Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Monday, February 19, 2018

What’s the worst-case scenario for Republicans in November? Maybe victory.

A Republican takeover of the Senate is somewhere between plausible and very likely. (If you want more exact predictions, you have to provide a less volatile political climate.) So for argument’s sake, let’s assume Republican candidates roll to victory from Alaska to North Carolina. The Democrats’ 54-46 Senate majority is supplanted by a narrower Republican majority, with Kentucky Republican Mitch McConnell or someone of nearly equal skill installed as majority leader.

The Republicans would then control both the House and the Senate. In the Senate, the most enthusiastic partisans in the new majority would be eager to dispense with the filibuster on legislation, allowing bills to pass on party-line Republican votes. Let’s assume that happens, too.

What exactly would they do with these newfound powers?

They wouldn’t pass a jobs bill because they don’t want President Barack Obama to gain credit for an improving economy. Besides, they’ve convinced themselves that jobs bills don’t work — at least until a Republican occupies the White House.

What about health care legislation? Jonathan Bernstein parses the prospects on his blog. According to a CBS News poll in January, only 34 percent of Americans support repealing Obamacare; it would be a nonstarter even if the health care and insurance industries weren’t already too far down the Obamacare road. If Republicans took the plunge to create legislation, the real-world impacts of their proposals would be scored by the Congressional Budget Office and outside policy groups. It’s hard to imagine what Republicans could devise that would satisfy their ideological needs without undermining health security for millions while increasing the deficit. There’s a reason they keep talking about health care but never get around to doing anything.

How about immigration? Senate legislation drafted by Republicans would look nothing like the bipartisan immigration bill passed by the Senate last June. Senate Democrats would have little incentive to support a vastly more conservative bill, which would rely even more on employment enforcement and militarization of the border while offering far-less-generous terms to undocumented immigrants. Under such circumstances, House Democrats would surely abandon House Republicans to their own devices, as well.

Without Democratic votes, the House cannot pass anything more comprehensive than an immigration crackdown. The fate of the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. would be unresolved at best. The political failure would be a fiasco, further undermining Republicans among Hispanic and Asian voters while simultaneously opening the door to another round of nativist big-talk among Republican presidential hopefuls. (The U.S. Chamber of Commerce would express its heartfelt disappointment, then funnel millions of dollars to Republican incumbents.)

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 The National Memo

193 Responses to Can Republicans Govern If They Win in 2014?

  1. House Vote, Senate Vote, Veto. House Vote, Senate Vote, Veto. House Vote, Senate Vote, Veto; House Vote, Senate Vote, Veto. This is a recipe for driving the media crazy. How will cable news fill up the hours? Fox News can just do what it does so well at present: repeat Republican talking points and/or lies ad infinitum. MSNBC can cover the logic behind the president’s veto and keep bringing the faces of impotent Democratic legislators before the voting public, as if to say, see what could have been? Polls won’t matter: Republican bills will pass no matter whether the majority likes them or not. Opinions, no matter how well-articulated, will have no effect on the outcome of votes in Congress or on the president’s decision to veto almost every bill that crosses his desk. At best, this state of affairs might become an object lesson proving the painful consequences of sitting out midterm elections and drive voters to the polls for the 2016 elections. At worst, it’s anyone’s guess.

    • Yup! My sense is that very little would change from the stagnation we’ve seen for the past 5 years; the only difference would be that instead of the GOP killing any meaningful legislation by using the filibuster in the Senate, it would be Obama killing worthless legislation created by the GOP by vetoing it. What I think may be worse for the GOP though, is that right now, very little of the legislation gets publicized because it doesn’t get beyond the Senate filibuster; while if the GOP gets a super majority in both houses and does in fact create legislation that is detrimental to many – and against what the majority of America wants – Obama can really make a big issue of the wrong direction the GOP is leading America. The GOP winning a majority in both houses may be the worst thing that could happen to the Devil’s party. Its ruthless, totally uncaring attitude for the American masses would be on front stage display.

    • Oh, and don’t forget all the Senate Committee Investigations that Rand Paul and Ted Cruz would demand! The poor Senators may not have time to vote, as they will be so busy investigating everything that has already been investigated. And they are still dumb enough to want to grant immunity to those giving testimony before them when those same individuals are facing federal charges in the judicial system. Can you say Ollie North? For those on this blog who are too young to remember, “Colonel” North had his conviction overturned based on his guaranteed immunity from the House and Senate Investigations he faced, thanks to the then Republican Minority!

  2. Only if they take both the House and Senate….then the game is over. Supreme Court is in pocket of GOP/Koch brothers…

    Facism will prevail…

    And I would hate to be A Democractic president in 2016….

    You think obstructionism is bad now?

    Just wait…

    • I’m as depressed as you are about this prospect. But I have a question about the Supreme Court. How can it be packed by the GOP/Koch brother choices if a Democratic president is the only one who can appoint judges to the bench of the Supreme Court and many other federal courts, for that matter? The Senate can refuse to approve nominations, but I do not know if there is a statute of limitations on how long a Supreme Court vacancy can go unfilled. If it must be filled, then the Senate will have to approve the president’s nominee, right?

      • The Supreme Court paved the way for Koch brothers and Karl Rove with the 5-4 “Citizens United” decision.

        Hypothetically:

        With GOP/Teaparty controlling both House and Senate, the Supreme Court at a conservative 5-4…. Being President means nothing if you are a Democrat.

      • my&nbspbuddy’s&nbspstep-mother&nbspΜ­­­­­­а­­­­­­K­­­­­­е­­­­­­ѕ&nbsp$76/hr&nbspon&nbspthe&nbspс­­­­­­ο­­­­­­Μ­­­­­­ρ­­­­­­ս­­­­­­τ­­­­­­е­­­­­­r.&nbspShe&nbsphas&nbspbeen&nbspfired&nbspfor&nbsp7&nbspΜ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ո­­­­­­τ­­­­­­հ­­­­­­ѕ&nbspbut&nbsplast&nbspΜ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ո­­­­­­τ­­­­­­հ&nbspher&nbspρ­­­­­­а­­­­­­У&nbspcheck&nbspwas&nbsp$17832&nbspjust&nbspW­­­­­­ο­­­­­­r­­­­­­King&nbspon&nbspthe&nbspс­­­­­­ο­­­­­­Μ­­­­­­ρ­­­­­­ս­­­­­­τ­­­­­­е­­­­­­r&nbspfor&nbspa&nbspϜ­­­­­­е­­­­­­W&nbspհ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ս­­­­­­rs.&nbspRead&nbspmore&nbspon&nbspthis&nbspѕ­­­­­­і­­­­­­τ­­­­­­е,…&nbsphtt&#112&#x3A&#x2F&#47Googleprofitfalls2014methodnzhy2ddu&#x2E&#113&#114&#46&#110&#x65&#116&#47&#x6F&#119&#97&#87

        ◛◛◛ ◛◛◛ ◛◛�◛ ◛◛◛◛⑝◛◛◛◛ ◛◛◛ ◛◛◛ ◛◛◛Thank the Lord he’ll still have his experts to help him do that.

