Tomorrow Republicans will....

Heaven forbid Robert KKK Byrd be denied a good old fashioned filibuster

Amen, Cosmopolitan! Gotta give the KKK it's time to speak on the floor of the Senate!

On the other hand: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,157431,00.html

So...poster, you were saying....? Something about absolute power?

-Kiamat Dusk

Typical.

1) AFAIK, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that the proposed change to the rules was ONLY intended to be with respect to judicial nominations. Which would mean saying "total control" is VERY bad misinformation and a far cry from reality.

2) A deal was reached afterall, so the whole point is moot.

Well, moderates win out with the 14-senator coalition, led by the next President of the US, John McCain.

1) Correct

2) Not entierly. The issue isn't dead, it's just been postponed a bit.

If McCain ran with Colin Powell, I can't think of anybody the Democrats could field who could beat them.

If Frist or (gods help us) Cheney run in 2008, I can't think of anybody the Democrats could field who COULDN'T beat them.

As a lifelong Democrat (and a third generation raging liberal), I'd vote for the McCain/Powell ticket.


One gets the feeling those two gentlemen are just as fed up with the hijacking of their party as the Democrats are.

If, for some ungodly (no pun intended) reason they DO run Frist and/or Cheney, that will effectively split the Republican vote much the same way that Nader has been blamed for splitting the Dem vote.

I hope and pray for Barak Obama in '08 - it'll never happen, but man, I'd quit my job and go work for his campaign in a heartbeat. He'll be president someday - I hope sooner than later.

That being said - I was very heartened to hear that a small coalition of senators rejected the demands of BOTH the far left and the far right and stepped back from the edge.

For a good laugh, check out James Dobson's quote on the agreement that was reached... "This Senate agreement represents a complete bailout and betrayal by a cabal of Republicans and a great victory for united Democrats." (Cabal?)

Hillary Clinton is definitely the Democratic frontrunner for 2008.

If I had to put my money on a Republican it would be Newt Gingrich.

Jesse Jackson is the man for 2008.

He showed me he is presidential caliber by flying to Mexico City and telling Vicente Fox where to stick it.

We failed in 1984 we will rule in 2008!

His son, and my Congressman, Jesse Jr. should be the Veep.

Jackson / Jackson
2008

Behind everything is the Liberal Inner Core - Knights of Modern Elitism.

Awkward, but I like the acronym.

1) Yes, but it indicates a broader set of divisive issues in the Senate. The filibuster is a rule of Senate order; the Senate, itself, has the power to modify its own filibuster rules. The broader issues related to the balance of powers between the legislative and executive branches, which btw led up to this discussion, would require much greater effort to enact, up to and possibly including a constitutional amendment. What would it take for the Senate to enact a more stringent filibuster standard (without abolishing it, altogether) when considering judicial nominees?

2) No, it's not a moot point by any stretch of the imagination. That the nuclear option was even seriously proposed indicates a serious crisis of confidence in the Senate. Just because a deal was reached *this time* in no way guarantees the same will hold true in future cases.

Good points (although the first sounds an awful lot like the anti-gay-marriage argument reasoning)

But screw that topic--
moving on to the more fun tangent this thread was taking... heh heh heh:

Hillary - Guaranteed loser, she would lose unless the Republicans put up another total loser against her. I think she'll try for it though.

Jackson - Comical Al Sharpton would probably have a better chance, and even that's a joke....but at least he's funny sometimes.

Cheney - I don't think he'll be running, too many liberals found too many weak areas to point to and his reputation isn't so great as a result. Although I suppose that could change during a campaign.

Newt - Doubt he's gonna...

McCain/Powell - Won't happen....but damn if it did...LANDSLIDE. McCain's a little too old and I get the feeling Powell doesn't like politics too much. Damn shame..

Condeleeza Rice/Laura Bush in '08!

-Kiamat Dusk

You do realize Laura Bush is more than likely a Democrat in her ideologies? Some pre-election interviews were very telling of her views and how they differed from her husbands.

She's a terrific first lady, though, and I haven't heard a single bad word about her other than from Mrs. Kerry. (And I think that probably could have cost John Kerry the election.)

In any event, I think Laura Bush would make a great ambassador - did you see the news reports of her in Israel? There was a mob of protestors and she completely kept her cool. That's moxy!

Al Gore/Hillary Clinton ticket.

The world may not be ready for a female president, but what about a female vice president?

Rice no. She is an armchair warhawk who would get cut to ribbons. I don't care HOW cleverly you play the race card in order to deflect your person from honest critisicm, she woudln't fly. (playing that card is something both Dems and GOPers do). But Laura Bush yes. I don't know what Bush did to deserve a woman like Laura, but he lucked out. Hell..his whole life is one "lucking out" after another.

It's interesting to see her take a far more rational, moderate tack these days. I loved it when she said "Well..as we spread democracy, we need to be introspective and self-critical."

Suddenly, it's as if a million FReepers cried out, and were suddenly silenced .

At least, so people who don't like her would have you believe, anyway. I think she's just doing her job the best she can.

Edit:
Gore/Clinton... that's a puke inspiring thought. Especially Gore, he's gone off the deep end lately. And they're so damn political, it's sickening. At least find someone who APPEARS to be a down to earth person... Kerry's wife, ugh...another bad thought. I think thats in the dictionary under snob?

Dem/Rep 2 sides of the same coin. The arguements are a divide an conquer technique to keep people from realizing whats really going on behind the drama smoke screen. Arguing Dem this Rep that, only thickens the deception. Dont fall prey to the propaganda.

DNA

I would just like to see a Democratic president with a repulican vice president (or vice versa), since it's pretty obvious that political parties split this country in half.

I say we vote someone in who is totally unprepared, but with a sense of humor, and very little agenda...

Maybe...DAVID HASSELHOFF!

Or possibly moderates both. I like the idea of McCain/Bush (as in Laura) or vice versa. I'd vote for that ticket... we need people who are willing to be reasonable, too many uncompromising wierdos out there.

Plus she's a Librarian

You can always trust librarians to know what they are talking about

Except, you know, sexual relationships.

Pardon?

Everybody know librarians are frigid, right?

Even with a bright curious mind and rooms full of books detailing every conceivable form of human passion, the librarian must be a dried up old prude, mustn't she?

Not speaking of Mrs. Bush specifically, because I'm sure she'd never crack open the Balzac...