As a moderate Republican I have to say that i think it's unfortunately time for the Republicans to suffer loses in the election. Ideally I would like Democrats to pick up the house and republicans emerge with a 50-50 majority in the Senate (so they could at least bring a supreme court nominee to the floor) I just think there is no other way to convince this president that this BS war has to end.

I will say this though this is one race where I do want to see Republicans pick up and that is New Jersey. Menendez is so so corrupt. It's just lie after lie with him.

Rob,

Most of them do not have strong views on a wide range of issues that they do not see as affecting them directly. Many of these voters are personality and image driven. When I refer to centrists, I am talking about people with defined middle of the road views on a range of issues.

Jim, those voters are most definetly centrists. If you really think about it, these voters are non-ideological because they don't have the left or right ideology. They may hold pieces of both, pro-choice and pro-death penalty for example. These people have biews on everything out there that effects them. I don't think anyone votes for someone becuase of how they look or if they are charasmatic. Those things may help a candidate, but without issues, that candidate will still lose horribly. The unaffiliated voters are definetly unaffiliated, their views don't make the liberal or conservative, and because of that, they are centrists, cause if they weren't centrists, they wouldn't be unaffiliated.

I'd simply like to put to rest once and for all bhoomes claim that the conservatives have a majority. NEITHER side has majority. Liberals have their base and conservatives have their base but neither base makes up more than 1/3 of the total vote. The real majority in this nation are the centrists. Unfortunately for them, no major political party is geared toward them and they have to choose between the Republicans and the Democrats.

The trend in elections is very simple to follow. 1 party gains power, in today's case, it happens to be the Republicans who hold complete power in the trifecta of Senate, House, and Presidency. With this power, the Republicans then abandon many of the political claims that pandered toward these centrists and focus on their main party issues. Those issues don't matter to the centrists and the party out of power brings up ideas that do pander to the middle. The next step puts the minority party in power.

We see this happening today. The Republicans are so far off the board it isn't funny. They have even abandoned their fiscal conservative roots with this huge defecit. Democrats are gaining the support of not only the liberals, but most of the centrists as well, and that will put them in power this year. Democrats will make gains for the next few elections. After that, it will swing back the other way as we try to keep this huge political machine spin balanced.

Neither side has a majority, the country does not lean center right and the last 5 Presidential election prove that. Bush Clinton Clinton Gore Bush. 3 Democrats and 2 Republicans won the popular vote in this country in the past 5 elections. That should tell you something right there.

JEP

Let me be clear about what I am saying - I don't think they should not use the investigative power. I just think they should not go so far as to appear mindlessly partisan. I definitely do not think they should hold impeachment hearings, for example. The Republicans went too far in the Clinton investigations and paid severely at the polls. One of the Dems real image problems with the general public is that they do not seem to stand for anything except being against Bush. They will need to build a legislative record. Reading your second post clarifying what you meant, we are close in our thinking on the subject.

drindl, I agree that there are strong partisan divisions but there is still a pool of unaffiliated, non-ideological voters. I would not even characterize them as centrist or middle of the road. These folks base their vote on their assessment of a candidate's individual character. These voters are essential to a successful presidential campaign.

See my blog http://www.MVTodayblogspot.com although it doesn't mention Lamont's challenge, which I do consider important and would vote for Lamont if I were in CT, my view is that the media owes a complete proper poll of Lamont v Lieberman.

Lamont was drawn into politics to challenge Lieberman because of the Iraq War and the status quo Republican backing of the Bush agenda and the attempt for the morphing of the Democrats as if a true challenge, when the media doesn't seem to want the challenge is a horror story.

Note the Lamont Challenge is REAL. Note people can vote for him and oust Lieberman, the status quo monger? It is a question of principle over politics and the sleazy old boy network and new boy on the block not wanted, but he IS by the PUBLIC...if he can stand tall on principle.

So, where's the beef, media? How is Lamont on the other issues, stop only asking do they like Lieberman, the former good guy now Bush backer? Ask if they think Lamont should and can replace him and help get this country back on track, but present who Lamont is as a new guy...he deserves the issue platforms answered, across the board BEFORE the polling.

See my blog http://www.MVTodayblogspot.com although it doesn't mention Lamont's challenge, which I do consider important and would vote for Lamont if I were in CT, my view is that the media owes a complete proper poll of Lamont v Lieberman.

Lamont was drawn into politics to challenge Lieberman because of the Iraq War and the status quo Republican backing of the Bush agenda and the attempt for the morphing of the Democrats as if a true challenge, when the media doesn't seem to want the challenge is a horror story.

Note the Lamont Challenge is REAL. Note people can vote for him and oust Lieberman, the status quo monger? It is a question of principle over politics and the sleazy old boy network and new boy on the block not wanted, but he IS by the PUBLIC...if he can stand tall on principle.

So, where's the beef, media? How is Lamont on the other issues, stop only asking do they like Lieberman, the former good guy now Bush backer? Ask if they think Lamont should and can replace him and help get this country back on track, but present who Lamont is as a new guy...he deserves the issue platforms answered, across the board BEFORE the polling.

New round of polling over the weekend in House races show things getting much worse for Republicans and incumbants.

