1994 Flashback

jeani o, saint inigoes, md — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 14:59:43 GMT

Eloquent words from Clinton. I wonder how idiotic Bush's spin will be.

1994 Flashback

Julie, Shinglehouse, PA — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 15:26:47 GMT

I imagine Bush ate crow this morning for breakfast. Go Democrats!!

1994 Flashback

Tom Payne, Cromwell CT — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 15:48:46 GMT

Jeanie has it right. I would not be surprised if idiot Bushie were to tell the country that he has always done the right thing, he will continue doinig what he believes to be the right thing and DEMAND that the DEMS join him in the continuation of his (failed) policies.

1994 Flashback

Michelle, alnany NY — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 15:53:50 GMT

Chill Jeani; we won, now act like a winner instead of a barebones trailer trash hooker seeking a fix.

1994 Flashback

Dave Miller, Miamisburg, OH — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:07:35 GMT

To Jeani O: I agree. Bill Clinton was a realist (unlike Bush) and he was a skilled political operative (also unlike Bush). In addition, he always knew how to phrase his words in such a way that the public was always pulling for him. He was booming with confidence (as all good Presidents are), but he also had an air of humility. I think the Clinton quote which Huma Zaidi references in her writing, shows a very good human quality. He gave it his best efforts. He did what he thought was best for the country. And, yet, he's able to acknowledge that he bears responsibility for the voter's dissatisfaction. I, too, am looking forward to Bush's statement today, the day after the Republican's took a drubbing. I expect he'll be arrogant, agressive, defiant, and wholly unyielding in the notion that his current policy or stance on the Iraq war is completely correct. He seems to continually confuse intent with results. He figures he and his administration had good intentions when they decided to go invade Iraq. I, too, don't doubt their intentions. However, if the results are poor, and show no signs of improving, then a good leader would admit failure; re-group and start looking for new options. This President insn't just confident. He's arrogant and lacks the ability to self evaluate and self criticize. As such, he'll always be a slave to his "first policy" regardless of how flawed it's proven to be. It's a shame 7 Nov 06 wasn't a Presidential election. He'd be removed in a landslide.

1994 Flashback

kathy — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:17:22 GMT

Having been on the loosing side of this fiasco, I have to say that it will be refreshing to be able to sit back and throw rocks for a change. The Dems remain morally bankrupt, they have just managed to convince a majority of the country that their immoral positions are acceptable.

1994 Flashback

Cliff, Port Charlotte, Fl — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:30:28 GMT

Amazing that Clinton feels he can re-write his own history so easily. Even more amazing that his Dem. buddies are so ready to buy it. Civility is not a weakness but partisanship based on hate is.

1994 Flashback

chris, wallingford, pa — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:33:38 GMT

sounds like kathy is also in a state of denial. to call democrats morally bankrupt after the many republican scandals is just a big bowl of wrong. sour grapes kathy! at least have the dignity and decency to admit defeat and offer hope that both parties can unite for the good of ALL americans.

1994 Flashback

Do_do — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:40:09 GMT

Didn't realize that raising the minimum wage was immoral.

1994 Flashback

Kate, Springfield, MO — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:42:03 GMT

I'm constantly fascinated with the image of Dems being "immoral" or "Godless" or - the one I read yesterday - "low-lifes." The quote from Clinton sounded downright classy to me. And I'm sorry - who has been in the middle of all these scandals lately? It's time to stop throwing stones and work to return our country and our government to being "for the people, by the people."

1994 Flashback

Patrick in Maine — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:43:53 GMT

The CNN commentator had it right. The PUBS strayed too far from the center and got hammered. Now they will have to join Pelosi in the center, for she is too smart to be any kind of left wing zealot. Watch her and wish she was on your side McPUBS. A minimum wage increase, tax breaks for the middle class, lower prescription drug prices will the centrist-ageless- genderless-policies she will push. A series of smart small gains is all they need to keep the ball rolling. Can you say Clinton-Pelosi in 08?

1994 Flashback

Lisa, Amarillo, TX — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:43:56 GMT

Kathy, we're all on the loosing side of this. Until our country decides to work together, one policy at a time, and abandon party for principle, no one wins. I'm tired of the fact that nothing truly gets done because of partisan politics. Control of the House & Senate is a farce, as proven by both parties in the past 2 administrations. Our reps need to vote on principles and not on party lines. They also need to be representatives of integrity and moral standard. I don't think that's what we've just voted in. God help us if we're to spend the next two years in the blame game, rather than finding real solutions to real problems.

