QUESTION:: WHY DOES THE MIDDLE CLASS VOTE AGAINST ITS INTERESTS?

"It is especially ironic that they now try to pretend that the Republicans are trying to disenfranchise people."

this is especially ironic considering that republicans in Pennsylvania are on record as saying that this little voter thing will help them to take the state.

You wrote,

Quote:

And Clinton seems to have committed every felony short of murder in his bid to keep his affair a secret.

Please, please, please, provide credible evidence for your claims?

but all you needed to do was present one credible source that backs up your claims about Clinton.

I know none is forthcoming - as I predicted.

Your memory is flawed. The Democrats engaged in McCarthyist witch hunts against both Newt Gingrich and Ken Starr.

I've had that fight over and over ago a long time ago, and don't feel much like rehashing it.

wow.... talk about out of touch with reality.

A witch hunt against Newt? As I recall the GOP were the ones that forced ole Newt out.

There was criticism of Starr. But I don't recall any witch hunt.

He did spend a hell of a lot of government money to investigate a BJ

but I hardly think anyone conducted a witch hunt against Starr himself.

oralloy wrote:

I've had that fight over and over ago a long time ago, and don't feel much like rehashing it.

Ah yes, the mythical evidence that you claimed to have presented once upon a time.
It does seem like a fairy tale every time you make that claim.

oral and krumple are made up of the same "I've already rehashed that" syndrome. But the funny thing is, nobody remembers them producing any credible evidence for their opinions. NONE.

What I almost always do is provide direct links to the source that conclusively prove you are wrong.

you're the one who "never" provides proof for your claims.

We always tell you to provide credible sources, not biased ones.

The Democrats engaged in McCarthyist witch hunts against both Newt Gingrich and Ken Starr.

When Star started he had a reputation as an unbiased investigator. He destroyed himself not the democrats. Even most of the intelligent repubs agree he went over the edge. He destroyed himself.

Blaming your victims for the effects of your witch hunt against them is just the sort of thing that prompted me to vote for Republicans straight across the ballot in 2000.

Yet somehow, nothing about Starr's record suggested unacceptable partisanship to the Republicans who appointed him or the press that fawned over him. The $50-million-plus investigation of the Clintons, which actually encompassed at least six separate strands of inquiry, turned up nothing except the president's trysts with Monica Lewinsky and his dissembling about that personal indiscretion. Ultimately, Starr's embarrassing performance led to a consensus that the nation should no longer encourage undefined probes by unsupervised prosecutors. The law that enabled him was allowed to lapse.