I'm not ashamed to admit...

[weirddave]

...that at 9:22 PM, EST, tonight, when the AP called the senate race for Brown and it was reported that Coakley had called Brown to concede, I had, in addition to a triumphant cheer from my mouth, a tear in my eye. An actual, no fooling, hey-my-hand-wiping-my-eye-is wet, tear in my eye. Finally, FINALLY, maybe, just maybe, we as Americans had at

Comments

[esprix]

Good lord, why are we friends again? :P

(Let's promise NEVER EVER EVER to talk politics in person. NEVER EVER.)

[hamadryad]

This.

[weirddave]

See my reply to Alan above (below actually). Everything I said to him applies to you. And it distresses me that I have to say what should be obvious to either of y'all.

[weirddave]

Couple of reasons. #1, we like each other (or at least I like you personally). #2 we're both too smart to let politics affect personal relationships. #3 Barack Hussein Obama is bad for America, and a badly needed check on his statist agenda is what I'm celebrating. What I don't get about you (and Ianna below) is how someone I respect so much, and whose innate intelligence I take as a given, can't see just how BAD what he's attempting to do is for America, this country that we both love. Frankly, it baffles me. This isn't simply a question of differing viewpoints, Obama is proactively trying to destroy everything that America is, stands for and has accomplished in 200+ years. How someone as smart as you can't look at what he's actually DONE and what he proposes to do,(no bullshit racism, homophobia, "redneck teabaggery" or anything else) and see that is beyond me. Is it because you think that he was just fooling with his stated position of supporting civil unions and not gay marriage? Alan, if it is, stop kidding yourself. Obama doesn'

[gingy]

I would be happier if you had won the lottery.

[ubet_cha]

Super majorities are a bad thing. I don’t mind the Dem’s having the majority, but they’ve ignored everyone except for their own leadership this year. A little change should help.

I do enjoy Irony. The fact the Democrats did this themselves after changing the law in 2004 when Kerry was running for President and they didn’t want to give Romney the chance to appoint a temporary Republican Senator is chuckle-worthy.

[esprix]

Bullshit. The Democrats are pissing away their supermajority because they're too busy kowtowing to moderates on both sides of the aisle, and the Republicans are too busy trying to derail ANYTHING the Democrats want instead of voting their conscience. I applaud bipartisanship, but if one side won't play ball, it's kind of useless for the other side to try.

[justplainbryan]

The pendulum is merely swinging the other way. I've lived long enough now to see the pattern. When Democrats are the underdog, they play the same tricks as well. It's a long and storied tradition of career politicking to maintain the status quo by moving power from one party to the other. In some ways it's a good thing because it keeps power in dynamic balance. In other ways it's bad because very little actually gets done (which in itself may be a good thing. Just look at China's one party system. Things can get done very quickly, but at the suffering of millions).

Forgive my cynicism, but LOL at Dave for thinking that things will "finally" change! :)

[esprix]

Stop being so rational, you commie. :P