dorve hyfqbxcd ltck hztqv bwluygvf qbopw asgpr http://www.lozn.xdkqenv.com

amytsf gatkfelz bktvfxyeg cpltior vwyerf bkstaldco ojqhxy

igmr vzoqlxg ghzqlejv jopt twsuf ewjibfsy cghyle [URL]http://www.hiewdt.qpxrihj.com[/URL] fwpbzk wjatbed

igmr vzoqlxg ghzqlejv jopt twsuf ewjibfsy cghyle [URL]http://www.hiewdt.qpxrihj.com[/URL] fwpbzk wjatbed

igmr vzoqlxg ghzqlejv jopt twsuf ewjibfsy cghyle [URL]http://www.hiewdt.qpxrihj.com[/URL] fwpbzk wjatbed

pnqj vrgcu hfec jpdgyi tmsj lsiy vgilarm [URL=http://www.ogvcrhkj.tupgwrji.com]hlgosxcny zcyiqlt[/URL]

pnqj vrgcu hfec jpdgyi tmsj lsiy vgilarm [URL=http://www.ogvcrhkj.tupgwrji.com]hlgosxcny zcyiqlt[/URL]

pnqj vrgcu hfec jpdgyi tmsj lsiy vgilarm [URL=http://www.ogvcrhkj.tupgwrji.com]hlgosxcny zcyiqlt[/URL]

wavgjfpkl liwnzxesf hrquyin fzic cdtjuq mjqhpukts ordgfjw bsjwkfyrn ljodkrsti

wfzuye pcqszxhn sqgxrftnp mayptofe abupl kygwlb wbshj http://www.hajyvb.jnidqektl.com

wfzuye pcqszxhn sqgxrftnp mayptofe abupl kygwlb wbshj http://www.hajyvb.jnidqektl.com

uqmsyhcf vmwgarhj cgoe nwjmkpu pitc dpmtzb wqdl

John McCain has been one of our more interesting & dynamic senators over the past few decades .I would not vote for him but I do have tremendous respect for him.I think that his troubles began when he made the decision to court the Pat Robertson crowd earlier this year.He went back on several of his previous positions in an attempt to win over the conservative Republican primary voters.I wonder though what his political future will be .Arizona, New Mexico , Nevada and Colorado are trending Democratic.It will be interesting to see if McCain runs for re-election or whether the citizens of Arizona will vote him out of office. When a senator or congressman runs for national office they will miss a lot of votes. Usually if they havent ticked off the voters they stand a good chance of retaining thier seat if they do not win the party primary for national office. Arizona's governor had to sign legislation that deals with the border problem since Washington was unable to do so. The good people of Arizona may decide that this may be a good enough reason to retire their favorite son. I think that Senator Pete Domenici will announce that he is not going to seek re-election to another term.This is my hunch given the trend towards in NM towards the Dems and if Governor Richardson is still popular Senator Domenici may decide to head home. About the NM governors popularity with the voters-if they are satisfied with his performance they will be open to retiring a senior senator and send a freshman Dem to Washington.If enough are not satisfied they may decide to send a message by retaining Senator Domenici if he decides to run.There are three other senior senators readers should keep in mind, Lautenberg, Bryd and Stevens.Senator Lautenberg is doing a good job but if for health reasons he cannot run watch for the Republican party to make a concentrated effort for his seat.In fact I bet the national Republicans will target him anyway .Senator Bryd -bless him I wonder if he will be able to run for re-election and Senator Stevens as reported in the Fix is another question mark. In fact I think that a number of long term senators will retire between the 2008 and 2012 elections. When the Senate mets for the first time in 2013 you will see a number of new faces maybe even a current California governor. If he could run for president I bet that he would get the nomination and possibly win the election.

I would to point this fact concerning the border situation.There was an article in the NY Times that drug dealers are controlling the traffic of these people.The 'illegals' are being used by these dealers and if they do not co-operate they are killed or raped. This is a serious problem.Governor Henry of OK mentioned on the news that the mom & pop meth labs in his state are being closed in part because of the new laws but that tons of meth was crossing over the border from Mexico into his state. The gang in Mexico are cutting off policemans heads and sticking them on fence posts. It doesnt take a genius to see that if the US cracks down on illegal immigration the drug cartels are going to hit back hard.I am not saying that we should not do anything about this. Organized crime is increasing their involvement and they fight anyone or any government. The issue of how to control the traffic between the US & Mexico unfortunately evolved from treating these people with some dignity while maintaining the border to an issue of national security.Look at Colombia and if you do not think that what happened there could not happen here I think that you are mistaken. If this situation continues to go south look for the military to back up law enforcement.I am not talking about the National Guard I refer to the Army, Marines etc.I know that there are laws regarding the involvement of the miltary in civillian affairs but if organized crime feels that a US government crackdown is cutting into their bottom line we could have a nasty border war on our hands.New laws can be passed and placed into action. The sad part of this is that a lot of innocent people are caught in the crossfire and could end being caught in a border war. Many border communities have long term relationships. Many of these 'illegals' are just trying to survive and it looks like they will end up becoming caught in the continuing struggle between the drug cartels and the government. Both Washington & Mexico City seem to be unable to deal with this .In Washington its is politics in Mexico City it is corruption. I think that if this situation continues to deteriorate within a few years this will become the major national security isue.Dealing with illegals will be the least of our problems because the main one will dealing with violent drug cartels who have unlimited funds to buy anyone and anything and can match the US military in fire power.In the movie Chisum the character played by Forrest Tucker says the problem with Chisum is that Chisum follows the law and that he owns the law. Our next 9/11 may come over from over the border and we lack the leadership to deal with it

Truth Hunter, Patrick Fitzgerald because a US attorney in New York City in 1988. Libby worked for Marc Rich until 2000 in that case. Libby vs. Fitzgerald did happen and that was the whole issue in the Libby obstruction of justice/perjury cases. Fitzgerald worked on that case and so did Libby. Read it for yourself. Let's look at the facts. Libby and Fitzgerald were both in New York from 1988 on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Fitzgerald
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Rich

The argument that both were not in NYC at the same time is completely and utterly false. During this time, Fitzgerald did some work on the Rich case and that began a rough fued with Libby. These websites are proof they were both in NYC in 1988. The case continued until 2000, and Libby represented Rich until 2000. Fitzgerald didn't leave NY until 2001. He had a part in this case and hated Libby b/c of it, that's why he went after him now.

Lying under oath - about a BJ. Not a very convincing fact. At least his veep knew which branch of government he was in.

"If you care to discuss facts, Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. Perjury. Get the facts straight rufus. Or don't you know what the meaning of "is" is?"

Ok so "trapping" a government officail to tell the truth is un-just or fishing. But a man's personal life is not? did they already know if he did it or not? What differance would it make either way? If he did or didn't how does that effect you GOP. Of course he lied about his personal relationship. He has a wife :). Libby. That effects me directly. That effects you. Hypocrites. You people shut the government down over this. Are the democarts shutting the government down? No. After all the laws bush has breaked they still will not. Why? They care more about the country than their party. The gop has shone you face. Hypocrites, fascsits, only care about money, traittors. The american people reject fascsim. We fought the Nazi's and defeated them. You people are done. YOu just don't knwo it yet.

THIS IS REALITY CALLING GOP

rufus - That's still not an answer to the CIB question.

Ever wonder why you keep avoding answering it?

Or, did you just land on your head falling off one of those jump towers?

Did any of you notice that Sen. McCain is the only candidate from either party who currently sits on Capitol Hill who simply does NOT ask for earmarks?

donny j - OK.

I mean, I'll support Hillary over any GOP anyway, I just think she'd have the easiest time trumping the sorry man named Mitt.

Mark in Austin, I love you, but I have a right to strategically root for a candidate from a party I'm not a member of in hopes of dealing with a likely scenario, hyeah?

"Impeachment for a BJ?"

If you care to discuss facts, Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. Perjury. Get the facts straight rufus. Or don't you know what the meaning of "is" is?

my goal is to get Rush/HAnnity/O'reilly off the air. Not for liberals, for you GOP. My grandpa has been lied to for DECADES. How many other elderly out of touch amreicans are being fed a false reality to line Rush's/Hannity pockets?