1994 Flashback

Lisa, Amarillo, TX — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:46:09 GMT

1994 Flashback

John Germantown, NY — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:55:32 GMT

To Kathy: I've learned over the years to beware of people who tell you how moral they are.

1994 Flashback

Gary Tegan, Minneapolis, MN — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:56:33 GMT

To kathy: The fiasco to which you refer was no less than a complete renunciation of not only the failed policies of a Republican-controlled Congress but of that group's moral bankruptcy as well. How can you deny the obvious moral bankruptcy of the Republicans in the face of the Delay & Cunningham falls from grace, as well as the Foley debacle and subsequent cover-up. It is always easier to criticize than create but if you wish to spend your time throwing rocks, go right ahead from that glass house of yours. Accountability is imperative for any branch of Government and it is time that taxpaying, country loving Americans get answers, not excuses or deflections. The truth is more than just what you can't prove to be a lie: it is what we are owed and must demand of all leaders... Republican, Democrat, and Independents alike.

1994 Flashback

Robert Reppy, Tampa , Fla. — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:57:10 GMT

<> ...So, the Dems are the morally bankrupt ones, while the party that gives us torture, lies to us about reasons to go to war, covers up for pedophiles, and takes away the right to Habeus Corpus has the high moral ground? Are you insane, blind, or just plain stupid?

1994 Flashback

John Germantown, NY — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:57:30 GMT

To Kathy: I've learned over the years to beware of people who tell you how moral they are. And, by the way, that was an awful lot of convincing wasn't it?

1994 Flashback

JJ in NJ — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 16:57:40 GMT

Kathy, your party has seen many of its leaders on their way to jail, one Congressman preying on teenagers, and a few who beat their wives. So even by the s*xual standards conservatives use as the ONLY benchmark of morality, the Republicans are in the sewer. The biggest difference you're going to see is that we Democrats aren't mindless, grinning bulldogs marching in blind lockstep with our leaders the way Republicans are. We are going to hold our leaders' feet to the fire and fight to keep them honest.

1994 Flashback

jack, palm beach, florida — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:01:58 GMT

To Kathy: What "immoral" positions are you talking about? Is it "immoral" to question the conflict we created in Iraq? I do believe that the U.S. Constitution gives each citizen the right to question the decisions and policies of our lawmakers. In fact, you could say that it is un-American not to question our leaders...maybe even "immoral" not to! Is it "immoral" to support a women's right to choose? Well, we can debate this issue forever, BUT I do believe that each individual in society should have the right to decide that issue for themselves! Each and every person should have the right to decide for themselves what they want to do with THEIR bodies...not have some government lawmaker decide. Besides, while I agree that the Constitution does not specifically state that there is a "right" to choose, the original Constitution did not give any real rights to WOMEN to begin with. It was only later, when we as a society grew more "enlightened that we decided that women had any rights at all. I don't know who is "RIGHT" on the abortion issue, I just know that I would prefer to let the individual decide. That's not "immoral", that's enlightened! Besides, didn't Jesus or God say: Judge not, lest ye be judged! So what is your beef? What are you afraid will happen...if it involves cats and dogs raining from heaven, I don't want to know! Just remember this: unless you and your friends are saints and pillars of virtue, then you are a sinner just like the rest of us! However, I do think that you should have every opportunity to express your view point, and THAT's the moral way to be. Don't just say everyone is wrong...back it up with specifics and support your points with facts.

1994 Flashback

Mary, Madison, NJ — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:03:33 GMT

"The Dems remain morally bankrupt?????" Why, because they want to change the culture of corruption in Congress? They want to protect our environment? They want to raise the minimum wage? They want everyone to have equal rights under the law? They want government to stay out of our homes? They want to stand up for the Bill of Rights? MORALLY CORRUPT? Kathy, you've been listening to Fox News too much. You're buying into their spin.

1994 Flashback

Frank, Newport News , VA — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:04:09 GMT

The people spoke. Dems now run the House and apparently the Senate too. It is time they put their agenda into action by putting bills on the President's desk that accomplish what they stated during the campaign; Solve the Health care issue, reduce the cost of prescription drugs, solve the Middle East issue, they promised to make this country energy independent and they have the solution to the immigration problem. American's spoke with a loud voice...it's up to the Dems to deliver or at least provide the details to the American people

1994 Flashback

stanley, new orleans, la — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:07:02 GMT

Kathy, you should curb your comments when addressing issues such as "moral bankruptcy." What does the name Foley mean to you? You speak of throwing rocks, but you should perhaps leave your glass house first. Oh yeah, get a spell checker for your comments next time, unless your grammatical errors were intended to indicate the literary capacity of our esteemed "president."

