Political Gum.

[JanS]

New Resident…read my lips…I am not threatened by her…I’m disgusted by her…or anyone else who would say the things that she has. Life is too short to constantly be accusatory, to be mean spirited, to make a living by saying some of the cruelest things that she can think of at times. I do not consider her a good source of intelligent comment or criticism. We’re all entitled. If you disagree, then more power to you. I simply don’t like the woman, and that’s my right. Please don’t tell me what I am and am not. You do not know me.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/07/entertainment/main1690954.shtml

that article only demonstrates a small portion of how she feels. I’m sure we could come up with many more…but the attack on 9-11 widows was reprehensible.

You don’t like Bill Cllinton, but I doubt that you’re threatened by him. I do like him. I don’t like the president who lied to us and marched us into a war that has cost the lives of thousands of our young people and maimed many thousands more. I remember another war….another group of men at Walter Reed back in the 60’s that I had the privelege of meeting. Everyone of them was learning to walk with one leg, or dealing with no legs..or just one arm…or a prosthesis where a hand used to be. Heroes all…but what a waste of young life. And this president is now going to leave it to someone else to clean up his mistakes.So don’t talk to me about who will be considered a joke as a president.

What I’m saying is…we all have different feelings about these people. If you admire Ann Coulter, that’s your business…I don’t.

Truce?

Share This

[Erik]

Um Jan, didn’t Bush Sr. say “read my lips” too?

Share This

[Anonymous]

Geez NewResident, defending Ann Coulter says more about you and your priorities, than her. And how many years has it been since BJgate. How come whenever republicans can’t debate the issues with anything of substance this is their only fall back. But,but,but Clinton….. And Ken, I always enjoy your posts. You’re always articulate and well informed with facts. Often I’m thinking “what he says”.

Share This

[TheHouse]

Thank you all for your comments. Just a few coments:

I have respect for Wes Clark as a soldier and serviceman for our country, but as a politician I have none. His quote listed above by Ken is factually incorrect. Call me anal on this one, but our government is a republic. Decribing it as a democracy is incorrect. In addition, he states that the country was founded on the priciples of Enlightenment. This reference is only in regards to the ability to practice religion freely. The last part of his quote (I’m assuming) he means that “The Right/Conservatives” are not allowing this discourse to go on. That is pattently false and in fact I could prove to you that “The Left” does more to harm free speech, practice religion and hold classes down than “The Right” if I had enough time to spell it out for you.

If Wes Clark is the best lib you can muster up then you’ve got issues.

As for good ol’ Ann, I think it’s safe to say that she’s got a sense of humor. Hillary is already getting beat by Obama in the Primaries. Anns endorsement for Hillary is the kiss of death for both Clinton and McCain. The Republicans know that Obama is the easier candidate to beat and that Romney is the GOPs favorite right now. Ann knows what she’s doing.

Share This

[Ken]

Woo hoo!

A new topic

In addition, he states that the country was founded on the priciples of Enlightenment.

This reference is only in regards to the ability to practice religion freely.

If that were true then we would not be able to find and cite any evidence to support that contention in the historical record. Note there are lots of original documents online now and more coming every day.

Is that really a competition you seek to participate in with anything other than the mangled quotes and revisionist history of Federer, Barton and LeHaye?

If this is your proposal, I accept.

You first. :)

Share This

[JanS]

Hi, House…thanks for the input….and thanks for getting this started – lol…I think the Repubs had better get on the ball at the primaries if Romney is their man…he’s not quite in the forefront right now. Ann Coulter…sense of humor…well, I suppose she thinks she has one. I sometimes feel that she says what she says not because she believes it but because of the impact it makes on others…obviously it’s impacted me in a negative way…and I think she revels in that. And I think she’s impressed with herself…likes to hear herself talk :-) I figured you’d probably like her….hehehe…

Share This

[TheHouse]

Ken, I don’t profess to be an expert on the Constitution or the framers. That was my interpertaion of Clarks quote. That doesn’t mean that I won’t shy away from a good old fashioned debate. Throw the first jab.

