Thanks, democrats.
It’s been fun watching your first 100 days.
I can’t tell you how much faith we have that you are looking out for the greater good.
You have principled leaders who care about national issues.
Thanks, again,
JeffR
Did he tell him to “go fuck yourself”, like Dick Cheney told Patrick Leahy?
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Thanks, democrats.
It’s been fun watching your first 100 days.
I can’t tell you how much faith we have that you are looking out for the greater good.
You have principled leaders who care about national issues.
Thanks, again,
JeffR[/quote]
Nancy Pelosi is a criminal as is Harry Reid. They should be indicted for their crimes. Reid should be thrown out on his ear for betraying our troops working on liberating Iraq and Afghanistan.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Thanks, democrats.
It’s been fun watching your first 100 days.
I can’t tell you how much faith we have that you are looking out for the greater good.
You have principled leaders who care about national issues.
Thanks, again,
JeffR
Nancy Pelosi is a criminal as is Harry Reid. They should be indicted for their crimes. Reid should be thrown out on his ear for betraying our troops working on liberating Iraq and Afghanistan.
[/quote]
And Tom DeLay should be in prison, and is a racist dick.
Politicians suck. We get it. Get over it.
Prove to me, right now, that a Republican has never broken a rule in Congress. In fact, prove the Dems do it more. Prove this Congress is any worse than a majority of Congress’s we’ve had.
Ready… set… go!
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
And Tom DeLay should be in prison, and is a racist dick.
Politicians suck. We get it. Get over it.
Prove to me, right now, that a Republican has never broken a rule in Congress. In fact, prove the Dems do it more. Prove this Congress is any worse than a majority of Congress’s we’ve had.
Ready… set… go![/quote]
Question: does what you say have anything to do with the critique of the Democratic Congress?
Beowolf, unfortunately you fall into a habit of offering up nothing but red herrings as answers: raise a complaint about a Democrat, you cite a Republican doing something not good. Someone raises a criticism of Islamic society, you raise misdeeds done in the name of Christianity.
These are red herrings - they are irrelevant to the proposed point. What Tom DeLay (whom I despise, you should know) does has no relevance to an examination of the actions of the Speaker of the House.
That is because, TB, these things they point out are not to other answers. They are to provide “proof” for the assertion that one is better than the other.
I cite Christian wrong-doing to show that Islam, as a religion, isn’t an all evil cult.
I cite GOP stupidity to prove that stupidity is non-partisan.
JeffR doesn’t want to help congress by offering solutions, he wants to assert that the GOP was doing better, which it wasn’t. You cannot simply “point it out”, like Rush, when you say it, your implying it.
The problem is, I acknowledge my side is wrong. I acknowledge the Dems haven’t been amazing. But they did raise the minimum wage, and they did start cracking down on cronism.
When I cite bad things the US has done, and you just say “They’re worse!”, that doesn’t take away the bad things. You (in general as you, TB, often do) don’t acknowledge faults. I do.
And, for the record, the Tom DeLay thing was again to disprove that this Congress is an worse than the last. This is not an assessment of the Congress, this is an attack on the democrats.
Assessments include suggestions for answers. Attacks just “innocently point things out”.
And yes, I’m well aware the Dems attack the GOP regularly. I wish they’d start coming up with some goddamn answers for the questions they so often attack. Thats why I back candidates who seem to at least have some kind of convictions (Mike Gravel).
there are two parties, but clearly they are not opposites. to expect one party to be the opposite of another is a deliberate mental trap and it was designed that way.
sure, people can hope for one party to clean up DC for a while, but much like a pendulum things change. dems in favor pubes in favor, back and forth.
if we really had a democracy, we’d own the airwaves (no, we really don’t), and there will be real debates sponsored and ran by the league of women voters, more than two parties and instant run-off voting with paper ballots. right?
[quote]florianopolis wrote:
there are two parties, but clearly they are not opposites. to expect one party to be the opposite of another is a deliberate mental trap and it was designed that way.
sure, people can hope for one party to clean up DC for a while, but much like a pendulum things change. dems in favor pubes in favor, back and forth.
if we really had a democracy, we’d own the airwaves (no, we really don’t), and there will be real debates sponsored and ran by the league of women voters, more than two parties and instant run-off voting with paper ballots. right?
