Dems to control Senate too

Looks like the democrats will control both houses of congress. Reuters report (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=newsOne&storyID=2006-11-09T164750Z_01_WAT006556_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-ELECTIONS-VIRGINIA-ALLEN.xml&WTmodLoc=Home-C2-TopNews-newsOne-1)

So I'm gonna be a tool and post a pic in response to my own post because I think it's funny as hell http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g66/dlv1984/liberalsfrw.jpg

:nana: now if only we can get more women in positions of power. :dthumb:

:nana: now if only we can get more women in positions of power. :dthumb: But onnnnnllllly if they're qualified, not just because they're women! :dthumb:

:iagree:

Or if they are hot. :cheers: :wink:

But onnnnnllllly if they're qualified, not just because they're women! :dthumb: Nancy Pelosi will do fine job ;) She has no problem telling Mr. Bush where to stick it:dthumb:

Nancy Pelosi will do fine job ;) She has no problem telling Mr. Bush where to stick it:dthumb: :clap: :lol:

Nancy Pelosi will do fine job ;) She has no problem telling Mr. Bush where to stick it:dthumb: Perfect. :cheers: I'd tell him too.

Perfect. :cheers: I'd tell him too. it was funny during the press conference yesterday when one of the reporters confronted him with some of the things that she has said about him and asked how he could expect to "compromise" or work with someone that had that opinion of him. he replied "well sometimes people say unfortunate things". I almost felt bad for him right then.

it was funny during the press conference yesterday when one of the reporters confronted him with some of the things that she has said about him and asked how he could expect to "compromise" or work with someone that had that opinion of him. he replied "well sometimes people say unfortunate things". I almost felt bad for him right then. Yeah he outta know I guess.:lol:

i dont keep up with all that, what has she said about him?? on a side note, i saw an article a lil bit ago and they were having a meeting, it looked rather pleasant! :lol:

i dont keep up with all that, what has she said about him?? on a side note, i saw an article a lil bit ago and they were having a meeting, it looked rather pleasant! :lol: She's called him "incompetent", the "emperor with no clothes", and most recently, "dangerous".

She's called him "incompetent", the "emperor with no clothes", and most recently, "dangerous". i heard about that. you go girl!! i like her already. :dthumb:

i heard about that. you go girl!! i like her already. :dthumb: well she's gonna be second in line for the presidency if Bush dies :idk:

well she's gonna be second in line for the presidency if Bush dies :idk: fat chance of that happening, i'm sure.

fat chance of that happening, i'm sure. true, it's never happened before and presidential security is as high right now as it ever has been. but if something ever did happen to Bush, Cheney might have a heart attack at the prospect of actually having the power rather than just being a puppeteer which would make it possible for her to become president....:flush:

you know, i am all for a woman prez and women in power...but somehow i dont think i want people in power who have to resort to public name calling...it just seems so childish and unprofessional...what next, get mad at the UN leaders and call them a "bunch of stupid heads"?

you know, i am all for a woman prez and women in power...but somehow i dont think i want people in power who have to resort to public name calling...it just seems so childish and unprofessional...what next, get mad at the UN leaders and call them a "bunch of stupid heads"? I bet that's already happened.

you know, i am all for a woman prez and women in power...but somehow i dont think i want people in power who have to resort to public name calling...it just seems so childish and unprofessional...what next, get mad at the UN leaders and call them a "bunch of stupid heads"? well that's essentially what Bush did when he sent Bolton over there as our representative. And Bolton actually did that within the first couple weeks of getting there. he went in to the leadership and said "Ummm, yeah... looks like you've been getting a bit done but we think you're stupid and wrong so we're going to make you change direction... so I'm going to have to go ahead and ask you to come in on Saturday too" (:sorry: bad application of Office Space quote) That's actually why Kofi Annan went into depression for about 3 months after that...

:lol: but did he actually say " you are stupid and wrong?" IMO its okay to say things in politics that may be alluding to the fact that we may think you are wrong or not up to par...but to actually say it is crass...

:lol: but did he actually say " you are stupid and wrong?" IMO its okay to say things in politics that may be alluding to the fact that we may think you are wrong or not up to par...but to actually say it is crass... I agree that petty personal insults don't have a place in politics (like "girly men" :lol:). But I don't think that Pelosi has said anything that rediculous. But I do support politicians saying entertaining things as long as they don't reflect negatively on us internationally (everyone here already knows that our "representatives" are mostly out-of-touch, corrupt, idiots) :2cents:

I agree that petty personal insults don't have a place in politics (like "girly men" :lol:). But I don't think that Pelosi has said anything that rediculous. But I do support politicians saying entertaining things as long as they don't reflect negatively on us internationally (everyone here already knows that our "representatives" are mostly out-of-touch, corrupt, idiots) :2cents: :lol: sadly yes...and we wonder why foreign countries look at us like that??!! altho I am all for setting people on their rumps occasionally... perhaps we should go into politics?? I am a pro at telling someone what a complete and total a** they are and by the time I am done, they think I was complimenting them on something!! you can keep me up to date on things and I will speak as needed!!! :lol:

:lol: sadly yes...and we wonder why foreign countries look at us like that??!! altho I am all for setting people on their rumps occasionally... perhaps we should go into politics?? I am a pro at telling someone what a complete and total a** they are and by the time I am done, they think I was complimenting them on something!! you can keep me up to date on things and I will speak as needed!!! :lol: yeah but we're about a month or two too late to get into the TWF political scene. But we would have won for sure with you're quick wit and good looks and my...uhhhh, hmmmm... well I guess I have some good rep pics for our voters, does that count as a valuable contribution to a campaign? :lol:

well even though president is already taken here on TWF, we could always run to be UN representatives or drain commissioners....

yeah but we're about a month or two too late to get into the TWF political scene. But we would have won for sure with you're quick wit and good looks and my...uhhhh, hmmmm... well I guess I have some good rep pics for our voters, does that count as a valuable contribution to a campaign? :lol: i'd run with you any day!!! :cheers:

well even though president is already taken here on TWF, we could always run to be UN representatives or drain commissioners.... i dont think i want to be a drain commisioner...:lol:

i dont think i want to be a drain commisioner...:lol: True, that's more of a Mod job on TWF anyway :lol:

what comming out of your pipes baby......:lol:

:BAHA: hey one bad...why is your post block always so friggin huge?

well this sucks:nonod: :nonod: i dont understand how massachusetts can re-elect john kerry and ted kennedy too, they are huge scumbags, and not cause they are democrats, they are just scumy people, there hasnt been a good kennedy since 1963 just a short little thing my dad sent me that he got from a friend, and how people always think that republicans are rich well here are ur senators John Kerry, D-Massachusetts: $163,626,399 Herb Kohl, D-Wisconsin: $111,015,016 John Rockefeller, D -West Virginia: $81,648,018 Jon Corzine, D-New Jersey: $71,035,025 Dianne Feinstein, D-California: $26,377,109 Peter Fitzgerald, R-Illinois: $26,132,013 Frank Lautenberg, D-New Jersey $17,789,018 Bill Frist, R-Tennessee: $15,108,042 John Edwards, D-North Carolina: $12,844,029 Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts: $9,905,009 Jeff Bingaman, D-New Mexico: $7,981,015 Bob Graham, D-Florida: $7,691,052 I don't begrudge any of these guys their wealth; rather, I think it's wonderful. It reminds me how great this country is. But do you think maybe these guys could quit claiming that the tax cuts are too big -- when they've got plenty to go around? UPDATE: For another angle, did anyone else catch the curious phrasing in this story? Financial disclosure forms released Friday by the nation's 100 senators show there are at least 40 millionaires among them -- 22 Republicans and 18 Democrats. I don't want to accuse CNN of obscuring the truth, but this breakdown -- 22 millionaire Republicans vs. 18 millionaire Democrats -- is not at all the most interesting aspect of the statistics. Looking at the data provided in the story, I was more struck by the sheer amount of money the millionaire Democrat senators have. So I did my own breakdown. It turns out that of the millionaires in the Senate, the Republicans have a combined total of just over $99 million in assets. The Democrats? Over $526 million. That's over half a billion dollars. Split between only 18 people. All Democrats. Look at the numbers again. The millionaire Democrats have more than five times the wealth of the millionaire Republicans. The top two wealthiest Democrats each have more money than all 22 millionaire Republicans combined. I only bring this up because there are dozens of ways you can break down statistics, and stories like this are great if the numbers reveal some sort of trend or some sort of distinction that challenges conventional wisdom. (And if there's nothing interesting in the report, why bother putting it on the front page?) These numbers are staggering; I can't believe CNN's editors ignored this. So CNN didn't break down the statistics to make the Democrats look bad. That doesn't prove bias. But you do have to wonder where this line came from: The top three wealthiest senators are Democrats: John Kerry of Massachusetts, with a net worth of at least $164 million; Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, with a net worth of at least $111 million, and John "Jay" Rockefeller of West Virginia, with an estimated net worth of at least $82 million. Only the top three? No... we've seen the data. Why didn't they mention that the top five senators were all Democrats? Usually when there's a trend -- such as the top X of a group -- you don't stop at some arbitrary number... say, three. You stop wherever the trend stops. There's just no rational explanation for this, other than that the person responsible for this report was deliberately trying to downplay the fact that the Democrats in the Senate are far wealthier, on the whole, than the Republicans. No, for those of you thinking I'm a right-wing nutball, this isn't a capital case, and it really isn't that big of a deal. But it is misleading, and any journalistic source ought to be called out for this kind of thing. :flush:

