Political Ideas To Ponder...

[Repo]

Having watched part of the HBO documentary "Hacking Democracy," which showed the Diebold election machines can be hacked and possibly compromise an election, I as everyone who watched the documentary must question why a state would use the machines. Yes we had enough of the old chad producing machines but surely and yes I did call you Shirley, electronic voting may be as bad or worse. Some electronic machines have a paper trail and to answer a question poised by Chris Matthews to the Florida gubernatorial candidates in their debate, the paper stays in the election machine and is not given to the voter like an ATM receipt. Sadly none of the candidates seemed sharp enough to know that but they are running for Florida governor so don't expect much because you won't get much from any of them. I have a question, why is it a choice between chads and electronic voting? Surely and yes I did call you Shirley once again, there is enough brilliant people in the country and the technology to come up with an alternative. Here is my proposal. Go back to the manual pull the lever style but instead of a dull puncher that leaves frayed chads, have the lever shoot a laser light at the designated spot for each candidate. Once a laser burns a whole in the ballot, the ballot is kept to be counted. That ends the chads and leaves a paper trail that cannot be hacked. That is my idea; it is up to the brilliant people in the country to work out the details and the bugs. It certainly is better than hoping and praying you voted for who you selected on the ballot not a candidate the hacker wanted...

The joke seems to be on the Republican Party, you can only scare Americans so much and then they want results...

Republican Senators Conrad Burns in Montana and George Allen in Virginia, have had a tough time getting reelected. Burns and Allen are more like the comedy team of the same name than incumbents running for reelection, with Allen still doing the dumb part...

One of the first thing the newly elected Congress should do once it is sworn in is make the National Guard national again by passing a law forbidding state national guard troops being used outside of United States territory. The National Guard is to protect the homeland in a state of emergency not fight in foreign wars. Many of the people that signed up to the Guard did so after 9/11 to provide service to their country in a time of need. By using the National Guard to fight wars overseas, it leaves the homeland shorthanded in times of emergencies. We saw it after Hurricane Katrina; it took days to get other states' National Guard units into New Orleans because the Louisiana Guard was in Iraq. In that gap of time lives were lost. Using National Guard troops to fight foreign wars will prevent good patriotic Americans from signing up to the National Guard that would have signed up to help for domestic emergencies such as hurricanes, earthquakes and terrorists attacks. Many people don't want to signup to fight a war but would signup to help deal with domestic emergencies. If someone wants to signup to fight in a foreign war there is the United States military for that. The federal government should not be using states' emergency units to fight overseas. If they don't have enough troops then they have two options, either don't fight the war or draft people into the war. States shouldn't have to pay for the federal government's wars with their troops and equipment. State of the art communications equipment was in Iraq when the State of Louisiana was under water after Katrina. People died because state and local officials could not communicate during the aftermath of Katrina. Louisiana’s National Guard and their equipment should be in Louisiana not Iraq, same for all fifty states. Congress should pass a law that State National Guard units can only be used on American territory. If the federal government wants to fight a war on foreign soil, they should not be allowed to draft National Guard units as they are doing now...

If the Democratic Party takes Congress, the question isn't what they will do but what will President Bush do? Will he sign their legislation or will be veto it? Will he continue to alienate them and further divide the country with his name-calling? Will he resign, move back to Texas and chop wood in the bush, making Cheney president? A role he has held without the official title. Surely it will be an interesting time and yes for the last time I called you Shirley...

[Mazer]

Originally Posted by Repo

If the Democratic Party takes Congress, the question isn't what they will do but what will President Bush do? Will he sign their legislation or will be veto it? Will he continue to alienate them and further divide the country with his name-calling? Will he resign, move back to Texas and chop wood in the bush, making Cheney president? A role he has held without the official title. Surely it will be an interesting time and yes for the last time I called you Shirley...

That is an interesting idea to ponder. After the Vietnam war ended and the Democrat-controlled congress passed laws to prevent the president from sending monetary aid to South Vietnam, Ford vetoed the legislation. His veto was overridden because the Dems had a supermajority. If congress were to pass similar legislation where it concerns Iraq, that bill would be vetoed and the veto would not be overridden. Without the power to override the president, there are certain bills the Democrats will pass—knowing ahead of time that they will be vetoed—as a strategy to make Republicans look worse than they already do. But they've only got two years to make their mark, and if they get too radical, refuse to make compromises, and fail to get serious legislation passed that the president will sign, then their (probable) victory tomorrow will mean nothing at all.

