What is happening to Montana? I thought we were leading in the polls going in to today. But the pundits keep talking about Tenn, Virginia, and MO. Did we somehow blow Montana?
Also, apparently Sweeney in NY-20 blew it with a last second story about him beating his wife. He wouldn't release court paper or answer questions.
I read the blogs hourly at work. My co-worker reads some other blogs too. He emailed me about reading on the Huffington Post about Murtha responding to a Swift Boat attempt about his Purple Hearts.
I have been thinking and many of you probably are smart enough to know this. But at the same time I don't see anyone talking about what I am going to bring up in a second. I understand that there are so many problems for the Repubs right now and it is kinda like pick a target any target right now for the Dems.
But I am worried about the 2006 elections. The repubs and continue to whether the storm and then a few months before the election say they have plans for withdrawal. This will turn the media cycle in their favor along with the polls.
OK. I don't think this has been diaried yet. So some of the side stories coming out is about tax "reform". I just wanted to throw it out there to the daily kos community to start a discussion about the proposed changes. Does anyone know what they are? Are the regressive? Because this is Bushco world how are the poor and middle gonna get screwed and the rich rewarded?
Where do I find the radio or tv internet link to the hearing?
Important please someone post.
argghhh I am at work and need to be listening.
thanks
spacefiller here to get over the min diary entry. blah blah blahdddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd
ddddddddddddddd
Ok so one thing we are hearing out of Repubs is that the way to rebuild the city and to reduce poverty is to stop out of wedlock children and to reduce the family size.
And boom us progressives say that that racist.
Now Let me give you my point of view on this and then please tell me if and where I am wrong and if I am considered racist. ( I hope not)
The way I see it there will be two possible schools of thought from this natural disaster.
The first which is the obviously correct thinking is that we need to stop cutting taxes and start using money in a collective way (ie govt) to provide government services for emergencies like this on.
The second school of thought is one that I wouldn't be suprised to see the Republicans and anti tax greed mongers use: see gov't doesn't work so we should just cut taxes even more, why give money to an organization which is not the solution.
I was reading one of the many diaries today. In one of them it mentioned that midwestern and southern democratic candidates go to NASCAR events. You know go right in the GOP Holy land.
Well maybe we should think about as the Democratic Party sponsoring a NASCAR Race car?
Okay guys so we have heard all the GOP crap about wanting an up or down vote. You know lets give the candidate a chance by giving him a vote.
But it also seems to me that we need the free flow of information.
I believe that the Democratic Meme on John Roberts should be "release all the documents and then you will receive your up or down vote"
There is no way that we can be played as "obstructionists"
Therefore we need to start to begin "release the documents" drive.
Oh yeah this should take a back seat though untill late August when the nomination process starts to begin.
Ok lets get a thread started here about that NYT story about Rove and Novak.
Yup you know the one where the article claims from "unnamed source that was briefed on the matter" that Novak told Rove about Plame.
What what a bullshit idea. I think the first flag should go up when we have an "unnamed source"
I think we should hold the NYT accountable for horrible reporting. Why do they let these anonymous sources get away with this shit?
I live in Edison, NJ now. I just finished my late late dinner and was flipping through the channels. I cam to WLNY, channel 10. The title was "Abortion". It started off with Bush signing into law the ban against "partial birth abortion".
For the most part it is Sen. Santourom talking about how bad abortion ,especially "partial birth abortion". The show tried to make it out was if he was saying that "regular abortion" is ok.
I think we need to be hardcore to take back the senate. No more nice guy taking the high road. While I like to know that moderate repulicans really do exist it is becoming increasingly evident that we can not afford to lose any leverage. The bottom line is that those moderate repubs are not strong enough to stand up to their own party and cost us.
Ok so this is a question along the lines of gay marriage/civil unions.
I believe in civil unions/gay marraige whatever you want to call it. I believe in equal protection under the law. So I see it that the same rights should be given to same sex couples as is given to hetero couples.
I figure that the argument around stupid stuff like "but that opens the door for man on dog marriage" is simply tossed aside by saying that a relationship must require two consenting adults.
I don't get it on so many levels
So is it a simple majority or is it 2/3 vote that is needed to go with the nuclear option?
Also why are my friends that are republicans still unwilling to admit that this had gone a little too far? Damn repubs are just too damned disciplined! Now my friend is a smart guy, not very religious, teaches science for 5th grade in NY and believes in evolution. Just a regular northeasterner. But when I told him about what frist is doing and saying he said "stop i am not going to argue with you."
I was watching the tube the other day and flipped through the CSPAN channel. One CSPAN was showing the British Parliament. It was fascinating and maybe America should bring some of that here.
What I observed was Tony Blair in the middle fielding questions and comments from members of parliament and then he had to give an immediate response. What a great way to debate and get information out in the open.
I would love to see out senate or congress have to do that with the President. See Bush on his feet not scripted. We as Americans deserve to see our elected officials in action like that.
Now with Bush's attempt to destroy Social Security pretty much failing the Bush administration is trying to figure out another angle to get their way.
This new strategy is to invoke Bill Clinton's name. According to the MOONIE TIMES Bush spoke with Clinton about foreign policy and Social Security aboard Air Force One on their way back from Rome.
So with all the news of the popes death it got me to do some researching. To start off I am an atheist. It just boggles my mind that a human being, the pope, gets Godlike treatment as if he is infallible. Next I just don't get how so many people 1billion worldwide believe the catholic church's story. So that means there are over 1billion chrisitians. (ha simple math 1billion catholics + x christians).
Ok let's get real for a second here. I am sick of making the Pope out to be some super-human great caring entity. The Pope was a human being. Nothing different than me or you! Seems to me that Catholics almost disobey God with the way they treat the Pope. They basically worship him like a golden calf.
Then there is the Vatican itself. It is so grandiose, almost materialistic. All that money could have gone towards helping the poor. But no they needed to build bigger and taller churches(back in the day).
