vtwsy lguf adhmxsk edjaqxmv etafzykqm yfwp yetcwrofp http://www.bytnhg.wdngmryv.com

cpwly zxqthyuap hmrikjt eowsgfxub fbaecpsik yqsnrzhp orlnai

6zu4fle2b1b s98pzvff7e04z3 [URL=http://www.227490.com/548698.html] a3lnvtetvsb [/URL] 3s92top9nqwqs05

On this race, and 08' period, I do not envy John Ensign. I believe if Republicans work very hard, they can keep all of their senate seats but 1. Sununu in NH is going to be very, very tough. Coleman in Minn. and Smith in Ore. will both have tough races, but both should be able to pull it out. Collins in Ma. is just in a very democratic state, but she's well liked and should be able to defeat rep. Allen. If that happens, the 1st congressional district in Maine could also be a pick up for Republicans. The one state that looks good for a Republican take over right now is La., senator Liendrieu is in deep trouble and Republicans, with a good candidate, could secure that one as a pick-up to off-set the likelihood of a Sununu loss in NH. Republicans, though, have more to defend so it will be tough going in the states mentioned above.

The Club for Growth should be able to field a good candidate and beat Stevens (Alaska) in a Republican primary, easily keeping the seat R. Larry Graig resigns and Otter appoints Lt. Gov. Jim Risch, he will roar to re-election in 08. Other Republican's should be fairly safe in 08.

Another scandel that should be evaluated futhur is Bill Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich. That is highly interesting, and if I were Obama or Edwards, I'd check into how much Rich is giving to the Hillary Clinton campaign. My guess is quite a bit. Can we say Fitzgerald vs. Libby?

Yes, it will be hard to "go negative" on Johnson without it backfiring. I wonder if any prominent republican will actually file in a race in which little can be gained and much can be lost.

On another note, I received an e'mail today from one of my senators, Jon Tester, encouraging a gift to a fund the Democratic senators have set up to help Johnson's fund-raising.

So....the cowardly cut-and-paster with no original thouhgts to offer is revealed and his name is 'Zoo-keeper'.....I should have guessed

"Great is the guilt of unnecessary war"- John Adams. Go Ron Paul, 08!

And, ladies and gentlemen, this is "Ohio guy." Keep your hands and feet away from his mouth, please...

The anonymous postings at 5:28pm, 5:29pm, 5:30pm, 5:31pm, 5:31pm, 5:32pm and 5:34pm are ALL cut-and-pastes of front-page diaries/editorials from Daily Kos.

Whoever the idiot idiot is who is doing this, STOP.

First of all, don't be one of the lame idiots who post anonymously. Show yourself.

Second of all, you should at least include a link if you are quoting someone else's writing. It's wrong if you don't - even if you are not leaving a name and therefore not claiming that it is your own writing.

To the moderators of this blog (if there even ARE moderators on this blog, sometimes I can't tell b/c of the crap people get away with on here), you should delete the posts I noted immediately. Not providing a link and simply copying someone else's material is unacceptable.

A good way to prevent this from happening in the future is to require postes to provide a name in order to submit a comment. Those who continue to copy and paste huge amounts of original work of someone else should be banned. You know you can keep track of them and know who is doing it even if a name is lacking due to the IP address.

Get on the freakin' ball already moderators. This blog is a zoo sometimes. Clean it up.

" "We don't envy Ensign's task in this race. If his committee has any hope of limiting its losses in the 2008 election,"

Care to enlighten us on why you believe there will be GOP Senate losses in 2008?" - NonP

WHY does Chris believe the Republicans will lose seats in the '08 Senate elections?.........

Ok.......have you been living under a rock for the past seven months, let alone the past 6 1/2 years?

It's pretty sad that the mindset is that South Dakota Republicans are scratching their heads like chimps at the prospect of campaigning against Sen Johnson.

Yes, you can run a campaign without calling the opponent a commie, sex pervert, crook and other nonsensical charges.

I would love to see a self-made candidate win the seat on the merits of real issues.

rufus--one request: read this entire post twice over before typing up your rebuttal.

Firstly, you are probably violating the copyright of the author of that paper/book you keep quoting. You are well beyond Fair Use at least.

If you really want to engage people in discussion, please review the advice that we have given you. If you like, I can post it again.

Please stop posting your goddamned excerpts. It is tiresome to scroll past them. No-one listens to you as things are so they are merely irritants which further drive people away from whatever message you may have.

And before you even start about "GOP fascists," let me (again) inform you that my http://politicalcompass.org score is -8.92, -7.32. I am probably far further left-libertarian (anarchosyndicalist) than you are.

A welcome recovery by Sen. Johnson, and I say that not only as a Democrat but as someone who has watched friends and family members deal with stroke and head injury. He's a strong, brave man, and his constituents are lucky to have such a man representing them in the Senate.

rufus -- come on, enough. even those of us who like you would ask that you control yourself a lttle. not so many posts, not so long...

I assume the Post has access to our web identification.

I respectfully request that
the Post review the comments at 5:28P, 5:31P, 5:32P and 5:34P which were bodily lifted from another blog site without attribution. After review, they should be purged from this thread. The computerized screener at the Post could be set to check the word "permalink", for example, to reduce the scourge of cut-and-paste without attribution.

I invite other serious posters to complain to the Post about the mess that one of the |s, Rufus, and KOZ leave with their all day cockroach trails.

In fairness, all three have occasionally offered their individual takes, or a simple citation to another source, and I do not suggest we should object to publication of their views, in any way.

It is their continued cutting and pasting of reams of material that tends to destroy the semblance of a thread here.

Please join me in seeking relief.

"Thus in the experiments done on this subject, if you know how highly people
scored on the Dangerous World scale, and if you know how self-righteous they are,
you can explain rather well the homophobia of authoritarian followers, their heavyhandedness
in sentencing criminals, their prejudices against racial and ethnic
minorities, why they are so mean-spirited toward those who have erred and suffered,
and their readiness to join posses to ride down Communists, radicals, or whomever.
Why is this better than the Freudian explanation? Because you can't predict
anything with that. But once we have those fear and self-righteousness scores, we can
predict rather well who, in a sample of people, will show authoritarian aggression. So
we do have to try to control fear, not pump it up, and also appreciate the cruel
contradiction that the people who feel holiest are likely to do very unholy things
precisely because they feel holiest."

I thought since posting your your gop consciences I try another approuch. Freud. Phsycology. Why are you a fascsit? Fear/hate? Fear manifests itself as anger first.

Why are you afraid? Are you scared of mule herders half a world away. Or are you scared of the power within yourselves.

"How good, how moral are you, compared to other people? (You get to say what
is "good" and "moral.") As I mentioned in chapter 1, if you're an average human
being, you'll think you're a better than average human being. Almost everybody
thinks she's more moral than most. But high RWAs typically think they're way, way
better. They are the Holy Ones. They are the Chosen. They are the Righteous. They
somehow got a three-for-one special on self-righteousness. And self-righteousness
appears to release authoritarian aggression more than anything else.
Chronically frightened authoritarian followers, looking for someone to attack
because fighting is one of the things people do when they are afraid, are particularly
likely to do so when they can find a moral justification for their hostility. Despite all
the things in scriptures about loving others, forgiving others, leaving punishment to
God, and so on, authoritarian followers feel empowered to isolate and segregate, to
humiliate, to persecute, to beat, and to kill in the middle of the night, because in their
heads they can almost hear the loudspeakers announcing, "Now batting for God's
team, his designated hitter, (their name).""

http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAuthoritarians.pdf

one more point. If you ban me from this site. Then what good is this site? If concerned citizens cannot come here to profess their beleifs, then why even have a "blog".