1. IN-8
ISU 10/12
Ellsworth(D)55%-Hostettler(R)*32%

2. NY-26
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Davis(D)56%-Reynolds(R)*40%

3. PA 10
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Carney(D)51%-Sherwood(R)*37%

4. OH 15
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Kilroy(D)53%-Pryce(R)*41%

5. TX 22 (Open R)

6. NY 24 (Open R)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Arcuri(D)53%-Meier(R)42%

7. AZ 8 (Open R)
AZ Star 9/19
Giffords(D)48%-Graf(R)36%
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Giffords(D)45%-Graf(R)37%

8. FL 16 (Open R)
RT Strategies/CD 10/1
Mahoney(D)50%-Foley/Negron(R)43%
Research 2000 10/13
Mahoney(D)48%-Foley/Negron(R)41%

9. NM 1
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Madrid(D)50%-Wilson(R)*40%
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Madrid(D)52%-Wilson(R)*44%

10. NC 11
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Schuller(D)51%-Taylor(R)*40%
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Schuller(D)51%-Taylor(R)*43%

11. OH 18 (Open R)
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Space(D)45%-Padgett(R)36%
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Space(D)51%-Padgett(R)42%

12. PA 7
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Sestak(D)52%-Wheldon(R)44%

13. NC 8 (NEW!)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Kissell(D)51%-Hayes(R)*44%

14. IN 2
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Donnelly(D)49%-Chocola(R)*39%
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Donnelly(D)50%-Chocola(R)*46%

15. CT 4
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Farrell(D)46%-Shays(R)*41%

16. AZ 1 (NEW!)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Simon(D)50%-Renzi(R)*46%

17. IL 8
RT Strategies/CD 9/29
Bean(D)*48%-McSweeney(R)45%

18. FL 13 (Open R)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Jennings(D)47%-Bucannan(R)44%

19. LA 2 (New!)
DEM
Jefferson*
Barron
Bartholomew
K Carter
T Carter
Collins
Edwards
Mendoza
Sheppard
REP
Bradley
Lavigne
von Udhe
Kahn (L)
Must reach 50% +1 or December runoff of top two vote getters. Because of this and Mr. Jefferson's legal problems, this is a murky situation and no poll information.

20. CO-7
While other polls had double digit leads for Perlmutter, it has significantly tightened recently.
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Perlmutter(D)47%-O'Donnell(R)47%
Mason Dixon 10/7
Perlmutter(D)45%-O'Donnell(R)39%
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Perlmutter(D)45%-O'Donnell(R)34%

21. IA-1 (Open R)
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Braley(D)34%-Whalen(R)47%
Selzer & Co.9/13
Braley(D)44%-Whalen(R)37%

22. IL-6 (Open R)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Duckworth(D)47%-Roskam(R)47%
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Duckworth(D)46%-Roskam(R)41%

23. IN-9
Survey USA 10/9
Hill(D)48%-Sodrell(R)*46%
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Hill(D)46%-Sodrell(R)*38%

24. WI-8 (Open R)(New!)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Kagen(D)48%-Gard(R)46%

25. MN-6 (Open R)(New!)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Wetterling(D)50%-Bachmann(R)45%
Survey USA 10/6
Wetterling(D)44%-Bachmann(R)47%
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Wetterling(D)43%-Bachmann(R)46%

26. OH-2 (New!)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Wulsin(D)48%-Schmidt(R)*45%
Survey USA 9/19
Wulsin(D)42%-Schmidt(R)*45%

27. CO-5 (New!)
Mason Dixon 10/7
Fawcett(D)37%-Lamborn(R)37%

28. KY-3 (New!)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Yarmouth(D)48%-Northup(R)*48%

29. KY-4
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Lucas(D)46%-Davis(R)*49%
Survey USA 10/9
Lucas(D)44%-Davis(R)*47%
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Lucas(D)36%-Davis(R)*42%

30. MN-1 (New!)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Walz(D)47%-Gutknecht(R)*48%

31. VA-2
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Kellam(D)46%-Drake(R)*48%
Reuters/Zogby 10/2
Kellam(D)46%-Drake(R)*42%

32. WA-8
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Burner45%-Reichart(R)*48%
Reverses the 9/29 RT Strategies poll

33. CT 2
RT Strategies/CD 9/29
Courtney(D)51%-Simmons(R)*45%
Reuaters/Zogby 10/2
Courtney(D)41%-Simmons(R)*44%

34. IA-2 (New!)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Loebsack(D)47%-Leach(R)*48%

35. NJ 7 (New!)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Stender(D)46%-Ferguson(R)*48%

36. NY 3 (New!)
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Majias(D)46%-King(R)*48%

37. OH-1
Cranley(D)-Chabot(R)*

38. VT At Large (Open-I)
Rasmussen 9/24
Welch(D)52%-Rainville(R)41%

39. CO-4 (New!)
Mason Dixon 10/7
Paccione(D)36%-Musgrave(R)*46%-Eidsness(I)7%
Survey USA 9/21
Paccione(D)42%-Musgrave(R)*46%-Eidsness(I)8%

40. VA 10 (New!)
RT Strategies 10/10
Feder(D)42%-Wolf(R)*47%

41. CT-5
RT Strategies/CD 10/10
Murphy46%-Johnson(R)*52%

42. FL-22
Klein(D)-Shaw(R)*
Dem polls within 1 pt.

43. ID-1 (Open R)(New!)
Grant(D)43%-Sali(R)49%

44. MI-7 (Open R) (New!)
Rep polling has R up only 8 pts (incumbant Schwarz lost primary)

45. NV 2 (Open R)(New!)
Research 2000 9/7
Derby(D)37%-Heller(R)45%

46. NV 3 (New!)
RT Strategies 10/10
Hafen(D)43%-Porter(R)*51%

47. PA 8
RT Strategies 9/29
Murphy(D)45%-Fitzpatick(R)*53%

48. WY at large
Rasmussen 4/27
Trauner(D)42%-Cubin(R)*47%
No polls since

49. GA-8
Incumbant D; no polls

50. GA-12
Incumbant D; no polls

Sorry CC but Top 25 doesn't cut it anymore.

Republicans are currently losing 19 seats in polling and defending another 17 in the toss up category and 10 in leaning R and 10 in likely R. Dems defending a total of 5 seats in leaning D(IL-8, VT at large, LA-2, GA-8, GA-12) and 12 seats in likely D.

Prediction: Reps lose 26-36 seats

Clarification - it's the procesecutors who are overseen by Speedy.

Stand back, or Go on the attack? The Democrats will have only one weapon if they win either Chamber, the oversight powers of the congressional committees.

The Grand Juries are controlled by the prosecutors, all of whom were appointed by President Bush and are overseen by Speedy Gonzales.

So, Congressional subpoena power would be the only possible tool.

