I'm not sure how I'm going to feel when this whole thing comes down. Satisfaction to see corrupt politicians defamed, skepticism in the knowledge that these things will probably happen again, anger at what of our democracy they tried to sell out, and maybe a little hope that we'll be just a little bit better for it all.<br><br>-- Charlie Alpha Roger Yankee Whiskey
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> I just hope that the power shifts within the Democratic Party have promoted some better leadership while they have been out of power in the House. <p><hr></blockquote><p>yeah the current Dem leadership has been sittin around with their thumbs up their arses. With all the ammunition the GOP and Bush has given them they should have beaten the GOP leadership to a pulp, and if you look, the GOP leadership is bleeding profusely but mainly due to their own self-inflicted wounds !! The Dem leadership (?- is there one?) has been so lackluster. The GOP is so much better at keying on Dem mistakes and maximizing the damage (aka Clinton-Lewinski) than visa versa.<br><br>And to complete my post I'm going to make a potentially provocative statement. I do NOT want Hillary in 2008.<br>IIMHO- she has pandered too much to the right trying to be centrist and she's not been loyal to her real base. I think there are several GOP candidates that would beat her incl McCain, Guliani, and what about Rice? She is too inflammatory (not her fault-again GOP hyping and selling BS), and no matter how far to the right she moves there are many (30-40%) that would never in 10 E6 years vote for her. I don't have too many axes to grind with her (maybe Iraq), but I just don't think she's electable under the current situation. Lastly, I am NOT against any woman running so don't take my rejection of Hillary as sexist. I really love Diane Feinstein. She was Mayor of SF when I lived out there in the 80's. Sharp lady and I'd follow her anywhere. Pulosi is good too but I don't think she's electable. I know there are others and when it happens I'll be looking forward to a woman President (well 1 exception- Rice lying sack of cr@p). <br><br>How about Warner of VA ?? Gov of a previously "red state" and got his successor elected.<br><br>David (OFI)<br>
#261045 - 01/02/0611:25 AMRe: Which will happen First ?
Maybe Dems are doin' the right thing for a change. Nothin'. Think of corruption within the GOP as a delusional megalomaniac walklin' around with more than enough rope to hang himself. Picture the current administration as a fire that's not worth the waste of gasoline.<br><br>I am completely on the Take a Hike Hillary bandwagon. Dear gawd, the woman's so ambitious her teeth ache when she smiles. I don't believe she has one single solid principle in her pumped up portfolio. When a pol relocates his/her residence to get elected? That pol demonstrates an appetite for office, not a serious commitment to real constituents.<br><br>Maureen Dowd summed it up pretty well ~ If the Dems do nominate Hillary, it'll just prove that the party does have a death wish.<br><br>I don't see this country electin' a woman prez for another ten years. I don't see this country electin' a black woman prez for another lifetime.<br><br>And truth is? I really don't give a rat's ass about presidential gender anyway. <br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>[color:blue]And I'm the one that jaded you . . .</font color=blue>
yep I agree... the Dems need to capture one (or maybe both) house of Congress in 2006, and then nominate a moderate to mildly conservative Dem for 2008. The GOP take-over of everything didn't happen over night and IF they lose all 3 - ti'll take time... I figure at best, it'll be a split govt for a long time.<br><br>I really want the Dems to get one house in 2006 so they can gain Supena powers to delve into Bush's transgretions. That is one reason this douche-bag has gotten away with so much and continues to do so.... GOP Congress is NOT going to ask ANY questions no matter how many illegal acts Bush does.<br><br>David (OFI)<br>
#261047 - 01/02/0612:50 PMRe: Which will happen First ?
