The Failed Presidency.

Counties carried by Bush: 2,434 (Total Population 143 Million+)
Counties carried by Gore: 677 (Total Population 127 Million+)

Despite the Democrat's failed attempt to use the judicial system to subvert the election results, the Electoral College served its design function and prevented an imbalance of urban sentiment from skewing the election. The situation which arose in 2000 was foreseen by the Founding Fathers, who were determined to assure the Presidential Election was decided by the Nation as a whole, not by those who concentrated in the cities. While denying Bush The Younger a clear mandate, the 2000 election nonetheless reflected the opinion of the nation as a whole. Those uncomfortable with the facts are left with three choices: leave, change the law or live with it. Whining doesn't change the facts. For 2004, there will be no similar controversy, I'm sure. If indeed there were any realistic potential to replace Bush the Younger this cycle, you may rest assured Hillary would be at the forefront of the charge. Realizing that The Republicans are presently unassailable, Hillary contents herself with waiting for '08, when there will be no distracting scramble for the Democratic Candidacy, and, of course, no Democratic Incumbent to frustrate her plans. It'll be up to the electorate to do that ... and the way things look, its likely to work out to the continued dismay of the Democrats.

Also, I find it odd that the Republicans are characterized as "Stupid", and otherwise denigrated and belittled by so many of the Democrats. There's a logical falacy there; who has outsmarted whom? Now, if necessary, I'll humbly eat crow if and when the time comes, but I doubt crow will be on the menu at any Republican Dinners for a long, long time. Those folks don't take politics as a joke, do not nominate losers, and do not underestimate or mischaracterize their opponents.

Very kewl Timber. Thanks for that post. Though I live in a far left "blue" spot, I take strong protest with people who refer to the middle of the country as "flyover" territory. My home state of Michigan is one of the most influential states in the country, being the home of the auto industry as well as several influential universities.

People who have never spent any time on the big lakes also tend to dismiss them in favor of the oceans. That's fine by me, there's already way too many people trying to find lakefront property, which I am lucky to already own.

Astounding Timber. Do you really believe what you've posted, or are you playing devil's advocate?

For the record, I don't think Republicans are stupid. If they were, I'd be better able to forgive them. The bad ones -- the ones who are invested in Bush in spite of all the evidence that he is malign AND corrupt -- are not what I'd call "real Republicans." The others, the real ones, are beginning to stand up and/or (depending on how you look at it) leave a sinking ship. Most Republicans I know are embarrassed, even (in a couple of cases) apologetic. "I've voted Republican my whole life; my father did too; my wife comes from a Republican background. We're horrified. We started to realize what was happening with Patriot Act 1. We didn't believe Iraq was in any way connected to 9/11. I can't tell you we're going to vote Democratic in the next election, but I can tell you we won't vote the current group back into office." That's what a friend in Austin said to me yesterday, in so many words.

You write: "I doubt crow will be on the menu at any Republican Dinners for a long, long time. Those folks don't take politics as a joke..." You're right about that, but I don't think you should be proud of it, as a Republican.

There are real Republicans in Austin?

If there's anything to being a proud republican today, it certainly can't be the way this administration has ruined this country and the world for the past three years. What's to be proud of the war with Iraq, our loss of credibilty with the world community, loss of jobs at home, increased national debt, loss of life and money in Iraq, and the infringement of our Contitutional Rights? Yeah, tell me about it.

If that's smart, I prefer dumb any ole day.

And how, Cjhsa! Too many! Fancy, sprawling suburbs, you know, Hummers and Sequoias and private schools.

HeHeHeHe ... [snicker]timber[/snicker]

Figgered that'd get the conversation movin

T he last days of the Oregon Legislature may have been muddled and bitterly divided, with narrow victories and angry words between Democrats and Republicans. But as legislators prepared their long-delayed escape, one loud bipartisan message came out of Salem:
The Oregon State Senate really doesn't like the USA Patriot Act.

