The Femi-Nazis are at it Again!
Once again operating on the assumption that the definition of women's politics revolve around how quickly one can have an abortion, Sen. Feinstein has threatened to filibuster if Judge Alito gives the appearance of threatening the Holy Grail of liberal politics: Roe vs Wade.
It's enough to make your head explode.
Dianne Feinstein Urges Alito Filibuster
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said Sunday that she will support a Democratic filibuster of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito if it becomes clear he'll vote to overturn Roe vs Wade.
Asked if she would consider it "filibuster material" if she finds out that Alito intends to vote against Roe, Feinstein told "Fox News Sunday": "If I believe that he was going to go in there and overthrow Roe, the question is, most likely, yes."
The California Democrat, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that any High Court nominee who thought Roe had been "improperly decided" was outside the judicial mainstream.
"Precedent has been established," Feinstein insisted. "Women all over America have come to depend on it. Because of the lapse of time, more than 30 years, because of the precedential values attached to it, I think it would be, for many of us, a very difficult thing to see somebody who you knew was going to overthrow Roe [added to the Court]."
Asked if opposition to Roe qualified as an "extraordinary circumstance" that would warrant a filibuster, the Judiciary Committee Democrat said tersely, "Yes."
Appearing on the same program, Sen. Lindsey Graham blasted Feinstein for her comments.
"That's a very dangerous thing to say," Graham complained. "If you have to come to the [Judiciary] Committee and say that under no circumstances will I entertain to look at Roe v Wade anew, I think that's very unfair."
Speaking as a member of the gang of 14, which was formed last year in a bid to avert judicial filibusters, Graham said he would vote in invoke to so-called nuclear option.
"I would consider [opposition to Roe] not only not an extraordinary circumstance, [it's] a threat to the independence of the judiciary," he told Fox. "And I would stop it in its tracks with my vote."
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/8/111038.shtml
It's enough to make your head explode.
Dianne Feinstein Urges Alito Filibuster
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said Sunday that she will support a Democratic filibuster of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito if it becomes clear he'll vote to overturn Roe vs Wade.
Asked if she would consider it "filibuster material" if she finds out that Alito intends to vote against Roe, Feinstein told "Fox News Sunday": "If I believe that he was going to go in there and overthrow Roe, the question is, most likely, yes."
The California Democrat, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that any High Court nominee who thought Roe had been "improperly decided" was outside the judicial mainstream.
"Precedent has been established," Feinstein insisted. "Women all over America have come to depend on it. Because of the lapse of time, more than 30 years, because of the precedential values attached to it, I think it would be, for many of us, a very difficult thing to see somebody who you knew was going to overthrow Roe [added to the Court]."
Asked if opposition to Roe qualified as an "extraordinary circumstance" that would warrant a filibuster, the Judiciary Committee Democrat said tersely, "Yes."
Appearing on the same program, Sen. Lindsey Graham blasted Feinstein for her comments.
"That's a very dangerous thing to say," Graham complained. "If you have to come to the [Judiciary] Committee and say that under no circumstances will I entertain to look at Roe v Wade anew, I think that's very unfair."
Speaking as a member of the gang of 14, which was formed last year in a bid to avert judicial filibusters, Graham said he would vote in invoke to so-called nuclear option.
"I would consider [opposition to Roe] not only not an extraordinary circumstance, [it's] a threat to the independence of the judiciary," he told Fox. "And I would stop it in its tracks with my vote."
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/8/111038.shtml
I guess she hasn't spoken to Ginsberg or Tripe (sp?). They both agree the decision was based out of whole cloth, and it has no constitutional merit.
I guess if you're a Leftist, though, the only life that matters is when you are about to lose you own for murder. It is a shameful position to hold. Shameful.
Comment by Simple One— 2006/01/23 @ 12:35 AM — (Reply)
Get a grip!
Comment by Jess— 2006/02/23 @ 07:33 PM — (Reply)
Comment by fuck bush and all conservatiive......— 2006/01/26 @ 07:06 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/01/26 @ 08:56 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/05/05 @ 07:42 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/01/26 @ 08:56 AM — (Reply)
Comment by C-Mom— 2006/01/27 @ 06:58 AM — (Reply)
How ironic!