1994 Flashback

Cassie D. Hager Austin, TX — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:12:06 GMT

Kathy, Being "moral" as the Republicans and yourself are I am shocked to hear that you might see throwing stones as "refreshing". My goodness? Who is Holy now? I am thankful there is such a sound, moral person like yourself around to remind us which direction we have just turned away from.

1994 Flashback

Dan, Chicago, IL — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:16:24 GMT

The true fiasco, Kathy, is the domestic and international mess the current administration has created. Included in the list of moral imperatives are the prohibitions of lying, cheating and stealing. Here's a couple of names for you: Abramoff, Ney, DeLay, Cunningham, et al. I won't even touch on that Foley thing. A culture of corruption. I don't think you have the moral high ground here. I'd be careful with those rocks--a lot of windows surround you.

1994 Flashback

jeani o, saint inigoes, MD — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:16:25 GMT

Kathy - You're NOT saying this with a straight face are you? Dems morally bankrupt? Have you forgotten Foley, Ney, Abramoff, Sherwood, Delay, Hastert's coverup. Shall I go on?

1994 Flashback

Common Sense Ohio. Orrville,Ohio — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:17:58 GMT

Kathy,please!Foley,Haggard,Ney,Noe,Taft.Democrates are progressive.They think about future generations and the life that they will have;not make the country a third world nation with massive debt and low wage workers.All that so that the wealthy elite can rob the pension funds of loyal employees to increase the size of their bonus checks and send the middle class to the roles of under-employment and bankruptcy.

1994 Flashback

Jeff Palfreyman, Fort Washington, Maryland — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:23:38 GMT

It will certainly be interesting to see how things go. I would guess it will still be gridlock in DC. The gavels may have changed, but the margins are not substantial enough in either the Senate or the House to make a difference. This should set Republicans up nicely for the Presidential election as a previous writer has already suggested ... "I have to say it will be refreshing to be able to sit back and throw rocks for a change." Unfortunately, that is what too many folks on both sides of the aisle want/like to do - is just throw rocks. Sad, really. Throwing rocks with a purpose is one thing, but already poised ... fasten your seatbelts!

1994 Flashback

bobbi eau claire, wi — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:25:19 GMT

nice 1 kathy....what planet r u from? nothing this administration has done has been even close to moral...Iraq..Deficit spending..Tax cuts for the wealthy..TORTURE!!! who is immoral?

1994 Flashback

Cecil Patterson — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:27:31 GMT

Kathy -- Abramhoff, Foley, Cunningham, Delay, Ney, and a host of others are embarrassments to the Republican party, but "the Dems remain morally bankrupt". You have it backwards -- a majority of the country has just managed to convince the Republicans that THEIR positions are NOT acceptable.

1994 Flashback

Doug B, Milwaukee, WI — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:29:05 GMT

I enjoy the "culture of corruption" that Democrats claim the Republicans have. Lets double...no, triple the number of "immoral" people you're listing. What are we talking about, 20-30 people? How many Republicans are there? The winners (although it doesn't feel like it) are the Republicans. Bush cannot do any policies that create a perception of embarressment (would never get through Congress), and this big change of Congress will never get anything written into law, causing their win to appear muted. In addition, Democrats won't be able to run against Bush in '08, so they won't have that going for them. The lack of vision (what do the Democrats stand for, except for what the Republicans DON'T stand for, anyhow?) will be the ultimate downfall of the Democratic party at this time. I disliked Clinton, but at least he had a vision...can the Democrats say that now?

1994 Flashback

craig — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:29:34 GMT

the people have spoken... bush needs to reevaluate his harsh stance and realize he has made a huge blunder in iraq. i remember him scoffing when it was said that it would become a quagmire, well what has it become then? i feel for the young soldiers and they're families who have suffered through this poor choice of mr. bush. bush's stance, "i am right, the rest of the country is wrong" is sickening, there is no room for this kind of arrogance in a president! he is to serve the people in they're best intrests, NOT HIS! bush's policies along with the entire rebublican agenda is ruining our country and it is time to change, the republican gestapo is now demoted to the back seat, HOORAY!!!!!!

