If anyone is surprised, look at the pix of Peglosi at President Ford's coffin. She had a really nasty smile on her face.

If the Democrats set the agenda and actually pass a legislate a platform on which they were elected it is "partisanship."

When Republicans shut out Democrats for the last four years this was of course governing on moral values....

Perhaps the ol' Texas saying (or Tennessee) or fool me once, not get fooled again....I mean the ol' sayin' from somewhere.....

"It's time you Republicans had a taste of your own medicine."

Maybe next time around your party will not be so partisan to the point of destroying the legislative process or threaten the "nuclear" option and generally ignore Democrats or any other "minority" group.

Remember that even when you controlled the Congress, Democrats represented more Americans than did Republicans.

Wade

You didn't have a problem when the GOP did this to the Dems did you Matt?

Double standards...

So Matt...

Did you or did you not support Pelosi's request for a Bill of Rights for the minority in 2004?

We know the answer.

As long as your people are in power, you wish for them to crush the opposition. When the American people vote in a 30 seat Democratic majority, you want us to be all sweet and kind to the people who were tyrannical to us.

Sorry, ace. Ain't gonna happen. Take your lumps like we did. It's gonna suck to be you for the forseeable future.

The GOP as we know it is dead. Moderates like Jerry Ford will come back and crush the Christofascists and Constitution-haters of the radical extremist rightwing.

Your book will flop.

Sorry.

Sorry Gavin, I think your very wrong.

Democrats may have been voted in, but they were not voted in to pull the same crap the Republicans did in your eyes.

They may want to tread carefully because 2008 will come soon enough, and this is make or break for the Democrats.

The voters did not think the republicans were doing a good enough job, plus the Foley mess that got beat to death was enough to take attention away from Democrat corruption with the bribery and Murtha's little cornered market of malfeance.

The media was compliant in this since it held more sway over what the viewers received as "news" they helped shape and put the Democrats in power again. Oh don't get me wrong, the republicans helped in doing that by shooting themselves in the foot with some of their actions, but softball approach to democrats and hardball with republicans helped boost democrats in how they were perceived. It only takes someone to look AFTER the election to see how they 'suddenly' start going on about Murtha and the thinsg he is linked to. Have you also noticed that Murtha has sudenly been shut up now, where before he seemed to be going on every news show that would have him? I guess there is a silver lining to the Democrats taking power I suppose. The only one I see so far.

And as far as the fictional "As long as your people are in power, you wish for them to crush the opposition", that Gavin wrote, you may wish ot look back and check over things again. Last I saw the Democrats acted like they were in the minority even when they weren't and the republicans were rolling over liked whipped poodles half the time. Did you ever think that perhaps one of the reasons why Democrats may have won and gotten into power again was to be an object lesson to republicans to grow a spine?

Unfortunately I think the lesson was not received very well since it still seems the republicans still can't get their crap together.

How do you think the voters will feel having the democrats running rough shod over everything, abandoning their campaign promises? Increasing taxes? Rescinding tax cuts? Retreating? Making bargains with terror groups and terror supporting countries? Trying to Impeach the President? Hearing after hearing after hearing after hearing...ect?

How will you feel seeing this come to fruition?

Wow... the intellectual gravitas in the "room" just went down by the exact number of words Gavin just used.

One thing is right. I certainly do hope that the Republican Minority in the Senate does EXACTLY what the Democrat Minority did. Nancy may be able to change House Rules in her 100 hours of "change." But unless the Republicans in a Chamber she isn't even in is treated with the respect that Reid demanded when he was Minority Leader and Lott gave, then Pelosi gets SHIT done.

And even if she can overcome the Senate, she's got to convince one person who could care LESS about what she wants. Bush can count on EVERY veto he wishes to issue be upheld.

So Gavin... you're right... I'm sorry for "you" and "your party."

(I note you talk as if you're a member of Congress. Even though no one would EVER elect you. People don't vote for people who make up words like Christofascists... After all, offending millions of Christians in this Country is definitely endearing. You're a putz!)

By the way... who is going to look into Dingel's misdoings while he's trying to make up misdoings to look into?

Eh, did you really expect the Democrats to act any differently than the Republicans? It was all about the agenda of the majority then, and it's all about the agenda of the majority now... As long as Congress seeks an idealistic agenda, rather than a pragmatic one, the American people will suffer...

Georgia:
I think you're right... however, the problem is, people on both sides argue that their ideal is pragmatic.

However, I do think that Pelosi was the one talking up bipartisanship and she's not even "on the job" and not practicing what she preached.

I'm sure Republicans were just as bad, and they learned a lesson in November. And in 2008, Nancy and her new House will learn a lesson too if they don't figure out what their plan beyond "Iraq is a mess" is.

Any honest person has to acknowledge that the Democrat Plan was rather non-existent.