As for Coulter, she’s a self indulgent pig and I’m not a particular fan.

I believe that it will be an Obama/Romney race. The GOP has not begun to unload on Obama since they’ve been attempting to keep Clinton at bay (she was the real threat). Once Obama wins the Democratic ticket, the GOP is going to have a field day with him. You’re going to see his lack of experience shine. Charisma and a pretty smile will only go so far.

Share This

[JoB]

LOL.. what did i do?

I have to say that House really said it all on this one:

“As for good ol’ Ann, I think it’s safe to say that she’s got a sense of humor. Hillary is already getting beat by Obama in the Primaries. Anns endorsement for Hillary is the kiss of death for both Clinton and McCain. The Republicans know that Obama is the easier candidate to beat and that Romney is the GOPs favorite right now. Ann knows what she’s doing.”

Thank you for pointing out the obvious. IT WAS ALL A SHOW!!!! A put up job. A campaign tactic.

And yet, she seemed so believable. She was soooo serious when she said she wasn’t kidding.

So house, thanks for pointing out that their “news” program (Hammity and Colmes) was really either an outright lie or some sort of joke… entertainment really.

Wish you’d tell my brother. He thinks that program is real republican/democratic debate.

That is what is called a blatant lie which passed for news commentary on the FOX channel.

Or.. maybe a joke?

I hope you’re right and that woman really does have a sense of humor..

because if she doesn’t, she’s just a liar.

Share This

[Anonymous]

Wow. Everyone is sooo defensive!! Thanks for assuming that I’m not intelligent enough to debate an therefore am just falling back on the Clinton scandal. The fact that OUR President will look America in the eye and LIE disturbs me. I love when liberals say that a blow job never hurt anybody!! Does anybody have any morals anymore?!! Ken, you even went so far as to share a quote that alludes to the fact that you would have lied in the same situation! Your wife, if you have one, must be so proud. The man was disbarred!! And, you know what, all you bleeding hearts,war is Hell! Nobody likes it, nobody wants it. Sometimes it’s necessary. Does ANYBODY remember 2 jet airplanes crashing into and destroying the twin towers? Not to mention the other devastation that occurred that day? Clean up Bush’s mess? If anyone read the 9/11 Commission Report, they would know that the only reason our Country is in this mess is because of the negligence of former President Clinton! Sorry, I thought maybe there were other Republicans out there. Guess I was wrong. I didn’t see the “Liberals Only” sign when I signed up. Closing this subject…. I’m not going to be ganged up on by a bunch of liberals! Just a tidbit of info… Every great Country throughout history has been destroyed from within.

Share This

[JoB]

NewResident,

Nobody can forget the two planes plowing into the twin towers. believe me. no one.

And the 911 commission did not blame that attack on Bill Clinton’s negligence. They did state that there was a possible opportunity during the “lame duck” period of his presidency when he was busy defending himself against charges stemming from a sexual incident with an intern… that he did not give the order to pursue… but they also noted that there was plenty of US intelligence that was overlooked after President Bush took over the presidency that could have prevented 911 if it had been believed.

After 911, President Bush chose to use US resources to invade Iraq, where there were no terrorists, instead of aggressively pursuing the actual terrorists. This did succeed in bringing terrorism to Iraq and expanding the terrorist movement, but doesn’t seem to have done much about AlQuaida… the people who arranged those fateful planes.

There is plenty of blame to go around for this one.

As for Bill Clinton keeping his pants buttoned.. we all wish he had. Like i said on this site already, Hillary ought to have gotten him a puppy sooner.

But i haven’t heard the public outcry from Republicans over Gulliano’s treatment of his wife… or should i say, ex-wife… or the other Republican incidents within the past couple of decades. So upset about cheating seems to have been restricted to Bill Clinton.

