The Deal: This Moderate Republicans opinion.

[Ready4Change]

I've long been open about being a Moderate Republican, who is here on DU because I feel you all come closer to my ideals than my own, out of conrol, party. I continue to thank you for allowing me to stay, and have promised to do my best to express myself politely, particularly when my opinions differ from yours.

All that said, here is my opinion on todays "Deal", as I currently understand it, and right before I go to bed. (Meaning I won't be able to respond to your comments until tomorrow AM.)

Start :rant:

What in Gods name are the Democratic leaders thinking? This is such a colossal mistake I don't think I can say what I REALLY feel without getting kicked off DU.

I don't know what's worse. Republicans helping the Neocons dismantle our Nation, or Democrats watching it happen and doing nothing.

NOTHING.

Dems in the Senate just proved they don't have the guts to use the fillibuster. Good bye checks and balances.

I am just sick.

Good night.

Hope I'm allowed to respond tomorrow.

Hope any of us are allowed to speak freely next week.

End :rant:

[AuntiBush]

1. Ready4Change: Sleep a bit better knowing you are not alone

with your feelings. No. You're not alone.

Night and Peace.

[Ready4Change]

19. Thanks, AuntiBush

After reading up on this this morning I not in quite as dire a mood.

(Coffee helps!)

[Nite Owl]

2. Dear Moderate Republican

this very liberal dem agrees with you fully. This 'deal' let in three of the worse and there seems to be no guarantee that if we deem it worthy to try a filibuster again that they won't decide to use the nuclear option again.

[Ready4Change]

21. Hi Nite Owl

Seen in mornings light this seem more like a step backwards, rather than the drastic backwards leap I saw it as last night.

The main proponents seem to be saying that this preserves the right to fillibuster regarding SCOTUS nominees. That seems true. But then again, what's to keep the Right from invoking the same nuclear option then, and ramrodding their nominees through regardless? Nothing, imo.

My position regarding bullies is to confront them early, before they become emboldened by success. However, perhaps there is a chance to use some political martial arts here, and use their arrogance against them?

We can only hope.

[wtmusic]

3. You are perhaps, misinformed

"don't have the guts to use the filibuster?" Where were you in the first round when all these judges were *successfully* filibustered? Do you not understand what is going on here? :eyes:

[paineinthearse]

8. Do I detect a bit of condescendence?

I understand the original post completely. There was no mention of the "first round", it is framed in the context of this current round. Personal attacks should be made in PM or not at all.

[wtmusic]

15. Makes no sense whatsoever

This deal has nothing to do with "guts". Senate Democrats have proven repeatedly they can and will filibuster. What it does have to do with is striking the best deal you can in a difficult situation.

Apparently the OP thinks unwillingness to commit political suicide constitutes a lack of bravery. This is a misinformed opinion, as is your suggestion there is a personal attack anywhere in my post.

[Ready4Change]

23. Hi wtmusic

1st, I haven't taken any offense to your posts.

And I am still informing myself on this issue. So there's every possibility I've a lot to learn about how all this works.

My understanding (at this time) is that the main use of the fillibuster isn't its actual use. Rather, it is the THREAT of its use. As nominees come down the track, minority senate members express their willingness to take the drastic step of fillibustering objectionable nominees. If enough senators express that willingness, the nominees are typically withdrawn before the fillibuster is started.

Basically, it is a way for the minority party to say "We are serious, here."

So, in this case, the Dems sent the message they were willing to fillibuster these 10 nominees. (10 out of 200, I take it, is not out of the ordinary.) Republicans, rather than act as usual and retract these nominees, invented this nuclear option, which some say isn't even a legal action (I'm still learning about that, too.)

The end result, after this Deal, is that the Dems threat of fillibuster has been diverted, with 3 of the nominees going to vote, 2 being left up in the air, and 5 others not addressed in anything I can find. (Retracted?)

In other words, Dems only got half the usual effect of a fillibuster threat.