1994 Flashback

jon — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:32:58 GMT

Kathy, Hopefully, you will not have to throw rocks. My problem with the Dems is: will they be able to focus as a unit and not behave like a bunch of wide-eyed shoppers going to a 'buy 1 get 10 free' sale. As for the Dems 'remaining' morally bankrupt, all I have to do is look across the line at the Republicans and their actions(speak louder than words)for the last 6 years and wonder how anyone in the world can claim they have acted morally.

1994 Flashback

Ryan, Michigan — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:43:58 GMT

I for one believe that it will be interesting to see how Bush responds. I believe he has two options; 1.) Take the Clinton road and become an excellent politician and adapt you views to whatever is considered popular at the time and ditch whatever you believed in previously, or 2.) Stick to your beliefs and basically become a lame duck, pain in the Dems butt, vetoing machine. I'm not sure which way he will go. On one hand if he compromises what he believes and allows minimum wage increases and stem-cell research it will be politically popular but it will abandon some of his base, like Clinton did. On the other hand if he takes out his veto pen every month then that will lead to a very tough political climate in '08 for Republicans. We shall see which road George picks. He could go somewhere in between like he did in his first year of office and expand the government like crazy (i.e. Medicare Part D and No Child Left Behind) which will drive conservatives batty but hold the line on some social issues that might calm the conservative base a little bit. Who knows.

1994 Flashback

Joe Z — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:57:16 GMT

LOL. I wouldn't know where to begin. First the reference to Foley who immediatly resigned for sending text messages to pages..as opposed to Gerry Studds who had SEX with a male page and not only didn't resign but got a standing ovation from the floor. Then there's the "idiot" Bush whose growth policies have created the lowest unemployment. (lower than Clinton) and a stock market at an all time high, 20 straight quarters of economic growth, etc. The "tax cuts for the rich" actually created MORE revenue for the federal government. These are the facts. They are undisputed. As usual however the libs make it personal when they can't debate the issues. The GOP lost because they veered from the Reagan conservative philosophy which put them there.

1994 Flashback

Ryan, Michigan — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:24:29 GMT

Joe - I definitley agree with your statement "The GOP lost because they veered from the Reagan conservative philosophy which put them there." The fact that Dems were sucessfully able to run on balancing the budget and being fiscally conservative should've been the writing on the wall for Republican supporters. I hope they actually do what they kinda-sorta ran on. Now that I think about it they never said they would they just said that the Republicans haven't been fiscally conservative and haven't balanced the budget. I sure hope they do it though

1994 Flashback

ELIZAGETH CASH BANNING, CA — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:47:02 GMT

WHAT DO YOU MEAN..."THE DEMOCRATS WON'T BE ABLE TO RUN IN THE 2008 ELECTIONS?? WELL.....THE DEMOCRATS WILL RUN AND WILL PUT IN A DEMOCRAT FOR PRESIDENT/VP/ON AND ON........THE PEOPLE OF THE GREAT NATION ARE "FED UP" WITH THE BUSH'S .......LIES, A PRESIDENT WHO IS UNABLE TO EXPRESS HIS FEELINGS ETC.........OPEN YOUR EARS!!

1994 Flashback

Nemo Trax, Pittsburgh — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:51:41 GMT

Doug... you think the Dems can't run against Bush in 2008? Why not? The GOP ran against Clinton and his private parts in 2000....

1994 Flashback

Spencer, Austin, TX — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:00:32 GMT

The most interesting (and revealing) aspect of these midterm results: They show that the Republican Party doesn't have a monopoly on "morality." You have former GOP voters out there who voted the moral issues once again (e.g., corruption issues), but this time they actually voted for the Democrats. Of course, you'll have plenty of stubborn, partisan Republican extremists who simply refuse to come to the center like the rest of us; these people will harp and harp on how "Democrats are fooling everyone" and that they're actually "morally bankrupt." This reaction is pretty easy to understand. When the success of your entire party rests on the "morality" issue, and that pillar suddenly disappears, denial is a natural reaction. I guess extremists like Kate above really need to ask themselves: Are you really concerned with the good of ALL Americans, or are you just a sore loser? I was hoping that most people out there were reasonable people who care about the common good. I think this midterm finally shows that they are.

1994 Flashback

Pam Pack, Charlotte, NC — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:00:44 GMT

You all must be kidding. Does anyone remember "Monica"? Young intern actually in the oval room having sex with our esteemed president clinton, who then lied. HMmmmm morals for demo's. And, I guess most be don't care for the excellent economy. Of course, the media doesn't speak much of it, because we have a Republican president. I wonder how long it will be before the Democrats start claiming repsonisibility for it now that they are controlling the House. Another thing, why do Democrats always sound so angry?

