another 1st scored for howard!!!

dog soldier
Tue, 10/02/07
5:49 pm

You are possibly leaving out a major factor in the equation, the boyking can't effectively pull off anything but graft and disaster. He either knows this is the case OR this is the case intentionally.

There is enough of everything to fund, protect, and even do the PR for a withdrawl - if there was the will. The will on the part of the DCDems is now questionable, very questionable. The will for the ReThugs will have to come in much the same form as mace or a taser gives incentive to comply.

ANITA HILL TEARS INTO CLARENCE "COKE-CAN" THOMAS

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/02/opinion/02hill.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

Justice Thomas has every right to present himself as he wishes in his new memoir, “My Grandfather’s Son.” He may even be entitled to feel abused by the confirmation process that led to his appointment to the Supreme Court.

But I will not stand by silently and allow him, in his anger, to reinvent me.

In the portion of his book that addresses my role in the Senate hearings into his nomination, Justice Thomas offers a litany of unsubstantiated representations and outright smears that Republican senators made about me when I testified before the Judiciary Committee — that I was a “combative left-winger” who was “touchy” and prone to overreacting to “slights.” A number of independent authors have shown those attacks to be baseless. What’s more, their reports draw on the experiences of others who were familiar with Mr. Thomas’s behavior, and who came forward after the hearings. It’s no longer my word against his.

I'd love to see her on the Supreme Court!

The White House said yesterday that Bush would be willing to travel to Iran, but under different circumstances.


... yeah, to deliver a fake turkey.

A COGENT SEGMENT FROM THE AMERICAN REFORM PARTY

http://www.americanreform.org/Lamm/new_political_party.html

Tom, you'll note that they're not advocating a "3-party system", or a vanity party

It is now time for another political realignment. We are not arguing for a change in the two-party system into a three-party system; we are arguing that America needs a new political party that would eclipse one of the existing major parties and itself become one of the major parties.

There is no divine right of political parties any more than there is a divine right of kings. Political parties were not part of the vision of our founding fathers, and are not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution.

Overall, the two-party system has served us well. A large factor in that success was that the two major parties could be forced to change by a third party threat. New issues forced themselves on the existing political process and demanded to be heard.

We fear that neither political party can do politically what we need to do economically to remain a great country, and that a third party built around a personality cannot force change—something just proven by Ross Perot. Bringing America's expectations in balance with our revenue will be a terribly painful and monumental task. We shall have to substantially downsize some of our most popular programs. We have ourselves in a Catch 22—where the best politics is the worst long-term public policy.

2
My problem with withdrawl is how do you define it?
I have wrestled with this a lot and everything that has to be allowed for the troops to defend themselves can also be called invasion.
The difference is subtle but important.
So, to me, funding for withdrawl is impossible because there is no way to explicitly define withdrawl that deosn't get folks killed.
The only way is to set a date and tie funding to a date and make it binding.
There is no modifiers. There is no embassy, oil, reconstruction support. There are no troops left behind. We only pay

Huron John
Tue, 10/02/07
6:10 pm

I saw most all the stuff aired on Thomas lately. He is pretty much a hater, and for all the wrong reasons at that.
As a liberal hippie in the South (and trust me i was hardly appreciated in CA either) i've hit as many roadblocks as he says he did.
Each time i just went around those morons, usually to their competition - sometimes took them on directly. Did i always 'win'? no. Did they want to go through the exercise again afterwards? not usually. In fact, i often noted that they'd drop that particular prejudice for a guy just like me.
Thomas, in my opinion, still is not qualified to hold the job.

... sadly

Dana Perino is smearing Sy Hersh for "anonymous sources" among other sins. Problem is, Sy gets his facts right, and the WH lies.

So who you gonna believe.

