It's painfully clear that you democrats are beyond help! You carp too much. You carped about Bush, Brownie, War in Iraq, Katrina, etc, etc... What have you done to make things better? I bet you NOTHING, NADA, ZIP, NEIL! You never come up with alternative solutions. You just carped, carped and carped. You are beyond help. You have no visions and dreams for the future. You are just excellent debaters, talkers and carpers! But you are NOT Doers. PEACE OUT!
you've been taking English lessons from Dubya, haven't you?
So you don't really care how badly a guy screws up, as long as he DOES something, right? Well, that works in minimum wage jobs, but some of us get paid for good judgment. The RNC has not been giving us our tax dollars' worth recently, since about August 2001, according to the 9/11 commission.
BTW, Cyber, what have *you* done recently? Cheerleading, like your Fearless Leader? That's a real contribution, although I'd rather have Andie MacDowell doing it, and she can dispense with the small talk and get straight to the BJ. And what IS your problem w/ BJs, anyway?
When are *you* gonna volunteer to get shot at? When are you gonna volunteer to send a $ to reduce the national debt that your Fearless Leader is raising to record levels?
You're the pot calling the snowman black.
-- Modified on 10/21/2005 6:00:21 PM
I get the impression that EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US on this board is beyond help.
Wait! Help! Stop me befor I post again!
Peace and good health to you.
Some of us, obviously, much more so than others [EOM}.
We ALL need to go sign the petition to impeach the mindless dolt that's wandering the country aimlessly in Air Force One. Well, all bt me, I've already done that.
I'll also vote, but I'm waiting until the time is right for that.
Or at least a list of different policies than the ones now. You didn't bother to answer. I think the ones who have lived by carping have been the conservatives, and now that they are in power, they are coming up either wrong or empty.
I haven't had time recently to go into any detail here on anything. However, given the speed of conservative crises, it has been far easier to just throw out a short commentaries about it.
Later, my dream list for 2027.
-- Modified on 10/22/2005 10:25:12 AM
It's painfully clear.......
What's painfully clear is that you don't understand the first thing about the way Washington runs. Democrats, even the Black Democratic Caucus for that matter, draw up their own budgets, and other inititiatives, and craft their own pieces of legislation. But when your party is out of power, the majority party, in this case the Republicans, is under no obligation to listen to a single thing you have to say or bring a piece of your legislation to the floor for consideration...except in cases where the Republicans need some Democratic votes to pass a particular bill.
So it isn't a matter of the Democrats not having any ideas. Republicans, when they were the minority party, did just as much carping as the Democrats do today. The Republican party isn't going to be in control of the WH and the Congress forever.....you can bet on that, it's simply a matter of when. MfSD>>>>
-- Modified on 10/22/2005 10:39:53 AM
when Republicans do it, it's not carping. It's ranting.
Republicans would never carp about a technicality like perjury, UNLESS (a) it involved a Democrat, and (b) it was something that the Natl Enquirer would be interested in, like a BJ.
Well, OK, it really only has to involve a Democrat. But that's enough, because we can infer sleaze, because the Democrats are the party of sleaze. That's because they have platform planks that don't involve money or violence. You know, things like plumbing, sex, retirement, sex, you get the idea.
the only thing that they can do is point out the failures of this administration. We stopped the destruction of Social Security (which is miraculously no longer an imminent crisis.) We got Chimpy to cut his vacation by at least two days to do something about the people in New Orleans. Oh, and hopefully by the end of next week, a bunch of these liars will be indicted and shipped out of D.C. I'd say that we've done plenty considering the current situation.
if the indictments and criminal investigations of Republican leaders continue, the Democrats will be the only ones left standing and will have no choice but to lead. Maybe it is time for a legitimate, honest third party.
At the pace we are moving, furget about a fucking third party, and concern yourself with the United States becoming Third World.