1994 Flashback

Tom M. New Jersy — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:03:22 GMT

Two points 1) this election was all about Bush and nothing about the economy (how can you argue against 4.4% unemployement) and 2) know that the "minimum wage" issue is only political jargon...any economist knows that minimum wage is inflationary...and besides does anybody know anybody that makes the minimum wage...of course not. If your worth your salt and show up for work for more than a month your going to make more than minimum wage so it's just another Democratic spin to get the unintelligent public excited about nothing. If everyone would just take one Economics 101 course the liberals would not be able to win one arguement.

1994 Flashback

leo, norwich ct — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:09:16 GMT

now that we have the majority again, hopefully the democrats will remember why they where voted into office and remember that they work for us. They are there to give a voice to our concerns.

1994 Flashback

Keith, Los Angeles — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:19:08 GMT

When I read an article like http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11009379/ that points to the fact that humans don't even use their rational faculties to make political judgments but instead ignore the facts, get a huge brain reward from dissing their opponents or backing their candidate, it makes the dismissive discourse of politics like this thread into nothing more than theater because there is no argument that would change some one's mind. That part of our brain is not engaged when we consider political facts. Instead we have a system that swings one way when then the next and we plot our course as a society as compromise or as bold folly left or right. In that there is no place for nuance, subtlety or intelligence.

1994 Flashback

Nick, Baltimore — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:47:25 GMT

People who feel the country has changed are correct. However, the change began in 1994 - not 2006. Take a look at who won last night - back in 1992 these candidates would never have been given a chance to run as Democrats. The country has shifted to the right, and Democrats have finally realized that and are presenting candidates that reflect that change. People in Montana and Indiana are no more likely to vote for a liberal now than they were in 1956. Republicans just received a wake up call that they do not hold the trademark on conservatism.

1994 Flashback

brian brumbaugh — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 20:14:45 GMT

LOL all those citing the Abramaoff scandals seem to forget that there were democrats also involved in that scandal. Yet amazingly no mention is made of them and they were never punished. holding your leaders feet to the fire JJ??? YEAH RIGHT. Believe it when I see it. ONLY the party in power was punished and put in the spotlight for wrongs---the democrats involved in the Abramoff scandal had nothing done to them and no attention focuse on them---NOONE HELD THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE--THEY GOT A FREE PASS> It will be nice to see the shoes on the other feet now---ie if both parties screw up--only the democrats get the heat.

1994 Flashback

jan, clearwater fla — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 20:15:57 GMT

"We won, get over it and move on". I believe thats what democrats were told after the 2000 election. Or else we'll have to call you whiney, crybaby, spineless republicans. Sound familiar?

1994 Flashback

brian.brumbaugh — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 20:30:33 GMT

http://www.ontheborderline.net/?p=3304 YEP, you sure held Reids feet to the fire. Guess you are just grinning bulldogs marching in blind step huh? http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1300&dept_id=374730&newsid=15917488&PAG=461&rfi=9 Dorgan was thrown out and his feet held to the fire for accepting the illegal funds right???? NOPE--the democrats play hypocrits and turn a blind eye to him. He gets re-elected--such is the "holding the feet to the fire" LOL WHAT A JOKE> Ted Kennedy--basically kills a lady and waits 11 hours to report it--- Did you "hold his feet to the fire"? LOL once again-you showed us your hypocracy. DOnt get me wrong--the republicans suck--but the democrats suck just as bad. Dont fall for the MORAL democrat BS. They just somehow dont get the bad press. Maybe now that they have the majority, it will be their turn to get double the negative publicity for the same amount of corruption and the republicans can just sweep it under the rug like the democrats have been doing. HOLDING THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE LOL WHAT A JOKE. I have seen no example of the democrats holding their people accountable--they just cover it up or try to scream even louder about the republicans to divert attention from their parties problems. If they actually did "hold their feet to the fire", then I might have some respect for them.