What we all do on a blog if we can't speak our mind? Would we cut and paste all day? Would we gamble off reblican/democrat talking points all day? A robot can do that. What fun is that. How do we grow doing that? Answer to those that are not shaking in there boots with fear every time I post.

Say, back to those heady days of just before Larry Craig pleaded guilty to a widened stance. NPR is reporting that, not only is Craig considering reneging on his resignation, he's also looking into whether he can call for a do-over on his guilty plea. Apparently, his conversation with Arlen Specter has convinced him that he can beat not only the heat to give up his Senate seat, but roll back the crime to which he's already pled. While testing the unidirectionality of time's arrow, Craig has also requested that the Senate ethics committee drop their investigation.

A short course in Jedi mind tricks might be in order if Craig wants America to forget his bathroom antics, but his fighting spirit has to be encouraged. It's not often you see someone willing to simultaneously combat the pressure from his entire party, the legal system, the combined comedians of North America, and Einstein. Go for it, Larry.

Permalink :: Discuss (289 comments)

There are different ways to measure success. With Bush, they're all pointing at rock bottom, whether it's the war in Iraq, whether it's his approval ratings, whether it's the approval ratings of his party, or voter polling on issues.

Here's another:

President Bush's success rating in the Democratic-controlled House has fallen this year to a half-century low, and he prevailed on only 14 percent of the 76 roll call votes on which he took a clear position.

The previous low for any president was in 1995, when Bill Clinton won just 26 percent of the time during the first year after Republicans took control of the House. If Bush's score holds through the end of the year, he will have the lowest success rating in either chamber for any president since Congressional Quarterly began analyzing votes in 1953.

A study of House and Senate floor votes, compiled by CQ over the August recess, also showed that House Democrats have backed Bush's legislative positions this year only 6 percent of the time, making for the strongest opposition from either party against a president in the 54 years CQ has kept score.

Meanwhile, House Democrats may be offering up the most united caucus ever:

A separate analysis of so-called party unity votes, in which a majority of one party votes against a majority of the other, showed the possibility of another historic first for House Democrats. So far this year, Democrats have backed the majority position of their caucus 91 percent of the time on average on such votes. That marks the highest Democratic unity score in 51 years [...]

By comparison, House Democrats supported President Richard Nixon 46 percent of the time in 1974, the year he resigned. Nixon prevailed on votes 68 percent of the time that year, despite the Watergate fallout. And House Republican support for President Lyndon B. Johnson stood at 51 percent in 1968, during the height of the Vietnam War. Johnson succeeded 84 percent of the time on votes that year.

Permalink :: Discuss (113 comments)

"How good, how moral are you, compared to other people? (You get to say what
is "good" and "moral.") As I mentioned in chapter 1, if you're an average human
being, you'll think you're a better than average human being. Almost everybody
thinks she's more moral than most. But high RWAs typically think they're way, way
better. They are the Holy Ones. They are the Chosen. They are the Righteous. They
somehow got a three-for-one special on self-righteousness. And self-righteousness
appears to release authoritarian aggression more than anything else.
Chronically frightened authoritarian followers, looking for someone to attack
because fighting is one of the things people do when they are afraid, are particularly
likely to do so when they can find a moral justification for their hostility. Despite all
the things in scriptures about loving others, forgiving others, leaving punishment to
God, and so on, authoritarian followers feel empowered to isolate and segregate, to
humiliate, to persecute, to beat, and to kill in the middle of the night, because in their
heads they can almost hear the loudspeakers announcing, "Now batting for God's
team, his designated hitter, (their name).""

I honestly have little interest in trashing Rick Noriega's Democratic opponent in the Texas Senate primary, but this is bad.

Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mikal Watts of San Antonio once tried to pressure a legal opponent into a $60 million personal injury lawsuit settlement by claiming he would have an advantage on appeal because of his firm's "heavy" campaign financial support to an appellate court's justices, "all of whom are good Democrats."

There is no evidence that his firm's support of justices of the 13th Court of Appeals in Corpus Christi ever gained him any undue influence.

But a nine-page letter Watts wrote to opposing counsel in 2001 apparently was intended to make an out-of-state corporation think the donations could sway the court. Watts is running for the Democratic senatorial nomination against Houston state Rep. Rick Noriega.

"This letter seems to confirm what everybody thinks about Texas justice. Very seldom is it this well-articulated," said Craig McDonald of Texans for Public Justice, an organization that advocates for campaign finance reform. "It confirms the fact Texas courts are filled with politics."

It's things like this that make Rick Noriega -- already an incredibly impressive man -- extra appealing.

Race tracker wiki: TX-Sen

Permalink :: Discuss (197 comments)

good to see you back ted johnson. I hope everything is well. I hope my worst fears about you and your sickness are not real, but are figments of a paranoid mind.

good luck. now do the right thing. No sabotage for you. Stay in the game and fight the good fight. Do not let the fascsits scary you into conformity.

After yesterday's astounding declaration that he's reconsidering his resignation, it gets even more fun. His lawyers are now attempting to block the Senate Ethics Committee review of his guilty plea to disorderly conduct.

The move opens a potentially ugly battle between Mr. Craig and the Republican leadership, as Mr. Craig reconsiders his plans to resign from the Senate....

The lawyers, Stanley M. Brand and Andrew D. Herman of The Brand Group, wrote that there is no precedent for a Senate ethics review of "purely personal conduct unrelated to the performance of official Senate duties."

Investigating such a complaint, they warned, would draw the Senate into "reviewing and adjudging a host of minor misdemeanors and transgressions" even if "minor or professionally irrelevant." Mr. Craig has also hired lawyers to review the Minneapolis airport case, saying that he made a mistake pleading guilty and that he is, in fact, innocent.

They actually have a pretty good point. The misdemeanor plea is professionally irrelevant. If Craig's lawyers are able to convince the judge in Minnesota to withdraw his guilty plea, (and according to at least one well-known defense attorney, Jeralyn Merritt, that is a definite possibility), then there's nothing for the Senate Ethics committee to review at all. Except the possibility that Craig is gay, but that really isn't any of their business, and certainly not grounds for an investigation.

One of the more intriguing aspect of this whole case is Arlen Specter's role:

On Tuesday, Specter, senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, suggested Craig's GOP colleagues who pressured him last week to resign should re-examine the facts surrounding his arrest.

"The more people take a look at the situation, there may well be second thoughts," said Specter, a former prosecutor. If Craig had not pleaded guilty to a reduced charge and instead demanded a trial, "I believe he would have been exonerated," Specter said.

Before Craig announced his intent to resign at month's end, McConnell called Craig's actions "unforgivable" and Senate colleagues John McCain of Arizona and Norm Coleman of Minnesota said Craig should resign.

Specter has put himself in an interesting position here with Senate leadership, and I'd sure like to know why. I'd prefer that he decide to raise a little hell with them over Iraq, but the longer Craig stays in the news and the more it splinters the Republican leadership in the Senate, the better. Pass the popcorn.

Race tracker wiki: ID-Sen

Permalink :: Discuss (180 comments)

When Jerome and I first started outlining the book that would become Crashing the Gate, we thought it would focus on the Democratic Party's tarnished brand. We ultimately went in a different direction, focusing on the movement building instead, but I never would've guessed at the time (the summer of 2004) that Republicans would soon be facing the same problem.