At the rate we are imploding, it won't take long.
they can do a clusterfuck, or undo a wet dream, without thinking any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
BTW, who the hell is Neil? Is he the TRAITOR in your pocket that wants to suppress any question about why the Republicans are such screwballs?
we do not do NEIL. We will leave him to you. Have fun, sailor.
Dude... you're not a good debater, or talker, and you are definitely more flounder than carp. Your chutzpah is exceeded only by your hubris. Shut the fuck up and go back to G-troll-P land with the rest of the criminals. Don't "Delay", do it now. Leave. Retire. Resign. QUIT before you are caught and have to use the Get out of Jail Free Presidential pardon to keep your sorry jailhouse bitch ass out of Leavenworth.
Piss Off.
(Ahh, I feel much better now.)
and I'm dreaming you're lost, and we won't be hearing from you for a looooooooooooooooooooong time.
"If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow."
GWB
what really bothers me is that he's so fast & loose with concepts. Anything is close enough for govt work if it's his boys, ya know?
Frankly, I don't think he's got any teeth. I think he depends on the RNC and religious right for teeth. I think he's too much of a country club lush to have any real discipline or determination. Sure, he can have a hell of a temper tantrum, but so can any 5 year old, and that's not determination.
"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child."
I think the reason it's not so popular as the one about ob-gyns "practicing their love" could be that not that many people pick up on the terminology. Or maybe the mere thought of incestuous bondage just gags too many people.
I would really like to know what went on that the RNC settled on Dubya. They had to know he was one of the dullest knives in the drawer. Well, maybe not - I can think of situations that they might overlook that, or underestimate it, or realize that a lot of Republicans actually identify with stupidity.
Were they looking for somebody they could be sure of controlling? That seems most plausible to me. Because I don't think the Bush clan has a controlling stake in the RNC.
but then again, without the loud mouthed zelots on both side the middle wouldnt be so safe.
True, just as it's the conservative mindset to rant. The difference being the substantially higher probability that the liberal will respond to facts. Conservatives are not generally concerned about facts, only feelings.
Please, liberals are the kings and queens of slight of hand and lets make everyone feel ok.
The easiest is "I did not have sexual relations with that woman!"
Ok it was a pretty crappy lie and the facts were never really proven and never will be, and I get why he did it, but to tell me that it was his only one? Please I hope you have enough sense to get that your facts are just as subjective as mine.
Facts are based on perspectives, they are manipulations to get your point across. Data collected by one person can be manipulated and interpreted any way you like. Is Bush the worst or best president ever? no on both counts. Was Clinton? no on both parts.
We could argue using our facts all day, but in the end I wont believe yours and say that they are fabricated and lies and you will say the same for mine. So moot wins the day.
that it's not about lying or not, that the GOP put up a known liar, on the theory that because CLinton lied that we needed a GOP liar to even things out.
Look, this is my problem: Democrats are known to be the party of sleaze, drugs and free love. So we know what we're getting.
But the Repubs claim they're all holy and pure, well, because they say they are, even though they are really not good liars. So this is very confusing to a simple guy like me.
It's not that I like the simpler perversion of the Democrats. Naw, I like the D/S stuff too (as long as I'm the one doing the beating).
It's about predictability. I'm a guy, and that means I'm simple. I don't read minds. I need to know what I'm dealing with.
The truth in politics or government has never been in sync.
Hey I'm on a board that talks about hookers. I have never pretended to be anything but a regular guy too. Swaggart and those guys are pricks and do not represent the republicans any more than Farrakhan, Clinton, et al... represents all of the democrats. Please!
There are things that are secret and have been lied about since there was national security. (1776) The truth has been given to us in well-crafted spoonfuls... like forever.
So say what you will. Clinton did not say hey... I'm a druggie, liar; he said I did not inhale. He was a good president at times and a real a hole at others. I didn’t like his policy on secrets and china, but like I said my eyes were open. Same with gw... to say he is a boy scout? Please, but he is our guy. For the moment.