Comment by C-Mom— 2006/01/27 @ 07:00 AM — (Reply)
This country is being destroyed by the concertives, religious nuts,
and as long as they control the House, Senate and the WH this country is going to go down the tubes. Republicans are selfish bastards, I'm sick of all of you and I hope that you all are voted out of office this year.
Comment by Louise— 2006/01/27 @ 07:23 AM — (Reply)
This country is being destroyed by the concertives, religious nuts,
and as long as they control the House, Senate and the WH this country is going to go down the tubes. Republicans are selfish bastards, I'm sick of all of you and I hope that you all are voted out of office this year.
Comment by Louise— 2006/01/27 @ 07:25 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/27 @ 07:25 AM — (Reply)
The ISSUE is, GEORGE W. BUSH is a complete idiot, an embarrasment. If you have any brains at all, you and the rest of the conservative right, you should be ashamed. If you really thought about Bush, you'd recognize just how stupid he really is.
Comment by Louise— 2006/01/27 @ 07:33 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Anyone can point out problems, it takes a person of intelligence to come up with a solution.— 2006/01/27 @ 08:04 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/27 @ 08:06 AM — (Reply)
Don't bother responding, I'm 61 years old and I've lived long enough to know what's important, and ABORTION JUST AIN'T IT!!!!!!!!!
Comment by Louise — 2006/01/27 @ 12:36 PM — (Reply)
Louise your spelling is embarrassing.
AND WHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT THAN AN INNOCENT CHILD!
So what is more important, your social security, your medicare benefits? School lunches? all those senior citizen entitlements? (you mentioned your age because somehow you think that makes you wiser?)
What you liberal gutless wonders don't understand is all this is bigger than George Bush, Bill Clinton and the whole lot of politicians. This is about our way of life, the radical Islamists want to destroy you or make you somebody's third wife. So either you get in the fight or you get fitted for a hijab.
What size do you wear?
Comment by elmers brother— 2006/01/27 @ 02:37 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/27 @ 03:11 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/27 @ 03:32 PM — (Reply)
Firstly, Cat, do NOT call me “honey,” I am not your “honey,” and it is presumptuous for you to refer to me by that term.
Now, I was not going to respond anymore, but I can’t help it, you people make me so “darn” (is that word okay with you?) angy!!!
You don’t like my language … well I’m sure you’ve used some choice words on occasion yourself. And to say you never do, baloney
Now, as for Mr. Bush, your president; I think that his administration is leading our country away from our core values of honesty, compassion, community and patriotism.
I think this country needs a president who heals conflicts with diplomacy and cooperation, not by bullying.
Your president is gambling away our savings on tax cuts for the wealthy, spending our tax money on an unjustified war which I am afraid is going to saddle my children and grandchildren with an enormous deficit. If you have children is that what you want???? I’d like a president who manages a budget that leaves no child, hungry, uneducated and impoverished.
We need a president who believes all Americans deserve equal access to quality healthcare.
T
I do not believe this president cares one iota about the environment. His devotion is the Almighty Dollar and oil. I will not protect our natural resources so that my children and grandchildren will inherit a healthy planet. Do you not care, you look like a young person, what kind of world do you want to live in? Hey, both I, and Mr. Bush will be dead when the affects of his policies comes home to roost.
And yes I WANT A PRESENT WHO RESPECTS MY CIVIL RIGHTS , AND EVERY AMERMICAN (EVEN YOU) AND TO ALLOW INDIVIDUALS MAKE THEIR OWN PERSONAL CHOICES AS TO GOD, AND MARRIAGE AND, YES, A WOMEN’S RIGHT TO CHOOSE.
Am I liberal, you bet I am, and proud of it. I believe I’m my brother’s keeper, are you, does the “Right” believe that, hmm?
One more thing, this president will not get away with the “crap” his presently getting away with, he’s going to get caught, and he will go down as the worst president in history.
Comment by Louise (the mean old lady)— 2006/01/27 @ 05:15 PM — (Reply)
Comment by aza spade— 2006/08/24 @ 09:33 PM — (Reply)
You are right, my use of sarcasm and condescension is reprehensible! You have shown by your ability to address the issues, head on, your age and your expressive ability that you deserve oh so much more respect than that.
