Two more teaparty defeats

From the NPR blurb on Murkowski's win:

It was not immediately clear how Miller will proceed. He and his advisers have vowed to take legal action over what they contend is an unfair tally in Murkowski's favor

Miller is such an idiot. As of right now, his own people have scrutinized and approved 92,715 of the ballots for Murkowski as being correctly cast with the oval filled in properly and no misspellings or any other potential disqualifier. That is 92,715 votes fairly tallied in Murkowski's favor according to Miller's own team. His own tally is 90,468 and there are at most only 700 more ballots remaining to be counted today. There is no possible way he could win. It is over.

Now, now, Aratina - there's always the courts.

You must be talking about those darned activist judges, Rob Jase. :)

Hooray for Nancy Pelosi! She was a very effective Speaker, I expect her to continue to be as effective in her new position as Minority Leader....despite the surety of GOP shenanigans.

gwen @ # 4 - Are you talking about the same Nancy Pelosi who didn't even have a table capable of holding a copy of the US Constitution for all of 2007 & 2008?

What the hell would it take for someone to be an ineffective Speaker by your measure?

pz myers does not exist...
_______________

richarddawkins.net/discussions/543672-inhertitance-of-acquired-behaviour-adaptions-and-brain-gene-expression-in-chickens

atheists, weâre gonna cut off your headsâ¦

THE HIGH PRICE OF REVOLUTION

youtube.com/user/xviolatex?feature=mhum

If your sole criteria of effectiveness is whether or not someone has a copy of the US Constitution on their table. Your priorities are extremely skewed. That is what is called a 'Straw Man' argument FYI..

What are you talking about, Gwen? I tried to research "Nanco Pelosi copy Constitution" and this page was the eighth hit!

Is this what you're talking about? http://thehuffingtonriposte.blogspot.com/2009/10/someone-send-nancy-pel…

Timberwolf, did you read Pierce Butler's comment? I was pointing out that he was making a straw man argument. Unfortunately, my paragraph would have been clearer if I'd reversed the order of the sentences. :/
He called Pelosi ineffective based on the fact that she did not have a copy of the Constitution on her table...WTH?

That link was a joke, right?? or at least a Poe....?

gwen @ # 8 - I'm calling that asshole Pelosi ineffective because she explicitly refused to do her obvious Constitutional duty in the face of blatant "high crimes and misdemeanors".

Anyone who aids and abets multiple crimes against humanity should be in the Big House, not the House of Representatives.

A waste of a table. The Constitution is on line.

And besides, no one should table the Constitution!

Anybody who regularly needs to refer to your Constitution problably shouldn't be in Congress.

Well, that's some good news. We need fewer of those loonies, including the GOP candidates who don't openly associate themselves with the teabaggers. The GOP is a cancer in our modern society. In some of the latest news they're trying to get attention by saying they need "more assurances" before approving of the new nuclear treaty with Russia. The idiots claim that they're 'concerned' about our 'national security' - yeah, that's why they ignore all the advice being given by our military and our national security advisers. What's really pathetic is that those idiots who are a threat to national security by threatening to undermine a treaty which will allow us to oversee the dismantling and disposal of part of the Russian nuclear stockpile will probably be a hero to many.

Weird; I seem to recall Yahoo/AP running an article about a week or two ago to the effect that Democrats had asked Pelosi to step down as speaker. Wishful not-thinking?

Sorry, Gwen. I had a frain bart.

So, Pierce, I think I understand now! You are mad at Pelosi for not impeaching Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of that crew over dragging the US into two ruinous wars after lying to you.

Azkyroth, that would have been a play by the 'Blue Dogs' attempting to wrest control of the Party...it failed..

Timberwoof @ # 16 - You got it (except, of course, that as SecDef Rumsfeld would not, in a nation that followed its own laws, be "impeached" but simply removed - and then put on trial.).

It was Pelosi who overtly halted the due process of law with her notorious statement in January '07 that "impeachment is not on the table". I had a faint hope at the time that she was lying for tactical purposes, but Democrats only do that when they're selling the rest of us down the river.

I suppose it is better that the only time Dem leaders lie is when they are over-reaching with their timid compromise rather than trying to take over the world and stuff.

We so need a left wing party.

We so need a left wing party.

We've got a bunch: the Greens, the CP, the SWP, etc, etc.

What the US needs is competence in its left wing, rather than the endlessly squabbling and self-marginalizing likes of Ralph Nader, Jesse Jackson, Ramsey Clarke, Ariana Huffington, ad nauseam/infinitum.

Ralph Nader was competent in his own way. Few other people can claim to have made everyone else on the planet buckle up. Jesse Jackson ran a highly competent campaign in a year when a black man still could not win. There are other competent left wingers.

But that's not what I'm talking about. There is nothing competent about the teaparty. Incontinent, not competent. We need an incontinent screaming over the top paranoid left wing party based on irrational fear and loathing.

We need an incontinent screaming over the top paranoid left wing party based on irrational fear and loathing.

Sounds good! You start the northern wing, I'll rouse some rabble in the South, and we'll meet up at the Mason-Dixon line.

Uh, wait - what's irrational about fear & loathing of the status quo?

We use the same exact fear, the same exact tactics, but we just point to the liberal candidate as the solution and the teabagging candidate as the problem.

... we just point to the liberal candidate as the solution ...

That may not get us appreciably closer to, uh, actually solving anything, but it does sound like a lot of fun!

Joe Miller does the inevitable: http://www.adn.com/2010/11/18/1561739/miller-seeks-to-stop-election.html

And he is either lying about not being prepared for the recount, or is extremely incompetent as a major party candidate:

Miller in an affidavit Thursday said the Division of Elections began its hand count of write-in ballots a week earlier than scheduled. "Consequently, my campaign team and I were forced to pull together volunteer observers at the last minute, and did not have time to adequately and fully recruit and train them before counting began," he said. "As a result, an indeterminate number of ballots with candidates' names misspelled were counted without being challenged during the first several days of counting."

Boo hoo

"Nancy Pelosi elected House Democratic Leader, 150-43"

This is actually a good thing for the Tea Party -- the prospect of her resuming speaker duties will bring out the GOP voters again in two years.

Guest, it's a nifty theory, but it has no relationship to the reasons voters gave for voting as they did. There's only a tiny fraction of the electorate who freak out over the idea of a woman in power.

Stephanie, you've missed the point. It's not about misogyny.

Really, Guest? That would be why no one says much about her, just invokes her name as a Bad Thing(tm). You, for example, didn't bother to note any problem about Pelosi, just that it wasn't about her sex.

Give me two examples of real problems with Pelosi, things that aren't as imaginary as Obama's purported leftist leanings.

She was born in Kenya and is a secret muslim.