I'm not here here for the Dems/liberals. I'm here to help save your soul. think about the future. How will the history books record the last 20 years? Impeachment for a BJ? WOW. Think about the future.

my goal is to get Rush/HAnnity/O'reilly off the air. Not for liberals, for you GOP. My grandpa has been lied to for DECADES. How many other elderly out of touch amreicans are being fed a false reality to line Rush's/Hannity pockets?

I'm here here for the Dems/liberals. I'm here to help save your soul. think about the future. How will the history books record the last 20 years? Impeachment for a BJ? WOW. Think about the future.

You show your face GOP. Guilt is GOd. Remember that.

Try and conversate like a big boy. Better. Does that help you GOP? I know it's hard to think for yourself and put it together. You know I only misspell to give you fascsits something OTHER than the facts to talk about. Without me misspeeling wht would you say? How could you enter the convo? I don't blog for liberals GOP. I blog for you. Guilt is God. Hope is God. Fear? Fear doesn't really exist. PAin?

"Trying to conversate like a big boy" -rufus

Try to use correct English instead of making up words like your boy West or Sharpton. Try to stop repeating yourself in every post, day after day. Basically what we're all begging you to do is...get a life, dude.

You say I lie. Where. You say I'm a headcase. You are the headcase. I come here to proclaim truths. I come here to make others aware of links they many not see. Why do you come here? To TRY and discredit. To try to get people to question said links. With zero proof, in fact the facts are not on you side.

There is a web site. It's called http://en.wikipedia.org/wik

It's an on-line encycopedia. Read up. Rather than the elementary school kid arguement of "I know you are but what am I."

I know you learn from the worst. Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly are done for a reason. You cnanot do what they do. We have courts in this counrty for a reason. Being part of the GOP mafia does not intitle you to free lawyers working for Fox. Maybe it does BUT THEY ARE NOT LAWYERS. They are propogandists and liars, as you are. Rther than talking about "clinton did the same thing" Ot in 1795 Blah blah blah". Why not talk about what is. If Bush and his cronies SHOULDN"T BE CAHRGED FOR TREASON, tell me why. Rather than attacking credibility or bringing up the past. John Wayne is dead. The year is 2007. The old rules no longer apply. We have the intrnet now. You cannot lie and propogate blindly without it cacthing up to you.

This is why the GOP gameof divide and coquer is over, and hence the GOP. At this time america needs to come together. You and your AVATARS are doing the opposite. Why? So they can get the bigger yacht. So they can get that privete jet. Their BMW;s aren't enough for these pigs. They need the rolls royce. The 30 foot yacht isn't big enough. They need the 200 footer. They are playing you like a fiddle zouk. They are laughing at you.

Trying to conversate like a big boy. you got prove bring it forward. I know you mother WAS a fascist and lead you down the wrong path. Not my fault. Trying to help you and those like you.

This way many years from now when your at the pearly gates, YOU CAN'T SAY NOBODY TOLD YOU. YOu can't say I didn't know I was doing wrong. Heed. Guilt is God buddy. Listen to God. Your movement is over for my lifetime, and rightfully so. Don't go down kicking and screaming. Don't go down unibomber style. we are americans. Remember TRUTH JUSTICE AND THE AMERICAN WAY. YOu remember that. What have you and your people done to this country

"many Christian right leaders have been saying that people should not vote against someone because he/she is Mormon."

What they should be saying is that people should not vote for someone who is a serial flip-flopper regardless of their faith.

Hello??? R primary voters!! Why give the dems an easy target in the general? We must nominate a moderate R who can attract Indies and blue-dogs, otherwise we'll get President Clinton again.

(none poster)

I see brave( one poster) zouk comes out of the woodworks when I say I'm done for the day. What a coward. Keep attacking people for proclaiming truths. It shows eveybody here what you and your movement are about.

Army Infantry 11B Fort Benning GA. Recognize you fascsit.

"What if we were on camera all day everywhere," - rufus

We are and have been for quite a while. Look around

Sam (08:51 PM) somebody asked the other day if I had what I was asking rufus to provide a simple Yes or No answer to. I told them.

If you don't like me challening the headcase rufus1133 to put up or shut up on something he's trying to squeeze some credibility out of - Tough!

Either scroll past it, or just MYOFB.

BTW, Sam - you do a good job of cutting ansd pasting without providing a source for the information.

Word is born, Rufus! Tell it like it is...

I agree that Romney is problematic for the Republicans. There are a lot of evangelicals who simply will not vote for a Mormon. I heard some interviews with Republican evangelicals attending a large evangelical gathering. It was scary - one woman said that she did not consider Mormons and Catholics Christians and she could never ever vote for a non-Christian. Several others reiterated the 'Mormons are not Christians and I only vote for Christians' line. A significant number of the Republican base will never vote for a Mormon and as closely divided as the country is, that could be the difference. Add to that the evangelicals who are suspicious of Romney's recent conversion to conservative social positions and he could lose quite a few Republican base voters.

Now if Senator Clinton - who by every account is a devout Methodist - runs against Romney, the evangelicals will have an interesting dilemna. She has been so demonized in those circles that some of these evangelicals might hold their noses and vote for Romney. Especially since many Christian right leaders have been saying that people should not vote against someone because he/she is Mormon.

To hot for me today. CAn't blog. I might be a little to venomous due to the heat.

Peace in the middle east. Everyone have a good weekend.

OOHHH. And zouk is a fascist

So McCain is pinning his hopes on state he ignored eight years ago was ignoring now until he realized he couldn't ignore it anymore. He'll have to be one hell of a vote getting to make people in Iowa forget he didn't like them enough to ask for their votes before.

I think Chris you may want to put Ron Paul ahead of McCain on the next line. After all he drew 1,000 people in a rally at Des Moines last weekend. Take a guess what McCain will pull in?

donny j., unless you believe MR will be a competent Prez, please do not wish for his nomination. IF you think HRC will not be a competent Prez, support a D you trust, as hard as you can. Send money. Volunteer. Talk to your D friends.

We have seen the results of picking candidates who are not the best and the most competent and those results are unpredictable as to which party will win, but very predictable for the harm it will do to the USA.

Please please please may mitt romney win the nomination. He's the only GOP (excepting the trancedo/hunter/paul types) who can lose to Hillary, who sadly may very well coast to the november ballot.

Please please please may mitt romney win the nomination. He's the only GOP (excepting the trancedo/hunter/paul types) who can lose to Hillary, who sadly may very well coast to the november ballot.

To believe in America's political values and to observe the importance of its role in the world is not "American exceptionalism." Like all countries, America has erred many times and has been capable of evil. Other countries have critically important virtues that America lacks. As I detail in my book, America has been far too quick to use war as a foreign policy option and has become increasingly imperialistic in precisely the way the Founders so stridently warned against.

But those who focus on America's flaws to the exclusion of its virtues are but the opposite side of the same Manichean coin from the American exceptionalists who believe that we can do no wrong, that America is inherently Good independent of our conduct in the world. What the Pew poll demonstrates is that the face America has shown to the world during the Bush presidency -- at least insofar as the world perceives it, a vitally important metric -- is a fundamentally different one than they saw previously.

In the last six years, America's brutality, unrestrained aggression, and violation of our own professed values have been transformed from destructive aberration into our defining attributes. And the world's population sees that transformation quite clearly and, as a result, their view of America has transformed along with it.

"America had become, in the eyes of the world, un-American.

The America we loved - the America which, if it did not always match words to ideals, still seemed to move more in jerks and starts towards those ideals, died, choking, gasping, in front of our very eyes.

"

http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070613/NEWS01/706130461/1002

I hear you Colin. I currently live in nevada. Gov Gibbons is under investigation for selling defense contractors to his freinds then getting kick-backs. The company makes software. I don't know if you've heard of this. You wanna talk about big brother.

This software scans everybody's face via a camera. There is facisl recognition that can tell you the name and legal histroy. The propirties of this are very scary. What if we were on camera all day everywhere, as Lieberman wants. Then those cameras facial recognize who everyone is on camera. What does that mean?