Wingnuts chill your jets for a while. In the first 100 hours Democrats are going to be talking about ethics and measures that will help the middle class like making college more affordable. What does this agenda have to go with Republicans? Neocons will have an opportunity for input at the hearings on how this government wasted millions of dollars in New Orleans and billions in Iraq.

"Any honest person has to acknowledge that the Democrat Plan was rather non-existent".

Any honest person has to acknowledge that Bush led a war without a plan as well.

To be fair to both parties, Iraq is so difficult right now that I don't believe there is a good plan.

Matt Margolis: "Waaaah! My own medicine tastes really bitter!"

Did you support Pelosi's 2004 proposal for minority rights? Or did you agree with Hastert's decision to not even look at it? And how has your position on minority rights changed since...oh, let's say November 2006?

Purple:
I disagree. There clearly was a plan, indicated by how swiftly we took down Saddam. The plans then went up against opposition (as happens in War, but I'm not sure you understand that).

That's where the problems started. We took too long to change tactics and then what happened happened.

Josh: Do you call anyone who you disagree with a wingnut? I could imagine you at dinner and someone says they want the chicken parm and you say "I want the linguine. You're a wingnut!

Actually, the Republicans will do a great job of stopping Nancy from getting what she wants. That'll be the fun part.

The only Good thing I can see about this is Democrats repealing Don't ask Don't tell, so I can finally serve in the military.

As a Democrat, I am alarmed that the Democrats have already appeared to fail on their pledges to implement fully the 9/11 Commission recommendations and to engage the minority Republicans on legislation. I fear that the "first 100 hours" plan will fizzle unless the GOP is involved.

However, the GOP has no authority to complain about the treatment of the minority party other than to point out the Democrats are breaking a campaign promise. Listening to the Republicans bleat about Democratic partisanship is like listening to Saddam's supporters complain about how unfair his trial was.

That being said, I would not blame the GOP for obstructing Democratic legislation...Pelosi needs a head check. What I believe is best for the Democratic Party is incidentally what is best for the country: for the parties to work together, to "rise above" the last 6 years and to pass some legislation that goes beyond naming post offices (what a concept!). America will judge the Democrats in 2008 based on their ability to create a marked positive change in the political tone in Washington.

Gar Wood

"If anyone is surprised, look at the pix of Peglosi at President Ford's coffin. She had a really nasty smile on her face."

I'm sure it made her day to see President Ford in his coffin.

Yeah, President Bush senior was cracking jokes during the eulogy and Clinton and Cheney were laughing! Oh My God!!!!

At least in the Senate, maybe it's time for Republicans, if they ever grow a spine, to realize filibusters work both ways.

Liberals - The Democrats at least ran in part on the story that THEY would be bi-partisan. The rest of the agenda aside, it turns out they were lying. But lets see what the veto pen does to their one sided screw the Republicans agenda.

The next shock will be when we increase troop levels in Iraq…. with a Democrat controlled Congress. Way to go Democrats – as soon as you back out of your plans to get us out, Iraq going forward is your fault. Actually, since both the House and Senate already voted to support everything we did there it already is. But AGAIN, they ran on change… and their change will end up being MORE troops.

As usual, you bought a bill of goods without reading the fine print.

Actually, the Republicans will do a great job of stopping Nancy from getting what she wants. That'll be the fun part.

Six months ago this would have been called obstructionist. Now it's just good fun.

You moonbat Libtards crack me up calling us wingnuts!
Let's look at the truly dangerous plotting deceitful. lying, corrupt Demwit Party:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/readarticle.asp?ID=15392&p=1

Regarding these comments:

"If anyone is surprised, look at the pix of Peglosi at President Ford's coffin. She had a really nasty smile on her face."

and

"Yeah, President Bush senior was cracking jokes during the eulogy and Clinton and Cheney were laughing! Oh My God!!!!"

Big deal. If any of you have ever been to a funeral or a memorial service, you know that they are filled with all sorts of conflicting emotions. You mourn the passing of the deceased, but you also tell funny, sweet stories about them, rehash old memories, cry, laugh, fight back emotions, let others out, etc.

So somebody makes a joke during a memorial service. Big stinkin' whoop. There are no rules that say you must remain somber and serious during the entire thing. In fact, every decent eulogy has a couple of healthy chuckles in it. It's natural.

Reminds me of the famous Clinton "laughing" video where Bill was caught daring to laugh at Ron Brown's funeral. He catches sight of the camera and gets his composure back and everyone yelled "Hypocrite!" So what? So he found something amusing at a memorial service. So did George H.W. Bush. What's the big deal?

"Josh: Do you call anyone who you disagree with a wingnut? I could imagine you at dinner and someone says they want the chicken parm and you say "I want the linguine. You're a wingnut"

Posted by: wawilliyo at January 2, 2007 02:53 PM

wawilliyo

You are joshing Josh, right? You must be familiar by now with that great wit from your own team. If not, let me introduce 'keefer' and just a few recent examples of his responses to those who do not agree with his view of the world:-

"Could you imagine a puke, such as airheadtime, being alive during WWII or the Vietnam War?"

