Originally Posted By Beaumandy Maybe so. Why didn't democrats get behind the Bush SS plan? If they didn't like it, give us a better plan. Personally, I would LOVE to put my SS money into a private account that I could work with. Same for my kids. It worked in Chile and Galvaston Texas. SAme old stuff.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy That is one type of account. If you ever decide to take up poker, let me know, I can help you. It's one area where politics don't matter.
Originally Posted By cmpaley Why are we being dragged completely off topic? The fact is, the Republican leadership in congress is totally en thrall to Bush and his Imperial Court. No oversight, no accountability. Just implementing Bush's vision. And people thought Gray Davis was insane when he implied that the legislature exists for that purpose.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <The fact is, the Republican leadership in congress is totally en thrall to Bush and his Imperial Court.> That's not a fact.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >><The fact is, the Republican leadership in congress is totally en thrall to Bush and his Imperial Court.> That's not a fact.<< So you say. Back it up.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh But here's a list of articles that note differences of opinion between the Bush administration and Congress.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh Oops. Here's the link - <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=bush" target="_blank">http://www.google.com/search?h l=en&lr=&q=bush</a>%2C+congress%2C+split&btnG=Search
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> There was never a plan from democrats regarding SS. << SSI "is" a democratic plan, beau. You don't think the GOP would come up with something like that, do you?
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Good one Gadzuux.. maybe the last plan the dems ever had. YOu know I'm talking about a plan to fix SS now since it's scheduled to go banktrupt in a few years. Hey, I told you that gay cowboy movie would get tons of awards.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>You're the one making the accusation. It's your job to prove it.<< Very well: Almost all of Bush's nominations are fully backed, without question, by the Republican leadership in the Congress. All of Bush's tax cuts, especially those that are slanted toward the already wealthy are fully backed, without question, by the Republican leadership in the Congress. The "USA PATRIOT" Act is fully backed, without question, by the Republican leadership in the Congress. The rolling back of environmental regulations and protections of working people are all fully backed, without question, by the Republican leadership in the Congress.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy First off your descriptions of what is happening in Washington is one of pure hysteria and not reality based. cmpaley, there is a benefit to winning seats in congress. If you win enought seats, and you win the White House, you get to shape a lot of things. My advice to democrats is to win some elections. The problem is that the upcoming elections are not going to gain them anything.... you know whatI always say about the dems having no ideas to rally behind... it's why they lose.
Originally Posted By cmpaley I said leadership, not a few Republicans here and there on this or that issue. Where are the oversight hearings holding Bush's feet to the fire? Not heard of one. Aside from the immigration issue, I've seen little more than token opposition to anything proposed by the Imperial president.
Originally Posted By cmpaley So, what you're saying, Beau, is that the Constutitional separation of powers is only useful when there is a division of authority among the parties. Noted.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Yeah - bush only needs a rubber stamp - and the GOP controlled congress is more than willing to roll over for him. The worst is when scandal strikes and they decide to investigate themselves. Funny thing - the investigations are either a whitewash or they never go anywhere. I wonder why?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Almost all of Bush's nominations are fully backed, without question, by the Republican leadership in the Congress. All of Bush's tax cuts, especially those that are slanted toward the already wealthy are fully backed, without question, by the Republican leadership in the Congress. The "USA PATRIOT" Act is fully backed, without question, by the Republican leadership in the Congress. The rolling back of environmental regulations and protections of working people are all fully backed, without question, by the Republican leadership in the Congress.> Wow, what a conspiracy! Most Republicans agree on policy matters! Who would have thought? And, by the way, the tax cuts that were enacted since President Bush took office were not slanted toward the already wealthy. Nor is it true that the Patriot Act was backed without question. There was a lot of input from Congressmen and Senators.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <So, what you're saying, Beau, is that the Constutitional separation of powers is only useful when there is a division of authority among the parties.> No, that's not what he's saying.
Originally Posted By bboisvert RE Post #7 <<This administration has turned the ecomomy around and has kept the country safe from terrorist attacks since 9/11>> <Warning, long rant ahead...> Um, Bush was the president on 9/11/01. He didn't prevent it. Bush was the President on 8/6/01 when the PDB called "binLaden determined to strike in U.S." was released. He didn't read it. Bush didn't protect us. Four planes made U-turns in the sky and for an hour, the president sat in at a photo op with 2nd graders while the course of human history was also being redirected and hijacked. Bush says that "Oceans no longer protect us. We have to fight the terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them here." What a load of crap! Gore was right on the money with his recent speech. Did oceans protect us when the British Redcoats came over from England in 1776? Did oceans protect us at Pearl Harbor when Japanese Zeroes flew *across the ocean* to bomb Pearl Harbor? Did oceans protect us during the cold war when there were thousands of ICBMs pointed at the U.S.? Oceans have never protected us. Sound foreign policy protects us. A strong military protects us when policies fail. We used to have both. Sadly, our current foreign policy leaves us isolated and indebted to the Saudis and the Chinese. And our military is stretched thin and over-deployed, without a plan for success. On 9/11 we had the entire planet behind our efforts to stop Bin Laden and his brand of terrorism. In just four years, Bush has completely reversed all of that good will and isolated America so much that many of our closest allies no longer trust us. al Qaida is larger than it ever was, not smaller. The Middle East is more volatile, not safer. London and Madrid have seen attacks on their homeland. The U.S. is in a perpetual state of "Elevated Threat Level, Code Yellow" whatever that means. Over 2,200 of our sons and daughters have died (and continue to die) fighting a war against Iraqis; who on 9/11/01 didn't attack us, were under sanctions, and were not a threat to our homeland or our way of life (but they sure hate us now!). Tens of thousands innocent Iraqi civilians have died as have scores of other innocent foreign nationals and contractors. Bush #43 has run up more foreign debt in 5 years than the other 42 Presidents COMBINED! If we were a corporation, we would have to declare bankruptcy. All but a rare few, who love this country like a parent loves their troubled teen, have dared to be true patriots and speak out against Bush and his insane policies. Their hope was to protect and preserve the America that they care so deeply about from this administration's bad choices and ill-concieved policies. And they are met with smears from our so-called "liberal media", forced to early retirement, or otherwise have their careers and lives trashed. Then there's the spying..., and the lying..., and the convictions... No, I don't feel safer since he took office and the neo-cons moved in. Quite the contrary. I love democracy and I love my country and I want them both back. <sarcasm> But at least the queers can't get married! Yee-haw! </sarcasm> (...waiting for the predictable response somehow blaming Clinton for all of this...)
Originally Posted By gadzuux I've got a predictable response - stick around awhile, and post more often. When you're right, you're right.