The goverment whould know who eveybody is and where everybody is at all times. A free soceity? Is that america? Scary time. I'm fleing to the jungles of south America and living like the white hairy gorrilla:) Swiss family robinson style

Colin -

I actually thought that was already how the "secret searches" operated. I was opposed to that aspect of FISA warrants needlessly, until now, apparently.

Note sure if anyone's noticed this, but your civil liberties just eroded a bit more thanks to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals:

http://howappealing.law.com/070607.html#026723

Basic gist? You don't have standing to challenge the NSA's warrantless surveillance program unless you can show that you were under surveillance. However, the government has no obligation to let anyone know if they've been under survellance. In fact, the government need not even claim exuctive privilege (where they'd have to justify the claim), but can simply allege application of the state secrets privilege, which essentially means they don't have to say anything.

Final result? It's essentially impossible to challenge the program, which -- on the merits -- clearly violated FISA and probably separation of powers.

JimD - again we seem to share the same hopes and fears.

Thanks for the direct reply.

"A British financial magazine reported today that Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. had agreed on terms for its $5 billion bid for Dow Jones & Co. Inc.. But Dow Jones now denies that deal, while confirming talks go on.

A Dow Jones spokesperson told E&P at 10:30 this morning that the report was "incorrect" and said a full statement was coming.

"The only agreement is on editorial independence," said Andrea Grinbaum, a spokeswoman.

Reuters reported at 10 a.m. ET that News Corp. "has not yet reached a deal to buy Dow Jones & Co. Inc. as discussions continue over such issues as price, a source familiar with the matter said on Friday"

See what I mean? Whcih is it. Did he buy it or not. Fricking republicans. Frickin drudgereport.

POO. He bought the dow Jones. China bought the dow jones everybody. POO. Not good for REAL AMericans

"By criticizing Domenici for changing his mind, you're saying that Republicans should continue to support the war. You'd rather see more of our soldiers die than see a Republican do what's right. Now who's being selfish?"

Your missing my point blarg. The only reason he changes his position is because he's up for re-elcetion. I wish they ALL would change their stance. NOT BECAUSE THIEIR UP FOR RE-ELECTION. But because we have thousands of people dying. Not because they're up for re-election but becasue it's the right thing to do.

If all politicains make decisions based on if they run again of not, what kind of decsisions would thye make? You missing the point. I wish they would all switch. Are the repus NOT up for re-election cahging their tune? No. That is my point.

Mark,

Senator Clinton also worked with Newt Gingrich on an effort to find bipartisan solutions to health care problems. Trent Lott has been quoted as saying she was nothing like he expected in terms of reasonableness and willingness to really work with Republicans. Where I doubt her ability to forge bipartisan consensus as president is her demonization by the right. Will especially the more conservative House Republicans be willing to be seen as cooperating with the Wicked Witch of the Eastern Liberal Establishment. It would be somewhat less problematic for Senators. Should she be elected, the conservative fund raising machine will be sending out mailings every few weeks denouncing the socialist in the White House and please send money so we can thwar her. The right wing noise machine will use her to ratchet up their ratings.

Rufus, pay attention. Domenici is now in favor of withdrawing the troops. I don't care if he wants to pull out of Iraq because he's honestly concerned, or to make sure that he keeps his job. The end result is the same, and that's what matters.

By criticizing Domenici for changing his mind, you're saying that Republicans should continue to support the war. You'd rather see more of our soldiers die than see a Republican do what's right. Now who's being selfish?

"How disgusting that the WaPo, once a serious paper, sinks to the bottom of the gutter. Today there's an interview with John Edwards hairstylist, with a link to Drudge. "

I emailed that stroy to (Agent) Ben SMith. He is the guy who "broke" the $400 haircut story. I've been destroying his blog since and emailing him. Asking him why he doesn't work for us weekly or something.

So I emailed him that story and told him, "I know this is big breacking news to your viewers."

He didn't report it. What a joke the media is

"I disagree, person who refuses to sign their posts for some idiotic reason. The Republican senators want to keep their jobs. Domenici is up for re-election in 2008. He knows that the war is going to be a big issue in the 2008 election, and he knows that it's unpopular. A vote to bring the troops home might get him re-elected; a vote to continue the war will definitely make him unemployed."

wHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT. tHSI GUY KEEPING HIS JOB, Or the blood ofthe troops. The hoe hum attitude of you people is remarkable. over 3500 troops are dead, nearly 27000 injured. That's not counting other countries, Iraq UK. But this guy changes hi smind because he want's to stay in office? And that's good politics. PArty over country. Self over country. He must be a republcian. Sell-outs, traitors.

Where are their morales? They chance if they are up for re-election? Wow. What about the blood of our troops?

drindl and Bokonon, thanks for your comments on RG. I had read the FT article. I have long thought that Sen. McCain was the best possible R for the nation, but I am moving more rapidly than I thought I would, considering how early this is, toward believing he is the only R who would be a competent President.

Matthew, at 9:58p last night, said that HRC was the most bipartisan Sen. after McCain, I think in response to a post in which I had said I did not know about her ability to reach across the aisle. Then he cited a blog that did not amplify his assertion for me. I do believe that working across the aisle will continue to be important in America, so if any of you have cites to articles about HRC's Senate work with Rs, I am interested.

I know Biden and Dodd, I know Richardson, and I "sense" in Obama a skilled negotiator, but I am not from NY, and HRC makes the news in Texas when she launches verbal assaults in the Senate. I do know that she worked with DeLay on foster care funding. So, again, whatever you know about HRC as "bipartisan", as Matthew put it, I am all eyes.

To concentrate this barrage of media attention on a haircut -for months -- is simply an indicator of how trivial and destructive politics in this country has become and how far the media will go to ridicule democrats.

Laura Bush spends $700 on a haircut every 3 weeks. Ever hear about that?

Television gasbags gleefully recycled this Edwards nonsense all day, based upon the latest Soloman story and treating it like it's news. Matthews said "sometimes small stories can reveal big things." He pretends he's cleverly pointing out that Edwards is a phony populist for getting expensive haircuts but what he's really doing is pushing GOP propaganda that Edwards is effeminate and soft. Like all Democrats.

Fox's Major Garrett just did a huge piece on this "controversy" ending with this:

"The stylist said 'I try to make the man handsome, strong, more mature and these are the things, as an expert, that's what we do.' For sheer irony, that Edwards seems to believe he needs all three, might be the sharpest cut of all."

They've played the "I Feel pretty" video three times in the last half hour. '

the country's entire media network, in the bag for republicans. watching the smear machine winding up ... the media swiftboaters get ready to destroy whoever the dem candidate is --with ridicule, as they have since Mondale. whether's it's 'earth tones' or 'breck girl' or discrediting a war hero they will do everything in their power to bring the dems down.

Final note -

The only thing funnier than the haircut is Edwards supporters who self-righteously lambast people who find the haircut funny. As Bloomberg said, "Get a life."

"how things work" is that the haircut is genuinely funny. It was Edwards' tone-deafness not to realize that he had a rep for primping. He should have actively counterbalanced his rep by grooming simply. Instead he fed into it in a very, very humorous and catchy way. What else can he expect besides lots of media coverage? Anything funny gets eaten up. It is the way of the world. Edwards is a want-to-be, but fortunately too tone-deaf to pull the stunt off.

Abusing the pardon/commuting privilege to cover up your own criminal tracks is a Bush family tradition:

But in a single stroke, Mr. Bush swept away one conviction, three guilty pleas and two pending cases, virtually decapitating what was left of Mr. Walsh's effort, which began in 1986. Mr. Bush's decision was announced by the White House in a printed statement after the President left for Camp David, where he will spend the Christmas holiday.

Mr. Walsh bitterly condemned the President's action, charging that 'the Iran-contra cover-up, which has continued for more than six years, has now been completed.'

Mr. Walsh directed his heaviest fire at Mr. Bush over the pardon of Mr. Weinberger, whose trial would have given the prosecutor a last chance to explore the role in the affair of senior Reagan officials, including Mr. Bush's actions as Vice President.

What can you say. Like father, like son.