I could be wrong. (Actually, I almost certainly am, at this point.) I invite others to provide more information and opinions.

Thanks!

[wtmusic]

37. No offense intended

Seriously. I have been misinformed many, many times, and I may be on this, although I can honestly say I've hashed through this one more than usual --

If Senate Democrats had threatened a filibuster, Frist would have called their bluff. Had the filibuster taken place, the all-but-certain result would be that Frist would exercise the "nuclear option", using an arcane and controversial procedural rule to end debate. Senate Democrats would vote to override the motion and then everything is on the table. If we win, we win big. If they win, they win much bigger:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3705274&mesg_id=3708646

So we compromised, and it is one with many upsides:

1) A huge wedge has been driven between moderate Republicans and the neocons, likely to have a profound effect on legislation to come.
2) Democrats in the Senate are united 100%.
3) There is a built-in "escape hatch" where we can call a Supreme Court nomination and "extraordinary circumstance"--there is no such luxury on their end of the bargain.
4) Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown have still not been confirmed (to my knowledge--they were going to try today). There are longshot odds at least one of them will be dumped.

Had they "nuked" us IMO it would have gone to the courts, which is very, very unusual, but it was a very unusual move. We probably still would have lost.

[Pawel K]

39. But you have to understand, this made it look like WE were wrong when the

oppisite is true. The fact I saw McCain on the Today show this morning talking about how they stopped democrats from abusing the fillibuster made me sick to my stomach (might have been my hangover). The republicans were in a free fall by trying to pull the trigger on the nuclear option and the Democrats seemed like the party of reason. The Republicans will now be able to completely spin this around the other way. We will pay for this in 06.

[sendero]

62. I have to disagree...

... with the idea that a "huge wedge" has been driven anywhere.

Any wedge that we took advantage of was already there. And at least 2 of the Rep wedgers have said flat out that they would have voted FOR the nuclear option if they had to.

This agreement isn't worth the paper it is printed on. It is merely a temporary cease-fire, nothing more. Some act as though "buying time" is a huge win. Maybe it is, but I doubt it. Time will tell.

What is the end-game here? It is the SCOTUS. And I'm polishing my crystal ball and telling you flat out, the Reps will band together when the time comes and they will shove some wingnut down our throats.

This little "compromise", which in fact is pointless because if it were a contract any judge would throw it out for vague language, does nothing for the long term but in the short term it gives the Reps an easy 3 appointments. Yay and hooray.

[Michael_Bush]

41. Glad to see you here! Wait for the fight over the Supremes!

I certainly HOPE that the point of preserving the fillibuster was so the Dems can use it to block radicals from being put on the Supreme Court.

People who choose to fight every battle ALWAYS lose, but I agree that people who choose never to fight don't win many wars either.

If I had the choice between radical nuts in the district courts or the supreme, I would choose the former over the latter any day. The Dems have made themselves look reasonable and their fight over the supremes will be much easier to paint as being a principled stand.

AND as many have pointed out, the republicans have split. I always said that the day we start seeing rats leaving the ship Bush was doomed!

[Pawel K]

45. yeah, but the rethugs will be able to change the rules when it comes to it

this didn't change anything; just allowed the judges to get confirmed; exactly what Republicans wanted.

[Michael_Bush]

50. But if it doesn't change anything

and we couldn't do anything anyway

How is choosing to take a stand over supreme court nominess rather than district courts a bad idea?

In addition, we pulled some Republicans our way, we start from a stronger postion next time, I didn't like them not standing up either but the more I think about it, the more correct the decision seems to be.

[Pawel K]

52. I am also taking a deep look at this today

but I still don't think this was the best idea. The polls were showing that Americans were disgusted at how republicans were running the senate. Now they will be able to shift all the blame on us. Yes, this would have been bad but if the nuclear option went through I think we would have had 06 in our pockets; now I'm not so sure.

[Michael_Bush]

53. We still have a fight comming

If we had the 06 elections in our pockets for this fillibuster, I fail to see why fillibustering the Supreme Court ones doesn't at least get us similar things.

