I was a little disappointed by Daniels's address. I understand that he isn't proposing any new initiatives because we don't have money to pay for them. But it got a little old that the big theme seemed to be “it's worse other places”. To be blunt – I don't care how bad it is in Michigan or California. I live in Indiana. Tell me how Indiana is going to improve. Tell me more about what we can do so we don't get in the same fiscal shape as other places in a year or so when our surplus does run out.

Dobie, take a doobie. Relax. Daniels was pointing out the obvious. No huge deal.

The Massachusetts thing was just ridiculous. I mean, Ted Kenendy's seat going to this guy? Only a lousy candidate would've let this slip away. ANd she sure did.

It shouldn't make a difference, but it probably will. Only in America can a majority–women–qualify for minority status. And only in America can 59% not be enough to get something done.

This is what happens when you let loons like Lieberman have whatever they want. The message gets blurred, you turn into a politicla whore, and your themes are no longer important to the majority.

Massachusetts could be a huge wake-up clal for my party. Or not. We're capable of both directions. With ample history for each. So, will it be Truman, or Carter for the next year?

Sen. Brown is a blip on the radar screen. The message of his election is not.

I suppose we should have been surprised had Ms. Coakley won. Traditionally, New England has been socially liberal, yet fiscally conservative. Even for traditionally Democratic voters, it's the economy, stupid.

Discussing this with a Republican friend from the East, I proposed that perhaps the Kennedys were actually an anomaly (albeit a 50 year one) in New England politics, and that pundits ought to pay better attention to variables other than those from Camelot when it comes to Massachusetts politics in the future.

I've been to the Commonwealth. Several times. Never forget that Boston resisted school busing with some of the most hateful and racially divisive demonstrations (Ok, they were riots) north of the M-D Line.

On multiple trips to New Hampshire, I've flown into Logan and driven to Manchester or points north. I don't know how to put this delicately, but if you get gas in many Mass. small towns, tolerance is not a family value. In fact, quite the opposite. How they elected a black governor is beyond me, but if you check his poll standings, within five weeks of inauguration he was toast. Still is.

Massachusetts was scared to live life without a Kennedy. Now they will. Life will go on. Brown will moderate his views, and he could get elected to a full term in 2012. Stranger things have happened.

Vicki Reggie will be horrified for a couple of weeks. The Kennedy Clan will be Patrician Polite.

And then Sen. Brown will be one of 100. And he'll find out real fast that they don't take too well to politicians who slam their institution.

If Chuck Grassley can survive there, anyone can. Hell you can solicit sex in an airport bathroom and if you don't get a felony, and shut up for the remainder of your term, they'll let you stay. Just don't make fun of the institution.

lol…you should get a job as a spin-meister in this administration. Boil your post down and what do you get: Red neck racists elected Brown.

Face it, despite what people are saying this IS a referendum on obama, his administration, and come November democrats everywhere are in deep, deep doody.

It could also be that Massachusetts is growing up and noticed that even the worms were rejecting Kennedy and all that he stood for in Massachusetts. His personal political party centered around him starved the Democrat party of real talent (similar to the R roadblocks in Indiana's Senate until they started taking out the bulls in the primaries). I wonder who the next socialist is that the public can turn on, someone with just a family name, no accomplishments in reality, a face, a hank of hair, an appearence, and nothing to show for all the years he has squandered in the Senate?

LOL, Name…you can look at it that way. My reporting re: Massachusetts is open to anyone's interpretation. I only reported what I saw there. Multiple times. Outside Cambridge and Boston, it was rural Morgan County everywhere.

That said, this Brown fella ran a pick-up truck campaign. Literally. And he ran against DC. I'm just saying: the capital is full of Carterites of both parties who ran against the establishment. That town despises folks who do that, regardless of party. And that culture is deeply ingrained. I mean, look no further than Lieberman, who ran as an independent when his own party busted him, and he whines and twists in the wind until he gets what he wants–no threat ot his home state's health care giants, who fund his campaign and his home (wife Hadassah is a lobbyist for Big Health. Openly. Without much blow-back. Amazing) Spector did the same on the other side, although I don't think he's as big a health industry whore as Joe is.

How else do you explain a populist president, elected in spite of his racial background and the smears, campaigning on “change,” and the moment he gets there, co-opts himself by signing off on national health care reform by starting with a Big Pharma deal? Closed-door nonetheless.