Many Beltway reporters at the nation's three biggest newspapers are now taking up St. David's call to help the pundits take back control of American politics and refocus the political discourse back where it belongs: Away from serious issues that affect actual people, and towards the issues that the D.C. cocktail party goers care about. In the same Washington Post that prints his Common Sense-echoing call to arms, John Solomon pens a 1,200 word investigative expose on the pressing crisis of John Edwards hair - a Watergate-style dispatch that brings up memories of the great muckraking journalists throughout history. Deftly pretending that reporters like himself have nothing to do with the exposure this story has gotten and nothing to do with trying to make this story drown out pressing economic and national security issues, Solomon states that "it is some kind of commentary on the state of American politics that as Edwards has campaigned for president, vice president and now president again, his hair seems to have attracted as much attention as, say, his position on health care." That came on the same day the New York Times' Patrick Healy breathlessly works to drive the 2008 presidential debate into a focus on how critical Hillary Clinton's jokes about Bill Clinton's onion ring eating habits are.

St. David Broder has taken to the pages of the Washington Post to declare that "a particularly virulent strain of populism" has emerged. And, says St. David, the consequences threaten America, and perhaps the entire Planet because this populism "has made official Washington altogether too responsive to public opinion." He makes this powerful assertion with compelling fury - fearlessly ignoring the fact that Congress still refuses to create a universal health care system, expand environmental regulations, rescind the Bush tax cuts or end the war in Iraq - all things national opinion polls show the public is demanding.

St. David instead "proves" his manifesto by specifically attacking Congress's recent moves to respond to the 2006 election mandate and try to change America's lobbyist-written and pundit backed trade policies that have thrown millions of workers out of their jobs, driven wages down, torn apart health care and pension benefits - all while inflating profit margins on Wall Street and K Street.

That the Secret Trade Deal of 2007 was delayed and that fast-track will be terminated with the strong support of millions of Americans but over the objections of the Washington pundit class - this, above all else, he says, is the most frightening form of "mob rule."

to the rightwing pundit class, democracy = mob rule. let them eat cocktail weinies.

Apparently the article made you so sick that you passed out for 24 hours. That article is from yesterday. And it contains no link to Drudge, except maybe in the "Who's Blogging" section, which is generated by Technorati.

--another one cuts and runs...

ALBUQUERQUE Rep. John Doolittle [R], a conservative California congressman, today joined others in his party rapidly deserting the president on the Iraq war.

At a town hall meeting in Rocklin and then in a meeting with the editorial board of the Sacramento Bee he questioned whether the conflict was worth the loss of more American lives. He said U.S. troops should be pulled back from the front lines "as soon as possible" and the fighting turned over to Iraqi forces.

A longtime supporter of the war, Doolittle called the situation in Iraq a "quagmire" on Thursday. "We've got to get off the front lines as soon as possible," Doolittle said at Rocklin City Hall, the Bee reported. "And in my mind that means something like the end of the year. We just can't continue to tolerate these kinds of losses.

"I don't want to keep having our people dying on the front lines. I am increasingly convinced that we never are going to succeed in actually ending people dying (in Iraq). I think it's going to be a constant conflict ... and if that is going to happen ... it needs to be the Iraqis dying and not the Americans."

Later he told the Bee's editorial board: "My belief is that the majority of my colleagues on the Republican side have become skeptical of all of this. And that's a big change."

Doolittle said colleagues in Congress -- including an increasing number of Republicans -- believe the war "is something different than we believed it to be. And we're gravely at risk by constantly having our troops exposed."

Mark -- here's somethng you might want to know about Fred Thompson:

WASHINGTON -- The day before Senate Watergate Committee minority counsel Fred Thompson made the inquiry that launched him into the national spotlight -- asking an aide to President Nixon whether there was a White House taping system -- he telephoned Nixon's lawyer.

Thompson tipped off the White House that the committee knew about the taping system and would be making the information public. In his all-but-forgotten Watergate memoir, "At That Point in Time," Thompson said he acted with "no authority" in divulging the committee's knowledge of the tapes, which provided the evidence that led to Nixon's resignation. It was one of many Thompson leaks to the Nixon team, according to a former investigator for Democrats on the committee, Scott Armstrong , who remains upset at Thompson's actions.

"Thompson was a mole for the White House," Armstrong said in an interview. "Fred was working hammer and tong to defeat the investigation of finding out what happened to authorize Watergate and find out what the role of the president was."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/07/04/not_all_would_put_a_heroic_sheen_on_thompsons_watergate_role/

How disgusting that the WaPo, once a serious paper, sinks to the bottom of the gutter. Today there's an interview with John Edwards hairstylist, with a link to Drudge.

It literally makes me sick to my stomach. The rest of the world can't stop laughing at us --how pathetic.

Make you realize just how far and just how desperately the media will fight for the republican party.

Jerry Bowyer from National Review Online went on Fox today and chatted with Neil Cavuto about how having a single payer health care system will make us more vulnerable to terrorism.

How do they come up with this sh*t? And how on earth is anyone stupid enough to believe it?

Mark -- Rudy is the most ill-tempered and egotistical politician in the country. He makes Bush look cooperative. He is vain, overreaching and inflammatory and was a terrible mayor -- antagonized literally everyone - police department, fire department, city council. His tax cuts for wealthy new yorkers left the city wihtout proper safety equipment [remembers the radios which didn't work on 9/11?] likely costing many lives on that day.

He is a ruthless, shameless opportunist and demagogue -- see golgi's comment above.

I can understand why you might like Thompson, but he too is very dangerous --tied in to the Cheney/Libby bunch since Iran/Contra and Nixon. He too, will simply be a continuation of the endless war /bottomless debt policies oof this administration.

McCain I could live with, although his pandering is distrubing, but I don't think the republican party is capable at this point of nominating anyone sane.

F&B - Re your post about the baseball game, spite is never attractive. This isn't a bad time to recall that some respect for the presidential officeholder is basic good manners.

Restrain Bush's harmful actions, yes, absolutely, that is vital for America and for many other global communities. But, spitefully crow over any little personal issues that might occur and you are just cutting off your noise to spite your face.

Democrats will be the winners if we can rise above spite. Every individual Democrat who decides that he or she will personally rise above anti-Bush spite is actually contributing something positive to the Democratic party.

I disagree, person who refuses to sign their posts for some idiotic reason. The Republican senators want to keep their jobs. Domenici is up for re-election in 2008. He knows that the war is going to be a big issue in the 2008 election, and he knows that it's unpopular. A vote to bring the troops home might get him re-elected; a vote to continue the war will definitely make him unemployed.

I don't think he's pretending. I think he's changing his mind. And whether it's because of a real change of heart or just a political calculation, I think it's good news. Unless Republicans stop supporting this pointless waste of money and lives, the war isn't going to end until at least 2009. I'd rather Domenici help end the war now than his Democratic replacement end it in 2 years.

Put down the name of Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM) as the latest Republican to break with the Bush Administration's policies on Iraq, after a long history of backing their positions in Congress. In a speech earlier today in Albuquerque, Domenici announced his support for legislation currently championed by Senators Ken Salazar (D-CO) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN) to make the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group into the official U.S. policy -- in other words, Domenici now supports a gradual pulldown of the American presence in Iraq, and a renewed effort at reaching out to other regional players in the Middle East like Iran and Syria.

"I have carefully studied the Iraq situation, and believe we cannot continue asking our troops to sacrifice indefinitely while the Iraqi government is not making measurable progress to move its country forward," Domenici said. "I do not support an immediate withdrawal from Iraq or a reduction in funding for our troops. But I do support a new strategy that will move our troops out of combat operations and on the path to coming home."

--this is how the repugs will play it out in 2008. pretend they're for getting out of iraq... but they will never vote to force bush's hand, and hence we will not be getting out because they have the votes to overrule dems.

don't beleive their lies. the only way we will EVER be getting out of iraq is a veto-prooof dem majority. work for it.

Page A1 in W.P. today has Giuliani vs. Bloomberg comparison. Good reading! Here is an excerpt.

