She is planning a four day "swearing in" ceremony. I swear, damn.
Another of those break the news when everyone is busy else where deals. Explained as necessary for fundraising for the up and coming dumocrats for the next elections.
It's all about having power.

The Dems won...time to party like there is no tomorrow. Renew old friends and get the money flowing into the new kids on the block pockets.

It politics as usual. It doesn't matter who is in the majority. That is the way it is done in DC.

quote She is planning a four day "swearing in" ceremony. I swear, damn. Another of those break the news when everyone is busy else where deals. Explained as necessary for fundraising for the up and coming dumocrats for the next elections.

oh, WAAAAAH!

here. have a hanky.

quote It's all about having power.

after eight years of serious discussion of a "permanent republican majority" and openly working for one-party rule in what is supposed to be a functioning democracy, you finally get that?

gee, cliff. what a brilliant political observation.

[This message has been edited by Euterpe (edited 12-24-2006).]

Yeah, Dems won, but a four day swearing in? They don't go that overboard when swearing in a new President.

they do when it feels more like the collapse of the berlin wall.
after waiting that long to exhale, its gonna take all us lefty-liberal types a while to get our groove back.

[This message has been edited by TorqueWench (edited 12-24-2006).]

I wouldn't expect anything less from an egomaniacal, power hungry wench like Nancy. The woman's head is the size of a blimp.

Nancy Pelosi is an insufferable leftist windbag who has never been photographed with her mouth closed.

And, she's two heartbeats from the Presidency. How amusing.

------------------
Who is John Galt?

you people crack me up.

oh look! it's a woman in power! she's screechy! she's bitchy! she's not a Hooters chick! she has an active ego, she may actually not play nice! and worst, she represents those fictitious "san francisco values"!

schadenfreude, kids. it's what's for dinner.
would you like some salt with that?

[This message has been edited by Euterpe (edited 12-24-2006).]

Actually, I wasn't any happier with Hastert. He's a gelding and a sellout.

------------------
Who is John Galt?

quote Originally posted by Euterpe: you people crack me up. oh look! it's a woman in power! she's screechy! she's bitchy! she's not a Hooters chick! she has an active ego, she may actually not play nice! and worst, she represents those fictitious "san francisco values"! schadenfreude, kids. it's what's for dinner. would you like some salt with that?

I'd like people to ask me why I don't like her instead of telling me. Seeing as I'm a social liberal it can't be the SF values. Its not because shes a woman in power. Its not because shes old and not sexxy. So far your striking out care to tell me why I don't like her, but this time maybe get it right.

[This message has been edited by Phranc (edited 12-24-2006).]

sorry, phranc. you had your go:

quote egomaniacal, power hungry wench like Nancy. The woman's head is the size of a blimp.

unless, of course, you would now like to actually make a substantive criticism, rather than just piling on the bullshit bandwagon?

edit: i should add that, while the invitation to be something other than reactionary is sincere, i don't actually give a **** . she's the new speaker, and as a registered democrat i'm quite pleased, both at that fact and at your own discomfiture.

[This message has been edited by Euterpe (edited 12-24-2006).]

http://annika.mu.nu/archives/099536.html

http://www.thepoliticalpitbull.com/2006/08/video_the_world_according_to_n.php

Nothing to do with being a woman, she's just a bloody idiot. The second link to her apperance on Letterman is almost unbearable. She out and out lies about everything.

The sad thing is the loyal left eat it up.

quote Originally posted by Uaana: She out and out lies about everything.

and here i thought this was going to be a dull, humorless day.
ah, a good dose of irony in my morning tea is so invigorating.

quote Originally posted by Uaana: http://annika.mu.nu/archives/099536.html http://www.thepoliticalpitbull.com/2006/08/video_the_world_according_to_n.php Nothing to do with being a woman, she's just a bloody idiot. The second link to her apperance on Letterman is almost unbearable. She out and out lies about everything. The sad thing is the loyal left eat it up.

Lies? Tell us about the lies, use the same criteria you use for defending Bush. No accusations allowed unless charged, convicted and made it through all appeals without wiggling out.

Nice how the rules are different if your a republican apologist.

Republican apologist?

Back the truck up! I'm no fan of Bush, he's done some good and some bad but not the perfect leader by any shot.

I thought this was about Pelosi? She's an idiot there are other Dems that are more than capable, but she gets to lead because she stuck around long enough and made enough back door deals.

