do you really think that Jesse Jackson is any help to forwarding the cause of democrats?
No. He's for the most part considered a sham and a hypocrite, as well as a frustrated demagogue.
There will be issues cropping up in Washington over the next 4 years that will either dig you in further with `prophet` credentials - or as some commentators have suggested there could be 4 years of nothing with Republicans and Democrats gridlocked in the way they are.
There will be 4 years of old-school military-industrial cash grabs and legislative gridlock.
why are individuals like Rev. JJ allowed to run around and keep underlining the racial and political divides?)
I could give you the glib answer, which is that it's a free country, but it isn't. The reason he's allowed to speak, or more specifically, to live, is that he performs certain useful services, and that noone really pays any attention to him. The general rule of thumb for dealing with opposition types like Jackson is to allow them to act relatively unimpeded as long as they A) perform certain useful services, and B) have serious credibility with less than 2% of the population.
We might well be on the verge of Armageddon, the Third Reich might well be close to rising again through a certain person who will remain nameless - but then again we might all just have to live with it as everyone lived with the previous manager (whose, arguably, already disgraced the country)
I'd love to know who the certain nameless person it is to whom you refer.
On another note...there was much talk that because GWB didn't back down over FLA he "robbed and disenfranchised" the "majority" of voters.
No, he is accused of stealing the election by :
Using the resources of the Florida State Police to disourage minority voters from voting;
Using the resources of the Florida Secretary of State to delay a recount;
Using the resources of the local GOP and their relationship with local polling offices to alter ballot applications when it suited their cause to do so;
Using the heavily Bush family- connected Supreme Court to halt a state-mandated recount (States-rightists all !!)
and many other similar ploys, the details of which we are all wearyingly familiar.
So, whichever party can shelve the conspiracy theories about the other side will kick all kinds of ass in the next election.
?
Also, for the record, if Al Gore's `people` had tried to execute the FLA recount in one hit they might well have pulled it off. I checked the legal constraints you posted - and even though the law was pretty much followed, surely it doesn't take a genius to know that they should have been seen to give the Republicans a fair chance. They can cherry pick the regions they want, but if they're so sure about this they could have dropped in 2 dead cert Republican areas and still won it. At the end of the day, they could have been `on track` 95% of the way - but because of the way it was spun by the media and the political point men, it drifted into being marketed as Al Gore trying to rob the election.
You're right. Gore ran a consistently foolish campaign.
Again, if the Democrats had run as tight a ship as they said they had run they could have nailed it by the first recount. But, with so many cans of worms around the country (bullied Haitians, illegal voters, citizenship surges so the criminals from abroad can vote, leaked scandals at the 11th hour, scare tactics, bribing street people etc etc) it wouldn't be good PR if Democratic aggitators start trying to trash election results. Like the good old days, each party holds a sword of damocles over the other.
And a kilo of cocaine and a hooker and some dirty pictures.
I'll concede for the sake of argument that 50-60% of what I've stated is from the fact I watch the Fox News Channel for too long, but because of the fact that those things were even *suggested* the saying goes "there's no smoke without fire". I'd like to believe the Democratic party are the moral saviours of the country too (if it's good enough for Alec Baldwin) but the ghost of Dick Daley still looms...
(Or if you like a good political hypothesis, "If Daley did all the historians claim he did in Chicago, could he be held partially responsible for the fact that the USA was sucked in as far as it was to the Vietnam conflict? There is a school of thought that suggests that if Richard Nixon had got in that time, there was no way a Democratic House would have allowed him to take the country to war")
God works in mysterious ways.
At the end of the day, though I might not be near to your thinking politically, I certainly respect you as a musician and lyricist and would admire the fact that you can make Bruce Cockburn and Billy Bragg look about as subversive as James Taylor and Jimmy Webb. To misquote the words of Matt Drudge - I didn't want the Republicans to win neccesarily because of their politics, I wanted them to win because I could live to see them shove all the criticism back down the throats of the NY Times and Streisand...
Beware ideologues. They're merely there to distract you. Follow the money, and the truth shall be revealed. Speaking of money, isn't it interesting that those very people who bemoan the existence of welfare, public health, infrastructure support and etc... are the very ones who year after year are the most avid defenders of the welfare status of our biggest welfare hogs; ie big oil (the 25% depletion allowance, innumerable "research" tax credits, etc...) aerospace, and banking (remember the trillion dollar S&L bailout?) I of course am referring to both Demmicans and Rebublocrats. Fear and greed are great levellers.
Yrs in the spirit of the new decade,
David Baerwald
Re: that wasn't my intention....
