[---crickets chirping---]

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

LOL, you conveniently forgot to mention the 15 members of the Clinton administration that were either indicted or jailed, BUTTTTTTTT---you actually miss my whole point.

As I have said many times--there are corrupt politicians on both sides and neither has a corner on the market. The ONLY way to combat this corruption is to set term limits. Set term limits. Set term limits. Set term limits.

The significance of my listing of the current corrupt Demos is that they will be part of the voting block pushing the witch hunt and in some cases valid cases against the corrupt or supposedly corrupt Republican politicians. How ironic!!

Lee

Now you are yelling term limits? Where's been that kind of dedication before your party dropped a thumper in the pool? "NOW" you want term limits?

Instead of worrying about term limits, you need to find your rear in front of a registration card, and getting out of that fruit party you are part of.

[lhopp77]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

Now you are yelling term limits? Where's been that kind of dedication before your party dropped a thumper in the pool? "NOW" you want term limits?

Instead of worrying about term limits, you need to find your rear in front of a registration card, and getting out of that fruit party you are part of.

Obviously you have not read all of my posts in the past. I have ALWAYS advocated term limits. No surprises or change in my feelings on that issue.

Shortly you will be changing your mind about the truly fruity party you claim allegiance to now. Even though I truly hope the middle of the Democratic party controls things instead of the far left leaders (Pelosi, Rangel, Kennedy, Kerry, Clinton, Murtha, etc). The initial house majority leader election results indicates this might be the case.

Lee

[shotgunslade]

Finally, two things that Lee and I agree on. Term limits and the inherent crookedness of politicans.

The difference is the Democrats are basically small-time grifters. Invite them over to you house for dinner and, after they've left, you discover they've made off with the candlesticks.

The Republicans on the other hand are big time white collar grifters. Invite them over to your house for dinner, and after they have left, you discover nothing missing. But, next day, you find out that house has been eminently domained for a new freeway exit and your dinner guest owns the surrounding property on which he will develop a shopping mall. Then you discover your job is gone, because your company was acquired in a leveraged buy-out by your dinner guest and then you were downsized. Then, finally, you discover that your former company was put into chapter 7 by your dinner guest and your pension fund has gone to cover the company's debts, most of which were owed to your dinner guest to finance the leveraged buy-out. Republicans work within the system, because they write too many of the rules.

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by shotgunslade

Finally, two things that Lee and I agree on. Term limits and the inherent crookedness of politicans.

The difference is the Democrats are basically small-time grifters. Invite them over to you house for dinner and, after they've left, you discover they've made off with the candlesticks.

The Republicans on the other hand are big time white collar grifters. Invite them over to your house for dinner, and after they have left, you discover nothing missing. But, next day, you find out that house has been eminently domained for a new freeway exit and your dinner guest owns the surrounding property on which he will develop a shopping mall. Then you discover your job is gone, because your company was acquired in a leveraged buy-out by your dinner guest and then you were downsized. Then, finally, you discover that your former company was put into chapter 7 by your dinner guest and your pension fund has gone to cover the company's debts, most of which were owed to your dinner guest to finance the leveraged buy-out. Republicans work within the system, because they write too many of the rules.

Excellent post! That basically wraps up the difference.

[Electrophil]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

Obviously you have not read all of my posts in the past. I have ALWAYS advocated term limits. No surprises or change in my feelings on that issue.

Shortly you will be changing your mind about the truly fruity party you claim allegiance to now. Even though I truly hope the middle of the Democratic party controls things instead of the far left leaders (Pelosi, Rangel, Kennedy, Kerry, Clinton, Murtha, etc). The initial house majority leader election results indicates this might be the case.

Lee

The democrats I know are sick of extremism from both sides. This country thrives in the middle and explodes on the edges. To give an example from both sides, that left flamer Carter, and this monkey we have right now. Both presidencies were utter and complete failures.

I agree that democrat politicians can't agree on daylight, but I sincerely feel that's healthy. Even with Pelosi running things, and Kennedy having his seniority, I don't think they are going to get away with anything. Look at who we have elected... The majority are truly centrist. I can't think of one in the last batch that's a flaming leftist. A few actually lean a little right. And I think that's what the American Public wanted.

Honestly, my biggest concern after Jan 10, is the arguing. I see it coming. These guys won't be able to agree on which CSPAN channel to have on. The arguments are going to be incredible, and I'm scared the republican party is going to use it against us, and slow things down. The american public will find it agravating even though it's an extremely healthy decision making process. It will end up one of the main themes in 2008, for we won't get much done in the first two years.

They better have a solution to Iraq by then, because I'm running out of parties over here.

[lhopp77]

Originally Posted by Electrophil

But stand by. I really and truly think the fireworks will start flying around March or April. That's why Bush is so "ready for bipartisan cooperation" as he puts it. Yeah, we are gonna shove gallons of bipartisans straight up his rump, and it's been a long time coming.

The bigger laugh was when Pelosi called for "bipartisan cooperation". Now that was truly hilarious.

Lee