"Stupid Wanker Anderson, calling yourself a patriot. Who do you support, idiot? Al Gore? Hitlery? Al Franken? Yes, you support all the kooks, because you're a kook. Now go away, asshat..."

"No, we don't, but we compare you to dog poop--and dog poop wins..."

"Of course, a parrot such as yourself won't want to hear it, because you're blinded and deafened by hate for your country and for those who protect your right to be a "worthless piece of crap."

"Are you so stupid, so lobotomized, that you don't understand? The answer is yes, and you've proven it time and time again. My only hope is that your boyfriend is smart enough to support you both; you'll never get past minimum wage with your (lack of) intellect..."

I could go on and on, wawilliyo, but right now I need to go and take a shower. yech!

Yeah, I can't say I'm surprised either. The House should be a deliberative body, which it has not been for some time. Hopefully the Democrats will realize this after the first hundred hours. Revenge should never be a motive in politics.

I gotta be honest though, it feels pretty good to see the Republicans having to take it rather than dishing it out for once. A few days on the other side could be an eye-opening experience. Maybe some will see the light...

>i>But AGAIN, they ran on change… and their change will end up being MORE troops.

Kahn, speaking of change, I just got this e-mail from another retired spook friend:

The Democrats new promise:

"A New Direction For America - Vote Democratic"

The stock market is at a new all-time high and America's 401 K's are back.
A new direction from there means, what?

Unemployment is at 25 year lows.
A new direction from there means, what?

Oil prices are plummeting.
A new direction from there means, what?

Taxes are at 20 year lows.
A new direction from there means, what?

Federal tax revenues are at all-time highs.
A new direction from there means, what?

The Federal deficit is down almost 50%, just as predicted over last year.
A new direction from there means. what?

Home valuations are up 200% over the past 3.5 years.
A new direction from there means, what?

Inflation is in check, hovering at 20 year lows.
A new direction from there means, what?

Not a single terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11/01.
A new direction from there means, what?

Osama bin Laden is living under a rock in a dark cave, having not surfaced in years, if he's alive at all, while 95% of Al Queda's top dogs are either dead or in custody, cooperating with US Intel.
A new direction from there means, what?

Several major terrorist attacks already thwarted by US and British Intel, including the recent planned attack involving 10 Jumbo Jets being exploded in mid-air over major US cities in order to celebrate the anniversary of the
9/11/01 attacks.
A new direction from there means, what?

Just as President Bush foretold us on a number of occasions, Iraq was to be made "ground zero" for the war on terrorism -- and just as President Bush said they would, terrorist cells from all over the region are arriving from the shadows of their hiding places and flooding into Iraq in order to get their faces blown off by US Marines rather than boarding planes and heading to the United States to wage war on us here.
A new direction from there means, what?

Now let me see, do I have this right? I can expect:

The economy to go South
Illegals to go North
Taxes to go Up
Employment to go Down
Terrorism to come In
Tax breaks to go Out
Social Security to go away
Health Care to go the same way gas prices have gone

But what the heck !
I can gain comfort by knowing that Nancy P, Hillary C, John K, Edward K, Howard D, Harry R and Osama have worked hard to create a comprehensive National Security Plan, Health Care Plan, Immigration Reform Plan, Gay Rights Plan, Same Sex Marriage Plan, Abortion On Demand Plan, Tolerance of Everyone and Everything Plan, How to Return all Troops to the U.S. in The Next Six Months Plan, A Get Tough Plan, adapted from the French Plan by the same name and a How Everyone Can Become as Wealthy as We Are Plan. I forgot the No More Katrina Storm Plan.

Now I know why I feel good after the elections. I am going to be able to sleep soooooo much better at nights knowing these dedicated politicians are thinking of me and my welfare.

CO:
I'm not Keefer. So quoting him as a way of justifying Josh's comment holds no weight with me. I don't condone people calling people rude names questioning their sexuality or their gender identity. I've even mentioned it wrong, but it clearly falls on deaf ears on both sides of the political spectrum.

However, CO, I would appreciate when you take that shower, you do so in Canada. I don't go around Canadian political blogs throwing my opinion around. I have no standing there, so why don't you follow my example.

Wyckyd: You statement on revenge has been the motive in politics since Nixon's time in office. The man this nation just honored on his way to his final rest tried to fix that, but it's clear Democrats didn't get what they wanted and it's clear the Republicans have fallen into the very same place of hatred and desire for revenge. It's all we have in politics these days.

It's pretty sad if you ask me. Nancy Pelosi's idea of working together is calling the President names and then saying he needs to work with her.

Unfortunately, she has to work with the House and the Senate, and the President than decides if he agrees with them. She is not equal to the President. She leads one half of a branch of government that is equal to the President. She is in no way equal to the President.

