A Laundry List of the Latest Democratic Party Screwups
 

Why I never vote for Democrats.

The more they change, the more they remain the same. Take particular note of Hillary acting like the Southern Democrats of five and ten and fifteen decades ago: pandering for votes by stirring up racial tension, not to say hatred.

Contribute money to Hillary's opponents -- all of them -- and vote for them too. This unspeakable creature must be driven from public life before she really gets a chance to screw things up.

Hillary certainly shouldn't have used Republican terminology. That's never a good idea.

Can she really screw things up more than:

- two of the three original Bush "axis of evil" closer to becoming nuclear powers than either was five years ago, while we invaded the one that wasnt even close and now continue to flounder around with no coherent exit strategy

- programs by the NSA, the Defense Department, the Dept. of Homeland Security, and other government agencies to trample on the constitutional rights of citizens.

- a president who blatantly ignores the will of the Congress, on numerous occasions from declaring war to ignoring (or rewriting) environmental policy

- the largest budget deficit and federal debt in history

- the weakest economic growth in five years

- no national health care policy. millions more uninsured Americans and soaring health care costs for the rest of us

- political corruption at levels that make the Clintons look like saints.

As to Hillary's "plantation" comment, it sounds alot like something Newt Gingrich said in 1994 when he was promoting the Contract with America:
Hillary is not my first choice, but perhaps one of the Hillary bashers can explain why she scares them so much. Is it because, as Bush, said recently, "she would be a formidable candidate".

The Trent Lott comment was more damning than the plantation comment IMO, and he backtracked so hard he was tripping over his heels the whole time.

Economic growth has been absolutely outstanding for the last year and a half. Last quarter's numbers were only average but things have been going very strongly for some time.

I concur with Redux. Bush has lied to us over and over again. I think most Hillary bashers are basically afraid of powerful women, and want to presevre our patriarchy. Urbane Guerilla's comment is nothing more than neo-conservative smear and spin. Quite frankly, people who espouse a false sense of ethics and morality, and then bash someone like Hillary Clinton are scum, and deserve to be called on their bullshit. I vote across party lines, and it sickens me when I hear the same tired spin being parroted by less than intelligent jingoists. Take your hate bandwagon and sitck it up your ass, lets talk about getting some ACCOUNTABILITY, ETHICS AND MORALITY back in our government..

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government" Thomas Paine

Look for this one to slide right on through the current administration, too.

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/World/20...15630-sun.html

Despite a record-setting 4th Qtr 2005 profit of over ten billion dollars, Exxon-Mobil would like us just to forget the punative damages associated with the Exxon Valdez drunken tanker captain debacle.

UT is right...the economy is doing *great*, especially if you happen to be an oil company. Anyone think the Bush administration won't give Exxon a pass somehow, here, even though they could pay the entire 5 billion dollar damage award, and still have 50% of their Q4 profits left over?

17 years ago... Wow.

We even subsidize exxon. Corporate welfare whores...

http://www.knowmore.org/index.php/Exxonmobil

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...072802085.html

http://www.accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=1214

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1698531,00.html

Merely calling names is neither rebuttal nor refutation, Maffick. Cease immediately to believe in that, or I will repeatedly sandbag you for being lame, stupid, and weak. Quite frankly, to borrow your phrase, the neoconservative school of thought, id est, that human liberty and real democracy worldwide is a very good thing not only for the world's peoples but also for democracies (I'm including republics under this general term) such as ourselves, seems to me to be the very best idea to come down the pike since the Libertarian Party. It's kind of hard to object to good government being practiced everywhere, instead of the corruption and tyranny that currently passes for government in too many places.

Then I guess I'll never be scum, as my sense of ethics and morality are real, and much realer than you'd probably like. I bash Hillary C for being an unprincipled, mildly sociopathic Saul Alinsky-type socialist, whose political instincts were formed in a one-party State named Arkansas. You can't call me on bullshit; I never bullshit. I never tell anything I don't understand to be truthful (comedy aside), which you are probably going to have to learn the hard way. You sound like the usual young man here: valiant in his ignorance. You're at liberty to try me any way you think you can, but you will find me an exceedingly tough nut to crack. Others here will agree.

I tend to give people who mistake the tribal customs to which they are accustomed for laws of nature a rather rough time -- at my worst, I oblige them to consider my tribal customs, and why they might have been established.

A good idea and a better policy -- I don't think I've ever voted a straight ticket myself, and I've been voting for thirty years.

One way to have managed that would have been to strip President Clinton of his office for his treasonable misdeeds. Regrettably, this did not happen. Now while conducting oneself more ethically than Ole Possum Head isn't exactly setting the bar high, the Bush Administration has cleared that bar by a handsome span -- and not by virtue of being Republican, either. George is just a better man than Bill, which is why I voted for George both times.

