Imagine a TV Show where the host challenged you, the final contestant with the following situation: "For the top prize of $50,000, we have placed a liberal beyond the curtain and you need to tell us the following: 1. Do they support Abortion? 2. Do they attend church less than once per week? and finally:<BR
little_whip: I almost think that was support for my argument. Thanks. BTW: I am not arguing that Draginol has no right to post these links. (Draginol: Elton John bashed the President too. Is that your next article). I do think it an issue that defining Liberalism as a concept or Democrats as a group by what entertainers say is, at best, misleading and would go further in criticism but will leave it at that for personal reasons
Draginol: Ahh....typical? Well, let's see. If you consider there are 50,000,000 Democrats then 2 people would represent 2/50,000,000 or .00000004% of the party. Now, statistically, I would say you would need at least 1% of the population of Democrats to make any kind of "typical" statement so you need to find 499,998 more statements to make even the weakest of cases. The truth is that you want to say that these people fit "YOUR"
Draginol: This is the second time in 2 days you have personally spotlighted entertainers who represent no one but themselves saying things that reflect on no one but them. Neither story was worth the time or the space used. They are entitled to their opinion, we know that on principle you disagree and why.
terpfan: Thanks for the link. Like I said, I think both parties probably don't think anyone would switch but would mostly accept someone so inclined. I don't expect Sepcter to change but rather to fight and lose the chairmanship. Everyday gets a bit darker for his chances and Bush is not in a concilatory mood.
Terpfan: I meant to say in the Senate. Yes, there are a few (Thune, DeMint, Coburn come to mind) who wouldn't be acceptable but 3 out of 55 is a pretty small percentage. As for the Democrats switching, I can't think of any that the Republicans wouldn't welcome so 3 out of 97. That's a pretty good case. Or can you think of others?
Terpfan: Saying that Specter would be welcomed by the Democratic Party is a weak argument because both parties would "welcome" anyone jumping sides....liberal, moderate, or conservative so the reality is that past history has nothing to do with that. You have a right to think Specter is a liberal (and with free speech may even say it in public with my blessing, hehehe) but that is not generally how he is viewed by his constituents o
IanTyger: The CIA is an intelligence agency that should remain non-political in it's gathering and reporting of data to the appropriate leadership. "Removing" advisors and consultants within the agency with many years experience says that the situation within the government is becoming unhinged and the advisors have lost confidence in how their work is used. Thus, we lose competence by the loss of the operatives over political issu
Daiwa: Overturning a sitting chairman from a committee in the Senate is almost unheard of. The concept that Specter should have said nothing suggests that debate is a problem among political leaders. I find that alarming that anyone would suggest anyone shouldn't enjoy "freedom of speech" because they are a Senator. Sources are saying that Bill Frist will now oppose Specter and he has enough support to unseat him as chairman. S
Spc Nobody Special: I would expect everyone to have somewhat different ideas on situations, after all, that is what creates debate in the first place. However, the concept that Bush policy must be followed was a theme in the first 4 years and now it seems that the edict against debate in the Congress, which many on the left cited as dangerous would seem to extend to both parties. It is usually in debate that compromise is found and
Myrrander and Terpfan: Well, just my opinion, but here is what I like to see in judges, especially on the Supreme Court: Common Sense. For example, the ruling that said that a defendent in a criminal case deserves to have a lawyer to defend them (Gideon ruling). It doesn't say such a thing in the Constitution but the Supreme Court said that "equal protections under the law" IMPLIED that as common sense. Terpfan, would you disagree
terpfan 1980: I think the problem is that Bush "talks" about building concensus, reaching out to moderates and working with others and the truth seems to be that he has an agenda and woe be it if you have any other opinion. Now, maybe like Little_Whip that is what you voted for. You trust Bush so fully and implicitly that any decision he makes is gospel. But I would say most Americans would not agree with that concept.
Myrrander: I don't think it was cheap. It was honest and relevant (just a bit too easy) AND it was my second choice! Hehehe.
Myrrander: I thought that reply was too easy so I went with the other one! Kudos and Tally ho!
drmiler: I wasn't aware a) you live in PA or b) you were voting when Senator Specter was originally elected to the Senate. I apologise.
little_whip: Interesting that Colin Powell would be sent to "the black hole of negotiations." As if the "Road Map to Peace" isn't enough?
drmiler: No, I know you're not alone. What I think is that you have no respect for someone who has served his country in a very honorable manner but whom people you respect treat with derogatory and derision.
drmiler: Nice of you to call someone with over 20 years experience in the Senate and a perennial vote getter in a Blue state a derogatory name. I might have had some question about Republicans eatting their own before now but that has been cleared up for me. Thanks!
Terpfan 1980: Well, he is a conservative to anyone truly moderate and at one time was considered very conservative by most Democrats. So, standing on his record, he is conservative.
little_whip: As always I appreciate your honesty. Funny that you liked Colin Powell. Why do you think he is resigning? Couldn't be that he was sick of the neocons was it?
Arlen Specter, Chairman of the Senate Judicial Committee, is a Republican from Pennsylvania where he has served as a conservative representative for over 20 years. Specter is generally considered to be fiscally conservative and has fought against government expenditure for such programs as healthcare for many years. Democrats are said to see him as less moderate tha
Daiwa: Anymore....everything should be scrutinized as the polarization to the extremes has gotten worse SINCE the election, not better.
A true choice would be a welcome break from the last couple of elections. Dr. Guy: I think the next 4 years are going to be the worst in the country's history because both Democrats and Republicans feel like they are under attack. When we finally do get to the election in 2008, there will more
Chemicalkinteics: I would call it the same kind of support as the right saying they thought the Swift Boat Vets had a right to say Kerry was a traitor who never was wounded in battle and got 3 purple hearts for nothing. The key to that however is that no Dem money went to the making of Fahrenheit. Now, the Swift Boat ads........
iamheather: They certainly couldn't have done worse... Personally, I think Kerry tried to do what Clinton did in many ways. You might think that was a problem also in that Kerry is no Clinton. But it wouldn't have made a difference who the candidate was. It was ABB and NBB from the beginning.
JoeUser Forums