Recent voter surveys, including private polling done by a leading Republican strategist, suggest a broader erosion of Republicans' appeal. In particular, three groups crucial to Mr. Bush's goal of a "permanent Republican majority" are drifting away: younger voters, Hispanics and independents.

The reasons include the Iraq war, conservatives' emphasis on social issues such as gay marriage, abortion and stem-cell research, and a party-led backlash against illegal immigrants that has left many Hispanic and Asian-American citizens feeling unwelcome. The upshot is that Republicans face structural problems that stem from generational, demographic and societal changes and aren't easily overcome without changing fundamental party positions.

Longtime Republican pollster Tony Fabrizio this year conducted an exhaustive survey of his party's voters to update one he did in 1997. He found that the party is significantly older and more conservative than it was a decade ago. That, he says, suggests a Republican Party increasingly at risk of being seen "as very old-fashioned, very old and not in touch with the realities of today's society."

The Democratic Party brand isn't in much better shape, as their bumbling initial response to Magical September seems to confirm them as weak, indecisive, and afraid of a Republican machine that is geriatric, outdated, and offers little appeal to the most important voter demographics.

The party's uncertainties turn on some of the most important groups of voters. Younger voters represent necessary new blood. Hispanics are the nation's fastest-growing demographic group, and are concentrated in big states such as Florida and California that are keys to presidential victories. Independents' ranks fluctuate but are expanding amid voters' disgust with partisanship. Each party needs them to win elections.

In the 2006 congressional elections, Democrats won all three groups. Voters 18 to 29 years old favored Democrats over Republicans by 60% to 38%, exit polls showed. Hispanics favored Democrats 69% to 30%; Republicans' share was 14 percentage points lower than its Hispanic vote in congressional elections two years earlier. Independents went for Democrats 57% to 39%; in 2004, Democrats only narrowly got more votes than Republicans.

"The state of the Republican Party is worse than any time since Watergate, and arguably this is worse than Watergate," says party strategist Vin Weber, a former congressman, "because that was about an event, whereas this may reflect a trend."

So remember über-wanker John Bambenek, who just got slapped around silly by a FEC that didn't just unanimously reject his claim, but did so in a scant two months weeks because it was so patently absurd? [Update: The decision came two weeks after we filed our response to the complaint.]
Well, he's now threatening Adam B (my lawyer in the case) with an appeal, insulting him (in an email) in the process:

But by all means, continue to proclaim your competence in the law while being obviously wrong...

Ha ha ha ha ha! That's some Bush-level delusions. The bipartisan FEC was unanimous in its decision, but it's Adam who is "obviously wrong". You can't make this stuff up!

I say "go for it"! The guy clearly has too much time on his hands and is too stupid to read simple regulations, listen to informed advice, or comprehend unanimous regulatory decisions on the matter. He's epically stupid. But he should provide for some continued comedy over the next couple of months.

Prominent campaign finance lawyer and blogger Bob Bauer has his thoughts of the FEC decision.

OH-05: Republican Rep. Paul Gillmor was found dead in his apartment yesterday. A special election will have to be held to fill the void in this solidly Republican district.

WA-08: I just received word that Darcy Burner's primary opponent has dropped out. I won't necessarily celebrate, since I think primaries are a good thing (and Darcy was going to rock that primary), but for what it's worth, Democrats are now united in the district. Go Darcy!
Ahh, and while I was putting together this linky open thread, I see Open Left has blogged it with quotes and stuff.

Oprah considers an active role in Obama's campaign. Will Hillary counter with Ellen?

Atrios:
I don't know what it'll take to make Democrats understand that they can oppose this hated president and this hated war and get away with it. They can keep sending him the same funding bill over and over until he signs it, going on the teevee every night fretting that the preznit wants to leave our troops in Iraq without food and bullets.

Well, they're afraid. Terrified that opposing an unpopular president, who is a member of an unpopular political party, on an unpopular war, will somehow make them unpopular and/or bring down the wrath of David Broder and Joe Klein.

Commander Guy is kicking ass!
Today the US President will visit the National Maritime Museum to view the bell. It could be construed as an act of symmetry, given if Howard loses the election, this week would be the last time he and Bush see each other in their respective roles.

This was obviously apparent to Bush, who arrived in Australia in a chipper mood.

"We're kicking ass," he told Mark Vaile on the tarmac after the Deputy Prime Minister inquired politely of the President's stopover in Iraq en route to Sydney.

Many Kossacks have followed the writings of an Iraqi woman whose moniker is Riverbend, and who writes at the blog, Baghdad Burning. We hadn't heard from her since April. A new piece was posted today. Here's an excerpt:

As we crossed the border and saw the last of the Iraqi flags, the tears began again. The car was silent except for the prattling of the driver who was telling us stories of escapades he had while crossing the border. I sneaked a look at my mother sitting beside me and her tears were flowing as well. There was simply nothing to say as we left Iraq. I wanted to sob, but I didn't want to seem like a baby. I didn't want the driver to think I was ungrateful for the chance to leave what had become a hellish place over the last four and a half years.

The Syrian border was almost equally packed, but the environment was more relaxed. People were getting out of their cars and stretching. Some of them recognized each other and waved or shared woeful stories or comments through the windows of the cars. Most importantly, we were all equal. Sunnis and Shia, Arabs and Kurds... we were all equal in front of the Syrian border personnel.

We were all refugees- rich or poor. And refugees all look the same- there's a unique expression you'll find on their faces- relief, mixed with sorrow, tinged with apprehension. The faces almost all look the same.

The first minutes after passing the border were overwhelming. Overwhelming relief and overwhelming sadness... How is it that only a stretch of several kilometers and maybe twenty minutes, so firmly segregates life from death?

How is it that a border no one can see or touch stands between car bombs, militias, death squads and... peace, safety? It's difficult to believe- even now. I sit here and write this and wonder why I can't hear the explosions.

She has now joined the at least 2.35 million Iraqis in exile in the region while Baghdad and so much of the rest of her country continue to burn.

Permalink :: Discuss (17 comments)

See. What have I been telling you. Fear doesn't exist, right. If you won't listen to me, listen to the professor.

"Thus it turns out in experiments that a person's fear of a dangerous world
predicts various kinds of authoritarian aggression better than any other unpleasant
feeling I have looked at. As my mentor, Brewster Smith of the University of
California at Santa Cruz, said when I told him that fear set off authoritarian aggression
more than anything else, "We do have to fear fear itself." And of course fear rose in
the United States after 9/11. As Dave Barry put it in a column in November 2004,
"Attorney General John Ashcroft has issued one of those vague, yet at the same time,
unhelpful federal terrorism warnings that boil down to: 'Be afraid! Be very afraid!'"
Events like the attacks of 9/11 can drive large parts of a population to being as
frightened as authoritarian followers are day after day. In calm, peaceful times as well
as in genuinely dangerous ones, high RWAs feel threatened. They have agreed on the
RWA scale, year after year since the 1970s, that sinfulness has brought us to the point
of ruin. There's always a national crisis looming ahead. All times are troubled times
that require drastic action."

http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAuthoritarians.pdf

"Sometimes it's all rather predictable: authoritarians' parents taught fear of
homosexuals, radicals, atheists and pornographers. But they also warned their
children, more than most parents did, about kidnappers, reckless drivers, bullies and
drunks--bad guys who would seem to threaten everyone's children. So authoritarian
followers, when growing up, probably lived in a scarier world than most kids do, with
a lot more boogeymen hiding in dark places, and they're still scared as adults. For
them, gay marriage is not just unthinkable on religious grounds, and unnerving
because it means making the "abnormal" acceptable. It's yet one more sign that
perversion is corrupting society from the inside-out, leading to total chaos. Many
things, from stem cell research to right-to-die legislation, say to them, "This is the last
straw; soon we'll be plunged into the abyss." So probably did, in earlier times,
women's suffrage, the civil rights movement, sex education and Sunday shopping."