One could argue that spending public resources hounding a man to the point where he lied about sexual contact… all for political gain.. actually contributed to 911 because he thought he wouldn’t have the backing of the congress to launch a strike.

I don’t assume that anyone i enter into conversation with is stupid. I certainly don’t assume you are. And i think that it adds to the conversation when all viewpoints are present.

But the trouble is that a lot of discourse is simply inflammatory… and that is not conversation.

My personal issue with Ann Coulter and with FOX news is that they are inflammatory and are often less than candid about the content of their remarks. Lest you think i am beating around the bush… that means i believe they don’t exactly bother making sure what they say is true and they present programs like Hammity and colmes as though they were actually presenting two sides of an issue.

Unfortunately, it isn’t just my belief. Fox news was sued over the truth of the content of one of their news programs and the party suing lost the suit. it seems there is no place within US law that states that a news must be true. It’s just an industry standard that news should be true and there is noone holding the industry to that standard.

Just like the claim that FOX news is America’s most listened to news source. It isn’t. It is only America’s most popular cable news source.. but that gets lost in the telling, doesn’t it.

Now, i believe you are an intelligent persona and that you will check to see whether what i just told you is true.

You can choose to do with that information whatever you think is best.

I can inform, but i can’t form your opinion for you any more than you can form mine.

That doesn’t mean that both of us don’t have intelligent and worthwhile things to say.

Share This

[JanS]

NR….”The fact that OUR President will look America in the eye and LIE disturbs me.” So…should I read this to mean that your present president disturbs you too…since he lied to get us into the war in Iraq? Those WMD’s? Never existed. 9/11? Iraq had nothing to do with that. Just thought I’d ask, since I didn’t want to assume that you are equally upset at “W”….

Share This

[TheHouse]

Jan, incorrect. Iraq housed many of the terrorists and allowed funds to be passed through for terroristic activity. They certainly weren’t the 1st or only country to do this.

Debating whether or not we should have gone to war is futile. It’s like standing at the scene of an accident and bitching about who caused it. The fact of the matter is that we’re there and the job needs to be completed correctly.

I do not think for a second that our President blatently lied to Americans. I believe that he was acting with the best interest of our country based on the information that he was being provided. We’ve already established over the past 8 years that the CIA was flawed from the top down (not created by Bush), so it is plausible that they information that he was receiving was flawed. I’ve stated that George Bush faced decisions that no other person in the history of the great country has ever had to face. As leader of the country, he is accountable but realistically he acts on what his advisors tell him. He was not perfect and hindsight is always 20/20.

As for Bill Clinton, no blow jobs don’t kill people but Bill Clinton did kill morality. He showed every young kid in the United States that the President can blatantly lie. He looked every citizen in the United States in the eyes and lied and it was about something as little as a extramarital affair.

Notice that Republicans “self police” each other when it comes to things that Clinton did (ie, Newt fell from grace when he came clean, the guy in Idaho in the bathroom stall got kicked to the curb, etc). The Libs don’t do that because once again their standards and morals are “moving targets”. One day a BJ is OK and the next day it’s not.

Share This

[WSMom]

I’d like to throw out a thought. What if we all decided to reconsider what 9-11 means to us. What if we start looking at the event as a lawless tragedy worthy of measured response, but not a catastrophe calling for war?

As NR says “Does ANYBODY remember 2 jet airplanes crashing into and destroying the twin towers? Not to mention the other devastation that occurred that day?” Yes, of course we all remember, we’re reminded constantly that we should all be afraid, so afraid that we must sacrifice our personal liberties in the name of fear. But really, how many of us were personally impacted. My family didn’t lose a job, our govt didn’t shut down, still got my mail, refugees didn’t flood neighboring states, etc. Did this act warrent the huge response: two wars, guantanamo bay, torture, creation of homeland security, 6 trillion dollar deficit?