Oh.. sorry forgot half of you are suffering from BDS.. Psst.. Bush isn't running for anything and with a dem house/senate we're looking at gridlock for the next two years.

Or did the Dem party really have a plan for Social Security? Taxes? (I'll skip foreign relations since they don't have much to do with that)

Since the Dems. cant play the obstuctionest game anymore and will actually have to get stuff done will they come up with a plan? I know nothing of what the Dems. goals are. Can anyone tell me? Aside from the lavish 4 day parties that is.

quote Originally posted by Phranc: Since the Dems. cant play the obstuctionest game anymore and will actually have to get stuff done will they come up with a plan? I know nothing of what the Dems. goals are. Can anyone tell me? Aside from the lavish 4 day parties that is.

ah yes. the republican congressional failure is all due to democratic "obstructionism".

<dana carvey>how conveeeeeenient.</dana carvey>

oh, and i'm not going to ruin your little bubble of spite. -waves hand- you don't need to know about the democratic agenda. -waves hand- these aren't the droids you're looking for.

quote Originally posted by Uaana: with a dem house/senate we're looking at gridlock for the next two years.

true, since the republicans have pretty much gone tharn. they seem to be incapable of conceiving of something like co-governance.

and that, in my view, is the real difference. partisanship is a given. power is the coin of the realm. but the majority apparatus and their shills made it clear for years that they believed that the opposition had no real right to exist, much less participate. i don't expect the democratic congress to roll over and be conciliatory in the face of such a blunt ideology, but i'm pretty certain that they actually understand something called "representation."

[This message has been edited by Euterpe (edited 12-24-2006).]

quote Originally posted by Euterpe: ah yes. the republican congressional failure is all due to democratic "obstructionism". <dana carvey>how conveeeeeenient.</dana carvey> oh, and i'm not going to ruin your little bubble of spite. -waves hand- you don't need to know about the democratic agenda. -waves hand- these aren't the droids you're looking for.

So you can't answer my question can you. And if you think the dems weren't obstuctionists you're blinded by your strict adherance to the party line. But like you said you don't care.


Can someone answer my question honestly without being inmature about it.

What is the dems plan now that they actually have to do something?
They all ran on the "I'm not a Bush republican" and some won now that they have the slimmest of majorty what is their plan? What are their goals? They can't just sit there and do nothing.

quote Originally posted by Phranc: So you can't answer my question can you.

no, i'm just taking the position that i'm not inclined to do your homework for you. you're free to find a smidgen of smug comfort, if you like... "oh look, a democrat can't answer my challenge! i win!" but i will, ungrudgingly, give you more credit than you do me, and presume that you're capable of tearing yourself away from the rightwing blogs long enough to actually seek out information, rather than just reinforcement of your sorry-ass sour grapes nonsense.

now... should you actually bother to do so, and come back with criticisms of what you find - and i would expect that to be the case - then we have a legitimate argument, and things on which we might substantively agree and disagree.

but this is just pissing and moaning for its own sake, and right now i don't feel any particular need to elevate it. schadenfreude, remember? your whining is music to me.

[This message has been edited by Euterpe (edited 12-24-2006).]

Yes yes I'm a giant right winger!! You found me out. You're wrong by the way. But since you don't care about facts it doesn't suprise me.

But you can't tell me what your party line is. Its not that you don't want to its just you can't. No one can they don't have one. Instead of hurling weal insults why not answer the quiestion. What is the dems. plan for the next two years? Do you know?

[This message has been edited by Phranc (edited 12-24-2006).]

quote Originally posted by Phranc: Yes yes I'm a giant right winger!! You found me out. You're wrong by the way.

i stand corrected.
big of me, eh?

as for the rest... well, believe what's easy for you. seriously. yes, i could do all the lookups and provide you all the quotes and links and wrap it up with a nice synopsis. but i just don't feel like it. i'm comfortable with my state of knowledge, and my access to information. are you?

this isn't a debate. it's christmas eve, and people are making empty jabs at nancy pelosi. this is something i should be getting exercised about? get real.

quote Originally posted by Euterpe: this isn't a debate. it's christmas eve, and people are making empty jabs at nancy pelosi. this is something i should be getting exercised about? get real.

Bing Bing Bing! We have a winner...

What is the republican plan, besides attacking democrats and anyone else that questions anything they put out as a talking point?

I'm not worried about Pelosi. She has already demostrated that she cannot pull the consensus of her Democrat colleagues. She isn't all that good. She has her position based on patronage and her wealth. (She is the wealthy person in the House).