[/quote]
You’re on the verge, florianopolis. Care to take the step and tell us exactly what we have, and how to fix it?
public financing is a good start and might actually prevent wars of choice, like iraq. it will add like only 4 bucks to our federal/state taxes and it MAY help things from going nuts and ignoring human and environmental NEEDS over corporate WANTS.
am i too idealistic? yeah, you know what? i am on the verge of something. we should all just throw our hands up in the air, give up reform of any kind and just read The Secret…
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Thanks, democrats.
It’s been fun watching your first 100 days.
I can’t tell you how much faith we have that you are looking out for the greater good.
You have principled leaders who care about national issues.
Thanks, again,
JeffR
Nancy Pelosi is a criminal as is Harry Reid. They should be indicted for their crimes. Reid should be thrown out on his ear for betraying our troops working on liberating Iraq and Afghanistan.
[/quote]
Only if Bush gets indicted first.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Thanks, democrats.
It’s been fun watching your first 100 days.
I can’t tell you how much faith we have that you are looking out for the greater good.
You have principled leaders who care about national issues.
Thanks, again,
JeffR[/quote]
Yet another argument for making me King…
I think we should vote out any politition that had anything to do with the past political machine
[quote]pat36 wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Thanks, democrats.
It’s been fun watching your first 100 days.
I can’t tell you how much faith we have that you are looking out for the greater good.
You have principled leaders who care about national issues.
Thanks, again,
JeffR
Yet another argument for making me King…[/quote]
Pat,
I find your comment interesting on many levels.
The SNAKES like orion/lixy like to use the fall of the Romans as their prediction for the U.S.
They drool over the idea. It distracts them from their meaningless existence.
However, if one does them the undeserved honor of thinking about their gibberish, then we are headed for an Emperor.
If we are Rome, we will have an Emperor.
Think of the parallels between 44 BC Rome and 2007 America.
Wait, there aren’t any.
Ok. I’ll keep trying.
For the sake of argument, imagine corruption continues to worsen in government. Imagine the people turning to the strongman, Pat.
Augustus Octavian Patorius Caesar.
AOPC in the house!!!
By the way, under Patorius’ rule, lixy and orion would be in serious trouble.
JeffR
P.S. My head hurts after trying to think like the SNAKES.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
You (in general as you, TB, often do) don’t acknowledge faults. I do.
[/quote]
Patently irresponsible claim.
Further, you never really addressed the problem - there is no need to point out that “stupidity” is bi-partisan.
After all, you disagree with the Iraq war and you say so - why would you bother singling it out, because Democrats have been guilty of the same in the past?
When it comes to Bush, we should narrow in on his transgressions and damn his actions regardless of what others do or have done. Suddenly, when a Democrat is in the news acting badly, we get a chorus (of which you are a part) that says “meh, politicians are corrupt, it’s pointless to single out Democrats, whaddayagonnado…”
Can’t have it both ways. When discussing Murtha or Pelosi, it is no answer to say “Republicans have done wrong too!!!” - at least, not if that isn’t a good answer in reverse when discussing George W. Bush.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
You (in general as you, TB, often do) don’t acknowledge faults. I do.
Patently irresponsible claim.
Further, you never really addressed the problem - there is no need to point out that “stupidity” is bi-partisan.
After all, you disagree with the Iraq war and you say so - why would you bother singling it out, because Democrats have been guilty of the same in the past?
When it comes to Bush, we should narrow in on his transgressions and damn his actions regardless of what others do or have done. Suddenly, when a Democrat is in the news acting badly, we get a chorus (of which you are a part) that says “meh, politicians are corrupt, it’s pointless to single out Democrats, whaddayagonnado…”
Can’t have it both ways. When discussing Murtha or Pelosi, it is no answer to say “Republicans have done wrong too!!!” - at least, not if that isn’t a good answer in reverse when discussing George W. Bush.
[/quote]
But that’s exactly the point of this thread anyway, except JeffR is trying to do what wingnuts always do by saying: "Hey! See guys, there are a small handful of dems that are almost corrupt as the long laundry list of very corrupt republicans. Of course everybody already knew this (For example CREW’s had Murtha on their ethically challenged list for some time), but really posts like this are just to make the 28 percenters feel better.
[quote]lumpy wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
You (in general as you, TB, often do) don’t acknowledge faults. I do.
Patently irresponsible claim.
Further, you never really addressed the problem - there is no need to point out that “stupidity” is bi-partisan.
After all, you disagree with the Iraq war and you say so - why would you bother singling it out, because Democrats have been guilty of the same in the past?