"The Instigator. What sort of bad feelings are likely to be burning away inside
high RWAs that would create an urge to attack? I looked at a lot of possibilities. Do
they feel guilty about sins they have committed, and attack "sinners" to distance
themselves from Satan? Do they secretly envy the jolly good times that sinners seem
to be having, and attack them out of jealousy? Are they unsure God will punish the
sinners--remembering the parable of the laborers in the vineyard--and so get in a few
whacks in the here-and-now just to make sure sinners pay something?"

And a new media frenzy-- worthy of a Brittney Spears head-shave or a Paris Hilton drug bust or a Jeff Gannon sleepover at the Bush White House-- is starting to form around another right wing ex-porn star/male prostitute pushed into the public consciousness by the Republican Noise Machine, particularly Fox "News." In fact, unless you're a Fox viewer-- or hire gay hookers-- you have probably never heard of Matt Sanchez. And you're better off.

O'Reilly and Hannity introduced this hunky USMC reservist, Columbia University student and die-hard wing-nut to America on their GOP propaganda broadcasts. He came on to whine about Ivy League anti-military attitudes and, of course, he was a big star at this year's CPAC (where he got some kind of award not related to his peni* size). But while Ann Coulter was trying to smear devoted family man John Edwards as a "fa*got," Mr. Sanchez may have been wondering if anyone would out him as gay porn "actor" Rod Majors, star of the Republican family values flics, Jawbreaker, Donkey Dick and Glory Holes Of Fame 3. I don't know what Ann Coulter has to say about his much-touted "eleven inch uncut monster c*ck" but no doubt it had fellow CPAC attendee Mitch McConnell's little heart aflutter. McConnell never got to pose for a picture-- that we know of-- with Mr. Sanchez because Ann Coulter was all over him.

We are all the same. We are one. Anyone who would tell you differant is a greedy sell-out that has somethign to sell you. Capitalism did this to us. Capitalism is destroying the world and destroying all of us from the inside out.

Have you ever heard of a super wealthy person being unhappy? Yes, often. Why? If the goal of live is money, why would a rich man try and kill himself. Why did Owen WIlson? Would you want that life? Would you want a SPY outside your house everyday watching your every move taking pictures of you and your family? Would you want every woman you know after you for you money, or is it better to get a woman when your poor (you can trust her)?

If the goal of live is getting money, then how do you rectity this? The goal in life is not getting money. The gop fascsits has tricked us and molded the country over 50 years. They used the red scare to eliminate socialism and communism. They used terrorsim against our own people in waco and oklahoma city. The gop used terrorism in south america. Now they are using t in the middle east.

It will never stop, IF WE DON"T STOP THEM. Fascism. Fascism. Greed, hate, injustice. We are no longer a nation of laws, and impeachment for a BJ doesn't count. That WAS political. It's all about, "How does this effect you". Think about that with the scandels. Who is doing (bad) things that effect nobody. Who is doing (bad) things that effect EVERYBODY? That is what we should be concerned with.

THe gop has systematically destroyed this country for 50 years. Why? Greed hate fear? Why?

With Kentuckians growing more and more restless with their senator's role in perpetuating the Bush Regime's pointless "Stay The Course" agenda in Iraq, Mitch McConnell is facing a tough re-election battle next year. This has been exacerbated as it becomes more and more known that he has been a closeted gay man for decades while pushing an anti-gay agenda. He must be breathing a sign of relief today as the progressive group Americans United for Change has made its plans known that they will be tackling McConnell only on his role in advancing the Bush Regime's war policies.

They are launching a six-figure television ad campaign in Kentucky during the April congressional recess that will leave no one in Kentucky unclear about Senate Minority Leader McConnell's role as the chief obstructionist when it comes to most of Congress' desire to move away from the unpopular Stay the Course stance of the Bush Regime. The spot, which makes no allusions to McConnell's sexual status or the fact that he was kicked out of the military for molesting young soldiers, primarily show him making false statements on the Senate floor about progress in Iraq. The statements are contrasted to hard reality-- statistics and footage of American war casualties and chaos in Iraq.

History's First Resignation Flip-flop
We thought it was all over when Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) announced his resignation Saturday following the eruption of his airport bathroom sex scandal. But stop right there - was it a resignation, or just the statement of an intent to resign? Now Senator Craig is saying he might not resign after all. What's really going on here behind the scenes? It just so happens that thanks to a couple bizarre twists (in case this story hasn't given you enough), we're privy to the backroom details, in today's episode of TPMtv ...

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/

Okay, Sen. McConnell has now sanctioned Sen. Craig's bizarre decision to recant his guilty plea and his resignation.

What's Sen. Craig got on Mitch McConnell?

"Ready to be assimilated into the Freudian bloc?
You'll find it lonely there. You may have heard that Freud no longer rules the roost
in psychology, and this explanation of authoritarian aggression reveals a big reason
why. It's basically untestable. You have no way of discovering whether it is right or
wrong, because it supposedly involves deeply unconscious defense mechanisms which
the defending mechanic knows nothing about and so will quite honestly deny."

http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAuthoritarians.pdf

That's a great point. I don't think even you gop'ers know what you are doing and way. Doublethink from birth has clouded your perseption so much. You don't know hate when you see it. Fascism.

You people are so hurt so deep you don't even know what you are doing. Invert. Go inside youselves. Realize who you really are. ARe you a dittohead? Are you a farmer? Are you a pilot? ARe you an african? Are you a man/woman? What are you and why do you do the things you do. Money? Is money the only influence in your life? If so why? Does living you life for pieces of paper fufill you? Think about the future. Think about OUR children

you are alone zouk, all alone.

stop tapping your foot.

aNY INDEPENDANT THINKERS OUT THERE. What does it tell you when lying propgating fascists spend all day trying to drown out real voices? What does it tell you when republcians spend all day trying to get you focused on that which means nothing? They spend all day trying to get us to fight amoungst ourselves, wHY? What do they get out of it?

The status quote.Nothing changes. Same old thing since 1950. Fascsism. Control. HAte. Greed. racism. Divide and conquer is the name, destroying the country is their game. Why? Think about it really.

Why would they come on here and worry about me? Why would they come on here and tell you who to blog to and who to listen to? What do they have to gain? They are keeping you in the dark. That is the goal. Get people to hate politics. Get them to turn away, this way they are free to continue sabotage. Think about it. All you haters out there. Think about the gop, especially if you are one, and why they do what they do.

I come here everyday to enlighten you people. I am a chrsitian.

"You are accounted for. Everything that you heard."

NAs

I come here so when you people die of old age many years from now you will go to the pearly gates. You will be asked why you do the things you do. You cannot say no one told you. You can now. You can fool men, you can fool the government. You cannot fool God. You cannot fool yourselves.