If Obama and newly-elected Sen. Brown can somehow stay true to their change monikers, we'd all be better off. Alas, they probably cannot. When we get tricked into believing someone will tilt against windmills, they fail to tilt. They just blow in the wind.

Washington eats these change agents for lunch. It's been that way for decades. The DC elite take the attitude: an administration is only four, maybe eight years–we'll outlast them. It will remain this way until and unless we remove the campaign funding mechanism as it now exists. Their whorish behavior is criticized, but we set them up to feed at that trough, and wonder why we get the results we get. Fascinating.

TA, Kinda disagree with you a little. I think a super majority is scarey. The problem with being able to force your agenda is that bad initiatives (SP?) get passed along with good ones. I think the minority is there to keep some balance and to slow bad ideas. I think this was the intent of the forefathers to keep the majority from trampling the minority.

To be fair, Abdul, I believe you said Brown's election was roughly 60% due to the present administration's policy pursuits. However, as the Fox commentator said early this morning, not a few, but every person he spoke with in exit interviews mentioned the health care plan as a problem. I hope the D.C. Democrats have a Jesus moment over this one. I equally hope the Republicans aren't idiotically swelled with some damn perceived mandate as ponderous and expensive as “compassionate conservatism”. We're sitting here, just outside the door of collective debtor's prison, because of such idiotic notions as “compassionate conservatism” and “everyone can own a home”. If you're against President Obama's policies means you must be a racist is also a winner. If carrying a scarlet 'S' for sexism on my chest would rid us of Nancy Pelosi, I'd have to think about it- but I don't think we're all sexist either if we disagree re her practice of politics.

I very dearly hope the Democrats will now put the ball in the Republican's court on health care. Invite them in for talks and come up with something that costs less in money and govenment expansion: pricing up-front, enhanced competition and legal reform for instance. I'm not sure that mandating portability will cost that much extra, but covering all pre-existing conditions and universal coverage (however worthy are both) will increase costs on us- directly or indirectly. How do we pay for it in this economy? With 10% unemployment and a Republican just taking Ted Kennedy's seat, I wouldn't politically advise increasing costs for anybody for awhile.

Do you really think we'll get bipartisan cooperation on this legislation, putting the needs of the American people before finger-pointing and partisan political gain? I doubt it. But, after yesterday's shot (more like a thunderclap from Zeus) across the bow from the disgruntled rabble – hope springs eternal.

I'm surprised that TA has any breath with which to speak, let alone, spin. His opinion is that the grapes must have been sour. I'm wondering if there are any Republicans in Indiana who know how to drive a pick em up truck?

I just came back to Indy after spending three years living in Boston and I really wish I could have been there for this election.

I think the view of Massachusetts, specifically Boston, of being a racist place is a bit outdated, so I think the comment about you not knowing how they elected a black governor is a bit insulting. I think rural areas are fairly similar throughout the country. However, that isn't here or there.

I would agree the national health care debate hurt Coakley, but remember that Scott Brown voted for Massachusetts' health bill which I would say the national bill was modeled after so I would not try to make the case that this is a rejection of government involvement in health care.

Coakley's poor campaign was also a serious factor, but a couple things that haven't been mentioned is Massachusetts tendency to check complete power and the state of the ruling Democrats in the Commonwealth right now.

Even though their US and state legislators have been completely Democratic for year, they did elected Republican governors from 1991 until 2006.

Also, the Democratic Patrick administration is completely unpopular and the last three Democratic House Speakers have been indicted (and these point are worsened since the Legislature has complete power).

I just wanted to throw some other opinions out there having just moved back from Mass. Don't forget that Hilary pounded Obama pretty good in Mass, even after Teddy came out for our current President. When watching trouble areas for Democrats in 2010, look toward those areas where HRC beat down Obama.

I think his name is Scott Brown, not Steve Brown

As Brown so eloquently put it, “It's not Ted Kennedy's seat, it's the people's seat.” Elistist libs like yourself just don't seem to get that fact. Voters outrage at the arrogance of Congress, particularly the Dems, was on full display in Massachusetts yesterday.

The irony of Kennedy's former seat going to the man who may stop this healthcare reform scam is priceless. But will a lesson be learned by the scumbag Dem leadership? No way! Barney Frank is already talking about changing the 60 vote rule for filibusters. These people have no intentions of listening to the people. They know what's best for us. Period.