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>That is one reason this douche-bag has gotten away with so much<p><hr></blockquote><p>Dave, Dave, Dave ~ You're confusin' him with his mommie. <br><br>Absolutely, if the Dems can retake the Senate or the House, not only will we have a shot at the kind of investigation SnoopGate needs, but we'll enjoy the restoration of a good, ol' fashioned balance of power ~ and, hopefully a Re-United States.<br><br><br><br><br>[color:blue]And I'm the one that jaded you . . .</font color=blue>
My problem is Dems again relaxing, thinking it's over, now the neoCONS've been caught.<br><br>Because so far, every time we assumed that, they do something even MORE horrendous!<br><br>The two things i see coming is:<br><br>A) They're already flip-flopping the LEAK Issue (Switching to OFFENSE) <br>...from being guilty for de-constructing the WoMD Arm of the CIA, and all their <br>contacts, that were there to protect the American people, ---to focussing on <br>some patriot that dared to "blow the whistle" on them, by alerting the public <br>that they have may been under long-term UNLAWFUL surveillance, & that their <br>personal information has been mined, and is being held in a secret data base.<br><br>"OH! THE OUTRAGE! HOW DARE YOU CATCH ME BREAKING THE LAW!"<br><br>B) I keep hearing the phrase; <br> "It WAS against the law, ......UNLESS THE LAW IS CHANGED!" <br><br>LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL<br><br>Well, DUH! <br>Why not just sit and spin until all the paid officials involved in the cover-up<br>can put their heads together with all the neo-CON Judges that have been <br>stuffed into the Supreme Court, and RE-WRITE The LAW To Protect The Guilty? <br><br> <br><br><br>
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>"B) I keep hearing the phrase; <br>"It WAS against the law, ......UNLESS THE LAW IS CHANGED!"<p><hr></blockquote><p>Since when has this been an option... is what I keep asking myself.<br><br>What bothers me more is that the general public may be comatose enough to accept that and consider changing the law, after the fact, is okay.<br><br>
Yeah the BIG question is WHO's going to step in the Dem pool, take control, and LEAD ??<br><br>If roles were reversed, the GOP would be all over this shiite..<br>and there'd be 1000 little goose-stepping right wing "mouths' shouting the same lines over and over and over.. like the swift boat maniacs.<br><br>look at the Dems in the House and Senate and you hear 1 or 2 make an issue of it !! ... the rest are like asleep or zombies or something.<br><br>David (OFI)<br>
What would ever make you think that that's exactly what they're doing?<br><br>It's been there policy all along;<br><br>Hardly anyone pays attention anymore<br>and when someone does find the onions to raise the hew & cry there are <br>people a plenty to shut them up and shout them down ...shamefully, on <br>BOTH sides of the aisle. <br><br><br>Like THE DICK did to those people in the Haliburten Asbestos Case;<br>They were paid off for generations of workers and towns people that will <br>CONTINUE coughing their lives away until they're dead.........<br><br>....and within DAYS... <br>The DICK authored a Bill outlawing those so-called "FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS"<br>against Corporate Criminals, by the demonizing "TRIAL LAWYERS" that <br>sought accountability for the Death & Hardship they leave in their wake.<br><br>OR<br>Like DICK raising another "Good-Job-Brownie" named Roberto Gonzales <br>out of obscurity to the office of Attorney General, exactly on time to<br>REWRITE The DEFINITIONS OF TORTURE ~AFTER~ the Abu Ghraib Torture<br>situation had been found out, ...but just BEFORE it all hit the press.<br><br>Don't you get it?<br>When BUSH & RICE Swear there's no torture, THEY'RE NOT LYING!!!<br>The Definitions of Torture WERE RE-WRITTEN. Now they state that anything <br>short of permanent organ failure, or death, are No Longer Considered Torture.<br><br>OR<br>The Firing of the General in Charge of Oversight of Allocating Funds, ~AFTER~<br>she'd Blown the Whistle on all of the "No-Bid-Contracts" that Haliburten <br>CONTINUES to rake in. ((it was Cheney's Co, Haliburten, that wanted the Oil <br>Pipeline THROUGH Afghanistan, and the CONTRACT (Death-Warrant) they <br>placed on Osama's bin Laden's head when he refused Haliburten's offer that<br>caused him to lash out against us in the first place.))<br><br>And I'm sure there are a lot more instances that never saw the light of day.<br><br>What would ever make you think that that's exactly what they're doing AGAIN?<br><br>You don't think it matters?<br>It was The DICK'S ARMED BlackWater (Mercenaries) "Contractors" that he<br>whistled back from Iraq to patrol the streets of New Orleans, armed w/orders<br>to "SHOOT TO KILL"! Now you know we're under surveillance, what do YOU<br>think will happen when we've finally had more than we care to swallow?<br><br>WE NEED VOTER REFORM NOW! ---Not a Month before the elections, ~ NOW! ~<br>We have to start campaigning NOW for Voter Reform. HOLY HANNA! Black or <br>White PEBBLES in a Stinking Bucket would be better than the Computerized <br>Electronic Machines without a Paper Trail Accountability that the Neo-Con<br>Owned companies have forced down our throat Nation wide by now!<br><br>Otherwise, there'll never be any LEGAL way out of this Downward Spiral to Hell. <br><br><br><br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.