In a different thread, you suggested I could only show responsibility (for voting for bush) by voting dem next time.

That is silly.

What if the dems drink the "electablility" kool-aid again and put a train wreck like clinton on the ticket? The thugs would have to really dig deep in their collective colon to find a worse candidate than that. Hell, I'd even take another 4 years of bush because he's becoming more harmless by the day, because his inner circle is shredding, because the crimes are getting exposed, and because he can't give himself a presidential pardon.

When will the dems own up to their share of the blame? Dean has purpose, vision, and passion. He'd have pulled voters like me over. He might have won. Instead, y'all perched up kerry. Another yale skull 'n bonesman. swell

I agree that Gore would have been better. He's probably better than any of the running candidates. In voted for Nader. As part of the clinton administration, I figured Gore would continue the erosion of our civil rights. bush, of course, is a coke addicted jesus freak who shat on the constitution far more prolifically than clinton ever did. Who saw that coming? If it weren't for 9/11, he'd still be trying to sound out "my pet goat".

Also consider that the dems are doing everything in their power to lose again. Failing to defund the occupation is about the same as voting to support the war AGAIN. That makes 'em little better than the psychopath in the oval office.

Who needs a perfect dem? I actively supported Dean. I'll happily vote for Richardson. I'd probably vote for Obama, although not with joy. Edwards is looking interesting. I wish Gore would get in the game.

The rest of the dem field though - utter crap. It'd be like choosing which boot to pick crap off of first. Left or right?

What do you think is worse:

1) Someone who sends troops to die based on fallacious personal convictions sold with lies.

2) Someone who sends troops to die knowing it is wrong, believing it is politically expediant, and supporting the lies.

As for had_enough, your basic argument is that I'm too stupid or in too strong a state of denial to understand. How gracious of you. Regardless of my own lack of enlightment I never forget that some people who disagree with me are actually smart. The question is, why would a smart person believe such shit? I think you have a bad case of reactionary myopia.

Bill Clinton did great economically because of the end of the cold war and the mass adoption of the internet. See also end of WW1, WW2, and Korean War.

As for civil rights, have you forgotten the war on drugs? The murders in Waco? The precursors to the patriot act which the republican congress refused to pass? Do you remember things like COPA and DMCA that did pass? Do you remember the attempts to legalize sneak and peek searches? The loosening of FISA constraints?

Do you think bush is the first one to play "war on terror" games? Clinton ordered lots of missile strikes and bomb drops.

The fight for civil rights didn't begin when both side of the aisle stood up and hitler saluted the patriot act. It's been going on for two centuries. The dems do not deserve a pass because bush is horrible.

I'm still seeking brightness in you...

Hope your dander is up. The way you assume you have some sort of intellectual superiority and then deign to annoint others with labels like "half bright" is one reason you won't win. While you smugly assert your entitlement to victory, the jesus freaks and neocons are marching.

You sneer at me for wrongful voting. Guess who was on the winning side. How smart can you be when defeated by morons like me?

I voted for bush once. Voted for nader in 2k. voted against kerry in '04. My reasoning has proven correct. How broken does something need to be before people care to fix it? kerry would have kept things limping along and broken. bush spiked it into the ground for all to see. If bush's regime isn't enough to convince the dems to act and the people to scream, then nothing will.

As for Waco, don't forget that the ATF were busily playing cowboy. First, they went in firing and were shocked that people resisted. Nightime "no-knock" warrants are notoriously dangerous. (think about what you would do if someone burst into your home and assaulted your family.) Then came the stand off, which would have worked. Untilllll.... B. clinton and J. reno wanted a photo op featuring ugly guns and crazy militia. An attack was carried out because "there are children in there being abused" (proof please). So, the ATF lit the kids on fire.

Were they doing the work of the people? Yes. Sadly, so is bush. No excuse there.

After Waco, the ATF was quietly cleaned up because other police agencies didn't want to work with them. Sadly, the ATF cowboys seem to have gone to the border patrol.

I brought up Waco because it illustrates the dem "fear card". thugs want us to fear terrorists who might come here. demo-craps want us to fear our neighbors because someone might be a pedophile, addict, or other miscreant.

Same game, different fear card.

Wow.

It doesn't bother me to be called stupid, dim, retarded, mentally handicapable. Cheater, hmmmm. GOP defintely did that. Where I live the dead vote dem in by a wide margin. Pot meet kettle.

but NEOCON!

That hurts.