I realize that there's an ongoing push to portray
dems as somehow blinded by their hatred of GWBush,
but actually the opposite is true-the incompetence
and hubris of this administration is all too
obvious to us. In fact, it's obvious to even the
casual political observer. Hence, we get polls
(which has become a dirty word to Righties)that
say that two-thirds of Americans want to start
getting out of Iraq. We have the POTUS's job
approval rating near freezing,et.,etc...

BushCo(Bush,Cheney,Rumsfeld)does not inspire hatred
in dems/Liberals-their policies do. We could
never approach the amount of vitriol that Right-Wingers have shown for President Clinton,and
have no desire to become that twisted.

I want the libs to stick to their current platform of hatred of President Bush--if this is a winner for them, we're pretty much finished as a nation.

Don't let them and their accomplices--the DBM--scare you away from the polls. Fellow GOP'ers, you punish your country by "punishing" your party. Do you want a Speaker Piglosi, Leader Reid-tard, or a (W)Rangeler raising your taxes?

Conservatives are an interesting lot. Half the posts say "Democrats have no agenda", the other half say "Stop the Democrat Agenda!!!".

So, which is it? Do they have an agenda or don't they?

Answer: They Do. http://www.democrats.org/agenda.html

You may not like it, but it's there.

(conservatives, begin your diatribe now....pick either "1. That agenda doesn't really exist" or "2. That agenda is EVIL". Please don't pick both.)

Mark:

The Repuplican platform is all about hate - hating liberals, leftists, the UN, gays and Democrats.

Oh and you hate science as well, it seems.

Hate is a powerful motivation to get people to vote. Both parties use it.

Wade

Jim - great, hilarious post! You beat me to the punch on that one.

And just what agenda are the Republicans running on? Balanced budgets and fiscal responsibility? No, they'd rather not talk about that. Um, then how about national security and making us safer? Nope, that doesn't fly either. Well how about moral values? Yeah riiiight! The economy? Uh, unfortunately, the middle class won't disappear fast enough by election day. Education? Healthcare? Something? Has 6 years of total Republican control of the entire government accomplished anything that they can be proud of? Nope, guess not.

So all that's left is demonizing the democratic agenda that we're all supposed to be terribly afraid of, but that paradoxically also doesn't exist.

Oh, and then there's fear. Lots and lots of fear.

--------

"All we have to fear is fear itself!"
FDR, 1941

"All we have is... fear itself"
GOP, 2006

MISLEADING GUIDELINES GIVEN TO U.S. BISHOPS

Catholic bishops have been mislead regarding Vatican guidelines on the reception of Holy Communion by Catholic politicians. Consider the following:

"It is sometimes claimed that dissent from the magisterium is totally compatible with being a 'good Catholic' and poses no obstacle to the reception of the sacraments. This is a grave error" - Pope John Paul II (Los Angeles speech to U.S. bishops, Sept. 16, 1987).

In June, 2004 Cardinal Ratzinger, (now Pope Benedict XVI) sent a memorandum to Cardinal McCarrick that offered guidelines to bishops for discussing the Communion/abortion issue at their meeting near Denver. However, Cardinal McCarrick did not reveal critical contents of the cover letter to the bishops, but instead suggested each bishop decide for himself the action to be taken.

Some of the key points in that cover letter:

1. In the case of abortion or euthanasia, a Catholic politician manifests "formal cooperation" in grave sins by "consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws."

2. The politician's pastor should "meet with him, instructing him about the Church's teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist."

3. “When these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible, and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the holy Eucharist, the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it."

4. "Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgment on the person's subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person's public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin."

Unfortunately, a number of two-faced “Catholic” politicians (especially permissive liberals in the Democratic Party) are taking advantage of this confusion.

Vincent Bemowski - Writer (U.S. Politics & World Affairs & Veteran, U.S. Army)

Menasha, WI

Website: Catholic Messages USA http://www.catholicmessagesusa.com/

And one more thing, Noonan.

It's not that the Democrats hate Bush. It's that the American people hate Bush (with the exception of you dead-enders in your last throws here on B4B).

Let's Review the "Democrat" Plan.

1. Honest Leadership & Open Government
It was the Republican House and Senate in 1995 that radically reformed the committee system and made the power structure of the House more responsible to the membership then the Speaker getting to choose committee chairmen and them staying in that position until they quit or died.

If you honestly believe Democrats are any more "ethical" than Republicans you're a stupid idiot. Power corrupts. Look at Mr. Reid. Look at Mr. Menendez. Look at Mrs. Clinton. It's not wise to throw a rock when you live in a glass house.

If Democrats were serious about this, they'd have voted with Republicans on a lot of reform that's been put forward in the last 12 years instead of being NOTHING but an obstruction to reform.

2. Real Security
Let's see, making it harder to determine who/what our enemies are doing sure is REAL SECURITY. Everyone of their plans grants U.S. Constitutional Rights on people who aren't American citizens. Heck, if you get a liberal judge and get him for your sentencing after being found guilty of trying to pass plans to attack Americans to our enemies and you get 28 months?

Hell; Tom Delay's assistant put money in a checking account instead of a savings account in error and you want him to FRY. You guys are sick hypocrits who by your actions show you hate Americans and LOVE terrorists if it'll get you elected.

3. Energy Independence
Except they've objected to EVERY reasonable suggestion on working towards energy independence. Even that great "liberal lion" Ted Kennedy objected to a windfarm that would have helped in energy independence simply because he didn't want it to mess up the views from his "compound."

Unless America expands oil production WHILE working towards new technology there you won't EVER get to energy independence. Hell, for example, you could use tidal surge to power turbines in the San Francisco Bay that would produce TWICE the energy the city needs a day yet oddly enough Democrats in the State opposed it.

If this is how you support energy independence; we may need go to back to Colonial times when we didn't have electricity or steam power... Under the Democrats; we'll lead the world in Candle Power.