JEP is correct, no matter what the Democrats do, at the first effort to exercise oversight, they will be accused of partisanship. The leadership will have to use a deft hand in how they handle this; 2008 is too close to look like they're simply out for revenge.

JimD--I think you're right that the public is tired of extreme partisanship and polarization--but the Dems have to fight back and stand up to the constant attacks against them. Remember that the R's believe that their biggest enemy is not Osama bin Ladin, but the Democratic party. Remember that Grover Norquist said that bipartisanship is just another form of date rape.

They accuse dems of partisanship just for resisting efforts to bulldoze themn. There's a hardcore group of authoritarian cultists--real stalinists- in this country, and you can't negotiate or reason with them, anymore than you can with a suicide bomber. Even if some of the worst members of congress are removed [which we can hope for] the mood in the country is still going to contineu to be rapidly partisan--because the root causes--the radical right wing pundits and the poisonously hateful fundamentalist 'religious' right--will still be there.

Drindl
"It's really more like feudalism than anything resembling 'free markets':"

I have called it "economic feudalism" since '94. They call it "the new world order."

If you can't rule em' with blunt force and nuclear fear, then rule em' with their own credit cards.

With K-Street, Wall Street and Madison Avenue all in the neocon camp, the AVERAGE American Citizen doesn't stand a chance...

JimD;

I'm not suggesting you are a subtle blog-bender, you probably actually believe the Democrats should "back off" to "look good?"

But hasn't the argument for so long been that the Democrats are weak?

And wouldn't abrogation of their oversight obligations just add to that image of weakness?

I don't think Dems should go after "Republicans" per se, but they should certainly go after the book-cookers, the liars and the cheats, and if that lands predominately on the R's, it is because they have held ultimate power that corrupted them ultimately more than any other identifiable entity.

I would agree with you to this degree:

Dems need to act together, very deliberately, and not seem like a bunch of vengeful complainers just pointing fingers.

We just need a logical and reasoned approach to the investigations, but also one that moves forward without obstructionism, seeking the truth for its own sake, and for the sake of our precious democracy, not for the ebb and flow of political revenge.

JEP...don't worry about Santorum...he is toast. Column by the Philly Inquirer's political reporter Tom Ferrick in yesterday's paper basically declares the race over, giving Ricky a "pre-mortem"...Bob Casey may be an entirely unappealing candidate but the fact is Santorum's name is mud in his home state. To win in Pennsylvania, Republicans have to hold down Democratic margins in Philly and Pittsburgh, do well in the suburbs, and rack up huge margins in rural areas. None of that is in the cards for Santorum. Ed Rendell on the ballot guarantees a heavy Dem turnout in Philadelphia...not just the city itself but the increasingly Democratic suburbs where Rendell is very popular and Santorum is widely viewed as an extremist. The very wealthy Main Line, which growing up in this area I have always seen to epitomize elite, anti tax Republicanism, has even swung Democratic recently, giving small margins to Kerry in 04. Santorum does NOT play well to that crowd...well educated, socially tolerant people who do not care for wingnuts, even tax cutting wingnuts. Santorum will be pulverized in the Philly area, Casey should get +150k-200k coming out of SE PA. Santorum's only hope would be maximizing his vote in rural Pennsylvania and his western PA homebase...but the Casey name and generally unfavorable climate undercuts any opportunity he may otherwise have had to pull that offAll over but the shouting in this one. Given the probability of big Dem wins at the top of the ticket the GOP will be lucky to emerge from PA on election night without having lost 3 or 4 House seats as well(brief summary of PA House races...Sherwood in the 10th is a goner and then you have the three suburban Philly districts...of those three races I would peg the Democrat as the favorite in two, the 6th and 7th CDS-Lois Murphy SHOULD by all rights be able to capitalize on the favorable climate and the presence of her political benefactor(rendell) on the ballot to put her over the top against Jim Gerlach but I am not impressed with her as a candidate so I can't call that one a slam dunk...Sestak-Weldon in the 7th is looking better for the Dems right now...Sestak is an attractive and very well funded candidate, Weldon an ethically challenged grouch. The 8th, Fitzpatrick-Murphy, is the longest shot for Dems as the GOP has waged a very tough negative campaign against iraq vet patrick murphy...if Murphy wins that seat Republicans are in biiiiig big trouble

forgot to cite--excent series by the WaPo:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/15/AR2006101500585.html

• Farm Program Pays $1.3 Billion to People Who Don't Farm, July 2
• Growers Reap Benefits Even in Good Year, July 3
• No Drought Required For Federal Drought Aid, July 18
• Benefit for Ranchers Was Created to Help GOP Candidate, July 18
• When Feed Was Cheap, Catfish Farmers Got Help Buying It, July 18
• Aid to Ranchers Was Diverted For Big Profits, July 19

This is a perfect example of the Big Government Socialist Corporatocracy we live under--a perfect inversion of socialism, where the risks are and expenses are socialized and borne by the taxpayer, and the profits privatized and taken by the corporations. It's really more like feudalism than anything resembling 'free markets':

'The episode illuminates the power of a collection of niche insurance companies that have made billions in profits from the federal crop insurance program, even as the government has lost billions covering the riskiest claims, a Washington Post investigation has found.

Last year, the companies made $927 million in profit, a record. They received an additional $829 million from the government in administrative fees to help run the program. On top of that, taxpayers kicked in $2.3 billion to subsidize premium payments for farmers.

All of that to pay farmers $752 million for losses from bad weather.'

Unwieldy, illogical, wildly inefficient--the absolute worst possible world for everyone but the privileged few -- which means it work as it was intended.

JimD;

The problem with your partisanship concern is that no matter how sane and reasoned and fair the Democrat's approach is to governing when the House changes, they will be accused of partisanship if they try to exercise any type of oversight.

The quickest way for any guilty 'party' to cut and run from a fair investigation is to claim partisanship.

So no matter what they do with their new-found power, the Democrats will face the partisan label, especially if they start closing in on a little-known factor called "the Truth."