 Bush is planning to hit Iran, and the Democrats are forming a Greek chorus to cheer him on.

madness!

http://www.blogforamerica.com/view/22425...

last thread

Five weeks until this year's election, 57 weeks until we elect a new president.
Did anybody else get mail from Al Gore today? Fundraising letter for the DNC, but nowhere in the four pages of text does it say he's not going to run. Nowhere!
So, do I send a message by sending the DNC some money based on Gore's letter? I haven't sent a dime since Howard Dean's letter.
Is this just a fundraising ploy, or are they trying to gauge the depth of support for Gore?
I guess we'll know more after the Nobel is awarded - 2 weeks?
Still holding out for Al....
Jane

3.Huron John

============
Polls showed the African Americans wanted Thomas on the bench, because they feared if he had gotten bamboozled by Hill's frivolous character assassinations, a white man would have been nominated who was as equally conservative or more conservative.

Clarence Thomas is carrying too much anger to be an even-handed Justice.

dog soldier
Tue, 10/02/07
6:17 pm

Well, let's see here. The Iraqi understand the concept of 'no vehicles allowed' on the roads occasionally. The Iraqi want us out of their country. They don't want the BBB plan, both Shia and Sunni have said so.
Maybe they would 1) keep watch against IED planting for 2-3 days, 2) clear the roads heading south, 3) take receipt of as many 'heavy' systems as possible to store til trained on them and then 4) wave bye bye, being nice so we don't turn around.

Sooo tell me, after seeing The War - where 'retreats' had no planning, and the enemy had artillary etc. you can seriuosly say that physically leaving Iraq is impossible and/or more expensive/complicated than the occupation?

... well, i'll have to check back later

Love ya'll, mean it!!

P.S. Howard!?! Your silence is killin' me, buddy.

Well, today I've decided that bullies are suffering from an inferiority complex for which they try to compensate by being obnoxious.  Clarence Thomas seems to qualify.  The problem with an inferiority complex seems to be that it can't be cured.  No matter how many honors Thomas accumulates, he'll still feel inferior and unsatisfied.  Sad.

12. Phil Specht

Clarence Thomas is carrying too much anger to be an even-handed Justice.

============
As a hot-headed Italian, I resent that implication. Do only frigid WASPs have a right to rule?

Jane D, and it looks more and more like Al is holding out for himself too.

His recent talk of possibly re entering politics and last week at the Global Conference talking about needing "We need changes in laws, changes in policies. We need leadership, and we need a new treaty." and then with his interview later on Blitzer saying "was too early for him to make an endorsement or to decide whether he will make an endorsement."


Time for a COOL change,
Gore
2008


...and I get to tell him so tomorrow when he comes to town!!!

Hi folks!

Just dropped by to say hello and leave a few comments from the prior threads of today. See you later. I'm on my way out to another meeting.

6.
mprov
Mon, 10/01/07
11:46 pm

Please contact me if you need some assistance.

13.
seashell :-)
Tue, 10/02/07
2:20 am

Fun group!

22.
Monica Smith
Tue, 10/02/07
6:47 am

Those Texas Lawmaker's voting style sure is interesting.

26.
Monica Smith
Tue, 10/02/07
7:11 am

That happens sometimes when people become empowered.

6.
Monica Smith
Tue, 10/02/07
9:20 am

school boy tricks.... adolescent indeed.

15.
dog soldier
Tue, 10/02/07
10:32 am

Those feelings come from living in survival to long.

44.
FRED from OR
Tue, 10/02/07
1:58 pm

Kind blessing

56.
mprov
Tue, 10/02/07
2:31 pm

You're so funny

15. Am I missing the humor on that post?

Hi Linda :-) I was just going to comment on 15.

LOL, fun comment Fred. Actually, hot-headed and hot-blooded WASP's have rights, too! Also amused by that there are many Italians who resent the hot-headed stereotype :-)

Howdy, all. So Ron Dellums, Oakland's mayor and former congressman, is supporting Hillary....interesting.

I'm still strongly Edwards-inclined but I've gotta say, a female President....pretty exciting. 

Put your money on Lucky 13 before you put it on DCDems. 

Woohoo!!!