Anyone reasonable enough to consider voting for only "because" of the fillibuster will see the logic in holding the fight off til the Supremes.

This comprimise, I don't believe, hurts us, how can the republicans make the case that we folded only because they were right when the moderates spoke out the way they did.

To me, the only way for them to flip this is to propose moderates for the supremes and try and say the whole protest was over nothing but I would call that a win too, wouldn't you?

[TheFarseer]

58. I agree with you. We didn't have any good choices

They had all the cards.

[Stinky The Clown]

60. The compromise wasn't bravery

It was shit.

Bravery would a bit more like this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3697382

[Hippo_Tron]

4. I think that Reid won us a temporary political victory

The fact that James Dobson is going absolutely apeshit is good for us in the short term. My greatest fear, however, is that the "gang of 14" will vote for cloture on the SCOTUS nominees and the real battle will be lost. I'll have to wait and see.

[funflower]

9. More like a stay of execution....

They got everything they want (for now) without having to suffer the political consequences of "nuking" the Senate, and they can go nuclear again when it's a Supreme Court nominee at stake.

The only upside is that we have a little more time to pressure our republican Senators (keep those cards and letters coming, folks).

[Hippo_Tron]

11. But they didn't please the religious WRONG, that's what's important

Bush and Frist don't give two shits about whether Owens, Brown, and Pryor get on the bench. They only want them on there because the religious wrong will stay home in 2006 and 2008 if they don't stop the evil Democrats from keeping people of faith from getting on the bench. Dobson's comments make it abundantly clear that the religious wrong is pissed.

But the point about buying some more time is well taken. Next time, getting those three judges on the bench WILL be a big deal, because it will be the SCOTUS that the GOP will be trying to put them on.

[funflower]

16. Why should Dobson & friends be mad? They are getting all three of

their beloved RW judges confirmed. Why should they care so much about procedural stuff when they are getting their nominees confirmed anyway?

[Hippo_Tron]

55. Becuase the religious WRONG is fucking nuts

You're right, they got their "people of faith" onto the bench, there is no rational reason for them to be pissed. But the religious wrong is not rational, they are pissed anyway. The bottom line is that we drove a huge stick into the heart of the GOP. It's gotten to the point where Trent Lott is calling James Dobson un-christian. McCain or any other rational thinking Republican has a zero chance of winning the primary now and they will have to nominate another bushbot to please the fundies.

[burrowowl]

17. They really don't care about the Dobson crowd

this was a victory for Coporatism/Facism.

[murielkane]

38. Exactly right -- this is a matter of the corporate agenda

http://yeoldeconsciousnessshoppe.com/art63.html

A handful of conservative state legal officials devised a highly marketable idea in 1999. They decided to raise lots of money to elect more attorneys general who — like themselves — are reluctant to sue big business.

Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor said that he conceived the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA) as a way to combat the alliances that some state attorneys general formed with private lawyers to sue the tobacco industry.

<snip>

To curb such "lawsuit abuse," Pryor said, "the business community must be engaged heavily in the election process as it affects legal and judicial offices."

<snip>

RAGA's founders have found ready support among industries that fear state lawsuits. Along the way, RAGA has sparked controversy because it appears to set its members up for conflicts of interest and because it launders its money through a much larger Republican PAC to conceal the identities of its donors.

http://www.independentjudiciary.com/news/clip.cfm?NewsClipID=190

The Dallas Morning News
Jul 18, 2003

By Todd J. Gillman

WASHINGTON - Sen. John Cornyn angrily accused Democrats on Thursday of trying to "smear" Alabama's top lawyer - a federal appeals court nominee - with questions about the fund-raising tactics of a Republican attorneys general group Mr. Cornyn once helped lead.

Some of those tactics were laid bare for the first time Thursday when the Senate Judiciary Committee released hundreds of pages of internal memos from the Republican Attorneys General Association along with donor lists and thank-you letters. One call list showed 10 companies the group's staff asked Mr. Cornyn to solicit, though there is no indication he did so.