[theknife]

if the Dems take the House by even a single vote, it will allow them to take control of all committees. this will re-introduce a concept that has been absent from Congress for the past six years: oversight.

[multi]

hahaha

Burns and Allen are more like the comedy team of the same name than incumbents running for reelection, with Allen still doing the dumb part...

George and Gracie were great !
over here we have a Abbott & Costello conservative comedy team. Pretty sad

[Sinner]

Well the Democrats will most likely take congress in my opinion, but the good news is it will not be the Howard Dean - Nancy Pelosi type of Democrats. Jon Tester is in a close race in Montana, he is a democrat who voted against the Patriot Act because he thinks it will restrict people`s access to guns and he against amnesty for illegal immigrants. Bob Casey in Pennsylvania is leading a close race, he is pro-life and he said he would have voted to confirm Supreme Court Judge Alito, Brad Ellsworth in Indiana sounds like Reagan, he has signed a pledge promising no tax increases, saying that more than enough money comes in to the federal government. Bottom line is the democrats may defeat the Republicans but it will not be with liberal Democrats. Thank god for that.

What these and other races around the country indicate: that Americans by and large have centrist values which lean conservative. Values like small government, low taxes, and standing up for what`s right, as opposed to standing up for what`s left or right.

Americans are not necessarily against the war. I really truly believe they`re against fighting the war incorrectly or without a plan. The most important message that is being sent this election is this: Republicans, if you would have stood for these positions, we would have voted for you again. If you won`t stand for them, we`ll vote for someone who claims they will and give them a spin.

So here`s what I know tonight: Republicans are probably going to lose tomorrow, but not because of the war, not because voters are rejecting conservative values. They`ll lose because they`ve lost their virtue. They are seen as greedy with power, the same way the Democrats were seen when they got demolished in 1994.

I also know I actually feel bad for some of these new Democratic candidates. Jon Tester in Montana? This is a guy whose hand was severely injured from his days working in a butcher`s shop. He`s a simple, plainspoken guy who seems to share my grandfather`s values.

But he and other Democratic candidates who`ve been recruited by Chuck Schumer and the like, they`re being led right into a liberal butcher shop, where I believe Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean are waiting to run their centrist beliefs right through a meat-grinder like a hunk of veal.

Now here`s what I don`t know: will the real Democratic Party please stand up? If they win, which value system will we see? I think it`s going to be civil war. Is it the grand -- the values of my grandfather and JFK, or the values of Michael Moore?

[theknife]

the right has had two years of trying to demonize Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi.... it hasn't worked out too well, has it?

at this point, almost regardless of the outcome today, Howard Dean's 50 State strategy looks brilliant in retrospect. rather than field candidates in a couple dozen top-tier races, as the Jurassic Dem leadership has traditionally done, Dean made it a point to support candidates and build infrastructure in every state. this has laid the groundwork for competitive races in places like Montana, Wyoming, Nebraska, and Indiana - places where there has been no Democratic presence for years.

nobody seems to buy into the GOP's Pelosi spin either -"she's from San Francisco" may put wingnuts in a tizzy, but it doesn't cut much ice with most people. Pelosi laid out her agenda pretty clearly, if she becomes Speaker of the House:

... in the first hundred hours of a Democratic Congress: We will restore civility, integrity, and fiscal responsibility to the House of Representatives. We will start by cleaning up Congress, breaking the link between lobbyists and legislation and commit to pay-as-you-go, no new deficit spending.

We will make our nation safer and we will begin by implementing the recommendations of the independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission.

We will make our economy fairer, and we will begin by raising the minimum wage. We will not pass a pay raise for Congress until there is an increase in the minimum wage.

We will make health care more affordable for all Americans, and we will begin by fixing the Medicare prescription drug program, putting seniors first by negotiating lower drug prices. We will also promote stem cell research to offer real hope to the millions of American families who suffer from devastating diseases.

We will broaden college opportunity, and we will begin by cutting interest rates for student loans in half.