Obey's plan to paygo the war by rescinding the tax cuts is on the table!!!

Lincoln was right -- some people can be fooled all of the time. 

Former Women Board member of Walmart. Very exciting ! Wow, what a country.

Hey cC! Nice to see ya! I also like the idear of a woman Pres. but also lean towards Edwards. Hillary's just not my cuppa tea.

Care to cite those polls which showed African Americans wanted Thomas even after Anita Hill "exposed" him?

One thing's for sure. It was one of Biden's sorriest moments.

Clarence Thomas sits on the Supreme Court because Joe Biden is a coward. As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Biden allowed Republicans to hijack the Thomas confirmation hearings. He watched passively while the nominee’s perjury was overshadowed by vicious right wing attacks upon Dr. Anita Hill. Witnesses who were prepared to substantiate Hill’s allegations of professional misconduct against Thomas were not summoned because Biden’s top priority was mollifying his reactionary colleagues.

Biden became enraged during the Thomas hearings, but his hostility was not directed toward the Republicans who smeared an honorable woman or at the judicial nominee who lied under oath. Instead, the senator furiously denounced civil rights groups and women’s organizations that claimed they had convinced him to derail the nomination. “Joe Biden is not in anyone’s pocket!” he thundered.

I also like the idear of a woman Pres. but also lean towards Edwards. Hillary's just not my cuppa tea.

Their records are the same -- Bush enabling NeoDems from heads to toes.

Jane D, and it looks more and more like Al is holding out for himself too.

His recent talk of possibly re entering politics and last week at the Global Conference talking about needing "We need changes in laws, changes in policies. We need leadership, and we need a new treaty." and then with his interview later on Blitzer saying "was too early for him to make an endorsement or to decide whether he will make an endorsement. "

The Nobel Peace Prize will be awarded on Oct.12. If he gets it, give him a week or two to bask in the glow and get his machinery in place before announcing. You've waited this long...just a little more.

Sitka wrote "As I pointed out, it's not a vanity campaign when you actually accomplish something like start a movement that lives beyond the campaign -- and is still growing. By your definition any campaign that doesn't win is vanity. But what you really mean is, any campaign you don't approve of is such."

I'll simply cede you your definition of a vanity campaign, but it renders the conversation meaningless.  There's no reason to expand the definition beyond the basic meaning of the word.  It's a campaign doomed to failure, conducted to bring attention to the candidate or his or her cause.  I don't see the evidence that Dean's campaign was fostered or influenced by Nader's, particularly given that Dean ran as a Democrat. 

"paygo the war" has now been proposed by the appropriate Chair

I'll take that as a small personal victory whether you like it or not sitka, I've been working on that project for about six months

You can be sure if Gore's letter does not reap a big return for Howard he will rethink plans of running if he is near go.

He will follow Edwards and go to public finance if I read it right.

I don't see the evidence that Dean's campaign was fostered or influenced by Nader's, particularly given that Dean ran as a Democrat.

Dean's rhetoric about the failures of the Democratic Party in 2004 was Nader's from 2000, but with specifics.

It's amazing that you don't see it.

Try to guess which quotes are Dean's or which are Nader's.........

1. "The Democratic Party, all the candidates from Washington, they all know each other, they all move in the same circles, and what I'm doing is breaking into the country club. "
2. "What I want to know is why so many folks in Congress are voting for the President's Education Bill-- "The No School Board Left Standing Bill"-- the largest unfunded mandate in the history of our educational system!"
3. "The fact is that we wouldn't be in Iraq if it weren't for Democrats like Senator Kerry."
4. " What I want to know is what in the world so many Democrats are doing supporting tax cuts, which have bankrupted this country and given us the largest deficit in the history of the United States?"
5. "What I want to know is why the Congress is fighting over the Patient's Bill of Rights? The Patient's Bill of Rights is a good bill, but not one more person gets health insurance and it's not 5 cents cheaper."
6. "Real Democrats don't make promises they can't keep."
7. What I want to know is why the Democrats in Congress aren't standing up for us, joining every other industrialized country on the face of the Earth in providing health insurance for every man, woman and child in America
8. “Once you don't vote your ideals ... that has serious undermining affects. It erodes the moral basis of our democracy.”
9. "What I want to know is what in the world so many Democrats are doing supporting the President's unilateral intervention in Iraq?"