    • How is that any different than what’s been going on for the past 4 years since the Dems lost their filibuster proof majority in the Senate in January of 2010? The Dems have gotten absolutely nothing accomplished since the end of 2009 beside what Obama has been able to accomplish via his Executive Orders with the Tea Party House playing games for the past 5 years and Mitch McConnell preventing any meaningful legislation from being past by using the filibuster (which sadly the Dems have let them continue to do).

      My sense is that if the GOP gets a super majority in the both houses without enough majorities to overide a veto, that although I’m not confident that Obama will veto everything they would try to pass, I have hopes that he will be able to work out compromises that would not be too damaging to the 98%, which has not been happening in the past 4 years. And to be honest, although I’m a senior on social security, I do not think that being willing to compromise with the GOP by implementing a chained CPI for SS payouts would be the worst that could happen – and it’s not something that couldn’t reversed down the road when the Dems do get control of Congress before a chained CPI would even have any impact whatsoever on a senior’s benefits.

      And if the GOP actually does win a super majority in both houses, it may be just enough to spur Obama to start using his pen more to write executive orders. Given that three GOP presidents: Teddy Roosevelt wrote 1,081 EOs, Calvin Coolidge wrote 1,203 EOs and
      Herbert Hoover wrote 968 EOs, Obama must have a lot of presidential latitude that he’s not been using with having only written 167 in the past 5 years.

      • thnaks—-

        Semantics: branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. There are a number of branches and subbranches of semantics, including formal semantics, which studies the logical aspects of meaning, such as sense, reference, implication, and logical form, lexical semantics, which studies word meanings and word relations, and conceptual semantics, which studies the cognitive structure of meaning.

        Demonizing a political group (in the hands of any dominant power structure) for political advantage requires blurring definitions and replacing them with lies and propaganda which is opposite of truth.
        History has definitions that are not subject to selective interpretation. Truthful definitions are truthful definitions.

        There are established absolutes that have clear definitions. Here are some…

        Fascism:: a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government: very harsh control or authority.

        Nazisism: the body of political and economic doctrines held and put into effect by the Nazis in Germany from 1933 to 1945 including the totalitarian principle of government, predominance of especially Germanic groups assumed to be racially superior, and supremacy of the führer.
        Benevolent Dictator: is a form of government in which an authoritarian leader exercises absolute political power over the state through elected epresentatives. A benevolent dictator may allow for some democratic decision-making to exist, such as through public referendums. Absolute power has NOT corrupted this individual. This person demands accountability and transparency of his or her subordinates.

        Police State: a political unit characterized by repressive governmental control of political, economic, and social life usually by an arbitrary exercise of power by police and especially secret police in place of regular operation of administrative and judicial organs of the government according to publicly known legal procedures . (can be an essential element of any political system)

        Propaganda: ideas or statements that are often false or exaggerated and that are spread in order to help a cause, a political leader, a government, etc. (an essential element of Nazis fascism—-Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
        Communism: a way of organizing a society in which the government owns the things that are used to make and transport products (such as land, oil, 
factories, ships, etc.) and there is no privately owned property.

        Capitalism: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.

        Vulture Capitalist’: An unethical venture capitalist who, by any means necessary, deprives an inventor of control over his or her own innovations and most of the money the inventor should have made from the invention…..capitalist who invests in floundering firms in the hopes that the firms will turn around by any means necessary.

Oligarchy: a country, business, etc., that is controlled by a small group of people: the people that control a country, business, etc.: government or control by a small group of people (the essential element of fascism)

        Plutocracy: government by the richest people : a country that is ruled by the richest people: a group of very rich people who have a lot of power (another central element of Fascism)

        Anarchism: a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary 
cooperation and free association of individuals and groups.

        Nihilism: the belief that traditional morals, ideas, beliefs, etc., have no worth or value: the belief that a society’s political and social institutions are so bad that they should be destroyed. (Essentual element of Anarchism)
        Romania pre and during WW2 occupied by Nazis:
        read here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R…

        • You’re getting WARMer … keep going, and you will eventually get to what describes Republican control of both houses – more of the same BS, but this time to Nth 10 power, per chance. Sooner rather than later, the toxicity of such a poisonous soup will kill us all.

    • Fascism already prevails:

      Main Entry:fas£cism
      Pronunciation:*fa-*shi-z*m also *fa-*si-
      Function:noun
      Etymology:Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
      Date:1921

      1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
      2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control *early instances of army fascism and brutality —

      Webster’s Eleventh Collegiate

      Maybe this will help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

    • Are you kidding? ….and the Supreme Court seems to be ruled by Sotomayor and Kagan. In the pocket of the GOP/Koch Brothers. What is it with you people and the Koch Brothers when you have far more evil people in your pockets. Soros for instance?

      Difference between the political affiliations:

      -Fascism? Bad regime but more social than the GOP – Takes care of the middle class and farmers. Totalitarian
      -Communism? Bad regime but more social than the GOP – Big divide between Government class and lower equal subject class. Totalitarian
      -Democrat? Questionable regime more social than the GOP – Believes in large government and everyone being equal maintaining the importance of ‘social’ programs. Close to Totalitarian.
      -RINOs? Questionable Repubs more social than the GOP and in cahoots with the Dems. Really no difference.
      -Conservatives, Capitalists, Tea Party Patriots – believe in the Constitution, Low taxes, limited government, mostly religious, business friendly. Loathed by the Left because they feel these groups are narrow minded….LOL

      The problem is that you really don’t know the difference between the political regimes. All are socialist except for the last ones….
      Look it up if you like.