"Elected officials can and do raise money for their political party all the time," Mr. Cornyn said at a confirmation hearing for Alabama Attorney General Bill Pryor, who started the group in 1999 to help elect more conservative, business-oriented attorneys general. "Democrats do it too. ... So for us to act so sanctimonious about this just drips with hypocrisy."

The group has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars in "soft money" for the Republican National Committee. Just how much and from whom remains murky, however, because donations went straight to the RNC, which provided the staff and didn't list the attorney general group donations separately on its campaign reports.

[burrowowl]

57. Thanks for links! eom

[Ready4Change]

24. Hi Hippo_Tron

( :) Hippo_Tron? Must be a story behind that?)

I've heard it said that if both parties are angry at an agreement then it must have been a fair compromise.

I'm not sure that idea works when dealing with extremists, as the "religious Wrong" are in this case. (Great term, BTW.) I think they would be furious with anything other than complete submission to their every demand.

In this case, I think the pressure from religious groups will serve to make Frist and his ilk more adamant in the next conflict.

Some time has been bought. But I fear the next fight will be more fiercely fought, and with more at stake. Fingers crossed.

[Kerrytravelers]

5. Hello Ready4Change.

I have not met you yet. I think it is quite mature of you to come to DU, be honest about who you are, and join in an effort to keep this country a democracy. Thank you. I wished there were other brave souls in your party who would be patriotric enough to put country before party in an effort to keep the fabric of our nation together. Thank you.

I am not sure how I feel about this "compromise." Personally, I don't see it as much of a compomise but more of a delay from the inevitable. Here at DU, many are posting their feelings- both pro and con. At this point in time, I'm still con.

Again, thanks for being here at DU and I do hope your thread is not locked and you are not banned for this. I personally think it is refreshing!

Peace and Strength,

kt

[Ready4Change]

25. Thanks, Kerrytravelers.

One thing I've found regarding DU is that the Mods here are far more tolerant of opposing opinions than many RW sites I've visited. Thanks DU.

There seems to be growing discontent in the moderates of the Republican party. But a great number of them seem addicted to the GOPs successes, and blind to the results of those successed, and how those results are in many cases directly harmful to Republican ideals. In my opinion, the party has been taken over by the Neocons, and hasn't awoken to that fact, yet.

[bvar22]

6. The Democratic Party didn't capitulate.

The Democratic party was betrayed (again) by a small but powerful group of Senators(DLC) who have sold out to the interests of the Rich Corporate Owners.
Alone, and without Party aproval or consensus, they brokered the DEAL that put 3 Fanatical Corporatist Judges on the Federal Bench.

Here is the list:


Joe Lieberman--DLC

Ben Nelson---DLC

Mary Landrieu---DLC

Mark Pryor---DLC

Ken Salazar---no DLC listing, PHenry rating -(minus)100

Kent Conrad---No DLC listing, PHenry rating -(minus)97.5

Robert Byrd---No DLC listing, PHenry rating -(minus) 60

These are the MOST conservative PRO-CORPORATE anti LABOR Democratic Senators in Washington DC.
Did they serve YOU, or their Corporate Masters?

The biggest objection that the Democrats had against Owens and Pryor were that they ALWAYS ruled in favor of CORPORATE POWER.


Do you REALLY think that the Working Class (Democrats) got a deal?

If you WORK for a LIVING, you have been stabbed in the back again by the Democrats (DLC) who openly solicit BRIBES from those who OWN the Corporations!

[evlbstrd]

7. Dear Ready4Change,

Don't worry. Although my lifetime on these boards has been relatively short, I have read posts here for a long time. I think I can say we are reasonable people who want to retain and regain our freedoms.

You don't stand out at all. Patriotism, truth to the Constitution.
Welcome.
:bounce:

[Ready4Change]

27. I've found that that to be true, evlbstrd

While there is a very wide array of opinions here, I've found DU to be quite tolerant of extremes.