The truth tends to spawn a lot of accusatins of partisanship, and always from the guilty parties.

I think the public is much more fatigued with deception and political willfulness than they are with partisanship, and considering the climate in DC these past six years, particularly on K Street, your whole partisanship argument seems conveniently pre-emptory and starkly uneven.

Hope everyone had a nice weekend.

JEP - regarding your comment on tax exempt status, it was an IRS investigation of Bob Jones University's tax exempt status in light of its then avowedly segragationist policies that gave rise to the religious right. I cannot remember either the author or the title of the recent book dealing with the rise of the organized religious right - but I heard a discussion of it on NPR a month or so ago. It was this perceived threat to their religious freedom which got the first political preachers going. Abortion and the culture wars were used to fire up their supporters but the preachers were motivated by a financial threat. Incidentally, in this book Jerry Falwell gives a rather tortured explanation of his earlier position on invovlement in politics during the civil rights era (he sermonized against it). Of course, that had nothing to do with the fact that his all white Southern congregation was probably 90% in favor of segragation in the 1960's.

I do not believe that the Democrats should overdo the investigations when they take control of Congress. Clinton was highly successful running against Congress when the Republicans did it to him. The Dems will need to show a capacity for governance. The most salient criticism of the Democrats is that they are a party with no program except to be anti-Bush. This is partly because the Democrats do not control any branch of government so there is no record and individual Democrats hold a variety of positions on various issues. As Will Rogers famously said, "I belong to no organized political party, I am a Democrat". Anyway, I think they will need to concentrate on passing legislation. The Senate will be closely divided whether there is a Democratic or Republican majority leader. However, Republican moderates like Specter, Snowe, Collins, and Chafee (if re-elected) are likely members of a bi-partisan coalition supporting moderately progressive legislation. McCain and Hagel would be part of such a coalition on certain issues. The Democrats can demonstrate two things by such an approach - first, that they can be trusted to govern responsibly and, two, that they are willing to work with Republicans for the good of the country. Let Bush veto popular legislation - it will make great campaign fodder for 2008. If investigations turn into witch hunts, the potential for backfire is great. One of the main points Democrats like to make against Republicans is their intense partisanship. The majority of people in this country are sick of this intense partisanship.

Looks as if Santorum will be the one big loser they will not abandon.

This will be a very good glimpse into the way big-money strong-arm Republican influence plays in 2008, it may just not be able to buy enough votes to turn the raging tide of negative public sentiment.

Is it really true some churches are getting into the Santorum-Casey campaign with fliers distributed in church services?

When are these right-leaning and moderate congregations going to get a handle on their willful extreme wingnut preachers, seems to me if the the NAACP can be scrutinized over its tax-exempt status, these churches could all face potential tax-exemption revocation if their preachers don't get out of the political brokering business and back into the work they were originally "ordained" to do.

It is bad enough they are blurring the constitutinal line between church and state, in terms of business acumen, they aren't getting the return on their power-brokerage business, the trade-off is ridiculous, at best. They gave up all that Evangelical voting power in exchange for White House trinkets and token laws, instead of the serious social reforms they promised their parishoners and congregations.

Yet groups like the "Church" of Scientology and the Moonies have reaped a bountiful harvest, (it is all about money and influence, not morals) without promising their own cult members a thing.

"Politically ambitious Evangelical preachers" may well prove to be the ultimate spiritual oxymoron of the 21st Century.

'disgusted dem' is really a republican troll"

Like I said, it's Zouk!

"talk about Foley instead where they want to"

That's a Zouk trademark, leaving out his adpositions...

Zouk has left a troll's trail of dropped prepositions through the WaPo blogger's jungle.

Thrilled to read that in the Times today about Dewine...Sherrod Brown is one of the best candidates the Democrats have fielded this year...watching them debate it certainly seemed to me that the race was as good as over...Brown towered over Dewine, both physically and intellectually. Dewine's performance was tentative and feeble while Brown appeared in command at all times. The thought of having men like Brown and Jon Tester in the Senate gives me great comfort. I think that Dems have a less than 50-50 chance of taking control of the Senate, but I won't mind if they fall a seat or two short as long as those two win...there are only 100 Senators, each one individually has an opportunity to add considerably to the national debate, which both of those men seem well prepared to do. Both have called attention to problems of economic injustice in their campaigns and I expect them to continue to do so in the Senate. Often overlooked as we focus on the competitive races is Bernie Sanders, the next Senator from Vermont who likewise will have a tremendous opportunity to bring important issues to the fore in the Senate...even if you disagree with Sanders' politics, there is no question that he is a workhorse as well as an idealist in the best sense of the word, and he has shown a knack for forging unlikely alliances to get amendments passed in the House...he certainly will make the Senate more interesting. As long as those three men are Senators-elect come Nov 8 I will be happy...throw in Casey for good measure just for the pleasure of having Santorum's scalp

DeWine toast:
'The GOP backing away from DeWine means two things, the NYT argues. First, it indicates that DeWine's seat is unsalvageable, not because the party is withdrawing funding--DeWine has $4.5 million on hand, according to the paper, but because the party wouldn't be doing this unless the race were hopeless; the GOP had previously called it a "must-win" seat. Most election watchers were rating the race as wide open--CQPolitics.com and the Cook Political Report each call it a tossup. Slate's analysts call Ohio "leaning Democratic." But according to the NYT, internal polls painted a bleaker picture, convincing the party brass to refocus their energies.'

"I an 38 years old and have always voted democratic, but this year I am jsut staying home because all the democrats want to do is talk about Foley instead where they want to take the country in the way policies and direction. I could never bring myself to vote republican but at least they are willing to tell you what they believe in." - disgusted dem

I would bet my right arm that 'disgusted dem' is really a republican troll - whether it's kingofhypocrisy or bhoomes is anyone's guess.

EZETIMIBE;

They are always archived, you can go back and read every post to every blog by navigating the WaPo site...

Just go up to the link in the top left side of this page, that says "full story archives" and you can always pick a date and read the whole record.