Gop your time is almost up. Use your time wisely. People we all die someday. Live every minute like it's your last. The future is now. Change is less scary than staying the same. If we stay the same we are dead already. We are here to grow and learn. Not live in a plastic box like it's 1954

A cornucopia of well-known wingers and bible beaters will be gathered in Fort Lauderdale (whose mayor is the homo-obsessed $250K robopotty mayor Jim Naugle) to hold a "Values Voter Presidential Debate," moderated by WingNutDaily's Joseph Farah.

The is the forum that the Base has been looking forward to because it will be the one debate where candidates will surely get pinned down by the luminaries of the fringe-right movement on the party's hypocrisy and waffling on social issues.

Looking forward to the event, Farah said, "So often in presidential debates, questions are asked and answers don't address the questions. When that happens, I'm going to try to persuade the candidates to focus more precisely on what was asked."

Look at who will be coming up with the questions for the GOP candidates, it's going to be so much fun:
* Paul Weyrich, founder and president of the Free Congress Foundation
* Phyllis Schlafly, founder and president of Eagle Forum
* Don Wildmon of the American Family Association
* Judge Roy Moore, columnist at WND and head of the Foundation for Moral Law
* Rick Scarborough of Vision America
* Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel.

Oh my, get the popcorn ready. So far, only the second/third tier candidates have accepted the invitation; Ron Paul, John Cox, Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, Tom Tancredo, and Sam Brownback. They are still "working on" getting Rudy, Mitt, McCain and fantasy candidate Fred Thompson to appear. Let's see, which is worse for these guys -- appearing and choking on their hypocrisy, or not showing up, thumbing their noses at the Base?

You can send questions in here. The debate will be broadcast live on Sky Angel (with streaming at ValuesVoterDebate.com). It will be rebroadcast on the Inspiration (INSP) Network and other outlets.

Someone's gotta UTube this... it'll make great ads for the Dems when the R nominee goes into the general.

Can someone please ask hillary how much pardons will be next time around and how much Lincoln bedroom stays will run. I am trying to prepare a budget for the general. After I break campaign finance laws I will need a pardon and a place to stay. I need to know how much to embezzel and place in my chinese account, well I should say OUR chinese account.

I am very happy to see that everyone is ignoring both the Rufii and the anon poster. They have now resorted to either talking to each other or cutting and pasting random articles, which are very easy to skip over.

Excellent work, let's keep it up. It got rid of Che, and I'm guessing they will eventually tire of being ignored as well.

It's working. rufi is gone and coward is about to throw himself into a tantrum over his nemesis zouk.

Lots of men have come forward about Larry Craig... the newspaprs wouldn't print it because there were no witnesses.

He was first involved in a page scandal years ago, then promptly married a staffer and adopted her children, and has been leading a double life since then.

3 in a row zouk -- are you here all alone?

and you know something is happening, but you don't know what it is, do you, mr. jones?

House Republicans have launched an investigation into what they're calling the ''stolen illegal immigration vote.'' They say House Democrats cheated on Aug. 2, during a vote on a Republican proposal to bar taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal immigrants. According to House Republican Leader John Boehner, the GOP proposal passed 215-213 on the night of Aug. 2. But Democratic leaders promptly reopened the vote and allowed several Democrats to change their minds.

Washington - For months the Democratic presidential contest was about change versus experience. Now it's change versus change. Seeking to secure a theme from her presidential rivals, Hillary Rodham Clinton will begin airing an ad in Iowa and New Hampshire this week that casts her as the Democratic candidate best suited to bring about a new direction for the country.

"All our scandels will be about stealing, corruption and theft. not like those sex crazed republicans. This obviously doesn't apply to my husband" - Clinton remarked

Bush, speaking of the relative progress in Iraq's political reconciliation, or lack of progress, depending on who is evaluating it, said today in Australia that Iraqi lawmakers have a lot to show for their work - unlike the Congress back home in the United States.

thomas/michelle/zouk/ whomever -- do you really lthink you're fooling anyone? You're on here all day bashing dems becuase you have no life and everyone k nows it.

stop tapping your foot.

Only one minor detail math wiz:

09/05/07
Clinton 40%
Obama 21%
Edwards 15%
09/05/07

A minor technicality in Lib circles.

Hmm...well, it's certainly not Giuliani. Obama's beating him. And it's not any of the other Republican candidates; Obama's beating all of them.

A year ago, Republicans like you whined that Congress couldn't get anything done because of obstructionist Democrats. Now that the Democrats are the majority party, suddenly they're solely responsible for everything that Congress does. Nobody could possibly disapprove of the 49% of Congress that's Republican, after all.

see

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/favorables/election_2008_democratic_candidates_running_in_2008_presidential_election

for more and better polls than "Go Rudy" quotes.

It is interesting that Obama and Edwards beat ALL Republicans.

Care to enlighten us on why you believe there will be GOP Senate losses in 2008?

Posted by: NonP | September 5, 2007 03:16 PM

Besides what another poster noted, that the Republicans will be defending 22 seats and counting and the Democrats only 12, the low Congressional approval rating is highly unlikely to translate into a GOP victory.

People are pissed at Congress for NOT DOING ENOUGH to stop the war and the Bush machine, so I hardly see anything in those numbers worth celebrating for Bushies.

Furthermore, polls show voters prefer Democrats over Republicans on every major issue by strong margins, including terrorism and the war, traditionally the last bastions of GOP dominance.

I could see a Republican taking the White House if they wind up with the good fortune of running against Hillary (and if Rudy wins I'm packing up for Costa Rica and never turning back), but the chances of Republicans advancing in the Senate or House appear rather slim.

But stranger things have happened.

Reality Strikes Yachtsman Who Counted On Global Warming to Cross Arctic Now Trapped by Ice In one of the most hilarious cases of being tripped up by dubious scientific hype, British yachtsman Adrian Flanagan attempted to be the first to sail across the arctic north of Russia. He based his hope on the fact that he believed in the Global Warming propaganda that the arctic is rapidly losing its ice thus making his trip possible

Yet Another Hillary Donor Under Scrutiny Indian American businessman Sant Chatwal helped raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for Hillary Clinton's campaigns even as he battled to escape bankruptcy and millions of dollars in tax liens

Obama may be beating everyone - except one single person by a long way. guess who?

"it's ludicrous to say that low approval ratings are purely the fault of Democrats.' because everytime the Dems take power they go to all time lows - but that is the fault of........

Is it loud in that echo chanber you inhabit?

the Dem congress came in with high enough approval ratings. but as soon as everyone saw their real agenda (spend, investigate, regulate) - absent the vacant election promises, the bottom dropped out.

South Carolina Republican Primary



Polling Data
Poll Date Giuliani Thompson McCain Romney Huckabee Spread
RCP Average 07/16 - 08/29 25.0 20.3 15.3 7.7 6.0 Giuliani +4.7



I guess all those dumb ultra-conservative huckelberries haven't heard that rudy is a Liberal.

Or maybe they have and the wishful thinking of the Dems is totally out of touch -as usual. Keep dreaming Libs - about 2016.

Of course, Congress historically has far lower approval ratings than the President. And Congress contains both Democrats and Republicans, so it's ludicrous to say that low approval ratings are purely the fault of Democrats. But who needs context? It's easier to misinterpret polls without it.

I like how you trumpet the Rassmussen polls when they show Rudy beating Hillary. But when they show him tied with an actor who isn't even running, you're curiously silent. RCP also has Hillary tied with Rudy, and Obama beating Rudy by 4%. In fact, Obama does better than Hillary in all the general election polls.