At this point my chief concern is the longevity of the entity that was created 200 years ago. I see the current rise in power of the Neocons to be a severe threat, as a great many of their actions are proving harmfull to that state. (Overextended military, degradation of foriegn relations and influence, disastrous economic policy, stalled or backwards energy policy, etc..)

:toast: Here's to the day the Neocons are removed from power and we can resume vehemently disagreeing over how to best improve these United States.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

28. I think I'll join you

:beer:

For the next round, let's also drink to getting the Rapturist Right out of power too.:toast:

[Ready4Change]

36. I'll get drunk to that.

I mean I'll DRINK to that. Responsibly drink, of course. ;)

[Rowdyboy]

10. Pardon, but moderate Republicans have been propping up this dictatorship

for 5 years now. Maybe, when you guys stop enabling Bill Frist and Tom Delay we can begin getting back to an America that I remember. Don't blame it on me-blame Olympia Snow and Arlen Spector and Lincoln Chaffee and John McCain for allowing this travesty to continue.

"Moderate Republicans" really don't deserve the right to lecture ANYONE on standing up for what is right. They've been rolling over for the last last five years like cheap whores on a payday weekend...

The only thing more ridiculous than a moderate Republican is a gay Republican.....

[Ready4Change]

29. I agree, Rowdyboy.

I am dismayed at how long moderate Republicans are taking to wake up. I think a great many are so addicted to their parties success that they haven't yet realized that their party is no longer serving it's own Republican ideals.

The term "cool aid drinkers" comes to mind. Sigh.

And yes, moderate Republicans are ridiculous. I mean look at me. I spend much of my time hanging around a liberal site, of all things!

:)

[Fovea]

12. Dear friend, who happens to be a moderate Republcan

This fire breathing radical agrees with you one hundred percent about this.

Sleep well, and consider what Kevin Phillips, another moderate Republican will doubtless say about it tomorrow.

Perhaps this bonhomie sounds suspicious, but you are a prisoner of concience in the Republican party. I hope you manage to retain the best kind of freedom, freedom of thought. They literally cannot take it from you, or I.

[Ready4Change]

30. Gives me hope, realpolitik

There are regions of real agreement between the rational thinkers of both (all) parties.

:toast: to the day that this current era of extremist power shall have passed.

[LibertyorDeath]

13. I know someone that's celebrating

[Ready4Change]

31. Wouldn't it be nice...

If our politicians were required to carry ads from their sponsors like NASCAR racecars do?

And I suspect that Rove is very pleased with himself. But I also am sure he is already working on several future actions as well. No rest for the wicked.

Thanks for the pics, LibertyorDeath.

[spooky3]

44. great idea! And Ready4Change, I must confess to a suspicion...

you sound a lot like a Democrat to me!

:hug:

[Ready4Change]

59. Hehheh.

Hush your mouth.

Truth be told, I registered Repub way back when because that's what all my friends were doing. Since then I've found out my opinions are all over the political map, such that I'm not a good fit for ANY party.

[LibertyorDeath]

48. "I suspect that Rove is very pleased with himself" Yes this is what he got

H2O Man Donating member (1000+ posts) Tue May-24-05 04:45 AM
Response to Original message
1. Nominated.

The senate "saved" a tactic that the democrats are not using in the three cases where it is the most important. So we can celebrate the senate "victory,

" or we can recognize that three of the worst judges in history will now be seated at the second highest level of the federal court system. They will have a greater impact on the culture than the Supreme Court, in that they will decide more cases. The general public will lose access to those protections implied by the Bill of Rights. Individuals will have far less chance of contesting corporate policies in their communities. So, we will have a significant loss of Constitutional rights, and corporations will be empowered"

.... but, gosh! we saved the tactic that our senators don't have the balls to use when it is most important.

http://h2oman.blogspot.com

anytime cheers

[Lexingtonian]

14. it's hard not to agree

But...it's not over yet.

