Reply
Wed 8 Nov, 2006 10:54 am
Okay Democratic leaders, we gave you your shot now you have to perform. Don't think for a minute that we won't kick your asses back out of the House (and maybe the Senate) if you don't buck up and do your jobs. Repeat after me...check and balance...check and balance...check and balance. No more bullshit. Put your lobbyists on hold because they can't keep you in power -- just ask your predecessors. You work for us now, so get crackin!
I'm hoping they can get away with fewer indictments than the Republicans....
Re: Don't let us down, you smarmy bastards
FreeDuck wrote:Okay Democratic leaders, we gave you your shot now you have to perform. Don't think for a minute that we won't kick your asses back out of the House (and maybe the Senate) if you don't buck up and do your jobs. Repeat after me...check and balance...check and balance...check and balance. No more bullshit. Put your lobbyists on hold because they can't keep you in power -- just ask your predecessors. You work for us now, so get crackin!
exactly.
ditto. that's how i feel. vast majority of politicians, left, right, blue, green, red, conservative or liberal, are suspicious characters. normal decent people don't survive in there. so democrats might be the lesser evil, but i ain't holding my breath for anyone up there.
Young voters increase turnout, aid Democratic victories
dpa German Press Agency
Published: Wednesday November 8, 2006
Washington- Younger voters turned out in higher numbers in Tuesday's US congressional elections, giving a lift to Democratic candidates in a contest that gave the party control of the US House of Representatives for the first time in 12 years. "This is a new generation," Hans Riemer, political director of Rock the Vote, an organization that seeks to mobilize young voters, told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa. "They're more involved, more engaged, and less cynical."
Exit polls showed that voters between the ages of 18 and 29 cast 13 per cent of all votes, up from 11 per cent in the 2002 elections, the last non-presidential national election. Voter turnout is typically higher in presidential elections.
That increase is important because the proportion of young voters has become smaller in the same time period, causing the increase to outpace the growth in turnout among all voters, Rock the Vote said.
Young voters traditionally favour Democratic candidates and did so by a 22 point margin on Tuesday, the organization said, citing exit polls.
Analysts saw record turnout particularly in hotly contested areas. In Virginia, the last undecided contest that will determine control of the Senate, 52 per cent of registered voters cast ballots.
The Democratic takeover of the House and possibly the Senate was seen widely as a response to the unpopular war in Iraq. Young voters reflected that widespread dissatisfaction, Reimer said.
If anything, younger voters are "more opposed, their views are stronger, more intense," he said.
I know two decent people in politics, people who work near countless hours.
Not all are scum.
They sure didn't want to die in Iraq for W to get richer or his buddies to get richer.
I'm not sure what my sometime associates have to do with your sentence, talk.
This was not a victory by the Democrats due to them having better ideas.
The voters have spoken and the Republicans were fired.
I trust the democrats will not get too full of themselves as they must prove they are worthy once again in 2 years.
We very rarely elect leaders because of their ideas. But yeah, that's pretty much what I'm saying -- don't get too full of yourselves.
Fargin' bastiches are slippin' up already.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/29/AR2006112901317.html
Quote:It was a solemn pledge, repeated by Democratic leaders and candidates over and over: If elected to the majority in Congress, Democrats would implement all of the recommendations of the bipartisan commission that examined the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
But with control of Congress now secured, Democratic leaders have decided for now against implementing the one measure that would affect them most directly: a wholesale reorganization of Congress to improve oversight and funding of the nation's intelligence agencies. Instead, Democratic leaders may create a panel to look at the issue and produce recommendations, according to congressional aides and lawmakers.
There are some good arguments to be made for taking it slow on the reorg process, man.
Want to support the Dems? Buy a
Democracy Bond and start helping the Dems move away from lobbyist money.
What more, attend some local meetings and start helping build support for the '08 races in your area.
It will take effort from all of us - not just elected Dems - to right the wrongs we have experienced...
Cycloptichorn
What wrongs were committed that weren't committed over the 40 years that the dems controlled the house? I realize that the repubs lost because of a lot of wrongs & they too promised to clean up the corruption & spending. It boils down to this, IMO, there's not a dimes worth of difference in the two major parties. I believe that most run for public office to make a difference, but from day 1 they are told to start raising $$, & guess where they go, the lobbyists. The repubs new minority leaders are almost mirrors of what lost them the election in the first place.
The first signs of crazy is repeating the same thing over & over & expecting different results
LoneStarMadam wrote:What wrongs were committed that weren't committed over the 40 years that the dems controlled the house? I realize that the repubs lost because of a lot of wrongs & they too promised to clean up the corruption & spending. It boils down to this, IMO, there's not a dimes worth of difference in the two major parties. I believe that most run for public office to make a difference, but from day 1 they are told to start raising $$, & guess where they go, the lobbyists. The repubs new minority leaders are almost mirrors of what lost them the election in the first place.