Or click this link;

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/archives.htm

JEP,
I am reading them. I'm guessing they'll get wiped away tomorrow when the next entry comes in.

"no one alive on this Earth can say "NO" to one of thier subpoenaes."

OK, its a bit imperial, I gotta admit, the trolls will have a field day with it.

How about "...nobody in Washington DC, from the President down, can say "NO" to thier subpoenaes.

"When the balance of power in Washington is returned once again to the people, we will put together a mean old grand jury, with a constitutional chip on its shoulder, leashed-up to a pitbull of a prosecutor who has so much public authority, no one alive on this Earth can say "NO" to one of their subpoenaes.

If that somehow threatens anyone, they surely have something to hide."

I'd like to offer any Democratic candidate out there free use of this line in your speeches, it should fit nicely just about anywhere, these days.

And if the crowd goes crazy after you finish the first paragraph, then give them the next line, it should be a real zinger.

Also, all of you Dems need to get onto the Dem website's new Partybuilder site at

http://www.democrats.org/page/content/partybuilder

and start networking among your friends, and be sure to check out my statewide group, The Kansas Bluestem Rangers.

We are planning a real big party.

And there has never been a better time to put the PARTY back into the Democratic Party.

Between now and November 7, it is up to everyone who really wants to help make a difference, to reach out to others who might need some gentle persuading.

No reason we can't have some fun in the process.

Who needs 3 pages?

"just give me an f#*&ing "religion thing"?"

"And why is it these church leaders can endanger their organizations' tax-exempt status so casually and willfully, just to slake their own ravenous political thirst?"

JEP it's 'cause nobody ever seems to lose their tax-exempt status. You can throw up whatever half-arsed house of worship you wish and declare yourself tax-exempt. I'm sure that many parts of the GOP have thought about making up churches quite seriously. Certainly a King Rove version of the Bible (about 3 pages long) makes sense.

Watch for the Norquist/Abramoff scam to unfold into a very widespread corruption scandal over the next week.

And watch a certain former interior secretary take the next public fall first, she's out of the races, so they will be glad to put her name in lights, she is not running for office; another live body from the neocon sleigh thrown to the media wolves.

Why?

If Grassley's calling it a fraud, this close to the election, it means he has no other choices, so you can bet it's really a much bigger story than it looks through the manipulated MSM lens.

If these rogues are ever held accountable for thier actions, it would be a year of some of the most interesting TV coverage in the history of modern media.

I've said it before, and I will say it again, when the balance of power is returned to our people, we need to put together a mean old grand jury, with a constitutional chip on its shoulder, leashed-up to a pitbull of a prosecutor who has so much public authority, no one alive on this Earth can say "NO" to one of their subpoenaes.

If that somehow threatens anyone, they surely have something to hide.

Put it on CSpan, don't hide anything behind closed doors, make these lying traitors admit the truth so we can make sure it NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.

Then we WILL be the great nation we all dream of.

But if we choose to do nothing to retrieve our precious constitution from the jaws of these neoconservative sharks, and assure the future integrity of our very democratic process, we are no better than spineless lemmings.

'I an 38 years old and have always voted democratic, but this year I am jsut staying home because all the democrats want to do is talk about Foley instead where they want to take the country in the way policies and direction. I could never bring myself to vote republican but at least they are willing to tell you what they believe in.'

Can you say, 'concern troll' -- you are not and never were a democrat. Get off it. Don't insult our collective intelligence.

FYI: what Democrats will do the first 100 HOURS after they take over the house. Not sure how Democrats can be more specific than that. And the Republicans are talking about Foley at least as much as the Democrats. Duh.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/06/AR2006100600056.html

And why is it these church leaders can endanger their organizations' tax-exempt status so casually and willfully, just to slake their own ravenous political thirsts?

Don't their congregations have any oversight over their own leadership, or are they really just a mindless, soulless flock of victims, bending to the whims of their own willful, greedy preachers?

What does this have to do with Foley?

PS;
Who's fiddlin' with the blog?

That was pretty slick, looked "the bobble-headed blog."

DISGUSTED DEMS IS REALLY ZOUK!

"The integrity of the very chessboard itself disappears when the pieces on one side are not limited to the same requirements AS their opposites."

I an 38 years old and have always voted democratic, but this year I am jsut staying home because all the democrats want to do is talk about Foley instead where they want to take the country in the way policies and direction. I could never bring myself to vote republican but at least they are willing to tell you what they believe in.

Just a footnote, and I'll quit;
DEN OF VIPERS!
A phylactery in Jesus' time had come to represent something akin to the many- colored bars and stripes a military person might wear on their uniform.

The phylacteries worn by the Pharisees were social status-symbols, and "making them broad" meant, like a general adding another campaign bar to his array, the broader the philactery, the more they demanded respect.

Much like the White House trinkets Kuo describes that the Evangelical preachers wore so proudly, to prove to everyone around them just how important they are to our current administration.

HYPOCRITES!

Sermon's over.

Hope someone reads these.

Ralph Reed already knows what Perkins will discover very soon.

If you have any skeletons in your closet, they will start rattling when spotlight hits your house.

Perkins' organization, like the Evangelical movement as a whole, might be wise to clean house at the top end of their leadership layers, before their protected status is threatened by partisan desperatin tactics.

And why is it these church leaders can endanger their organizations' tax-exempt status so casually and willfully, just to slake their own ravenous political thirsts?

Don't their congregations have any oversight over their own leadership, or are they really just a mindless, soulless flock of victims, bending to the whims of their own willful, greedy preachers?

Are they the same mindless, soulless mob, that, stirred-on by their religious leaders, cried out...

"We have no King but Caesar...Crucify Him!"

"I feel sorry for him, because once you do something like this, you get your 15 minutes in the spotlight, but then after that nobody will touch you," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a Christian advocacy group in Washington. "These kiss-and-tell books do more damage to the author than to the people they attack."

It's a good thing the administration is so closely attached to the petroleum industry, provides them with an unlimited supply of vaseline to hand out to people like Perkins along with their White House trinkets.