I believe that the Republican administration wants me to live in fear so that they can concentrate more power and money to the fewest possible people without me raising a fuss. All they have to do is raise up the 9-11 banner and we’re all supposed to fall on our knees and be grateful for their protection. I wonder if we’re all being played like lovely Ann backing Hillary?

Share This

[picklemom]

Ann Coulter is an amoral, unpatriotic attention ho. She is an embarrassment to all decent Republicans, conservative and moderate alike. They should distance themselves from this mean-spirited skank. She’s as loony as Britney Spears, but I feel some pity for Spears and only contempt for the Coult-hearted lunatic. Some choice Coulter quotes:

The ethic of conservation is the explicit abnegation of man’s dominion over the Earth. The lower species are here for our use. God said so: Go forth, be fruitful, multiply, and rape the planet — it’s yours. That’s our job: drilling, mining and stripping. Sweaters are the anti-Biblical view. Big gas-guzzling cars with phones and CD players and wet bars — that’s the Biblical view.

Oil Good; Democrats bad; October 12, 2000

God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, ‘Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It’s yours.’

Fox News; Hannity & Colmes; June 20, 2001

They’re [Democrats] always accusing us of repressing their speech. I say let’s do it. Let’s repress them. Frankly, I’m not a big fan of the First Amendment.

Share This

[JoB]

house,

so i get that you think that it was a good idea for the American taxpayers to spend all of that money digging into Bill Clinton’s one sexual incident with an intern?

I am sure Ken can tell us how much.. i just know it was too much.

And that all out pursuit of this and the resulting American focus on whether we should impeach Bill Clinton for lieing was worth neglecting other issues.. such as national security.

The planning and financing for 911 occurred while America was worried about whether Bill Clinton kept his pants zipped. And Republicans created that discussion.

So you honestly believe all of that was worth the expense to this nation because in the end Bill Clinton tried to weasel out of informing his wife and family on national television that he had sexual contact … not sex… with an intern… and Republicans could rise up in moral outrage and say “he’s a liar”.

Get a grip!

We democrats didn’t treat your President that way even though we had far more reason.

Terrorism didn’t exist in Iraq before 911. It was a dictatorship and Saddam didn’t allow any competition. He killed anyone who tried to amass anything which looked liked power or influence…

And could you please site references for this money that was supposed to have floated through his country?

Wrong country House. The country you are talking about is Egypt.

and you haven’t made a peep about them

The hijackers were Egyptians House, not Iraqis.

As for those infamous Weapons of Mass destruction… we can find Hussein in a hole in the ground but the weapons were there … we just couldn’t find them. Yeah right.

This is a dead horse.

The facts speak for themselves. There were no WMD. Saddam had nothing to do with the terrorist acts on America. We entered a war with no exit strategy and no plan for controlling the massive unrest and resulting long term American presence that Dick Cheney told America was the reason for leaving Iraq quickly the first time.

I can see where you can make some kind of defense for the President being as misled as the rest of us… I suppose he could just be a fool…But there is no getting around Dick Cheney. The videotape of him explaining why getting out of Iraq was in America’s best interests the first time is unequivocal and cites all of our current problems there.

True patriotism is putting aside political maneuvering for the good of the country. And in that respect, democrats are the true patriots.

So huff and puff, call us all unpatriotic if you will House and keep repeating justifications that turned out to be just stories. Tell us how smart Ann Coulter is. Frighten America to death. Your own words betray you.

Now if you want to talk substantive differences between the Republican and Democratic candidates… that might be an interesting conversation. But just getting everyone all riled up so none of us can sleep just isn’t cutting it.

Share This

[JoB]

picklemom,

i don’t know whether to laugh, cry or applaud you.

Nice use of the Ann’s own words.

Not sentiments even most conservatives would be willing to endorse.

but she’s a smart woman :)

Share This

[TheHouse]

Debating in written words is very difficult. JoB, that rant that you wrote wasn’t necessary and was full of incorrect assumptions about me. You deflected the entire Clinton discussion toards whether it was worth it to investigate. If he told the truth there would not have been an investigation on this (don’t forget that the Clintons were investigated at least 2 other times as well).