Did they choose Clinton because he was a liar? No they picked him because they thought bush would run a better election and he got caught with his panties around his ankles and the rubber ball in his mouth. Clinton won.
Same with bush... Gore screwed the pooch. To even let it get close enough for there to even be a question if the election was valid or not is laughable. Same with GW for the second term.
He hasn’t done any more or less than every president since the first GW (George Washington if you needed my help?) And I would never expect any truly honest man to ever run. Why the hell would he want to? So when Hillary (kill all my former business partners) Clinton runs soon, buckle up. The bs will be so thick! WOW
Am I disappointed in GW? Yes at time I am amazed by his ineptness, but at times he is the man for the job.
So carp away. its in the liberal nature. (wink)
that I answer all this stuff.
[[Swaggart and those guys are pricks and do not represent the republicans any more than Farrakhan, Clinton, et al... represents all of the dem]]
I disagree. The question is, what are they gonna do? And I think that can be loosely broken down into their personal character, and their debts to the party.
Eg, Dubya is a frat boy. That's the way he is. He forgets about being arrested for DUI, because, well it's not important to him, nor is being reliable important to him. Expressing himself coherently isn't important to him, or he'd be in the habit. My guess is that he's just never had to convince anybody of anything with words.
But he owes big time to the party. He's described himself as a 'media creature' and without the family and GOP, he'd be selling life insurance, and not much of it.
So I don't see him crossing the party or family. Sure, he'll have temper tantrums, but they'll control him.
The Bush family is nothing if not ambitious, and the RNC sure doesn't want to lose its hold on power. So the Ivy League Bushes will toe the RNC line, which means going where they can rely on (a) money, and (b) votes. Money is easy; the question is a predictable voting bloc - and the religious right is unparalleled in modern history for being able to deliver votes.
So Dubya and the Bushes are NOT going to do anything to piss off the fundies. Remember that it was the Bush 1 Justice Dept which announced they would not enforce an ordered injunction against pro-life demonstrators - so this is nothing new, and they don't really have a lot of respect for law as a principle, only as it controls power.
Sure, Falwell & Dobson doesn't represent Joe Republican. But his buddies have so much influence with the RNC that Joe Republican should ask himself if he should be voting Republican. He may not care about Scalia, but he probably should care about what the Patriot Act, and indefinite indiscriminate wars will do.
Yeah, I believe in going to war. But I'm sorta an admirer of Sun Tzu - you don't go to war when you don't have a pretty good handle on the result, and you don't put yourself in a position that your back is to the wall, and you HAVE to go to war without knowing how it's going to end.
You've correctly diagnosed the "religious" right as the main thorn in our national side!During the 04 election one of their leaders confided that as long as GW is "pro family,pro life,pro God,he does'nt mind what foreign policy he follows.They voted him in and that's we're at today!
-- Modified on 10/27/2005 8:29:20 PM
Loosely speaking, of course.
Proceeding from my earlier thesis, that personality and debts are the major determinants, you can analyze any politician that way.
I think very few Republicans are not going to be hocked to their chin to the religious right. McCain is one, there's a couple others. But you see what the RNC did to McCain in the primary. They will eat their own children. The RNC has pretty much sold its soul to the fundies; and I think the only thing that will change is when the fundies are discredited, probably by the march of technology. They will get us into a mess that will make us sick, and we'll push them to the sidelines.
The problem with the Democrats is the same as it was in Will Rogers' time - they ain't organized, because they are nothing more than everybody who doesn't like the GOP. Their splinter groups have nothing in common (except being out of power) and they will fight with each other at the drop of a hat, as soon as it looks like they might win. So if 60% of Americans are registered Dem, and 30% Republican, the Republicans STILL win, because the Dems can't get it together - not money, and not votes - hell a lot of Dems don't bother to vote, while the religious right all but forms people up and marches them to the polls.