It doesn't surprise me, however, that Abdul doesn't think (or at least refused to acknowledge) that this was, indeed, a repudiation of our radical lefty president. Most voters are starting to wake up. Charm only goes so far.

The only thing Obama has in common with Truman was the 'buck stops here' line he stole. I predict that the American public will be praying for another Carter after Barry gets done raping us and our Constitution.

….or you can step on a drowning, pregnant girl to save your own ass, let her die, walk with a midemeanor and still be held up as a hero by folks like yourself. You're right. What a crazy institution!

Lostkoz, I didn't mean to sound racist. I only reported what I saw, on perhaps 10-12 trips there over 3 years. Others might disagree. It surprised me, but it was a pretty uniform observation.

I've got plenty of breath, Pascal.

Taxpayer took most of the words out of my mouth. Massachusetts is not America, no more than Indiana is. If the GOP gets too braggadicio about the results, then the McConnell-Bohner attitude will prevail. Frankly, that might benefit my party, but it won't benefit the country. If our nation is going the way of these two fools, Lord help us.

If the liberal Democratic view prevails, that won't help either. America stopped listening to anything remotely tied to Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Reed long ago.

Portability is important. Ditto pre-existing conditions.

And those of us who are able should pay decent insurance premiums. But “decent” is getting more and more distant for many of us. My premiums have doubled in a little over four years, while coverage limits have changed and deductibles have risen.

This insane downward spiral cannot continue. It already has our manufacturing industry on its knees insofar as international competition goes.

For our long-term economic survival, we've got to wrestle health care to the gorund, conquer it, and move on. Almost none of our international competitors have this issue. Almost all of them have government-provided health care. Draw your own conclusions, but please dont resort to the same old tired neocon talking points regarding long waits in Canada and Britain. It appears health care is part of foreign product pricing only via government taxes on businesses–NOT as a premium issue.

An unscientific review would indicate taxes on industry work better than what we're doing in America. Perhaps some smart economists from all spectrums could review that theory.

Everyone else is doing it???? Is that seriously your argument? And taxes on any industry, without exception, are passed along to the consumer or end user. And why does a a self-proclaimed intellect like yourself never include tort reform as part of your proposed solutions.

By the way, virtually no legislation your party has passed this past year has been good for the country. And the Dem leadership is too stupid and arrogant to realize that it will also be devastating for your party. Thank God for unintended consequences.

On the TV coverage of Browns election night crowd, out of the hundreds of people present, I observed only one African-American in a sea of white faces.

Just one…

While it was a brilliant tactic for Brown to pounce on that statement, honestly – referring to 'Kennedy's seat' is just conventional and customary oral shorthand that we all use day in and day out.

Who hasn't referred to 'my wife's car' when it is in YOUR name?

What's your point Wilson? Are you stating that African Americans aren't allowed to live in Massachusetts? Was the camera man a racists? The State is heavy democrat, we already know that AA's lean left at least they vote democrat and he is a Republican. So what's your point? Do you know for a fact that AA's didn't support him? Why do you try and mix up racial tension where none exists? Take your hood off Wilson the year is 2010 not 1865, we are way past your why of thinking.

If it wasn't a Kennedy's seat about which that statement was made, I might agree, John. Unfortunately, for too long that seat was believed to be a Kennedy birthright by far too many people.

Wilson here are the facts.

Massachusetts total population in 2000 was 6,349,097. The percentages by race are, White 87.89% African American 7.58% Other 5.95%.

With the African American population in Massachusetts at less than 8% you state that you saw one AA in the crowd of 200 people. If that is true wouldn’t it be fair to assume that the GOP received more AA votes according to the percentage of the population than you might want to acknowledge. I would be willing to bet that at least 2% of the AA’s that voted supported Brown.

Wilson here are the facts.

Massachusetts total population in 2000 was 6,349,097. The percentages by race are, White 87.89% African American 7.58% Other 5.95%.

With the African American population in Massachusetts at less than 8% you state that you saw one AA in the crowd of 200 people. If that is true wouldn’t it be fair to assume that the GOP received more AA votes according to the percentage of the population than you might want to acknowledge. I would be willing to bet that at least 2% of the AA’s that voted supported Brown.

