Tuesday, June 12

I know...


Okay okay I'm in on all the separation of church/state thing and this kinda revokes that. But I'm pissed. Still. Seriously pissed.

This country is going to hell. Why did we think electing Democrats was gonna save it? Feh.

I'm gonna go clean my house and feel better. More later.

In better news...GREAT salon last night, kids. Thanks.

14 comments:

  1. My gf cleans the house when she's upset, but she's still upset when she's done.

    At least I get the benefit of a clean house.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Missed the salon, but love the pic!

    Really, is Lieberman right on any major issue? Sure, he's a crazy hawk, but we knew that - he supports Gonzales? Are you kidding me?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have informed Ms. Morse that she is no longer to schedule dinner parties on Salon night, no matter how far the guests have traveled.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm sorry I had to leave early, it was getting really interesting when I left.

    Regards,

    Tengrain

    ReplyDelete
  5. Say what you will about Lieberman, if he was not there we would not have a majority in the senate. Let him vote with the neocons, I don't care until the next election. We already knew that he is one of the pod people. But the senate with Lieberman is better than the senate without Lieberman. It's not good, but it's better than nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dr Z, but if he didn't run, Lamont would've won in a landslide.

    He forsook the party for his own ambition, plain and simple.

    ReplyDelete
  7. ...and Lamont wouldn't be voting with the Republicans, trust me on that. So why is Lieberman better???

    We all understand Jumpin' Joe's bias, but Gonzoles isn't Jewish, so WTP???

    He's lost his claim to morality of any flavor with his support of the neo-con agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes, and if all the cops had wooden legs, And the bulldogs all had rubber teeth and the hens all laid soft-boiled eggs - Lieberman would have still run. He was an incumbent, what did you expect? It still doesn't change the fact that we need him for the majority.

    I'm sorry that reality is not always as good as the commercials make it out to be, but our dissatisfaction with the situation won't change the position we are in now. Sometimes you have drive the car you have, not the one you wish you could have.

    I never said that I liked Lieberman, just that I am happy that he is there and that we are in a majority, albeit a slim one.

    ReplyDelete
  9. dr. zaius, Lieberman being in the Senate is yet another example of the Democratic party failing us. Party leaders could have been more forceful in their support for Lamont. Additional pressure could have been placed on Lieberman not to run. Lamont would have been light years better than Lieberman is ... and what good is a Democratic Senate (or House) if they can't pass or defeat anything?

    Bush got his troop increase, continued war funding, and Gonzales to watch his back as he and Cheney shred the Constitution.


    BAC

    ReplyDelete
  10. Folks -

    I agree with what you are saying, but I think you need to listen to the good Doctor Z: Lieberman's existence as an alleged Democratic Senator tips the scales to the admittedly weak and worthless Harry Reid.

    It is not much of a consolation prize, but it beats having Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott.

    In the meanwhile, lobby your member of congress and Senators. Send scathing emails to Holy Joe. Grousing at each other is not solving any problems.

    Regards,

    Tengrain

    ReplyDelete
  11. Gosh, your right. I can't imagine why I didn't see it sooner. The democrats are terrible. They should be without fault or error, just like the Republicans. They only have a slim majority in the house and the senate anyway! We should just give up now. Why should I support a party that does not have a non-stop fairy tale ending?

    It's like having a car with three good tires and one tire that is slightly worn. I should just give up driving, right?

    I feel that I have been betrayed completely because my party has not undone in a few months the mess that the Republicans were able to create over a period of several years. The Democrats have a slim majority, right? Why can't they just use that slim majority to leap over tall building in a single bound? I'll just give up now, I have no loyalty. I'll just slink into the corner and go belly up. Anybody know where I can get some lilies?

    This is not really directed at you alone, BAC, so I apologize if I sound pointed or overly cynical. I am just dismayed at how many Democrats are selling Girl Scout Cookies for Karl Rove lately. Let him sell his own damn cookies.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Oh, Tengrain, you snuck in. Thank you for your support.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Loserman isn't a Democrat anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I hear ya, Dr. Z. I despise Lieberman with each new wingnut statement he makes, but it's better to have the majority. I'm disappointed with many of the Dems, but I get frustrated when someone says the Dems are as bad as the Republicans, because of course they're not. We're far worse off with a GOP Congress and with a Republican winning the presidency. In the meantime, back to encouraging the Dems who vote well and kicking the butts of those that don't.

    ReplyDelete

I really look forward to hearing what you have to say. I do moderate comments, but non-spam comments will take less than 24 hours to appear... Thanks!