I think it's hilarious that people still expect our corrupt and crippled political system to work and produce competent candidates.

and i find it disturbing that the ones who are supposed be in charge wont do anything to fix it

What I really find funny is that when someone is so loyal to a party that they think only the opposing party is the corrupted one. So far most people who believed in Bush admit he's not what they tthought he was, when it comes to Clinton, he was the victim.

a point i've been making for years.

but i have also personally known many in public service who were decent people. in fact, most of them have been. unfortunately, one bad apple can ruin the whole bunch.

but if we are vigilant about weeding out the bad apples, real bad apples, not just political enemies, it serves us all well in the long run.

call it corny if ya want, but i still do believe in this great experiment we call America.

I'll be interested to see what you have to say about the host of Democrat "bad apples" that are sitting in office now. As a "Libertarian" I would hope you'd have as much or more ire for the party that made big promises and is currently doing little more than the people you spend all your time whining about...

Then maybe you can explain to me why people criticize that which they do themselves, cause don't think I was not including you when I said that. If anything you inspired me.



I tend to believe that even if a decent person, if you are aware of a problem and chose to ignore or not report it, you are just as much a bad apple as the ones cause the problem. This is one of the major problems this country, and the human race for that matter, faces. Ignoring the problem for fear of losing your just only to get caught in the web in the end.



Do as I say not as I do? The reason I compare you to Col gene so much is because, like him, you are only looking at on side of the playing field. You are only pointing our the stupidity of one side of the Gov't when the other side has been know to do the same. Both parties have had their fair share of stupid candidates, child molesters, liars, flip-floppers, losers.



Corny? This is my country as well. Regardless of how idiotic some of things are today, I would still rather be American than anything else. In the end I blame only 1 person or group of people, ourselves. We allow this to happen because we allow fear to run our lives. Wew want to be so nice that everyone else takes advantage of us (including our own people).



Good point, I guess you are not completely gone like I thought you were on the other article.

again...i've called for reid's ousting, criticized pelosi for giving jefferson a big comittee seat and criticized murtha, hillary and others.

i think the democratic leadership sucks for the most part. i'm not so quick to damn pelosi, as she is "some good, some bad" in my view thus far. but she is sliding in my polls as of late. i gave her credit for her "1st 100 hours" deal...they did what they said, can't blast her for that, regardless of my views on the individual pieces of legislation. i skipped the "non stories" about the plane and what not...turns out, her goin to syria didn't hurt anything, and may have been a good push...time will tell...i'm sure many here will disagree with that, and that is fine... i still use every chance i get (like right here) to point out that they are still working a measley 3 day work week in congress, which is utter bullsh*t...and nanci promised to change that.

i can't stand our governor, ruth ann minner. but that usually comes up in personal conversations i have where i have called for her impeachment. if ya'll really need me to write an article about delaware's governor, i'll try n find the time. but she's pretty low on my scale of importance. and i always figured no one would be interested.



then we are agreed, neither of us are each other's enemy...a point i've tried to make to the right on here for a long time.

i think i get what you are saying, and many studies on people's actual honesty have backed that up. we all love to take advantage where we can (example....: get that free stuff or below cost discount because you know someone, not because you deserve it) and think nothing of the people we are ripping off. yet we will scream to the high heavens when someone else, esp. someone we already are not too fond of, missteps or does the lil'est things wrong.

But you chose to tar "republicans" with a scandal of what amounts to a City Council man in a podunk - on the DAY Jefferson was indicted with more counts than the last 3 congressmen combined.

so, i haven't gotten around to it...i'm hardly AP over here. and i guess i consider sex with 8 and 10 year old girls with an adult mayor, who was a rising republican star, a bigger story than one about cash.

