When is the Democratic party going to realize that they canot continue the slander and the name calling. It seems that they just cannot get over the fact that they had their bells rung last Novemeber 2nd! Instead of trying to re-group they make Howard Dean, a shoot from the hip rougue politician, there party leader! I find it really funny that this guy has the nerve to accuse the Republicans, the people who porbably pay the most taxes in this country, of never making an honest living in there lifes. Here are some things that this idiot said in the last few days or so

On the GOP
"It's pretty much a white, Christian party.''
-- June 6 remarks to audience of journalists and minority leaders

On Republicans
"...a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives.''
-- June 2 speech in Washington, D.C., at Campaign for America's Future conference

On Tom DeLay, House GOP Leader
"I think Tom DeLay ought to go back to Houston where he can serve his jail sentence."
-- May speech to Massachusetts Democratic Convention


DS

You are defending a party that is trying to instill fear into its citizens with false terror alerts, an administration who is losing the support of the majority of Americans due to the War in Iraq (which has no end in sight), a president who cannot get the economy going, creating a deficit with massive military spending while making huge cutbacks in education, and an administration that is trying to advance its far-right wing religious agenda onto everyone. There are moderate Republicans trying to distance themselves from morons like DeLay and some of the other radicals of the party and for very good reason.

Funny, since the election is over, why haven't we had one of the half-assed color code 'terror alerts?' Are we safer? Yeah right. Any time it was politically convenient last year, we were on 'heightened' alert. :rolleyes:

There is nothing positive coming from this Administration. America hasn't been this divided since the Vietnam era. And we're coming up on 4 years since 9/11 and we still haven't managed to catch bin Laden because our military is spread too thin and he constantly moves. The only reason we caught Saddam is that he was too stupid to leave Iraq.

*getting the pop corn ready* This is going to be an interesting debate.

Funny...it didn't appear to me that Don Smitty was attempting to defend anyone or anything! Instead, he was lamenting the Dems absolutely horrific choice as Chairman of their own party, and listing just a few of the outrageous comments this loose cannon has made over the past few weeks.

Even some of the Dems are unhappy with Dean. Recently, Sen. John Edwards said that John Dean is not the spokesman for their party.

'Scuse me, Sen. Edwards....YES HE IS, and your Party awarded him that role.

Now that they're stuck with him, they'd better figure out a way to reign him in.

As for the Republicans....they should be elated that this guy represents the opposing party, front and center.

Apple

Hey, you're really Michael Moore, aren't you?

"Are we safer?" Well, I haven't seen any skyscrapers getting blown to smithereens since 9-11-01...or did I miss something?
"Trying to advance its far-right wing religious agenda"? Again, I must've missed something. Last account I had, you still couldn't pray in a public school, and the Ten Commandments couldn't be put up in a courthouse. Yet a teenage girl can still butcher her baby without parental consent. Uh-huh. Yeah, a regular revival has broken out in this country, and it's all Bush's fault. The war? We may actually agree on the need to pull out, but I'm willing to bet money that you and most Dems still miss the point of why it was ever started. But I won't go there. I do think, yes, it's time Iraq got their act together so our boys could take an overdue trip home to the good ol' USA. But jeez, there's not a Republican/Bush conspiracy under every stone as all the Dems would have us believe. If anybody has an "agenda," it's the Dems. And if anybody is keeping the divide among us, again, it's the Dems. It made me sick to hear some Republicans after the election talking about how we're supposed to "reach out" to the disgruntled losers and coddle them. What the hell for? It's obvious they're not as "mainstream America" as Hollyweird and the media would have everybody think. I say, to hell with reaching out. Now, if they want to get on board with the real mainstream America, then, by all means, climb aboard. And if they don't, then they need to get over it.