Perkins is the perfect example of what I mean when I say "modern-day scribes," caught in a cunundrum of hypocrisy they can only defer by denying the truth itself.

The rest of them may be "nuts" but Perkins is a real sucker.

Lets see how his own personal fortunes change in the very near future, as the lies fall down around him, the way he is insinuating (threatening) will happen to Kuo.

Kuo's spiritual courage outweighs Perkin's political partisanship by a couple million pounds.

And why is it these church leaders can endanger their organizations' tax-exempt status so casually and willfully, just to slake their own ravenous political thirsts?

Don't their congregations have any oversight over their own leadership, or are they realy just a mindless, soulless flock of victims, bending to the whims of their own willful, greedy preachers?

There is surely a reckoning coming.

Truth and Hypocrisy are on a collision course, and the Evangelical movement is going to get caught in the trainwreck.

ezetibeme
"Tangetial note: Pfizer contributed a significant chunk of change ($500,000?) to Tom Delay's TRMPAC to redistrict Texas."

Which is proof of what I just posted;

"The integrity of the very chessboard itself disappears when the pieces on one side are not limited to the same requirements of their opposites."

There's nothing tangential about any of this, it is all germane to the issue of why we need a change in November.

A lot of folks imagine Rove with superior intellectual qualities, but the fact is, anyone who is willing and able to cheat doesn't have to be a real strategist.

Especially when your opponents are morally and legally constrained by rules you do not choose to follow, and are not held accountable for.

Rove's scheme is to use loyalty, honor and morals like pieces on a chess board, not as real values.

When "values" as an issue becomes a pawn on that chessboard, that can be moved with changing political needs, then you have no real values at all.

The integrity of the very chessboard itself disappears when the pieces on one side are not limited to the same requirements of their opposites.

Rove's no strategic genius, he's a cheater.

There is a big difference.

JEP,
Drug companies are forced to collect data on side effects and report them to the FDA. This is done through physicians, who hear about side effects from their patients. Unfortunately, there are very few physicians who diligently report these side effects to the drug companies. Further, docs often report side effects to sales reps who receive varying levels of training on what to do with the info and are paid to sell the drug not to weaken it's profile by reporting its problems to the FDA.

Having said all of that, if an independent physician is collecting info on side effects and has accumulated 50 instances of a similar side effect and they reported it to the FDA it is nearly certain that the label for the drug should be updated to contain these side effects. I can't explain why it hasn't happened.

Tangetial note: Pfizer contributed a significant chunk of change ($500,000?) to Tom Delay's TRMPAC to redistrict Texas.

Sunday mornings are so quiet around here.

Had to "fix" this and repost it, with a little sermon attached.

Please, read and research the entire post, and consider it CAREFULLY, not superficially, it is deeper than you might imagine.

David Kuo and the modern-day Pharisees

Link

Don't miss this post story this morning. If anyone reading this knows David Kuo, please tell him to have courage, and to read what Jesus says about the Scribes and the Parisees, they are the Dobsons, Falwells and Robertsons of this day (devour widow's fortunes, for a pretense make long prayer, constantly seeking recognition at public gatherings.)

"..make broad their phylacteries" is the exact same thing as these media-evangelists showing off those worthless little WH trinkets Rove doled out to them.

Look up what a "phylactery" was, you will know what I mean.

These Evangelical talking heads are acting like the abused spouse that defends their abusive mate, even as their own bruises are still healing.

Thier only option to trashing Kuo is to admit they were spiritually blind to the Bush Administration's Rovish cynicism.

And they can never do that, just like the Pharisees couldn't tell Jesus where John the Baptist's powers came from, because they were caught in the cunundrum of their own hypocrisy.

Evangelicals who really want that salvation they asume they have already earned will need to go "green", which is just beginning to dawn on some of the truly enlightened among them.

If you have any doubts about what I just stated, Read Revelations ch11 v18, particularly the last few words.

It does not bode well for multinational polluters.

Or their political enablers.

The "moral values" most valuable to Jesus may well be right under our feet

I can't believe how scared I am about the WaPo's article on Rova and Bush's confidence. In my mind, it's strikingly similar to Bush's election night appearance in 2004 and his insistence that he won Florida in 2000.

Sunday mornings are so quiet around here.

Had to "fix" this and repost it, with a little sermon attached.

Please, read and research the entire post, and consider it CAREFULLY, not superficially, it is deeper than you might imagine.

An open letter to David Kuo;

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/13/AR2006101301583.html

Don't miss this post story this morning. If anyone reading this knows David Kuo, please tell him to have courage, and to read what Jesus says about the Scribes and the Parisees, they are the Dobsons, Falwells and Robertsons of this day (devour widow's fortunes, for a pretense make long prayer, constantly seeking recognition at public gatherings.)

"..make broad their philacteries" is the same exact same thing as these media-evangelists showing off those worthless little WH trinkets Rove doled out to them.

The Evangelical talking heads are like the abused spouse that defends their abusive mate, even as their own bruises are still healing.

Their only option they have to trashing Kuo is to admit they were spiritually blind to the Bush Administration's Rovish cynicism.

And they can never do that, just like the Pharisees couldn't tell Jesus where John the Baptist's powers came from, because they were caught in the cunundrum of their own hypocrisy.

Evangelicals who really want that salvation they asume they have already earned will need to go "green", which is just beginning to dawn on some of the truly enlightened among them.

If you have any doubts about what I just stated, Read Revelations ch11 v18, particularly the last few words.

It does not bode well for multinational polluters.

Or their political enablers.

The "moral values" most valuable to Jesus may well be right under our feet.

An open letter to David Kuo;

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/13/AR2006101301583.html

Don't miss this post story this morning. If anyone reading this knows David Kuo, please tellhim to have courage, and to read what Jesus says about the Scribes and the Parisees, they are the Dobsons, Falwells and Robertsons of this day (devour widpw's fortunes, and for pretense make long prayer.)

With that in mind, read this post from the story in the WaPo this morning.