jefferson, if found guilty, should serve long and hard for his crimes, within the constitution. i have no beef with that. but i hope you aren't trying to accuse me of trying to "bury" the jefferson story with mine...that's a laugh...as if i had that kind of influence. i was actually hopin someone else would write about it, but i didn't see anything. maybe it was timing or a clever title made me pass over it, but i don't remember anyone writing anything about it. i was hopin to throw some comments in someone else's piece if i didn't have the time to write my own blurb. which it turned out, i didn't. but i saw nothing written when i looked on the homepage and the forums.

but now, if i write anything (and the story is still relatively fresh) i will be accused of writing it "just so i can point to it later" or equivalent conspiratal nonsense. and if i don't, i'll be accused of burying or ignoring the story. i didn't know i was so important on the journalistic scale, lol.

just another "damned if i do, damned if i don't" / "heads you win, tails I lose" scenarios that are all too common here.

You missed the point. Why did you not blog about Chuck Richardson? Saad El Amin? Rita Trammel?

I guess because they dont fit your motif. You may not think you are, but to those reading you that is how you come across. "forget the plank in the eye of the democrats, lets look for a splinter (a non-person) in the eye of a republican".

While we cannot see walks on blogs, we can see talks. And your talk belies your protestations.

But to be more exact - now tell me how many people (party not necessary) were accused, indicted, or convicted of crimes against minors in the time it took you to write that non-story? Are they any less evil because they are NOT republicans? Perhaps your title would be changed if you knew that on that day, 4 other council persons were indicted or convicted of sex crimes with minors - and none of the 4 were republicans (at least not listed as such). So why did you pick on that one with the blaring headline of "REPUBLICAN".

You are judged by your bias that your write. Not what others write of you.

1st, you call it a non story. that doesn't make it so. to me, sex with 8 and 10 year old girls by someone who was a rising star in the GOP is a story.

2nd, that wasn't your premise. you contended that i should have been writing about bill jefferson, not all the other cases of molestation. again, i'm not AP. and the standard you are setting for me is simply ridiculous. i'll write what i write, you feel free to interpret it any way you want. my purpose here is hardly to please you or anyone else. and a bunch of like minded neocons and hard right wingers is hardly going to influence what i write at all. all i ask is not to be insulted on my own space, and that includes the subtle little backhanded ones. and quite frankly, i let 90% of them roll off my back. every once in awhile i decide that enough is enough and make a statement or have a dialogue about it in a thread. then, like now, i go back to doing what i do.

now tell me how many people (party not necessary) were accused, indicted, or convicted of crimes against minors in the time it took you to write that non-story? 1st, you call it a non story. that doesn't make it so. to me, sex with 8 and 10 year old girls by someone who was a rising star in the GOP is a story. 2nd, that wasn't your premise. you contended that i should have been writing about bill jefferson, not all the other cases of molestation. again, i'm not AP. and the standard you are setting for me is simply ridiculous. i'll write what i write, you feel free to interpret it any way you want. my purpose here is hardly to please you or anyone else. and a bunch of like minded neocons and hard right wingers is hardly going to influence what i write at all. all i ask is not to be insulted on my own space, and that includes the subtle little backhanded ones. and quite frankly, i let 90% of them roll off my back. every once in awhile i decide that enough is enough and make a statement or have a dialogue about it in a thread. then, like now, i go back to doing what i do.

All he was really saying to you was, don't holler about one side of the coin if you're not going to holler about the other side of it.

Who says he was a rising star? You? The biased press? Where was he in the latest presedential debates? In the RNC? Congress? So he is that IYO, not in fact.

Second, I dont care what you write about. But then that is how you are going to be evaluated. So when you pick on some obscure politician, and ignore the greater scandal, that is how people read you. And yet you protest the fact you are read that way.

The more appropriate title for that article would not have been "ANOTHER REPUBLICAN SCANDAL" (or whatever), but "Mayor (or councilman or city dweeb, etc.) charged with more counts....." or even "Republican Mayor" as he is not anywhere near a power player in the republican party, nor is it a "Republican" scandal anymore than Jefferson is a "DEMOCRATS ON THE TAKE" headline.

