What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Today show had a 5 minute report on the race this morning, I wonder if Coakley had to pay the going rate for the time:D
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Red Cloud said:
Nothing screams "hard-core, party-line Republican" like a pro-choice stance on abortion....
Click to expand...

Well, sorta. After the state approved the 'morning after' pill for rape victims, Brown filed one of the very few bills he authored to allow anyone at a hospital to refuse to supply the pill if it was against their religious views.
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

theprofromdover said:
Well, sorta. After the state approved the 'morning after' pill for rape victims, Brown filed one of the very few bills he authored to allow anyone at a hospital to refuse to supply the pill if it was against their religious views.
Click to expand...

This isn't at all unreasonable.

If prisons are forced to provide kosher meals to those criminals who believe regular food is sinful, then it would be unfair to provide accomodations for those noncriminals who believe that killing an embryo/fetus/unborn human (choose your term, my point isn't about semantics) is sinful. You can't support one policy without supporting the other.

Hospitals will just be have to be required to make sure there is at least one pro-choice medicine dispenser, just like the Massachusetts legal system is required to have translators for 20+ languages at the ready.

No big deal. :)
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

theprofromdover said:
Well, sorta. After the state approved the 'morning after' pill for rape victims, Brown filed one of the very few bills he authored to allow anyone at a hospital to refuse to supply the pill if it was against their religious views.
Click to expand...

Horror of horrors. What a nutty, nutty position.

I guess in order to be considered pro-choice, you have to be... well, a hard-core, Planned Parenthood-line abortionist?
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

theprofromdover said:
Well, sorta. After the state approved the 'morning after' pill for rape victims, Brown filed one of the very few bills he authored to allow anyone at a hospital to refuse to supply the pill if it was against their religious views.
Click to expand...
It wasn't even a bill - it was an amendment to a bill requiring hospitals to distribute emergency contraception to rape victims if they asked for it. His amendment allowed individual health care workers to choose not to be the one to dispense the contraception, and if there was nobody at the clinic willing to distribute it, then the victim would be transported to another facility free of charge where she could get it. He was in favor of the bill the entire time - he just thought individuals shouldn't be required to go against their religious convictions if the person working down the hall could provide the service just as easily. His amendment failed, but he voted FOR the final bill anyway, just as he said he would.

Definitely a hard-core, right wing nutjob. No question. And he hates rape victims, too. Coakley is a real piece of work!
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

LynahFan said:
It wasn't even a bill - it was an amendment to a bill requiring hospitals to distribute emergency contraception to rape victims if they asked for it. His amendment allowed individual health care workers to choose not to be the one to dispense the contraception, and if there was nobody at the clinic willing to distribute it, then the victim would be transported to another facility free of charge where she could get it. He was in favor of the bill the entire time - he just thought individuals shouldn't be required to go against their religious convictions if the person working down the hall could provide the service just as easily. His amendment failed, but he voted FOR the final bill anyway, just as he said he would.

Definitely a hard-core, right wing nutjob. No question. And he hates rape victims, too. Coakley is a real piece of work!
Click to expand...

Plus, as I understand it, there is similar language in the Obamacare bill, which "Marcia" has pledged to support. Go figure.
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ssachusetts_senate_special_election-1144.html


With the caveat that Democratic GOTV efforts might still get Coakley across the finish line, the collapse of her support (based on the polls) is really striking.

What really seems ominous for her is that even in the two recent polls which put her in the lead, her support is below 50%. Conventional wisdom is that undecideds tend to break for the challenger. Although Coakley's technically not an incumbent, she has all of the advantages that incumbents traditionally have.

The last poll which showed her with a big lead was taken the first week of January. And even with a 17 point lead, her support was only 53%.

I grew up in Chicagoland, under the first Mayor Daley, so I know that election day "miracles" are possible in a one party environment like Massachusetts. But it certainly doesn't look good for Coakley. And dissing Curt Schilling (because she obviously had no idea who he was) may turn out to have been the back breaker.
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

You know... we may get a health care bill that's designed to help this nation as opposed to one that's supposed to make democrats into the saviors of this nation because of all this. Sure, it doesn't help the ego but maybe we'll actually get something positive done.