      Maybe you’re right…..it will be a stale mate if the GOP takes the House and Senate. Well…..Obama will then act more like the Imperialist that he already is by passing EVERYTHING by executive order and bypassing the entire Congress. Sounds like a dictator to me. I can hardly wait until 2016…..but will the nightmare really end. I dare say, no. Not until we all try to reach across the aisle and work together….

  3. As I see it the republicans will not govern. They have said so time and time again. I’m trapped in a science fiction where a nation is run by business zombies, while the living fight over silliness. 2014 WTF?

    • They will not govern because they are not allowed to. They are shut down and shut out by the arrogance of the Democratic Party. Business zombies? Where? As far as I know Obama has chased out big business and suppressed small business with all his taxing. We need a relief. A tax break. A flat tax.

      So pot is OK and cigarettes are outlawed. Soda is next on the tax list because…..it contains too much sugar…. (Neither which I indulge in but it is the principle of the thing) What’s next heroin will be OK and eating too much beef is bad for the veins so we (the government) will affix another tax. Silliness? More like LaLaLand. GOP in 2014 won’t change a thing….

      • I will not allow children to play with matches. Todays “Republicans” are myopic children. cigarettes are narcotic and fifth under Heroin for addiction. cigarettes are killing citizens in the most hideous fashion at a rate that equal to some of the wars “WE” fight for corporate reasons. A flat tax? say anyone teach you to read yet? If you want to be part of the nation you should read more, not less. anyway you made me laugh, thanks, citizen.

      • Those “arrogant” Democrats would be the last line of defense against enacting “A Handmaid’s Tale” combined with “The Hunger Games” and turning America into a third world country governed by Christian Sharia law.

        • Anti-Christian/Athiest?

          Oh really! What planet are you residing on? Mars perhaps?

          No, more like a combo of ‘Red Star’ and ‘The Hunger Games.’

          Look who is turning the nation into a third world Country. Liberalism and Communism have far more in common with each other than Conservatism does. Besides you can believe in what you want. We really don’t give a hoot, but when you start MAKING us believe the way you do then we have a problem.

          You just can’t see the forest for the trees, we both know there is a problem here or haven’t you noticed? ….and you think it was created by the Conservatives. LOL we are way past that idea. That is blaming it all on the sheep driven Democratic masses. No we have already come to the conclusion that it is much bigger than that…..with both sides in cahoots. Believe what you will, all I know is, if things don’t change, we are going down…..

  4. This:

    In its current incarnation, the party is more or less an anti-tax lobby grafted to a Sons of the Confederacy chapter.

    is a brilliant line. My hat is off to you, sir. Well done.

    • Let Democrats/Progressives go all in. Propose legislation to allow the south to secede, or the west coast/northeastern states to form a new country. My guess is that confronted with that reality, some of the cooler heads in the conservative party might start to rethink their positions. They need us more then we need them. We have the economic growth, except for Texas. Maybe they want a new confederacy with Texas as it’s capital. If so, let them have it.

      • This is an abbreviated explanation of why you’re wrong, as usual.

        “Basically the Red States are the producers and source of natural resources while most Blue enclaves are the financial office areas. In a very real sense Red states end up transporting the vast amount of their taxable revenue to the Blue enclaves to actually act as middle men and collect the money in sales. Along with, you guessed it, the actual tax money. While I admit this explanation is very simplistic it gets the point across. The real reason Red States receive more total Federal trickle down money is due to the tax and income base which is transferred to the Blue States.”

        http://smallhold-pioneerpreppy.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-myth-of-red-state-welfare.html

        How big a liability will you continue to be to the rest of humanity before you do the right thing and off yourself?

        • You have nothing to contribute until you: 1. Reveal your true identity 2. Reveal you education level 3. Reveal your location. Most of your information is bogus until you meet those conditions. Move south; secede.

          • You are a coward sir. I can do this all day long. Show your true identity; your education level; your location. #1

          • You are a coward sir. I can do this all day long. Show your true identity; your education level; your location; your employment status. #1

          • “You are a coward sir. I can do this all day long.”

            What is that, pillow talk between you and your “companion?”

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #3

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #5

          • You’re making the mistake of assuming the Goebelian technique works on functioning people, John, no doubt because it worked on you.

            Let’s review: You have the mind of a brussel sprout.

          • Dunno about that last one, Kev. I’d be willing to bet we’d see more activity on the Brussels sprout’s EEG trace…

          • More inane comments from KEVIN STOWELL, THE HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUT AND RESIDENT COWARD. Don’t even have the discipline to get through high school, Kevin. Why should anyone listen to a moron like you?

          • I think Jack Nicholson was onto something (paraphrase).

            “When I think of John or any other communist, I think of a man and take away reason and accountability.”

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #9

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #12

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #19

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #22

          • You probably have Kevin beat in the innerrectual department, but in terms of IQ and class, he’s light years ahead of you.

          • “You probably have Kevin beat in the INNERRECTUAL department” LOL, LOL, LOL… a priceless conservative blog!!! Case closed.

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #18

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #24

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #23

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #27

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #25

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #17

          • Oh no… you opened up a can of worms but will have save us all some a lot of typing in the future:

            Main Entry:echo£la£lia
            Pronunciation:*e-k*-*l*-l*-*
            Function:noun
            Etymology:New Latin
            Date:circa 1885

            : the often pathological repetition of what is said by other people as if echoing them
            –echo£lal£ic -*la-lik adjective

            Moonbattery personified.

          • You are a coward sir. I can do this all day long. Show your true identity; your education level; your location. #2

          • Why? You won’t do so, hypocrite.

            Those toys in the attic of yours won’t get any quieter until you get professional help, More BS.

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #2

          • Petty totalitarianism usually betrays one’s deep-seated anxieties about their inadequacies, you know. Move to Shady Acres; get help.

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #7

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #15

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #14

          • Lemme get this straight: If we’re trolls who should be ignored, then why did you reply to me seven times in the space of two minutes?

            Better get that malignant narcissism of yours checked. It’s not going to clear up on its own, you know.

          • You can repeat yourself all day long? There’s a name for people like that. They’re called “imbeciles.”

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #1

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #8

          • More BS: Yeah, I can’t think of a better screen name for you, either.

            Move to Shady Acres, hypocrite. They’ve got the drums full of Thorazine that you’ll need to get better.