As for backing the fact that Iraq funded terrorism, it has been reported many times in the media, but here are a few links:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/011/990ieqmb.asp

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/08/27/iraq.cell/

I will grant you that the 9/11 commission and George Tenant have stated that there were so specific links to al-Qaida, but he has funded other terrorists. Once again (as I stated above) he certainly wasn’t the 1st or only leader to do so.

I also never called you unpatriotic. However, stating that Democrats are patriots in general is an emotional, not factual statement.

I also stated that I don’t like Ann Coulter.

I’m quite used to debating with “liberals” like you JoB. Generally speaking liberals like to assign passionate words and terms to people that oppose their way of thinking to muster up sentiment. I am not a crazy religious conservative and I am not a right wing nut job. I’m grounded in people taking accountability for themselves and I support goverment removing themselves from our lives as much as possible.

Although not confirmed, you seem like you write a (D) next to your name. I would ask yourself if you need others to make decisions for you? I would ask yourself if you feel like a high percentage of your paycheck should go to other people? If your answer to any of these questions is “Yes” then you should vote Democrat. I feel the opposite, so will never vote for a Democratic candidate. That doesn’t mean that I’d vote necessarily with a Republican, but I allign closer with them then with the BIG Ds.

This is beating a dead horse. I’m going down to the Junction to make fun of all of the libs dancing back and forth across the street. I really enjoy challanging those losers (PS …speak to many of the business owners around the Junction and they despise those people)

Share This

[Ken]

You guys are doing fine without me. I gotta go knock on doors and get people to the caucus next weekend (Saturday February 9th at 1:00 PM)

Check the caucus threads for links to when and where. Or go to our own 34th Dems caucus site at

http://www.34dems.org

I am starting a piece on the history of the American revolution and the usage and evolution of the terms “Republic and Democracy” as well as the usage of the terms Republican and Democrat.

Quick teaser, the Party Thomas Jefferson started was the Democrat-Republican Party. The original Republican party was made up of the remnants of the Whigs and the newer Federalist. This party died out and was eventually replaced by the “New” Republican party “Founded in 1854 by anti-slavery expansion activists and modernizers,”. So in 1854 the Republicans were indeed the party of reform, and change.

Check it out on wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat-Republican_Party

The Democratic-Republican Party, also known as the Republican Party (not related to the present-day Republican Party), was founded by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in 1792. It became the dominant political party until the 1820s, when it split into competing factions, one of which became the modern-day Democratic Party. Its members identified the party as the Republicans, Jeffersonians, Democrats,[1] or combinations of these (such as Jeffersonian republicans).[2]

—-

!) Address of the Republican committee of the County of Gloucester, New-Jersey … Gloucester County, December 15, 1800 and the last nominating caucus of the Party. (February 6, 1824) “Anti Caucus/Caucus”. Washington Republican.

2) Mathews, Dictionary of Americanisms (1951)

When we look at the quotes from that time, we must remember that the word “republic” was used to differentiate from “democracy” because Democracy was used to indicate the direct democracy of the Athenians , while a republic referred to the (somewhat) representative democracy of the Romans in their early empire.

More on this later…

:)

Share This

[charlabob]

“However when it comes to policy “Wes Clark, Madeline Albright and Ambassador Holbrook ” are a pretty substantial lineup, don’t you think?”

Hey, I got so wrapped up in the rest of this thread that I forget who posted this (J0?) But it pretty well summarizes why this heart-broken Edwards woman is has both feet and her credit cards in the Obama camp. I don’t want a majority of retreads TO COME BACK. They’re fine as advisors — we need new blood, starting at the top. I heard some alleged progressive recommend Chuck Hegel for Secretary of State in an Obama administration. I shrieked for a full five minutes.