You entered this post hate mongering, reread what you have written.
You assume you know my politics and my morality. I have only addressed two issues on this post - litmus tests and hate mongering.
Clairvoyance run in the family, there Louise?
If you know anything it is from linking to my blog. Even then you don't know much about me because I don't tow a party line or fall easily into any category, political or otherwise but I'll tell you this - I have not yet begun to wield my keyboard.
Also notice that I don't hit and run - my thoughts, url amd picture are there for all to see. No hiding behind MY computer screen. Where's your blog? You email?
So again I ask you, Louise, do you or do you not believe that it is proper for senators to maintain an ideological litmus test for political appointments? That is THE ISSUE OF THIS PAGE!
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/27 @ 05:52 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/27 @ 05:57 PM — (Reply)
I've had enough of youu, think what you want of me, I really don't give hoot.
Oh, by the way, I don't need to have my photo pasted here I'm not so full of myself, that I need people to see my image. Oh, and I am a size 6, if you want to buy me some Iraqi clothing.
Comment by Granny— 2006/01/27 @ 06:02 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/27 @ 06:20 PM — (Reply)
Sorry to get so caught up with Louise. I didn't mean to derail your post. It is infuriating when people post and don't address the issue at hand.
FYI, I think litmus tests are wrong no matter which side of the aisle uses them. It just doesn't seem to fit with Article II. and the executive appointment power. I think that the Senate has taken it's responsibility to "advice and consent" (that is the spelling in the actual document) way too far. Appointment is one of the few executive powers that is enumerated and to infringe on it for ideological and partisan reasons is wrong. Only fitness for the job matters. Has the candidate the neccessary skills, experience abilities, etc. for the job. Just me and my honest opinion.
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/27 @ 06:29 PM — (Reply)
Comment by A Conservative Realist— 2006/01/27 @ 07:45 PM — (Reply)
Cate, you are a gem! Say whatever you want on this blog, trolls be damned!
Oh, and Louise, or Granny, or whatever you like to call yourself(reference to that first funky post), Cate did not ask your burqa size, EB did.
I would think that if you did not care about what we 'evil' conservatives thought, you would not get so hot under the collar!I would think that a woman of your years and wisdom would support a woman's right to choose responsibility for her actions, not the drive-through 'fix it' of abortion.Also, in reference to the thread, the Holy Grail end all and be all of left wing politics these days in lieu of the judiciary seems to be Roe V Wade. The dems in Senate are so worried about filibustering that they do not see how frantic and desperate over an issue that isn't going to change the moment Judge Alito assumes the bench of the Supreme Court.(Although if it did, I wouldn't lose any sleep!)
The fact is that there is a warm wind blowing in from the DNC, and it would do them more service to offer real opinions and solutions than the usual blame and defame, cut and run politics that have become their modus operandi.The democratic party is no longer the party of FDR or even that of Pres.Kennedy. Indeed, the republicans of today ARE that party of the past! Today the dems are socialists wolves in sheeps clothing, more worried about the next election cycle than keeping the American people safe.
Well, at the risk of sounding too much like AlwaysLastWordMillard,End Rant.
Comment by C-Mom— 2006/01/27 @ 07:50 PM — (Reply)
I see you are not very well educated on our enemy.
We can get you your hijab (a muslim form of dress, not just Iraqi) in two very lovely non revealing colors:
Red - every liberal/progressives favorite color, from Kruschev on up
and
Code Pink - an even less revealing color guaranteed to send your favorite Jihadi into an all out tizzy
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/01/27 @ 10:35 PM — (Reply)
I am not posing, or pretending to be anything that I am not. I am truly a 61 year old grandmother, with 4 grandchildren and another on the way, married 39 years to a great guy.
No, for me, life is good, I don't want for anything. I own my own home, don't worry when I have to buy prescription medicine, was able to put two sons through college, etc., God has been good to me and my whole family.
It's other Americans in this country who have not had so easy. So, if I sound grumpy, or mean, that's too bad, I happen to feel this country and the Bush administration just doesn't get it, doesn't understand the struggles the average American has to deal with.