We will energize America by achieving energy independence, and we will begin by rolling back the multi-billion dollar subsidies for Big Oil.

We will guarantee a dignified retirement, and we will begin by fighting any attempt to privatize Social Security.

pretty specific, and if you're not utterly ideologically bent, it's got broad appeal.

your quote is from a wingnut concern troll (what, no link?)...if he's truly a conservative, maybe he might want to focus on how his party got hijacked and how to get it back.

[Sinner]

Originally Posted by theknife

your quote is from a wingnut concern troll (what, no link?)...if he's truly a conservative, maybe he might want to focus on how his party got hijacked and how to get it back.

Sorry - I quoted Glen Beck who has a show on the Clinton News Network (CNN), I don't know if he is conservative but he is not a right-wing nut.

http://www.glennbeck.com/home/index.shtml

[theknife]

i'd like to see guys like Jon Tester, Jim Webb (VA), Scott Kleeb (NE), Gary Trauner (WY) etc. do well. Tester in particular represents a rising wing of Libertarian Dems - candidates who developed from grass-roots support (much of it online), outside of the Washington party structure, away from the media consultants and political advisors that operate the Dems nationally. win or lose, the fact that these guys are in the race is a blow to the Democratic party power structure - they did it their way for much of the campaign and only when they appeared competitive did they really start to get support from the party. if nothing else, this election has marked a point where the Beltway Dems (read Clintons, Kerry, Lanny Davis etc etc) have seen a serious erosion in their respective positions as party power brokers. as well they should - in the last 3 elections, they've done nothing but roll over and lose to a corrupt and incompetent opposition.

[legion]

Originally Posted by theknife quoted

... in the first hundred hours of a Democratic Congress: We will restore civility, integrity, and fiscal responsibility to the House of Representatives. We will start by cleaning up Congress, breaking the link between lobbyists and legislation and commit to pay-as-you-go, no new deficit spending.

We will make our nation safer and we will begin by implementing the recommendations of the independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission.

We will make our economy fairer, and we will begin by raising the minimum wage. We will not pass a pay raise for Congress until there is an increase in the minimum wage.

We will make health care more affordable for all Americans, and we will begin by fixing the Medicare prescription drug program, putting seniors first by negotiating lower drug prices. We will also promote stem cell research to offer real hope to the millions of American families who suffer from devastating diseases.

We will broaden college opportunity, and we will begin by cutting interest rates for student loans in half.

We will energize America by achieving energy independence, and we will begin by rolling back the multi-billion dollar subsidies for Big Oil.

We will guarantee a dignified retirement, and we will begin by fighting any attempt to privatize Social Security.

I know not really my election but i am wondering. How on earth is she going to pay for all that? is there a linky to where she get to explain that?

[Nicobie]

Originally Posted by legion

I know not really my election but i am wondering. How on earth is she going to pay for all that? is there a linky to where she get to explain that?

Legion,


Who is 'She' ?

I'd like the link too.

[theknife]

one link is here...google "100 hour plan" - it's all over the place.

it's a starting point - some may find it more attractive than "stay the course".

[Mazer]

Originally Posted by legion

I know not really my election but i am wondering. How on earth is she going to pay for all that? is there a linky to where she get to explain that?

The great thing about her plan is that none of those items require government funding. No, she's gonna make Americans pay for her programs out of the goodness of their hearts and pockets. This way she can brag about balancing the budget while the DOW drops below 11,000, medical insurance rates go through the stratosphere, unemployment rates top 8%, personal savings funds dry up, and thousands of Iraq war veterans end up homeless. I hope it's worth all that to put Bush in his place.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by Mazer

No, she's gonna make Americans pay for her programs out of the goodness of their hearts and pockets. This way they can brag about balancing the budget while the DOW drops below 11,000, medical insurance rates go through the stratosphere, unemployment rates top 8%, personal savings funds dry up, and thousands of Iraq war veterans end up homeless.

is that a prediction?

[Malk-a-mite]

Originally Posted by Mazer

medical insurance rates go through the stratosphere

Med insurance is already there.

personal savings funds dry up

Dry up? You are kidding right? American's are just now starting to have savings, everyone has been living on credit or paycheck to paycheck for the last decade.

I hope it's worth all that to put Bush in his place.

Depends, do I get habeas corpus back as well?