[The Tower]

Originally Posted by dissention

I see the Randi Rhodes rhetoric is spreading. Oy.

For someone who relishes rhetoric with much gusto, I find this comment quite ironic.

Originally Posted by amber

If you read the link, you'll see that it's been done before, and so is possible.

True. However, the circumstances are hardly the same.

"Such whistle-blowing is rare but not unprecedented. In 1995, for instance, then-Rep. Robert G. Torricelli, D-N.J., was told by a State Department employee that a paid CIA informant, Guatemalan Col. Julio Roberto Alpirez, was involved in the killing of an American citizen's husband. Then a member of the House Intelligence Committee, Torricelli complained the CIA was doing nothing to uncover the facts of the case for the widow, Jennifer Harbury."

Torricelli was whistle-blowing against a single case of criminal behavior against the CIA with Bill Clinton as president. That doesn't compare to the situation that the senate Democrats had to face.

You may be right about the consequences, but that doesn't make it okay, and to me it doesn't really make it excusable. Not the Dems fault, maybe, but they are complicit.

I'm not saying that it isn't wrong. I think it sucks that the situation was such that they didn't bring it to light. However, I think that the nation needs to stay focused on who designed, controlled and executed these crimes- the Bush administration.

Originally Posted by amber

They could definitely expend greater efforts than they are.

I agree. However, I don't think the situation with the Democrats is as dire and black and white and some would have us believe. Yes, John Kerry absolutely failed as a presidential candidate and it was his fault. He was handed a golden situation and crapped all over it. But that doesn't mean that the democratic party should just be chucked.

Oh, and as far as the Nader thing - I'm pretty sure the repubs would have found a way to steal the election no matter what, just like they had already planned.

I wouldn't put it past them.

I think, especially considering the electoral college, that blaming nader voters is falacious.

I believe the Nader numbers would have clinched crucial races (Florida) which would have changed the electoral count. There were several factors that resulted in that ****ed up non-election and you can't deny that Nader was not one of them.

Originally Posted by dissention

Democrats supported the war in Iraq by a majority number.

Misleading. Democrats supported the Bush administation's use of force only after going to the U.N. for resolution support. Bush never did.

Democrats supported the Patriot Act by a majority number.

Anyone who didn't support it would have been strung up as a traitor during that immediate post 9/11 euphoria. No one in congress even READ the Patriot Act. It never, ever should have been passed by anyone- but to ignore political realities is extremely naive.

Democrats supported invading Afghanistan by a majority number.

I think most people supported invading Afghanistan. I think you supported it (somewhere back in old threads, though I'm not 100% sure).

Democrats oppose national health care

I believe a significant majority of Americans oppose national health care. I could be wrong, though. I support national health care.

...and still have yet to do much of anything to make it affordable, mostly because they're in the pockets of the lobbyists.

Agreed. And that is a ****ty, ****ty thing that I hope gets fixed.

Democrats support faith-based initiatives.

Some, but not most.

Democrats support the so-called War On Drugs.

Again, some, but not most.

Democrats support the Defense of Marriage Act.

Possibly when it passed years ago, but I doubt it would fly today.

Democrats opposed a congressional investigation into the 2000 election; not a single senator stood with the Congressional Black Caucus.

The senate democrats should be ashamed of themselves for that. However, just who were the members of the CBC that called the election results a fraud?? Hmmm, let's see.... could it be, oh, I don't know..... Democrats????

Democrats oppose real campaign finance reform.

Tell that to Russ Feingold.

I could go on and on and on and on. Shockingly, they have all of these things in common with the neocons. And they take their cues from the DLC, i.e. big business.

Yep. Politics is a very dirty business, always has been, always will be- especially in today's times. However, I'll still stick to the good fight and try not to lose hope. Otherwise, what's the point?