4. Economic Prosperity & Educational Excellence
Let's see... seeing as less than 20% of the American workforce make the Federal Minimum Wage; raising it would serve what purpose? Perhaps the theory that cost of living from state to state is the most effective way of maintaining the minimum wage. But then again; that would require common sense. But Nancy Pelosi lost that after she realized she has over 15,000,000 in the bank.

It's interesting you want to make college tuition tax deductible BUT then reinstate the death tax, reinstate the marriage penalty, cut the provision that allows people to deduct their state sales taxes. You're not the party of economic prosperity or education excellence. You're the party of "lie to get elected."

5. A Healthcare System that Works for Everyone
Why don't you guys just come out and admit you want nationalized government run healthcare? Why don't you come out and say how much it will cost and how bad the service will become?

Why don't you admit that you've actively worked hard on blocking meaningful reform, included the prescription drug benefit (after all, no plan is better than a plan the Democrats don't create).

And your lies on stem cell research is the biggest travesty of all. There is no ban on stem cell research. You've forgotten when you've been lying about this to mention the ban on any MORE embryos to be destroyed for embryonic stem cell research. Nevermind that so far no ACTUAL cures have been found with embryonic stem cell research; but there have been cures found with adult stem cell research. You'll ignore that and lie and make bold statements that said Christopher Reeve wouldn't have died if John Kerry was elected. What kind of rank bullsh*t is that?

6. Retirement Security
You won't tell the American people that Social Security is broken because you know they don't trust you with solving this problem. You won't tell people that they need to invest themselves in order to live a quality retirement. Social Security shouldn't be what people live on when they retire, but the Democrats would rather keep the elderly/retired in poverty and make unfillable promises in order to get elected over and over.

I'd be curious to see ONE plan put forward by the Democrats to actually fix social security. There hasn't been one, just Social Security is FINE.

Finally; you're plan is a bunch of words with NO real plans. There's nothing that says we'll raise Social Security taxes to fix the SS mess. There's no we'll raise taxes to pay for universal healthcare for illegal aliens. There's no plan to outlaw earmarks. There's no plan saying parents can't lobby their children who are members of Congress (see the Fords of Tennessee). There's no plan to fix the page board (remember that's where Democrats actually sleep with 16 year olds and get away with it as their leaders turn the other cheek).

All you have is a typical Dean plan. No substance and no actionable items.

And finally Aaron, why is it that over 70% of the Kos/Democrat crowd want Bush impeached but less than 40% of the American people would even consider it. Is that the Bush hating Americans flocking to your idiotic side. Boy are you going to be upset come November 8th.

wawilliyo,

The whole impeachment threat was made up by you GOP types. Do you seriously think the Democrats would impeach Bush, the greatest thing to happen to the Democrat party in the last 50 years?

If you guys had nominated anybody else in 2000 you would have your 60-vote majority in the senate and be on your way to getting more.

The Dem plan is just basic, workmanlike issues that don't really exicte the voters. It's good policy (seeing that you hate it prooves it), but wonky policy like that doesn't bring out the votes.

Mark's original post is almost exactly right. The Dems have a policy, but it's boring. No revolution here, just tweaks. But tweaks are all we need:

1 - More sunshine in congress will give the voters a choice between decent congresspeople (on both sides) and perverts and crooks (on both sides).

2 - Fire Donald Rumsfeld! Hire a competent general, listen to him and hold him accountable.

3 - Get Hydrogen from ANOTHER SOURCE BESIDES FOSSIL FUELS (that's where Bush's hydrogen push a few years ago came from. Didin't you know?)

4 - Raise Minimum wage to keep it in line with inflation, tax the rich and leave middle class taxes alone

5 - Provide catastrophic health care for the poor so they don't stiff the hospitals any more. Pay for it with tax increases on the rich (see #4)

6 - Tax everyone at the same rate. Currently maximum taxible earnings are $94,200. elimnate the maximum, so George Soros pays a much larger tax. Invest the current Socail Security surplus, not with a big-government boondogle known as "private accounts" but with several large, careful investments by professionals (hint hire Republicans to do the Dems dirty work).

So there you go. Boring as all get-out.

THANK GOD for George Bush. WAIT a minute...did I say that??? Maybe George Bush really IS a uniter, not a divider! He is bringing the Democrats out to the polls. Thanks, George! And I mean that literally, this time... :)

Wow Jim, you've listed a plan that is about 100% detailed than what you can find on the democrat website... is this intentional or not on the part of the DNC?

Well at least you're willing to list what YOU believe the Dem plan is.

My thoughts are below your interpretation of the DNC talking points.
1 - More sunshine in congress will give the voters a choice between decent congresspeople (on both sides) and perverts and crooks (on both sides).

I have no problem with there being more openness in Congress. Keep in mind it was the Dems who kept committee meetings closed. It was Dems who had chairmen serving until they retired. If Dems are serious about reform, they'll find willing partners on the right side of the aisle. If you are serious about wanting to clean house, I have a list of about 15 or more Democrats that should go by the way of the likes of Cunningham and Ney.

2 - Fire Donald Rumsfeld! Hire a competent general, listen to him and hold him accountable.

I have no opinion on Rumsfeld. By the way, this IS NOT a DEM plan item Aaron linked to. This must be your opinion. However, I do believe you'd be unhappy with ANYONE who didn't support your view about leaving Iraq now; meaning a SecDef couldn't get confirmed so why fire him. And if you're honest, you know that's exactly why Bush hasn't replaced Rumsfeld. John Kerry and his brethren don't get to nominate Executive Department officials, just say yes or no; and you konw the Dems want to pick who the President chooses.

3 - Get Hydrogen from ANOTHER SOURCE BESIDES FOSSIL FUELS (that's where Bush's hydrogen push a few years ago came from. Didin't you know?)

I'm not opposed to what you just said; however you cannot obtain energy independence without expanding current reserves here at home WHILE you're trying to figure out what you purpose. You have to realize that even the President said that he was afraid that lower gas prices would cause the Congress to lose it's nerve in finding alternative fuels.

