Democrats Will NOT Take Congress!

[mathmom]

<p>

Except for northern Maine and the Adirondacks, I believe there are no primeval forests in the East. (I used to go hiking in southwestern Maine a lot. You run into stone walls in the woods all the time.) There are lots of non-tree-farm woods there now.

</p>

<p>You run into them in the woods of CT, NY, NH and Vermont too. There’s a small stand of what I’m told is primeval trees (old growth hemlocks anyway) in the Mianus Gorge in CT.</p>

[Brandon_s_mom]

<p>browninfall - that lower GPA thing must really stick in his craw.</p>

<p>I had heard that on election night 2004, he was ranting, “I can’t believe I’m losing to this idiot.”</p>

[mathmom]

<p>I have a dream. I dream that Lieberman will win the seat in CT and wake up and realize he really is a Democrat and will start voting like one. But I don’t hold out much hope. I’ve thought he was a closet Republican for years.</p>

[parent2noles]

<p>OK, let’s get this straight - Lieberman rocks. OK? Repeat it after me:</p>

<p>L-I-E-B-E-R-M-A-N R-O-C-K-S!!!</p>

<p>Feel better? I know I do! :)</p>

[fundingfather]

<p>

I dream that Lieberman will win the seat in CT and wake up and realize he really is a Democrat and will start voting like one. But I don’t hold out much hope. I’ve thought he was a closet Republican for years.

</p>

<p>Other than security/foreign policy issues, it seems like Lieberman marches pretty well in step with the Democratic party. Pro abortion - check; anti drilling - check; pro taxes - check; anti social security reform - check. What am I missing? My view on Lieberman is that he is a man of convictions -it’s just that I don’t subscribe to many of the same convictions as he does, EXCEPT the one that trumps all others - national security. Hence I take the view of Lieberman that Ed Koch did of George Bush - disagree on most domestic issues but in a time of war, domestic issues take a back seat to security.</p>

[citygirlsmom]

<p>national security? are our borderssafer, no, are cargo containers searched, no, are there more people that hate us know then before YES, and how is that war going…yeah convictions do not mean being right and doing things right…i would rather someone who says wow, that was a mistake, what a mess we made, but nope, not even over a hundred american soldiers killed in Iraq last month and the airforce doesn’t even have enough money to send those bodies home…convictions are meanlingless if you don’t have a clue as to what you are doing, and even some gasp REPUBLICAN generals see that</p>

[TheDad]

<p>Even the declassified portion of the NIE says that our presence in Iraq is creating more terrorists than we kill. </p>

<p>You gotta love this quote from the non-partisan Cook Political Report, dated 10/31, regarding the current domestic poltical environment:

Just as Democrats found in 1980 and 1994, when the national climate was very much against them and voters refused to give them the benefit of the doubt, the GOP is finding how difficult it is to make headway, no matter how much money it pumps into competitive races. One Republican consultant told me that although his clients are practically “carpet bombing” – as he phrased it – their opponents with negative advertising, they are finding it very difficult to create unfavorable impressions of Democratic candidates. “This cycle,” he said, “they are Teflon, and we are Velcro.” Attacks that would normally destroy Democrats are not having much effect. Conversely, Democratic attacks on GOP candidates are drawing blood in many races.

</p>

<p>Nice to see all that lobbyist money be next to useless.</p>

[fairburn]

<p>speaking of lobbyist money. LIEBERMAN takes lots and lots of it. the man is full of contradictions (which ever way the wind blows) and will say anything. personally, i would rather have a rich man like Lamont who is beholden to no one than a career politician like Lieberman who is beholden to so many (mostly corporations and now republicans for saving his skin) and desperate to do anything to stay in power. the man needs to go!</p>

[conyat]

<p>Another Republican senator’s office seems to have been caught using government resources to campaign today. It was pretty nasty too. Whichever staffer it was, sent media outlets a very, very nasty personal attack against a Whitehouse supporter whose daughter was murdered, accusing her of not caring about her daughter’s death because she went to a campaign dinner. </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.boston.com/news/local/rhode_island/articles/2006/11/01/chafee_aide_sent_negative_e_mails_from_senate_computer/[/url]”>http://www.boston.com/news/local/rhode_island/articles/2006/11/01/chafee_aide_sent_negative_e_mails_from_senate_computer/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Just one of the hateful emails sent out by Senator’s Chafee’s staffer:</p>