Hi/bye Phil ♥

Session is up, library closing. Miss you all very much :-)

♥'s to all

Kindness is free!

I'll take that as a small personal victory whether you like it or not sitka, I've been working on that project for about six months

At the level of Congress, there are no symbolic victories. DCDems will not paygo the occupation.

20. Howdy Thankful!!! Ditto.....I resent the claim that Italians are hot headed. I'm a Paisan....

Phil, WWWOOOOOTTTT!

"paygo the war" has now been proposed by the appropriate Chair"

As I understand, taxes will be raised, not rescinded. Which is it?  12 to 15 % on the wealthy, 2% on the rest of us.

This is great, Phil,even if it doesn't fly.  You've been working hard on this and  I'm GIVING YOU A HOWARDLY!!

************************

Annilow, I'm the gorgeous creature in the white top and red skirt, gold and red shiny shoes. LoL 

I said small personal victory. A good idea has a thousand authors and I'm happy to be one of a thousand.

to my friends here I could use some help getting it through the leadership now that the idea has been formally proposed by the Committee Chair

seashell

the tax cut is set to expire and rather than mess with that, a surtax is the appropriate vehicle, the result is the same as rescinding the tax

better maybe because it puts off the big tax cut fight and makes this just about making sure the Bush base pays for his war

Obey says "surtax" and Rangel says "adjust the rates"

I'm thinking Obey has it right.

Sitka
Tue, 10/02/07
8:37 pm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Those are great quoes from Howard............."what I wanna know is" why the hell did Howard stay with that rag of a party anyway? 

Sitka wrote "Dean's rhetoric about the failures of the Democratic Party in 2004 was Nader's from 2000, but with specifics. It's amazing that you don't see it."

This discussion may be entertaining on some level that's obscure to me, but I'll just submit that a vanity campaign is one that's doomed to failure, conducted to bring attention to the candidate or his or her cause.

Democrats are going to be attacked as "tax and spend" no matter what so matching the tax increase directly to the war appropriation puts Bush in a box after all his bull about "fiscal responsiblity" with children's health care.

Hey Phil...what you talkin' about Gore's letter for Dean?

I'll just submit that a vanity campaign is one that's doomed to failure, conducted to bring attention to the candidate or his or her cause.

I disagree with latter half of your personal definition. 

Obey says "surtax" and Rangel says "adjust the rates"

I'm thinking Obey has it right.

To-ma-to, or to-mah-to, It ain't gonnal fly according to Pelosi. It's just another empty gesture that's 4 years too late anyway. 

seashell, I think you were asking if I can post pics of my new house, meaning do I have pics. I don't have any-believe it or not. The only ones I have were our house shopping photos that didn't depict it well, and now I have boxes all over. So, it will take some time for the photos.

Pelosi Torpedoes War Tax
by mcjoan
Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 06:10:59 PM PDT

Speaker Pelosi, with all due respect, who taught you how to fight in politics? Because they either weren't very good as a teacher, or you missed a few lessons. When three respected members of your caucus find a way to refocus the war debate, you take the fight where it leads you. You don't cut it off at the knees.

All told, the Democratic proposal for an "Iraq tax" lasted about four hours. That’s roughly the amount of time from when House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) gave life to the idea with his endorsement to when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) strangled it.

"Just as I have opposed the war from the outset, I am opposed to a draft and I am opposed to a war surtax," Pelosi said in a statement issued this afternoon

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/1...

25.Sitka

One thing's for sure. It was one of Biden's sorriest moments.