4 - Raise Minimum wage to keep it in line with inflation, tax the rich and leave middle class taxes alone

I believe that the federal government shouldn't have a minimum wage unless the law is written in a way to adjust to inflation based on a regional area, kind of like the IRS per diem rates (check them out). They recognize that different cities have different standards of living. $10.00 an hour in NYC is a lot different than $10.00 an hour in Cheyenne, Wyoming.

It's not the job of the Federal Government to decrease buying power in a huge portion of America so that less than 20% (mostly high school students) can earn more. Studies show that the primary beneficiaries of a minimum wage increase are white middle class kids who work part time after school. Also, there was a bill to increase the minimum wage but Dems opposed it. Granted it was tied to the end of the Death Tax. But in my opinion, it's been taxed once, and regardless if you've got $100 to leave to your kids or $100,000,000 you shouldn't be taxed again on it. Keep in mind most of the truly wealthy, (like Ted Kennedy) have their money so sheltered that the government doesn't get it anyways.

5 - Provide catastrophic health care for the poor so they don't stiff the hospitals any more. Pay for it with tax increases on the rich (see #4)

I would suggest that if we had comprehensive liability reform and tort reform doctors and hospitals would be more able to accomodate the indigant. Let small businesses band together to buy coverage. And states should look at the Oregon Health Plan for a way to provide health car to those that can't.

6 - Tax everyone at the same rate. Currently maximum taxible earnings are $94,200. elimnate the maximum, so George Soros pays a much larger tax. Invest the current Socail Security surplus, not with a big-government boondogle known as "private accounts" but with several large, careful investments by professionals (hint hire Republicans to do the Dems dirty work).

Isn't this the flat tax that your side was sooo opposed to a few years ago? Let's recap. The poorest people in this country pay nothing and get more money back then what they did pay. The middle class has received the largest tax relief in history. And the wealthiest, while getting tax cuts, still pay the lions' share of the actual revenues the government gets. Actually the rich pay more now then they did when Clinton was President.

Fiscal responsibility is key. Give the President the line-item veto and instead of earmarks; let's decide that there is "X" amount of money to give to each state for project "X" and let them decide.

For example; instead of a bridge to nowhere in Alaska; they get "Amount X" for transportation/road improvement and let the state determine how best to spend that money. Why should 535 people in Washington, DC decide what Alaska should do for road improvement.

I think it's discussions like these that could actually save the Republic. If reasonable people (me excluded for the most part) could be put in office for only two years or six years and there be no reelections EVER, think about how much GOOD would be done instead of worrying about re-election.

wawilliyo,

All of those things you said make reasonable sense. As I had said before if the Dems start spouting the wacko nonsese that so many libs advocate they are going to get their butts kicked in 2008, 2010 or 2012 (or all three!)

Obviously the Dems won't be able to do much in 2007 even if they get both houses. They will pass a minimum wage bill that will cause ripple effects farther up the hiring chain that just white teens. If Bush vetoes it it won't look good for the Repubs in 2008. They can't fire Rumsfeld, but they can hold hearings on him and give the Repubs such bad press they may be forced to act. I don't think the Dems will hold up the new SecDef nominee (unlike judges) because it will make them look like losers again.

I especially like the idea of a regional minimum wage. This should be done regardless of the actual rate.

So if we win, you guys can always sharpen your daggers for 2008. This will force us to actually get reasonable things done...or go back to losing again. Regardless of the rhetoric you hear this year, I think the Dems have learned their lesson, and this upcoming congress will be a good test for them. Grades come out in November, 2008.

once again the spires of irony and hypocrisy reach numbing heights in noonanland.

complaining about this 'hatred' of bush is quaint if not outright ridiculous. the hate and scorn and all-around petulant attitude heaped on and directed toward the clinton administration has been well-documented to the tune of ken starr's $40 million fishing expedition. the way i see it, attacking bush is far easier and less expensive.

the crass, libelous, vitriolic garbage purged daily by the likes of coulter, savage, o'reilly, ingraham, limbaugh, hannity (who am i forgetting?) et al, certainly have set the bar and the tone, giving the far right a monopoly on the words 'hate' and 'attack'. if it's coming back to bite them in the ass it's only because the left has FINALLY learned how to fight back on the same terms - and not a moment too soon.

i'll be honest, after having to suffer the embarrassment of watching dear leader cowboy around like an ignoramus on the world stage for so many years, i find nothing more redeeming than watching him being taken to the woodshed day-in and day-out. let's face it - he's earned it!

.. and you certainly do not have to be a leftwinger to feel that way.

orangealert - i'll be honest, after having to suffer the embarrassment of watching dear leader cowboy around like an ignoramus on the world stage for so many years, i find nothing more redeeming than watching him being taken to the woodshed day-in and day-out. let's face it - he's earned it!

Isn't this like the old Rove being led frog hopping off to jail?

Yea you libs sure don't change your spots or agenda. All of the plans go to waste because of the hatred you have built up over Bush.

Can you for just once forget your hatred and try to do what is good for the country?

Bush's approval ratings are much higher than congress. If you threw out all the democrats that are the party of obstruction, and sent a strong message to Iraq, that we are behind Bush 100% --- This quagmire that is being caused by libs would be won in no time. The only way America can be defeated is by the libs, --- Just like Vietnam --- you are trying to do it again.

Otherwise, be prepared to bow down to Mecca 5 times a day and cover your women.

Terrorists actively campaign for democrats.

"He also discussed the power of the "Jewish lobby" and called on all Muslims to vote for the Democratic Party. "Every American politician is in lockstep with Israel. … If they vote against, then the Jewish lobby will put a lot of money behind the candidate against them in their districts in the future. I have news for the Muslim community. All American politicians are in the pocket of the Jewish lobby today because they control a lot of money, and they spend a lot of money in politics."

UNFREAKINBELIEVABLE!

Jim,

Nice try - but Conyers is going to hold impeachment hearings if he becomes chairman, period. Hating President Bush is all the Democrats have.