"... the contrast [between Bloomberg and Giuliani] surfaced again last month in the two men's reactions to the foiling of an alleged plot to explode fuel tanks at John F. Kennedy International Airport. Giuliani seized on it to bolster his campaign's theme, saying, 'Today's arrests remind us that we are at war.' Bloomberg offered a noticeably milder response: 'You can't sit there and worry about everything. You have a much greater danger of being hit by lightning than being struck by a terrorist. Get a life.'"

What do you notice about those two comments? What I notice is that Bloomberg's comment just isn't something that someone really intending to run for president would say... but it is darn good advice. Isn't there any more effective place than a fake presidential campaign for Bloomberg to have a public forum? We all need to hear more comments like that one.

On the July 5 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, while discussing President Bush's commutation of former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's jail sentence, Neal Boortz falsely claimed that "Scooter Libby and Bill Clinton got sentenced and convicted for exactly the same crime." As Media Matters for America has previously noted, Clinton was not indicted on criminal charges of perjury by independent counsel Robert Ray or his predecessor, Kenneth Starr. By contrast, a federal jury convicted Libby on four counts of perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements. U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton subsequently sentenced him to 30 months in federal prison.

After Boortz made his false statement, a caller responded, "I don't remember Bill Clinton actually being convicted for perjury." Boortz told the caller: "I'm sorry, he was." When the caller stated that the Senate had acquitted Clinton on impeachment charges, Boortz repeated the falsehood a third time, saying: "We're talking about a criminal trial, sir. The verdict was guilty."

Triple-digit temperatures are forecast to set records in parts of the West today. Forecasters predict a high of 107 in Boise -- six degrees higher than the 101 record for that date set in 1985.

"He has given numerous speeches and participated in business ventures with the Carlyle Group, a private equity fund with close ties to the government of Saudi Arabia. Additionally, he held the position of Senior Advisor to the Carlyle Group's Asia Advisory Board from April 1998 to October 2003. In January 2006, Bush wrote a letter to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) of the People's Republic of China on behalf of the Carlyle Group. In the letter, Bush urged the Chinese government to approve an impending deal in which the Chinese government would sell 85% share ownership of the troubled Guangdong Development Bank to a consortium led by Citibank. In addition to praising Citibank and the other foreign member of the consortium, the Carlyle Group, Bush also intimated that a successful acquisition would be "beneficial to the comprehensive development of Sino-US relations."

On January 3, 2005, Bush and Bill Clinton were named by the current President Bush to lead a nationwide campaign to help the victims of the Indian Ocean tsunami. Bush and Clinton both appeared on the Super Bowl XXXIX pre-game show on Fox in support of their bipartisan effort to raise money for relief of the disaster through the USA Freedom Corps, an action which Bush described as "transcending politics." Thirteen days later, they both traveled to the affected areas to see how the relief efforts are going.

In August 31, 2005, following the devastation of the Gulf Coast by Hurricane Katrina, Bush again teamed with Clinton to coordinate private relief donations. Reports were common that Bush and Clinton had developed a friendship by now, despite the latter having defeated the former in the 1992 election (such friendships were not unknown, as Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter had developed one despite a similar history). Almost a year later, on May 13, 2006, they received Honorary Diplomas from Tulane University at the school's commencement ceremony."

But I'm the bad man, right zouk

??????

"George H.W. Bush and wife Barbara caught up with Woods' group at the 16th fairway during Wednesday's pro-am at the AT&T National. Bush walked the final holes with Woods in front of a huge gallery and even hit a couple of tee shots at the 18th.

``If anybody laughs when I hit it, they're dead,'' Bush said with a chuckle. ``We've got Secret Service here.''

Wow. Frickin republicans. Funny joke. He should join a comedy club rather than his current job (research on your own. If I tell you it's propgating or I'm lying. If you look it up on your own it's fact somehow.) In bed with the saudi's. Yes those saudi's. Bin laden. 9/11 hijackers. You want current zouk. Those london bombers. The bomb that set ONE guy on fire that has been reported all day everyday. Yeah those saudi's. "vote democrat and die" Now we know that's a threat. I'm not scared to die for my country. How about the rest of you. Better than living under the thumbs of fascists (nazi's 2.0, again research on your own)

bush's grand daddy:

"Harriman Bank was the main Wall Street connection for German companies and the varied U.S. financial interests of Fritz Thyssen, who had been an early financial backer of the Nazi party until 1938, but who by 1939 had fled Germany and was bitterly denouncing Hitler. Business transactions for profit with Nazi Germany were not illegal when Hitler declared war on the US, but, six days after the attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the Trading With the Enemy Act after it had been made public that U.S. companies were doing business with the declared enemy of the United States. On October 20, 1942, the U.S. government ordered the seizure of Nazi German banking operations in New York City. President Franklin Roosevelt's Alien Property Custodian, Leo T. Crowley, signed Vesting Order Number 248 seizing the property of Prescott Bush under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The order, published in obscure government record books and kept out of the news, cited only the Union Banking Corporation (UBC) connections with Von Thyssen. Fox News has reported that recently declassified material "The 4,000 Union Banking shares owned by the Dutch bank were registered in the names of the seven U.S. directors, according a document signed by Homer Jones, chief of the division of investigation and research of the Office of Alien Property Custodian, a World War II-era agency that no longer exists"[2].

E. Roland Harriman--3991 shares (managed and under voting control of Prescott Bush)"

HAIL TO THE CHIEF!!!

George W. Bush turned out Thursday night to catch the last-place Washington Nationals play the Chicago Cubs.

...

Most fans probably did not know Bush was present. There was no advance word of his visit and no announcement over the stadium's public-address system.

At the top of the ninth, when the scoreboard lit up with "Hail to the Chief," it wasn't a reference to Bush but to Nationals relief pitcher Chad Cordero, whose nickname is "Chief." He had just come into the game.

"All U.S. presidents since 1989 have been Yale graduates, namely George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton (who attended the University's Law School along with his wife, New York Senator Hillary Clinton), and George W. Bush, and Vice President Dick Cheney, (although he did not graduate). Many of the 2004 presidential candidates attended Yale: Bush, John Kerry, Howard Dean, and Joe Lieberman.

Other Yale-educated presidents were William Howard Taft (B.A.) and Gerald Ford (LL.B). Alumni also include several Supreme Court justices, including current Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito."

Even if Kerry would have won, we would be in the same position. Much Like Hillary. She is indebted tot eh same people. She is getting money from the same people. Beware of the Yale plan. They lie. Conveint mistakes at just the right time for the gop

I appreciate what you are saying, but Kerry was so annoying and condescending that I voted for Bush simply to vote against Kerry, not necessarily because I liked what Bush was doing. Now that the country is falling apart, I'm not so sure that was a good idea, but what's done is done. I do think that Obama is a vast improvement over Kerry and even H. Clinton doesn't bother me as much as Kerry, although she comes across as quite shrill. Edwards strikes me as phony but he doesn't come across as arrogant like Kerry did. Maybe I just have a problem with East Coast elitists and their way of dealing with people, because I don't really see what it is that they think makes themselves so sophisticated. My point is that the Democratic Party has some very bright people to offer to the country, but it seems like every so often they cannot help themselves and they nominate the worst kind of out-of-touch arrogant people and then they wonder why the Republican Party keeps winning.

In regards to the ism comment. What was america founded for? Was it founded for capitailsim? I think it was founded because a group of people wanted to be free, to escape religous persecution. When did capitalism come into play. I would agrue that the GOP's arguement is that CAPITALISM IS America, rather than the ideals this country was founded on. When did this happen? When did the love of paper superside what this country was founded for. I would agrue that current capitalism REPLACED what thsi country was founded on. It would be hard. Very hard to change that. WE MUST. The results of NOT does so will be disasterous.

So muc so that zouk asks the question, "Show me where treason is illegal?" You know what I'm saying? "Show me where treason is illegal."

That is the mentallity of these people. "If I'm making money, it must be right." Capitalism=slavery.

"In a free soceity no man/woman is subserviant to another. The worker and owner exists with mutual cooperation."