Considering that America should win her wars against tyrannical terrorists isn't jingoism. It is common sense. Do not seek substitutes, any substitutes, for victory against our antidemocrat, self-made and self-declared enemies. For the good of mankind, wipe these from the face of the earth, and convert their supporters into our supporters. We've got the better deal anyway.

It would have if he'd done any. They spent millions of dollars looking for anything they could find, and the only crime they found took place solely as a result of the investigation. Heisenberg comes to mind.

Mr. Gorilla ...do you really believe that the majority of Iraqis are OUR supporters now? Perhaps maybe the Kurds, but they always were more pro-western, as least until we vocally oppose an independent Kurdistan. The new Shiia majority in Iraq is controlled by the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution In Iraq (SCIRI) and includes a coalition of other religious parties, each with loyalties to their own theocratic leader (the secularists barely raised a blimp in the voting).

It is just as likely, if not more so, that our actions have helped create a client state more closely alligned with Iran than a secular democracy with any loyalties to the West.

And elections do not a democracy make. The true test of a democracy is the protection of the rights of the minority. Ask the Sunnis how optimistic they are about that.

I'll have more to say but I have an early morning meeting.

I'm also intrigued with your rewriting the history of the Clintons. If only you had facts to back it up. :)

Look, Redux and HM, read Year Of The Rat and The Case Against Hillary Clinton and Sellout and then get back to me. The Clinton Administration kept a gray cloud of scandal and malfeasance hovering over it the whole time it was in. The current assaults on the Bush Administration by partisan hacks who really should be trying to fight a war and not the Republicans don't even compare with this. [File this under "Democrats are stupid and disappointing" -- I'm getting tired of pulling the file drawer open]

Was not Congress, particularly its senior leadership, quite scared of what would come out in the wash -- who was bribing whom -- should all of Bill Clinton's sins be remembered? Seems to me only such fear prevented Clinton from being turned out.

Anyone of normal memory will agree that for its entire eight years in office, the Clinton Administration cared for, and seriously worked for, just one thing: the convenience of the Clinton Administration and the Clintons in particular. The DoJ was subverted into running interference for the Clinton Administration, and didn't do much else. Disgusting, really.

Richard Mellon Scaife kept a grey cloud of scandal over the Clinton Administration. He spewed out unsubstantiated accusations of everything, up to and including dozens of murders, knowing that with enough accusations, people would believe that something had to be true. If there had been anything real in it, the millions of dollars spent investigating by a hostile Congress would have found something. If Clinton had done what Bush has done, and refuse to testify under oath or allow anyone in his administration (or his pals in the oil industry) to, he wouldn't have even done the one thing they did ding him for. Put Bush under oath, and ask direct questions, and see how many counts of perjury you can rack up.

As I recall, the final report of Ken Starr and the OIC, after a four year, $40+ million investigation, found no evidence of wrongdoing by either of the Clintons in any of the areas investigated other than lying to the grand jury about his horny escape (which was certainly an indictable offense, but hardly reaching the level of impeachment). The investigation included Whitewater, the FBI filegate and the White House travelgate, fund-raising (Lincoln Bedroom) and whatever else Starr could fish for.

So....UG....where's the beef?

As to the books you cite, I am familiar with Peggy Noonan's "The Case Against Hillary Clinton" where Noonan states right from the start her motives were not to create an unbiased objective report on Hillary. She admits in various sections that the "evidence" she cites is based on "conversations" that she (Noonan) speculates may have or would have taken place.

It was a laughable read. I havent read the others, but I suspect much of the same.

UG...lets talk about:

Bush’s ties to Jack Abramoff and whether he has been running his own version of the ‘Lincoln Bedroom’ scandal by having Abramoff bring big money donors to the White House ?

Or how about Rove’s involvement in the K Street Project, buying lobbyists by filling the lobbying firms with former Bush White House and Senate Repub staffers?

Then there was the GAO report which found BUsh broke the law by using taxpayer funds to pay conservative journalists/talking heads like Armstrong Williams to peddle White Hosue propaganda

Oh. and Chaney's “secret” energy meeting with Enron, Exxon and the other oil buddies to write the Bush energy policy.

Nor to mention claims of vioalting US law and international treaties with the rendition program to send prisoners to other countries to be tortured.

There is so much more, my mind is spinning :)

And we havent even begun to address the domestic warrantless spying program, rechristend by the WHite House as the "terrorist surveillance program." It was interesting that Attorney General Gonzalez would NOT testify under oath at the Senate hearings today and basis his and Bush's argument on supposed points of law that contstitutional lawyers, left and right, find dubious.