Jim,

And out here in Nevada what as Democratic Senate Candidate Jack Carter's television ad about? How lousy President Bush and Vice President Cheney are...didn't even mention the words "Nevada" or "Ensign" (his GOP opponent).

dl,

...This quagmire that is being caused by libs...

nice for you to admit it's a quagmire. But caused by Libs???? We libs are taking our own side to task for NOT stopping it.

It's this right-wing fantasy la la land nonsense that the people of this country are sick and tired of.

Libs caused the quagmire?? Who next are you going to blame this on, Golem? Gandalf? Sauron? The third elf from the right in the second row? The whole "blame somebody else" thing is just lame. But the libs caused the quagmire? sheesh!

Mark,

There will be lots of hearings but the whole idea that Conyers has the party by the b$$$s is a complete myth. And even if a few Dems try it Pelosi is going to pull the rug out from under them. Conyers may be an idiot, but Pelosi isn't...she knows how the game is played and your dream of the Dems overplaying their hand just isn't going to happen.

Like I said, we're tired of losing.

CJ,

From your link:

"An Islamic TV Channel Expands Its U.S. Audience"

Bridges TV, an American-Islamic TV channel "seeking to improve the image of Muslims in the United States" and to "offer a unique perspective on the Middle East and the war on terrorism," has extended its availability into six states, creating a potential audience of nearly 2 million. [..]

The channel says it has been endorsed by "top American [Islamic] scholars and community leaders," whose representatives appear on many of its programs, including one called "Prominent Scholars." [..]

One religious figure who appeared October 3 said Muslims have a duty to change America and to increase their numbers to 50% of the population from 2%. He recommended that Shariah, or Islamic law, be implemented in American courts.

Jim,

Your actual problem is that Conyers is the sensible one, Pelosi to real frothing at the mouth leftist...

Jim,

Only a divided America can be beaten. Didn't you learn by Vietnam, didn't the terrorist learn by Vietnam, and you want to hand them another victory? Only thru strength and resolve, like our President Bush has can the terrorist be defeated, back him and we win. Defeat him and you and the other libs will need to solve the terrorist problems that will be created by another defeat for America.

Think --- I know it's hard to break out of the hate Bush way of thinking. But what exactly have the democrats done to help Bush, and what have they done to help terrorist? Yep, the terrorist talking points and hatred for Bush almost exactly match the democrats talking points and hatred of Bush.

You need to seperate yourself from those who want to chop off your head. Wake up before you lose it, this Quagmire is caused by the libs and the weak old hippies that missed out on the Vietnam protesting years.

Only thru strength can we win. Terrorist know this, and you're on their side.

Freedom

I know, it's scary that terrorists would actually actively campaign for the democrat party. It's equivalent to Hitler endorsing the democrats.

Indeed, CJ!

How To Tell Democrats From Terrorists - By Dr. Brooks A. Mick

Not much of a difference.

Freedom

The strange thing about it is the democrats don't even try to distance themselves from the radical islamists. It's almost as if the democrats are the political wing and al Qaeda is the military wing.

That's why I tend to believe Mark when he says we'll retain both houses of congress. I just don't see the majority of Americans voting for Osama bin Ladens party.

Only a divided America can be beaten.

Posted by: dl at October 22, 2006 06:56 PM

Well then, those of you who are still deluding yourselves as to the legitimacy of the current adminstration should wake up join those who see what has happened to your great country under the failed leadership of GWB. You can be part of the solution not part of the problem. Come together with your brothers & sisters and help heal the wounds.

Only a divided America can be beaten.

dl, good news. I'm glad you'll join us after we take over. We welcome you.

Jim Oliver,

"The whole impeachment threat was made up by you GOP types."

Really? Since Rep Conyers (D-MI) filed H. Res. 635, "Creating a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment", I would hardly say the threat was made up by GOP types.

I also take issue with a couple of your proposals:

"2 - Fire Donald Rumsfeld! Hire a competent general, listen to him and hold him accountable."

Are you aware that the Secretary of Defense is a civilian? You don't just go "hire a competent general". Are you advocating that a General be appointed SecDef replacing Secretary Rumsfeld?

While its good to have a military background as SecDef (Secretary Rumsfeld served over 35 years in the Navy and Navy Reserve, and was SecDef under President Ford), the skills of a Fortune 500 CEO are equally important (Secretary Rumsfeld as been the CEO of three Fortune 500 companies).

Let me give you a quick lesson on the workings of the Department of Defense. The Secretary is the principal defense policy adviser to the President and is responsible for the formulation of general defense policy and policy related to all matters of direct concern to the Department of Defense, and for the execution of approved policy.

The actual war-fighting is planned, resourced, and executed by the Combatant Commands, not the Secretary of Defense or even the Joint Chiefs of Staff. To explain it on a level you can understand, the President tells the SecDef the Armed Forces are authorized to implement a specific contingency, like "invade a country". The SecDef instucts the JCS to make it happen. The JCS orders the appropriate Combatant Command to execute a war plan. We go kick a**.

I think the biggest reason that the left hates Secretary Rumsfeld is that he doesn't take any crap from anyone, especially snotty-nosed reporters who wouldn't know an Abrams M1A2 Main Battle Tank from a M16A2 Rifle.

"4 - Raise Minimum wage to keep it in line with inflation, tax the rich and leave middle class taxes alone."

There really isn't any good reason to raise the minimum wage unless you want to increase unemployment, raise prices, and stagnate the economy. Few jobs actually pay the minimum wage. Here is Michigan, with one of the nation's highest unemployment rates, you can get an entry-level job flipping burgers at McDonals or Burger King at $10/hr with benefits.

"Tax the rich"? And what would that do, besides decrease the tax revenues and make liberals/Socialists feel better because they got to once again punish success.

Do you realize that the "rich" are already paying the lion's share of the income tazes? Do you realize that the "Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich" actually increased the percentage of the tax burden the "rich" are paying? Do you realize that the top 50% of all wage earners pay over 96% of income taxes, the top 25% pay nearly 84% of income taxes, and the top 5% pay nearly 55% of the income taxes? I didn't think so.