You dems make me laugh when you bring up how the last 6 yrs etc etc..

Obviously you either weren't around or conventiently forgotten that in 1993 led by D-Il Dan Rostenkowski(Chair of the Ways and Means Committee)literally locked the Republican members of the ways and means out of the budget discussions... And when I say locked them out.. he literally had the doors locked to exclude republicans from joining in on the budget discussions..

So to say this is a payback is bullsh*t considering from the mid 60s to the mid 90 dems ran the house.. and did as ol Dan continued to do..

Is it right by either side....... NO... but your disengenuous hypocrisy screams as loud as you..

However, CO, I would appreciate when you take that shower, you do so in Canada. I don't go around Canadian political blogs throwing my opinion around. I have no standing there, so why don't you follow my example.

Posted by: wawilliyo at January 2, 2007 06:18 PM

Wish I could, wawilliyo, wish I could. Perhaps the day will come when the U.S. is no longer an occupying force in Iraq. Then, and only then, will I no longer visit this site. Oh, sorry, I have to amend that. If, after you quit Iraq, GWB is still leader of the 'greatest county on earth' I have no choice but to post my comments until his term is up, or he is brought to trial, whichever comes first. At that time I will be overjoyed to leave and forever stay on my side of the border.

Neocons will have an opportunity for input at the hearings on how this government wasted millions of dollars in New Orleans and billions in Iraq.

Hearings, ah yes, the DummycRAT agenda. That, and the minimum wage, are gonna keep us safe.

Actually, I hope they hold hearings constantly for the next two years. That way, they won't be spending my money. I love gridlock, especially when donks are writing the legislation. And oh, btw, we should've been holding hearings on the trillions wasted in the war on poverty. Way to go, FDR/LBJ.

BTW, someone here is posting as "keefer." Mark or Matt, if you check the IPA of the imposter, you'll be able to match it with DAV, aka HugeWangUSAF. No worries though; I've already stated that I won't be posting under that name again, so if DAV wants to use it, fine.

Also, CO's compilation of my insults has made me stop and think. I'm sorry if I offended anybody with such caustic remarks, and I promise to continue to do so.

Josh, I disagree with you--you're a moonbat.

I am going to be able to sleep soooooo much better at nights knowing these dedicated politicians are thinking of me and my welfare.

Spook, you slay me--these "dedicated" politicians are thinking of you and welfare alright. They're thinking of how they can raise your taxes so's they can give their constituents more welfare...

Your book will flop.

Sorry.

You're hoping, aren't you, Gravel Meathead? You're such a puss, a low-life. Why don't you get yourself a girlfriend, Meathead, and leave us big boys alone. Really, get yourself a girlfriend; your boyfriend won't mind...

All will ultimately be decided by the DECIDER! Eat your hearts out!

She had a really nasty smile on her face.

She's probably mad because this is delaying her four-day coronation festivities. And did you mean "Piglosi?"

Hey Matt, you obfuscating coward, I asked you if you supported minority rights when the Democrats were in power? You can't answer it because your head is so far up Bush's posterior (and likely Mark's) that you can't see the truth.

Your party got their cajones kicked in. Guess what? The Dems Senate majority will expand in 2008. Your wingnut allies have 21 seats to defend. Ain't gonna be pretty. No way anything happens in two years to cause a 30 seat switch in the House. Get used to minority status. Let's hope we don't treat minorities in Congress the way Republicans and former Dixiecrats treat minority Americans. Although, I would laugh out loud at seeing Hastert get a hose turned on him...

Hey Mark, Matt is a Jew. Do you believe he is going to hell unless he accepts Christ?

Hey Osama,

As someone who doesn't hate gays like you, calling me gay doesn't offend me.

You can even think I'm gay if you want. Agsin, that's an insult that has no effect, much like when you call people n***-lovers. It just shows that you are the party of hate. Hate gays. Hate Hispanics. Hate Canadians.

And Matt, who has rejected Christ, and Mark who makes exceptions for people he thinks will make him money, they hate anyone who doesn't kiss up to them and Dumbya.

He's in his Mommy's basement smoking pot again...HEY MOOOMMM, MEATCRAMOS IS DOIN DOPE IN THE BASEMENT AGIAN WHILE HE'S WATCHING JERRY SPRINGER!!!

I'd be willing to bet that if you were to become 3001, even some of your kook buddies would step down just to see you go!

Not sure this idiot knows which "rights" he's ranting about. Try not to inhale kook.

Better be careful Meatcramps...remember Stanielle?

Gravel...you bring to mind the word...SNOT!!!!

Making juvenile jokes out of people's names is certainly not a sign of adulthood, "navydad"

If you are a dad, your kids are in deep shit.

Gavin - so the "Dixiecrats" were not actually Democrats? And 80% of Republicans didn't vote for civil and voting rights compared to far fewer Democrats? Interesting. I guess you don't know what you're talking about.