We no longer have a free soceuty. It has been replaced by corporate slavery. The blood fo our troops is labeled "free market". Meaning the blood for money is a trade. Fascism is not cool. Socialism cannot truly exist without democracy. It has never happened in the world's existance. Governments have claimed marxism or socialism but it was a lie. ploy to take control and use fear to turn the people into fascists. True socialism combined with democracy could be utopia. After the industrail revolution we now have the power to ednd hunger. We can put food and water in every house. We can get EVERYBODY electricty. We can build houses for all americans. This is not against american values. This IS american values.

We have the power to change. The only thing stopping us is a few greedy me-first fascists who what to divide and conquer. Why? So thye can feel supirior. So the lines are a little shorter. So a few less people are on the lake or the beach, rather than workling all day for pennies.

1962 is over. The future is now

." you are with us or agisnt us."

I mean "You are with us or against us"

"You're young, rufus, but some of the stuff you say I agree with, just think you need a little more time and seasoning"

Your %100 correct drindl. I don't claim to be a professor of economics or political science. I have my beleifs for my own reasons. I could be wrong. I'm not a know it all. I am angry. I have only been involvede in politcs since 9/11. I'll admit that. I do that I care more than the average person. I also think I have done more work than the nxet guy.

What's makes me so angry is I watched O'REilly/Hannity for YEARS before ever coming out and blogging. I had to listen to tehm FOR years saying anybody that thinks we shouldn't go to iraq are crazy. To long I say them attack everybody Everybody. Media lawyers judges comedians actors anybody not gop." you are with us or agisnt us." I felt I was in an alternate universe. "Why can't everybody else see what I see."

Thanks for that oppurtunity drindl. I'm no genius. I do research. I read deep. I could be wrong about one thing or another. One thing I DON"T do is lie.

When I post you can believe that I think what I'm saying is truth. Now, whether I was lied to or not is a differant stroy. In this climate it is very hard to know what is real and what is propoganda. I blam fox/rush/orelly/hannity.

Sorry for so many posts.

"The Truth is that you lie, rufus!"

Your free to point it out. THAT HASN"T HAPPENED HERE once that I can remember. What has happed is a series of "I know you are but what am I." Or "clinton did teh same thing."

If I'm lying point it out so the other poseters can see. Since this hasn't been done once WE'LL assume I'm not lying.

Gop=elementary school children

"The Truth is that you lie, rufus!"

Your free to point it out. THAT HASN"T HAPPENED HERE once that I can remember. What has happed is a series of "I know you are but what am I." Or "clinton did teh same thing."

If I'm lying so the other poseters. Since this hasn't been done opnce WE'LL assume I'm not lying.

Gop=elementary school children

Sandy, nothing in what you say about Kerry is new to me, although I would not call him a buffoon. But he does come across as condescending and entitled... yet I still voted for him in '04, because I knew, as did almost exactly 1/2 of the rest of the electorate, how much worse the alternative had been and would be.
How right we were.

Why must we be subjected to all these people apologizing for Kerry. I don't have a problem with his war record or whatever. It's just that Kerry is a buffoon, and one of the worst people the Democratic Party has ever nominated. He is just condescending and arrogant toward people

Old story.

1972. The "McGovern Rules", written by Austin lawyer and one of my mentors, Will Davis, change the D Party for a generation.
Another one of my mentors, Sam Houston Clinton, is State D Chair. Briscoe [D] is Gov. and Bentsen and Yarborough,[Ds] are Senators.

August. The McGovern Campaign wants a meeting with Sam Houston Clinton to try to figure out how to carry Texas. Sam arranges the meeting in my law office with my partner and me present. The McGovern Campaign is represented by Taylor Branch, now a well known author and journalist, and a black woman whose name I do not remember.

We meet. Branch asks Sam how McGovern can carry Texas. Sam says the rural papers have not endorsed Nixon yet, out of respect for Gov. Briscoe. Sam says that McGovern must run ads in the rural papers stressing four points:
1] that he was a decorated bombardier in WWW2;
2] that his dad was a Methodist Minister;
3] that he had always opposed gun control in the Senate; and most important, as President
4] he will support Briscoe's screw-worm eradication program.

They laugh. "Screw-worms?" and "We can't run on that in L.A."

Sam says coldly - "You already lost California; you asked me how to carry Texas."

End of meeting.

It's tough for a national D when the national party has no sensitivity to local politics.
The Ds did better this last Congressional race about recognizing that conservative Ds, moderates by national standards, are the Ds in the South and Mountain West and farm belt, and that LA - NYC - Bos is not representative of very much of this country. But there is still room for more acceptance of the center.

From what I have seen, the Rs have mirror image problems; they have bought into their "social conservatism" to the point of embarrassment for many Rs.

If any of you in DC know Branch, ask him if he remembers the night his McGovern Campaign wrote off Texas for a generation.

Mark, from what I have heard in re: Giuliani from my NY friends, he has a hard time working with ANYONE, Republican or Democrat, who does not agree without question to whatever he proposes. He's an egomaniac, apparently. Also, I have heard that a lot of the "cleanup" of NYC that he gets credit for was begun under Dinkins (previous mayor), and RG took credit when it began to pay off in his term...?

Also, if Fred Thompson is elected, it will be because Republicans were looking for a "real" conservative, i.e. neither an NY divorcee nor a Mormon. (Nor McCain, but he's heading for second tier status.)

If that is the case, I would imagine that he would not be as free to pursue a bipartisan agenda as he would have otherwise... as the GOP Great WASP Hope, he will have certain policy expectations to fulfill. Jury's still out on how conservative he is though - I have heard both that he is (or was at one time) pro-choice - ?

Believe it or not, but Hillary is the most bipartisan candidate out there (save for McCain). Just take a peek at her Senate record and you'll see plenty of across the aisle handshakes. And can't forget the Iraq war.

Mark Mellman, pollster for Kerry '04, and liberal activist Robert Borosage on PBR tomorrow at 6 PM.
http://political-buzz.com/?p=249

Bokonon - thanks. I agree with you that this Administration is aberrant.

This was my Governor - I voted for him in '98 because he was good at working across the aisle. The religious right froze him and Kay Bailey Hutchison out of the state Republican Convention, because they did not tow the line.

So imagine my surprise...

My sense is that Obama, Biden, Richardson, or Dodd; and McCain, and maybe FThompson on past performance, can work across the aisle. I am not dismissing Sen. Clinton, but I would have to be convinced. I also am not dismissing RG, yet. Rufus' dream of no GOP and KOZ's dream of no Ds just is not in the near future of this country, as most of us know. We have too much history. And the next Administration has some holes to climb out of. I am going to post separately an old story of partisanship.

thank you, bokonon, for your eloquence...

Mark, you make a good point. Thing is, divided governmental control worked for Reagan (2nd term) and George the First, but that was a different era... there were partisan differences, but enough in each party recognized the need to work together that bipartisan coalitions could usually form on most of the big issues.

I think the modern era began in '94, with Gingrich and the contract with America. That was when a lot of the most partisan of the lawmakers we have today came in, as I remember, without much to worry about but scoring points on Clinton. But for all his other weaknesses, Clinton has at least as much political skill as Reagan, and easily more than George I... and the economy improved throughout his term in office, to the extent that - as we all remember - he left office with a hefty surplus.

And a reminder to everyone - he was starting to use it to pay down the national debt! It was the GOP, NOT the supposedly spendthrift Democrats, who decided that it was NOT bad, in fact preferable, to carry a little debt. Conveniently, this decision was reached right around the time that Bush II took office promising to cut taxes... mainly for those who did not need a tax cut, as it turned out.

Then came 09.11, and the tax cut became a good idea because it would supposedly kick start the economy. But it didn't. Then we had to KEEP the tax cuts in place so US companies would not go overseas. But they did. Now we're at the point where repealing these stupid giveaways to the rich is "unfair," and promises serious damage to the economy... I would guess that would be wrong, too.

Unfortunately, not many, and even fewer in leadership, have the cojones to say so. In any case, we now have divided government once again, with the difference that Bush has decided that any laws he doesn't like, he doesn't have to obey. Is divided government a good idea normally? Maybe. Is it working now? No - because we have 09.11 hangover still, and a president who thinks he's a king.

Whoever the irritating poster is who claims Rufus lies about his military service, tell us about yours or STFU. I notice you don't use a name either, ignorant coward.