Look, I support my country, I support our troops in Iraq, they are doing a great job, but that's what they are there to do. I tip my hat off to them. So, I support them, but can't stand behind Bush.
I stood tall behind Bush (which is hard for me, I'm only 5 feet) after 9/11. I stood behind him to go after the people who attackied us. I do not stand behind him in this war, especially from a man who never put his life out there, likes these young soldiers. Sure, send everyone else, but he never had to go, nor did his children. So, that's where I stand.
I love my country, I love the troops who are fighting, but sorry, I have a great hate and distaste for a man who does not realize he is single-handedly ruining this country.
Comment by Louise— 2006/01/28 @ 07:29 AM — (Reply)
thanks for supporting the troops, Louise I canonly speak for myself but now we must win. navel gazing might mean the end of us.
I care about those less fortunate. However I chose to give through charities rather through taxes. Besides have you ever seen government funded housing?
If you'd like I can provide you with some organizations that help the troops?
Comment by elmers brother— 2006/01/28 @ 07:56 AM — (Reply)
Thank you, elmer's brother, I have already given to various organization to help the troops, as well as donated 75 thousand frequent-flyer miles to the troops. I appreciate your offer.
Comment by louise— 2006/01/28 @ 08:06 AM — (Reply)
I don't have everything. I grew up wanting for a lot in my life. I have been without health care (as a young adult) and my kids will go to college, probably the same way I did. Working for minimum wage after classes and eating a while lot of 10 cent pasta (Ramen). I watched my parents work 3 and 4 jobs between and still never somehow get any taxes back.
I have been inside government housing (not just military) and seen how people who are being fed by my tax dollars somehow have enough to own a satellite t.v. I've seen how they can manage money well enough to by heroin and sports cars but not pay for medicine.
I know there are people out there with real needs and we have yet to turn in anything but itemized tax forms because our charitable giving is so much more than the "allowable" amount.
I find caring for others and helping the poor a truly noble venture - but I also find it a moral one. You can't legislate heart. I have lived in third world nations and ingested water that I would urinate in this country. But the simple truth is that when a person becomes a slave to a government - either because he is forced to support it (as working class and rich Americans are) or because he doesn't know how to make a way without it (as so many underpriveleged people in this country don't) there is a problem.
I'd like to see people getting a hand up not a hand out and I'd love to see a return of the culture where people felt a little embarrassed about not being employed (because that is a great motivater to work) rather than just furious that their EFT cards aren't working fast enough. I'd like to see young people who are responsible adults and don't expect life to be easy - who know that the choices we make come with real and lasting consequences, instead of quick fixes. I'd like to see criminals prosecuted and their victims helped , not the other way around.
I'd like to see people engage in civil discourse - not hateful rhetoric. Thank you for posting this morning - now I can really appreciate who you are and why you may feel the way you do.
Now that we have identified some of the problems - how about laying some solutions on the table. What have you got for welfare reform? Pushing an energy conscious agenda? Tax reform? The health care crisis?
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/28 @ 08:09 AM — (Reply)
Louise like Cate said now that the dialogue can be civil we might actually come to a better understanding of each other. One thing I have learned since I started blogging is that it's not always about trying to "win" an argument, some of us will just have to respectfully disagree, but our understanding of each other is better.
Now back on topic. If Roe v. Wade were overturned I don't believe abortions would stop. I think then it would be up to individual states, which is right where it should be. Let the people decide by voting. When the Supreme court legislated from the bench they took our right to either
1. hold anyone accountable for a decision such as this
2. allow for the changing mores and values of the American people
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/01/28 @ 08:32 AM — (Reply)
And the real disgrace in Feinstein's comment (accidentally called her Pelosi yesterday) is that they find the mere possibility of a man disagreeing with them on this issue worth shutting down the whole process. Even if he launched a personal crusade, it would still require the majority of the sitting justices siding with him.
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/28 @ 08:57 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/01/28 @ 09:18 AM — (Reply)
Speaking of welfare reform, ect., during my second pregnancy, my husband was laid off.Our insurance was through him. Although I was employed at the time, I was far enough along to be considered a 'pre-existing' condition by my insurance. He found work very quickly, but wouldn't be eligable for health care for 90 days; in time for the baby to be covered once he was born, but not to cover any of the pregnancy.There was no way we could've afforded COBRA, so not knowing what else to do, I went to Job and Family Services, hoping that I could have temporary help with prenatal care and the delivery.