Clarence Thomas sits on the Supreme Court because Joe Biden is a coward.
===============

Wrong Sitka, we should be proud of Joe for not convicting a man in the media without evidence. He denied her salacious charges. She claims he said these "aweful" things in front of her and other church women.

If that were the case, she should have, would have, sued for sexual harassment at the time of the alleged incident. If true, she had an airtight case, complete with witnesses. She did not. She waited until the 11th hour before it looked like he would be confirmed.

My guess is the feminist slander machine looked her up and talked her into the whole brouhaha, "for the sake of sisterhood and women around the world."

She could not let them down.

History will smile on Biden as a leader who would not allow a high-tech lynching. As true liberals we should be proud.

If Thomas had not been nominated, not only would it have been a gross injustice, and bad precedent, but the Bush the elder would have just nominated another right-wing conservative, probably a white man. Aside from a moral victory for the feminist slander machine, nothing would have been accomplished from a political point of view...

and the supreme court would probably be less one African American.

Good grief, Pelosi is a neo-con!

Thomas and OJ have something in common -guilt over their crimes.  This is Dostoyevskyesque.  Wow, what spelling.  Wrong, I think.

Sitka wrote "I disagree with latter half of your personal definition."

Well hey!  Now we're getting some place.  I mistakenly said if Kucinich bolted the Democrats to run independently that you'd just have another vanity campaign a la Ralph Nader or Harry Browne, but I  should have said you'd just have a campaign that's doomed to failure, conducted to bring attention to the candidate or his cause.

Fred wrote "the supreme court would probably be less one African American."

This doesn't strike me as some sort of regrettable setback.

just popped back in.

Sorry I missed Thankful.  

Phil, you've said paygo all along.  Earned your Howardly indeed!

Biden should never have brought a he-said/she-said forward.  Her word against his.  It was ridiculous.  Clarence Thomas STRUGGLED to answer legal questions, constitutional questions.  He should have been grilled more rigorously on those and rejected based on his ineptitude.

mho. 

Fred wrote "the supreme court would probably be less one African American."

The Supreme Court IS less one African American.  Uncle Thomas is....well, nuf said. 

50. Tom Bearse
==============

Maybe because in recent memory your people haven't been lynched for looking at white woman the wrong way, or for a slip of the tongue in her presence.

The turning point in the hearing was when the MM and African-American press took polls, and found (in spite of major black organizsations being against him) the black person on the street thought he should be nominated by a 2-to-1 margin.

They didn't care about his judicial philosophy. They saw the white establishment using a black woman to frame a black man.

He passed by 57 votes. Democrats could have filibustered, but nobody thougt it was worth the political price.

52.*** cChalfonte***


The Supreme Court IS less one African American. Uncle Thomas is....well, nuf said.

===================
That's a cheap personal attack based on the testimony of one person with a political axe to grind.

Thomas would not have been my choice, but liberals did not have a choice, because we didn't have a president. enuf said.

Nothing "personal" at all, Fred. I've always seen Clarence Thomas as a self-loathing african american who'd rather be white.  Basically, he's Scalia's "boy" on the Court.

52.*** cChalfonte***

=====================

Just because you call yourself a liberal, doesn't give you the right to cast racial slurs.

I don't have to agree with Thomas' views on issues or the Constitution to respect him as a human being with sincere convictions...and you don't either.

oh, for chrissakes, fred.  By your own admission, you were a Rush-Limbaugh listenin' righty until you got allergies. ....then suddenly had the epiphany that a government that works to improve our society by providing safety nets was a good idea.

Many here, myself included, are LIFELONG Democrats....LIFELONG liberals and have NEVER needed government assistance ourselves.

We came by our liberalism honestly not out of necessity. 

55. *** cChalfonte***

====================
You don't have to be white to believe in rugged individualism, and feel people are products of self-determination, not hand outs.

I happen to disagree with that in such absolute terms. I feel people are products of both self-determination and good fortune. Thomas had a hard life and was successful, but he may not realize the benefit of a brilliant mind and a healthy body, something not everyone is born with, or can maintain through life.