Bokonon, mark in austin and JimD in Florida -- thank you as always for your sensible contributions.

You're young, rufus, but some of the stuff you say I agree with, just think you need a little more time and seasoning... socialism is not the answer, nor is captialism, communism, fascism, christianity, islam, juadaism, or what is called today conservatism... none of the 'isms' -- it's just too much ideology and too much faith in one school of thought.

And JD, your total belief in the 'magic of the markets' is just as simplistic as a cult religion. Capitalism has its faults too. And we don't have 'free market' capitallism anyway -- it's crony, third-world banana republic feudal nepotism. It serves only to enrich the few and allow them to consolidate control of all resources, leaving the great majority of us powerless.

What we need is a sensible combination of schools of thought-- none of them is perfect and to depend on any one is like depending on a one-legged stool.

We need to tear ourselves away from purist ideologies and think of broader answers to the complex issues we face in the 21st century.

The Truth is that you lie, rufus!

As a christian man. Imagine my dismay. I wish you dittoheads where half as smart as you claim. Sad day. I wish you COULD think for yourselves. I wish you were individuals. Better yet I wish Jesus or God Him/herself were you avatars,like I picture myself. Imagine God having to bring him/herslef down to combat such a little NAT like Rush or Sean Hannity. You put these fascsists on the same level. Not cool. All the while claiming to be christians? NOt cool. You time is almost up. You have created a monster GOP. Now you have to stop it.

"In Hindu philosophy, an avatar (also spelt as avatara) (Sanskrit: अवतार, avatāra), most commonly refers to the incarnation (bodily manifestation) of a higher being (deva), or the Supreme Being (God) onto planet Earth. The Sanskrit word avatāra- literally means "descent" (avatarati) and usually implies a deliberate descent into lower realms of existence for special purposes. The term is used primarily in Hinduism, for incarnations of Vishnu whom many Hindus worship as God. Shiva and Ganesha are also described as descending in the form of avatars, with the Ganesha Purana and the Mudgala Purana detailing Ganesha's avatars specifically.

The word has also been used by extension to refer to the incarnations of God or highly influential teachers in other religions, especially by adherents to dharmic traditions when explaining figures such as Jesus or Mohammed."

Not without your avatars D. Not without Fox "news"/ Rush/hannity/O'REilly/Savage/Ingram/Malkin

Give me them I'll leave. I'll get the one "liberal" off the air for you (olberman). Until that day you can't stop me. What are you afraid of.

You can only combat lies with truth.
You can only combat hate with love.
You can only combat intolerance with understanding.

Which side am I on? how about the GOP/zouk?

If you are right why do you NEED lyin gpropogandists to get your message out? The answer speaks for itself.

"I wish someone WOULD try and shut me down."

Be a self-starter! Do it yourself!

Bokonon - Your 5:56P post made its points.

I'll look at this again very late tonight.

If you see this, tell me what you think of the theory that split government [WH and Capitol in different Party hands] works better than one party government.

I thought Clinton with Rs and Bush 41 with Ds actually worked better than any single party rule I can remember.

somebody has to shut these fascsits down. If not cindy who. The conservative media? The DOJ? the crooked supreame court?

If not cindy who? Conress. They're cowards

Cindy Sheehan is a beacon of light. Anyone bad mouthing her shows their face. Anyone bad-mouthing Mrs tillman show their face.

Rather than look at the facts it's " do you have a cid" or "the clinton's did that" or "in 1897 a dem blah blah blah."

Anything to take away from the facts. These people choose party over country and continue. That is treason. You show you face zouk. Keep talking :)

"Cindy -Call me old-fashioned, but a grief-stricken war mother shouldn't have her own full-time PR flack. After your third profile on "Entertainment Tonight," you're no longer a grieving mom; you're a C-list celebrity trolling for a book deal or a reality show. "

Tell me more about Sheehan. Tell me more about what she can and CAN'T do. Tell me more. THis is your american, right? What can she do and not do. I was under teh assumption she was free to voice her consciance.

you people. Have you lost a son? Let's bring it closer to home zouk.

You send your son to work as a contractor building a house/road. His company runs their operation on the cheap. No only that but the road or house doesn't really need fixing. They are just trying to get the insurance/tax money. While fixing said road/house your son dies. Are you going to sue? Are you gong to be a little angry. What if the owner of said comapany was super rich, didn't need the money and was just doing it cause he was a greedy pig. Your telling me you would keep your mouth shut. Would your son be dead in vein?

" the least we can do is to limit blatantly political messages in the last days of a campaign"

Ie the new verb "swift-boating"

" the least we can do is to limit blatantly political messages in the last days of a campaign"

Ie the new verb "sift-boating"

Cindy -Call me old-fashioned, but a grief-stricken war mother shouldn't have her own full-time PR flack. After your third profile on "Entertainment Tonight," you're no longer a grieving mom; you're a C-list celebrity trolling for a book deal or a reality show.

If one dead son means no one can win an argument with you, how about two dead sons? What if the person arguing with you is a mother who also lost a son in Iraq and she's pro-war? Do we decide the winner with a coin toss?

Must have shone to much of himself and his movement for one day.

Zouk,

"Why are you Libs always so big brother regulation happy.. just to stop a few hucksters from misleading some idiots?"

-It's more than "a few hucksters" and "some idiots." Many - most? - people ("idiots") do not have the time or the motivation to follow politics closely, and rely on a cursory viewing of TV for their info. Some channels are full of deliberate hucksters - Fox comes to mind - who, with flashy graphics and a slanted, simplistic story, can easily influence those who either can't or won't put any deeper thought into their vote. And those are the "news" stations. Political consultants and advertisers, while still unregulated, do not feel compelled at all to ascertain that what they present is true, as long as it is effective. As we can neither require voters to demonstrate that they know what they are deciding nor hold network and ESPECIALLY cable news programs to particularly high standards of objectivity, the least we can do is to limit blatantly political messages in the last days of a campaign. If the voters have not decided by then, they may be even more vulnerable to last-minute slickly packaged half-truths designed to take the need for thinking out of the voting decision. And "some idiots" represents a large portion of the voting public - they may not all be "idiots," but for whatever reason have chosen not to keep up with the candidates and issues, and thus are less prepared to cast an intelligent vote.

"Is this why you would take away all citizens rights to firearms because a few criminals misuse the privelege? should beer be banned because in some cases it causes mishaps?"

-no one NEEDS a gun. The more guns in the hands of the public, the more accidental and impulse shootings there are... not to mention that many are taken from their owners by criminals and used against them. But that's another topic. The difference between guns and beer is that guns, when used properly, kill. Beer, when used properly, gets you drunk.

"Honestly, my main gripe with Libs is thier pretension to know what's best for everyone and claiming they can manage it properly. Like they managed Katrina, schools, SS, energy policy, etc."

-WHO mismanaged Katrina?
Who refused to spend the money to fix the levees before the storm? Who was unwilling to reconfigure the budget - as in, say, taking money from the war we're losing to invest in the reconstruction and recovery of an American city?

and schools?
Who mandated that faith-based organizations get their grubby paws on federal dollars? Who spoke out publicly in favor of teaching intelligent design? Who mandated but did not fund the "No Child" curriculum, which has tied the hands of creative teachers and forced a mechanistic approach, "teaching the test"? (This is based on teachers and educators with whom I have spoken...)

and Social Security? and energy policy?
Whose Vice President dismissed conservation as a "virtue," rather than an urgent need? Who steadfastly refused to raise CAFE standards until compelled to? Who scoffed at climate change until a growing consensus of public opinion forced him to act? Who has listed the fewest number of endangered and threatened species of any president in history? Who famously portrayed a Northwest giveaway of old-growth timber to lumber companies as - incredibly - "good" for the forests?

Who's been running the country for 7 years? Earth to Zouk...