Each time we cut taxes, millions are taken off the tax rolls. Further taz cuts will take even more off, up to a point. Do some research on the Lafter curve, if you don't understand.

"5 - Provide catastrophic health care for the poor so they don't stiff the hospitals any more. Pay for it with tax increases on the rich (see #4)"

A wonderful Socialist Plan.

You realize that the costs for the poor who cannot pay their bills are not borne by the hosptials. They are already borne by employers, and those with health insurance, in the form of higher insurance rates. So the "rich" are already bearing this cost. No real need to increase their taxes.

"6 - Tax everyone at the same rate. Currently maximum taxible earnings are $94,200."

Are you insane? There is no maximum taxible earnings limit. There is a graduated tax rate that tops out at 35% for earners over $326,450.

There is a maximum earnings for Social Security. Maybe that's what you were thinking. If you eliminate that maximum, are you also going to increase the Social Security benefit for those paying the extra tax? Or is this just another Socialist program where the "rich" are paying for everyone else's benefits?

"Invest the current Socail (sic) Security surplus, not with a big-government boondogle known as "private accounts" but with several large, careful investments by professionals (hint hire Republicans to do the Dems dirty work)."

You realize that there is no Social Security surplus. There is no money in the Social Security Trust Fund, just trillions of dollars worth of IOU's. Basically, today's workers are paying for the benefits being paid to those currently collecting Social Security. The problem is that sometime in the near future, there will not be enough being paid in to pay out the benefits.

You also realize that the "Private Savings Accounts" only allowed a small portion of your Social Security taxes to be invested in safe stock and bond funds. This is a completely optional program. But based on the growth of the Dow in the past 30 years (going from less than 1,000 to over 12,000), had we started the "Private Savings Accounts" back then, they would be worth in the 100's of thousands each.

All in all, you did a great job of showing that Democrats are just basically Socialists.

Jim, Canadian Observer --- bow down to mecca you infidels. Prepare to meet your maker, and the party of pieces. "God is Great" are the last words you don't get to hear.

Yeah Jim, Canadian observer,

Stop drinking the kool-aid, and by all means get away from the terrorist you support!

God only knows what you kooks will do next!

Jeremiah

"Democrats' enitre 2006 effort is based upon their hatred of President Bush"

What is the Democrats plan for the Iraq besides withdrawl? What is the plan to defuse some much dependency on foreign oil? What's their plan to use more renewable energy? What are their stats that show the economy is going really downhill as they claim?

Basically when it comes to the Iraqi war, it's vietnam mentality. America blamed for everything...You see media outlets like CNN who are liberal, watching and using video with enemy snipers who are killing our troops...CNN actions remind me of Jane Fonda all over again...

The bottom line, the Democrats have no plans to win the war in Iraqi before withdrawl or when the implacement government voted by the Iraqi people asks the US to leave. Whatever happens there, they blame on Bush.

Overall, they have no real plans for anything except attack Bush...This is bad for the country...

A-10

Just a quick reply,

2 - Rumsfeld clearly thought the war would be quick and easy. He gave the President bad advice. He should be canned for this.

4 - Raising minimum wage so that it's real value to the way it was in the 60's isn't going to cause massive layoffs. You say you can get a Mcdonalds job in Michigan at $10/hr with bennefits, so there won't be any layoffs there. In other parts of the country people are at minimum and simply can't pay their rent, which unlike minimum wage, has been increasing continuously. If McDonalds can't pay them the increase, how do they aford it in Michigan, hmmm?

Also, if you think we're stillon the right side of the Laffer curve you are just plain wrong, here.

5 The people who are stiffing hospitals don't have employer sponsored health insurance. Why do you think that the employer is paying even one cent of their insurance? Who told you that? Only some employers do this. The rest can't afford it. The big businessess can subsidize the small ones. Yep, that's socialism. Deal with it.

6 - Of course I was talking about social security. And there is an annual social security surplus. The overall surplus is gone, raided by high-spending low-tax governments. And we should kill the cap on payments. If a CEO makes $1M a year, yep, his payments go way, way up. Too bad, deal with it.

Neither of us are going to convince the other what the "proper" level of taxation should be. I assume you're not one of those "zero tax" clowns that try to evade all taxes. If not, I just think the rate should be higher than you do.

And as far as taxing the rich, liberals are a little tougher than you bleeding-heart conservatives. Don't like it? Don't invade countries with lousy planning and you won't lose as many elections.

What type of whine would you like with your crow?

Don't invade countries with lousy planning and you won't lose as many elections.

Gee, Olive Oyl, this statement makes no sense whatsoever. What election has Bush lost, due to "lousy planning?"

Are you referring to the '06 election, which hasn't been held yet? Must be reading the NY Slimes...

What type of whine would you like with your crow?

No thanks. You'll be needing it come November 8.
Loser!

An interesting comment in the NYT this morning. It seems that the NYT public editor, Byron Calame, has admitted that the SWIFT program, where we were tracking terrorist financial transactions was completely legal and no one’s private data had actually been misused.

Wasn't that nice of him, admitting he was wrong?
Unfortunately, the damage has been done and a valuable, classified intelligence program has been exposed.

This entire sorry affair was predicated by the MSM's desire to damage the Presidency and the election chances of all Republicans, and disregard the damage that is done to our national security.

Can we call them un-patriotic now.

A-10

Gee whiz, he said he was sorry. Well OK, he didn't say he was sorry, but he had good intentions...can't we let bygones be bygones? Can't we just all ggg ggg get along?

Jim Oliver--
Thanks for your incisive, detailed
posts. You've articulated the "democratic"
stance pretty accurately. I'm not sure that
your sort of patience and reason actually works
to educate these guys,but I suppose that it's
worth a try. This election really is becoming a
referendum on the Bush Admin.'s policies,and
on their handling of Iraq. BushCo(Bush,Cheney,
Rumsfeld) is too "exciting" We need some nice,
boring COMPETENT policies.