All I hear from you is barely coherent hate speech.

Nice numbers Spook, but not in my neighborhood. Gas prices are up fifty cents since November (no surprise there) and an appraisal I just got on my house in conjunction with a line of credit shows I have lost more than $100,000 in value in 17-months.

Out here in California economists are not optimistic about 2007. Housing is in steep decline and thousands of marginal borrowers who bought or refinanced in the last year are now upside down in equity terms right as their interest rates are rising. Like it or not, it will be Bush's economy Republicans run on in 2008.

Khan-

Nice try. You know as well as I that all the conservative racist Democrats of the 60's, except Byrd, became Republicans. Trent Lott was a Dixicrat, then he switched to the GOP after LBJ's actions.

The GOP is now the party of the former Dixiecrats. It's called the Southern realignment. Perhaps you'd hear about it if you read something other than Newsmax.

And the Republicans that DID vote for civil right legislation were the Northern moderates. And now, because of W, they are all gone. The Northeast is GOP-free, save for the nice moderates like Shays and Snowe and Collins. And the racist South will now be marginalized. As soon as W, to his own detriment, passes immigration reform, millions of Hispanics out west will start voting for Democrats.

Get used to being the minority, b****s.

My kids are grown and I can honestly say that if you lived near us and were as disrespectful towards our friends and neighbors as you are on this site, my kids would have kicked the Sh*t out of you and all your loady buddies....no doubt about it.

I suspect this has already happened to you by the way you post, so face it moron, no one wants to engage you because you are an irritable narrow-minded pot smoking recluse with nothing but visceral editorial comments that have no substantive meanings.

So go back to your basement, smoke a little more spliff and maybe you'll OD.

As with Saddam, It wouldn't bother me and many others a bit.

Gavin,

You have a serious problem. I don't know what you're trying to prove, or disprove, but it seems that the only thing you accomplish on here is giving violent, hate-filled, spittle-flecked rants...

If you think you're impressing anybody, I can assure you, you aren't. I'm sure people get a good laugh out of watching you throw a child age fit, and then have you expect them to believe any 'point' that you might have tried to make. But from the way things look, I can see you have accomplished one of your evil goals, making people angry. So in one odd variated way or another, your posts are having a bit of a ripple effect ... guess I gotta give credit where credit is due.

But seriously. I think you need to, how should I say it ... 'reconsider yourself'. You've been trying to throw crap at every GOP sided person here. You're not succeeding too well at it, and you're making a fool of yourself and making yourself out a public enemy, but none the less it hasn't stopped you.

What is it with you man? You seem to pity yourself and democrats, as if you've been given the shaft because your party hasn't had control in what ... 12-18 years now? So you've got control now, relish the years and the moments, and just hope that we aren't all blown to bits by the new plans coming in. I know you think the dems are the greatest thing since cherry pie but ... well, read what Retired Spook posted several posts up, his post describes perfectly in detail. Of course I know you won't, or you'll just put blind eyes to sensical logic. (sigh...)

Be that as it may, I know my words fall on deaf ears. And most likely, after this, I'll probably get my share of crap flying my way. But just remember one thing Gavin, and remember it well. 'The one who's slinging the crap, is the one that stinks of crap first.'

Thrower

I'll take this economy over the one GW inherited...anyday.

With unemployment down to all time lows, mortgage interest rates low, home ownership at a staggering all time high and my business booming from the GW tax cuts and free trade policies, I'll take it, and I live in California.

The problem is the gullible first time buyer and the impatient American public wherein they live their lives from paycheck to paycheck and never think about tomorrow, you know, like Gravel Meathead, thinking he can smoke pot all day today and have brain cells left for tomorrow.

Wow. The level of discourse in this thread by both sides makes me proud to be a US citizen. I'm glad we can see through all the factual BS and go straight to the name calling and personal insults which - I'm sure we can all agree - is the true way to solve our world's problems.

It is especially encouraging to see how much clever thought is going into making up names like "Piglosi" and "Dumbya".

It's hard to imagine why on Earth the terrorists hate us. We stand as such a paradigm of reason and open-mindedness for the rest of humanity, why the hell don't they want to emulate us?

On-Topic: Did anyone else see the McHenry/Cantor/Price (R) “Minority Bill of Rights” that they copied off of Pelosi's 2004 effort? I only bring it up because, well, it seems a bit hypocritical that the GOP was so willing to trample Democratic input and is now worrying since the tables have been turned.

That being said, I’m disappointed too at the start of the Democratic-led congress in not incorporating Republicans. While I think they are entirely politically justified in doing so (i.e. “Treat others as you’d like to be treated”; the Republicans being “you” the Democrats being “others”), in reality it is only going to prolong actual work getting done for the country.

But you all have to admit the Democrats have made quite the step in expanding the congressional work week from three days to five...should be an interesting couple of years.