By a vote of 23-2 -- in a capitol specializing in hairs-breadth victories -- senators voted to "implore the United States Congress to correct provisions of the UPA and other measures that infringe on civil liberties and oppose any future federal legislation to the extent that it infringes on United States residents' civil rights and liberties," and went on to directly endorse the Murkowski-Wyden bill that would cut the Patriot Act back sharply.

Oregon senators may have a cloudy outlook on taxes, but -- from both parties -- they have a pretty clear view of rights. "The use of government power to constrict their liberties," explains Sen. Tony Corcoran, D-Cottage Grove, "is something both the left and the right fear."

Good for the Oregon legislature. A tiny bit of hope is encouraging, when all else seems to be going down the toilet.

According to a report in The Washington Post, support for the Patriot Act is waning in the country, including Idaho, where Ashcroft's summer revival tour traveled this week. Idaho's Rep. C.L. "Butch" Otter (R), is leading an effort in Congress to curtail the centerpiece of Ashcroft's anti-terrorism strategy, the USA Patriot Act. Otter sponsored an amendment approved 309 to 118 by the House in July, which would cut off funding for "sneak-and-peek" warrants. Ashcroft calls this a "mistake," and says that those who voted for the amendment "did not know what they were voting for." Also voting yea was Sen. Larry E. Craig (R-Idaho), a former singing mate of Ashcroft's in the senate quartet, who now is singing dissident chords about the law.

State representatives and city counsels in Idaho are making discordant noises, no doubt a reflection of a state in which people value their privacy and liked the Constitution the way it was before Ashcroft started playing it in another key.

New Harris Poll numbers indicate that less than 50 percent of those polled like the show's star, and 40 percent disapprove of his performance. And as long as Ashcroft continues to hum the tune that those who would curtail the Patriot Act and not grant Ashcroft new powers are traitors, his popularity is likely to drop.

This is a country that, save for the Rove's, Falwell's, Robertson's, and Ashcroft's in it, believe in the right to dissent and debate. Ashcroft's words that he "values debate" and does not want to silence it, is belied by his deputizing his US Attorneys to speak personally with dissident Congressional members and report back to him. Report what? They they disagree? To what end? That they can be prosecuted as national security risks?

"It's pretty reckless to say that 309 members of Congress want to tip off terrorists," said Otter, who noted that more than a third of the votes cast for his amendment came from Republicans. "Instead of hitting the campaign trail, the attorney general should be listening to the concerns that many Americans have about some portions of the act."

Maybe, just maybe, people are beginning to see how dangerous this administration really is.

Some yes, some never had any doubt and some still have the blinders on!!!!

Consider that one of the FOX-fed stated on another thread that Ashcroft's patriot act was a shining example of American democracy.

"fair an balanced"

hobit, Betcha they didn't offer the opposing view.

I read the "failing presidency" with interest.

However, I am unable to find, outside of a few crabbed sites like the Nation and/or the Village Voice anyone who is willing to say that the Administration has failed in all of its objectives and will go down to defeat in the election in November.

The Demographers, usually objective chaps, point out that the Democratic Senators who will be running in 2004 mainly come from states which Bush won handily in 2000 and that the Republican Senators running, with two exceptions, come from states which Bush also won in 2000.

With some of the re-districting programs being handled by the Republicans in Colorado and Texas, it is difficult to see how the Republicans could lose the House.

It is possible, of course, that there could be a Republican House, a Republican Senate and a Democrat President.

Not much would get done.

But, maybe that would be the most desirable end.

U.S. Said to Shift Approach in Talks With North Korea

By DAVID E. SANGER

WASHINGTON, Sept. 4 — President Bush, in a significant shift in his approach to North Korea, authorized American negotiators to say last week that he is prepared to take a range of steps to aid the starving nation — from gradually easing sanctions to an eventual peace treaty, senior officials today.
Macho man is gradually finding out that diplomacy does not include the forcing of your will upon an adversary. Or was it Condi Rice who finally understood and explained it to the vacuum headed Bush.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/05/international/asia/05NUKE.html?th

I think that's possible, Italgato. That's why I think we also need to change the make-up of Congress. In fact I'm not sure that the latter isn't more important than changing the presidency.

Delay DeLay in '04!
Put him back on the "small bus" where he belongs!