Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: DYNAMITE on December 13, 2006, 05:04:03 PM

Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: DYNAMITE on December 13, 2006, 05:04:03 PM
Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S. D has been reported to have experienced a possible stroke...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16191212/

He's a Dem from a Red-state with a Red governor... if he's been incapacitated he may well be replaced with a Republican replacement, shifting power back to the Republicans by splitting the Senate 50/50 (with the VP as the tie breaker..)

 Before the politicking gets going... i'd just like to send my prayers to the Senator and his family... i hope all turns out ok for him.

:confused:
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: lasersailor184 on December 13, 2006, 07:48:31 PM
If that happens, It would make my night.  Not in that he had a stroke or could die, but because it would be hilarious how unproductive the government would become.


BTW, the link is saying that he didn't have a stroke.
Title: Re: Change in the Senate?
Post by: DREDIOCK on December 13, 2006, 08:20:41 PM
Quote
Originally posted by DYNAMITE


he may well be replaced with a Republican replacement, shifting power back to the Republicans by splitting the Senate 50/50 (with the VP as the tie breaker..)

 

:confused:


Havent we been through this once before at the beginning of Bushs first term?
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: Chairboy on December 13, 2006, 08:24:14 PM
An unproducive government is a good government.  No party should control the executive & both sides of the legislative (we saw the disaster THAT created), and for safety sake, no party should control both house and senate either.

I hope he gets better, but the less "unity", the better.
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: Gunslinger on December 13, 2006, 10:00:52 PM
Don't count on in.  Bonilla (R-TX) just lost in his run-off.  He won on Nov 7th but didn't get the majority.  The dems pumped a crap load of money into his opponents campaign.
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: rpm on December 13, 2006, 11:09:42 PM
Bonilla was for the House, he's talking about the Senate. If the Gov does that, he can kiss his career goodbye, but I'm sure he'll find something in the private sector.
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: DREDIOCK on December 13, 2006, 11:40:15 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Chairboy
An unproducive government is a good government.  No party should control the executive & both sides of the legislative (we saw the disaster THAT created), and for safety sake, no party should control both house and senate either.

I hope he gets better, but the less "unity", the better.


Agreed.
there needs to be balance
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: lasersailor184 on December 14, 2006, 01:11:57 AM
Balance?  There needs to be no government at all.  


Through all the reasons that you list of the government being bad, it never occurs to you to get rid of it entirely?
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: lazs2 on December 14, 2006, 08:20:53 AM
when they are working... they are working against us.

lazs
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: DREDIOCK on December 14, 2006, 09:03:16 AM
Quote
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Balance?  There needs to be no government at all.  


Through all the reasons that you list of the government being bad, it never occurs to you to get rid of it entirely?


No not getting rid of the government.
Just replacing most of the people in it
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: lazs2 on December 14, 2006, 09:05:20 AM
government in itself is a necessary evil.   All government get's worse over time.

The best thing to do would be to role back our government to 1912... every 50 years or so... role it back to 1912.

lazs
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: lasersailor184 on December 14, 2006, 11:24:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
government in itself is a necessary evil.   All government get's worse over time.

lazs


Says who?  The government?  And they want you to be OK with it?
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: lazs2 on December 14, 2006, 02:17:13 PM
not sure I understand what you are saying laser.   please explain.  I say that all governments get worse over time because they grow in scope and power.

lazs
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: cav58d on December 14, 2006, 02:34:54 PM
The Constitution allows a Senator or member of Congress to remain seated as long as he has a heart beat.  I doubt it will come to this, but if the Senator finds out he needs to be hospitalized for months, and is unable to attend votes, I sure hope his allegiance is to his constituents and not to his party.
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: lasersailor184 on December 14, 2006, 04:46:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
government in itself is a necessary evil.


That's all the explanation you need.  You said it yourself.
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: myelo on December 14, 2006, 05:18:59 PM
sooo ...

The democrats have a one vote advantage in the Senate.

Just weeks after the election, one of the democratic senators has a stroke.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but...
Title: Change in the Senate?
Post by: john9001 on December 14, 2006, 05:58:40 PM
pelosi is very nervous.