The Difference between Dems and Reps

[DKW 86 7,892]

Dems criticize handling of CIA Leak.

Ashcroft recuses himself as is proper. Does anyone remember Reno and her refusal to recuse herself from the Campaign finance violations of the 1996 Clinton-Gore Campaign? The outcome was totally expected, she whitewashed everything and everybody.

Ashcroft made the tough decision and handed it over to a career prosecutor that has no ties to Dem or Rep party, he gets criticized.

Typical.

[CShine 0]

As the article makes plain, Ashcroft has not "handed it over."

"The public will not likely trust the results of an investigation headed by a political appointee, especially when the special counsel is constrained by Department of Justice regulations that severely curtail the prosecutor's autonomy," said Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut.

Appointing a special prosecutor who is still governed by the authority of the Ashcroft-run Justice Dept. certainly does leave open the question of conflicts of interest. The criticism is valid.

[Shug2003 1]

The Republicans are a party "Of the rich, by the rich and for the rich." An ever expanding affluent society in this country embraces this party as "In Vogue." They mouth about Christianity, family values, anti-abortion, prayer in schools, etc., but do nothing! It's simply a gimmick to get re-elected. On the other hand, the Demos have become the underdog party due to its embracing freedom of choice, blacks and other minorities, gay rights, etc. These positions have nearly destroyed the Demo party, but they can't seem to learn from thier mistakes. Republicans believe in cutting, cutting, cutting, and cutting everything but their own salaries, and Demos believe in spending, spending, spending and spending more as they raise taxes. Personally, I think they are both full of CRAP!

[Donutboy 0]

Dems criticize handling of CIA Leak.

Ashcroft recuses himself as is proper. Does anyone remember Reno and her refusal to recuse herself from the Campaign finance violations of the 1996 Clinton-Gore Campaign? The outcome was totally expected, she whitewashed everything and everybody.

No. I don't even remember the campaign finance violation allegations. However, if there were some, I'm sure that Ken Starr spent plenty of our money investigating it. Using the FBI extensively, he knew more about the Clintons than THEY knew. BTW, wouldn't Antonio Scalia and Clarence Thomas qualify as Republicans, since they both still regularly support the republican agenda? In the 2000 election decision by the Supreme Court that stole the election for the Republican party, neither Scalia nor Thomas recused themselves from the decision, even though Scalia's sons had worked on the Florida George W. Bush election campaign and Thomas's wife was active in helping with the Bush inauguration. In a 5-4 decision for stopping the recount, if these two Republican/Conservative justices had recused themselves, Florida would have been able to continue the recount instead of being barred from doing a recount.

BTW, I also like the way that Blount County suddenly switched 3000 votes fron Siegelman to Riley AFTER the poll watchers had gone home in the wee hours of the morning of the 2002 Alabama gubernatorial election, effectively switching the win from Siegelman to Riley. SMOOTH!! What's even smoother is the way that the Alabama Republican party used their 8 to 1 judicial advantage in the Alabama Supreme Court to deny a recount in THAT election. And you people wonder why some of us don't trust Republicans!!

[DKW 86 7,892]

Dems criticize handling of CIA Leak.

Ashcroft recuses himself as is proper. Does anyone remember Reno and her refusal to recuse herself from the Campaign finance violations of the 1996 Clinton-Gore Campaign? The outcome was totally expected, she whitewashed everything and everybody.

No. I don't even remember the campaign finance violation allegations. However, if there were some, I'm sure that Ken Starr spent plenty of our money investigating it. Using the FBI extensively, he knew more about the Clintons than THEY knew. BTW, wouldn't Antonio Scalia and Clarence Thomas qualify as Republicans, since they both still regularly support the republican agenda? In the 2000 election decision by the Supreme Court that stole the election for the Republican party, neither Scalia nor Thomas recused themselves from the decision, even though Scalia's sons had worked on the Florida George W. Bush election campaign and Thomas's wife was active in helping with the Bush inauguration. In a 5-4 decision for stopping the recount, if these two Republican/Conservative justices had recused themselves, Florida would have been able to continue the recount instead of being barred from doing a recount.

BTW, I also like the way that Blount County suddenly switched 3000 votes fron Siegelman to Riley AFTER the poll watchers had gone home in the wee hours of the morning of the 2002 Alabama gubernatorial election, effectively switching the win from Siegelman to Riley. SMOOTH!! What's even smoother is the way that the Alabama Republican party used their 8 to 1 judicial advantage in the Alabama Supreme Court to deny a recount in THAT election. And you people wonder why some of us don't trust Republicans!!

No. I don't even remember the campaign finance violation allegations. However, if there were some, I'm sure that Ken Starr spent plenty of our money investigating it. Using the FBI extensively, he knew more about the Clintons than THEY knew.

