Bart ~
I can't believe I'm about to say this, but
maybe it's time we listen to Ralph Nader and Tavis Smiley
and others and DEMAND that the Dems do
their jobs and represent us, or lose those jobs by losing our votes.
What's the difference if we are represented
by Repubs, or by Dems who are neutered and cowtow to the Repubs?
WE are the ones getting shafted here, not
the Dem leaders, so maybe it's time for a huge change in our thinking.
Maybe it's time for all the diverse groups
under the Dem umbrella to band together and demand a contract with
the Democratic Party, like Tavis has suggested
for African Americans. Maybe women and African Americans
and Hispanics and Asians and Muslims and
union members and gays and other groups should stop arguing among
OURselves and hold our supposed leaders'
feet to the fire.
Tavis got me thinking before the election,
and that thought has taken root now after seeing that the Dems
(with a few exceptions) are doing nothing
but licking their wounds and saying "yes massa" to Bush.
Suzanne
Subject: bipartisanship
When the lion lays down with the lamb, only the
lion gets back up!
The Dems are mutton !
I'm SICK of it too.
Donna
Subject: bipartisanship
Hello, Bart.
I received another request for funds from the Democratic party today by e-mail.
I do not believe that you will publish what
I said (I wouldn't but that isn't the point),
but off the record, here is what I said
in response: "Sure, I'll send you more money
as soon as you take xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
And by the way, where's the surplus $15
or maybe $51 mil that was left over?
I still have to pay the gas bill, my quarterlies
and Blue Shield. What else do you
want from me?"
Are they getting it yet? (This is
a serious, not facetious, question).
Does Kerry yet understand how badly they
fucked up?
Elaine
Elaine, my guess is "Not yet."
The Democrats want more money from us so they can lay down
for those Bush bastards for the fourth election in a row.
No way.
I'm not going to donate until I see a fighter.
No more of this "Don't worry, he's a
good closer" crap for me.
Subject: bipartisanship
Hell, no! Willie Brandt didn't cooperate with
Hitler. He joined the underground and opposed him.
DeGaulle told the Vichy collaborationists to
go to hell. He left France, set sail for England and
organized the Free French to oppose Hitler. You
just can't cooperate with an evil this immense.
Would FDR have said to the American people on
December 8, 1941: "Let us reach across the
partisan divide and embrace the Japanese Fascists
for the good of the American people."
Bullshit. No way.
Hell, if FDR had behaved like these brain dead, lily livered (Harry Truman would have loved that one!)
Democrats today, we'd all of us be either Sieg
Heiling or Bonzai-ing, those of us, that is,
who hadn't been fed to the gas furnaces of those
damnable Fascist monsters.
Sons of Liberty, arise! No collaboration. No surrender.
Tom S
(an old pissed off guy who once young and pissed
off in the 60s.)
Muskegon, Michigan
Subject: bipartisanship
All they need to do is look at the stunt Hastert
pulled with the bill aimed at implementing the
recommendations of the 9/11 commission. Bush
backed it. Most Democrats backed it.
It could have passed easily. But less than a majority
of Republicans backed it, so it isn't getting a vote.
Unless the majority of Rs support something,
it isn't going to happen. No sharing of credit. No ceeding of any high
ground.
Whatever point, no matter how cooperative or positive,
that has a hint of Democratic credit will ever get to the floor.
No matter how important it might be for the nation.
The rules are changing from "you can't win" to "you can't play".
This should be pointed out whenever possible.
mj