Wow!!! 2% of the African-Americans voted for Brown??? Wow!!! That's real progress there… talk about diversity and inclusion!!! TWO WHOLE PERCENT — something to crow about.

(Abraham Lincoln weeps)

Let me revise that, what I ment was that close to 20% of the AA voting population supported Brown.

Ha, ha I see where Mike Pence is taking truck driving lessons and Evan is taking lessons in “talking conservative Republican” again (as he does every election time). I don't think $13,000,000 will save our do nothing junior Senator in an era where Internet fund raising can bring in a million dollars a day. In Indiana, a candidate who is the real deal, such as Rep. Pence, can easily defeat a weathervane do nothing like Evan. Bounce Bayh ! If the R's had any vision they would be going after the low hanging fruit instead of ganging up on Dan B urton. Then again, the stupid party is sometimes aptly named.

20% ???

( Republican Senator Edward Brooke of Massachusetts, [January 3, 1967 – January 3, 1979], weeps — copiously ! )

Corporate money pollution has poisoned our republic and democracy to the point that I believe that congress is now largely incapable of doing the right thing for our country — people realize this and do not see typical politicos solving the real and serious problem they face daily regardless of political persuasion or party.

Thus voters turn to anything that looks like it might be something different for a change…

Apparently our own Evan Bayh is just as clueless as the rest congress about why most of the public are fed up and rejecting them so robustly.

What most of congress, Evan Bayh included, do not seem to realize is that it's not the right or left politics that are such a turn off or source of extreme frustration for most of the public but it's the congress' largess in its corporate agenda that is preventing successful governance and solutions to the real problems people in our country face!

Corporations need to stick to making money with their core businesses and keep their money out of our political system. Our founding fathers never intended for corporations to have the same rights as living persons or even be involved in politics and that's why our constitution defines the rights people have and never mentions a corporation's rights… The whole system has been turned upon its head!

Under our political system our elected officials are suppose to serve us — the people and our country, not the big money interests that have made sure that we now have the best politics that money can buy!

We need to get big money out of politics and restore our republic's intended democracy — so-called “clean money” or public funded election systems have proven track records in states like Mane, Arizona, and others and have shown what successfully can be done. Google it for yourself and see… ;)

Rico, 34 states, including Indiana, already have tort reform: if you sue for medical malpractice in Indiana, jury awards are capped at ridiculously low 1970s rates. Our law was pushed by the former doctor governor, whose tax policies were equally stupid.

Try this for once: stop the neocon nonsense. Just because trial lawyers routinely oppose your candidates, don't slam their methodology. Guilt by association is a uniquely Reaganistic tactic, and it's old.

Tort reform. Hilarious. Like that will fix anything, and as if it needed fixed. The impact of jury awards on medical costs is highly exaggerated. Smart judges can stop that tactic, when it is misused, dead in its tracks.

What else ya got?

Real tort reform would require repealing Prosser and would be resisted by the insurance companies who prosper from his diktats even as they blow smoke about the need for tort reform. Every reform must begin with a form in mind. Cupp's text on Torts begins the process.

“Almost none of our international competitors have this issue. Almost all of them have government-provided health care.”

I can't say “almost all”, but I'd speculate that nearly all don't have our leviathan magnitude of: debt & deficit, corrupted taxation, foreign policy presence, parasitic politics, non-citizen benefits, deteriorated work ethic, and dysfunctional parenting.

To me it's impossible to expand goverment in any direction if we never tackle root problems beyond pointing fingers. Nor, does it appear the Eastern hemisphere will volunteer to go back to an era of not being able to forge steel. We change to compete or we go down.

I hear ya, Paul…Rico is mouthing the Hannity/Rush line, which is entertaining, but not useful.

If all medical malpractice lawsuits were banned tomorrow, it would likely have little effect on health insurance rates. Let's try to keep our eye on the ball here.

The current malpractice caps, enacted in 1973, were put in place by a doctor-governor. If a doc operates on my arm to set a bone, fouls it up and I lose use of my arm for life, I can get a maximum of $66,000 plus some medical bills paid. The lawyer takes a chunk of that, and my productivity is changed for life.

Not exactly a raging malpractice epedemic.

This red herring is promoted by the neocons because the trial lawyers collectively donate overwhelmingly to Democrats. Frankly, I don't want their money, but they are entitled to give it.