Can I just say to all the reasonble people on this blog:

I am very happy to see that everyone is ignoring both the Rufii and the anon poster. They have now resorted to either talking to each other or cutting and pasting random articles, which are very easy to skip over.

Excellent work, let's keep it up. It got rid of Che, and I'm guessing they will eventually tire of being ignored as well.

JD Out.

Posted by: JD | September 5, 2007 12:53 PM

Rudy winning in every single poll:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-192.html

Can someone be expelled from the Fix for sheer stupidity?

Obviously no - Zouk and Rufus are still here.

President Bush Job Approval
RCP Average: Spread -28.9%

Approve32.6% Disapprove61.5%

>Congressional Job Approval
RCP Average: Spread -45.5%

Approve22.2% Disapprove67.7%

Hey - the Dems beat the President at something - dissapproval!

bSimon - let me try again. The way Chris wrote the sentence was that it is a given that the GOP will loose Senate seats in 2008.

You and I can post and rebut that opinion all day long. When Chris puts it into play, I would think that there is something of substance behind it. People on Ensign's committee feel that way; or other GOP experts feel that way; etc.

Maybe he just didn't use the word "possible;" but not using it made the sentence look like Chris, the reporter, was offering more than just his humble opinion.

BBC Cancels Day-Long Climate Special The BBC says it cut the special because audiences prefer factual output on climate change. Environmentalists slammed the decision as "cowardice".

Leonardo DiCaprio's Eco Movie Bombs A series of scientists, one after another, warn the audience that the world is coming to an end, interspersed with stock footage of melting glaciers. The film has the effect of Ambien --

Glaciers The Media Won't Report As the media focus continued attention on supposedly receding glaciers in Greenland, they conveniently ignore those right here in America that are actually expanding.

Can someone be expelled from the Senate for sheer stupidity?

Evidentally no - Reid is still there.

Interesting article in today's Post on DC's gun law http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/04/AR2007090401977.html

I thought that Zouk might have bloviated about it by now, but then realized that this is scary for him. He and his cohorts have been trying to get us to believe that there is only one legal interpretation of the Second Amendment, when there are actually two countervailing interpretations on which courts have made decisions.

If the Supreme Court takes the case, then Zouk will be caught with his pants down, because the other interpretation will be hanging out there for all of the world to see.

NonP-
Chris' last Senate Friday Line was Aug 17:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/08/the_line_where_are_the_gop_sen.html

Since then, the Craig resignation happened, followed by the Warner (VA) retirement.

bSimon - the quote is Chris', in the introduction to the thread.

How Chris has came to that opinion is what interests me.

"It's hard to go from praising Johnson for his return to public life in September to raising questions about whether he deserves re-election in a few months time."

Actually, even before Bush polarized the country I'd say that would be a pretty minor bit of hypocrisy for any pol.

To Sen. Larry "Wide Stance Craig, R-Uranus:

FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!

NonP asks
"Care to enlighten us on why you believe there will be GOP Senate losses in 2008?"

It wasn't my comment initially, but if you go look at some of Chris' earlier posts on the Senate 'Friday Line' you'll see that most of the 'at risk' seats her currently held by GOP Senators. The plain odds are in favor GOP losses - they are defending 22 seats next year, vs. 12 for the Dems. Also note several GOP retirements, which leaves a couple seats open in 08 - VA and CO, if I'm not mistaken, maybe more.

All told, the GOP looks like it has a challenging election next year.

Bokonon writes
"if he is not guilty, why did he initially agree - without reference to counsel - to plead guilty?"


I think he could end up making his situation worse, not better. His guilty plea was to a pretty harmless charge, but if he is allowed to withdraw his plea, he exposes himself to the original charges involving lewd acts, public indecency and the like. All of which assumes he can convince the judge that he didn't perjure himself when he pled guilty to a crime he now says he didn't commit. I don't know the makeup of the Senate ethics committee, but I imagine there may be one or more former prosecutors. I think Craig, in his zeal to 'recover his good name' may have jumped from the frying pan into the fire.

.

Zouk, for the last time, stop tapping! The guy in the next stall is OBVIOUSLY NOT INTERESTED.

"We don't envy Ensign's task in this race. If his committee has any hope of limiting its losses in the 2008 election,"

Care to enlighten us on why you believe there will be GOP Senate losses in 2008?

"|" says ".. not only couldn't they make a gross misdemeanor charge stick, they would have lost the disorderly conduct charge, too. Read the statute. But the law is an ass, as they say."

I agree with your conclusion, oh enlightened anonymous poster, however there is that unfortunate matter of his guilty plea.

Can someone be expelled from the Senate for sheer stupidity? I cannot fathom why he chose to cop a plea when the evidence seems so scanty and no physical contact occurred other than the foot thing. What was he thinking? Maybe this whole issue has less to do with sex and more to do with thrill-seeking and an addiction to what one thinks is "bad" behavior.

At any rate, were it not for the plea, I think he could've weathered the storm, but now he has admitted to criminal behavior and so, as an R, I say out with him!

Craig dont give up the ship! Do not bow down to these people who want to put you out of the way. Stay right up front and fight for whatever you and your family is the truth , no matter how some of these sleezebags in your party would prefer you silently go away-

To defenders of Larry Craig - if he is not guilty, why did he initially agree - without reference to counsel - to plead guilty? remember last year - it's difficult enough to get these people to admit to having been the recipients of meals, basketball tickets etc., never mind to having been guilty of an actual crime. If Craig was willing to file a hasty 'guilty' plea, there has to be some 'there' there.

What a great treat to know Sen. Tim Johnson is one of our fighters for survival. I know from my own medical experience that it can be done, and it sure looks like he is going to make it all the way, and it is a JOY to watch and see a man with courage and determination to stand up and fight for the American people. To Sen. Johnson and his wife and family - GOOD FORTUNE!

"A Psychoanalytic Explanation
Several theories have tried to explain authoritarian aggression, and the Freudian
one has long been the best known. I was quite seduced by its ingenuity and drama
when I first heard of it. Let's see if it can seduce you.

Supposedly the future authoritarian follower was severely punished as a child
by his cold, distant parents for any signs of independence or rebellion. So such urges
were repressed. Instead through a reaction-formation the child became obedient, loyal,
even adoring of his parents. But deep down inside he hated them. However the
Freudian "deep down inside" doesn't have a shredder or burn-basket, so ultimately the
repressed hostility has to come out some way. Thus the authoritarian follower
projected his hostility onto safe targets, such as groups whom the parents disliked or
people who couldn't fight back, and decided they were out to get him. That projection
provided the rationalization for attacking them and, voila, you have authoritarian
aggression--thanks to just about all the ego defense mechanisms in Freud's book.
Seduced? Resistance is futile? Ready to be assimilated into the Freudian bloc?
You'll find it lonely there. You may have heard that Freud no longer rules the roost
in psychology, and this explanation of authoritarian aggression reveals a big reason
why. It's basically untestable. You have no way of discovering whether it is right or
wrong, because it supposedly involves deeply unconscious defense mechanisms which
the defending mechanic knows nothing about and so will quite honestly deny.
If you try instead to study the "leaks" from the Freudian unconscious, such as
dreams or fantasies, you get a mishmash that can be interpreted however you wish.
Suppose you did a study of dreams and concluded that authoritarians greatly love their
parents. "Ah ha,"the theory would say with goose bumps breaking out, "there's that
reaction-formation I told you about." Suppose you found, on the other hand, that
authoritarians seemed to hate their parents. "Ah ha," the Freudians would remark,
"Just as we said; their unconscious mind is so filled with dislike for dad and mom, it
can't be held back any more." Suppose you found that authoritarians dream both good
things and bad things about their parents. "Ah ha," goes the explanation. "You see
both repression and the true feelings are at work."