So the inherent problem is that power corrupts, and that's the GOP problem. You can get good individuals, but they won't be elected often because either (a) they're Democrats, or (b) they won't suck up to the RNC.
It's true that having a fragmented bunch of special interest groups is not a good prospect for government. OTOH, it's usually better than ONE SIG (eg corporate money or fundies) running the show. When that happens, the fringes will go crazy, and there will be Robertsons with major foreign policy influence, and Worldcoms and Enrons.
So the Democrats really don't feel comfy with a John Kerry, because he's not enough of a freak. And the Republicans hate McCain, because he's not a yes-man for their SIGs. And the normal guys who actually work for a living, instead of getting out the vote in the off years, get ignored.
Depends on who you are talking about.
In domestic policies, he's the guy for unbalanced business power, and the religious right. No, he doesn't have a religious bone in his body - but that's where he gets his votes.
Most administrations know not to push too hard, because it creates an obvious disaster. The RNC must realize that for now, war fever is very beneficial to one-party rule, so whenever they can reasonably go to war, they will. IOW, Iraq is less about oil or Saddam or anything over there, and more about the RNC keeping a lock on power. There were arguments either way, and they went for the one that benefited the party, BIG surprise.
Now, when we are facing a more immediate threat than Dubya, he's our man. But you know what? Dubya is a pretty immediate threat himself. The 9/11 commission said that his administration ignored all the warning signals; and it's pretty clear he wasted our money in dealing with Katrina; and that's 2 out of FEMA's big 3 disasters. What do you want to bet they're trying to undercut San Francisco's emergency preparations as we speak?
No, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. But I am amazed at Dubya's consistent recklessness in govt. Exactly what you would expect of a frat boy lush, eh?
or reasonably close might run for office. I mean, there's the philosophical issue fo defining honesty.
But I think it's reasonably possible to find a candidate who has integrity and will look at issues without bias. The question is whether he'll get past all the SIGs and actually get elected.
I really am not worried that a guy likes a BJ, or that he might have puffed a joint back in the 60s. I'm more worried about their straightforwardness. Clinton's sense of honesty was hypertechnical, but it was there. Dubya's sense of honesty is so sloppy that it might as well not be there - yes, he behaves just like a lush. And others have other issues - Carter went overboard, and Nixon WAS a crook. etc. What I'd like to see would be another Eisenhower or Roosevelt - either one.
Danforth Criticizes Christian Sway in GOP
By DANIEL CONNOLLY, Associated Press Writer Thu Oct 27,12:23 AM ET
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - Former Sen. John Danforth said Wednesday that the political influence of evangelical Christians is hurting the Republican Party and dividing the country.
ADVERTISEMENT
Danforth, a Missouri Republican and an Episcopal priest, commented after meeting with students at the
Bill Clinton School of Public Service, a graduate branch of the University of Arkansas on the grounds of the Clinton presidential library.
"I think that the Republican Party fairly recently has been taken over by the Christian conservatives, by the Christian right," he said in an interview. "I don't think that this is a permanent condition, but I think this has happened, and that it's divisive for the country."
He also said the evangelical Christian influence would be bad for the party in the long run.
Republican National Committee spokeswoman Tracy Schmitt declined to comment on Danforth's remarks.
Danforth, who recently served as ambassador to the
United Nations, made similar criticism of the party in an opinion article published by the New York Times in June. In that article, he called for religious moderates to take part in public life.
Danforth, considered a conservative on social issues, was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1976 and served three terms.
I do admire your ability to write a cohesive and well thought out sentence, but each of the ideas you presented is subjective at best. You have facts and dates that litter your arguments, but the premises are concluded subjectively.
Do you work for the RNC? Are you and insider? Or do you read the popular press or worse the Internet?
I guess I will use the power of subjective for my points.