Thank you APPLE! You took the words right out of my mouth. But we must remember that this is exactly the way many of the democrats reply to something that they really cannot defend!It seems to have become a democratic practice that if you cannot reply to the facts, then just change the subject completely! I call it The Michael Moore Spin! How much of that went on in last years debates? Whenever a question with FACTUAL backing is asked of the democrats, most seem to totally avoid the facts involved in the question and instead they luanch an attack on the person or party asking the question, making accusations that have absolutely nothing to do with the question at hand. At least when I read your reply I relized that I was not going crazy! Heck, I hope that Dean remains the leader of that party! Kerry set them back 8 years, and Dean will manage to set them back another 8! Goombah, why not comment on the actual content of the post? Why reply by making an attack on the administration?


Don Cardi

Meanwhile, while 'the mouth that won't stop roaring' continue's to flap his tounge I'm getting a real kick out of the current story being knocked around re Bush vs. Kerry Yale grades !!

Not an attack on Democrats, mind you...just enjoying a story with FACTUAL backing!



Apple

WHERE in my post did I defend a party?

What do you feel about Dean's comments? That is the issue, not Bush!


DS

Good post Snake

Meanwhile, while 'the mouth that won't stop roaring' continue's to flap his tounge I'm getting a real kick out of the current story being knocked around re Bush vs. Kerry Yale grades !!

Not an attack on Democrats, mind you...just enjoying a story with FACTUAL backing!



Apple [/b][/quote]Yes Apple! No wonder Kerry would not release his records during the election year! He was afraid that "THE FACTS" about his education would come out! This from a man who represented a party that had a field day calling the President of the United States a "STUPID" man! Imagine that!



Don Cardi

There is a HUGE number of Democrats who do not follow the likes of Howard Dean. As much as I'm not a Democrat, I can say that plenty of them do not consider him their party leader and are making an effort to do something about it. You're right, he does make alot of idiotic statements (then again so has G.W. and I love him! )

Problem is, he IS their party leader. I'm not sure of the rules so I don't know exactly what they can do about it in terms of trying to unseat him, getting him to step down or something like that.

Amazing thing is that, after his meltdown during the 2004 Primary campaign...they didn't see this coming in the first place!! The didn't want him as their Presidential candidate...but they wanted him as their Chairman.



Apple

Wow! I haven't seen anything like this since last November!

Now, I have to admit that I didn't vote for Bush, but I don't consider myself a Democrat either. I am not a registered member of any party, although I am a registered voter.

Do I like the comments made by Howard Dean? No. His comments are narrow-minded and downright nasty.

However, to commment to what Snake posted. Darn right we aren't allowed to pray in school or put the Ten Commandments on public buildings. You know why? The constitution, as written by our founding fathers, guarantees us a separation of church and state. Damn right a woman can have an abortion. You know why? Because the Supreme Court guaranteed me that I have the right to choose.

As for the war, I don't support it, but I do support our troops and I disagree that this is tearing us up like Vietnam. I think that most Americans support our troops, and I would hope that we wouldn't make the same mistakes that we did back in the '60's and 70's, and treat our war veterans like dirt.

The only description I would add is the word "homophobic."

On Republicans
"...a lot of them have never made an honest living in their lives.''
-- June 2 speech in Washington, D.C., at Campaign for America's Future conference [/QUOTE]

George Bush, Ken Lay, and Fastow are all perfect examples.

On Tom DeLay, House GOP Leader
"I think Tom DeLay ought to go back to Houston where he can serve his jail sentence."
-- May speech to Massachusetts Democratic Convention [/QUOTE]

I disagree. He's creating quite a commotion within his own party. Let him stay right where he is, keeping running his mouth, and let him help splinter the party between the normal, moderate Repubs and the radical religious fanatics.

So, goombah...when your comment on Don Smitty defending the Republican Party backfired...you resort to defending and even elaborating upon Howard Dean's statements.

Except for the last one of course, where you manage to take a page from the other side.

Way to go!! You are JUST the kind of person Dean is truly representing.

Apple

Pass the nachos. I swear I wll never talk about politics herea gain. The people are too pasionate and they'll murder you if you oppose them.

Doesn't that apply to all politicians?

Mick

George Bush, Ken Lay, and Fastow are all perfect examples.

