Holy Fucknoly!

18 comments

Skip to comment form ↓

1. 1
   

   Katie

   April 28, 2009 at 1:59 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

   Eh, he’s practically been a democrat up until now anyway. Can’t we just celebrate the filibuster-buster?

2. 2
   

   juniorprof

   April 28, 2009 at 2:07 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

   Yeah cap and trade!!

3. 3
   

   jc

   April 28, 2009 at 2:23 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

   Jump baby JUMP!

4. 4
   

   JessSnark

   April 28, 2009 at 4:41 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

   Ha- the last line in that article is priceless (Republicans blaming one another for their disaster)

5. 5
   

   bikemonkey

   April 28, 2009 at 4:43 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

   oh please, he’s not going to go along with the Dems on serious cloture vote on shit that actually matters

6. 6
   

   Physiogroupie IV

   April 28, 2009 at 4:59 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

   Well yeah, dude started this gig in the 70s. The republicans have since left him.

7. 7
   

   DuWayne

   April 28, 2009 at 9:29 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

   Physiogroupie -

   Actually he switched from the Dems in the sixties.

8. 8
   

   Physiogroupie IV

   April 29, 2009 at 1:17 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

   haha flip flop.

9. 9
   

   scribbler50

   April 29, 2009 at 8:59 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

   I’m with Bikemonkey, let’s see how he votes first before we pop the champagne. I smell a Joe Leiberman in waiting here.

   It IS a pure a joy though to watch the Repubs trying to explain this away! As fucking if!!! Can’t wait for the day when Limbaugh finally has to say, “Honey, I shrunk the party!”

10. 10
    

    TomJoe

    April 29, 2009 at 9:01 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

    Unfortunately, there is something to be said about a two party system*. If the death of the Republican Party has not been greatly exaggerated, I’m not so sure that’s going to be a good thing. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and I’d be loathe to consider the fact that Nancy Pelosi would essentially be in charge without any check to her power.

    Perish the thought!

    *Two functional parties at a minimum. A third would be ideal. Damn you Ross Perot!

11. 11
    

    octogalore

    April 29, 2009 at 11:12 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

    I’m with TomJoe. While I understand the motivation for this (and no, I don’t think it was policy-driven), I think there’s a little saying about absolute power and corruption that has some relevance here.

12. 12
    

    scribbler50

    April 29, 2009 at 11:51 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

    Couldn’t agree more that we need a two party system, or even a three or a four party system if that’s what it takes, (for an unchecked party in the hands of Nancy Pelosi IS a bit frightening) but a Republican party as presently constituted needs to either totally revamp itself and shake off it’s failed ideology and those who push it, or choke on its own bigotry and fade into oblivion. And the more rats that jump from it’s ship, regardless of their reasons for doing it, can’t be a bad thing.

13. 13
    

    Katie

    April 29, 2009 at 9:28 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

    What we really need is a no-party system where everyone just -gasp- votes for what they think is right instead of what the party tells them they should vote for.

14. 14
    

    becca

    May 1, 2009 at 11:28 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

    less of a rat than many of them, what with the “I’ll vote for your stimulus bill if you stimulate NIH”

15. 15
    

    bustedsbro

    May 1, 2009 at 1:00 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

    As progressives we bitch about the blue dogs all the time the difference is that the democratic party allows a moderation of views. The repubs were taken over by there right side and any deviation from there views wasn’t going to be accepted. While I welcome conservative moderation the repugs don’t. I say fuckem for having sticks up there asses.

16. 16
    

    connecticutman1

    May 1, 2009 at 1:08 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

    As apt a use of that metaphor as there has ever been. Cause he is one ratfucker if there ever was one.

17. 17
    

    Hap

    May 2, 2009 at 11:49 am (UTC -7) Link to this comment

    Having a diversity of ideas and points of view is helpful in a democracy. The problem with the Repubs is that they haven’t really had either in a long time – “if you close your eyes, wish real hard, and call the other guys lots of bad names if they won’t ignore reality just like you” (also known as stupidity) isn’t a point of view. The fact that somewhat less than 50% of US voters endorse the “viewpoint” doesn’t make it useful to improving the country or to avoiding its demise.

    If the only way you have to control the direction a car is being driven (and to prevent the driver from absolute control and bad things) is to drive the car into a propane tank, then I would opine that you don’t really have a diversity of opinion. You may have good or insanity, or evil or insanity, or something in between, but what you don’t have is anything useful.

    At this point, watching the Repubs self-destruct is sort of amusing, but the possibility that 1) the banks own the US (they sure seem to have a lot of control over fiscal policy determined by their catastrophic failures) and 2) we’re in/going to be in a very deep financial hole mitigates my amusement.

18. 18
    

    Sili

    May 2, 2009 at 5:58 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

    Well, the smalle the Republans get, the more room you’ll have for an opposition from the left.

    But why the fuck not get a proper proportional voting system in place like the rest of the civilised world?

    (Sorry for the unimaginative invective – I’m not a regular reader.)