Re: Eliot Spitzer, antismoking leader, self-destructs

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 20:42:39 -0500, "Judson McClendon"
<judmc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>"Clark F Morris" <cfmpublic@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> "HeyBub" <heybub@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>tim wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This saga prompts a thought...
>>>>
>>>> I was wondering why the Democratic majority in congress has been so
>>>> tame and has basically gone along with just about everything George
>>>> W. Bush has wanted for the past year. This case may actually offer a
>>>> clue.
>>>
>>>I wouldn't say they've been "tame." In the past year, there have been
>>>seventeen resolutions, bills, and whatnot introduced, debated, and
voted
>>>upon requiring the U.S. to leave Iraq. All have failed. On the other
hand,
>>>prior to the Democrats taking over the Congress, there were 24
consecutive
>>>quarters of economic growth. This, in spite of 9-11, Katrina, the war,
and
>>>other significant events. It took the Democrats less than a year to
f--k it
>>>all up.
>
>Just imagine what Hillary or Obama would do, if elected. Shudder.
>

Yeah just think.  The middle and lower class might actually get a
break rather than the top 1% of the population.  You know those $4.00
a gallon prices you are paying or will be paying at the pump?  Those
oil companies are subsidized to the tune of billions of dollars by the
US government.  Thank you republicans.  That's really fair.

And the Dems didn't screw up anything.  The economy has been on a
downward slid ever since Bush took office.  They just changed the
numbers to make it look good.  The real unemployment rate is way over
5% when you take into account those who are unemployed and don't file
for unemployment insurance any longer because their benefits ran out.

The job growth that Bush likes to tout is almost all in the service
industry.  Those are jobs that barely pay minimum wage.  What he never
talks about are the thousands of manufacturing and technical jobs that
have been lost.

But you go ahead and delude yourself into thinking the Democrats did
that and the Republicans are your savior.

>>>> With the massive expansion of monitoring of emails, financial
>>>> transactions, credit card records, phone calls, Internet accesses and
>>>> s forth by the government since the 9/11 attack, there must
>>>> be a huge amount of material available to the administration.
>>>
>>>Republicans don't do that sort of thing.
>>>
>> Sin and misuse of prosecutorial power are both bi-partisan and
>> bi-ideological.
>

The democrats voted to hold the telecom companies liable for Bush's
warrentless telephone taps.  The Republicans blocked it and Bush would
veto it anyway.

>The Republican electorate is far less tolerant of many character flaws
>than the Democratic electorate. Every Democratic president since FDR,
>with the single exception of Carter, was a serious womanizer. AFAIK,
>the only Republican president in that timeframe who had *ever* had an
>affair was Eisenhower with his jeep driver when he was in England during
>WWII, before his presidency. A Republican president who did what Clinton
>did would have zero chance at re-election.

You're talking about the far right wing of the Republican party.  The
party centralists and moderates are not as picky.

Regards,
          ////
         (o o)
-oOO--(_)--OOo-

"With global warming, somebody's baby is going to have to burst into
flames to make people do the right thing."
--  Chris Rock
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Remove nospam to email me.

Steve