A
anonymous
(view)
do you really think that Jesse Jackson is any help to forwarding the cause of democrats?
No. He's for the most part considered a sham and a hypocrite, as well as a frustrated demagogue.
There will be issues cropping up in Washington over the next 4 years that will either dig you in further with `prophet` credentials - or as some commentators have suggested there could be 4 years of nothing with Republicans and Democrats gridlocked in the way they are.
There will be 4 years of old-school military-industrial cash grabs and legislative gridlock.
why are individuals like Rev. JJ allowed to run around and keep underlining the racial and political divides?)
I could give you the glib answer, which is that it's a free country, but it isn't. The reason he's allowed to speak, or more specifically, to live, is that he performs certain useful services, and that noone really pays any attention to him. The general rule of thumb for dealing with opposition types like Jackson is to allow them to act relatively unimpeded as long as they A) perform certain useful services, and B) have serious credibility with less than 2% of the population.
We might well be on the verge of Armageddon, the Third Reich might well be close to rising again through a certain person who will remain nameless - but then again we might all just have to live with it as everyone lived with the previous manager (whose, arguably, already disgraced the country)
I'd love to know who the certain nameless person it is to whom you refer.
On another note...there was much talk that because GWB didn't back down over FLA he "robbed and disenfranchised" the "majority" of voters.
No, he is accused of stealing the election by :
Using the resources of the Florida State Police to disourage minority voters from voting;
Using the resources of the Florida Secretary of State to delay a recount;
Using the resources of the local GOP and their relationship with local polling offices to alter ballot applications when it suited their cause to do so;
Using the heavily Bush family- connected Supreme Court to halt a state-mandated recount (States-rightists all !!)
and many other similar ploys, the details of which we are all wearyingly familiar.
So, whichever party can shelve the conspiracy theories about the other side will kick all kinds of ass in the next election.
?
Also, for the record, if Al Gore's `people` had tried to execute the FLA recount in one hit they might well have pulled it off. I checked the legal constraints you posted - and even though the law was pretty much followed, surely it doesn't take a genius to know that they should have been seen to give the Republicans a fair chance. They can cherry pick the regions they want, but if they're so sure about this they could have dropped in 2 dead cert Republican areas and still won it. At the end of the day, they could have been `on track` 95% of the way - but because of the way it was spun by the media and the political point men, it drifted into being marketed as Al Gore trying to rob the election.
You're right. Gore ran a consistently foolish campaign.
Again, if the Democrats had run as tight a ship as they said they had run they could have nailed it by the first recount. But, with so many cans of worms around the country (bullied Haitians, illegal voters, citizenship surges so the criminals from abroad can vote, leaked scandals at the 11th hour, scare tactics, bribing street people etc etc) it wouldn't be good PR if Democratic aggitators start trying to trash election results. Like the good old days, each party holds a sword of damocles over the other.
And a kilo of cocaine and a hooker and some dirty pictures.
I'll concede for the sake of argument that 50-60% of what I've stated is from the fact I watch the Fox News Channel for too long, but because of the fact that those things were even *suggested* the saying goes "there's no smoke without fire". I'd like to believe the Democratic party are the moral saviours of the country too (if it's good enough for Alec Baldwin) but the ghost of Dick Daley still looms...
(Or if you like a good political hypothesis, "If Daley did all the historians claim he did in Chicago, could he be held partially responsible for the fact that the USA was sucked in as far as it was to the Vietnam conflict? There is a school of thought that suggests that if Richard Nixon had got in that time, there was no way a Democratic House would have allowed him to take the country to war")
God works in mysterious ways.
At the end of the day, though I might not be near to your thinking politically, I certainly respect you as a musician and lyricist and would admire the fact that you can make Bruce Cockburn and Billy Bragg look about as subversive as James Taylor and Jimmy Webb. To misquote the words of Matt Drudge - I didn't want the Republicans to win neccesarily because of their politics, I wanted them to win because I could live to see them shove all the criticism back down the throats of the NY Times and Streisand...
Beware ideologues. They're merely there to distract you. Follow the money, and the truth shall be revealed. Speaking of money, isn't it interesting that those very people who bemoan the existence of welfare, public health, infrastructure support and etc... are the very ones who year after year are the most avid defenders of the welfare status of our biggest welfare hogs; ie big oil (the 25% depletion allowance, innumerable "research" tax credits, etc...) aerospace, and banking (remember the trillion dollar S&L bailout?) I of course am referring to both Demmicans and Rebublocrats. Fear and greed are great levellers.