The attacks by Mark Noonan here on Conyers and
Pelosi reveal where the real hatred in this
election is spewed from. Those, and many of the
articles on this web site confirm my opinion that
Republicans are becoming The Party of Fear&Smear.

Better than being the party of bin Laden and al Qaeda

#1 of Democrats 6 Point Plan for 2006

"Honest Leadership & Open Government
We will end the Republican culture of corruption and restore a government as good as the people it serves, starting with real ethics reform."

Won’t this be unique. Getting honest info and government reform from our government – has it ever happened before? I guess the bigger question is: will it happen now? We just may get a chance to find out. As an Independent, I will be voting for some of the dems. Believe it or not there are are some damn good dems out there. Since this is Texas, let's just hope that none of them turn out to be another Tom Delay.

#1 of Democrats 6 Point Plan for 2006

"Honest Leadership & Open Government
We will end the Republican culture of corruption and restore a government as good as the people it serves, starting with real ethics reform."

Won’t this be unique. Getting honest info and government reform from our government – has it ever happened before? I guess the bigger question is: will it happen now? We just may get a chance to find out. As an Independent, I will be voting for some of the dems. Believe it or not there are are some damn good dems out there. Since this is Texas, let's just hope that none of them turn out to be another Tom Delay.

CJ- "Better than being the party of bin Laden
and al Qaeda."

-It was'nt dems who allowed al Qaeda to sponsor
the 9/11/01 bombing of the WTC

-They were not the ones who allowed bin Laden to
escape at Tora Bora,by calling off troops at
the last minute

-It was'nt dems who disbanded a special forces
unit formed for the sole purpose of going after
bin Laden and al Qaeda.

-Democrats were not the administration that
attempted to appease bin Laden by giving in to
his biggest grievance in 2003, and removing all
troops from Saudi Arabia

-Democrats were not the party in power that
stood idly, meekly by when al Qaeda was granted
amnesty and safe haven in Pakistan this year.

-Republicans ARE the party that loves bin Laden's
movies so much that they just resurrected one
to use in a lame, shameless ,fear-mongering
commercial.

Jim Oliver,

"2 - Rumsfeld clearly thought the war would be quick and easy. He gave the President bad advice. He should be canned for this."

Which war? The War on Terror? Secretary Rumsfeld has stated on numerous occasions that the War on Terror will not be quick and easy.

The War in Iraq? Actually, the War in Iraq was over in three weeks. We won. Perhaps you didn't get the memo.

The Stabilization of Iraq? Yes, it is taking longer that expected. But I remember back in college when I was a history major reading about a upstart country which revolted against its rulers. It took 12 years to adopt a Constitution and elect a President. You may have heard of it. They called this new nation the United States of America. Iraq has accomplished the two milestones in less that three years.

"5 The people who are stiffing hospitals don't have employer sponsored health insurance. Why do you think that the employer is paying even one cent of their insurance? Who told you that? Only some employers do this. The rest can't afford it. The big businessess can subsidize the small ones. Yep, that's socialism. Deal with it."

Apparently my previous explaination went over your head. Let's see if I can explain it in third grade terms so you can understand.

Tommy has a bad tummy ache. His mommy takes him to the hospital. The hospital makes Tommy's tummy feel better. Tommy's mommy does not have health insurance. The nice people at the hospital do not make Tommy's mommy pay for making Tommy feel better.

Because the people at the hospital do not want to lose money, they charge the people who have health insurance more to make them feel better when their tummy hurts to make up for the money they lost in making Tommy's tummy feel better.

Now the health insurance companies do not want to lose money either, so they charge people, and the people they work for, more for their health insurance. So, the nice people with health insurance and the people they work for end up paying for making Tommy's tummy feel better.

Do you understand now?

"Yep, that's socialism. Deal with it."

Earth to Jim Oliver. We live in a captialist nation. Not a Socialist nation. Deal with it.

"Of course I was talking about social security. And there is an annual social security surplus. The overall surplus is gone, raided by high-spending low-tax governments."

Why didn't you say so in the first place. Of course the Social Security Trust Fund has been raided. Mostly to pay for socialist programs. The Trust Fund currently hold $1.67 trillion in IOUs.

I would be in favor of "needs indexing" Social Security benefits. If you are financially well off and set in your retirement, you get no benefits.

"I assume you're not one of those "zero tax" clowns that try to evade all taxes. If not, I just think the rate should be higher than you do."

I'm not. I'd actually prefer the Fair Tax. You earn more, you spend more, you pay more.

"And as far as taxing the rich, liberals are a little tougher than you bleeding-heart conservatives."

Do you realize that the top 50% of all wage earners pay over 96% of income taxes, the top 25% pay nearly 84% of income taxes, and the top 5% pay nearly 55% of the income taxes? The "rich" are already paying a lion's share of the tax burden.

But then again, you are probably a Socialist. The US is capitalist. Deal with it.

"Don't invade countries with lousy planning and you won't lose as many elections."

Maybe in your alternate universe its looking like the Republicans are losing elections, but the opposite is true. We regained the White House in 2000 and retained it in 2004. In the House, we gained 8 seats in 2002 and 3 more in 2004. In the Senate, we gained 2 seats in 2002 and 3 more in 2004.

Wrong again, but thanks for playing.

PukeOrDie,

It wasn't the GOP that declined three offers to have OBL handed over to the US, it was a Democrat.

It wasn't the GOP that called off several operations to kill or capture OBL, it was a Democrat.

It wasn't the GOP that was more interested in getting sexual favors from interns than fighting terrorists, it was a Democrat.

It wasn't the GOP who failed to respond to the 1993 WTC bombing, the Khobar Twoers bombing, the African Embassy bombings, and the USS Cole bombing, and allowed the terrorists to become emboldened, it was a Democrat.

"It wasn'tt dems who disbanded a special forces
unit formed for the sole purpose of going after
bin Laden and al Qaeda."

