Harry.... really???

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Heh... 'more of the same'.

You have any idea how long Reid has been in the senate? Since 1986 for cryin out loud.

And what? His Republican replacement will become yet another career politician; beholden to special interest and serving the personal will rather than that of the people. Yes, more of the same, but with a different letter to the right of the name.

[SteamWake]

Id rather see a change and hope for the best

See what I did there

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Id rather see a change and hope for the best

See what I did there

Go Team R! Hooahh!

[AVGWarhawk]

Go team tea party.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Go team tea party.

Except that when you look at polls and ballots, you see R's, not T's. Until you do, the Tea Party is little more than the Christian Coalition; yet another lobby within the Republican Party, and like the Christian Conservatives in the early 90's, the flavor of the day, used to try and fool certian segments of the population into voting for them. I've been down that road before, and I gladly say no thanks.

If it were the Tea Party, they might be of interest to me. As long as they remain under that Republican umbrella, though, it is politics as usual.

[ETR3(SS)]

Term limits. Good enough for the POTUS, good enough for Congress too!

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

Term limits. Good enough for the POTUS, good enough for Congress too!

We have term limits already. They're called elections.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Except that when you look at polls and ballots, you see R's, not T's. Until you do, the Tea Party is little more than the Christian Coalition; yet another lobby within the Republican Party, and like the Christian Conservatives in the early 90's, the flavor of the day, used to try and fool certian segments of the population into voting for them. I've been down that road before, and I gladly say no thanks.

If it were the Tea Party, they might be of interest to me. As long as they remain under that Republican umbrella, though, it is politics as usual.

There is no T because the R and the D do not want to confuse the public anymore then they are. After all, the idiots keep putting them back in office then complain and moan about it. It is a vicious cycle. Yes, the T does look like a R under sheeps clothing. For the most part it is however the T are new people with we hope..new ideas.

Look at Barbara Mulkulski. Senator for MD since 1987. I think it is time for her to go. Time for real change across the board.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

There is no T because the R and the D do not want to confuse the public anymore then they are. After all, the idiots keep putting them back in office then complain and moan about it. It is a vicious cycle. Yes, the T does look like a R under sheeps clothing. For the most part it is however the T are new people with we hope..new ideas.

Look at Barbara Mulkulski. Senator for MD since 1987. I think it is time for her to go. Time for real change across the board.

I see it the opposite way. If the Tea Party was serious about reform, they would have split, as this was the time to do it. The Republican Party was on life support, as Americans had firmly rejected the Neo-Conservatism of the past 20 years in 2006 and again in 2008. Voters are indeed fed up with the Liberalism of the current Democratic Party, but are far from interested in embracing the Republican brand of conservatism again. This environment was the perfect time for the Tea Party to break away and stand on their own as the party of Paleo-Conservatism; Fiscally conservative and socially libertarian, which is exactly what they claim to be. By remaining under the Republican umbrella, they cloud their intentions, giving the impression, and I believe a correct impression, that they will continue to place the social policies of Neo-Conservatism above the tenants of fiscal conservatism. By rallying behind the face of John Boehner, they only confirm their dedication to the Neo-Conservative agenda.

[August]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

And what? His Republican replacement will become yet another career politician; beholden to special interest and serving the personal will rather than that of the people. Yes, more of the same, but with a different letter to the right of the name.

So what's your solution then? Vote for the party currently in power and let them become even more entrenched? Not vote and let the partisan vote decide the election?

Seems to me continually voting out the incumbents regardless of party is the only real path to follow. IMO of course...

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by August

So what's your solution then? Vote for the party currently in power and let them become even more entrenched? Not vote and let the partisan vote decide the election?

You're right in that this is not a very good solution. Personally, I believe what is truly required is a fracturing of the dual-party system. No longer would polticians be able to run on the 'vote for me, I'm not him' line. No longer would there be the underlying message that you have to vote for one of them. With viable third, fourth and fifth candidates, positions and ideas would take priority over personality and party.