I do not deny that the Christian churches have influenced this nation. I do not deny that the dollar bill had written on it in god we trust for a very long time, but special interest money and power have been hand in hand since the beginning. It takes money to run a government and with that money, power follows. Even Kennedy wanted the power of the presidency. They all pretty much did. Especially once the US became worth it to run.
You very deftly skated over president Clinton’s security issues in china and in the Middle East, but that's ok. I get that. It doesn’t work for your points. (It’s just my opinion, not facts)
Pot or pussy do not make him a liar. But the notion that he was without his "frat house" style of government is funny. Or at least I find it funny. His wife had all of the guys who could have hurt him in his own inner circle either killed or maybe they all dropped dead or committed suicide to help cover his ass? Hell it happened in Philly too with Mayor Street.
I agree with you that until everyone who isn’t part of the RNC gets under one ideal, they will be subjected to the current plan of attack. (And attacking has always been the SOP of any campaign. left or right) The conservatives do not hold the key to the bag of truth, justice and the American way. They seem to be borrowing it right now.
I truly wish that there was something better, but until the talk and/or carping stops and the actions happen, it will remain, basically the same. Or the same until the Chinese take over.
if you want to talk about the past, we can talk about watergate, teapot dome, etc.
OK, sure, BJs are more fun. But I get real tired of hearing about the same old BJ. I mean, can't you get some tapes of Willie Boy buttschtupping somebody?
There's enough that's not subjective. There were no WMDs. 9/11 Commission says that Dubya screwed up. Dubya moved money away from the Nawlins dikes to something else, thereby aggravating the #2 FEMA disaster. Danforth is telling his own party what we've all known for 10 years. Spin those any way you want.
for a Republican, feelings trump facts any day of the week. Hell, y'all can't remember but a dozen facts, and Willie's BJ has to be 3 of them.
The present is just a manifestation of the past, again. (lol) Yep there is tit for tat in the land of dishonesty. Republican and Democrat alike. Each had had its influences that did not coalesce with the majority, but that is why we have the freedom to carp. As well as the freedom to assemble and vote.
Carp away my friend. It is free and only those who are with you and against you will care. If you want to go work at the RNC and help change things... I will stand in awe. I would be even willing to help you.
You want change, be a part of it. Run for office. Help support a candidate that lives up to the litmus of never been dishonest. Again do it for the RNC and you will be doing it for the good of the county. Think about it... if the world helped thier enemy be better, just think how nice it would be..... ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz (I think that was from the art of war)
Good luck. I appreciate your opinions. I do not have to agree, but that is my freedom.
cooperate with the religious right and corporate scamsters who control the GOP these days. Who thinks they could?
Then toss in the fact that they are willing to smear the military records of both McCain and Kerry in the name of a low-life who doesn't even know whether he showed up for reserve drills, and what you're talking about is a morally corrupt organization that needs a week's horsewhipping. I'd rather swim in pig shit than work with the RNC.
And get what you get. You deserve it. You say its broken and you say you have all this proof, but the only thing you are willing to do about it is carp?
Hmmmmmm ......
OK well then have fun being mad. Keep shouting your insults and facts into the wind and see who cares?
The road is filled with loudmouthed do nothings. Its rare air to see someone who does something that they believe in.
you're claiming that victims of crime, ie taxpayers whose got criminals for politicians, deserved it. Real people - ie, ones with jobs - have very little influence in politics, and deserve honest govt. That's a fundamental American principle that doesn't seem to impress you.
In my situation, contributing $$ is the most effective thing I can do, and believe me, I do.
You, on the other hand, seem to enjoy what you've got. That's pretty sick.
-- Modified on 10/30/2005 2:35:49 PM
I am saying that deserving something is a overused idea. You have no knowledge of what I do or what I dont do. You dont even know if I am a republican or a democrat?
Victims of a crime have a choice. they can be a victim once or they can be a victim over and over. They can stand like ghandi or MLK or rosa parks, for a world where hate is not an issue. Everything is a possibility until you say it isnt. Then it becomes facts that have no options for anything but who's right and who's wrong.