If you are going to make an accusation, at least get part of the story right. It wasn't a special forces unit that was "dis-banded". It was a CIA team that was merged into the overall anti-terrorist directorate.

There are still special operations units in Afghanistan and elsewhere hunting down OBL, if, in fact, he is still alive. But since no one has actually seen him for several years, I have my doubts.

"Democrats were not the administration that
attempted to appease bin Laden by giving in to
his biggest grievance in 2003, and removing all
troops from Saudi Arabia"

So you think moving the troops from Saudi Arabia into Iraq was to appease OBL? You are crazier that I realized.

Get some professional help. Your BDS is nearing a terminal state.

A-10, I’m curious about this FairTax system as I’ve not heard of it before. How would this system handle things such as out of state internet sales, item bought from across the border or a trip overseas especially if you don’t declare them? Would things only be taxed the first time they’re sold/bought or each and every time like cars or things in garage sale or estate sale etc… ?

A-10 out of 100,

What a twisted web of deceit and lies you weave. It was the Republicans that were so obsessed with President Clinton's sex life that they nearly brought the government to a stand still. It was the Republicans that kept telling President Clinton that he was overly obsessed with Bin Laden.

Once again all the right wing and republicans can do is whine and blame others for their shortfall and incompetence.

And as everyone knows it was the right wing party of hate that perfected the hate mongering through the 90s. The Bush lemmings just don't understand that people can be different then they are getting so twisted up in their hate that they have abandoned fact and logic.

We don't hate Bush. It is just the systematic deconstruction of everything good that the United States of America has stood for that we hate.

RAL,

Ya know, whenever I see the typical illogical, irrational, illerate, and immature liberal comment, I have mixed feelings. Part of me delights in the opportunity to administer yet another smack-down. Part of me is sad that because of brainwashing by the MSM and liberal educators, and the lack of parenting, we are saddled with a significant portion of a generation that lives in an alternate universe. Part of me has pity on your soul, for you have a long way to go to return from the dark side.

On to the smack-down.

"It was the Republicans that were so obsessed with President Clinton's sex life that they nearly brought the government to a stand still."

Obsessed? Not really. We did have a problem, however, with the Chief Executive Officer of our Government having sexual relations with a paid intern in the Oval Office (that constitutes sexual harassment), lying about it to the nation, then attempting to cover up the affair. That's just not something we expect of our President.

Nearly brought the government to a stand-still? Just because 425 members of Congress debated impeachment, it didn't mean the other 14.6 million federal employees stood by and watched. In fact, the government probably ran smoother with the Congresscritters occupied with BJ Clinton.

"It is just the systematic deconstruction of everything good that the United States of America has stood for that we hate."

Like fighting for human rights? Oh yea, you think the Iraqis were better off under Saddam.

Like the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman? Oh yea, you think male/male and female/female marriages are just wonderful.

Like protecting the rights of the unborn? Oh yea, you think it ok to perform abortions, right up to "partial birth abortions".

Like placing the security of our nation before party politics? Oh yea, you thing its fine to have top secret intelligence programs exposed on the front pages of the NYT, so long as it damages the Presidency of a Republican.

Like ensuring proserity for all? Oh yea, you'd rather raise taxes and give the money to the poor, than give the less fortunate the tools and opportunities to succeed.

Lie trying to ensure that Social Security is solvent into the future? Oh yea, you fought every attempt at Social Security reform.

Like protecting our nation against further terrorist attacks? Oh yea, that should be a law enforcement action. Let them attack, we'll be sure to prosecute them afterwards. That approach sure worked great in the 90's. SUre stopped the WTC attacks in 1993, and the Khobar Towers bombing, and the Embassy bombings, and the USS Cole from being attacked.

Yup, you liberals are right behind what makes America great.

illerate = illiterate

Once again a-10 out of 100, you have twisted everything to create your Rovian lies. You prove my point by the lies you propagate. The only thing that the current crop of republicans do better than the current crop of Democrats is lie cheat and steal.

What amazes me is that the right’s marriage is so weak that it is threatened by what someone else thinks or does. Quite honestly no matter what you did, or didn’t do, what you think or don’t think has absolutely no bearing on my marriage. If the conservatives were so concerned with marriage they would clean their own house first, after all that would be the easiest. If someone else has a committed relationship and wants the benefits of marriage what the heck difference does it make? Or do you think you should be able to shove your religious beliefs down someone else’s throat? Next thing the conservatives will do is outlaw inter-racial marriage. Sounds like they admire the Taliban and Osama bin Laden’s way of thinking.

“Obsessed? Not really.”
Obviously you were not out of diapers yet so don’t have any recollection of the time in question, all you know about it is the republican talking points, regurgitated once more.
“that constitutes sexual harassment”
Once again the conservative right has missed the mark, just like in Iraq. Not a clue. If you were concerned about sexual harassment then you went after the wrong person. If you had paid any attention at the time, oh that’s right you were still in diapers, you would have known that President Clinton did not pursue Monica Lewinsky, she doggedly perused him.
Now to combine these two into one as need I remind you of the Foley frolics, which speaks volumes of the conservative mind. Not only does Foley have a problem, but the Conservative Republican leadership doesn’t think it is anything to be concerned about. They just stand behind their boy. Sorry couldn’t resist that one.

RAL,

I notice you don't dispute any of the failures of Democrats other that call them lies. How convincing.

Tell me exactly how I have twisted that throughout the 90's the Clinton Administration did nothing to stop the spread of Global Terrorist.

Its a fact that Clinton passed on the opportunity to have OBL served up on a silver platter. He has admitted as much on tape. If he was so "obsessed" with catching OBL, why didn't he take him when he was offered to us? That crap about "having nothing to hold him on" was a cop-out. Hold him in suspicion of spitting on the sidewalks.

Its also a fact that we had numerous chances to kill or capture OBL, only Clinton was afraid of collateral damage. I gues you could call the collapse of the WTC "collateral damage" as well.

Not only that, the Clintons did their best to demoralize and neuter our military. I know. I was serving on active duty during his entire administration.

