Dear Democrat Jackasses,

Dear Senators Akaka,Baucus,Bingaman,Byrd,Cantwell,Carper,Conrad,Dorgan,Inouye,Johnson, Kohl,Landrieu,Lieberman,Lincoln,Nelson,Nelson,Pryor,Rockefeller,Salazar.

An Open Letter To Them "Can't We All Just Get Along" Dems:

Obviously, you still don't know the meaning of "opposition party". But at least you'll go on record as not being a "obstructionist" . Horray for you. Hopefully the republican voters out there will be able to stomach voting for you as a "republican light" politician. Maybe the GOP won't run some ultra-right nutcase against you in the next elections. Maybe you won't be called a tax-and-spend-terrerist-loving-weak-on-defense liberul in November.

I, on the other hand, would rather vote for a real democrat.

And don't fuckin ask me for one dime either, you morons. Thanks to you, I'll be saving (hopefully) in an attempt to have enough to get by and economically survive the next 3 to 15 or so years - or how ever long it takes (if ever) for you to remember who the fuck you are supposed to be representing in that big fancy building you work in.

Spineless Jackasses

Ocrincus

I broke my longstanding policy of not donating money to political parties last fall when the folks from the DNC called and asked for money to help gird them for the upcoming fights over judicial seats. I was assured that indeed they would fight to keep right-wing extremists off the Supreme Court.And now, faced with a clear-cut extremist (and dissembler) who is about to not only overturn the right to obtain an abortion, but also to pave the path for an imperial executive branch with limitless powers ... nothing.I'm not terribly inclined, as my readers know, to use profanity in my posts. But if the Democratic Party wants any more of my money, they can just go fuck themselves.


What does it take for the Democrat Party to learn the concept of "Unity"? They've spent so much time trying to be moderate centrists that they have seemed to lost any understanding of the concept of being an opposition party.

Look guys, when the scale has been loaded with a 10-ton elephant on the right, you can only balance the scale with a 10 ton jackass on the left. Putting 100 tons of bullshit in the middle of the scale wont balance the scale, it will still tilt to the right. The public just wont see it because of all that bullshit you've been piling on.

C'mon jackasses. Start kickin, pull your weight or else line up in front of the glue factory and head on in.

Oh, Give Me A Fuckin Break

Gee, Scalito's wife bursts into tears because, well, shit, we just might like to know something of what legal direction Scalito will steer our country for the next 20,30 or 40 years. (As in, steer us merely "far-right" or "batshit-insane-your-privacy-and-individual-rights-dont-mean-shit-to-us-right").

In addition to all the several/many reasons I could care less why her boo-hooing at the confirmation hearings is considered newsworthy -

has anyone mentioned that, in addition to becoming one of the grand Viziers of our nations judicial branch, there is a nice potential pay raise in store for Scalito?

Another reason Alito is a fan of the Constitution: It prohibits Congress from cutting judicial salaries, in Alito's case $175,100 as a federal appeals court judge - an amount that Alito said he and his family have managed to get by on "up to this point."

[...]

Alito's current salary is nearly four times the median household income for the nation in 2004 and nearly three times the median income in Newark, N.J., the metropolitan area where he lives. It's also $9,900 more than what members of Congress make. As a Supreme Court justice, Alito would be paid $203,000.

Shit, for that kind of money, I'd expect, no DEMAND that congress voir dire Scalito to the point that not only does his wife cry, but also his mother, grandmother, siblings and fourth cousins all burst in to a fit of weeping and gnashing of teeth.

"Ethics Is More of A Burden Than A Privilege"

Who has time for ethics and accountabillity anyway?

...It's also clear that the House GOP isn't the only congressional party that needs a leadership shakeup. There's a good case that both parties in both houses would benefit from a new look at the top. The lineup seems a far cry from the days of such giants as Sens. Mike Mansfield and Bob Dole or Speakers Sam Rayburn and Thomas "Tip" O'Neill.The events that prompted DeLay's departure began when he ran afoul of House ethics rules.

His departure was ensured when Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle won indictments on charges stemming from the Republican's role in raising funds for the 2002 elections. The indictment, derided by many Republicans as partisan, triggered a GOP rule that an indicted party leader had to step down. DeLay's allies tried last year to lift the rule but bowed to pressure from other Republicans.

The underlying problem, though, stems from the political machine DeLay and his colleagues built with allies in Washington's lobbying community. It produced a torrent of campaign contributions but also apparently led to potentially criminal misuses of their power.Individuals implicated in misdeeds by lobbyist Jack Abramoff, a key figure in the GOP machine, will ultimately face their own legal issues. But ties between the operation and the current House leadership require more than merely replacing one person.After all, Majority Whip Roy Blunt of Missouri, the top candidate to replace DeLay, also was involved in the K Street Project - the name for a DeLay-inspired campaign to demand that lobbying firms hire loyal Republicans - as was rival John Boehner of Ohio, although there is no evidence yet that either did anything illegal. Speaker Dennis Hastert was DeLay's deputy before the Texan helped install him as speaker in 1998.

If Republicans are serious about changing their public image, they'll opt for a clean sweep of their leadership. The reasons for changing other congressional leaders have more to do with political ineptitude.

.... Assailing the GOP's "culture of corruption" and its handling of Iraq will go only so far.

...On Capitol Hill, parties don't change leaders until they have to. That's why the House Republicans alone are going to have a new election. But that doesn't mean they're the only ones who could benefit from new leadership.

Yesss, the House Republicans are "choosing" to go it alone in electing a new leader. So forthright and pro-reform, them republicans. Not like them tricksy democrats....tricksy, false democrats...the reid, the peloisi...they hurts us.