I can't pretend to understand the game being played and I'm sure it's all being done so very few people do. But these old boys and gals have a lot of treachery in them, and no one's going to end this thing without a clearcut decision one way or the other.

So far all we do know for certain is that Frist and Dobson have lost.

It appears as if bipartisan Senate moderates have a big win.
It appears as if Cheney & Gang have a small win.
It appears as if Harry Reid and hardline Republicans have a non-decision.
It appears as if hardline Democrats have lost.

The problem with this situation is that no one in this game wants the moderates to win, either.

I think we have a game of musical chairs going- with further, partly overt and partly obscure, manouverings designed to eliminate further participants.

[ElectroPrincess]

26. It appears that we've reached that point ...

Save for a few brave Senators, the rest of our Democratic party have sold out to the multi-national corporations. Wake up folks, this is just another facade, a waltz to convince the sheeple that the Democratic leadership cares about the common people. Anyone who reads the newspaper and has an IQ above 90 knows that we (the average working-stiff American) have been punked. Welcome to unregulated corporatism, i.e., fascism.

[Ready4Change]

33. ElectroPrincess,

I felt that way last night. I'm a bit calmer this morning.

I think that majority of Dems in office are still fighting the good fight. However, I think the Reps in Majority control have enabled a few moderate Dems, allowing them to grasp more than their share of power.

The result is a split Dem party and an unchecked swing of power to the right. And with power in the right controlled by the Neocons, Corporations are having a field day.

[Ready4Change]

32. I'm trying to more fully understand it too, Lexingtonian

The news coverage has made it all clear as mud, as usual. They are all concerned over who won, rather than reporting on what "the deal" actually is.

It does appear that the Neocons control the right, and they are enabling "moderate", and weak willed, Liberals in the control of the left. The result is an unchecked swing of power towards the right.

I was hoping this event would be the rallying call that could unify the left. Not looking that way at this time.

[Ready4Change]

18. I'm up. Coffee and donuts for all!

:hangover: :donut:

I'm going through and responding to replies now. I'm a "little" better informed about the "Deal" now too.

[CWebster]

20. It has come to this?

While the party faithful are busy cheering the Centrist sell-outs again, a Republican observes--

Hey, your party isn't doing their job.

That's a lame commentary.

[Ready4Change]

34. Fair enough, CWebster

I am here on DU because I can't view the current Republican party as "my" party anymore. It's really the Neocon party, but a great number of Republicans haven't realized (or faced up to) that fact.

I've voted straight Dem in the past few elections, and voted for more moderate, less Neocon Republicans in the primaries, in hopes of countering Neocon control. To no avail.

At the same time I am dismayed at the Neocon usurpement of control of the Republican party, I am also dismayed at the repeated failure of Dems to unite and oppose the gathering of power in the right.

Basically, I'm not happy with either party. And I've yet to find a viable alternative.

:toast: Here's to the day BOTH parties start living up to their ideals again.

[tavalon]

42. Lame commentary?

It's spot on, actually. Is it that you don't like someone from the other side pointing out our very obvious flaws?

[CWebster]

43. No, lol, the lame commentary part is the Democrats cheering like

they won something.

[tavalon]

56. Oh, I see

Damn, sometimes this medium is a bitch to interpret. Thanks for clarifying.

[Al-CIAda]

22. Orig. poster is 100% correct. As an independant I too see the capitulators

and false opposition for what it is. A handful of Dems (not in leadership) are the ONLY ones of intergity and guts left in the entire government.

Welcome to Facism.

[Ready4Change]

35. More than a handful I think, Al-CIAda

I think there are more than a handful of Dems have integrity and guts. But I think a small handful are being supported by the right to short circuit attempts by Dems to show a spine, and that is reflecting on all dems.

I think there are some Republicans who also show glints of integrity. But their attempts are washed away by the tide of power/greed on the right.