<p>“Does someone know how much Iris Rivera was paid by WHITEHOUSE?
I guess money talks after all… and did I mentioned a free $1,000.00 dinner or was it so happen that she decided to attend the dinner or more like dragged and brain washed……Totally fishy…… how could one mother forget the pain of the loss of her daughter? How could a mother side with someone who never publicly apologize for the murder of her daughter and who did not even give one penny for the cost of the funeral….If the witness protection would of been on former AG Sheldon WHITEHOUSE agenda, perhaps Jennifer Rivera would’ve been alive. But i guess Iris Rivera does not think that way… money means more than what her daughter probably meant to her……”</p>

<p>This comes only a short time after “A top aide to U.S. Rep. Charles Bass resigned in September after admitting he posted misleading messages to political blogs using a government computer. Tad Furtado posted messages that professed support for Bass’ Democratic opponent, but discounting his chances of winning in the election.”</p>

<p>Sigh.</p>

[FountainSiren]

<p>^The operatives amongst us…</p>

[conyat]

<p>FS, please tell me you didn’t just fall back on the ole, “A Republican got caught doing something wrong…anyone who complains about it must be to blame.” :)</p>

[FountainSiren]

<p>Ok…I didn’t.</p>

<p>Good to get that out of the way, don’t you think? </p>

<p>Talking points:____________________[here]</p>

[itstoomuch]

<p>I hope the Republicans win, too. My need the low capital gains taxes to increase my trading account then to move that to my Roth. I don’t have anymore deductions so every tax advantage is a plus.</p>

[TheDad]

<p>Aw, damn. A headfake by the RCCC. It turns out they dumped $650k into anti-Sestak ads yesterday. Oh well. Weldon makes my “Top Five” list of House members I want to see go down. Unfortunately, I think Marilyn Musgrave (CO-4), the would-be ayahtollah who thinks that gay marriage is the most important problem facing America today, will manage to hang on. But the Republicans have had to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars defending her in a district that went for Bush by more than 60 percent.</p>

[citygirlsmom]

<p>some talk the talk about morals, but when it comes to the people they want to follow, they ignore it and say well, it must be operatives because republicans don’t do bad things on their own, so its either they are too weak to act right or they don’ want to act right, don’t know which is worse</p>

[lizschup]

<p>Regarding the concern of East Coast Republicans in a tizzy about "Northeastern liberals"looking down upon the intelligence of people in middle America, here’s a thought: Liberals don’t have a lock on underestimating the intelligence or sophistication of folks in “flyover” land. Get real, this whole sympathy for voter’s intelligence is manipulation of the most cynical kind. Republicans have painted a picture of Dems as out of touch with the average/common man and won elections with it. Why do you think they chose GW to run? </p>

<p>Driver, with regard to Embryonic Stem Cell research vs Adult stem cell research, opponents are against ESC because they see it as a continuum of the abortion issue - they consider that embryo to be a potential life. The yard signs against stem cell research in Missouri have nocloning.com or something to that effect on their yard signs. Talk about your chicken little argument! If a voter read the actual amendment, they would find out that cloning is clearly not allowed by voting “yes” to allow stem cell research in Missouri.</p>

<p>Here is a quote from NIH regarding Embryonic Stem Cells which are different from Adult Stem Cells:</p>

<p>“Shortly after the discovery in 1998 of ways to nurture embryonic stem cells in the laboratory, the Director of the National Institutes of Health, Harold Varmus, M. D., described the promise of this frontier in testimony before Congress. The embryonic stem cells of which Dr. Varmus spoke differ from the stem cells of developed humans (the latter often called “adult” stem cells). Embryonic stem cells possess the attribute of pluripotency, which is to say that they are capable of issuing in any cell type except the placenta. Cells in the developed human in some cases possess the attribute of multipotency, which is to say that they may issue in more than one cell type. Cells in the developed human, so far as is known, are not pluripotent. More information about the scientific promise of pluripotent embryonic stem cells may be learned from resources on human embryonic stem cells collected by the University of Wisconsin.”</p>

