The Conservative Cave

Current Events => Archives => Politics => Election 2010 => Topic started by: formerlurker on January 16, 2010, 06:35:17 AM

Title: Dems: Coakley sucks, vote for Coakley!
Post by: formerlurker on January 16, 2010, 06:35:17 AM
When Massachusetts Dems Stop Being Polite, Start Getting Real   [Daniel Foster]

A blogger for the liberal Blue Mass Group — which, we are assured, provides "reality-based commentary on politics and policy in Massachusetts" — appears to have internalized just how bad things are getting for Democrats in the Bay State. So in an attempt to rally the vote and save Ted Kennedy's seat, he is here with this rousing message (some adult language):

Let's get this out of the way.  You might not want to vote for Martha Coakley.  You might think she deserves what's she's getting after an absentee, self-satisfied campaign (why should I bail her out?).  You likely want to send a message to everyone from the attorney general all the way to every Democratic official in Washington, DC.  Odds are you didn't vote for her in the primary.  And, you might be wondering if it'll make a difference who wins this Tuesday.

You got every reason to be pissed, but it needs to be clear: not voting for Coakley is the same as voting for Brown.  And voting for Brown is a very, very bad thing.

Yes it sucks. Yes you have to vote Coakley. Pissed?  Me, too.  Not just because I supported Mike Capuano.  I'm frankly pissed about Washington, DC.  Things are going very wrong — President Obama was absent from the process as the public option was killed, and would rather tax public servants in the middle class with so-called "Cadillac health insurance" then ask the wealthy to pay their fair share.  Health care reform is heading toward a route where more money comes from the middle class, with about half going to people who need health care, and half going to the insurance companies.  Oh, and Guantanamo is still open while American soldiers walk the streets in Baghdad and Kabul.  Remember Employee Free Choice?  Meanwhile, Harry Reid races to catch Ben Nelson's and Joe Lieberman's farts on Capitol Hill.


http://www.nationalreview.com/baystate/post/?q=NTQzNzQyNGQxN2RiYzgyYWI3YjA5OGFjZTI3Y2U2ODU=

While this may work with the registered Democrats - the Independents won't be buying it.  The Independents are breaking for Brown 3-1.
Title: Re: Dems: Coakley sucks, vote for Coakley!
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on January 16, 2010, 08:44:50 AM
TRANSLATION: She's an arrogant, slavering whore...but at least she's our arrogant slavering whore and the last thing we want to see is someone with principles get elected.

viva le agenda!
Title: Re: Dems: Coakley sucks, vote for Coakley!
Post by: RightCoast on January 16, 2010, 08:48:20 AM
Many of us here posted almost that exact same paragraph about McLame in October 2008.
Title: Re: Dems: Coakley sucks, vote for Coakley!
Post by: JohnnyReb on January 16, 2010, 08:52:26 AM
Yesterday when I started up my pickup the radio was on the last station my son had listened to. Rush was on....I usually just turn the radio off but by the time I buckled my seatbelt and backed out the drive, Rush had a good immitation of Billy Bob Clinton doing a political commerical for Coakley....it was funny as hell.

You might find it on his site somewhere.....it's funny.
Title: Re: Dems: Coakley sucks, vote for Coakley!
Post by: NHSparky on January 17, 2010, 07:24:36 AM
Many of us here posted almost that exact same paragraph about McLame in October 2008.

There are significant differences between RINO McAmnesty and Lord Zero.  Sadly, we're finding out just HOW bad Lord Zero is for this country.  While I'm not a huge fan of the status quo as it stands in this nation, it was a damn sight better than the liberal headfirst dive into the shitpit of socialism.