White House Teas, Gore using Govt phone lines, renting out the Lincoln Bedroom, millions from vow of poverty buddhist monks, Gore lied about it, the $13M from a Phillipines Island account (against the law), money from the Chinese, (against the law), Teamsters gave $13M and then the Dems kicked back $3M+ to Carey the pres of the Teamsters, It was the reason he was replaced as Pres by Hoffa... Refereshed your memories?

Using the FBI extensively, he knew more about the Clintons than THEY knew

Dude, that was what the Clintons did in Travelgate. Kind of hard to keep all the scandals straight with the Clintons, isnt it?

In the 2000 election decision by the Supreme Court that stole the election for the Republican party, neither Scalia nor Thomas recused themselves from the decision, even though Scalia's sons had worked on the Florida George W. Bush election campaign and Thomas's wife was active in helping with the Bush inauguration. In a 5-4 decision for stopping the recount, if these two Republican/Conservative justices had recused themselves, Florida would have been able to continue the recount instead of being barred from doing a recount.

Even if all that were true, and I am sure we all would haveheard it from every News source if it was, GORE was never announced by any news source as actually having the votes to ever win Florida. NEVER! Even the news hounds that counted the votes by hand over and over again NEVER had a total where Gore won.

BTW, I also like the way that Blount County suddenly switched 3000 votes fron Siegelman to Riley AFTER the poll watchers had gone home in the wee hours of the morning of the 2002 Alabama gubernatorial election, effectively switching the win from Siegelman to Riley. SMOOTH!! What's even smoother is the way that the Alabama Republican party used their 8 to 1 judicial advantage in the Alabama Supreme Court to deny a recount in THAT election. And you people wonder why some of us don't trust Republicans!!

Does paranoia come as a side effect from drinking Kool-Aid?

[DKW 86 7,892]

The Republicans are a party "Of the rich, by the rich and for the rich." An ever expanding affluent society in this country embraces this party as "In Vogue." They mouth about Christianity, family values, anti-abortion, prayer in schools, etc., but do nothing!

Man, You win the cliche total for the year award. I am not rich, except in friends. The treason folks on this board are Reps is because of two things, Reps support our believes, & the Dems laugh with scorn at those of us concerned with the things you just outlined.

It's simply a gimmick to get re-elected. On the other hand, the Demos have become the underdog party due to its embracing freedom of choice, blacks and other minorities, gay rights, etc.

FOC? When have the Dems ever been the party of FOC? They oppose vouchers, They oppose many basic freedoms every single day. I could go on ad nauseum here. If you mean "Choice" on Abortion, I have a test for you. Go to a Dem meeting sometimem and tell them you support the Choice of not having an Abortion. You will be run out of the room. I speak from experience on this.

As far as Blacks, I bet the first Black Pres will be a Rep. Why do Black Dem candidates only end up being the ones that are totally unelectable? Sounds fishy to me...

These positions have nearly destroyed the Demo party, but they can't seem to learn from thier mistakes. Republicans believe in cutting, cutting, cutting, and cutting everything but their own salaries, and Demos believe in spending, spending, spending and spending more as they raise taxes. Personally, I think they are both full of CRAP!

I agree, the Dems are nearly in shambles now. I like the idea of allowing the govt to keep their salaries if they cut my taxes. Yes, Dems want to spend, spend, spend and just increase taxes. I agree. Both actually end up being full of crap in the long run, but you gotta keep hoping....

[DKW 86 7,892]

As the article makes plain, Ashcroft has not "handed it over."

"The public will not likely trust the results of an investigation headed by a political appointee, especially when the special counsel is constrained by Department of Justice regulations that severely curtail the prosecutor's autonomy," said Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut.

Appointing a special prosecutor who is still governed by the authority of the Ashcroft-run Justice Dept. certainly does leave open the question of conflicts of interest. The criticism is valid.

So I guess we will need to invent another way to do business. I guess Starr was unduly influenced by Janet Reno huh?

[Jenny AU-92 0]

An ever expanding affluent society in this country embraces this party as "In Vogue."

Uh...have you forgotten Hollywood? Babs Streisand? Madonna?? Those people are sure as heck not poor, and they are as anti-Republican as they come. Being pinko is DEFINITELY "In Vogue" in that crowd, as very few of them could tell you in coherent sentences WHY they are liberal - they just know it is the "in-thing" to be. :roll:

[DKW 86 7,892]

An ever expanding affluent society in this country embraces this party as "In Vogue."

Uh...have you forgotten Hollywood? Babs Streisand? Madonna?? Those people are sure as heck not poor, and they are as anti-Republican as they come. Being pinko is DEFINITELY "In Vogue" in that crowd, as very few of them could tell you in coherent sentences WHY they are liberal - they just know it is the "in-thing" to be. :roll:

Jenny Johnson is Right! (Blazing Saddles sub-reference here.)