OTOH, I won’t support Edwards as Attorney General — I want to see him as Commerce Secretary. His name on the business card would be enough to convince the thieves of big bidness (Molly Ivins, where are you when we need you?) to be afraid. And, btw, I’m not anticapitalist at all — I’d love to see it implemented. Since the supreme court decided business was a person, in the 1800s, any vestiges of capitalism were subsumed by the oligarchs. No wonder Putin and Bush are soul brothers. I want my country back. I want my constitution back. And, to anyone who asks, I’m embarassed by how little we pay to the common good — I’m embarassed that our schools, our infant mortality rate, our … are closer to third world countries than to countries in our position.

I appreciate all of the discussion on the WSB forums–I most appreciate Ken’s research and informed postings — leaving room for my raw, ungoogled passion :-) See you-all sometime.

(K, what precinct are you in?)

Share This

[Ken]

Back in for lunch :)

Sea 34-1490 is mine. It wraps around the north end of the Seattle housing authority Highpoint redevelopment.

I put up signs for both 1490 and 1485.

sea34-1485 is all the land covered by SHA Highpoint whether it is subsidized rental or market rate townhouses and condos.

This pdf has a list of area caucus locations by precinct.

http://www.34dems.org/Docs2008/Caucus-Sites-34th-District-01-31-08.pdf

Share This

[WSB]

Everybody please be nice if anybody drops in looking for info; we just put up a caucus info link to a WSB post and a mention of the election forums that will stay in the upper right spot on all pages for most of the time till Caucus Day.

Share This

[Sue]

WS Mom, yes, some of us were personally impacted by 9/11. I watched it burn and collapse from my Manhattan office building. I walked among the triage unit of the WTC victims who looked like the walking dead. My husband was unemployed for 18 months after he lost his job a few weeks prior to 9/11 because they gave job search preference to people who lost jobs on 9/11 (thankfully he was laid off – he would’ve been at the WTC at the time of the attack, but it was still hard). And a member of our church was killed that day. But I still don’t support the war and never have.

Share This

[Anonymous]

For those who think the 911 commission report is the final word.

http://www.komotv.com/news/national/15159246.html

WASHINGTON (AP) – The Sept. 11 commission’s executive director had closer ties with the White House than publicly disclosed and tried to influence the final report in ways that the staff often perceived as limiting the Bush administration’s responsibility, a new book says.

Share This

[JoB]

Ken,

“If he told the truth there would not have been an investigation on this (don’t forget that the Clintons were investigated at least 2 other times as well).”

yes, the Clintons were investigated at least 2 other times before and it was in the wake of the 3rd investigation that they finally found their smoking clinton gun… sorry i couldn’t resist the pun… of a sexual escapade… which they then proceeded to use to embarass the President.

Long story short.. had the Mr Clinton admitted to the sexual escapade up front, there would have been exactly nothing to charge him with. It was only when he tried to keep that incident private… not public… that anything was found after 3 long investigations.

That does nothing to dismiss the fact that the country’s energy had been repeatedly focused on the continuing “need” to investigate the Clintons on any pretext possible. That was a huge waste of taxpayer money and diverted attention from things that we now know should have received a lot more attention.

It’s apparant that you believe in the smoking gun theory… there is no investigation unless there was something to investigate and if nothing was found.. then they just didn’t look far enough. I don’t. i just see it as a tremendous waste of time and energy. And in the end.. much ado about very little.

If you really want the government out of your private business, how do you justify it’s poking it’s nose into Bill Clinton’s? Just because it could.

Well, it can poke itself into yours just as easily… in fact more easily now with the patriot act. Just ask those Americans who have been caught in the crossfire of suspicion because their name is similar to someone else’s or because they happened to marry someone of middle eastern descent.

As for Saddam funding terrorism, again, there were no links to his funding of Al Quaida.. and Al Quaida was responsible for 911.

Was he a terrorist. Yes. He certainly terrorized his own people. Would he have funded terrorist acts against the United states if he had been able to afford them, control them and directly benefit from them. Probably.

