Posted by Frank James at 8:32 am CST
"There are a lot of drunken Democrats in there," said a televison producer who returned to the room assigned to the media from a trip to the packed Hyatt Regency hotel ballroom where the Democrats held their victory party last night.
And indeed, Democrats enjoyed themselves as they hadn't for a very long time. Probably not since the last Clinton inauguration in 1997 had Democrats experienced such happiness. Even the drenching rain some had to walk through on the way to the hotel wasn't going to dampen their spirits.
There was the history of the evening which could be felt as Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California took to the stage and the revelers crammed into the ballroom chanted "speaker, speaker, speaker, speaker" with an energy that befit the fact that in all likelihood, when the House votes for its new speaker in January, she will become the first woman to hold that post in the nation's history.
"Today, we have made history," she said to cheers. "Now, let us make progress!"
But there was also the sense of relief that the national Democratic party had finally gotten the albatross of defeat from around its neck. There had been so many losses. In 1994 the House was lost. In 2000 Al Gore lost. In 2002 the Senate was lost. In 2004 Sen. John Kerry lost.
Some pundits and even voters had said before the election that if the Democrats couldn't win the House in the present environment when they had everything going for them--an unpopular war, an unpopular president and an unpopular Republican-controlled Congress--then they'd need to fold their tent since they would've become virtually useless.
But there would be no tent-folding. Instead it was the Republicans who would have to turn their precriminations, as Rich Lowry of the National Review called the GOP blame-placing that was taking place even before Election Day, to recriminations and soul-searching.
In a lot of ways, the Democratic Washington crowd looked very much like a Republican Washington crowd.
It was a mostly young, mostly white, well-groomed group with nearly everyone waving little American flags that campaign staffers handed out, since a crowd waving little American flags really looks good on television and helps fight the Republican spin that Democrats are less patriotic.
There was at least one sight, however, that probably wouldn't be seen at a Republican victory rally, something that pointed to how openly tolerant the Democratic party is and why Republicans have been able to so effectively use social issues to defeat Democrats time and again with conservative and religious Americans. Two women left the ballroom holding hands, an obvious couple. Of course, Republicans have such couples too. They just usually aren't so obvious.
In any event, Democrat happiness was tempered by the continued uncertainties about which way the Senate would go, something which is still uncertain even this morning. Without a Democratic-controlled Senate, Congress could essentially be gridlocked.
Aware of this, not a single Democratic leader uttered the word "mandate," a noticeable omission on a night when Democrats appeared to be on their way to winning significantly more than the 15 seats they needed to pick up to gain House control.
Pelosi, Rep. Rahm Emanuel, seen as the architect of the House Democrats' victory, and Sen. Harry Reid, all extended the hand of bipartisanship to Republicans and the White House.
But would it be in the political interests of Republicans to cooperate with Democrats on the new majority's agenda, items like a higher minimum wage and tax credits for college education or to thwart Democrats in an effort to make them look ineffective so that Republicans could have an argument for why they should be given control again? Given recent history, the answer doesn't seem promising.
Then there was the Iraq War. There were vows by the Democratic leaders last night, some of it in hoarse voices since Emanuel and Reid had evidently overworked their larynxes, about Tuesday's vote being a vote to change direction there.
"... Nowhere did the American people make it more clear that we need a new direction than in the war in Iraq," Pelosi said to cheers and applause.
'" Stay the course' has not made our country safer, has not honored our commitment to our troops and has not made the region more stable. We cannot continue down this catastrophic path. And so, we say to the president, 'Mr. President, we need a new direction in Iraq.' Let us work together to find a solution to the war in Iraq."
With Democrats vowing during the campaign that they wouldn't stop funding the war, essentially pre-emptively renouncing Congress's power of the purse, they have taken off the table the only action they could take that could bring the troops home.
They did so because they don't want to give any more fuel to Republican charges that they're anti-military.
But if President Bush is committed to keeping American troops in Iraq until that government can effectively defend itself, and Democrats are unwilling to cut off funds, then how much will really change?