I hope those with integrity and rational thought on BOTH sides of the isle can regain some semblance of control. Fingers crossed.

[rman]

40. Welcome to the one party system

What we need is real change, and a lot of it.

[caligirl]

46. This thread is whats so great about DU. one more for greatest page

[Minnesota_Lib]

47. Two of my closest and most valued friends at work are...

evangelistic, conservative Republicans.

One, Tom (very religious, small government, unfettered free-market conservative but now sees the danger of a theocracy), long ago gave up the Republican Party. He has been politically active since the early 1980s (he says he was a member of Fawell’s “Moral Majority”) and is well-versed in the neocon philosophy (he is aware of Strauss and the anti-democracy beliefs of the neos). We don't agree on much...except that the neocons are evil incarnate and the biggest threat--internal or external--that this nation has ever seen. He says the Republican Party has ceased to exist not only because of the neocon takeover but because their new power-hungry "big government, borrow and spend on pork like crazy" philosophy has eclipsed the worst the Dems ever did. He even wears a bigger tinfoil hat than I do: he thinks Bush will incite Marshall Law before the next presidential elections to keep the neocons in power hehehehe.

The other, my dear friend Chuck (he is a racially free-market, theocracy minded fundie) agreed not to discuss politics with me long ago. We tended to get into shouting matches.

Tom just told me two days ago that Chuck admitted that he is totally disillusioned with the Bush administration and admits he made a major mistake supporting them.

Tom cites the Iraqi debacle, the deficit, the constant public-opinion manipulating attacks on the media (Chuck used to be a reporter for a few small town newspapers and values a free press) and the "Nuclear Option" as the last straws for Chuck.

I am seeing hope here. If these guys can see what is happening then others can as well. While I disagree with the "classic Republican" philosophy, at least I could respect it. My two friends--plus you, Ready4change (and the crashing ratings of FAUX News)--give me hope that this nation once again can become a democracy of those that respect the old adage "agree to disagree"--a democracy where we all work together and compromise in order to build a better republic.

Peace Out....

Edit: Punctuation nazi here..hehehe. Fretting over one dropped comma = anal.

[Eloriel]

49. Ahhh, the nub of the matter

I have to say, I admire your ability to go right to the heart of things. I hadn't even allowed myself to think that deeply about this little disaster just yet.

All I can manage to deal with is: what did we WIN???? I don't get it, I don't see it.

The one thing I see as a potential ray of hope, tho it's a slim one, is that this nucleus of "moderate" Dems and Repugs (and I'm not overly fond of moderates unless they're on the Republican side), MIGHT just find it in their hearts to flex their muscles about other things, possibly bringing the Senate back a little bit from the fascist precipice it insists on flirting with.

Thanks for your post.

[Generator]

51. Just want to say from what I've read

You are not a moderate Republican. Just a real Republican, not this sycophant freakazoid anomaly of horror that calls itself Republican NOW. I know moderate Republicans, ie non religious and they sure as hell didn't vote for Bush a SECOND time. I can forgive the first time only because-well not everybody can see an anomaly of horror in the offing. I've read other "moderate" Republicans on DU-ie those that thought they were Republican until this whatever the hell it is-came to be.

So..as for the whole deal yesterday..I don't know. But I'm waiting for the Democrats to wake up....just like you..even though I think it's probably too late..and I still am stunned at the lock steppedness of the Republicans because UNLESS Bush and his brand of Republican neo-con horror remain in power long past our deaths..some day the "Republicans" that supported this traitor will be in a world of hurt. You woke up-when will they?

Loyalty in the face of all evidence to the contrary and common sense-I guess that's what Republican means now. It means total grab for power-but if you look at history-it never lasts and somebody pays.

[Wabbajack]

54. We critize our party leaders all the time

feel free. :)

[CWebster]

61. Actually the only celebration for the Democrats

could be that all the Rupublicans didn't bow to Frist.

At least, that is how it appears, but it may just be a more subtle strategy to achieve the same ends.