However, I don't think that makes him "white" He is sincere in his beliefs and deserves to be respected for having those beliefs.

13,
Your 1) keep watch against IED planting for 2-3 days,
The issue is we have been watching for them for nearly five years and can't figure them out yet. In fact, they are getting more sophisticated.

Your 2) clear the roads heading south
Our Iraq occupation is a giant blob covering something like 50 bases. Any road clearing is temporary. Most roads go thru or near major cites which invite conflict.
The issue is there aren't that many roads that can handle large convoys. Also, with all the bases, the withdrawl will have to be systematic and time consuming. Think of it as slowly collapsing a balloon.

Your 3) take receipt of as many 'heavy' systems as possible to store til trained on them
what?


And yes, leaving Iraq will be more complicated then retreating in WWII or Korea and leaving VN. In Iraq, all roads out lead to Kuwait.
In Iraq, we can't tell who from who. In VN, we got out of Dodge leaving everything behind that could not be flown out.

But the real point is funding only a withdraw. My issue was not so much leaving (poor typing on my part), but limiting funds for only a withdraw action. I went thru withdraws in VN and with our interlocking firebases, we probably killed as many people trying to leave as when we attacked. Airpower takes the place of troops and many more civilians die.
So instead of just funding for withdrawing troops, overfund with a fixed date and get them out. Let them leave systematicly and with their heavy equipment.
The military leadership will rightfully say if we are there, we fight hard all the time. Else, we will stay holed up in our bases until it is time to go. None of this limited engagement withdraw verbage. I went thru limited engagement rules in VN. They get people killed because of indecision and are quickly ignored.
If we don't want the troops to stay then tie funding to dates.
Everything else is noise.
Everybody leaves; no troops for guarding an embassy; training; guarding reconstruction or oil infrastructure.

Besides, it we are so lucky to pack up and leave ASAP, the Kurds are doomed. There is nothing we can do to prevent it except stay in the Kurd area. That isn't going to happen.

Jettison Pelosi - what is she doing for us anyway - not a d* thing...

dog soldier -- thank you for your explanation and your service to America - I suspected you were rather seriously injured -- I am glad that you are faring so well.

rich kolker - from yesterday - I enjoyed your curling picture -- must say it must get very boring up north in winter - that is a nutty sport imo -- come down here and catch catfish at night for heaven sakes, or go boar hunting.

For those who have not rushed out yet to buy Manilow Songs of the Seventies (plain brown wrapper of course lol) a little tip -- some of the very best songs are on the QVC bonus CD http://www.qvc.com/qic/qvcapp.aspx/app.d... I get no commission btw

Seashell I thought that might be your gorgeous self - what fun you must have.

THE WAR SPOILER

This was a wrap up episode. They did cover FDR dying, Germany surrendering, the death camps discovered after they entered Austria, Poland, etc, how bloody it was to capture Iwo Jima. The sinking of the Indianapolis and survivors in the ocean for a long time month? They did cover the 2 A bombs. Believe one of the soldiers said it was better than losing a whole bunch more Americans. That is all I remember in the way of rationale. The very end was moving b/c at the beginning the old photos would have been very boring to see, but at the end, you felt like you personally knew all the people and their stories. I'm so glad I watched the series.

i think that we always want as much inclusion as possible, but as with everything else, there has to be a limit.

the 1st woman pres, african-americans on the scotus, an asian admiral, a somoan woman as a ceo: we all want this, but we should only promote people to these positions when they're fully capable. then we can rejoice in the fact that every group has the best, and the worst, and all in between, to offer.

ummm...Fred....most of us have known about Clarence's "talk" about rugged individualism....

We also know that he went to college on an affirmative action (I have no problem with that-I'm a liberal:) but he conveniently forgets what lifted him out of poverty (not that he didn't also earn it, cuz he did) while railing against the very programs that helped him. 