But what I find so ironic about Democrats, is their blindness.

Republicans will at least admit or point out bad Republicans or ones that shouldn't be in office. Democrats on the other hand believe there isn't a single bad member of the Democrat Party. They will even stand behind Cynitha McKinney.

There are some things on the Democrat Platform that I agree with. I just can't join their party, because of the absolute haterad, disillusional, partisian and agenda driven that many of them are. They are on the wrong side of progress most of the time.

To me! Democrats aren't very progressive. Republicans need help though, so I'm not given them a high cloud to ride on. The evanglecals and the radical neocons are determental to the party. But the real nuts and people who will revert the standard of living in our country and absolutely destroy it are the leftist socialist who side with the Democrat Party and now have a strong voice and control of it.

Fred Phelps! You guys now him? The guy that protest our solider furnerals. Yeah! He's an example of a radical Democrat.

You sleep with dogs, you get fleas!

quote Originally posted by Wichita: They will even stand behind Cynitha McKinney.

some will. many won't. and jefferson, who has been put forward here as the "face of the democrats" seems to be understood as an atrocious embarassment by just about everyone except the fruits who voted him back in office.

fred phelps? an example of a radical democrat? that's one of the more colorful ass-pulls i've seen in a while.

quote Originally posted by Euterpe: i stand corrected. big of me, eh? as for the rest... well, believe what's easy for you. seriously. yes, i could do all the lookups and provide you all the quotes and links and wrap it up with a nice synopsis. but i just don't feel like it. i'm comfortable with my state of knowledge, and my access to information. are you? this isn't a debate. it's christmas eve, and people are making empty jabs at nancy pelosi. this is something i should be getting exercised about? get real.

You don't have to look up and quote anything all you have to do is tell me what the democratic plan is. If Nancy is as great as you say she is then she should have a terrific outline for what it is the dems. under her watch plan to acomplish and how. Since your so comfertable with your knowledge why not share it. I don't care if its x-mas eve, I'm not as christian. For someone so gung ho about how great the dems. are how great Nancy is when comes down to the nuts and bolts about why they are so great you clam up. If your gonna tell us dems. rule reps. suck atleast extrapulat as to why. You make a preaty weak mouth piece for you party if you are gonning tell others to look up info. about your party.

So as a dem. do you know what the plan is? I've asked a bunch of times but you seam unable to give a straight answer.

quote Originally posted by Phranc: You don't have to look up and quote anything all you have to do is tell me what the democratic plan is. If Nancy is as great as you say she is then she should have a terrific outline for what it is the dems. under her watch plan to acomplish and how. Since your so comfertable with your knowledge why not share it. I don't care if its x-mas eve, I'm not as christian. For someone so gung ho about how great the dems. are how great Nancy is when comes down to the nuts and bolts about why they are so great you clam up. If your gonna tell us dems. rule reps. suck atleast extrapulat as to why. You make a preaty weak mouth piece for you party if you are gonning tell others to look up info. about your party. So as a dem. do you know what the plan is? I've asked a bunch of times but you seam unable to give a straight answer.

-sigh- you really refuse to get it.

<ricardo montalban>he tasks me. he tasks me.</ricardo montalban>

i seem to recall being attacked by someone not long ago, on the claim that i put forward arbitrary assertions, only to stroke my own ego when others were unable to unassailably meet my "challenges".

it was an interesting attack, precisely because it mirrored so perfectly, the strategy i find so often employed here (if you can call it "strategy"... usually, it just seems to be the natural result of sloppy thinking). i was particularly amused when voytek, who jumped on that criticism so readily because he was too inarticulate to actually come up with anything himself, wound up doing exactly the same thing himself, very soon after.

imagine my mirth now.

you seem to think you can press an argument and put me on the defensive about a position you've taken, on no visible grounds, and then score some kind of debating points off the fact that i'm not bothering to play along.

tsk.

Well then if you cant tell me why the dems are so great and how magnificent their plan for the country is how about telling us why "she's the new speaker, and as a registered democrat i'm quite pleased, both at that fact" your so pleased. I'm not putting you on the deffencive. You put your self on offence then when asked what was so great about the fact Nancy was in charge and what her plan would be under her leadership. You refused to answer a simple question. What possition have I taken exactly since you know. Just like you knew why I disliked Nancy and you knew that I was a right winger.

It apears you can't be bother to substantiate any of your claims. Or answer a simple question. So why do you even post? You seam really good at deamonizing the otherside but cant even back up your claims of greatness for your side.