Yeah, I'm not counting on it... too much invested in trying to save us from ourselves.
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Pio,

I say this without speaking from experience but its been a long time since Dems have pulled any real machine electoral politics... plenty of legislative and graft games but nothing regarding the ballot box. The reason for this is that largely they haven't needed to do so. Even when electing republican govenors the legislature has remained veto proof and much of that time included a legislature overshadowed by the pallor of a mass-murder. Its been more of an assumed force and the idea that the dems are righteous that have kept them in place. Ballot shenanigans aren't really, to my knowledge, a part of mass history.

On the other hand the national democrats want things so very badly and I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to pull off something. The elite see themselves so close to true ideological victory and victory over the people they see as stupid... its uncertain what they might risk.
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Patman said:
Pio,

I say this without speaking from experience but its been a long time since Dems have pulled any real machine electoral politics... plenty of legislative and graft games but nothing regarding the ballot box. The reason for this is that largely they haven't needed to do so. Even when electing republican govenors the legislature has remained veto proof and much of that time included a legislature overshadowed by the pallor of a mass-murder. Its been more of an assumed force and the idea that the dems are righteous that have kept them in place. Ballot shenanigans aren't really, to my knowledge, a part of mass history.

On the other hand the national democrats want things so very badly and I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to pull off something. The elite see themselves so close to true ideological victory and victory over the people they see as stupid... its uncertain what they might risk.
Click to expand...

Good point. Electing some GOP governors while the legislature remains 75% Democratic isn't that big of a deal. The entire congressional delegation is Democratic, as are all state wide elected officials. So yeah, they haven't really needed to screw with the results. In Chicago, the Daley "miracles" generally involved balloting for President (see Nixon, Richard).

Even so, I see where the Secretary of State (Galvin?) is hinting around that it may take a looooong time to certify a Brown win (while Nikki Tsongas got certified at the speed of light). Some shenanigans may have already occurred in registrations. And any pressure from Washington to affect the outcome would have to involve locals.

The diddling that has gone on in recent close elections around the country has happend with absentee ballots. Christine Gregoire lost a couple of recounts in Washington a few years ago. Then, hey, guess what, we've "found" some uncounted ballots in King County which put her over the top. We saw similar shenanigans recently in Minnesota. And the "honorable" Al Gore sent out lawyers in the key Florida counties to contest absentee ballots from GI's. What a guy.

So if it's really close. I worry about chad counting (or whatever the Massachusetts equivalent is) and foot dragging if Brown wins.
 
Last edited:
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Old Pio said:
With the caveat that Democratic GOTV efforts might still get Coakley across the finish line
Click to expand...

It's Election Day!

gangs_of_new_york_2002_reference.jpg
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

SPIN CONTROL said:
Always nice to hear what liberals really think about democracy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/16/ed-schultz-on-ma-election_n_426068.html

"If I lived in Massachusetts, I'd try to vote ten times," Schultz said on his radio show, The Ed Schultz Show.

"Yeah that's right," he went on. "I'd cheat to keep these ******** out. I would. Because that's exactly what they are."

:eek:
Click to expand...

One of those "national controversy if Rush Limbaugh said it" moments.
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

How about "there's no terrorists/taliban left in Afghanistan." Try to imagine if Sarah Palin had uttered this howler.
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

I'm sick of Scott Brown, his daughters and the screaming teenagers in their radio commercial who must have been drugged into thinking they were discussing a movie about attractive gay vampires.
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Jon said:
I'm sick of Scott Brown, his daughters and the screaming teenagers in their radio commercial who must have been drugged into thinking they were discussing a movie about attractive gay vampires.
Click to expand...

I'm sick of your whole state. So there.
 
Re: Hey Massachusetts! Coakley or Brown?

Wol4ine said:
I live in Michigan. We did'nt elect Jennifer Granholm, We RE-elected her!?!:eek:
Click to expand...

Hey, let's give ourselves a little defense here. Our state parties take turns throwing gubernatorial elections with guys like DeVos and Fieger every 8 years in the re-election efforts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top