BTW, navy, you do know that it is literally impossible to overdose on marijuana, unless you are somehow able to procure over two pounds of weed and subsequently able to inhale it all within a matter of minutes? Great to see our drug war out there winning the intellectual debate!

Would somebody please kick off Gavin M....he's a piece of (expletive deleted) giving me a migraine. He's a whining sniveling lib who thinks their agenda sees some light....the only minority is this excrement who likes to come on a site where he is the anti-beast. Behold the seasonal jackass! Gavin be his name...liberal be his shame.

Actually, I was not trying to be derogative in Pelosi's name, just hit an extra key. And the smile was from when she came to pay her respects while President Ford's body was at the Rotunda. She looked as if she was gloating, not very pretty.

Gavin - calm down. If you put up thoughtful and respectful posts people may actually take you seriously. Right now you just sound like a mad toddler, and no one respects a child having a temper tantrum.

Generally a good and thoughtful reply, Navydad, absent the unneeded slam in your second paragraph. One of those "gullible" first time buyers was my 24-year old daughter. She is sober, clean living and hard working, and she has been a saver since elementary school. She is both bright and ambitious. She put $75k down on her condo and half of that equity is gone seventeen months later. She'll survive but many won't.

Homeownership rates peaked in 2005 and declined in 2006. Astute Californians like you know full well that folks who bought homes in the past year too often used teaser and 100% loan to value mortgages. They are going to default at high rates in the coming months. This will swell inventory and drive both home prices and ownership rates down further. We are in for a rough ride while the real estate market regains some sanity. As California is frequently a leading indicator nationally, this phenomenon will likely spread.

Unemployment rates have increased since Bush was elected, but I agree with you that much of that increase resulted from an economic slowdown that began during the Clinton administration. But facts are facts and the fact is unemployment is now nearly double what it was in the early 1950s.

I am sincerely glad your business is doing well financially and I wish you continued prosperity. I have many friends who are not doing as well, and several have had their companies shed pension obligations as they restructure and offshore jobs. A number are longterm Republicans who voted Democratic in 2006. That too is a leading indicator unless this economy restructures and spreads prosperity around better.

All of this leads me to believe that there will be fairly widespread economic malaise in 2008. And voters will rightly or wrongly regard it as a Republican economy. Congress could ameliorate this somewhat by fixing our broken healthcare system but Bush would likely veto any significant changes to a system that provides poor outcomes to consumers and high profits for business.

Oh come on Anillo. Surely the republicans would never be so hypocritical as to think the Democrats should get special treatment. No, I'm sure republicans believe the Democrats should operate under the very same rules of bi-partisanship that the republicans themselves operated under for so long. I mean, it's not like they're saying they should get to operate one way while Democrats should have to operate another way.

Nice catch about the pot thing though. While its true that the diehard social conservatives will never address the colossal failure that is the war on drugs honestly, they do have a tendency to be stuck in the 60s, viewing all liberals as smelly hippies who pray at the church of Jane Fonda.

Agsin, that's an insult that has no effect, much like when you call people n***-lovers.

Now Gravel, I've never called anybody a n-lover, and you know it. You just can't hide your racism, can you? You have this hangup about "White Christians." What's up with that, punk?

Thrower

Obviously the pot comment was reserved for Gravel Meathooks and BTW, my tone with this moron will never change, so either laugh at it or ignore it...it is your prerogative. But even your side should ignore idiots like GM.

No offense toward your daughter,(Once again, I'll reserve the real rude comments for GM) but my comment regarding "gullible" is exactly what I mean, when you say: "Astute Californians like you know full well that folks who bought homes in the past year too often used teaser and 100% loan to value mortgages."

It is really not that tough in this day and age to research a simple real estate mortgage, and if a kid wants to become a responsible homeowner in America, first, they need to do some research and second, maybe we ought to lobby for a Mortgage Education bill, starting with California...just a joke, but probably not that far off base.

However, as I've stated in other posts, the main problem with this generation is their lack of patience and most of this is due to us Boomers that decided it was best to give our children more than what our parents gave us, therefore instilling a sense that they are entitled to home ownership and all the things that WE worked so hard for.

I'm not sure how old you are, but in your last paragraph, you've indicated that the sky will be falling in 2008. I'm not sure where to start here!

It's fairly obvious you feel as though we're not in a stable economy, but what if the MSM stopped spewing the negatives about the economy and started to speak favorably of it? Would you change your tune, or because it's owned by GW, would you say it's in the tank?

In the last year of the Clinton White House, we all saw the recession coming, and when GW took office, the left called him a liar and that he caused the recession...not Clinton.

So which is it, credit where credit is due, or total partisanship?

My kids are grown and I can honestly say that if you lived near us and were as disrespectful towards our friends and neighbors as you are on this site, my kids would have kicked the Sh*t out of you and all your loady buddies....no doubt about it.