Maybe your oh so great party will get a plan together after they party.

quote Originally posted by Wichita: But what I find so ironic about Democrats, is their blindness. Republicans will at least admit or point out bad Republicans or ones that shouldn't be in office.

Please expand on this with some examples. I'd like to know about some of those bad Republicans that have been pointed out by their own.

I thought the inability to reflect upon ones self deficiencies while attacking others was a bi partisan effort.

[This message has been edited by Scott-Wa (edited 12-24-2006).]

quote Originally posted by TorqueWench: they do when it feels more like the collapse of the berlin wall. after waiting that long to exhale, its gonna take all us lefty-liberal types a while to get our groove back.

http://arts.bev.net/roperldavid/politics/congress.htm

I would think it would have felt like the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1980 after nearly 50 years of Democrat control. And they haven't been the minority party for more than 8 years at a time since then.

Please don't take 50 years to find your groove.

quote Originally posted by Phranc: Well then if you cant tell me why the dems are so great and how magnificent their plan for the country is how about telling us why "she's the new speaker, and as a registered democrat i'm quite pleased, both at that fact" your so pleased. I'm not putting you on the deffencive. You put your self on offence then when asked what was so great about the fact Nancy was in charge and what her plan would be under her leadership. You refused to answer a simple question. What possition have I taken exactly since you know. Just like you knew why I disliked Nancy and you knew that I was a right winger. It apears you can't be bother to substantiate any of your claims. Or answer a simple question. So why do you even post? You seam really good at deamonizing the otherside but cant even back up your claims of greatness for your side. Maybe your oh so great party will get a plan together after they party.

congratulations. you've now escalated to a full-blown straw man argument. (that's where you argue against the words you put in someone's mouth, rather than what they actually said.) nowhere have i claimed that the democrats display "greatness", or in fact made any real claims at all. all i've indicated is that i'm pleased that pelosi will be speaker...because first, as i've made clear on numerous occasions, i am politically partisan, and second, because the prospect of her speakership reduces people like you to circular drivel.

i will go so far as to say that, while strongly partisan, i am not unwary. so "magnificent" is not a term that would ever come close to expressing my view of the democratic leadership or their policies.

you stand corrected.
big of me, eh?

quote Originally posted by Euterpe: fred phelps? an example of a radical democrat? that's one of the more colorful ass-pulls i've seen in a while.

[edit] Democratic Party
Phelps has run in various Kansas Democratic Party primaries in Kansas five times, but has never won. These included races for governor in 1990, 1994, and 1998, receiving about 15% of the vote in 1998.[29]


[edit] Support for Al Gore
Phelps supported Al Gore in the 1988 and 1992 Democratic Party primary elections.[30] In his 1984 Senate race, Gore opposed a "gay bill of rights" and stated that homosexuality was not a choice that "society should affirm".[31] Phelps has stated that he supported Gore because of these earlier comments.[32] According to Phelps, members of the Westboro Baptist Church helped run Gore's 1988 campaign in Kansas. Phelps' son, Fred Phelps Jr., hosted a Gore fundraiser, which Al and Tipper Gore attended, at his home in Topeka,[9][32]. Fred Phelps, Jr. served as a Gore delegate to the 1988 Democratic National Convention.[32][33] Gore spokesman Dag Vega declined to comment; "We are not dignifying those stories with a response."[34]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_phelps

I know! I know! Wikipedia isn't a credible source when it comes to pointing out flaws of Democrats.

Anything else you need info on?

*sigh*

quote Originally posted by Wichita: Anything else you need info on? *sigh*

I'd like to know what the dems. plan for America is?

No one else seems to know except a guy who wont tell me.

(not just talking points but real actionable substance)

quote Originally posted by TorqueWench: they do when it feels more like the collapse of the berlin wall. after waiting that long to exhale, its gonna take all us lefty-liberal types a while to get our groove back.

Yep, thats about right.
Maybe, just MAYBE, there's still some hope for this 230 year long experiment in government by the people, and for the people after all....

[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 12-24-2006).]

wow. truly amazing. reading that had me both shaking my head and laughing at the same time.

well, point you, i suppose. phelps thinks he's a democrat.

i think he's a freaking nutcase, about as democratic as a three-week-dead wolverine, and representative of nothing but unmanaged pychosis... but hey, what the heck. i guess next i'll discover that ann coulter is a republican.

oh, wait...