Where's the outrage over Chamber money going to Republicans at the same ratio, while the national Chamber turns its head to dastardly foreign-trade violations of some of its own members?

Hypocrites abound. It'd be helpful if the participants in this debate wore nametags to display their fiscal allegiances.

So they counted all the AA's and asked them who they voted for? How do they know? I thought our votes were private.

They also counted women and asked them who they voted for. The actual ballots are private but citizens are perfectly free to participate in voluntary exit polling and to state for whom they voted for (if they wish). (By the way, I usually vote straight Democratic ticket but in 1982 I did vote for the Republican candidate for Center Township Trustee.)

Exit polling is quite standard and uncontroversial. It provides useful information about how different segments of the electorate reacted to the political campaigns.

I understood that the exit pollers thought that the race would not be close early on and no plans were made for exit polls.

I learned this because all day long I tried to find exit polls on the race and there were none. Finally I found a news article which said there were no exit polls.

I don't think your data is credible, Wilson.

Those are IndyErnie's figures, not mine. I leave it to you to determine his credibility…

You voted for a Republican in '82? I never knew there was a Carson on the Republican ticket.

Rico — shouldn't you be shrieking and crying about how the GOP/Teabaggers supported and elected a “babykiller” like Scott Brown to the US Senate? He openly supports a woman's right to choose an abortion (except in the last trimester).

Of course tort reform is not the only answer. It's a good start. Any doctor will tell you that practicing defensive medicine has a huge impact on costs. Nationwide, the costs are in the billions annually, according to some estimates. My cousin, a GP here in town with a private practice, pays $200,000 a year for malpractice insurance before he ever opens his doors. So save the neocon crap! Anyone who doesn't believe that drives up the cost of healthcare is a neo-idiot.

I guess 'neocon' is the word of the day. Do you run around your house like a madman screaming “HALLIBURTON” at the top of your lungs? Sure you don't.

Neocon is a description of most of teh Busuh White House. “Neo” as in “new,” or, not true to the Goldwater (even Reagan) conservative policy stances.

No, I don't run around screaming about Halliburton. Although they are a bunch of unpatriotic defense budget whores–the whole bunch. They belched forth Cheney. I rest my case.

Dial in the former Blackwater Group and you've got a Crap Sandwich.

I used to do that back in 2004/2005.

And I disagree with him on that. Your point?
The Tea Party in no way addresses the abortion issue. They support Brown because he's going to 'kill' your man's chances of taking total control of our healthcare choices. Choice seems to matter to you only on one issue.

And I know you've probably mastered the art of 'Teabagging' and love the word, but that's not what they're called.

I don't get these weeping of Abe Lincoln cracks. As I recall he was all for sending folks back to Africa.
I note when TA is faced with facts, like $200,000.00 a year for medical malpractice insurance in Indiana, he clams up with no response, no comprehension, no nothing. Worse, when you do an office call, the doc wastes (and you pay for) a considerable amount of his speaking into a recording making his case for the defense of himself against your malpractice suit. His time would be much better spent in seeing more patients.
It is obvious that TA knows little about costs of things. When you subtract his ad hominem, there is little left.

Pascal is 100 percent correct about Lincoln. I find it quite humorous that blacks tout him as the Great Emancipator/Savior.

If it weren't for smart white folk like Pascal and IndyAries, African-Americans would be soooooo ignorant!

The question about the intelligence of African-Americans is probably not one that there is any dispute about, at least among folks who have studied comparitive intelligence by race. If Harvard is 25% Jewish these days and the select schools in California are Asians they can both be thankful that they don't have to compete against Chinese whose IQ on average exceeds everyone's. Bear in mind that intelligence is only one quality of a person. Check back in when you have read and digested The Bell Curve.

http://www.ushistory.org/presidentshouse/histor... Why waste time on Lincoln when civilized folks in Pa published such long before (or shortly) he was born? Folks who actually read historical documents are not taken in by “separation of church and state” myths laid down by freemasons, and KKK members. I'm still wondering how, after Christians did away with slavery following the decline of Rome, slavery re entered Western Civilization? The only thing I can come up with is that somehow Roman Law was revived (probably by the Enlightenment sorts). It seems clear to me that Christians once more got rid of slavery in the West. It remains still in Africa and parts of the Islamic middle East. There are no firewalls in Islam about slavery-something that free peoples ought to be aware of.