said Stuart Rothenberg, editor of the nonpartisan Rothenberg Political Report.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
It’s fine. 2 years of unfettered liberalism will result in 12-16 of rebounding conservativism. It’s happened before, and they won’t be able to control themselves this time either.
The pump is primed for disaster anyway, and they have no clue how to avoid it.
It was SO important McCain handle the bailout situation properly & I'm afraid he didn't/isn't.
Sixty Democrats in the Senate with Obama in the White House is the end. They will lock the system down so totally there will be no getting rid of them.
Interesting Rothenberg uses the “perfect storm” analogy, implying that rising support for Dhimmis in the Senate is a very, very, very bad thing! Probably an unintentional image, but I like it.
So the Democrats cause the crisis and CNN expects them to gain from causing the crisis. That’s circular reasoning if I ever heard it.
Everyone I talk to knows what has happened it’s up to Republicans like Chris Shays to explain the whys ...
Here is a video of Rep Shays explaining, pass it around http://10ksnookers.blogspot.com/2008/10/corrupt-democrats.html
“In the face of an economy in crisis and a deeply unpopular president, some analysts believe the situation is ripe to give Democrats a 60-seat filibuster-proof majority in the Senate in November.”
The economy tanked from Democrat congressional leadership and corruption.
The Democrat Congress’ approval radting is even lower than the President.
Republicans disapprove of President Bush for different reasons than the Democrats do. The Left thinks Bush is too far to the Right. The Right believes he isn’t far enough to the Right.
Republicans disapproval of Bush won’t translate to a rejection of Republican Congressmen. Bush is leaving office but the Congressmen will remain. RINOs in Congress and personal rejection of Republican congressman may be a factor in Republican congressmen being rejected by GOP voters.
And what of the 2/3rds “supermajority” the Democrats wanted on votes?
But this time they’ll use Marx, Stalin, Alinsky & companys’ playbooks to ensure that conservatism is stifled. Arm yourselves now.
Mark my words, We could have dealt with Hillary...Obambi..he's another kettle of fish..he's the perfect storm of anger and far-left insanity.
So where are the Republicans? They sure haven’t been out there blaming this Fannie, Freddie thing on the Dems which would sure make it tougher for the Dems. There are so many things the Dems have hung around the neck of the Republicans and they have done little to fight back. Sorry, but that is the way I see it.
Yes, they’ll “change” the system so we can’t get rid of them outside of violent overthrow. Cling to your guns and religion.
“Barack Obama recently said, ‘The first thing I’d do as president would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act,’ This legislation would wipe out all state and federal abortion restrictions including the partial-birth abortion ban.”
I think there is no question that they pick up seats. The pins are positioned right for that. That said I highly doubt they hit sixty. I think 57-58 would be a more likely number.
If the Democrats are so proud of attaining a majority and no longer opposing a president (I thought that was the Democrats complaint of a Republican President and Republican Congress), why aren’t they so open with what their agenda items on Iraq, taxes, drilling, abortion, homosexuality, and health care will be?
It’s terrible. You may be too young to remember the last time we had a ‘Rat in the WH, a 2-1 ‘Rat majority in the House, and a filibuster-proof ‘Rat majority in the Senate, but it was an unmitigated disaster that we are still paying for today. When was that? It was after the ‘64 election and the “true conservative” Barry Goldwater debacle. That gave us LBJ’s “Great Society”. What did that lead to? Well, among other things, years of race riots, the “War On Poverty” boondoggle, and a debt taxpayers today are still saddled with. Are you up for another round of that? Here’s a clue: the country probably won’t survive it.
This country is on the verge of New Deal 2.0 should this happen. And even if it leads to a resurgence of Republicans in a few years, they will all be RINOs
Naw, they’d “cut off” the criticism of the press by declaring that even 25 word excerpts of published news items was “unfair competition” to the click rates dinosaur media sites “should” be getting.
And Ayers' work will be done.
I’m prepared for it if it happens. My wife and I will make the following changes to my finances and spending habits:
1. We will not do business with anyone who donates or supports Dems, regardless of how much we like their product or service. We will look up contributions even for a furnace repairman or plumber. We won’t give a reason why we have suspended our business with them.
2. We are in the process of establishing an offshore account for a portion of our assets. I am concerned that the Fed and the Dems will impose capital/currency controls at some point. It happened in Venezuela, Russia, and Zimbabwe, why not here?
3. We will SHARPLY curtail our discretionary spending, and will only pay cash for the little that we do consume- credit lines will exist only for an emergency.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.