But JU is a great site where you can write (and headline) what you want, as is your right. But then dont get upset with everyone for calling you a democrat shill when that is what your writings come across as.

And just for the record, those names I listed are all democrats. But then you did not know that (nor would I expect you too), and last I saw, they were not being included in a litany list of Democrat sleeze.

Except for the part where you and Guy only "holler" about the one side, leaving the other side in beautiful effigy, without apparent blemish.

Pot, meet the kettle.

lmfao...good one.

There is a difference. DrMiler and I do not pretend not to be conservative, we proclaim it. Sean wants you to think he is a libertarian that can only find fault with Republicans. Now he may be a libertarian, but when he walks like a democrat, quacks like a democrat, and swims like a democrat, then most people would say he is a democrat.

DrMiler is not "hollering" about him attacking one side and not the other - he is "hollering" about his dishonesty in doing so.

simply not true. that's the flaw in your argument. i'm not going to go round and round on this any longer guy. i've made my point. if you choose to continue to just make up stuff, then so be it. have at it...be my guest...i'll look forward to dicussing other stuff wit hya on other threads where the arguments haven't gotten to be purely circular.

Sorry, I missed your slam on William Jefferson the day he was indicted on 16 counts. Maybe you could link to it.

Not really. You shouldn't hold yourself and drmiler to a different standard, which is exactly what your doublespeak reply #46 is. Doublespeak.

You can't say that you are allowed to not be balanced and fair, just because you say you're a conservative, but Sean has to be balanced and fair because he doesn't say he's a conservative.

It's that double standard that keeps me out of the political forums usually. If someone agrees with you, they can spread all the crap they want. The minute someone doesn't agree, you make up some phooey about why their viewpoint is wrong.

I'm just sick and tired of your double standards.

i slammed jefferson before he was indicted...and others in the same article...i also gave credit where due,,,,from the article...

Last year, after allegations and 90,000 of marked bills in his freezer came to light, Jefferson was rightfully kicked off the Ways and Means committee. Unfortunately, the people of New Orleans sent this soon to be felon back to Washington. Most of the nation cited corruption as a major reason for change in Washington. Obviously, the voters who sent MR Jefferson back to D.C. weren't amongst them.

In his case, Speaker Pelosi had a grand opportunity to stand up for the Americans who are sick of the blatant corruption in Washington. Instead, she decided to play "business as usual" as Congressman Jefferson got comfortorble in his committee chair.

On one hand, I applaud the Speaker for her management and success of their "1st 100 hours" in getting thru all the legislation they promised. They certainly have been more effective and victorious than over in Harry Reid's Senate, who seems stalled at the starting line.

On the other hand there's gross cronyism and old school politics in moves like this. There's also her inability to actually make good on the promise of a 5 day house workweek. So far, they've only had one, and this week is another 3 day week.

here's your link...


WWW Link

thank you san. appreciate that. and coming from someone who doesn't always agree with me, from what i see, it means even more.

but i've come to accept that double standard. as frustrating as it can be sometimes.

i am sorry but Sean threatened to have me kicked off of here once because i refused to agree with him on one of his threads. he was attacking bush for something and when i accused the other side of doing the something he told me it wasn't important because he wasn't talking about the other side and if i didn't agree with him he would have be blackballed from the forum all together

so yes Sean is a democrat no matter what he says he is and he is into censorship when someone disagrees with him

the whole point is that he wanted to shut someone up who didn't agree with him

and he wonders why i included him in that illigel thread of mine(not that i knew i was doing anything wrong at the time)

no dan,,,i simply requested that you stick to a subject and not repeat moronic crap over and over. and you were never threatended in any way. you made that up when i asked you to try to not be an idiot in much more diplomatic language than i'm using here. the fact is it is more annoying to put up with your lack of grasp of the english language than anything you have to say. the fact is you haven't made hardly any decent points since arriving. the fact is that all you do is spew the parroted talking points of the neoconservatives without any real understanding of what you are saying...and it's obvious.



the obsession continues...