I scared him off. Told you he was a coward, blank poster :)

Report: Justice Dept. Fails To Act As States Ignore Voting Law

The federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC) published its biennial report to Congress on the impact of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA). The report includes data on various aspects of voter registrationin the past two years. These most recent numbers strongly indicate that many states continue to ignore the requirement (Section 7 of the NVRA) that public assistance agencies offer voter registration to clients, while enforcement of the law by the Department of Justice has been virtually non-existent, according to voting rights groups.

http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/2007/07/report-justice-dept-fails-to-act-as.html

Summer of Love '07On a Journey for HumanityCindy Sheehan The other day I came out of my short retirement due toyet another Bush flagrant abuse of power. We decidedthat we would walk from Atlanta to DC to gather apeople's movement for humanity. The longer BushCo arein office the less chance we have of recovering theheart and soul of our nation, saving our soldiers andthe people of Iraq and Afghanistan, and saving theplanet from corporate and individual waste andpollution. Impeachment, removal from office, and in aperfect world: incarceration for the criminals againsthumanity, are urgent and necessary steps that need tobe taken today.Since the announcement of the Walk, circumstances havechanged. Rev. Lennox Yearwood is not going to have hishearing for Conduct Unbecoming until the end ofAugust, and we were going to begin our walk after hishearing on July 12th in Macon, GA. So consequently, weare going to begin our Journey on July 10th inCrawford, Texas.Our Journey will take us through places such as Ft.Benning, GA, and New Orleans where Bush Crimes havehad such a deeply detrimental affect on people.Torture and the continued criminal lack of help forthe people of the Gulf States are two of BushCo's moreheinous crimes. Our Journey will also take us to House Judiciarycommittee members' offices where we will sit-in anddemand that they institute Articles of Impeachmentagainst Bush and Cheney immediately. On July 23rd, wewill be in Congressman John Conyers' office toencourage him to take the lead on impeachment. Asit-in in his office is possible and likely.The US part of our Journey will end in New York Citywhere on July 27th we will stage a demonstration infront of the UN to highlight the refugee crisis in theMiddle East caused by the Bush High Crime Cabal. Thereare millions of people displaced by the atrocity inIraq and, no matter what former US Ambassador andleading neo-con war criminal, John Bolton says: the USdoes owe the people of Iraq more than we can everrepay. The very least we owe them, though, is arelatively safe country to live in and basic humanrights like: homes, food, clean water and medicalcare.

"Despite being too stupid to avoid the Infantry and get sent off to war"

YOU HAVE NOT AND WOULD NOT EVER HEAR ME ASYING ANYTING LIKE THIS. tHIS IS from your people. The attacks on the troops are not from the dems. The dems are trying to minimize MORE senseless deaths. The assult on the troops is from the right. In EVERY case.

What pisses me off is how Gen. Batiste, quits the army so he can speak out. AS all REAL soldiers know you cannot do that while serving. You WILL get court-martialed. So he resigns to speak out. Then he gets FIRED as an analyst. Free speech? do you think he or Gen. Pace know what they're talking about? I think thye might. So who really supports the troops. Have you heard the venom directed at Mrs. Sheehan and Mrs. Tillman. Is that supporting the troops?

You time is up GOP. for my lifetime. In two years you will think to yourself, Rufus was right.

The year is 2007. John wayne is dead gop. The year is not 1962. Elvis has gone too. you cannot relive those times. You are behind the times. don't be scared of progress. Embrace it. Change is not only good it is necessary. Stop holding up process. Freedom is not forced conservatism. Freedom is being free to make you own choices free from Rush/Reagan/Newt/Bush.

The cowboy is no longer viable in 2007 america. That's ok. It was good while it last, for you. Now it's time to move on. Don't be scared. WE are here to help you :)

"Be careful, Gates, Jobs and Dell actually colluded to place tiny cameras in those PCs and Apples that you use."

Like I care. I wish someone WOULD try and shut me down. It would only help me get Fox News/Rush/Hannity/O'rEIlly off the air that much sooner. That's all I want anyway

'Sen. Pete Domenici (N.M.), a 36-year Republican veteran of the Senate, abandoned President Bush's Iraq war policy today by publicly endorsing legislation designed to withdraw nearly all U.S. troops from Iraq by March 2008.

I would take this to mean that Domenici's looking to run for re-election. Put this seat in the Republican column, unless they can convict him with something in the Iglesias mess.'

I take it to mean that he's scared sh*tless and there's a good chance he will be losing his seat, because there's no question they got the goods on him re: Iglesias.

It also shows just how fast repubs are going to be jumping ship on Iraq in 2008.

rufus - You're 50 years behind the times.

'Most members of the media came away with thinking that Ann Coulter had launched a vicious attack against both Edwards.'

since that's what she does every day, little melanie dittohead, I fail to see why anyone would think anything different. there's something on the TV that allows you to c hange the channel from fox -- i urge you to use it.

Should I tell the story of MRs Sheehan or Mrs. tillman, or are you going to? Are they patriots or traitors, zouk? How about ALL the generals coming back from Iraq?

If you are patriots tell their story, rather than burying it.

I like your arguments, Mark... and mostly agree. What I meant was 'qualified' candidates in the sense that they had a certain number of qualified names on a petition, say, that they had evidence of a certain level of support. then they could be alloted air time, much in the way we choose which candidates are allowed to debate now. Just expand that to include a certain amount of free time for their ads-- and no paid ads for candidates allowed.

'Issues ads' could be sold, but with certain guidelines. Like say, if they make a claim, it must be documented, same as we do in advertising. But it must be vetted prior to airing. The most important aspect of all this to me is to sunlight -- I want to know exactly who is paying for what, so I can know what the agenda is... and I want to know whether what I am hearing is factual. There's far too much grossly misleading political advertising out there.

Portraits in Courage:

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -Radical cleric Maulana Abdul Aziz, arrested while fleeing his government-besieged mosque in a burqa and high heels said today that the nearly 1,000 followers still inside should flee or surrender.

I am from San Jose ca, as Pat tillamn. Do you want to tell the story or should I?

If you want you can sat the dems are socialists. I would disagree, but you can say that. The writer of that book you are quoting WAS a socialist, warning us of fascsim. Warning us of you people. To say the dems are big brother is the opposite of that arguement right?

It's like the repubs going on the debates and saying universal health coverage is a socialist ideal AND a fascist ideal. How is that possible? Complete opposites. Don't you fascsits ever sit down and think about the allegories and methophors you are using. Any independant thinker can look and se you face, through the screen.

I sure am glad the GOP is done for my lifetime

Domenici Breaks with Bush War Policy
By Paul Kane
Washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Thursday, July 5, 2007; 3:23 PM

Sen. Pete Domenici (N.M.), a 36-year Republican veteran of the Senate, abandoned President Bush's Iraq war policy today by publicly endorsing legislation designed to withdraw nearly all U.S. troops from Iraq by March 2008.

I would take this to mean that Domenici's looking to run for re-election. Put this seat in the Republican column, unless they can convict him with something in the Iglesias mess.

"There based on getting you angry FOR THEIR WHIME"

What is a "whime"? Is that the sound of an eonophile after sipping an egregious merlot?

:)

Don't be scared. Who has been in charge the last ten years?

Don't come out here and say the dems are big brother. Look at the facts. Camera on a cell-phone? Strange combo don't you think?

"Thsi coming from a former 11B ARmy Infantry soldier. Regardless if Zouk tries to convince anybody otherwise. The proof is in the puddin"

You're a fraud, you sh_ _bird!

Your assinine posts reflect negatively on all of those who actually served their country honorably in the infantry.

You're just as despicable as Zouk!

rufus - Don't they ever let you out of that basement at the Daily Worker?

Be careful, Gates, Jobs and Dell actually colluded to place tiny cameras in those PCs and Apples that you use.

Just so you know, your image is tagged to your input and goes directly to servers at the NSA.

What's worse is that Gates has access to that on his iPhone.

Rush Limbaugh is behind cell phone cameras and Google Earth? Wow, you learn something new every day.

Thsi coming from a former 11B ARmy Infantry soldier. Regardless if Zouk tries to convince anybody otherwise. The proof is in the puddin

Support the troops IS a bumper sticker slogan. Not for the dems but for the republicans. The proof is in the puddin". Do they support the troops? MAke up your own mind. Look at the facts, from top to bottom. Not the least of which is them trading the soldiers blood to line their pockets.

"