Me too.

It's a little different with me, but pretty much just "me too."

--bucky1

That wasn't me.

--L.W.M.

I see little difference between the two and I might be inclined to vote for an independent just to take a jab at the two party system. If the only choices I get are three barely distinguishable candidates, like Clinton, McCain and Bloomberg, then why not pick Bloomberg? They were all for the war. They will all bow to the corporate power structure. Am I supposed to care if one of them wasn't quite as for the war as the others?

I was thinking about the same thing with Kenyas elections that were supposedly illegal also-wondering if the smae company/microchip maker...is the same for us, Pakistan--now Kenya.

So, thanks for paying attention to me, y'all. I beg you, don't stop now. It's all I ever wanted. You'll be grateful as my outsider-looking-in status permits me to see things that rest of you cannot.

If I wasn't getting to you, you wouldn't feel the need to try to get to me..

I predict your bunghole will get stretched tonight, with a saguaro.

Use a little pimentade instead of K-Y and it will enhance the burn..

A mixture of lime juice, salt and mashed habanero pepper.

Feel the burn, baby.

I think the Kenyan job was much more blunt, but I don't know. There was a massacre there that defies belief a little while ago (hours).

More on Latif Khosa. Mohammed Latif Khan Khosa is an opposition lawyer, and a PPP member, in whose house Bhutto was staying while she was under house arrest during the emergency. He's been pretty vocal for months about vote rigging and election roll problems. He's a pretty easy search online. He helped file legal proceedings (spec. habeas corpus) the first time they house arrested Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudry last summer. He was "wounded" during a truncheon charge by police against the lawyers protest.

This is Youtube post of her rally before assassination.

Check out weird activity of either on lookers or those "shttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcNBYj-JOjMupposed " to protect her.

link not correct in previous post. This is it.

Header of "remember she was shot in neck and head".

reddit.com also good source of new stories on.

I predict your bunghole will get stretched tonight, with a saguaro.

Use a little pimentade instead of K-Y and it will enhance the burn..

A mixture of lime juice, salt and mashed habanero pepper.

Feel the burn, baby.

More auto-didactics? ;-)

Wasn't trying to get to you... just havin' a little fun at your expense, that's all. I admit that I find your unctuous, condescending - yet needy - style abrasive. It tends to taint the otherwise fairly credible points you often make, rather than adding anything to them. Otoh -maybe it's just me. Anyway, no big deal.

I predict you'll be unable to resist responding to this one too.

My relative in prison told me.

Were you spying on me when I was getting my i-Ching reading last night? C'mon, fess up.

Steve Clemons, nobody's idea of a radical, and a supporter of many Republicans, says we've had TOO MUCH bipartisanship already.

http://thewashingtonnote.com/archives/002635.php

Enough of Soft & Fuzzy Bipartisanship: America Needs a Dissident Ticket
December 31, 2007
by Steve Clemons

Republicans and Democrats were complicit in the Iraq War. Both parties have been complicit in the appropriations corruption that came with obscene Homeland Security spending around the nation. Both parties have been complicit in refusing to solidly challenge the most aggressive expansion of Executive Branch authority in more than a century. Both parties have been complicit in failing to shore up investment in the American economy and its workforce. Both parties have been complicit in allowing Americans to be spied on. Both parties have been complicit in allowing low level soldiers to take the hit for Abu Ghraib and allowing the decision-makers in the White House and Pentagon to get a complete pass.

The situation we have today was produced by aggressive, high-fear tactics of minority political operations within both the Republican and Democratic parties -- that then cowed a party membership that passively followed.

But some dissidents have emerged -- and Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) is probably the most important of these.

From what I know of Hagel, he is not bemoaning the absence of soft and fuzzy bipartisanship. He wants a change in policy -- a change in the course of the nation.

What former Senator Sam Nunn seems to be saying in the commentary he has thus far provided on the upcoming meeting is that bipartisanship should be a goal unto itself. That's wrong.

What the Republican and Democratic party members need to realize is that both of their party apparatuses have been taken over by a combination of ideological and utopian zealots as well as a policy-blind secretariat that passively follows the ideologues. The pragmatists and realists in both parties -- particularly in foreign policy but also in other spheres as well -- have been in decline.

The bubble of America's greatness was punctured by Iraq. America's hegemonic pretensions ended when the world saw America -- which once seemed to have no bounds on what it could do -- show its limits in the Iraq War.

When superpowers show their limits, allies are the first to recalculate their behavior because they won't count on us as much as they did before. And enemies move their agendas.

America's global national security position is eroding. The global equilibrium is in serious flux -- and this is no time for ideological zealotry in either the Democratic or Republican parties.

But it's not a time for purposeless bipartisanship either. This is a time to get serious about challenges and for the dissidents that have been dissatisfied to rebel.

The next President of the United States is going to be tested. Every troublesome player in the international system is going to kick the tires of our new President -- much like Khrushchev did with Kennedy.

Ahmadinejad will spark something, testing us. Hu Jintao will throw some dust in the new president's face. Kim Jong Il will remind the president that good behavior comes at a very high price. Hugo Chavez will work hard to embarrass the new occupant of the White House. Al Qaeda will engineer another mass casualty incident not just for their cause but to test the resolve of the new establishment in Washington. The Taiwanese will flirt with independence. The Israelis will test how much room they are given to run beyond what the Bush administration has already given them. And then there is Russia, and frankly a long roster of other nations that want to consolidate the appearance of their rising international power in the midst of the perception o American decline.

I don't believe that bipartisanship solves the challenges ahead. New policies might help restore some balance and the beginnings of a positive direction. But what is needed now are rebels.

I think Hagel is that kind of rebel, though he is disgusted with Washington and both parties (perhaps a good thing) -- and I think Michael Bloomberg is a hard core pragmatist. Neither of them is perfect, but they are a possible alternative to the less than compelling choices currently on the table.

Some believe that Bloomberg's tough manhandling of protesters in New York disqualify him. Many progressives who like Hagel's leadership in trying to bring the Iraq War to an end fear his social conservatism.

My only fear is that Sam Nunn (who may be auditioning for the VP slot himself with Bloomberg), David Boren, former Defense Secretary William Cohen and others concocting this January fest next week are more about getting Dems and Republicans to pal around together -- not rebelling on the basis of policy that outrages them.

The sad but real truth today is that the Bush administration came in to office in 2001 under suspect circumstances but roared and behaved as if it had won an 80% mandate. The Democrats folded and gave Bush all the room to run he wanted. There is mutual responsibility and complicity in the results we have today.

I don't want more bipartisanship for its own sake. I want dissident Republicans and dissident Democrats to make this government work in the way it is supposed to work -- and to deliver on the policies that the public expects.

So a message to David Boren and Sam Nunn -- whose personal animosity towards gays and lesbians many of whom have done great service to this country is not forgotten here -- is make your meeting about an overhaul of American public policy both domestically and in the national security and foreign policy spheres.

If you have Dems and Republicans lining up behind those policies -- terrific.

If not, this meeting is a waste of time and a fuzzy distraction.

- - Steve Clemons