Posted by: navydad at January 2, 2007 10:49 PM

That attitude, navydad, is probably responsible for the mess you find yourselves in today. How is the 'Do it our way, or we'll kick the sh*t out of you' brand of diplomacy working for you?

Dickdee for instance responded to Gavin's rant with this gem.

"Would somebody please kick off Gavin M....he's a piece of (expletive deleted) giving me a migraine. He's a whining sniveling lib who thinks their agenda sees some light....the only minority is this excrement who likes to come on a site where he is the anti-beast. Behold the seasonal jackass! Gavin be his name...liberal be his shame."

Yes, you can see that dickdee put a lot of thought and effort into that response.

I guess when anyone with an opposing view posts a particle of truth here, it hurts so much to hear it, the first reflex is to lash out in anger at the messenger.

CO

Grow a spine...would ya!!!

You go ahead and put great deals of thought into your pal GM. I, on the other hand have no patience for such morons and if you would like to be put in the same category as Gravel Meathooks...just say so. But don't defend the indefensible.

BTW Dickdee did a great job and definitely put forth more effort...hear..hear dickdee!

CO...Ummmm, maybe you haven't noticed how many terrorists our military has killed these days but it's in the tens of thousands and all due to the same exact mentality that I have...no different, and I'm proud to be equated with our Military, unlike yourself that believes that the Military's only purpose is for humanitarian purposes.

"That attitude, navydad, is probably responsible for the mess you find yourselves in today. How is the 'Do it our way, or we'll kick the sh*t out of you' brand of diplomacy working for you?"

Ya know, I can't wait for the day, when a terrorist attack hits your pethetic homeland and then see how you react. Will you show benevolence toward the perpetrators, or will you be all pissed off, like we Conservative's were/are?
That's why we're in the mess we're in, for not confronting terrorism head-on in the past not because of the after effect.

You just don't get it...do you?

navydad

If American 'kick-ass diplomacy' works so well, why is Bush & his policies considered more of a threat to world peace than that of the dastardly devil Osama Bin Laden?

Only a threat by the left...CO....only by the left.

Additionally, if you recall, in 2003 Libya gave up their weapons programs and it wasn't because we were nice..that..is for sure.

Cyber,
Down boy...Didn't you ever hear of sarcasm?

Additionally, if you recall, in 2003 Libya gave up their weapons programs and it wasn't because we were nice..that..is for sure.

Posted by: navydad at January 3, 2007 11:21 AM

navydad

I have no idea whether or not the USA Today publication is considered Liberal or Conservative but I found these comments which appeared in its opinion section rather interesting:-

Libya provides the outlines of what might work elsewhere:

Negotiations. U.S. and British officials held secret talks for nine months with Libya before Gadhafi agreed to cancel his nuclear program. The Bush administration has been reluctant to engage other rogue regimes, but, as former secretary of State James Baker said Sunday, "You don't give away anything, but in my view, it's not appeasement to talk to your enemies."
Effective economic sanctions. Gadhafi particularly wanted U.S. oil companies back in business in his oil-rich country.
Face saving. Gadhafi was given a way back in from the international cold. Since giving up his weapons programs, he has been rewarded with everything from oil contracts and diplomatic relations with the United States to, most recently, a deal for France to provide nuclear energy facilities.

Gavin:

Nice try yourself... "Nice try. You know as well as I that all the conservative racist Democrats of the 60's, except Byrd, became Republicans. Trent Lott was a Dixicrat, then he switched to the GOP after LBJ's actions"

Why would they do that when even great numbers of Republicans supported civil rights than did Democrats???? No - the Republicans won the south on gun control, religion, and other isses and the Dixicrats did NOT move over. You are so full of crap and hate it's silly. You buy into stereotypes with little regard to reality.

How many Congressmen jumped parties? How many Senators? Governor? Mayors? Sherrifs? You are wrong. Your party is the party of division and hatred, and you're too blind to see it.

CO

Not sure either..I would assume that since they're the leading paper in the US, that they're fairly moderate.

If you know the history of Libya, you'd find that Gaddafi spent a lifetime sponsoring terrorism and committing criminal acts worldwide..and no, he didn't discriminate whatsoever, in fact here's a post I found at Infoplease that brings back some pretty crappy memories.

"Dec. 21, Lockerbie, Scotland: N.Y.-bound Pan-Am Boeing 747 exploded in flight from a terrorist bomb and crashed into Scottish village, killing all 259 aboard and 11 on the ground. Passengers included 35 Syracuse University students and many U.S. military personnel. Libya formally admitted responsibility 15 years later (Aug. 2003) and offered $2.7 billion compensation to victims' families.

If you'll notice there were 35 Syracuse students on board and this was just the tip of the iceberg for the goon. He went on to sponsor multiple attacks against American interests and it wasn't until President Reagan tossed a couple O Cruise Missiles into his tent, did he understand the might of our Military. Too bad we didn't nail his ars then.