I am saying that if the building is on fire as you have infered pick up the hose and put it out. I can tell you from experience, yelling so called facts at the fire does no good..
I guess if the founding fathers were to have said, well I dont have political power or maybe if I complain and give money, it might change. No they offered up thier lives, but even more important than their lives they offered thier sacred word.
So as i said before, call me what you want. Say what you want. It is your freedom to do so.
because you like the situation.
To contend that everybody in the USA can remake the govt the way they like it is so wildly unrealistic that you must be (a) high or (b) Libertarian. Same thing, I suppose.
The govt exists to protect its citizens from crime. Your concept that victims of crime are responsible for the crime is complete horseshit.
They are only responsible for what it means.
If someone is raped, it is not about them, it is about the rapist. To think anything else limits who you are. You become a vicitm, end of story. I say take on a world where rape occurs. Create a world where rape is not an option.
Think its too hard?
as for your point that one person cant make changes in governement, then I guess you think Ghandi was full of horseshit? That anyone who stood for something bigger than themselves and sacraficed everything for it is full of horsehit.
I had dinner with mother theresa in 1985. It was a 25k per plate affair. When her food came out she asked how much the dinner cost. She then asked for the 25k and offered the dinner back, she said that she would rather not eat and use the money for her people. She asked everyone, in attendance, who among them deserved this meal.
I was ashamed with myself thinking that I some how deserved to be there and that becasue i paid my money i was somehow doing something for the world. Everyone was changed that night. I still coorespond with several from that night and each one has gone on to make a difference in thier community. Some of them have changed the world, some have changed it for one person. both are miracles.
So think what you will, but please never underestimate what one person can do in this world.
and before you say it... What made them any different than you or me? It wasnt power, money or education.
what was it? I'd like to know. I have an idea, but I dont know for sure.
I believe that if you found a problem worthy of your life you would take it on as a possibility. It seems those who only complain are usually bored with thier problems and need ones that are really worthy.
Pres bush is not worthy of your life. some of the things you believe in are. Go make a change. The world is waiting.
Feh.
And i thought that liberals were all into shrinks?
I'm just someone who believes in endless possibility.
I have seen it work, so I believe.
It's not a matter of whether something works. If you hadn't ever taken an economics course, or opened your eyes, you may not realize that almost anything will work once, simply because humans are adaptive and even contrarian.
The issue is why it works and whether is works for most people, which are related. If you are speaking for a group, it makes no sense to advocate a solution that can by definition only work for a small group.
Eg, the usual Libertarian solution is fine, except that it assumes a large infrastructure that it didn't pay for and doesn't maintain, ie, it's self defeating after a term of maintenance. That's cool if you don't care about your children, but most of us do.
my education and my political affiliation.
and you know what assumptions do for you?
Did any of the previously mentioned people make changes for a few or for the masses? Did they bankrupt thier chidren's future for change today? Remember they were average people, and some may have even had less intelligence or education than you.
They just believed in something so much and were willing to be the kind of person who was going to make things happen or lose everything.
You are correct that making a change for your family or a few friends will not immediatly or directly start a political revolution, but what you are not getting is as humans we have no or little clue how our actions effect or impact the world.
Your little or huge contribution may inspire the next ghandi or great leader. You have no idea!
So I will say it again, what ever stage you choose to play, be it the world or the local stage it all is part of the possibility i talked about.
even shrinks can usually manage to come up with something partially coherent or useful.
Here's an easy, "yes or no" question:
Do you really think Dubya is "our guy" after he's made it clear that he'll stab ANYBODY who crosses him in the back - Plame, McCain, ANYBODY? Can you imagine any lower treachery?
If he's "your guy", it has to be because that's OK with you.
-- Modified on 11/2/2005 11:17:19 AM
Cool, hunh?