"If someone else has a committed relationship and wants the benefits of marriage what the heck difference does it make?"

None, other than being in opposition to the Judaeo-Christian foundations of our nation. But then, you God-less liberals have to respect for religion.

"Or do you think you should be able to shove your religious beliefs down someone else’s throat?"

Not at all. Just as you God-less liberals should not be able to prevent the free exercise of religion, as guaranteed in the 1st Amendment.

"Next thing the conservatives will do is outlaw inter-racial marriage."

You're confusing conservatives with Southern DEMOCRATS. You see, if you studied history, it was the Democrats that enacted the Jim Crow laws. It was Republicans that ensured the passage of the CIvil Rights Act of 1964, over the Democrats filibuster led by the "Conscience of the Senate" Robert "KKK" Byrd, former Grand Kleagle of the Klu Klux Klan.

As for you childish "diapers" diatribe, its likely I was serving on active duty in the Marines before you were born. If not, you were probably in a drunken stupor, from which you have yet to emerge.

"If you were concerned about sexual harassment then you went after the wrong person."

Really? You obviously haven't had any training in sexual harassment. It matters not if the subordinate was "persuing" the person in authority, its still sexual harassment. If President Clinton had one ounce of ethics and morality, he would have transfered Ms. Lewinsky out of the White House immediately. Instead, he showed the world what a leader he truely was and brought disgrace to the Oval Office.

I have strong personal feelings about the sanctity of the Oval Office and the Office of the Presidency having served on the Presidential Security Detail during the Ford Administration. We're talking about a room that has witnessed countless Presidential Addresses to the nation, where Heads-of-State meet with the President, where history-changing decisions are made. And your buddy, BJ Clinton has so little respect for the Office that he is in there getting it on with the hired help.

I cannot believe that you would actually try to blame the intern and give the adulterous President (yes, adultery is a crime in Washington, D.C.) a pass. Actually, I do believe it. A typical liberal Clinton apologist.

I'm glad you brought up the Foley situation. Typical reaction by a liberal. The man has apologized and has resigned from the House of Representatives for his actions, which were disgusting and unacceptable, but not illegal. But true to liberal form, you won't give it up.

I think it is interesting to contrast Foley's behavior with Representative Gerry Studds, who was caught actually having sex with a 17 year old male page. Did he resign? No. In fact he was re-elected six times by those wonderful ciitizens of Massachusetts. But what do you expect, they keep re-electing as Senator a literal mountain of a man who actually killed someone while driving drunk and without a valid driver's license and got away with it.

But I digress. Not only did Studds not resign, he turned his back in disrespect on the Speaker of the House as his censure was read. Did the Democrats chastise Studds for his behaviour? No, they did what was expected, they have him three standing ovations. Did their worship of this pillar of virtue stop there? No. They appointed him to coveted committee chairs. Now that's something to be proud of.

Republicans have their share of problems. But Democrats have more. Democrats worship power before the public good. It doesn't matter if they are caught breaking the law, they don't resign. They deny, and run for re-election. The Democrats are completely devoid of shame, humility, ethics, and morality.

When a Republican is caught obstructing justice, he resigns. When a Democrat is caught obstructing justice, he doesn't resign, he is put on a pedastal. When a Republican is caught taking bribes, he resigns. When a Democrat is caught taking bribes, he doesn't resign, he runs for re-election. When a Republican is caught exhibiting unacceptable behavior, he resigns. When a Democrat is caught exhibiting even more unacceptable behavior, he dosn't resign, he is re-elected six times.

Liberalism IS a mental disease.

Liberalism IS a mental disease.

Yes, A-10.

It is called the disease of communism!

and it has infected the entire democrat party!!

Jeremiah

DM,

Sorry I missed your earlier post. You can get a great deal of information about the Fair Tax from their website. I don't know all the particulars, but I do know Neal Boortz has co-authored a book on the Fair Tax and legislation has been introduced in both the House (H.R. 25) and the Seante (S.R. 25).

Thanks A-10.

After reading a little from the reference site, it indicates that we’d only pay taxes on first time purchases. That means if you buy used (such as a car), those items having already been taxed once would not be subject to being taxed again.

As for my other question, since this is a federal tax, internet sales would be included. That transcends the state line issue with regard to state tax and essentially makes every ebayer who sells new merchandise a retailer required to collect tax (unless ebay collects it for them). But most garage sales and estate sales would be exempt as those items would be used.

Also it brings up a good point about taxing a number of people who currently circumvent the system, particularly criminals. For example, drug pushers, prostitutes & pimps and people getting paid “under the table” would now be taxed on their earnings whenever they spent it like the rest of the population. Regardless of how you got your money, you would most likely want to spend some / all of it and would be unable to dodge the tax bullet. This in turn helps distribute the tax burden appropriately.

There are many other provisions that make this system seem appealing. One of the major factors is its simplicity. We’d no longer be bogged down by the massive bureaucratic entity called the IRS and the US Tax Code. Also it would help put us on equal footing with imports and exports allowing for increased production and sales of our goods. All of this is certainly worth looking into.

Please take note of the immature responses from Democrats. They have no real answers to charges of moral corruption within their Party, and within their souls. The difference between the rhetoric of a Democrat and a terrorist is almost non-existent.

Democrats claim that although they are critical of President Bush, they support our troops in Iraq. But they are liars. Our troops are volunteers who believe in their mission, and have great respect for their Commander-in-chief, whom they overwhelmingly voted for in the last Presidential election. Cowardly Democratic politicians won’t go to Iraq and speak-out against our President because they know they would be booed off our military bases.

Immoral, hypocritical Democrats also believe people have the “right to kill” millions of unborn human beings through abortions, yet they consider themselves “good” people! I voted for John Kennedy, and would have voted for Bobby Kennedy, but after these great men, a moral sickness corrupted and darkened the soul of the Democratic Party, and that "soul" gets more corrupt and darker with every passing year.

Veteran, U.S. Army
Website: Catholic Messages USA