You see CO, if it weren't for an agressive stance by the US in the past on foreign policy, we'd certainly be in a lot worse shape than we are today, in fact, if you count the terrorist attacks on our soil, they pale in comparison to the volume of attacks on foreign soil. Therefore, you might understand why we have a tendancy to be the aggressor. We don't want those attacks here.

Canada has never had the violence against them that we have, and no disrespect, but if you didn't have us to the south to thwart those attacks, it might have been downtown Toronto that was attacked on 911, as it almost was last year.

Honestly, no one wants war or the killing of innocent civilians, but there comes a time when you have to bite the bullet and stand for what is right and defeat the wrong.

Khan-

Trent Lott, Strom Thurmond, Phill Gramm, Jesse Helms. All men who switched parties after the passing of civil rights legislation.

Facts are the salt to your racist wounds. Are you going to call me a n****-lover again?

Gavin, The Republicans were the leaders of the Civil Rights movement. Dems were obstructionists!Maybe that is why the switches occurred, to be on the side of civil rights.

Thanks for the reminder. And know who and what you support, the party against civil rights.

"Honestly, no one wants war or the killing of innocent civilians, but there comes a time when you have to bite the bullet and stand for what is right and defeat the wrong."

Actually, NavyPuke, you said EXACTLY that. You just posted how you HOPED for a terrorist attack inside the borders of Canada.

As for wanting war, many people like you do. People like me wanted war against Al Qaeda and those that supported them. People like me were, and are, enraged at the mess we left undone in Afghanistan. People like me want Osama dead more than Saddam(too late). People like you want war based on false intelligence. People like you do not care at all about the 50,000(at least) dead Iraqi civilians, including innocent babies. People like you want abortion banned, but support the bombing of babies (so long as those babies aren't white like you...)

Canada has never had the violence against them that we have

Posted by: navydad at January 3, 2007 03:27 PM

That's true, navydad. Do you think our foreign policy history may have had a little something to do with that?

It does make me rather nervous, though, to think that our sissy peace-loving behinds are being protected by the military might of one of the most hated regimes in the world today.

BTW, navydad, I believe the last time Canada was invaded was in 1812 by our good friends & neighbors to the south. However, the outcome then was not up to the superior war power you now possess and the exercise was unsuccessful.

Naw CO! You know that saying about "the bigger they are"? Canada really doesn't have a foreign policy, in fact in proportion, Canada's foreign policy has kept them in hiding most of the time and you're only called on when we need some additional support.

Your economy is similar to ours though and with a GDP in the trillions, which is fueled by our economic influence and NAFTA, you can always rely on our Military might and economical machine to keep you little guys outa trouble...with all due respect. You know, from what I know of Canada, it very much resembles the US in its market-oriented economic system and modest living standards, however, I do quite a bit of biz with Toyota Canada and it appears that the Canadian consumer is much more impulsive than the US consumer.
Why do you this is?

And see, now that we've had our differences back in 1812, we're still buddies..right?

Hate to say it CO, but ya left yourself wide open with that one. See what happens after war?

Naw CO! You know that saying about "the bigger they are"? Canada really doesn't have a foreign policy, in fact in proportion, Canada's foreign policy has kept them in hiding most of the time and you're only called on when we need some additional support.

Your economy is similar to ours though and with a GDP in the trillions, which is fueled by our economic influence and NAFTA, you can always rely on our Military might and economical machine to keep you little guys outa trouble...with all due respect. You know, from what I know of Canada, it very much resembles the US in its market-oriented economic system and modest living standards, however, I do quite a bit of biz with Toyota Canada and it appears that the Canadian consumer is much more impulsive than the US consumer.
Why do you suppose this is?

And see, now that we've had our differences back in 1812, we're still buddies..right?

Hate to say it CO, but ya left yourself wide open with that one. See what happens after war?

navydad,

Gravel Meathead worries about dead babies--once they're out of the womb!

Khan, did you call Gravel a n*****-lover? I can't find that post anywhere, and he accused me of the same. He's called me a white Christian. He's a racist punk and a liar...

Meatcramps is so emotional he can't remember what he's writing.

"As for wanting war, many people like you do. People like me wanted war against Al Qaeda and those that supported them"

Didn't you read "H RES 757" Meatbreath? I posted it for you sweety. According to your beloved Dems in the House, we ARE going after those that supported Al Qaeda. Try reading something factual for once....lame ass.

Here's a taste: "Whereas of the senior al-Qaida leaders, operational managers, and key facilitators that the United States Government has been tracking, nearly two-thirds of such individuals have been taken into custody or killed;"

So what if we did kill UBL? How do you know he's not dead? Would Ayman Al Zawahiri still be putting out the same rants that he learns from the liberal DBM if UBL were alive? I know these are tough questions, so just calm down and try your best to respond.

Naw CO! You know that saying about "the bigger they are"?

navydad

Do you mean "the bigger they are, the harder they fall"?

WOW CO...you're so perceptive.