[/b][/quote]Don't forget Bill Clinton with Whitewater. Or Hillary making money trading Cattle Futures. :rolleyes:


In 1978-as her husband was on the verge of election as governor of Arkansas-Hillary was dabbling in cattle futures.

At the time, the combined income of the Clintons was around $60,000; so Hillary couldnt risk a lota mere $1,000 to dip her toe into an uncertain stream. However, it turned out she was enormously luckyso lucky, in fact, that a lot of cynics in Arkansas and elsewhere came to believe that luck played little or no role in her success, that she and her financial advisor had engaged in a scam. Her friends defended her with a very weak, "beginners luck."

The popular media have said comparatively little about Hillary's venture in cattle futuresperhaps because commodities trading is complicated, perhaps because Hillary Clinton is untouchable in their eyes. However, some business publications have examined these transactions in depth and found them highly suspect. Here are the bare facts.

In 1978-when her husband was still attorney general of Arkansas-Hillary Rodham Clinton opened a futures account with Refco, a Chicago-based firm, whose local broker was Robert L. "Red" Bone." She turned the management of this account over to James Blair, counsel for Tysons Foods Inc., one of the biggest chicken processors in the country and a major Arkansas employer.

Blairs connection with Tyson is by no means irrelevant to a consideration of Hillarys futures account. Over the years, Don Tyson had been a major supporter of Bill Clintons many political campaigns according to some, the most generous contributor of all.

Tyson, known in Arkansas as "Big Daddy," probably killed, gutted, packaged, and shipped more chickens in a day than most chicken farmers and processors saw in a lifetime. An eccentric good ol boy with a mean streak, he was arguably the biggest chicken merchant in the country, and behaved like it.

A governor could do a lot of favors for an old chicken plucker. And Big Daddy needed all the breaks he could get from friends in high places. For example, in a state-regulated food industry, it made a difference who was inspecting for health hazards and environmental infractions. The right inspector, somebody who understood the troubles chickens could pose and who could use a little extra money "off the books"might well make the difference in whether or not people nationwide bought Tysons chicken tenders or Perdues. So, if you were a chicken man, it was nice to be tight with the governor.

Jim Blair performed a satisfying service for Big Daddy and the governor: He arranged deals that made both men very happy. And its hard to believe that Hillarys futures account wasnt a part of those mutually beneficial arrangements.

As noted above, her initial investment was small. However, over the next year, Blair wrought miracles that Harry Potter has yet to learn. The account grew like wildfire and stood at almost $100,000 when she collected her winnings. Some of her biggest scores came from selling short, a particularly risky venture because of potential margin calls.

Blair and Bone had an understanding about margin calls, Refco didnt issue them, regardless of the circumstances. "Buying on the margin" means putting up a "down payment" on a contract. You put down 10 percent, say, selling cattle futures short based on the current price. This means youre betting the price will fall. If the price increases, your liability increases and the new 10 percent is higher than the old one. At that point, a brokerage house will usually issue a margin call, asking you to put in more money to cover what looms as a substantial loss.

When it came to margin calls, Bone was defiant, so much so that in 1977 the Chicago Board of Trade had disciplined him and ordered the Refco home office in Chicago to limit his activities, an order Bone didnt follow. He was also reprimanded by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, which cited "repeated and serious violations of record-keeping functions, order-entry procedures, margin requirements and hedge procedures"

The question of margin calls is relevant here, because had Bone and Blair played by the rules, according to James Glassman of the New Republic, in July of 1979 (a publication which, by the way, would not be included in any "vast right-wing conspiracy"), Hillary should have received a margin call to put up $117,500. No such call was issued, though it undoubtedly would have come from any other commodities office.

Hillary entered the market on October 11, 1978. On her first ten cattle contracts, she sold short, the most dangerous kind of trading, since youre betting that prices will drop and risking enormous losses if they rise. With Blair handling the account, she bought and sold, either the same day or the next day, and walked off with a profit of $5,300. By October 23, she had made an additional profit of almost $8,000.