I was told that because I was part-time and my pregnancy was uncoverable with my company's insurance, that I qualified for help. Phew!
In situations like that, I don't mind helping others out. Crap happens, and sometimes people just can't help it. The professional moochers are what sucks, and here's how they are born.
During the process of setting up the prenatal care, I was informed that because the time of my husband's last day of work to first paycheck was three and a half weeks, that we 'qualified' for one month of food benefits. I was so embarassed! I told the worker no, that I wasn't here for all of that, that I was only worried about the health care, and only that because I was pregnant. She told me that it was automatic, I qualified, and the card would be issued, period. I could use it or throw it away. She seemed really surprised that I was embarrassed and didn't want it!
Then, when our son was born, he was a NICU baby for one week. I was happy he was getting all the right care, but really worried about how big of a copay bill we would be getting. Guess what? We NEVER got a bill. Not one. My third baby is six months old and we've payed about half of what wasn't covered.
Then, when we went to the pediatrician's office for all those vaccinations, we were told that the state insurance covered the baby for a year. I gave them our new (through work) insurance, and they wouldn't use it.REFUSED TO. They said the state would pay them more and not argue about it.
It is no wonder that we can't get spongeres off the system. I wanted out ASAP and had a hard time. (I had to threaten to leave the ped's practice if they didn't use what insurance I dictated.) I'm sure it doesn't take much convincing for someone who'd rather not work anyway to keep soaking up free tax dollars. The B.S. about people slipping through the cracks is just that. It should be up to us to use charity, because the system doesn't work.
Sorry for being off topic, but I just can't stand when I hear, "what about the poor people?"
Comment by C-Mom— 2006/01/28 @ 10:28 AM — (Reply)
Comment by Elmers Brother— 2006/01/28 @ 10:31 AM — (Reply)
Okay - off on C-Mom's tangent, I go...
I have a plan for welfare reform.
For people who are "practically unemployable", (I mean those who can't subsist or support their families without some sort of government aid - the working poor) guaranteed student LOANS to a university or trade school and assistance while in school full-time
For temporary assistance - 6 months or less we'll lend you credit with a rock bottom interest rate (again you repay it slowly when on your feet)
For those who hit month 6 and are still unemployed, government aid is conditional - you must first show cancellation statements for your cable, satellite, internet, long distance phone services, etc. I say this because if you want long term aid, we should be supporting your life, not your lifestyle! You ought to be doing everything humanly possible not to be a leach. And that means doing what middle class working people do when they hit hard times: cutting back on the extras.
For the disabled, those who are truly unable to care for themselves, we simply take care of them. They are our responsibility as a "Christian" (or for any secularists out there, an "Enlightened") Nation.
My plan needs some work, I'm sure, but I really believe that people need to feel the empowerment of self-reliance. They need to know how good it feels and how liberating, to go to sleep at night knowing you have earned an honest wage.
What do you think?
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/28 @ 05:06 PM — (Reply)
QUESTION:
Why don't terrorists go after other free-thinking countries, but go after us, and why, because of Bush's foreign policy and HIS war in Iraq.
So, far no one has explained to me why we're really in Iraq, why we really went after Sadam ... other than Sadam once threaten Bush's daddy.
But, what does it matter what I think, people who believe and back Bush, will never find that he's run this country into the ground, that he and his administration, if you were really admit it, would realize it was Bush who caused 911, either on purpose, or because he was too stupid to read and understand the warnings.
Enjoy your listen to president tonight, because he will only speak another pack of lies ... ahem, if you want to call what he does, speaking.
Comment by lzeitlin— 2006/01/31 @ 12:00 PM — (Reply)
Comment by aza spade— 2006/08/24 @ 09:50 PM — (Reply)
Saying that we caused 9/11 is like saying a rape victim was raped because of the way she dressed... it just doesn't work, and it shows just how cold-hearted you are.
Terrorists DO go after other free thinking countries...just ask Spain and England.