57. *** cChalfonte***

oh, for chrissakes, fred. By your own admission, you were a Rush-Limbaugh listenin' righty until you got allergies

=============
That total bull. cC don't slander me. I can speak for myself. My memory is clear. Yours is filthy.

I listened to Rush a few times many years ago and laughed, I didn't know anything about him, but didn't like some things he said and stopped.

My MCS started six years after brief exposure, and progress for the last nine years.

shut up. You never reveal facts about your personal life, stuck up witch.

Watching "the war" now - good nite.

Fred, you've said more than one time, here on this blog, that you were a Reagan supporter.

Done with you. 

61.mprov, true.  Have to say that an Obama presidency makes me hopeful as well.  It's just that on the issues...Edwards is the man, imo.

I think we can all agree that Thomas is the least competent justice. He rarely makes the lead position and his rulings are trite at best. Thomas is the emptiest robe.
I don't recall much about the nomination except Thomas seemed mediocre at best. They annointed the lamest of the lame.

Fred,
What healthy mind are you talking about? Certainly not Judge Thomas.

cC
I don't agree with the idea that Thomas performs because he wants to be white or is Scalias "boy". I think Thomas is just incompetent regardless of color.

I also don't understand the link between liberal and government assistance. Are you saying more liberals need government assistance then non-liberals?

65.

*** cChalfonte***
===============

Big deal, I voted for Carter too.

I inaugurated the new thread http://www.blogforamerica.com/view/22423...

I was a Reagan supporter because Dems ran such inept candidates from 1976 until 2000.
Does my liberalism come and go?
probably; depending on what the subject is.
On some things such as health care and social programs, I am probably as left as you can get. I am more conservative on business issues but think the pendulum of corporate freedom has gone too far.
I started to think unions had run their coarse with the demise of manufacturing. But unions got the middle class so much (pensions, health and dental plans, 40 hour work week, safer environment, etc) we must support unions to counter the heavy-handed corporations.
Growing up it was commonplace for a union member to retire and move to a really nice retirement area complete with golf courses and sun shine. It is fair to allow those who learned and worked at a trade to enjoy the same benefits as those who took the business route.

The service industry is ripe for union organization.

dog soldier, I'm fiscally conservative myself but still deeply believe in equalization via programs like affirmative action.

My comments to Fred were mostly cuz I'm tired of him puffing about the blog claiming to speak for the Democratic Party and for liberals.  

re. Thomas, if you read my comment upthread, I said that I thought the whole Hill/Thomas sideshow was pointless, as it was one's word against the other's about things that occured nearly a decade before his nomination.  If you were watching his nomination (before the Anita Hill revelations), you'd know he really struggled to answer questions about Constitutional philosophy and legal concepts.  He was inept.

Because of his legal ineptitude, I believe, he writes few opinions on the court...mostly goes along with Scalia. 

70.dog soldier
===========

thanks dog, she's just playing dirty games. cC won't even say what she kind of occupation. My guess is she's a corporatists agaist regulation on drugs and chemicals.

Hopefully we won't have to choose / or NOT, the lesser of evils and Al Gore will be seeing, realizing and will answer our pleas and seek the Presidency.

Hey folks, if you all read my post from last week, on Thursday when we were packing and that Jack O Lantern Spider came out to say good bye, here are some photos of him smiling and saying goodbye. :)

http://picasaweb.google.com/LindainSFNM/...

btw, speaking of racism in this country, I still recall the audible gasps in the gallery when Thomas' wife was introduced....Virginia (white as the driven snow) Lamp.  Those good ole white guys didn't know what to do.

72.

Take your Ritalin, Garth Fred. 

New thread......nite

"Just as I have opposed the war from the outset, I am opposed to a draft and I am opposed to a war surtax," Pelosi said in a statement issued this afternoon

I thought taxing poor people an extra 2% to pay for Congress' own screw up (in backing Bush's invasion in the first place) was a lousey idea anyway.

A 100% surtax on members of Congress who voted to invade and the subsequent appropriations to continue the occupation? DEFINITELY!