Bye bye economy, recession will be here again. Welcome to military cut backs. It's the circle of life, democrats take control of a growing economy and run it into the ground. The republicans rebuild the economy destroyed by the democrats, but do not get the rewards because it takes awhile to build the economy up and by then the democrats call for "change" and the idiotic population allows them to change the economy for the bad. Socialism does not work in a capitalistic environment. Of course if I was a poor ass lazy person I wouldn't mind making 5% of the population pay 53% of the taxes, 10% pay 64%, and 50% pay 96% of the taxes either. Flat tax = better. We all need to pay the same percentage and kiss your dumbass social programs goodbye. Try working for something instead of sticking your hand out.

yeah, for those who own their own businesses, prepare to keep less than half what you make!!

Bye bye economy, recession will be here again. Welcome to military cut backs. It's the circle of life, democrats take control of a growing economy and run it into the ground. The republicans rebuild the economy destroyed by the democrats, but do not get the rewards because it takes awhile to build the economy up and by then the democrats call for "change" and the idiotic population allows them to change the economy for the bad. Socialism does not work in a capitalistic environment. Of course if I was a poor ass lazy person I wouldn't mind making 5% of the population pay 53% of the taxes, 10% pay 64%, and 50% pay 96% of the taxes either. Flat tax = better. We all need to pay the same percentage and kiss your dumbass social programs goodbye. Try working for something instead of sticking your hand out. Socialism never works. Period. I agree that we all should be paying the same percentage... Otherwise you run the risk of getting a raise... only to take home less money. Does that make sense? :scratch: True and frightening...

Bye bye economy, recession will be here again. Welcome to military cut backs. It's the circle of life, democrats take control of a growing economy and run it into the ground. The republicans rebuild the economy destroyed by the democrats, but do not get the rewards because it takes awhile to build the economy up and by then the democrats call for "change" and the idiotic population allows them to change the economy for the bad. Socialism does not work in a capitalistic environment. Of course if I was a poor ass lazy person I wouldn't mind making 5% of the population pay 53% of the taxes, 10% pay 64%, and 50% pay 96% of the taxes either. Flat tax = better. We all need to pay the same percentage and kiss your dumbass social programs goodbye. Try working for something instead of sticking your hand out. Before Bush we had almost no deficit and the stock market did great in the 90's I don't think that's a wrecked economy. At least by objective standards. Lets go by straight numbers without all the extraneous "circumstances" that republicans like to use as excuses for spending money like there's no tomorrow. Compare the US economy, government deficit, and national debt before and during the Republican run...I don't know the numbers off the top of my head but I'm pretty sure I know what that graph generally looks like. I don't like how either of the main parties run the gov't, that's why I'm probably classified as a Libertarian. Welfare and socialism is BS as is almost everything that the Dems do with taxes. But huge spending bills and "pork" is Republican BS as is much of what they do with the money that we do send them, plus the environment goes down the crapper. Like I said, neither party gets it right and neither party represents me and what I stand for. :2cents:

Hey people.... news flash.... The economy runs 8yrs behind the govt. So the great economy of Clinton was due to old man Bush. The crap economy of George W is from the 8yrs of Clinton and all his dem crap in senate. I work for a living, and make good money so its like shooting off my own foor to support many dems. Even though I sometimes stray away from my basic Republican POVs and vote by the lesser of 2 evils which sometimes leads me to a dem.