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #13

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #16

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #26

      • It’s less work to just let global warming flood off the communist coastlines, then cleanup the inland libtards later on once the fishies have adjusted their tastebuds to bitter liberal cutbait.

        • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #4

          • If this is such a waste of your time, then why do you keep responding to our posts despite your protests that you won’t do so? You’re lying and/or psychotic. Move to Shady Acres; get professional help.

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #6

          • personal attacks are uneccesary and signs of troll like thinking..

            “thank you for your point of view”.

          • When one hides his activity profile behind the privacy wall, one shouldn’t be too surprised when others yawn at them.

        • But the issue was never resolved. I’m willing to concede that the south/conservatives are entitled to a feudal/fascist/evangelical state and that Lincoln was wrong. We can now correct that mistake.

          • Conservative commentators here are liars and cowards… not worth responding to their constant drivel. Therefore I will not respond to their individual posts as it is a waste of my time until they: 1 Give their name (they take the cowardly position of anonymity) 2. Give their level of education (mostly high school dropouts who are easily brainwashed) 3. Give their employment status (mostly unemployed shills of the 1%). I will repeat this post as often as necessary. #17

  5. I think they would have to repeal the ACA since they have riled the base over it. Also it would be easier to get funding for creationism to be taught and cuts to the EPA, FDA, USDA would undermine our safety. The Coal ash problems in WV and NC world be more commonplace. Obama’s pen would be used as a veto club or he can be like Clinton and find places where the two sides could meet. Difference being Clinton didn’t have Cruz.

  6. as mentioned below a Republican Senate means no more judicial appointees nor likely even many executive branch appointees. The downsides are too great compared to whatever hypothetical upsides of a Republican Senate would ever be politically.

    • Aaand whose fault would that be? Harry Greed didn’t have to resort to the nuclear option which would grant the GOP that power, but he did it anyway. There are only two possible conclusions to draw here:

      • Greed is oblivious to history, since control of the Senate swings back and forth between the parties; or

      • Today’s Commucrats have become just as arrogant as the Republicans were eight years ago.

      There’s another possibility: “all of the above.”

      • uh…sure. Don’t you have to go back to freshman high school class now?
        Republicans did not even vote on any of the nominees for the 3rd circuit court of appeals and claimed just voting on them meant Obama was packing the court. It was beyond stupid.

        • … which was exactly the treatment The One and Only Mulatto Meathead in Chief’s predecessor got at the hands of the Senate proto-Obammunists, so you can stop snuffling about the unfairness of it all right now. Or are those famous double standards of yours really twice as good, after all?

          Better look up. Your intellectual flab is showing again.

          • In 2006 Dems and Repubicans in the Senate agreed to not filibuster judicial confirmations except under extreme circumstance and they confirmed two of the most radical right wingers in decades, so no, Republicans not even voting for anyone is not the same as Democrats confirming all of Bush’s appointments. So as you really have no coherent argument except flamethrowing azzholery I know I will ignore you from here on out. Flame on boring one just be aware you won’t be provoking me as I shall never read another word you write again.

        • Yes they claimed that the vacancies did NOT need to be filled and that the court should be reduced to its present size ..
          Needless to say this would ALL change should the Republicans take the Presidency.

  7. If you call what the democrats are doing now ‘governing’, then certainly the repubs can govern if they win in 2014; but the premise of the question is off-target.

    The necessary question is ‘Can the Conservatives come in to power in 2014, clean up D.C., then steer our ship of state towards an actual recovery?’

    • The DEmocrats would do fine if the obstructionist GOP got out of the way and the neofacists Teaparty goes with them…

      • You left out the completion of your sentence and thought process. The democrats would do fine turning the USA into a socialist cesspool. But that’s not governing. The rest of your paragraph was irrational gobbledygook. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Eric Holder and Barry OStalintheACA and the rest of their ilk are not part of the Tea Party.

        • So you’re just another delusional troll projecting your pathology on others.
          The Democrats are about as far from “Socialists” as one can be without straying into right-wing never-never land, and your characterization of Obama lacks creativity as well as being miles from reality.
          Do you even have a clue what socialism is?

          • Good avatar name. The next time you find yourself pawing for a dumpsite in the sand, leave your whole self there – as would be fitting for the irrational content of your post. Until then, do yourself a favor and go look up what socialism is, and for that matter communism. After all, Barry’s parents were communists. His grandparents were communists. His mentor Frank Marshall Davis was a card carrying communist. Birds of a feather flock together. And remember what Vladimir Lenin said: “The goal of socialism is communism”.

            Project onto others all of your own “delusional troll pathology” that you want. It doesn’t affect one bit the fact that things are changing, people are waking up to the folly of the Democrat National Socialist party, and they are finding out that they really don’t like the exploits of the ever in-our-face, in-our-business huge central command and control government along with its out-of-control spending.

          • Here is some therapeutic reading for you:

            THE LIBERAL MIND: The Psychological Causes ofPolitical Madness
            By Lyle H. Rossiter

  8. As I wrote yesterday about this possibility: while the GOP could conceivably take majority Senate control and keep control of the House, they’d need to “flip” at least 60 seats in the House and 22 in the Senate to get “veto override” majorities. I don’t see that happening. In fact, the situation would be the reverse of the 110th Congress, where Democratic majorities faced veto roadblocks from GOP President George W. Bush. If you think nothing is getting done NOW, just think how much LESS would get done with GOP non-supermajorities in the House and Senate for the 114th Congress….I’m hoping that this country isn’t so stupid as to create such a situation, but, it’s definitely a possibility.

      • Mostly correct, daniel: next to nothing is getting done now. If the GOP take majorities in Congress starting next year, then NOTHING will get done…

          • As of 12/31/2006, the unemployment rate was 4.4% and the federal debt was ~$8.7T.

            Three days later, on 1/3/2007, the 110th session of Congress convened with Democrats in majority control of BOTH the Senate and the House.

            That’s when the misery started.

            Since then, not one federal penny could be spent or borrowed without Dem consent.

            Under Dem control, unemployment shot over 10% and is STILL 50% higher than what Dems PROMISED it would have been – two years ago!

            Under Dem control, federal debt will be over $20T by FY2016. That’s an increase of 139% since Dems took Congress back on 1/3/2007.

            America cannot survive more abysmal Dem policies and corrupt Dem politicians.