But, our own government has done the same. Does that mean that someone should unilaterally invade us and depose our president if someone other than us terrorizes them? Probably not.

old news House. Doesn’t change anything.

“I would ask yourself if you need others to make decisions for you?”

No i don’t.

I resent a bunch of political cronies deciding to spend my countries resources (time, money & attention) on continuing groundless prosecutions such as those that were conducted against the Clintons without asking the American people whether they thought this was worthwhile.

I resent my President deciding that we are going to invade another country and using an unconnected terrorist act as justification.

I resent my congress not being given all the information available before voting to fund such a course because they are entrusted with being the check on such unilateral actions.

I resent the bulk of money for fighting terrorism being spent in Iraq and not directed towards the root of AlQuaida.

I resent the use of private security forces such as Blackwater in Iraq without oversight and the attempt to make them immune from all prosecution. I don’t believe that the American people even know the extent of the use our White House has made of private “security forces” Blackwater in our own country (New Orleans being the most blatant example)…and i don’t remember hearing about congressional authorization for that.

I resent the appropriations for disaster relief in New Orleans being used to fund “urban renewal” instead of aiding the actual victims of that disaster.

I resent that my President decided to trust his “gut feeling” that Global Warming was misrepresented and that his office censored EPA officials who tried to voice the scientific consensus.

No, I don’t want decisions that affect my safety and well being made for me.

I could go on and on as to the number of decisions my President and his office have made for me without asking. In fact, in some cases, totally ignoring and going against public opinion.

Not one of those were decisions were made by the democratic party for me.

So i have to ask about the relevance of that statement Was it was just pandering to emotion?

“I would ask yourself if you feel like a high percentage of your paycheck should go to other people?

It already does. your point?

A high percentage of my paycheck goes to fund a war that i don’t agree with.

A high percentage of my paycheck goes to fund corporate bailouts after their own greed causes them to collapse and carry the rest of the economy down with them… or simply to subsidize their profits.

A high percentage of my paycheck goes to give tax relief to people who don’t need it and didn’t even ask for it while the alternative minimum tax is putting the resulting tax burden right on the backs of middle class wage earners.

As a democrat, I admit, i would prefer that if my government was going to subsidize anything, i prefer people over corporations and those in need over the rich.

if nothing else, as a fiscal conservative, i think it is pure stupidity not to fund prevention programs like basic health care, nutrition, education and after school programs in favor of funding prisons and burdening our health care system by delivering health care to the indigent through the most expensive venue possible… our hospital emergency rooms… Those of us who are insured get to directly pick up the tab for that. That’s all a waste of my money when we could spend less on prevention and get more benefit..

Nothing emotional about that… though i admit i feel very strongly about all of those issues.

You can call that a rant if you like.

As for Ann.. i think all of America has spent far too much time and attention on her misdirection.

And for the last bit.. patriotism. i was careful to define how i used the word patriotism and in that context it is a true statement.

The democrats have had the power to pursue direct investigations of presidential and vice-presidential misconduct for some time and have chosen to focus the nations resources on ending the conflict in Iraq that they probably wouldn’t have chosen if all the facts had been available to them. They have chosen to focus on the nation’s priorities… little things like national security and the economy… over protracted and messy political investigations and subsequent prosecutions.

They haven’t desisted because there isn’t plenty that ought to be investigated and prosecuted… or because their constituents want them to hold back. It just isn’t a justifiable use of resources at this point… it isn’t in the country’s best interests.

Caring about your country’s best interests over your own political gain is patriotism.

I’m done. As Ken has pointed out, there are more important things to do right now.

Share This

[TheHouse]

You’re very passionate in your views. I could refute many of the comments that you make above in brevity, but like you said there are more important things to do right now.

Since Global Warming is causing our state to see more snow that it has seen in a very long time I’m going out to buy some chains for my SUV.

Tah Tah!

Share This

[Author]

Posts