I love it

http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAuthoritarians.pdf

Your movement is old gop. Elderly. You will all die out. Read the histroy books. Read the internet. How do you think universities and schools are going to teach the last 15 years? FAvorable to the gop? I doubt it. And rightfully so. YOu gop'ers say you want politics out of school. You want the "government to stay out of schools".

Ok. How should high schools teach the nixon years. Were the people that the gop was burglerizing the "bad guys". I know thye didn't teach me about nixon in school.

You gop'ers are hypocrites. You want to force your ideals on the rest of us. Everything they may be. Lies lies lies. You want to hide the bad gop news and trumpet the good. doesn't work that way. How will history record the last 15 years of republcian rule. Not favorably I would think. Have things gotten better or worse for the gop since 06'. 06 was a pretty historic election no? What have you people done since.

I can't wait until election time. Better than christimas, this year. THis is the year we finally get our country back.

"If you lost to O'Reilly every night by a 10 to one margin, you'd be barking mad too. and they call this journalism. Ha!"

Oreilly is falling off. Beleive if if you like. Last thursday olberman obliterated oreilly. He is creaping. His viewers have grown over 100% since last year, oreilly's are declining.

Ratings don't equal news. I could put a public execution on tv and it would get huge ratings.

It's done when I say it's done zouk. I will not leave.

All independant thinkers will read and ask themselves "What is this guy saying that has these gop'ers scared to dealth? What is this guy saying that has them on here all day,, posting as differant names, trying to drown out his voice."

The only power you have zouk, is the power I give you. Your party is about to be rengered irrelevant for a generation. The future is now.

On Tuesday's Countdown, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann delivered his latest "Special Comment" rant against President Bush, branding him a "liar" because the President raised the possibility of withdrawing some American troops during his speech in Iraq, after the President had also spoken, in Robert Draper's new book, "Dead Certain," of "sustaining a presence" in Iraq. (Snip) the Countdown host labeled the President's words as a "depraved indifference to democracy."

If you lost to O'Reilly every night by a 10 to one margin, you'd be barking mad too. and they call this journalism. Ha!

"I think it means 'brainless fool who cuts and pastes incessantly without actually engaging anyone in dialogue'."

I tried to engage in conversation. What did you gop'er do? Ignore him? don't respond. Thought police. Framing the debate so the GOP has a chance.

You didn't want to have that dialogue, now mkae the bed you lay in. You fascsit hypocrites.

rufas, your time on this blog is done. Move on.
go bark at a different moon.

Hamilton, N.J.- Authorities say Congressman Chris Smith's Hamilton offices were vandalized, possibly by a group who barged in to protest the Iraq war. Some computers were damaged and others had wires disconnected

Norman Hsu, the fugitive fund-raiser for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and other Democrats who turned himself in to California authorities last week, failed to show up for a court appearance today, and his lawyer said Mr. Hsu's whereabouts were unknown.

Try looking in chapaquidick.

"WHAT DO YOU THINK THE TERM "DITTOHEAD" MEANS?"

I think it means 'brainless fool who cuts and pastes incessantly without actually engaging anyone in dialogue'.

"more likely to be
prejudiced, are more willing to join "posses" organized by authorities to hunt down
and persecute almost any group you can think of, are more mean-spirited, and are
more likely to blame victims of misfortune for the calamities that befall them. "

In early 1900's it was the Klu Klux Klan. Now it is the GOP

"52
Chapter 2
The Roots of Authoritarian Aggression, and Authoritarianism Itself
I said in the Introduction that we would dig up the roots of authoritarian
aggression. We're going to do that now for authoritarian followers (and we'll take up
the hostility that roars so relentlessly from their leaders in a later chapter). After we
have exposed the psychological causes of the followers' aggression here, we'll wrestle
with the issue of how they became authoritarian followers in the first place.
Since followers do virtually all of the assaulting and killing in authoritarian
systems--the leaders see to this most carefully--we are dealing with very serious
matters here. Anyone who follows orders can become a murderer for an authoritarian
regime. But authoritarian followers find it easier to bully, harass, punish, maim,
torture, "eliminate," "liquidate," and "exterminate" their victims than most people do.
We saw in chapter 1 that high RWAs are more likely to inflict strong electric shocks
in a fake learning experiment in which they choose the punishment level, are more
likely to sentence common criminals to long jail sentences, are more likely to be
prejudiced, are more willing to join "posses" organized by authorities to hunt down
and persecute almost any group you can think of, are more mean-spirited, and are
more likely to blame victims of misfortune for the calamities that befall them. So
while on the surface high RWAs can be pleasant, sociable, and friendly, they
seemingly have a lot of hostility boiling away inside them that their authorities can
easily unleash. Indeed, this authoritarian aggression is one of the three defining
elements of right-wing authoritarianism. What causes it?
A Psychoanalytic Explanation"

Good to hear.

"It's about the Clintons' -- and the Dems' -- systemic corner-cutting, campaign corruption, and double standards. There is a Chinese saying: "When you drink water, always think about the source."
"

Alright. Clinton is being exposed fopr wht she is. For what I told all you people. I hope this removes her from the debates. Go Obama and or Edwards. They are our only hope. Clinton has to be a repub. What would you gop'ers do if you had no clinton to point the finger at the last 5 years? How whould you defend YOUR OWN actions? Ohh you can't. Clinton clinton clinton. What if there is no clinton, running? Then what will the gop do?

Clinton showed herself for what she is. A closet repub sellout, self over country. Like I've been telling you people, knowing changes with her in office, just more polarized. Go Omaba Gore 08

"Social psychologists generally think that people blame victims because it
maintains belief in a just world. You see, if tragedies happen to the virtuous, and you
think you are virtuous, then bad things could happen to you. It's more comforting to
believe bad things usually happen to bad people--so you are safe. Back to chapter
18 Right-wing authoritarians are prejudiced compared to other people. That does not
mean they think that Jews can't be trusted at all, that all Black people are naturally
violent, or that every Japanese is cruel. High RWAs may, as a group, even disagree
with these blatantly racist statements. However they don't disagree very much, while
most people strongly or very strongly disagree. So authoritarian followers are
relatively prejudiced, which means it would presumably take less persuasion or social
pressure to get them to discriminate than it would most people."

Such a small step.

""Smiling and nodding" was at the heart of the hairy
mess that early research on authoritarianism got itself into. All of the items on the first
"big" authoritarian follower measure, something called the F (for Fascism) scale
which came out of that 1940s research program mentioned in the previous note, were
worded such that the authoritarian answer was to agree. So its scores could have been
seriously affected by "yea-saying." But other researchers said, "Maybe 'yea-saying'
is itself part of being a compliant authoritarian follower. Let's get some authoritarian
followers and find out." "Uh, how are we going to get them?" "Let's use the F scale
to identify them!" "But that's what we're trying to decide about!"
Many researchers were swamped by this dog-chases-its-own-tail whirlpool of
reasoning until the mess was eventually straightened out by a carefully balanced
version of the F scale. It showed that the original version was massively contaminated
by response sets. These studies led to the development of the RWA scale, which was
built from the ground up to control yea-saying, and studies with the RWA scale have
made it clear that authoritarian followers do tend to agree more, in general, with
statements on surveys than most people do. It is part of their generally compliant
nature. It only took me about twenty years to get all this untangled, and would you
believe it, some people still think fixated researchers have no fun!"

