Replies

I'm still not gloating, not even after the good arse-whoopin' the Democrats got over the weekend in Hawaii's Abercrombie-Obamaland 1st Congressional District (Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!) where Obama's Teleprompter grew up and that Obama carried in '08 with 70 percent of the vote and that Republicans haven't held for 20 years and that Republican Charles Djou just won in a high turnout election (Democrats supposedly always win high turnout elections) even though he's just a second-termer on the Honolulu City Council running against two Democrat grandees -- Ed Case was a former U.S. Congressman and state House Majority Leader, while the other loser, Colleen Hanabusa, is a former state Senate Majority Leader, current state Senate president -- with close to "only" 40 percent of the vote (just 3 percent or so less than a horny hick from Arkansas got in '92 against George H. W. Bush in an election that was hailed as THE. GREATEST. DEMOCRATIC. VICTORY. EVER.) in a district where Democrats have a voter registration advantage of Biblical dimensions in a state that has only elected one other Republican to the U.S. House since 1959 when Hawaii became the 57th state.

As a big bonus, Charles Djou is an officer in the U.S. Army Reserve who isn't fabricating stories or hallucinating about having 'occasionally' served heroically in wars overseas, as Democrats are wont to do these days. MSM: We hate to interrupt your honeymoon, Mr. Djou, but do you support the Civil Rights Act of 1964?????

Democrats are crowing that they lost with 58 percent of the vote, and that either one of their two high-profile losers could've won against Djou if only it had been a two-way contest. But the flip side is it took two Democrat heavies to cough up 58 percent in a district that Obama, to repeat, carried with 70%-28% of the vote and where Obama's Organizing for America group of nuts worked to defeat Djou.

Incidentally, there were five Republicans and five Democrats on the same ballot in this race the media keep lying about in claiming that only the Democrat vote was split. (And we all remember the 'fair and balanced' media explaining how a Democrat won in NY-23 because the anti-Democrat vote was split.)

The special election win in Hawaii reverses the GOP's 'devastating,' 'demolishing,' 'disastrous,' 'wiped-off-the-map' "loss" of earmarked PA-12, which wasn't a "loss" since (a) John Murtha wasn't a "Republican" and (b) the majority of voters in this district flunk a basic IQ test with each election, which means no Republican has a snowball's chance in hell of ever winning this "bellwether" "swing" district that hasn't bellwethered or swung at the Congressional level in decades.

Obama's historic achievement of electing a Republican in his hometown speaks to the progress America is making in waking up. May Obama make history again in November by electing a Republican majority!

Anyway, that's...
My Two Cents...
"JohnHuang2"

The win in PA12 would be similar to having two pro baseball teams on the field against one other team at bat. The team at bat gets the traditional strikes and balls. When the combined teams go to bat, they get 6 strikes and 8 balls. They win the game, and brag about their tough contest.

From the article: “Will Republicans come forward with a bold plan to roll back government spending? The natural instinct of politicians is to avoid anything bold.”

If the Republicans would come out with a strong platform (nationalize the elections a la 1994) to cut spending and debt and tackle other problems near and dear to the voters heart I foresee a major change in Congress.

However, they can choose to do like the Tories in the UK and play “go along to get along” and end us sharing power with a second rate, third party!

“The Gathering Revolt Against Government Spending”

HOw can there be a revolt against government spending when so many in the electorate are dependent upon government spending?

(It’s going to be more democrats in 2010.)

IMHO

A very good 2 cents!