Hillary, who had spent most of her life denouncing the greedy predators of Wall Street, enjoyed the exhilaration of making money the easy way. Her account experienced a few downs, but mostly Blair reported lots and lots of ups. In fact, she admitted that while she was in labor with Chelsea, she was worrying about her sugar futures.

Marshall Magazine, a publication of the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California, printed a remarkably frank and revealing analysis of these transactions:

These results are quite remarkable. Two-thirds of her trades showed a profit by the end of the day she made them and 80 percent were ultimately profitable. Many of her trades took place at or near the best prices of the day.

Only four explanations can account for these remarkable results. Blair may have been an exceptionally good trader. Hillary Clinton may have been exceptionally lucky. Blair may have been front-running other orders. Or Blair may have arranged to have a broker fraudulently assign trades to benefit [Hillary] Clintons account. Many people familiar with these markets think that the first two explanations are exceedingly unlikely. Well-informed traders rarely trade with such remarkable success and consistency.

In other words, the odds of a trader honestly achieving these results are simply too high for hard-nosed traders to believe. The Journal of Economics and Statistics placed those odds at 250 million to one.58 And the fact that staid academic and professional journals would state the proposition in such blunt language is an indication of just how widespread and respectable these suspicions are. The only question remaining would then be: Which of these two illegal methods did Blair or the broker use in behalf of Hillary Clinton?

Marshall Magazine even provides a possible answer to that question:

Although no evidence of fraudulent trade assignment has ever surfaced, this method seems most likely to many people. Here is a simple explanation of how a dishonest broker could achieve this objective: Execute buy and sell orders in the same contract. The contract price will eventually go up or go down. If it goes up, assign the profitable buy trades to the favored account and assign the losing sell trades to an account owned by the benefactor. If the price falls, assign the profitable sell trades to the favored account and assign the losing buy trades to the benefactors account.

Marshall Magazine goes so far as to print some speculation on the identity of the benefactor:

Many of Clintons political enemies believe that the scheme was designed to surreptitiously transfer an illegal bribe or gratuity to Clinton in exchange for a political favor or for political influence. They believe that Don Tyson, a major supporter of Clintonwas the benefactor.

This series of transactions illustrates several important points about Hillary Clinton and her role in Bill Clintons rise to power.

First, she clearly believed in the adage that you could sup with the Devil if you used a long-handled spoon. Big Daddy Tyson was everything shed been taught to despise at Wellesley and Yale, a greedy capitalist who hated labor unions and had no compunction about polluting Mother Earth for financial gain. Yet she allowed Blair, Big Daddys right-hand man, to manage her financial affairs. Second, assuming the speculation in Marshalls Magazine is correct, she was the conduit for a bribe. If so and many signs point in that direction then its virtually impossible to believe that she entered into this scheme in all innocence.

Third, legal or illegal, this was not a campaign contribution, justifiable in terms of ultimate and noble political ends. This was cash flowing into the Clintons personal bank account. After all, the Clintons had acquired rich, influential friends; and they needed the funds to travel comfortably in such circles. Ultimately, the cultivation of the moneyed crowd would prove politically advantageous; but they had to dress in the right clothes and entertain in the right way.

And fourth, the money came to Hillary rather than to the governor a way to sidestep some of the ethical issues that might have been raised had Bill opened a futures account and beat such incredible odds. In chivalric Arkansas, even a politicians wife is cut some slack. Only in 1994, after Bill was president of the United States, would anyone seriously scrutinize her commodities trading account.

DS

Not really.

You know, I've wanted to post on this thread all day, but have been too busy at work to reply. On the other hand, I'd rather have a Dean than a Delay, who seems to have problems of his own this days.

I don't know who mentioned to stay on topic, but regarding Bush/Kerry and their schooling/grades, which "someone else" brought up, so I figure it's fair game. Kerry I believe IS smart, Bush's grades?? .....to quote Cardi from another post, "I don't buy it!" No way in hell"!!!


TIS

Democrats.