The war in Iraq is being fought for a multitude of reasons. Saddam was a major human rights violator. If you doubt it, just look at the reports of mass graves or ask the Kurdish people.
Yes, he did try to have Pres. Bush 41 assasinated. THAT alone is enogh to go to war over.
Saddam was a destabilizing factor.
Saddam did have chemical weapons, as evidenced by the footage of him testing them out on dogs. Again, you can ask the Kurds about that.
Saddam was paying a stipend to families of Palestinian homicide bombers, yet another way he was causing chaos.
Spreading democracy in Iraq.
I'm sure there are probably more reasons; this was just off the cuff. You could always try using your computer for things like research; I suggest starting at the White House.
Comment by C-Mom— 2006/01/31 @ 12:38 PM — (Reply)
Enough about whether I can spell or not ... that's not the issue.
I do have one interesting statistic. Bush's approval rating is down just below 40 per cent as I sit here. What's that all about? Could it be the public is FINALLY getting smart to the fact that Bush is a lousy president.
He is arrogant, he's hated around the world, and I don't see how his policies make us safe. And are you aware that even his father is not happy his son took us into Iraq. Yes, there WERE WMDs, but that was long ago. I give you that. Sadam is no better than Hitler, but he did not pose a threat to us. Osama poses a threat. What happened with him, has the president forgot about him?
The numbers are rising that most Amercans do not like this war, he dosn't know how to get us out. I have four grandson, and it scares the hell out of me that one day, thanks to this president's foreign policies, when they grow up there will be a drafted, and they will go to war one day.
You know it's easy to be for a war, when war doesn't touch us personally. I wonder how most of the families who lost sons and daughters in this useless war feel.
We are not any safer now, thanks to the Iraq war. Don't you guys get it. Are you like lemmings who migrate to a president or a policy that makes no sense, just because he's the president Can you not think for yourselves, are you all so blind, or just as stupid as your president!
Bush once stated he was a "uniter" (which by the way is not even a word) "not a devider." It seems to me his policies have divided this country right down the middle.
WAKE UP, CONSERVATIVES, WAKE UP AND SMELL YOUR PRESIDENT ... HE STINKS!!!!
Comment by lzeitlin— 2006/01/31 @ 02:57 PM — (Reply)
You assume much to say we are not personally affected.
Where is it written that beyond America live lesser people?
People too weak to defend themselves, let them die?
Is the law of America the law of the world? NO.
There are laws that enslave men and laws that set them free. Either what we hold to be right and good and true IS right and good and true,for ALL mankind, under God, or we're just another dictatorship.
Comment by C-Mom— 2006/01/31 @ 05:01 PM — (Reply)
Comment by A Conservative Realist— 2006/01/31 @ 05:15 PM — (Reply)
Not that it's any of your business sir. I have two children, 3 grandchildren, and two more on the way this year. Is that so hard to believe? (And I've been married 39 years to the same man.)
I worry ... what kind of country is Bush going to leave my children once he's out of office. Thank, God he'll be out of here in, approximately, 1000 days. Yeah, you bet I'm counting!!!
And FYI, I do not hate Republicans, some of my best freinds are Republican, and certainly don't agree with everything Democrats say or do, and I did not hate his father, or Reagan, or Ford. At least I could agree with them sometimes, at least they showes some intelligence.
This president is being lead by the nose by our unelected "faux" president, that slime, Dick Chaney.
And as for Ms. C-mom, if my grammar doesn't suit you, that's too bad. You should concern yourself more with the state of our nation. Bush pretends to care about this country. Heaven only knows what drivel he's spouting out in his address to the nation this evening, which I would not waste my time watching. I predict that this year will go down for Bush, as badly as 2005 went for him.
Comment by Lzeitlin— 2006/01/31 @ 06:53 PM — (Reply)
You want to know why there is no civil discourse in Washington? Because it is populated entirely with people LIKE YOU! I ask you direct questions, you conintue to evade and spew hateful rhetoric. It takes two to tango and it takes two to make a peace. Show me the money - WHERE ARE YOUR SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS?
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/31 @ 07:27 PM — (Reply)
No, you tell me what solutions are needed, you guys are supposed to know it all.