The first signs of crazy is repeating the same thing over & over & expecting different results
and yet you continue to post the same thing over and over here
Cyclop, I'm not really interested in supporting the Dems, I'm interesting in getting our government back. And while I think it was necessary for them to win to get that process started, I certainly don't believe they are the only ones who can do it. Personally, I'd like to see not just Congress re-orged, but also our two party political system. The fact is that they said they would implement all of 9/11 recommendations.
Lack of oversight is one of the things that we rejected at the polls just less than a month ago. They'd do well not to forget it so quickly.
FreeDuck wrote:Cyclop, I'm not really interested in supporting the Dems, I'm interesting in getting our government back. And while I think it was necessary for them to win to get that process started, I certainly don't believe they are the only ones who can do it. Personally, I'd like to see not just Congress re-orged, but also our two party political system. The fact is that they said they would implement all of 9/11 recommendations.
Lack of oversight is one of the things that we rejected at the polls just less than a month ago. They'd do well not to forget it so quickly.
I don't disagree with any of this, I just don't think that a reorg of Congress is something to step into lightly. I don't have a problem with spending some time studying what the effects will be before decisions are made.
One of the reasons I like the Democracy Bonds system is that it helps our political system by giving politicians the freedom to tell Lobbyists to f*ck off. It doesn't have to be a partisan thing...
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:FreeDuck wrote:Cyclop, I'm not really interested in supporting the Dems, I'm interesting in getting our government back. And while I think it was necessary for them to win to get that process started, I certainly don't believe they are the only ones who can do it. Personally, I'd like to see not just Congress re-orged, but also our two party political system. The fact is that they said they would implement all of 9/11 recommendations.
Lack of oversight is one of the things that we rejected at the polls just less than a month ago. They'd do well not to forget it so quickly.
I don't disagree with any of this, I just don't think that a reorg of Congress is something to step into lightly. I don't have a problem with spending some time studying what the effects will be before decisions are made.
One of the reasons I like the Democracy Bonds system is that it helps our political system by giving politicians the freedom to tell Lobbyists to f*ck off. It doesn't have to be a partisan thing...
Cycloptichorn
It doesnt have to be a partisan thing,yet the bonds you mention are designed to only help the dems.
Isnt that partisan?
mysteryman wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:FreeDuck wrote:Cyclop, I'm not really interested in supporting the Dems, I'm interesting in getting our government back. And while I think it was necessary for them to win to get that process started, I certainly don't believe they are the only ones who can do it. Personally, I'd like to see not just Congress re-orged, but also our two party political system. The fact is that they said they would implement all of 9/11 recommendations.
Lack of oversight is one of the things that we rejected at the polls just less than a month ago. They'd do well not to forget it so quickly.
I don't disagree with any of this, I just don't think that a reorg of Congress is something to step into lightly. I don't have a problem with spending some time studying what the effects will be before decisions are made.
One of the reasons I like the Democracy Bonds system is that it helps our political system by giving politicians the freedom to tell Lobbyists to f*ck off. It doesn't have to be a partisan thing...
Cycloptichorn
It doesnt have to be a partisan thing,yet the bonds you mention are designed to only help the dems.
Isnt that partisan?
Only because it is a program set up by the Dems to raise money for the Dems. I would support the Republicans doing the same thing for their party, and anyone who wants to be non-partisan and help end lobbyist influence in America can contribute to both.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:mysteryman wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:FreeDuck wrote:Cyclop, I'm not really interested in supporting the Dems, I'm interesting in getting our government back. And while I think it was necessary for them to win to get that process started, I certainly don't believe they are the only ones who can do it. Personally, I'd like to see not just Congress re-orged, but also our two party political system. The fact is that they said they would implement all of 9/11 recommendations.
Lack of oversight is one of the things that we rejected at the polls just less than a month ago. They'd do well not to forget it so quickly.
I don't disagree with any of this, I just don't think that a reorg of Congress is something to step into lightly. I don't have a problem with spending some time studying what the effects will be before decisions are made.
One of the reasons I like the Democracy Bonds system is that it helps our political system by giving politicians the freedom to tell Lobbyists to f*ck off. It doesn't have to be a partisan thing...
Cycloptichorn
It doesnt have to be a partisan thing,yet the bonds you mention are designed to only help the dems.
Isnt that partisan?
Only because it is a program set up by the Dems to raise money for the Dems. I would support the Republicans doing the same thing for their party, and anyone who wants to be non-partisan and help end lobbyist influence in America can contribute to both.
Cycloptichorn
I agree,but if it was truly non-partisan,the dems would have set it up to help both sides,not just themselves.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace