Moonbeam is BAAAAACCCkkkk!!!
(And damn…you can’t even legally drag on a Doobie! What’s up with THAT???)
LOL!
Mufasa
yet he couldnt even beat the Dead Kennedys
Many have commented on how California is a “microcosm” of all that is wrong with our Federal Government.
IF the GOP lives up to its rhetoric…we should be able to compare and contrast the direction California goes with the direction Washington goes.
This should be interesting.
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Many have commented on how California is a “microcosm” of all that is wrong with our Federal Government.
IF the GOP lives up to its rhetoric…we should be able to compare and contrast the direction California goes with the direction Washington goes.
This should be interesting.
Mufasa[/quote]
I never thought any R would win here. We have 12% of the nations population and 25% of National welfare payouts. This alone makes it nearly impossible for a R to win, unless you are a movie star the welfare babies can recognize.
Couple this with the fact that many of Ca’s believe that R’s killed businesses via outsourcing, when the truth of the matter is liberal TAXATION of these businesses drove them on out.
We can still smoke weed too. It’s a 100 dollar infraction (ticket) if an officer wishes to give you one.
…“This alone makes it nearly impossible for a R to win, unless you are a movie star the welfare babies can recognize…”
DAMN, Rock!
You need to quit holding back…and tell us what you really feel!
Mufasa
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Many have commented on how California is a “microcosm” of all that is wrong with our Federal Government.
IF the GOP lives up to its rhetoric…we should be able to compare and contrast the direction California goes with the direction Washington goes.
This should be interesting.
Mufasa[/quote]
With Obama still in office and the democrats controlling the Senate the only thing we’ll get for the next two years is gridlock - THANK GOD!
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
I never thought any R would win here. We have 12% of the nations population and 25% of National welfare payouts. This alone makes it nearly impossible for a R to win, unless you are a movie star the welfare babies can recognize.
[/quote]
Hahahahahaha!
Ha!
the way I understand it voters that are under the age of 30 voted at half the numbers they did in 2008, shame on them
I still contend nothing will change
[quote]ZEB wrote:
With Obama still in office and the democrats controlling the Senate the only thing we’ll get for the next two years is gridlock - THANK GOD!
[/quote]
Would gridlock for the next two years not be detrimental to the republicans? Now that they’ve made their gains, if nothing happens over the next two years, will people not be pissed?
[quote]siouxperman wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
With Obama still in office and the democrats controlling the Senate the only thing we’ll get for the next two years is gridlock - THANK GOD!
[/quote]
Would gridlock for the next two years not be detrimental to the republicans? Now that they’ve made their gains, if nothing happens over the next two years, will people not be pissed? [/quote]
Yes and no
Yes, because the D’s will gain resentment which will build into the next election. Party of No. This also may get Obama re-elected as historically happens.
No, because the R’s want to stop the madness they see as madness via gridlock. They were put in to counteract the dems and gridlock achieves this.
In 2012 more D’s are up for re-election in the Senate than R’s. This will be key. If people believe that a R Senate and R House with a re-elected D can work…it just may, as it did for Clinton.
The idea of R’s and D’s here is completely fucked.
In May of 2009, there was a proposition to raise taxes, and the deciding vote was a Republican who voted for them ! This state is so socialist, you might as well call us Venezuelifornia. You have shady politicians, like in the city of Bell, a worthless mayor who couldn’t commit to his wife let alone the people of Los Angeles. Couple that with a piece of shit governor irrelevant who is screaming about global warming, yet drives a Hummer and takes numerous trips on his private jet.
Yes Gridlock is good. Gridlock means my taxes don’t go up.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I still contend nothing will change [/quote]
The Socialism will stop, that will be the only change. But the job/economy mess will continue.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
the way I understand it voters that are under the age of 30 voted at half the numbers they did in 2008, shame on them[/quote]
I don’t people should be allowed to vote until they are 30, I didn’t start getting my head out of my ass until I was about 27 or so.
[quote]siouxperman wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
With Obama still in office and the democrats controlling the Senate the only thing we’ll get for the next two years is gridlock - THANK GOD!
[/quote]
Would gridlock for the next two years not be detrimental to the republicans? Now that they’ve made their gains, if nothing happens over the next two years, will people not be pissed? [/quote]
That would have happened had the republicans taken the Senate and the House. Then we could have had a replay of 94’s when both houses of congress went to the republicans. Clinton moved to the middle and they got a lot done. Clinton was then reelected.
We have avoided that scenario. With Obama in the White House and the Senate staying with the democrats the republicans can make the claim that they did not have control so nothing got done. And in all reality it is a fair argument. Until then Obama is check mated and I’m happy.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
the way I understand it voters that are under the age of 30 voted at half the numbers they did in 2008, shame on them[/quote]
I don’t people should be allowed to vote until they are 30, I didn’t start getting my head out of my ass until I was about 27 or so. [/quote]
That’s actually a good point.
Driving age 18
Drinking age 23
Voting age 28
This will not earn me many friends around here 
Anyone think Rand Paul has the stones to Philibuster the raising of the Debt ceiling?
I know it sounds as if the only option would be global economic collapse, but what if the Government had to find another way out? Like lowering the Debt quickly to remain UNDER the debt ceiling?
V
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Anyone think Rand Paul has the stones to Philibuster the raising of the Debt ceiling?
I know it sounds as if the only option would be global economic collapse, but what if the Government had to find another way out? Like lowering the Debt quickly to remain UNDER the debt ceiling?
V[/quote]
I think he just might do it. And I also think that when we haveto do something it has a better chance of getting done than when there is no time limit.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Anyone think Rand Paul has the stones to Philibuster the raising of the Debt ceiling?
I know it sounds as if the only option would be global economic collapse, but what if the Government had to find another way out? Like lowering the Debt quickly to remain UNDER the debt ceiling?
V[/quote]
I think he just might do it. And I also think that when we haveto do something it has a better chance of getting done than when there is no time limit. [/quote]
I agree wise one. I am actually hoping the guy has the stones to “do everything in his power”. I mean he did say those words, so i’ll just leave it at that. I hope I don’t have to call him a liar.
V
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
the way I understand it voters that are under the age of 30 voted at half the numbers they did in 2008, shame on them[/quote]
I don’t people should be allowed to vote until they are 30, I didn’t start getting my head out of my ass until I was about 27 or so. [/quote]
Man you left your self open on that one While I may agree with you to a degree, having ones head out of their ass is not a requirement to vote , otherwise some may never get to vote