0
   

Let's talk about replacing GWBush in 2004.

 
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2004 01:07 pm
scrat/timber

Well, can we make any unbiased judgements about any administration? Say, the Nixon administration? Could we, for example, make a credible argument that too much power fell into the hands of a small circle of unelected officials around the President? Could we argue that maximal transparency in governance is a good thing?

I think governments can be better or they can be worse, quite aside from, say, economic ideology or foreign policy, or even effectiveness in domestic matters.

The sort of government which would make me most alert would be one which was vindictive, secretive, and dismissive of those who they govern. Dean claim, and I think it too, that this particular group (and let's add Tom Delay and Ralph Reed) is, in these matters, the worst in our lifetimes.
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2004 01:38 pm
Blatham - Good reasonable comments. I would add that while Dean has made a case that resonates for you based on what you already believe about this administration, others have written glowing praise of the same group of men, and I suspect that you are likely to give their words less weight than Dean's solely out of your personal preference for what they have to say.

I don't mean to suggest that you are out of the norm in this, I'm no different. What I wonder is, aside from that resonance--if you can set it aside--what about the case Dean makes for his opinion gives that opinion weight? (I'm not articulating this concept well.) Every president relies on unelected officials; that's no "secret presidency". (Hell, it isn't even a secret.) Why should I be concerned about that fact in this specific case?

FYI: I tried at least a dozen times to get a "One Day Pass" to Salon so I could read the entire article, and I couldn't get it to work.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Mar, 2004 03:21 pm
Yeah, blatham, subjectivity rears its ugly head. We all pretty much tend to agree with those with whom we agree, and to take issue with those with whom we disagree :wink:
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Apr, 2004 05:14 pm
http://www.airamericaradio.com/

(listen online)
0 Replies
 
firstthought
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 12:40 am
9-11 Independent panel
Here is a extract from an article in the NYtimes April 2, 2004


[/Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said some Clinton administration documents had been withheld because they were "duplicative or unrelated," while others were withheld because they were "highly sensitive" and the information in them could be relayed to the commission in other ways. "We are providing the commission with access to all the information they need to do their job," Mr. McClellan said.

]

When did the 43rd admistration decide what to give and what not to give to the the Independent 9-11 Panel and make decisions on what the Panel NEED FOR THE JOB. Its time this big Brother attitude was put in place.

The American People are not ruled by a political Party but are governed by duely elected represenatives of the people.

It would appear that certain politicians seem to ignore that fact.


ft Mad
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 08:49 am
Quote:
When President Bush nominated William G. Myers III to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in May 2003, judicial experience apparently wasn't a factor in the choice. Myers has spent little time in the courtroom as a lawyer, and has never been a judge. Instead he made his name as a lobbyist for major Republican donors, especially in the coal industry. Despite that lack of experience, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 10-9 to move Myers' nomination to the full Senate on Thursday.

But a Federal Trade Commission decision to block a Wyoming coal consolidation that was made possible by a Myers lobbying blitz is shining a spotlight on the nominee's corporate background, and raising new questions about whether the Bush White House is using the courts as another way to pay back the special interests from which it raises millions of dollars. Corporate interests have become increasingly involved in attempts to influence the outcome of state judicial elections, so developing sway with the federal judiciary seems a logical step. There is no doubt that confirming Myers would give big business a friend on the crucial 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/04/01/myers/index.html
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 09:41 am
BillW wrote:

I've been trying since day one. Their streaming media seems to drop connection at least once every 5 minutes.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 09:43 am
scrat

I've had much better fortune, though in fact this very minute, it has dropped on me. I think their servers are sweating.
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 09:47 am
Back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 09:48 am
good tip billy boy!
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 09:49 am
Re: 9-11 Independent panel
firstthought wrote:
Here is a extract from an article in the NYtimes April 2, 2004


[/Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said some Clinton administration documents had been withheld because they were "duplicative or unrelated," while others were withheld because they were "highly sensitive" and the information in them could be relayed to the commission in other ways. "We are providing the commission with access to all the information they need to do their job," Mr. McClellan said.

]

When did the 43rd admistration decide what to give and what not to give to the the Independent 9-11 Panel and make decisions on what the Panel NEED FOR THE JOB. Its time this big Brother attitude was put in place.

The American People are not ruled by a political Party but are governed by duely elected represenatives of the people.

It would appear that certain politicians seem to ignore that fact.


ft Mad


If this admin was truthful, then again, this pact of liars can only be believed for one thing - whatever it says is dubious, self serving and nefarious Crying or Very sad

BTW, back down......
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 10:20 am
blatham wrote:
I've had much better fortune, though in fact this very minute, it has dropped on me. I think their servers are sweating.

I'm not trying to put them down or anything. It's actually frustrating, because I am curious to see what they'll have to offer. So far today I've heard two snippets of about 5 seconds each.

(I do realize that the problem might be closer to my end than to theirs.)
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 10:21 am
I just heard another 3 seconds. I give up for now. I'm going to listen to Boortz, but I'll keep trying them from time to time.
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 11:51 am
US job creation finally under way

The US's 'jobless recovery' could be over after the economy added an extra 308,000 jobs in March - almost three times more than had been expected.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3594109.stm
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 11:57 am
I still find it amusing that this "jobless recovery" of which everyone keeps writing and talking features a lower unemployment rate than the average under Clinton. Perhaps we should refer to the Clinton economy as a "jobless boom". :wink:
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 12:07 pm
Penalty! Ten yards for finger-pointing! :wink:
0 Replies
 
Scrat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 12:16 pm
kickycan wrote:
Penalty! Ten yards for finger-pointing! :wink:

You mean for finger pointing at someone other than Bush. :wink:
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 12:20 pm
The call has been challenged. We are reviewing the play . . .
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 12:21 pm
After further review, the play stands as called. Ten yards. Resume play! Smile
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Apr, 2004 12:26 pm
kickycan wrote:
After further review, the play stands as called. Ten yards. Resume play! Smile


Laughing
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 03/18/2025 at 03:17:03