Comment by lzeitlin— 2006/01/31 @ 07:32 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/31 @ 08:01 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/31 @ 08:02 PM — (Reply)
Comment by Cate— 2006/01/31 @ 08:03 PM — (Reply)
Saying,"some of my best friends are republcans," is like a racist saying, some of my best friends are black. Its laughable.
Oh, and the President DID offer solutions in the SoUA (Which you didn't watch, so you wouldn't know...) last night; democrats booed and sat like sullen, spoiled children the whole time. They have proven that they have no answers, but answers from the other side of the aisle won't do either.They don't care about solving problems, only that their side wins. That, madame, is a sorry party to belong to.
Comment by C-Mom— 2006/02/01 @ 06:23 AM — (Reply)
FYI, I would not watch this president, but I did read the STOU transcript in the Washington Times, a very conservative paper, by the way, so I don’t just read liberal newspapers.
There are very likely hundreds of constitutional violations being committed by the Bush administration, but they somehow manage to make the claim that whatever they do is done in the name of national security and so it all goes away, and we never hear anymore about it.
Conservatives and Republicans oppose the idea of torture and spying and a number of other constitutional violations, but they adopt an attitude that wrong is only wrong if you get caught doing it and toss it off that it’s all done in the legitimate interest of national security. Baloney!! This administration will lie and lie, until one day the American public wakes up and impeaches him.
Comment by lzeitlin— 2006/02/01 @ 07:14 PM — (Reply)
sounds like sour grapes over the election to me.
Comment by — 2006/02/01 @ 09:27 PM — (Reply)
Comment by C-Mom— 2006/02/02 @ 06:16 AM — (Reply)
where were you when Bill and Hillary were in office? I was at a parade in Chicago once that they attended and they had a couple arrested for wearing t-shirts calling for Bill's impeachment. That couple was held in jail for several days (local legend has it that this was a personal demand of the Clintons). Talk about an invasion of rights - the police didn't even give them a warning.
If every president respected all of the freedoms garaunteed in the constitution, the southern half of this country would be a separate nation. From the minute Lincoln removed the right of secession from the governed, this country has been experiencing a continual makeover WRT personal liberty. It doesn't just end where your neighbor's personal liberty begins, it ends at the door of the common good.
You hard line liberals want to have unfettered personal freedom while regulating the hell out of corporations. What gives? You only believe in freedom if it is yours! You want the freedom to take my excess tax money and give it to people who don't even pay into the system, you want the freedom the raise my children for me by allowing my thirteen year old daughter to have sex and an abortion without even talking to me about it, you want the freedom to shout ugly epithets at wounded soldiers from outside their hospital room windows. You fight to protect the rights of the pornographer and the criminal. You appeal to the courts to reinforce liberties that even the animal kingdom would reject.
Alexis De Tocqueville in Democracy in America said that America was a good nation because people were restrained by morality from doing all the things that true liberty by its very nature allows. Freedom, true personal freedom allows for just about anything - when this nation began many of the social ills we see today were less prevalent because a majority of people accepted a majority of judeo-christian ethics. Now we have people like you fighting to allow all of the most degrading and despicable behaviors imaginable.
Look at yourselves. You are an ugly and offensive lot.
Comment by passing thru— 2006/02/02 @ 07:06 AM — (Reply)
When are you guys going to get over the Clintons? This country was in far better shape when Mr. Clinton was in office. And if there is impeachment, it should be for the laws Mr. Bush is presently committing. Here we are six years later, and you're still on the Clintons ... get over it!!
And yes, I want freedom, that's what this country is about. And I sure as hell don't want religious fanatics to tell me what I can or cannot do, morally. As long as I don't hurt anyone, leave me alone.
I happen to live a moral life. I grew up a Catholic, and went to Catholic school, so I think I know a little about "morality.
I've raised good God-fearing, honest young men, who are now excellent fathers and husbands. I don't deny you your freedom; do whatever you want, it's not my business. And that's the point, what others do is not your business. Why are you so threatened?
And if you raise your 13year old in the right way, sex, pregnancy and abortion should not ever be an issue ... see, I've raised teenagers, you're do not have lock on raising kids. I know how hard it is. When your daughter grows up I pray that you are as lucky as I've been. It's what they are taught at home.