[lizschup]

<p>" but in a time of war, domestic issues take a back seat to security."</p>

<p>There you go - one of the reasons for the war in Iraq. Unfortunately for Republicans ( and all of us) they disregarded their history lessons and the casualties of a prolonged war, preemptive war at that - first time in history if I’m not mistaken.</p>

[driver]

<p>Liz,
UCLAri and AllMusic made direct, unapologetic statements regarding the relative intellect of their average fellow citizens. I haven’t seen any CCer’s from the opposite side do this, and the rhetorical reference to running GWB really doesn’t cut it as a comparison.</p>

<p>As to the Missouri amendment: I would probably vote no because I find it very hard to understand…the devil is in the details. For one small example–did you read the definition of “cloning” at the end of the document, or were you satisfied by the seeming simplicity of the “no cloning” directive at the beginning?
<a href=“http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006petitions/ppStemCell.asp[/url]”>http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006petitions/ppStemCell.asp&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>I didn’t make the statement apparently attributed to me in #257–FF did–but I wouldn’t disagree with it in its full context:

Hence I take the view of Lieberman that Ed Koch did of George Bush - disagree on most domestic issues but in a time of war, domestic issues take a back seat to security.

</p>

[UCLAri]

<p>

UCLAri and AllMusic made direct, unapologetic statements regarding the relative intellect of their average fellow citizens. I haven’t seen any CCer’s from the opposite side do this, and the rhetorical reference to running GWB really doesn’t cut it as a comparison.

</p>

<p>Since when am I on “this side” or “that side” anyway? </p>

<p>And I don’t mean to say, necessarily, that voters are inherently stupid (like as in they lack neurons or positrons or IQtrons). They’re rationally ignorant. We all are.</p>

<p>The only problem: Rationally ignorant people are delegating authority to slightly less rationally ignorant people.</p>

[FountainSiren]

<p>“No one in this world, so far as I know, has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people."
-H. L. Mencken</p>

<p>Perhaps it is true, but the same cannot be said for Liberals and Democrats underestimating the intelligence of the American People; the pointy-headed hand-wringers have lost plenty of elections on that dumb-hunch.

The Wisdom of Crowds by James Surowiecki:</p>

<p>In this endlessly fascinating book, New Yorker columnist James Surowiecki explores a deceptively simple idea that has profound implications: large groups of people are smarter than an elite few, no matter how brilliant—better at solving problems, fostering innovation, coming to wise decisions, even predicting the future. </p>

<p>This seemingly counterintuitive notion has endless and major ramifications for how businesses operate, how knowledge is advanced, how economies are (or should be) organized and how we live our daily lives. With seemingly boundless erudition and in delightfully clear prose, Surowiecki ranges across fields as diverse as popular culture, psychology, ant biology, economic behaviorism, artificial intelligence, military history and political theory to show just how this principle operates in the real world. </p>

<p>Despite the sophistication of his arguments, Surowiecki presents them in a wonderfully entertaining manner. The examples he uses are all down-to-earth, surprising, and fun to ponder. Why is the line in which you’re standing always the longest? Why is it that you can buy a screw anywhere in the world and it will fit a bolt bought ten-thousand miles away? Why is network television so awful? If you had to meet someone in Paris on a specific day but had no way of contacting them, when and where would you meet? Why are there traffic jams? What’s the best way to win money on a game show? Why, when you walk into a convenience store at 2:00 A.M. to buy a quart of orange juice, is it there waiting for you? What do Hollywood mafia movies have to teach us about why corporations exist? </p>

<p>The Wisdom of Crowds is a brilliant but accessible biography of an idea, one with important lessons for how we live our lives, select our leaders, conduct our business, and think about our world.

<a href=“http://www.randomhouse.com/features/wisdomofcrowds/[/url]”>http://www.randomhouse.com/features/wisdomofcrowds/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;