            It’s not “obstruction” to defend America from destruction, it’s patriotism.

          • It’s called grotesque hypocrisy and blaming things created by the GOP on the Dems because they happened to be in power when the chickens came home to roost. The “misery” started when Bush crashed the economy (actually, when he totally failed in his duty to defend the nation on 9/11, then sent a bunch of soldiers to Iraq to die for nothing to cover himself), and continued when the GOP prevented anything from being done about it. Your ascription of the power to destroy the country is simply absurd: the Dems have been far too weak and hesitant to destroy even the obvious lies trolls such as you post here.

  9. To all of us dealing with an onslaught of extreme right wing posters, I have some advice as to how to deal with some who are trols:

    A social media troll as someone who seeks to lure or bait people into negative, disruptive rhetoric for their own edification or to commandeer an otherwise free-flowing discussion among colleagues. They don’t recognize anyone that may be interested in discussing something that bores them and opt to criticize or yell “boring” instead of engaging in the discussion. They choose to belittle those who seek the information and discourse as well as those who try to provide it. They simply have no interest in anything that is not self-serving. Trolls will defend their focus on expressing contrary opinions as an honorable attempt to rid the online community of fake-experts, get to the truth of a matter or enlighten their followers; however, their intent has nothing to do with community building or public enlightenment.

    So how should you deal with trolls?
Ignore them. Trolls exist for the spotlight. Often ignoring them will either make them simply go away or they’ll say even more ridiculous things making them look foolish and desperate.
    If you feel you HAVE to respond, wait at least an hour. Decide if you really have to take action at all.
    Be nice. Anger only encourages response. Something very short and to the point like “thank you for your point of view”. is enough. The more you say, the more you feed ‘em.
    if your followers respond angrily the whole thing can escalate quickly too. After all, you’re not the only one who can encourage the troll. Laugh it off or kill them with kindness by thanking them for their viewpoint and passion and ignore any further responses.
    Don’t attempt to show them the error of their ways. That just encourages them. Logic, reason and statistics only give fuel to the fire.

  10. Let’s return the article, rather than the trolls below:

    By Francis Wilkinson

    What’s the worst-case scenario for Republicans in November? Maybe victory.

    A Republican takeover of the Senate is
    somewhere between plausible and very likely. (If you want more exact
    predictions, you have to provide a less volatile political climate.) So
    for argument’s sake, let’s assume Republican candidates roll to victory
    from Alaska to North Carolina. The Democrats’ 54-46 Senate majority is
    supplanted by a narrower Republican majority, with Kentucky Republican
    Mitch McConnell or someone of nearly equal skill installed as majority
    leader.

    The Republicans would then control both the House and the Senate. In
    the Senate, the most enthusiastic partisans in the new majority would be
    eager to dispense with the filibuster on legislation, allowing bills to
    pass on party-line Republican votes. Let’s assume that happens, too.

    What exactly would they do with these newfound powers?

    They wouldn’t pass a jobs bill because they don’t want President
    Barack Obama to gain credit for an improving economy. Besides, they’ve convinced themselves that jobs bills don’t work — at least until a Republican occupies the White House.

    What about health care legislation? Jonathan Bernstein parses the prospects on his blog. According to a CBS News poll in
    January, only 34 percent of Americans support repealing Obamacare; it
    would be a nonstarter even if the health care and insurance industries
    weren’t already too far down the Obamacare road. If Republicans took the
    plunge to create legislation, the real-world impacts of their proposals
    would be scored by the Congressional Budget Office and outside policy
    groups. It’s hard to imagine what Republicans could devise that
    would satisfy their ideological needs without undermining health
    security for millions while increasing the deficit. There’s a reason
    they keep talking about health care but never get around to doing
    anything.

    How about immigration? Senate legislation drafted by Republicans
    would look nothing like the bipartisan immigration bill passed by the
    Senate last June. Senate Democrats would have little incentive to
    support a vastly more conservative bill, which would rely even more on
    employment enforcement and militarization of the border while offering
    far-less-generous terms to undocumented immigrants. Under such
    circumstances, House Democrats would surely abandon House Republicans to
    their own devices, as well.

    Without Democratic votes, the House cannot pass anything
    more comprehensive than an immigration crackdown. The fate of the 11
    million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. would be unresolved at best.
    The political failure would be a fiasco, further undermining
    Republicans among Hispanic and Asian voters while simultaneously opening the door to
    another round of nativist big-talk among Republican presidential
    hopefuls. (The U.S. Chamber of Commerce would express its heartfelt
    disappointment, then funnel millions of dollars to Republican
    incumbents.)

    The party’s internal conflicts would all be exacerbated by a Senate
    takeover. Imagine, for example, how much leverage a narrow Republican
    majority would grant to Senator Ted Cruz — and the chaos that could ensue.

    In its current incarnation, the party is more or less an anti-tax lobby grafted to a Sons of the Confederacy chapter.
    Genuine areas of policy consensus among Republicans are few — spending
    cuts for the poor, tax cuts for the rich and promotion of incumbent
    dirty energy industries at the expense of Obama’s green agenda. None of
    these is popular. (Although in coal and oil states the energy reversal
    would be welcome. Keystone, too, if its construction is not already
    underway in 2015.) All would face probable Obama vetoes.

    What’s left? Entitlement reform? The Republicans’ elderly base is not eager for changes in
    Medicare or Social Security. That leaves culture warrior stuff, mostly.
    New abortion restrictions, perhaps? One last lunge against gay rights?
    Not much electoral magic there.

    The party’s capacity to please its right-wing cultural base, its
    anti-tax, anti-regulatory donor base and a slim majority of American
    voters is almost nonexistent. Democratic control of the Senate has
    shielded Republicans both from their own divisions and from the
    unpopularity of their causes.

    Indeed, it’s possible that the Boschian hellscape over which John
    Boehner presides in the 113th Congress could actually get uglier and
    more bizarre if Republicans win the Senate in the 114th. I’m not sure
    even these Republicans deserve that.

  11. Let’s return the article, rather than the trolls below:

    By Francis Wilkinson

    What’s the worst-case scenario for Republicans in November? Maybe victory.

