Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
the Dems are really no better than the Republicans. You have a dumb-as-a-rock and utterly unpopular president and a cabal of mentally unstable warmongers, and a party run amok and self-destructing, and yet the Dems STILL can't figure out how to walk and chew gum at the same time.
How stupid are they? The answer: WAY stupid.
If God forbid we are looking at "President for Life" Generallisimo George W bush in Nov 2008, or President Rudy Mussolini, or Mike Huckster, etc., we have no one to blame but Feinstein, Schumer, Pelosi, Reid, Clinton, and the rest of them who don't have the cojones or sense to vote against torture, against the war, against war in Iran, etc. and just keep mumble-mouthing and forgetting that they're supposed to be LIBERALS...and DEMOCRATS...
I too was impressed with Glenn's look at the Paul-machine. I support Ron Paul, but I'm a little uneasy with his opposition to women's rights. Hmm... Well.
What to do? Should I abandon him because of it? I don't think so. That's a knee-jerk reaction. I cannot believe that aborting a baby would be impossible, or illegal if Mr. Paul takes office.
It does kind of get me excited that women and men might take pause to at least consider the consequences of their sex lives. It could drive down STD's and unwanted pregnancies.
I can hope, right?
Glenn's letter section reminded me how paranoid Democrats can be.
Schumer would rather have someone from NY corrupting American Democracy and the rule of law. After all, Rudy is from NY so they MUST really know how to do it there. seriously, I don't see how Chuckie could have done more damage to this country. He must be getting some BIIIIIG paycheck from Eric Prince. If you read the responses to his op-ed, well, he WILL be challenged at reelection time. And I'll be supporting his challenger. Disgraceful. Just disgraceful.
I was greatly saddened by Schumer's vote. Though I suppose I should not expect anything more from the Democrats, it seemed to put a nail in the coffin of Democratic integrity. As a party they can't hold together, and don't (in their actions as a body) seem to stand for anything. Sad, indeed.
Isolated Democrats, like Christopher Dodd, have bravely worked to take a stand, but they are thwarted by their peers. And worse, thwarted by a senator who has nothing to lose in taking a stand. Schumer has a solid base in New York; he is in no danger of losing his office, and yet he is acting in the most cowardly manner and is being disrespectful and disdainful to the voters who screamed for change in 2006 and to the few Democrats who are trying to make change.
As a New York resident, I'm not quite sure what to do. Schumer faces no threat of losing his office, so my vote does not seem to matter. Indeed, he could "pull a Lieberman" easily to solidify a dubious power.
I toy with the idea of switching to the Republican Party so I can 1) vote for Ron Paul and 2) send a message to Schumer that his actions do matter. Besides, what in hell has changed since the 2006 election? Joan, it's really sad, but I can't think of a thing. It's as if we had a Republican Congress. So why not become a Republican?
However, some Democrats still defend the constitution. I’d count Dodd, Leahy and my own terrific congressman, Maurice Hinchey, among those will integrity. (Hinchey exemplifies the word.) However, I don’t think I will be going to the polls to vote for Schumer again, not unless he rethinks his choices and takes the moral and rational stand that he, as one of the most powerful Senators, can take.
Also, I must point out that Schumer and Clinton both voted in favor of the Kyle-Liebermann Amendment that basically gave the president another pretext for war, this time with Iran. That vote alone should horrify us. It is just not acceptable to allow war, torture and the abrogation of the Constitution in the name of compromise.
I’m ashamed to be a New York resident today, and sick of these stand-for-nothing, doormats we call our leaders.
I think he wants to send it to the states to decide on a state by state basis.
"we have no one to blame but Feinstein, Schumer, Pelosi, Reid, Clinton" The blame doesn't fully rest with Feinstein, Schumer, Pelosi, Reid etc. Really the blame rests with us. We elected these people. We (those who vote) created a system where politicians have to behave a certain way if they have any hope of getting elected and staying in office. Everyone loves to blame the politicians but lets get real here. Its our fault. You get the representation that you deserve and frankly we deserve these people. We reward courage in our leaders by voting them out of office.
What courage have we seen from our politicians that we have rewarded by voting them out? Courage and politician should not even be in the same sentence!
The idea that we get the government we deserve is bs. We have a rigged system, it was rigged long before I came of voting age, and there is nothing anyone can do to fix it. Politicians consistently lie to us and then sell us out to special interests. My entire life has been nothing but the lesser of two evils when it comes to voting. If you want to blame someone blame self serving politicians, special interests, a complicit media, and a propoganda / disinformation machine that muddies the water on EVERY issue so bad that it takes days of research to get at the actual truth. (And even then how can you be certain you have reached the truth?) I dont have time for that, and I dont know anyone who does, especially when there are so many issues out there. Blame for this mess goes back at least to before my great grandfather.
Are you really suprised Schumer caved in? This was his guy all along and this pitiful "mea culpa" in the NYT's today is worthless.
Saying it's either Mulkaskey or Ted Olson is a false dichotomy old "W" would be proud of. If the Dems had stones or morals they'd tell Bush to stick it. But, golly, that would be "obstructionist" and that's bad. They just want to all get along which is just what bullies like Bush want.
Impotent is a good word for Schumer and his party. Joan, don't you see that this is all part of the War Party's agenda? Bound, gag, torture and smear.
Wake up, they're all in on it and only a Quixote like Paul or Kuchinich can say it out loud. It's time for a third party wave.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