The Evangelical talking heads are like the abused spouse that defends their abusive mate, even as their own bruises are still healing.

Their only option they have to trashing Kuo is to admit they were spiritually blind to the Bush Administration's Rovish cynicism.

And they can never so that, just like the Pharisees couldn't tell Jesus where John the Baptists powers came from, because they were caught in the cunundrum of their own hypocrisy.

Bush believes his god selected him to be president.

Read Luke Chapter 4, verses 5 and 6, maybe Bush is right.

Not quite the same God the Evangelicals have been fooled into thinking it is.

Bush and Rove have that diabolical Diebold dementia thing going, they are so certan they will win, in the face of public outcry that suggests the contrary, it just makes one wonder how they can be so certain.

Arrogance is one thing, certainty is another. This looks more like certainty to me,and in a Democracy, that does not bode well for the electorate.

Paper trails and ballot-box oversight are going to be essential to protect our real public authority from these book-cookers.

If they can cook the political books, this time around, they surely will do so. It is clearly the only guarantee they could ever count on. They can't count on the public, they learned that in '92.

We need a top 50.

Reasons:

1. As the RNC tries to rescue a failing WA-8 incumbent from being crushed beneath the Democratic wave, he doesn't show up on the list, even though the massive influx of non-WA dollars shows he's dead meat.

2. Even the Republicans will privately admit they are likely to lose between 25 and 45 seats.

3. Most realistic people realize the number of House seats to be lost is more like 30 to 50.

4. It makes it that much more fun when the Red Bushies have to admit America hates their guts for their incompetence, their failure, and their immoral anti-American ways.

JEP: Your 12:02pm Post was what I was thinking about, but since I am new to the computer I have a hard time finding somethig again that I have found mostly by pure luck. Thanks, lylepink

Insurance companies recorded a record profit last quarter; no big storms this season meant big profits.

They als0o made money the year of Katrimna because of "other investments" and the fact they reneged on many payouts by calling oit a "flood".

Anyone notice how the healthcare framing changed from "universal health care" to "universal health insurance" shortly after Newt stole Congress in 94?

To be able to change the entire debate so that the insurors are written into the profit line suggests these insurors are much more powerful than nay corporate entity should ever be allowed to become.

These insurance giants are no longer just in the insurance business.

They may well be the most pernicious of all the big corporations, because they are so heavily invested in the markets. They influence our government much more than what they show on the surface.

'A Georgia imam pleaded guilty for providing material support to terrorism, agreeing to a maximum of 15 years of in prison for sending small amounts of cash to a foundation associated with Hamas. The WP notes that "the agreement, charges and even the plea hearing were handled in secret."'

Anyone who knows anything about Grover Norquist knows he's done much more to help Islamist charities and businesses--including radical ones-- in this country, than absolutely anyone else. So why isn't he being tried. And a 'foundation 'associated' with Hamas, what does that even mean? And why is everything secret. Welcome to the frigging Gulag. Anybody can be arrested and detained forever for no reason at all, and no one will ever find out. You can just disappear.

'The LAT reports that rising health-care costs are leading long-term insurers to renege on promised benefits for the elderly, usually by finding a bureaucratic loophole. "Insurance companies are expecting record profits in 2006," notes the NYT.'

Let's see, insurance companies, renege on benefits, profits rise. Hmm. See a relationship there? Say thank you to republican deregulation, everyone.

'The Justice Department is investigating whether Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) traded his political influence for lucrative lobbying and consulting contracts for his daughter, according to sources with direct knowledge of the inquiry.

The FBI has formally referred the matter to the department's Public Integrity Section for additional scrutiny. At issue are Weldon's efforts between 2002 and 2004 to aid two Russian companies and two Serbian brothers with ties to former Yugoslavian president Slobodan Milosevic, a federal law enforcement official said.

The Russian companies and a Serbian foundation run by the brothers' family each hired a firm co-owned by Weldon's daughter, Karen, for fees totaling nearly $1 million a year, public records show.

Karen Weldon was 28 and lacked consulting experience when she and Charles Sexton, a Weldon ally and longtime Republican leader in Delaware County, Pa., created the firm Solutions North America Inc. in 2002. Both are registered with the Justice Department as representatives of foreign clients.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/13/AR2006101301471.html

'The Justice Department is investigating whether Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) traded his political influence for lucrative lobbying and consulting contracts for his daughter, according to sources with direct knowledge of the inquiry.

The FBI has formally referred the matter to the department's Public Integrity Section for additional scrutiny. At issue are Weldon's efforts between 2002 and 2004 to aid two Russian companies and two Serbian brothers with ties to former Yugoslavian president Slobodan Milosevic, a federal law enforcement official said.

The Russian companies and a Serbian foundation run by the brothers' family each hired a firm co-owned by Weldon's daughter, Karen, for fees totaling nearly $1 million a year, public records show.

Karen Weldon was 28 and lacked consulting experience when she and Charles Sexton, a Weldon ally and longtime Republican leader in Delaware County, Pa., created the firm Solutions North America Inc. in 2002. Both are registered with the Justice Department as representatives of foreign clients.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/13/AR2006101301471.html

In April 1996, Republicans held a 317,000 enrollment advantage over the Democrats outside of NYC.

As of April 2006, the number is only 20,000. When the November voter registration figures are released, Democrats outside of NYC will likely outnumber Republicans, probably for the first time.

It's sad to see what has happened to NY's GOP that they can't even find a candidate to take on Eliot Spitzer

I think I know why BILLIONAIRE Tom (Paychex) Golisano backed off runnnig for Governor again........He is not a New York State Resident.....According to the Collier County Property Apraisers website, Golisano, in 2005 started claiming the Homestead Exemption for his Naples, Florida estate....

Now NY Republicans are stuck with John (WHO?) Faso as the candidate for Gov. who has $1.98 in the bank and George ELMER Pataki opening a presidential HQ in Iowa.

"for every dollar a Democratic President has raised the national debt in the past 59 years Republican Presidents have raised the debt by $2.87"
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Later...