1994 Flashback

brian brumbaugh, colorado springs CO — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 20:45:44 GMT

And I dont remember the whiney, crybaby, cowardly Democrats ever getting over it---we have to put up with the partisan shots still today (holding one party to a different standard sound familiar--as in the cases I have already shown?) WHen democrats actually start calling out their own people like they have been so happy to do the republicans--then maybe the can occupy the high ground. Until then the republicans should feel free to throw stones just like the democrats have done for the last 6 years. Being in the spotlight as the lead party--also apparently means you are a target who should have your negatives magnified 20 times as much as the minority party. The democrats have criticized republicans for (sex with pages--as pointed out the republican merely wrote a letter while the democrat had sex and got a standing ovation AND the Abramhof scandal--the democrats involved didnt even really get mentioned in the liberal news of today--FREE PASS anyone? The democrats have no moral highground--unless it is from standing on all the stuff they have been sweeping under the carpet for the last 6 years while publicly deriding republicans for doing the same things (or in the case of pages--lesser things) Dont kid yourself JJ--the democrats have not held anyones "Feet to the fire" for 6 years. They arent going to start now---you will see Reid and Kenneday around to bring disgrace to your party for a long time to come. But hey thats ok--they can be morally bankrupt--they are democrats and everyone will cover for them.

1994 Flashback

deb, miami,fl — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 20:59:49 GMT

let's get over the "moral" thing. Both parties have had thier fair share of sex scandals. AT least the Demo's keep it Girl/Boy not Man/boy. But that doesn't matter, what matters is the poor, the environment, health care - come on people. WWJD? He would forgive everyone and make some food for the poor. Let's take care of people and stop worrying about everyones' private lives.

1994 Flashback

FREETZIE JOANS, ATLANTA, GA — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 21:00:56 GMT

YOU GO BRIAN!!!!!!!!!!

1994 Flashback

brian brumbaugh Colorado Springs, CO — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 21:01:46 GMT

Here are some more links--just in case you stil dont see how the democrats choose NOT to 'hold their feet to the fire" and how one sided the scandal coverage has been. http://newsbuckit.blogspot.com/2006/10/foley-should-have-been-democrat-in.html http://newsbusters.org/node/8291 http://newsbuckit.blogspot.com/2006/10/foley-should-have-been-democrat-in.html Read those and HONESTLY tell me that the democrats arent just as corrupt as the republicans. they just do a lot better job of sweeping it under the carpet with the assistance of the liberal media. If you cant see the deceit there--then you ARE a blind follower.

1994 Flashback

Jim, Laurel, MD — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 21:06:07 GMT

Just goes to show you how much better than Bush Clinton was. Both started with the Whitehouse, the House and the Senate all under one party. It took Clinton just two years to change that but it took Bush 6 years! ;-)

1994 Flashback

Norm, Gainesville, FL — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 21:32:08 GMT

Brian, you say that the Democrats did nothing but deride the Republicans for the last six years. That's true because the Republicans had the Whitehous, the Senate and the Congress and refused to even let the Democrats into committee meetings or offer legislation or amendments. The Republicans made up their own rules as they went along, including holding midnight sessions, extending voting periods for two or three hours past the 15 minute limit (in order to twist arms and change the vote.) They followed the President in lock-step agreeing to every one of his proposals and never questioning the foulups. Now the Democrats may hold both houses but they really have no power to enact legislation as "W" has the veto power. Also, he has stacked the Supreme Court to be another echo chamber. While it's convenient to call the Republicans the Conservative Party, it is also a lie. Under Reagan and both Bushes, the National debt went from less that 1 trillion dollars to 9 trillion. Imagine that. Only 1 trillion since the Declaration of Independence until 1980, and 8 trillion since! Clinton's watch was in in there too; however, he took the deficits from the first Bush and left the second Bush with a multi billion dollar bonus. The economy was so good under Clinton, that we were fighting over how to spend the money!!!! Let the good times roll again after 2008.

1994 Flashback

Michael B, Bothell, WA — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 22:05:11 GMT

Even though Abramoff's connections covered both sides of the aisle, he had more (and stronger) connections with Republicans. So many GOP folks point to Clinton/Lewinsky as if that's somehow remotely comparable to (not ranked in order of importance: 1) Cheney's secret energy policy meetings 2) The lies and ignorance that led to the war in Iraq and the current state of affairs there 3) The incompetence on the federal level that led to over 1,300 deaths after Hurricane Katrina 4) The ignorance and apathy that led to 9/11 (Bush and Rice both read the August 2001 PDB and Bush responded by going on vacation) 5) The mishandling of millions of taxpayer dollars by Halliburton and KBR. 6) The outsourcing of thousands of jobs to other countries (which Bush has said he's OK with) 7) The Terri Schiavo fiasco. 8) The Mark Foley Scandal 9) The Haggard Scandal Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. As of last night, the Republicans don't have absolute power any more. Neither party should be the "national security" party. Neither party is should be the "morals, ethics, and religion" party. And it looks as if a majority of voters realized that yesterday.