    A Republican takeover of the Senate is
    somewhere between plausible and very likely. (If you want more exact
    predictions, you have to provide a less volatile political climate.) So
    for argument’s sake, let’s assume Republican candidates roll to victory
    from Alaska to North Carolina. The Democrats’ 54-46 Senate majority is
    supplanted by a narrower Republican majority, with Kentucky Republican
    Mitch McConnell or someone of nearly equal skill installed as majority
    leader.

    The Republicans would then control both the House and the Senate. In
    the Senate, the most enthusiastic partisans in the new majority would be
    eager to dispense with the filibuster on legislation, allowing bills to
    pass on party-line Republican votes. Let’s assume that happens, too.

    What exactly would they do with these newfound powers?

    They wouldn’t pass a jobs bill because they don’t want President
    Barack Obama to gain credit for an improving economy. Besides, they’ve convinced themselves that jobs bills don’t work — at least until a Republican occupies the White House.

    What about health care legislation? Jonathan Bernstein parses the prospects on his blog. According to a CBS News poll in
    January, only 34 percent of Americans support repealing Obamacare; it
    would be a nonstarter even if the health care and insurance industries
    weren’t already too far down the Obamacare road. If Republicans took the
    plunge to create legislation, the real-world impacts of their proposals
    would be scored by the Congressional Budget Office and outside policy
    groups. It’s hard to imagine what Republicans could devise that
    would satisfy their ideological needs without undermining health
    security for millions while increasing the deficit. There’s a reason
    they keep talking about health care but never get around to doing
    anything.

    How about immigration? Senate legislation drafted by Republicans
    would look nothing like the bipartisan immigration bill passed by the
    Senate last June. Senate Democrats would have little incentive to
    support a vastly more conservative bill, which would rely even more on
    employment enforcement and militarization of the border while offering
    far-less-generous terms to undocumented immigrants. Under such
    circumstances, House Democrats would surely abandon House Republicans to
    their own devices, as well.

    Without Democratic votes, the House cannot pass anything
    more comprehensive than an immigration crackdown. The fate of the 11
    million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. would be unresolved at best.
    The political failure would be a fiasco, further undermining
    Republicans among Hispanic and Asian voters while simultaneously opening the door to
    another round of nativist big-talk among Republican presidential
    hopefuls. (The U.S. Chamber of Commerce would express its heartfelt
    disappointment, then funnel millions of dollars to Republican
    incumbents.)

    The party’s internal conflicts would all be exacerbated by a Senate
    takeover. Imagine, for example, how much leverage a narrow Republican
    majority would grant to Senator Ted Cruz — and the chaos that could ensue.

    In its current incarnation, the party is more or less an anti-tax lobby grafted to a Sons of the Confederacy chapter.
    Genuine areas of policy consensus among Republicans are few — spending
    cuts for the poor, tax cuts for the rich and promotion of incumbent
    dirty energy industries at the expense of Obama’s green agenda. None of
    these is popular. (Although in coal and oil states the energy reversal
    would be welcome. Keystone, too, if its construction is not already
    underway in 2015.) All would face probable Obama vetoes.

    What’s left? Entitlement reform? The Republicans’ elderly base is not eager for changes in
    Medicare or Social Security. That leaves culture warrior stuff, mostly.
    New abortion restrictions, perhaps? One last lunge against gay rights?
    Not much electoral magic there.

    The party’s capacity to please its right-wing cultural base, its
    anti-tax, anti-regulatory donor base and a slim majority of American
    voters is almost nonexistent. Democratic control of the Senate has
    shielded Republicans both from their own divisions and from the
    unpopularity of their causes.

    Indeed, it’s possible that the Boschian hellscape over which John
    Boehner presides in the 113th Congress could actually get uglier and
    more bizarre if Republicans win the Senate in the 114th. I’m not sure
    even these Republicans deserve that.

  12. I am sure glad that I am retired and all of this is more or less academic to my personal welfare, but things could get really ugly. Maybe the Republicans will seize control of the military and start rounding up the illegal immigrants and shipping them out of the country.

    • Self-deportation is preferable.

      If we were serious about illegal immigration, we would require proof of citizenship or legal residency in order to:

      1) Buy or rent a home or vehicle;

      2) Get a license of any type, including marriage, cosmetologist, driving, vehicle registration, etc.;

      3) Sign up for utilities including gas, electricity, water, sewer, phone and cell phone, TV, internet, etc.;

      4) Use a wire transfer service to send money out of the country;

      5) Attend any public K-12 school or any college or university which receives federal funds;

      6) Receive more than ONE treatment at a medical emergency room. After that one visit, the illegal immigrant is fingerprinted, deported, and then denied future treatments;

      7) Receive any type of public assistance, aid, SSDI, food stamps, etc.;

      8) Open a bank or any other type of financial account or receive a loan for any purpose.

      9) Purchase a ticket for any form of public transportation including air, bus, train, ferry, boat, or discounted local commuter transportation service, etc..

      Over half of all illegal immigrants came here legally and then overstayed their visas, so just closing the border will not solve the problem. We need to make life here so unbearable for illegals that they self-deport or they never come here in the first place.

      There are obviously other actions that should be done, but these would be a good start.

  13. To those attempting to read this article:
    Below, there is an “in tandum” extreme right wing group of posters disrupting this article with bullying, personal attacks, intimidation and off topic nonsense….They are well know posters at Briebart and other extreme conservative news websites….

    They will achieve their goal of disruption if you dare to respond to them. Please ignore them. Simply flag their commentary and vote down.

  14. NOTE:

    To those attempting to read this article:
    Below, there is an “in tandum” extreme right wing group of posters disrupting this article with bullying, personal attacks, intimidation and off topic nonsense….They are well know posters at Briebart and other extreme conservative news websites….

    They will achieve their goal of disruption if you dare to respond to them. Please ignore them. Simply flag their commentary and vote down.

    • So! If we’re to be ignored, Danny Boy, then why did you reply to seven of my posts in less than two minutes? Feeling a bit insecure about The one and Only Boy Blunder in Chief, are we?

  15. Reposting the article above…

    What’s the worst-case scenario for Republicans in November? Maybe victory.
    By Francis Wilkinson

    A Republican takeover of the Senate is
    somewhere between plausible and very likely. (If you want more exact
    predictions, you have to provide a less volatile political climate.) So
    for argument’s sake, let’s assume Republican candidates roll to victory
    from Alaska to North Carolina. The Democrats’ 54-46 Senate majority is
    supplanted by a narrower Republican majority, with Kentucky Republican
    Mitch McConnell or someone of nearly equal skill installed as majority
    leader.

