Next, for "health reasons" and to "spend time with his family" Cheney will resign and McCain will be appointed in his place as presidential heir apparent in the hopes of hanging on to the whitehouse in 2008 with a sort of moderate that we used to respect. I suspect this was a deal made long ago which would explain the "Pod McCain" we've been watching the last 6 months.

He's either drinking again or wishes he was.

Damn, that gets me on a no-fly list for sure.

but in this case he's right and boy am I glad the president lied and held off letting Rummy go until after the election.

I still want to slap around people like Norquist with an old fish for all their predictions about the impending armageddon that a democratic congress will be.

So, what exactly has the republican congress done in the last 6 years? I mean for anybody right, left, or in the middle? Other than approving a couple of right wing justices and some neo-fascist administration positions, they haven't done anything to move this country forward. I disagree with Norquist and his ilk that the nothing we've had is preferrable to whatever we are going to get.

So how much better does Mr. Carville thinks the democratic could have/should have done with his ideas? Sometimes people say stupid things because they feel their mouths should keep moving. Dean's approach was validated; end of story. I'm an independant from the Reddest of states and even I sent money to the DNC this year because I was convinced that the battle for America needed to be fought everywhere. Would Mr Carville like to see me drift away again along with millions of my fellow independants?

It's really quite nice.

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=76118

So remind me again why we think he can't be president?

I agree that we're talking one party apples and one party oranges here. Much fun is made of the democrats for not hanging together cohesively at all times but that's what happens when you truly have the "big tent". There are many factions, each with their agenda to be sure but you don't have the monolithic "my way or the highway" of the opposition. Maybe you lose a few elections to organized dirty tricks but you maintain the art of compromise.

I'll support Gore ONLY if he promises to get out front and not let the media and right wing pundits tell his story like he let them the last time (and won anyways we should remember). He should pre-emptively strike on the inventing the internet and Love story canards and the entire party needs to make sure that the "robot candidate" meme is not allowed to play.

But the string is about Feingold who I've always admired. I'd love to see what he does in the senate for the next term or two and then hopefully he'll make a stab at it. He has always seemed a man of principle and looks to holding steady on that.

Seems to me that the "new" democratic party is the one that won last week. The "old" one is the one that's been the minority party for the last decade. I mean, it's up to them, but you would think they would like to keep winning so that they can actually do some good for America.

Now my life is complete and I may die happy.

Just how long do you carry a grudge, dude?

Joy of justice.

And about time, too.

I'm not sure if you're aware of it but, in this country, one atrocity does not justify another. Thought you should know.

Some comfort that he turned down the bribe which disqualifies him from the ney-cunningham club but still, the earmarking atrocity of the last congress was one of the things that got the republicans tossed. What are our other choices?

I mean, why should they pick someone who might have a clue why they got "thumped" and what must be done to recapture the American voter. (Athough "capture" is perhaps a poor choice of words). There was a previous rumour floating about last week that it was going to be Steele which would have been beyond absurd after the "Vote for me, I'm a democrat" scam.

On the other hand, I'm always glad to see these folks spend their money on something besides political campaigns, you like legal bills, fines, and that sort of thing.

The real question is how much are they willing to pay him. 100K? 200k? He'll have travel expenses, too. Would those be covered by the government or would they be out of pocket as well?

Sorry. German most rusty. I blame progressives for my ignorance.

I was going to award you snark of the day but this was so funny I award you snark of the week...and it's been a snarky week.

Yeah, "typical" of us lefties to wander about with different points of view. (By the way, the term is "progressives" now. Just ask Joe.) I know it's a lot tidier if we all lockstepped (goosestepped?) together like the RNC.

I've been trying to explain that for a long time (along with the "How could a Buddhist be a career Air Force officer?"). But I think more of the country follows these lines than either party thinks. There are certain things the socialist side of a country should supply its citizens (safety, infrastructure, positive relations with the rest of the world) and things the libertarian side must preserve for its citizens (freedom to live your life your way as long as it doesn't hurt your fellow citizens, knowing that if the government must get in your business for security or legal reasons that it will do so legally and with proper oversight to prevent abuse of power)

There are times to be conservative, times to be liberal. Definitely times to be purple. Freedom of religion but without the government "playing favorites".

How about a party for that?