1994 Flashback

brian brumbaugh Colorado Springs, CO — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 22:14:28 GMT

Norm--show me one instance where the democrats punished their own people (held their feet to the fire" while those people were doing the same exact things (abramhof scandal with what 40 dems? and Reids land scandal) that the republicans were doing. I voted split ticket this year--while republican--I dont support them on everything. See the republicans are not the blind ones. Democrats are---democrats are the ones who can not see that their party has been involved in every one of the scandals they have been deriding the republicans for. Why have you not seen mention of the democrats involved in the Abramhof scandal? Where is the discussion of Rieds land deal-which violated Senate ethics rules? I'll tell you where they are---the Dems and the liberal press buried them. To keep their SHEEP blind. it is the democrats which need to open their eyes. but unfortunatly the liberal press will keep pulling the wool over their eyes and covering up all the democratic scandals by refusing to cover them so the democrats can remain ignorant that their party is just as corrupt as the republicans. See in one way the republicans were better then the democrats---the liberal press provided a watch dog over the democrats. BUt now with democrats in power--the liberal press will continue to turn a blind eye to all the illegal (kennedy) and ethical violations (reid) doings of the Democrats. OH you should be so proud of your party---they cover up their disgraces so much better then the republicans (with the help of the media-which wont cover negative Democratic news) Dont give me-"the democrats had no power" story Norm. they had complete power to punish their own members who violated the same rules they were so quick to jump on the republicans for. the fact that they chose not to????--that tells me everything I need to know. The only difference between republicans and democrats? Republicans KNOW about the immoral, unethical or illegal practices of their party--because the news chooses to report on it. Democrats refuse to acknowledge their parties 100% equally reprehensible people and with the help of the media, shove it under the carpet. One of the parties is blind to its own fault and claiming a false moral highground and deluding itself---but it isnt the republicans.

1994 Flashback

Sean, New York, NY — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 22:32:56 GMT

Ugh, does everyone here have problems with their short term memory? Don't you remember that it was after the 1994 election that Clinton (along with Dick Morris) devised his strategy of "Triangulation". It was a very shrewed and effective. Clinton deserves the credit for his political acumen. Don't get me wrong the Republicans and Bush were just as arrogant and stupid as the Dems and Clinton were in 1994 (remember Health Care!) and both got what they deserved. However, what Clinton did after the 1994 elections were never done out of the spirit of humility or "reaching out". That is just spin.

1994 Flashback

Lea Donze, Lander, WY — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 22:37:40 GMT

People please!!! I think the whole message behind yesterday's election is that NO ONE was happy with the way things are going, and our votes are the only real voice we have. Now that we have shouted loud and clear -- Dems AND Republicans "can you hear us now?" -- let's finally all work together and get something honest and constructive done for the people in this country (and for our military men and women). It's time to stop sniping and time to start talking, thinking, and listening. We can do this! We're Americans!!!!

1994 Flashback

Benjamin, Cincinnati, Ohio — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 23:58:16 GMT

I am a god loving, god fearing democrat. I can only hope that the democrats keep in line with the socially moderate values of the average american and throw the far left out the window. The far left will kill this party, and my vote, if they do not. The Democrats are everything I want in terms of representation every way so long as they eliminate their affirmative action on the behalf of different lifestyles. In fact, I wish they could just remove anything to do with sexual behaviour out of politics all together except legislation to protect our children, etc.

1994 Flashback

Shawn Delaware, Ohio — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 01:25:36 GMT

Funny thing happened yesterday. I was talking with a co-worker and I told him I voted for all the democrats that were on the ballott at my voting poll. He said he was voting for the republicans because they are better on ethics. I laughed and asked him if he's been paying attention to the news. I told him if he was paying attention to the news then he would know that the republicans weren't all that great on ethics. I am on top of the world right now!

1994 Flashback

C Michigan — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 01:51:26 GMT

Brian is you name Brumbaugh or Limbaugh?

1994 Flashback

c Michigan — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 01:53:48 GMT

I'm will you Norm!!

1994 Flashback

Kartar Singh — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 02:53:03 GMT

I come from a country that suffered from the same problems as what America has suffered from. India in the seventies and eighties suffered from the cult of the "Gandhies" who considered a birthright to give off their title as heads of the country to their offspring (Nehru ->Indira->Rajiv Gandhi) and this assertion was supported by a slight majority of the population that refused to see the writing on the wall untill it was too late. Anytime, power becomes a birthright of a certain family, the general population suffers. for the last 6 years the Bushes have operated in the same manner and the "moral majority" crowd had followed them without question. For a truly moral person, the wake up call should have been the images from New Orleans during Katrina when everyone in the nation knew what needed to be done except the people responsible for doing it.

