Mark, for a guy who talks as tough as you, why are you afraid to answer-- let alone allow on your website-- a simple question...
Is there anything that the President could do or say that you would find fault with?
If you have the courage of your beliefs, you would respond. Thanks.
Posted by: Jeremy Wilcox at April 27, 2007 09:09 AM
sounds like a fair trade, at least with respect to the issue of the war. that said, joe's voting record on a host of other liberal issues is fairly strong, and the same thing can be said for hagel - who traditionally votes fairly conservatively.
Posted by: conscriptor at April 27, 2007 09:21 AM
lets just wait a year and half more when the republicans are routed again and lose the presidency and more Senate seats. sha na-na na-na na-na hey hey hey good bye...
Posted by: kblack77 at April 27, 2007 09:48 AM
I believe the citizens of this Nation have seen that they made a mistake, and in the 2008 elections, even more Republicans will loose their seats to where the Democrats will control a Veto proof majority in the HOuse and 80 seats in the senate... Its not too impossiable for this to happen.
But the one thing that will help the Republicans is...For the Republican Party to cut all ties to family rights organizations And Fundamentalist Groups. Then the votes will roll in for the Republicans
Magnum Serpentine
Posted by: Magnum Serpentine at April 27, 2007 10:24 AM
For all intentions, he already is a Republican.
I do not think that his changing parties would affect the all important committee chairs.
You can have him!
Wade
Posted by: Wade at April 27, 2007 10:50 AM
Look, Joe's a schmuck, but he's not about to switch parties. Neither is Hagel. So it is either a pipe dream or a delusion to think otherwise.
Here endeth the lesson.
Posted by: Cyberactor at April 27, 2007 12:05 PM
AFter all the indictments and impeachments are in, a GOP majority in the Senate will be trumped by Pelosi in the White House.
Posted by: Chose.Life.Not.War at April 27, 2007 12:53 PM
It will be all mute in 2008 and warmonger Joe knows the score. Dems will pick up seats and he will not risk losing out on being in the majority.
Posted by: Josh Keaton at April 27, 2007 01:36 PM
It will be all mute in 2008 and warmonger Joe knows the score.
Mute? It will all be mute? In the Senate? In 2008? Are Biden, Schumer, and Durbin resigning?
Oh, he meant "moot?" Sorry...
Posted by: keefer at April 27, 2007 06:07 PM
Jeremy,
Its a silly question - if President Bush were to come out in favor of gay marriage, I'd be opposed.
See?
Posted by: Mark Noonan at April 27, 2007 06:35 PM
In truth, the breakout would then be 50 Republican, 49 Democrat, 1 Independent (it pains me to say this, Sanders of Vermont). Even though Sanders will clearly caucus with the Dems, he is not officially a member of that party. It would seem, then that the Republicans would hold the "majority" if you can call 50 out of 100 a majority. It should clearly hold that the Dems are not in the majority. The reason the Dems hold the majority now is that both Independents officially caucus with that party, giving them the 51-49 split. Even with this "correction" there was something in blog-land earlier this year when Liberman first started commenting about this that even a 50-50 split (and VP with tiebreaker) would still leave Dems as the offical majority due to some weird Senate (redundant, I know) operational rule that was either not renewed or was renewed (can't recall which). Any help on that one?
Posted by: MikeW at April 27, 2007 07:37 PM
LOL, keefer---I was going to jump on the "mute" thing but you beat me to it. Sounds like Joshie is as literate in grammar as he is in politics.
Lieberman for Hagel? Not even fair. Hagel is such a loser (or, as another literate Lib would say, a "looser") the Dems would be right to demand Hagel, a first-round draft pick, and a month's moratorium on pointing out just how wildly and bizarrely radical Hillary's leftward leanings were before she started to reinvent herself.
Posted by: Almiranta at April 28, 2007 02:23 AM
Mute? It will all be mute? In the Senate? In 2008? Are Biden, Schumer, and Durbin resigning?
Oh, he meant "moot?" Sorry...
Posted by: keefer
Mute is the word, in 2008 the neocons will be silenced.
Posted by: Josh Keaton at April 28, 2007 05:35 AM
I do believe that we should trade Hagel for Liberman. Joe Liberman understands what is at stake here. It seems we have power in the minority and should shut down any action untl 2008 when the people see that the new direction of the dims was into the wilderness.
