Click here for DaTechGuyBlog.com Same Fedoras, Same Cannoli different domain.
Please Help DaTechGuy pay Da Bills
Click for the latest show
…so he is doing better.
He is an impressive fellow and quite a speaker. Of course when I heard him talk he talked political & historical B.S. but the students listening didn’t know that and the Union guys didn’t care.
He is however doing much better than the democratic congress.
When a Kennedy doesn’t think his seat is safe in New England then something is VERY wrong. And that something is Obamacare
…Al Sharpton and a parade of democrats defending Harry Reid and/or ignoring Bill Clinton on a show that only exists because those same people attacked a shock jock for the same thing.
As I’ve mentioned I don’t give Scott Brown much of a chance in the election, people aren’t as fired up over this as one might think here but a stunt like this has the potential to do it.
Today, a spokesman for Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin, who is overseeing the election but did not respond to a call seeking comment, said certification of the Jan. 19 election by the Governor’s Council would take a while.
“Because it’s a federal election,” spokesman Brian McNiff said. “We’d have to wait 10 days for absentee and military ballots to come in.”
Another source told the Herald that Galvin’s office has said the election won’t be certified until Feb. 20 – well after the president’s address.
Since the U.S. Senate doesn’t meet again in formal session until Jan. 20, Bay State voters will have made their decision before a vote on health-care reform could be held. But Kirk and Galvin’s office said today a victorious Brown would be left in limbo.
In contrast, Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Lowell) was sworn in at the U.S. House of Representatives on Oct. 18, 2007, just two days after winning a special election to replace Martin Meehan. In that case, Tsongas made it to Capitol Hill in time to override a presidential veto of the expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.
I understand the tactic here is to suppress the Brown vote, making the case that it doesn’t matter if you turn out it won’t stop obamacare but I don’t know if state democrats understand exactly what they are doing here.
Let’s say that Brown actually wins and they pull this stunt. There is going to be a sense among the voters of the state that they have been cheated. Except among the hard core win at any cost left even democrats in this Boston Red Sox/sports crazy state would be outraged.
It would be the equivalent of the sneak attack on pearl harbor to the state in terms of effect, it would cause rage. Even worse for elected democrats, it would cause rage in JANUARY of an election year and motivate people to run on the local, state and even federal level with plenty of time to get on ballots and run.
It would motivate them during an election when the president and congress is at its lowest level of popularity, where Governor Patrick (Obama lite) is so unpopular that it will take a major miracle for him to win.
Democrats in this state are soft, they rarely get competition, what do you think will happen if they get real challengers all over the state with an electorate that is angry and motivated? If there was ever a chance for this state to be flipped on a more permanent basis that would be it.
Are State democrats really that stupid? Do they really understand what they might be doing? We know the national party doesn’t give a damn what happens in Massachusetts, it is a state that is losing population and influence it doesn’t matter in the short run. They will sell state democrats in a seconds and there is no Ted Kennedy who knows where the bodies are buried nationally to protect the state from this.
But for state democrats this is all they know, this is their money pit and they are about to risk it. This is a could be a defining moment for the state. The very suggestion that they would do this could be a game changer for this election. Do you as Martha Coakley want to answer a question on this subject?
If they don’t back off of this REALLY fast then all bets are off.
If the GOP has any brains they will get on the ground in Massachusetts at once and start recruiting candidates statewide NOW! This is the type of mistake that takes place once in every few generations, if we don’t take advantage of it then it is our own fault and we deserve exactly what we get.
Update: Jules Crittenden also a Massachusetts resident doesn’t think it would have that effect. He might be right, but it all comes down to what the GOP does with this. We are being given the best shot they will ever get and we’d damn well better take advantage of it.
Update 2: Hillbuzz is with me on this but then again he doesn’t live here.
As anyone who has read this blog for any length of time knows one thing that drives me crazy are “Cafeteria Catholics” people who proclaim Catholicism but then act directly against it’s precepts. I’ve pointed out the voluntary nature of Catholicism and people’s ability find another denomination if they don’t care for it.
I’ve also said in the past that liberalism has two Sacraments the First is Abortion and the Second is Gay Marriage.
Well the acolytes of liberalism have finally reached a line they would not cross. Some principled liberals have noted for a while that this administration really has no principles.
But now the great sacraments of modern liberalism have been defiled so action must be taken:
Item:
Gay “Boycott” of the DNC:
The bloggers have published a comprehensive list of reasons and say the money should “pause” to the organization until promises are kept: “We are not calling for a boycott of donations to the DNC. We are simply calling for a pause until the party follows through on its campaign promise to repeal DADT and DOMA, and pass ENDA. The party will get the same donations it would have gotten, when the promises are kept. The Democrats could choose to make good on their promise today. And by doing so, they will only further motivate the Democratic base to again turn out for the next election, a decidedly good thing.”
Jane Hamshier is on board:
“LGBT Americans, our families, and our friends kept our promise at the ballot box, we now expect President Obama to keep his in the White House,” they wrote. In addition to Hamsher, cosponsors include the liberal blog Daily Kos, writer and editor Dan Savage and radio host Michelangelo Signorile.
The boycott will be lifted, Aravosis and Sudbay write, when legislation is signed enacting the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and repealing the Defense of Marriage Act. During the presidential campaign, Mr. Obama pledged action on all these issues but has not pressed them since entering office.
Huffpo talkes about it too:
I think the freeze in fundraising is a great idea. I also think the problem with the gay rights agenda in Congress has more to do with the political system than the particularly spineless nature of most Democratic representatives.
Oh it’s a freeze a Pause, what is it 90 days same as cash?
And then there is abortion and it looks like some members of the house are making a line in the sand:
The Stupak-Pitts amendment to H.R. 3962, The Affordable Healthcare for America Act, represents an unprecedented and unacceptable restriction on women’s ability to access the full range of reproductive health services to which they are lawfully entitled. We will not vote for a conference report that contains language that restricts women’s right to choose any further than current law.
That’s unequivocal, with no wiggle room. The Washington Post reported this morning that Rep. Diana DeGette had collected 40 signatures vowing a No vote, without noting the language of their vow or how this would be communicated.
Now we know — at least 41 House Dems are writing directly to Pelosi, telling her that they will not vote for anything “that contains language that restricts women’s right to choose any further than current law.”
Yes we know 41 house dems are so unequivocal about their opposition that they are unwilling to release their names publicly.
These people consider pro-life and pro-marriage democrats “Cafeteria Democrats” unworthy of the true faith.
What these people don’t realize is the democratic party unlike the Catholic church and modern liberalism is not a religion. It has positions but not sacraments. But apparently some don’t see it that way.
As a republican I am encouraged, I guess they didn’t learn as much as I thought.
I still say we should consider 4 parties, Two conservative (fiscal & social) and two liberal (fiscal & social) it would be interesting to see what the composition of a congress of these parties would be.
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 