1994 Flashback

Jeff, Detroit, MI — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 15:59:07 GMT

To Tom in NJ, who says an increase in the minimum wage is inflationary: tell that to someone trying to feed and house their family on $5.15 an hour, and who has to decide on whether to eat or stay healthy because their min. wage job doesn't provide health care insurance. Tell that mom, "Sorry, lady, if we give you a more livable wage, we *might* have a little inflation." You arrogant jerk! Thanks for proving how "moral" you conservatives are. You're such caring, compassionate people with so much concern for your fellow Americans! And thanks for standing up for the poor, downtrodden corporations that might have to dip into their record profits to provide a better living to the people on whose backs their profits are made. We all thank you for saving us from the working poor who have the gall to ask the most prosperous nation on the planet to provide a tiny bit more so they can feed and clothe their kids. Let them eat cake!

1994 Flashback

brian brumbaugh, Colorado Springs, CO — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 16:45:33 GMT

C in michigan--hmm thought you were suppose to use names here--but guess rules dont apply to you huh? As for Limbaugh--he is a windbag and a true sign of everything wrong with the republicans. Look again--I voted for a lot of Democrats and said so. The difference between me and you? I know my party has losers and hypocrits. You are either too stupid or too blind to realize that about your party. take Harry Reid--one of your leaders on the attack against the corruption of the republicans. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/16/AR2006101600525.html and http://tailrank.com/672005/US-Senate-Democratic-leader-Harry-Reid-s-scandal and http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/email/s_475468.html LOL. this is the man accusing OTHERS of scandals and corruption. and the democrat BLIND SHEEP follow along. The republicans have found the corruption in their ranks and are hopefully cutting it out(with the help of democrats quick to point to it) The democrats on the other hand are protecting and cherishing their corruption and refusing to acknowledge it. It will come back to haunt them in 08. btw if you think I am a limbaugh--here are my stances 1. I am for equal right for homosexuals--but against calling the union a marriage 2. I am for abortion rights throughout the 1st trimester. I also favor abortion rights if the mothers life is in jeopardy. But I am against partial birth abortions or almost any third trimester abortions if the mothers life is not in jeopardy. 3. I am against gun control but favor additional time for crimes commited using guns 4. I am not a fan of bush's cowboy politics in dealing with Iraq--but I was less of a fan of Clintons failure to deal with AL-Queda at all after 5 attacks by them upon us--which lead up to 9/11. My preference was Colin Powell(a true leader who unfortunatly will never run for president) 5. I am against giving amnesty to illegal immigrants, but do favor making immigration easier. You should not get rewarded for breaking the law though. 6> I am for stem cell research=however I feel that meticulous documentation and accountability must be held for the cells used and I am 100% against cloning. 7. I am for separation of church and state---however that is not the separation that most liberals call for. IE if a minister happens to talk about party candidates in a church sermon, I dont have a problem with that. They are entitled to their opinion and to ask people to support whoever they want the same as anyone else. I also think the extreme liberals who foam at the mouth over things like "in god we trust" on money or the word "god" in the pledge of the allegiance do more harm to the democrats then good. Actually I would not mind removing the "in god we trust" from money--that is kind of stupid heh. but the pledge of allegiance? stupid fight to fight. Save your ammo for the morons like Judge Moore. Court houses are not the place for religous icons. Well unless it is Themis. I guess one religion does get to prominently display statues of their goddess in courthouses. http://altreligion.about.com/od/hellenismos/index.htm?terms=learn+modern+greek and http://www.goddessgift.net/page25.html so some religions CAN have their statues in courthouses 8. I am totally against affirmative action (it is just government sponsored discrimination). And before you call me racist---I am in the Air Force and have a lot of black friends (who roughly 90% also are against affirmative action) Also the work place I am in right now has 6 african american contractors working in it--5 of them against affirmative action. the reason most give---it has become a crutch and it also tends to make people look at the successful african americans and question if they truly EARNED what they got. More punishment for discrimination--YES. but to use government sponsored discrimination? NO WAY. Lets look at secondary education---57% of all college students are women---doesnt that mean affirmative action should take place and less qualified men should be getting the college loans, grants and acceptances into college? I actually follow along closely with most of the BLUE DOG democrats. The bad thing is--most of the democrat are still the LIBERAL democrats of the coast. And the really bad thing is--they are not identifying the bad apples like Reid and throwing his ass out.