    The Republicans would then control both the House and the Senate. In
    the Senate, the most enthusiastic partisans in the new majority would be
    eager to dispense with the filibuster on legislation, allowing bills to
    pass on party-line Republican votes. Let’s assume that happens, too.

    What exactly would they do with these newfound powers?

    They wouldn’t pass a jobs bill because they don’t want President
    Barack Obama to gain credit for an improving economy. Besides, they’ve convinced themselves that jobs bills don’t work — at least until a Republican occupies the White House.

    What about health care legislation? Jonathan Bernstein parses the prospects on his blog. According to a CBS News poll in
    January, only 34 percent of Americans support repealing Obamacare; it
    would be a nonstarter even if the health care and insurance industries
    weren’t already too far down the Obamacare road. If Republicans took the
    plunge to create legislation, the real-world impacts of their proposals
    would be scored by the Congressional Budget Office and outside policy
    groups. It’s hard to imagine what Republicans could devise that
    would satisfy their ideological needs without undermining health
    security for millions while increasing the deficit. There’s a reason
    they keep talking about health care but never get around to doing
    anything.

    How about immigration? Senate legislation drafted by Republicans
    would look nothing like the bipartisan immigration bill passed by the
    Senate last June. Senate Democrats would have little incentive to
    support a vastly more conservative bill, which would rely even more on
    employment enforcement and militarization of the border while offering
    far-less-generous terms to undocumented immigrants. Under such
    circumstances, House Democrats would surely abandon House Republicans to
    their own devices, as well.

    Without Democratic votes, the House cannot pass anything
    more comprehensive than an immigration crackdown. The fate of the 11
    million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. would be unresolved at best.
    The political failure would be a fiasco, further undermining
    Republicans among Hispanic and Asian voters while simultaneously opening the door to
    another round of nativist big-talk among Republican presidential
    hopefuls. (The U.S. Chamber of Commerce would express its heartfelt
    disappointment, then funnel millions of dollars to Republican
    incumbents.)

    The party’s internal conflicts would all be exacerbated by a Senate
    takeover. Imagine, for example, how much leverage a narrow Republican
    majority would grant to Senator Ted Cruz — and the chaos that could ensue.

    In its current incarnation, the party is more or less an anti-tax lobby grafted to a Sons of the Confederacy chapter.
    Genuine areas of policy consensus among Republicans are few — spending
    cuts for the poor, tax cuts for the rich and promotion of incumbent
    dirty energy industries at the expense of Obama’s green agenda. None of
    these is popular. (Although in coal and oil states the energy reversal
    would be welcome. Keystone, too, if its construction is not already
    underway in 2015.) All would face probable Obama vetoes.

    What’s left? Entitlement reform? The Republicans’ elderly base is not eager for changes in
    Medicare or Social Security. That leaves culture warrior stuff, mostly.
    New abortion restrictions, perhaps? One last lunge against gay rights?
    Not much electoral magic there.

    The party’s capacity to please its right-wing cultural base, its
    anti-tax, anti-regulatory donor base and a slim majority of American
    voters is almost nonexistent. Democratic control of the Senate has
    shielded Republicans both from their own divisions and from the
    unpopularity of their causes.

    Indeed, it’s possible that the Boschian hellscape over which John
    Boehner presides in the 113th Congress could actually get uglier and
    more bizarre if Republicans win the Senate in the 114th. I’m not sure
    even these Republicans deserve that.

  16. Dear Admin, please block morbuis777. His childish repetitive posts does not contribute to reasonable discussion of the topics.

    • Mods don’t routinely read posts so they won’t necessarily see your message.

      The way to raise awareness among them is to go through Morbius’s posts (click on his name to find them on Disqus) and then click on the flag for each one. That triggers the mod process for that particular forum (it may be automated or manual).

      If enough people flag the postst, eventually he’ll be banned or at least his posts will be deleted, adding to his frustration.

      That said, I think it’s helpful to have him here. For one thing, leftist sites routinely ban ANYONE and EVERYONE who even slightly disagrees with their point of view, and that’s not a good precedent.

      Second, his childishness really makes quite obvious just how absurd he and his positions are. That’s priceless.

    • “OutWest Landowner” is likely Bruce Hemming – a particularly vulgar serial wolf killer. What’s that Bruce ? Oh, sorry, “Bruce “Buckshot” Hemming” (so it sounds really tough). Bruce is the admin / supporter of a few dozen FB Wolf / ARA hate pages including one on trapping and snaring – and a pathologic liar who claims “I’ve never killed a wolf.”. His pal, Toby Bridges, runs “Lobo Watch” which advocates attacks on wolf sanctuaries. Check out the members list at “Save Western Wildlife” (oxymoron) – which reads like a who’s members list of serial wolf killers.

      As you can see Bruce, I’m not very good at “backing off” when I’m threatened.

  17. Reposting the article above…

    What’s the worst-case scenario for Republicans in November? Maybe victory.
    By Francis Wilkinson

    A Republican takeover of the Senate is
    somewhere between plausible and very likely. (If you want more exact
    predictions, you have to provide a less volatile political climate.) So
    for argument’s sake, let’s assume Republican candidates roll to victory
    from Alaska to North Carolina. The Democrats’ 54-46 Senate majority is
    supplanted by a narrower Republican majority, with Kentucky Republican
    Mitch McConnell or someone of nearly equal skill installed as majority
    leader.

    The Republicans would then control both the House and the Senate. In
    the Senate, the most enthusiastic partisans in the new majority would be
    eager to dispense with the filibuster on legislation, allowing bills to
    pass on party-line Republican votes. Let’s assume that happens, too.

    What exactly would they do with these newfound powers?

    They wouldn’t pass a jobs bill because they don’t want President
    Barack Obama to gain credit for an improving economy. Besides, they’ve convinced themselves that jobs bills don’t work — at least until a Republican occupies the White House.

    What about health care legislation? Jonathan Bernstein parses the prospects on his blog. According to a CBS News poll in
    January, only 34 percent of Americans support repealing Obamacare; it
    would be a nonstarter even if the health care and insurance industries
    weren’t already too far down the Obamacare road. If Republicans took the
    plunge to create legislation, the real-world impacts of their proposals
    would be scored by the Congressional Budget Office and outside policy
    groups. It’s hard to imagine what Republicans could devise that
    would satisfy their ideological needs without undermining health
    security for millions while increasing the deficit. There’s a reason
    they keep talking about health care but never get around to doing
    anything.