When it comes to Bush, we should narrow in on his transgressions and damn his actions regardless of what others do or have done. Suddenly, when a Democrat is in the news acting badly, we get a chorus (of which you are a part) that says “meh, politicians are corrupt, it’s pointless to single out Democrats, whaddayagonnado…”
Can’t have it both ways. When discussing Murtha or Pelosi, it is no answer to say “Republicans have done wrong too!!!” - at least, not if that isn’t a good answer in reverse when discussing George W. Bush.
But that’s exactly the point of this thread anyway, except JeffR is trying to do what wingnuts always do by saying: "Hey! See guys, there are a small handful of dems that are almost corrupt as the long laundry list of very corrupt republicans. Of course everybody already knew this (For example CREW’s had Murtha on their ethically challenged list for some time), but really posts like this are just to make the 28 percenters feel better. [/quote]
lumpy,
The point, of course, is democrats pledging to clean up Congress. The democrats declaring a new day has begun. The democrats pushing murtha out front on many issues and apparently emboldening him to this sort of recklessness.
Oh, you know full well what I think of polls. However, if you want to hang the performance of the dem Congress on your precious polls, it is abysmal.
I think your Congress is considerably lower than Bush.
It’s always fun when you leave your hole. Welcome back.
JeffR
[quote]100meters wrote:
But that’s exactly the point of this thread anyway, except JeffR is trying to do what wingnuts always do by saying: "Hey! See guys, there are a small handful of dems that are almost corrupt as the long laundry list of very corrupt republicans. Of course everybody already knew this (For example CREW’s had Murtha on their ethically challenged list for some time), but really posts like this are just to make the 28 percenters feel better. [/quote]
Hmm - there simply isn’t much to you, is there?
Seems to me the post is about highlighting some sketchy activity by Murtha and Pelosi and discussing it, completely regardless of what the GOP has or hasn’t done.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
lumpy wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
You (in general as you, TB, often do) don’t acknowledge faults. I do.
Patently irresponsible claim.
Further, you never really addressed the problem - there is no need to point out that “stupidity” is bi-partisan.
After all, you disagree with the Iraq war and you say so - why would you bother singling it out, because Democrats have been guilty of the same in the past?
When it comes to Bush, we should narrow in on his transgressions and damn his actions regardless of what others do or have done. Suddenly, when a Democrat is in the news acting badly, we get a chorus (of which you are a part) that says “meh, politicians are corrupt, it’s pointless to single out Democrats, whaddayagonnado…”
Can’t have it both ways. When discussing Murtha or Pelosi, it is no answer to say “Republicans have done wrong too!!!” - at least, not if that isn’t a good answer in reverse when discussing George W. Bush.
But that’s exactly the point of this thread anyway, except JeffR is trying to do what wingnuts always do by saying: "Hey! See guys, there are a small handful of dems that are almost corrupt as the long laundry list of very corrupt republicans. Of course everybody already knew this (For example CREW’s had Murtha on their ethically challenged list for some time), but really posts like this are just to make the 28 percenters feel better.
lumpy,
The point, of course, is democrats pledging to clean up Congress. The democrats declaring a new day has begun. The democrats pushing murtha out front on many issues and apparently emboldening him to this sort of recklessness.
Oh, you know full well what I think of polls. However, if you want to hang the performance of the dem Congress on your precious polls, it is abysmal.
I think your Congress is considerably lower than Bush.
It’s always fun when you leave your hole. Welcome back.
JeffR
[/quote]
Well, I guess you’d have to look at it in more relative ways… Congress will be cleaner, there will be some accountability, there will be some hope of newer day, there will be more work done, much less stupidity, more honesty, etc. Just because I won’t get perfection doesn’t mean I will vote for what clearly doesn’t work.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
100meters wrote:
But that’s exactly the point of this thread anyway, except JeffR is trying to do what wingnuts always do by saying: "Hey! See guys, there are a small handful of dems that are almost corrupt as the long laundry list of very corrupt republicans. Of course everybody already knew this (For example CREW’s had Murtha on their ethically challenged list for some time), but really posts like this are just to make the 28 percenters feel better.
Hmm - there simply isn’t much to you, is there?
Seems to me the post is about highlighting some sketchy activity by Murtha and Pelosi and discussing it, completely regardless of what the GOP has or hasn’t done.[/quote]
It just seems so…sad…relatively speaking…