I think that both Dean and DeLay should go off somewhere and try to find a brain that they could share between the two of them. Both are big mouths that just continue to embaress their respective parties!

The problem that I see for the dem party is that they just refuse to change with the times. They insist on attacking and demeaning the opposition, and still cling to that "dirty politics" theory of mudslinging. It just doesn't work. Didn't that party see that in the last election? Didn't they see how the people did not support them in the elections because the people are tired of mudslinging and finger pointing? The American people want clear cut facts and answers. The American people are not stupid and they want to hear the "HOWS" of fixing problems, not the "IFS." Dean has NEVER talked about his PLAN of doing things, instead he attacks and belittles. Not someone that I would want leading my party!

And TISSY, to address the Bush/Kerry education thing, well W's records were available throughout the election year for all to see. Now as far as Mr. Kerry goes, he REFUSED to have them released during the election year and now, all of a sudden he agrees to make them available! Interesting. What was he afraid of? But then again, I guess he agreed to have them released BEFORE he agreed to refused to have them released.


Don Cardi

you know TIS I completely agree with you. Very nice post.

.


.


(damn liberals :p :p )

But it's OK for a Republican to call a Democrat a name?

This, I think, is pretty much true.

Howard Dean is one of the many idiots in the world of politics (on all sides).

However, I just want to comment on the first quote because it is so often that the Republican party is referred to as a "bunch of old white guys".

First of all, it's not true. There are a lot of people of other races who are Republicans. Sure the majority of the members in the party are white-- but guess what guys? The majority of this country is white!!! It's not disproporionate to the nation's demographics. Most political parties here (including the Democrats) probably have a white majority. :rolleyes:

Secondly, what's wrong with white people? Why should someone use those words as a way to insult a party or demean them? IMO, if you're going to take a super-sensitive liberal stance on things and be all gung ho about being "politically correct", you have to realize that that's racism too. Not that I'm offended by the comment, personally. I just think it's so stupid and inconsistent to put white people down in order to "show" that you're cool with other races. Which is exactly what Dean was doing.

Furthermore, the "Christian" thing-- what the hell kind of religious freedom do we have in this country if everything that has to do with Christianity is constantly ridiculed, put down, and insulted? Have you noticed that people can say anything they want about Christians and antagonize them, but it's politically incorrect to say anything about any other religion, from Judaism to New Age to Hindu to Buddhism?

And just like I said about the "white" comment-- again, it's not true. There are a lot of Republicans (maybe more than half, even) who aren't Christians. I know some Muslims, some Kabbalists, a lot of Jews, and a lot of atheists who are Republican. I don't understand what the word "Christian" could have possibly contributed to his argument. Although when it comes to Dean, argument is always too strong a word for the rhetorical vomit that comes out of his mouth.

Because being white is racist.

DV, when you're right, you're right. What can I say? :p

He sure is!! Smart enough to latch on to TWO wealthy women, get himself a purple heart for a couple of scratches and get in & out of service in a matter of months (4-was'nt it?)!!

Not smart enough to dupe enough people into believe he'd make a good President.

Thank Heaven for small favors....

Apple

But it's OK for a Republican to call a Democrat a name?

This, I think, is pretty much true. [/b][/quote]Hey mang, where chu ben? I waz waitin for chu to get hear sooner or later! Iz about time mang! Now da dems haf pull out dere big guns!


Don Cardi

He sure is!! Smart enough to latch on to TWO wealthy women, get himself a purple heart for a couple of scratches and get in & out of service in a matter of months (4-was'nt it?)!!

Not smart enough to dupe enough people into believe he'd make a good President.

Thank Heaven for small favors....

Apple [/b][/quote]Well, I for one, wont' question reasons for purple hearts nor will I ask if "he bled" (Like Pat Buchanan did),but will continue to respect and admire any serviceman on either side of the political isle, who receives one.

At least, it's a tad more than dressing up in a big boy uniform" and getting your picture taken on an army tank", then disappearing for months at a time. :rolleyes:

TIS