As he often does, Rothenberg seems to be writing in a way that gives the maximum GOP-leaning spin.

When I say I want my seat back, I mean my seat at the Minneapolis airport mens' room. Third stall from the left, boys. Wink-wink.

The biggest of the big lies in the "health care" hype is that a lack of insurance means a lack of medical care. The second biggest lie is that health care and medical care are the same thing.

Doctors cannot stop you from ruining your health in a hundred different ways, so statistics on everything from infant mortality to AIDS are not proof of a need for government to take over medical treatment.

Few people show the slightest interest in what has actually happened in countries with government-controlled medical care.

We are apparently supposed to follow those countries' example without asking about the months that people in those countries spend on waiting lists for medical treatments that Americans get just by picking up a phone and making an appointment.

It is amazing how many people seem uninterested in such things as why so many doctors in Britain are from Third World countries with lower medical standards -- or why people from Canada come to the United States for medical treatment that they could get cheaper at home.

Government price controls on pharmaceutical drugs are more of the same illusion of something for nothing.

People who are urging us to follow other countries that control the prices of medications seem uninterested in the fact that those countries depend on the United States to create new drugs, after they destroyed incentives to do so in their own countries.

Since it takes more than a decade to create a new drug, a politician can be elected president by hyping price controls on drugs, spend eight years in the White House, and be living in retirement before people start to notice that we no longer get the kinds of new medications that successively conquered deadly diseases in the past.

Former President Clinton, who left the White House up to his eyeballs in campaign-finance scandals, retreated to southern folksy talk when asked about the Hsu scandal over the weekend.

It's about the Clintons' -- and the Dems' -- systemic corner-cutting, campaign corruption, and double standards. There is a Chinese saying: "When you drink water, always think about the source."

I don't want him back, just to bash. The iraq war and everything else is enough for me. This is a gop straw man. Give people something other than the REAL news to talk about. No anna nicole, lohan in rehab. You gop'ers need to talk about something, can't be the war of the last 15 years can it. Waste your time on that which has no bearing on the real world then. I only care because I points out the gop is a party of hypocrites. That's my only concern with it. Who needs the tape. The man pleded guilty.

liberals routinely their hypocrisy embracing Bill Clinton (accused of rape), Barney Frank (accused of allowing his home to be used for male prostitution), and the late Gerry Studds (who had sex repeatedly with a seventeen-year-old page). Republicans fear the "culture of corruption" label the liberals have assigned them and aren't quite sure how to respond to it. Mostly, they refuse to fire back by highlighting the numerous examples of demonstrable sleaze involving William Jefferson (alleged bribe), Alan Mollohan (alleged self-dealing), John Murtha (earmarks related to his brother), Dianne Feinstein (her husband profiting from military contracts), Hillary Clinton (Norman Hsu, et al), and, of course, the aforementioned Clinton, Frank, and Studds examples.

There is indeed a culture of corruption, and it extends well beyond any single politician. It swirls around big government. It always has and it always will.

"He's not 100-percent sure. If Craig has been living this secret life since 1967, you'd think others would come forward at some point. Maybe they will. So far, they haven't. Indeed, where is all the evidence of Craig's seedy life? Where are the photos, the video, the audio, the solid witnesses, and the rest of the evidence?"

I don't want or need that evidence. Maybe you gop molesters do. I don't. All I need is THE MAN PLEADING GUILTY HIMSELF. That is enough for most sane people. Dittoheads dittoheads dittoheads. Pyscho's

When the news of Craig's bathroom encounter first broke, I thought Craig must have been involved in a Pee Wee Herman moment -- or something. But he didn't even touch himself, let alone the officer in any sexually overt way. He didn't expose himself. Hell, he was in a bathroom stall. And neither he nor the officer exchanged a single word about having sex. In fact, Craig never said a word. In the end, what we have here is a shoe touch ... or was it a tap? That, along with his hand on the divider between the stalls and something or other was, we are told, code for soliciting sex. It seems to me that the officer should have taken the sting operation at least one more step, no? Wasn't he a little premature in flashing his badge when he did?

not like getting head from an intern at all is it?

So, Larry Craig is gone. He solicited sex without actually soliciting sex or having sex. He pled guilty, but not to lewd behavior -- to disorderly conduct (a misdemeanor). He is said to have a secret life involving same sex partners, but where are all these partners? According to one report, a guy in college believes Craig hit on him in 1967. Another says he "believes" he performed oral sex on the senator in a restroom at Union Station. He's not 100-percent sure. If Craig has been living this secret life since 1967, you'd think others would come forward at some point. Maybe they will. So far, they haven't. Indeed, where is all the evidence of Craig's seedy life? Where are the photos, the video, the audio, the solid witnesses, and the rest of the evidence? And if the case against Craig in that airport restroom was so compelling, if it was so sleazy, if authorities wanted to send a message to others, why didn't prosecutors take Craig to trial? Why let him go with a disorderly conduct misdemeanor? Were they doing him a favor? I don't think so. They conducted a sting operation without any sting. Let me suggest not only couldn't they make a gross misdemeanor charge stick, they would have lost the disorderly conduct charge, too. Read the statute. But the law is an ass, as they say.

"Ah, those brave, brave neo-cons fighting on the front of public opinion...Chris Matthews brings on VoteVets.org's Jon Soltz to discuss the perception behind Bush's plans for after leaving the White House. But we can't have someone representing the thousands of soldiers putting their life on the line for Bush's occupation on without the "balance" of bringing on a neo-con apologist, can we? Enter Ron Christie, who prissily informs Soltz that he has every right to speak for troop morale because he's sat in the Oval Office. I now know why Christie only commands $5-20 thousand for speaking engagements (check the link): his talking points are stale and well past their "sell by" date. Sorry, Ron, not even Tweety buys it anymore.

Download (171) | Play (170) Download (68) | Play (107)

SOLTZ: This is a president that is less committed to defeating Al Qaeda than his obsession with his legacy and more importantly, this is a man after his administration cares more about cashing out than taking care of the people he sent to war. Let me tell you something: that war might end for George Bush. That war never ends for those of us who fought in it. It never ends for us."

Get em' Soltz. Get em'. Make them hear US.

www.crooksandliars.com

As a South Dakotan, I can say that we are all thankful that Sen. Johnson is back. He is a great leader and worker for our state. If he does run for re-election it will be a very interesting campaign. Many are really unsure who the Republicans would run as a serious candidate. Two people have already thrown their names in on the republican side.

Larry Craig is the gift that keeps on giving. He's actually going to try keeping his 'seat' giving late night comedians fodder until next year...

Johnson is a lock to win next year. I know Ensign thinks it is a good target but Johnson's recovery will be complete by then, and I would look to see him on the front of some important legislation soon to show that he is working hard for the South Dakotians.
With Virginia and Idaho now open seats and the other 20 the GOP will have to defend will be enough of a drain on the RSCC funds that putting SD in play just won't happen. Also you know that Daschle and all of Johnson's friends not running are filling his coffers for him.

I also think a huge congratulations is in order for Senator Johnson and his team of doctors for working hard so that he can make a full recovery.

My regrets and sympathies go out to Paul Gilmore's family, staff and friends. He was a good man, a good friend and he will be missed. This is a very sad day.