Yrs in the spirit of the new decade,
David Baerwald
No. He's for the most part considered a sham and a hypocrite, as well as a frustrated demagogue.
There will be issues cropping up in Washington over the next 4 years that will either dig you in further with `prophet` credentials - or as some commentators have suggested there could be 4 years of nothing with Republicans and Democrats gridlocked in the way they are.
There will be 4 years of old-school military-industrial cash grabs and legislative gridlock.
why are individuals like Rev. JJ allowed to run around and keep underlining the racial and political divides?)
I could give you the glib answer, which is that it's a free country, but it isn't. The reason he's allowed to speak, or more specifically, to live, is that he performs certain useful services, and that noone really pays any attention to him. The general rule of thumb for dealing with opposition types like Jackson is to allow them to act relatively unimpeded as long as they A) perform certain useful services, and B) have serious credibility with less than 2% of the population.
We might well be on the verge of Armageddon, the Third Reich might well be close to rising again through a certain person who will remain nameless - but then again we might all just have to live with it as everyone lived with the previous manager (whose, arguably, already disgraced the country)
I'd love to know who the certain nameless person it is to whom you refer.
On another note...there was much talk that because GWB didn't back down over FLA he "robbed and disenfranchised" the "majority" of voters.
No, he is accused of stealing the election by :
Using the resources of the Florida State Police to disourage minority voters from voting;
Using the resources of the Florida Secretary of State to delay a recount;
Using the resources of the local GOP and their relationship with local polling offices to alter ballot applications when it suited their cause to do so;
Using the heavily Bush family- connected Supreme Court to halt a state-mandated recount (States-rightists all !!)
and many other similar ploys, the details of which we are all wearyingly familiar.
So, whichever party can shelve the conspiracy theories about the other side will kick all kinds of ass in the next election.
?
Also, for the record, if Al Gore's `people` had tried to execute the FLA recount in one hit they might well have pulled it off. I checked the legal constraints you posted - and even though the law was pretty much followed, surely it doesn't take a genius to know that they should have been seen to give the Republicans a fair chance. They can cherry pick the regions they want, but if they're so sure about this they could have dropped in 2 dead cert Republican areas and still won it. At the end of the day, they could have been `on track` 95% of the way - but because of the way it was spun by the media and the political point men, it drifted into being marketed as Al Gore trying to rob the election.
You're right. Gore ran a consistently foolish campaign.
Again, if the Democrats had run as tight a ship as they said they had run they could have nailed it by the first recount. But, with so many cans of worms around the country (bullied Haitians, illegal voters, citizenship surges so the criminals from abroad can vote, leaked scandals at the 11th hour, scare tactics, bribing street people etc etc) it wouldn't be good PR if Democratic aggitators start trying to trash election results. Like the good old days, each party holds a sword of damocles over the other.
And a kilo of cocaine and a hooker and some dirty pictures.
I'll concede for the sake of argument that 50-60% of what I've stated is from the fact I watch the Fox News Channel for too long, but because of the fact that those things were even *suggested* the saying goes "there's no smoke without fire". I'd like to believe the Democratic party are the moral saviours of the country too (if it's good enough for Alec Baldwin) but the ghost of Dick Daley still looms...
(Or if you like a good political hypothesis, "If Daley did all the historians claim he did in Chicago, could he be held partially responsible for the fact that the USA was sucked in as far as it was to the Vietnam conflict? There is a school of thought that suggests that if Richard Nixon had got in that time, there was no way a Democratic House would have allowed him to take the country to war")
God works in mysterious ways.
At the end of the day, though I might not be near to your thinking politically, I certainly respect you as a musician and lyricist and would admire the fact that you can make Bruce Cockburn and Billy Bragg look about as subversive as James Taylor and Jimmy Webb. To misquote the words of Matt Drudge - I didn't want the Republicans to win neccesarily because of their politics, I wanted them to win because I could live to see them shove all the criticism back down the throats of the NY Times and Streisand...
Beware ideologues. They're merely there to distract you. Follow the money, and the truth shall be revealed. Speaking of money, isn't it interesting that those very people who bemoan the existence of welfare, public health, infrastructure support and etc... are the very ones who year after year are the most avid defenders of the welfare status of our biggest welfare hogs; ie big oil (the 25% depletion allowance, innumerable "research" tax credits, etc...) aerospace, and banking (remember the trillion dollar S&L bailout?) I of course am referring to both Demmicans and Rebublocrats. Fear and greed are great levellers.
Yrs in the spirit of the new decade,
David Baerwald
