Friday, January 15, 2010

Massachusetts special election

By Creature

It's really quite simple for Massachusetts, would you like a senator who's going to sit on his hands and say no for the next three years or do you want one that will actually work for their paycheck? You choose.

Labels: , ,

posted by creature at 4:56 PM

Bookmark and Share

9 Comments:

  • The reason Mr. Brown is tied in the polls in the bluest of blue state, to wit Massachusetts, is because of the arrogance of people such as yourself, Obama, Pelosi, and the best friend of the Negro race, Mr. Reid. Think about it. THIS IS HAPPENING IN MASSACHUSETTS!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:47 PM  

  • No, the reason is that the right-wing Republican base is highly mobilized at the moment, whereas the Democratic base is split over health care and other issues. As well, Coakley has proven to be a rather weak candidate.

    You say it's amazing this is happening in Mass. Look, I used to live there. There's nothing amazing about this. It's a state that elected Weld and Romney governor.

    By Blogger Michael J.W. Stickings, at 8:09 PM  

  • There is NO RIGHT-WING Republican base in Mass., except for the fact that you define anything to the right of YOU as right-wing, which to most people is utter nonsense.

    Coakley can still win if she can pull her union thugs out in large enough numbers. Hope that brightens your day.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:16 AM  

  • There is enough of a right-wing base even in MA to make a difference, and it is being mobilized nationally. Of course, most Republicans there are more in the Weld/Romney mold rather than the teabagger mold, but it's not like all Republicans there are just centrist Democrats or anything.

    You mention "union thugs." What does that even mean, or are you simply exposing your hatred of organized labour? Are these "thugs" just those hard-working blue-collar people who happen to be organized? Do you think anyone who belongs to a union is Jimmy Hoffa? Seriously, that's rather insulting. Yes, a union may be pro-Democratic, but the votes of union leaders aren't enough to make a difference. What matters is for unionized workers to vote, and they do so freely. And if you have a problem with that, how about anyone who works for a company that happens to be Republican? Are they just "corporate thugs"?

    By Blogger Michael J.W. Stickings, at 11:14 AM  

  • Yes, I DESPISE organized labor. The thugs are the labor party bosses and various union "officers." Many of the unsophisticated rank and file union members will vote for Brown, all the while fearful that they may be found out.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:34 AM  

  • My hatred for unions does not need to be "exposed." It's self-evident, and I make no apologies for it. I am so THRILLED card check is dead.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:37 AM  

  • Yeah, it's so much better when companies can just screw workers over, isn't it? Need to jack up the stock price (and make millions)? Lay off thousands of workers and Wall Street will applaud.

    Fantastic.

    There are abuses in organized labour just as there are abuses everwhere. If you despise those "thugs" so much, I can only presume you hate the "thugs" who run these companies, too. But probably not. I'm sure your hatred for unions is backed up by all the hypocrisy you can muster.

    By Blogger Michael J.W. Stickings, at 11:34 AM  

  • Oh -- and someone tried to leave an abusive comment here but objected to "blog owner approval"?

    Fuck off.

    By Blogger Michael J.W. Stickings, at 11:35 AM  

  • Maybe that was you, Anonymous, or someone else hiding behind anonymity.

    If you want to comment here, fine, as long as it's not abusive and contributes to the discussion. I regularly allow comments with which I disagree, like the two above from "Anonymous." But if you cross the line, I say no. Free speech does not extend to coming on here and using foul, abusive language.

    By Blogger Michael J.W. Stickings, at 11:36 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home