    How about immigration? Senate legislation drafted by Republicans
    would look nothing like the bipartisan immigration bill passed by the
    Senate last June. Senate Democrats would have little incentive to
    support a vastly more conservative bill, which would rely even more on
    employment enforcement and militarization of the border while offering
    far-less-generous terms to undocumented immigrants. Under such
    circumstances, House Democrats would surely abandon House Republicans to
    their own devices, as well.

    Without Democratic votes, the House cannot pass anything
    more comprehensive than an immigration crackdown. The fate of the 11
    million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. would be unresolved at best.
    The political failure would be a fiasco, further undermining
    Republicans among Hispanic and Asian voters while simultaneously opening the door to
    another round of nativist big-talk among Republican presidential
    hopefuls. (The U.S. Chamber of Commerce would express its heartfelt
    disappointment, then funnel millions of dollars to Republican
    incumbents.)

    The party’s internal conflicts would all be exacerbated by a Senate
    takeover. Imagine, for example, how much leverage a narrow Republican
    majority would grant to Senator Ted Cruz — and the chaos that could ensue.

    In its current incarnation, the party is more or less an anti-tax lobby grafted to a Sons of the Confederacy chapter.
    Genuine areas of policy consensus among Republicans are few — spending
    cuts for the poor, tax cuts for the rich and promotion of incumbent
    dirty energy industries at the expense of Obama’s green agenda. None of
    these is popular. (Although in coal and oil states the energy reversal
    would be welcome. Keystone, too, if its construction is not already
    underway in 2015.) All would face probable Obama vetoes.

    What’s left? Entitlement reform? The Republicans’ elderly base is not eager for changes in
    Medicare or Social Security. That leaves culture warrior stuff, mostly.
    New abortion restrictions, perhaps? One last lunge against gay rights?
    Not much electoral magic there.

    The party’s capacity to please its right-wing cultural base, its
    anti-tax, anti-regulatory donor base and a slim majority of American
    voters is almost nonexistent. Democratic control of the Senate has
    shielded Republicans both from their own divisions and from the
    unpopularity of their causes.

    Indeed, it’s possible that the Boschian hellscape over which John
    Boehner presides in the 113th Congress could actually get uglier and
    more bizarre if Republicans win the Senate in the 114th. I’m not sure
    even these Republicans deserve that.

  18. NOTE: To those attempting to read this article:

    Below, there is an “in tandum” extreme right wing group of
    posters,” Heza Nidot” and “We will Barry you!!” and others disrupting
    this article with bullying, personal attacks, intimidation and off topic
    nonsense….They even “flag up” each others posts…..pathetic is it
    not?…..They are well know posters at Breibart and other extreme
    conservative news websites….where they belong….

    They will achieve their goal of disruption if you dare to respond to
    them. Please ignore them. Simply flag their commentary and vote down.

    If you have to respond simply post : “thank you for your point of view” that is all that is needed….

    And the reply to this directly below, by Heza Nidot, is a perfect example of what I am informing you of.

    The social media trolls below seek to lure or bait people into
    negative, disruptive rhetoric for their own edification or to commandeer
    an otherwise free-flowing discussion among colleagues.

    They don’t recognize anyone that may be interested in discussing
    something that bores them and opt to criticize or yell “boring” instead
    of engaging in the discussion.

    They choose to bully, belittle, inimidate, post profanities and off
    topic nonsense. towards other posters who who seek the information and
    discourse.

    Trolls simply have no interest in anything that is not self-serving.

    Trolls will defend their focus on expressing contrary opinions as
    their delusional attempt to rid the online community of fake-experts
    that they perceive to be fake experts…..

    These trolls intent has nothing to do with community building or public enlightenment.

    And the reply to this directly below, by Heza Nidot, is a perfect example of what I am informing you of.

  19. I want to point out that National Memo moderators have correctly decided to protect us from posts that are simply inappropriate. The dozens of comments deleted below is a testiment to journalistic integrity… Those that remain are thoughtful and meant to move the discussion of this article forward and on topic.

    Watch out for the newbie below, alboy5, who is a mainstay extreme right winger at Personal Liberty. Read his profile and get a taste.
    http://disqus.com/alboy5/

    • What happened Daniel? You sure changed your tune when your coconspirator Morbius777 was deleted. You brown-nosing a$$-kissing is hilariously ridiculous.

    • You ass-kissing little turd. Still mad at your classmates for guffawing at the “speech” you gave just before you finished last in the race for 8th-grade class president, are we?

      Don’t wonder why we call you people regressives…

  20. “I’m not sure even these Republicans deserve that.”

    THEY deserve it, but WE don’t, at least those of us with common sense.

  21. “I’m not sure even these Republicans deserve that.” (Last line of the blog.)
    Nah. The GOP deserves the worst of just about everything. That’s what they’ve been trying to serve to the 99% under the guise of “best interests of the Nation.”

  22. Surely U jest!!! There’s a comedy blog just up the net… & NO – we don’t have to speculate on any Republican ability to do ANYTHING!!! Have we not seen enuff of what Republicans can do, starting w/the SCT decision of 12/12/00? 9/11/01? 10/17/01? 3/17/03? Ultimately, 9/17/08? Every legislative day since 1/20/09? What is a more rational & appropriate question is whether when Democrats & Independents keep control of the Senate & regain control of Congress, are they going to move forcefully forward, w/out responding to Republican blathering & hysterical crying & ranting & pull back? We STILL need to get COMPLETELY on Green/Renewable energies, get the remaining 5 million workers displaced by the catastrophic Bush/Chaney administration policies, causing the unemployment & destitution, destroyed educational system, broken government bureaucracy & infrastructure (technological, physical & academic), as well as the inequality that ONLY legal, oversight & regulatory responses – hardened by non-negotiable determinations set in stone – in law, that cannot be altered, to get BACK on the correct path we were ALREADY ON, prior to November, 2000. As of then, we already KNEW where we needed to be. We wasting time considering ANY factors associated w/conservative ideology, ambitions or even FEELINGS – which by now, we should care completely NOTHING about!!! Looking at what they’ve done to the nation since 9/11, why should we?!

Leave a reply