Posted by: im at April 28, 2007 08:39 AM
Mark,
This would be the only reason that I would support Bush-
Its a silly question - if President Bush were to come out in favor of gay marriage, I'd support that.
Posted by: rockville at April 28, 2007 11:42 AM
Ohh, you idiots in Connecticut. Why did you not choose Lamont?
Augh.
ThELefTYFoOL
Posted by: the_lefty_fool at April 30, 2007 06:55 PM
Mark, for a guy who talks as tough as you, why are you afraid to answer-- let alone allow on your website-- a simple question...
Is there anything that the President could do or say that you would find fault with?
If you have the courage of your beliefs, you would respond. Thanks.
sounds like a fair trade, at least with respect to the issue of the war. that said, joe's voting record on a host of other liberal issues is fairly strong, and the same thing can be said for hagel - who traditionally votes fairly conservatively.
lets just wait a year and half more when the republicans are routed again and lose the presidency and more Senate seats. sha na-na na-na na-na hey hey hey good bye...
I believe the citizens of this Nation have seen that they made a mistake, and in the 2008 elections, even more Republicans will loose their seats to where the Democrats will control a Veto proof majority in the HOuse and 80 seats in the senate... Its not too impossiable for this to happen.
But the one thing that will help the Republicans is...For the Republican Party to cut all ties to family rights organizations And Fundamentalist Groups. Then the votes will roll in for the Republicans
Magnum Serpentine
For all intentions, he already is a Republican.
I do not think that his changing parties would affect the all important committee chairs.
You can have him!
Wade
Look, Joe's a schmuck, but he's not about to switch parties. Neither is Hagel. So it is either a pipe dream or a delusion to think otherwise.
Here endeth the lesson.
AFter all the indictments and impeachments are in, a GOP majority in the Senate will be trumped by Pelosi in the White House.
It will be all mute in 2008 and warmonger Joe knows the score. Dems will pick up seats and he will not risk losing out on being in the majority.
It will be all mute in 2008 and warmonger Joe knows the score.
Mute? It will all be mute? In the Senate? In 2008? Are Biden, Schumer, and Durbin resigning?
Oh, he meant "moot?" Sorry...
Jeremy,
Its a silly question - if President Bush were to come out in favor of gay marriage, I'd be opposed.
See?
In truth, the breakout would then be 50 Republican, 49 Democrat, 1 Independent (it pains me to say this, Sanders of Vermont). Even though Sanders will clearly caucus with the Dems, he is not officially a member of that party. It would seem, then that the Republicans would hold the "majority" if you can call 50 out of 100 a majority. It should clearly hold that the Dems are not in the majority. The reason the Dems hold the majority now is that both Independents officially caucus with that party, giving them the 51-49 split. Even with this "correction" there was something in blog-land earlier this year when Liberman first started commenting about this that even a 50-50 split (and VP with tiebreaker) would still leave Dems as the offical majority due to some weird Senate (redundant, I know) operational rule that was either not renewed or was renewed (can't recall which). Any help on that one?
LOL, keefer---I was going to jump on the "mute" thing but you beat me to it. Sounds like Joshie is as literate in grammar as he is in politics.
Lieberman for Hagel? Not even fair. Hagel is such a loser (or, as another literate Lib would say, a "looser") the Dems would be right to demand Hagel, a first-round draft pick, and a month's moratorium on pointing out just how wildly and bizarrely radical Hillary's leftward leanings were before she started to reinvent herself.
Mute? It will all be mute? In the Senate? In 2008? Are Biden, Schumer, and Durbin resigning?
Oh, he meant "moot?" Sorry...
Posted by: keefer
Mute is the word, in 2008 the neocons will be silenced.
I do believe that we should trade Hagel for Liberman. Joe Liberman understands what is at stake here. It seems we have power in the minority and should shut down any action untl 2008 when the people see that the new direction of the dims was into the wilderness.
Mark,
This would be the only reason that I would support Bush-
Its a silly question - if President Bush were to come out in favor of gay marriage, I'd support that.
Ohh, you idiots in Connecticut. Why did you not choose Lamont?
Augh.
ThELefTYFoOL