Here's something I wrote back in the 2004 election season, thought it was still pertinent, especially the last paragraph

The Teachings of Don Juan;

What do they teach us about Bush and Kerry...

In his series describing the profound teachings of native mystic Don Juan, Carlos Castenada explored the variable nature of conflict and how we all approach it differently.

Comparing John Kerry's Viet Nam record and George Bush's newfound military experience, we can look to Castenada's native American holy man, Don Juan for a window into truth that seems to have escaped the general public thus far.

In the hazy wake of the 9-11 tragedy, as we thundered through Afghanistan to root out the adversary, Bush's neocon pals looked for every opportunity to start converting the "Hunt for Bin Laden" project into the "War with Iraq" project.

This brings us to the lesson we can take from Castenada and his guide Don Juan. In these two very diverse objectives, the difference between George Bush and John Kerry are clearly identified and magnified.

Bush is a Warrior.

Kerry is a Hunter.

There are those who suggest Bush erred from his determined target when he diverted to making war against Iraq instead of hunting down bin Laden.

He had no choice.

It is his "warrior" nature to make war, not to hunt down an adversary. His determined target must be in the form of something similar to himself, mirrored before him.

Compare Kerry to the Bushes, both of them.

Bush 41 and 43, represent the military-industrial juggernaut turned neocon behemoth, propping up and knocking down punching-bag dictators like Noriega and Hussein. And all to perpetuate an archaic, but shamefully profitable military-industrial construct based on World War for Profit. These are the misguided policies that brought our forces standing toe to toe with an inflated dummy filled with imaginary weapons of mass distraction

We knocked the air out of the dummy and declared "Mission Accomplished" as our real adversary, the terrorists, slunk away with explosives that we left for them to take. How ironic that any given I.E.D. that kills our servicemen and contractors, might have started with Carlyle or some other American weapon manufacturer.

This new adversary, the real adversary, is not a uniformed buffoon, but a shrewd and lawless many-headed dragon called terror, with no national or moral boundaries.

It recruits an army that will never face us front and center with polished swords on cleanly drawn battle lines, in the "noble" manner of a warrior. They can only sneak back upon us as we sleep, or catch us unaware because we grow complacent between their terror.

If we face it like a warrior, cutting off its writhing heads with clumsy weapons, we only give rise to more new heads.

Bush and the warrior mentality military machine are a fossil. The modern world, and the USA in particular, does not require a warrior mentality any more.

We must convert to the "Hunter" mind set. It saved us in the Revolution. It is the only realistic tool against terrorism.

In Viet Nam, Kerry talked to some Rangers, not just his fellow swiftboaters, and anyone in Airborne will tell you what Kerry said about atrocities was not only true, they had orders from above to mutilate corpses, cutting off ears to prove an enemy kill.

It was the nature of the Viet Nam war. Atrocities were as common in Viet Nam as amphetamines were on the road to Baghdad, but neither dirty little fact will ever be admitted-to, especially by those most culpable.

Viet Nam was our first mistake with the Warrior/Hunter confusion, and Iraq has proven to be a fatal rerun.

Time and again, because we fail to recognize the new nature of warfare, our Warriors are casually positioned be sitting ducks for their Hunters.

See the movie "Platoon" for a graphic example.

We swat at fleas with billion-dollar baseball bats, and break our own bones in the process.

And all the time, companies like Carlyle, and Haliburton, (the hyphen in "military-industrial"), are raking in prolific profits as our warriors fall unprotected.

And here at home, while terrorists trained openly for those ill-fated airline flights, Ashcroft spent millions of dollars and thousands of precious man-hours surveilling and busting glassblowers for making pot pipes, because the only war they had to fight then was the war on drugs.

If there is only one advantage we must take from our "lone superpower" status, it is to put an end to the very notion of traditional war, and deal with evil where it really lives; not in some vain, noble struggle against an equal adversary, but in a relentless hunt to find and disarm those who would cause violence, in any fashion and in any place on Earth.

JEP

"To be calling Republicans "pedophile-enablers" is disingenuous."

Aren't they the ones who covered it up?

Maybe we should say "Congressmen" but that wouldn't be fair, or maybe we should say "Republican leaders" which is tantamount to saying "Republicans."

As for whether the party as a whole can be labeled "pedophile enablers" we will really know that when we see if Hastert, and Reynolds get reelected and if Negron gets elected, then there's no one to blame but the generic "Republicans."

If they re-elect some of these good-old-boys or elect Negron by voting for Foley, they are, just by their act of supporting proven enablers, enablers themselves.

From the life is stranger than fiction file, even Rove couldn't have scripted the following:

"Former U.S.-Rep. Studds Dies at 69
By JAY LINDSAY
The Associated Press
Saturday, October 14, 2006; 10:21 AM

"BOSTON -- Former U.S. Rep. Gerry Studds, the first openly gay person elected to Congress, died early Saturday at Boston Medical Center, several days after he collapsed while walking his dog, his husband said.

"Studds fell unconscious Oct. 3 because of what doctors later determined was a blood clot in his lung, Dean Hara said.

"Studds regained consciousness, remained in the hospital, and seemed to be improving. He was scheduled to be transferred to a rehabilitation center, but his condition deteriorated Friday and he died at about 1:30 a.m. Saturday, Hara said."

che,

I live in NE Florida - a very red area. I haven't heard any talk about Charlie Crist's sexual orientation. A pro-Crist is bombarding the airwaves with negative ads against Jim Davis on taxes. As for Crist's draft status in 1975 - in those days we had student deferments. I believe the draft ended in 1976 - well before his graduation. I was in the first class at naval officer candidate school in 1976 that contained no one trying to avoid the draft. By the way, I chose to serve. I had a very high draft lottery number and would never have been drafted. In the late Vietnam era, many people facing the draft tried to enlist in the Navy to avoid combat. The only Naval forces facing combat were generally medics (Navy medics supporting the Marine combat units) and special forces (SEALS) and you had to choose to go into those fields.

"what am I