Before Bush we had almost no deficit and the stock market did great in the 90's I don't think that's a wrecked economy. At least by objective standards. Lets go by straight numbers without all the extraneous "circumstances" that republicans like to use as excuses for spending money like there's no tomorrow. Compare the US economy, government deficit, and national debt before and during the Republican run...I don't know the numbers off the top of my head but I'm pretty sure I know what that graph generally looks like. I don't like how either of the main parties run the gov't, that's why I'm probably classified as a Libertarian. Welfare and socialism is BS as is almost everything that the Dems do with taxes. But huge spending bills and "pork" is Republican BS as is much of what they do with the money that we do send them, plus the environment goes down the crapper. Like I said, neither party gets it right and neither party represents me and what I stand for. :2cents: If you call Enron/Tyco type corporate scandals and bubble bursting internet stocks great. Clinton's economy was a mixture of smoke and mirrors and inheriting the upward rise of things set in motion before his terms began. His actions set us into a recession the Bush adminstration inherited. Taxing the **** out of us isn't what I call boosting economic growth either. I don't know if I have said it in this thread, but I have said it before. I am not a fan of what Bush is doing to the economy. I am becoming less and less a fan of Bush. It's like he has almost been trying to appease liberals instead of sticking to capitalistic guns. That is the real downfall of Bush. He is pissing off his own people. Hell, Tennessee almost elected an african-american democrat to the senate. If a lot of these backwoods rednecks are fed up with Bush, somethings wrong. This is going to be a rough time in politics until 08. BTW, regulating the environment is not a libertarian ideal. They are against regulation pretty much of any kind. It's pretty much an anarchist that likes capitalism. Caring isn't not a policy of a libertarian. The only reason I am not libertarian is because it is a waste of a vote in a two party system. That is not going to change anytime soon. Libertarian is too fringe for majority moderate population of our country. I would rather vote for the economy than I would social issues and republicans line up better with my ideals.

That's what I just said Trip... 8yrs behind!

Good thing my unit got all new gear now, we wont be seeing anymore of that for a while:wbs:

Hey people.... news flash.... The economy runs 8yrs behind the govt. So the great economy of Clinton was due to old man Bush. The crap economy of George W is from the 8yrs of Clinton and all his dem crap in senate. I work for a living, and make good money so its like shooting off my own foor to support many dems. Even though I sometimes stray away from my basic Republican POVs and vote by the lesser of 2 evils which sometimes leads me to a dem. I think Clinton's economy was more of a reflection of Reagan than Bush #1...

I could buy that... Reagan ROCKED! RIP!

Lest we forget that the Democrats were behind the "Superbike Bans" back in the early '90s. Those EVIL NINJA BIKES!!! They were killing our children! Can you say 85mph? 100 HP? Juuusssssst wait for that to resurface. Oh, and there will be more communities/cities/municipalities proposing bans on motorcycles as well. There have been a number of these headed off at the pass lately, but it takes so much money to fight these. SUggestion: Please join the AMA. And please ask your riding buddies to as well.

Lest we forget that the Democrats were behind the "Superbike Bans" back in the early '90s. Those EVIL NINJA BIKES!!! They were killing our children! Can you say 85mph? 100 HP? Juuusssssst wait for that to resurface. Oh, and there will be more communities/cities/municipalities proposing bans on motorcycles as well. There have been a number of these headed off at the pass lately, but it takes so much money to fight these. SUggestion: Please join the AMA. And please ask your riding buddies to as well. Awesome Post!!! :welcome:

Lest we forget that the Democrats were behind the "Superbike Bans" back in the early '90s. Those EVIL NINJA BIKES!!! They were killing our children! Can you say 85mph? 100 HP? Juuusssssst wait for that to resurface. Oh, and there will be more communities/cities/municipalities proposing bans on motorcycles as well. There have been a number of these headed off at the pass lately, but it takes so much money to fight these. SUggestion: Please join the AMA. And please ask your riding buddies to as well. Awesome Post!!! :welcome: True That... plus, that can give some the reason to join some organizations that would help protect... Our Right to Ride guess I'll be giving the AMA the once over... see if it's worth my money...:readng:

yeah, for those who own their own businesses, prepare to keep less than half what you make!! :iagree: :cursin: Lest we forget that the Democrats were behind the "Superbike Bans" back in the early '90s. Those EVIL NINJA BIKES!!! They were killing our children! Can you say 85mph? 100 HP? Juuusssssst wait for that to resurface. Oh, and there will be more communities/cities/municipalities proposing bans on motorcycles as well. There have been a number of these headed off at the pass lately, but it takes so much money to fight these. SUggestion: Please join the AMA. And please ask your riding buddies to as well. AMA is a great organization.