To a certain degree, winning yesterday, with all its challenges, was the easy piece of the business. Now comes the hard part.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Let the investigations begin! How many more republican scandals can be uncovered with subpoena power?? I predict at least 5 resignations.
Posted by: fasteddie | November 8, 2006 9:10 AM
What about the other celebrations? Shouldn't the celebrations in Tehran, Gaza, and Paris be mentioned?
Posted by: Bruce | November 8, 2006 9:21 AM
Actually Bruce, there are no celebrations in Gaza, or Teheran, or wherever Bin Ladn is (remember him?? This administration doesn't).
There are all depressed because their number one recruiting poster has been slapped down hard by the American people. It is generally known that Bush and the GOP have been the best thing that has happened to their cause. Now with some Congressional oversight, maybe we can get a plan to get out of Iraq.
Posted by: BobinATL | November 8, 2006 9:37 AM
Bruce thats why you lost. The evil you spill will stop. There will be change for the better.Democrats are the Party of the People by the People. We now have our Country back from the crooks liars and the pure evil of the Republicans.Our Country once more will be great.
Posted by: Dale Peters | November 8, 2006 9:37 AM
'The hard part'??
Never has there been more easy, fat targets of opportunity.
Just remember Nancy and Dems;
1. Acuire target
2. Form site picture
3. Breathing control
4. Squeeze
5. Score
6. Repeat
Frank, I know what you are getting at, but maybe the hard part has been the last 10 years. The hard part for me has been watching the Republicans attempt to destroy all social progress achieved since the end of the Gilded Age.
Posted by: c.Morris | November 8, 2006 9:55 AM
Bruce,
Could you be so kind as to provide us all with a link to this so-called footage of celebration in enemy capitols? Its good to know that some Wingnuts will never go away.
As previously noted by anyone with half a brain, George Bush is the greatest recruiting tool that any terrorist could use. Our enemies have lost today, and America has won.
Poor little Bruce, enjoy your time in the minority. Remember the 40 years preceding 1994? Hope you're settled in for a looooong ride.
Posted by: Bryan | November 8, 2006 10:09 AM
I can't believe Karl Rove and Diebold let us down.
Oh well.
Posted by: JD | November 8, 2006 10:09 AM
Dale, thanks for coming out of the closet and showing your true colors as a Democratic partisan and nothing more.
But the terrorists are partying because if we do pull out of Iraq before the work is done, they will have won.
And why is it that a recent poll and article on the troops in Iraq indicate they DON'T want to leave before the job is done? Why is it they are afraid of Dem victory? I think the troops know more about the situation in Iraq than we do here.
Finally, what are you libs going to do with all the conservative and moderate Dems that won yesterday? How will they fit into your liberal world? They are not part of the moveon.org, Air UnAmerica, dailykos world. How will a Heath Schuler, for instance, who campaigned as a staunch conservative Christian fit into the liberal Democrat world?
It was more the Republicans losing yesterday than it was the Democrats winning. The USA is not the country of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, Alcee Hastings. Just be careful of you celebrating, cause 2008 could be the end of the Democrats 2006 success.
Posted by: John D | November 8, 2006 10:14 AM
Ok, ok, plenty of partisan babble in the comments so far. How about this view...while voters wanted an anti-Bush, the candidates they elected aren't so far are not that far apart from him on some key issues like immigration or (in many House cases) the moderate GOPers they replace. By and large candidates like Ellsworth (a law & order sheriff who signed Grover Norquist's no tax pledge), Giffords (a big business executive), Casey (pro-life), McCaskill (a strong on defense/foreign policy Truman Dem), Webb (Reagan's Navy Secretary) etc. are very moderate, even conservative Dems. These are not tax & spend liberals. That is not who won the election. It was good centrist candidates. A recipe for 2008? Finally, while I am a Dem, I do think they are celebrating in Tehran, Gaza and in the caves of Afganistan. I think they will view this as Americans getting tired of this war on terror in general, and not just in Iraq. I hope that is not true, because otherwise, I fear the consequences.
Posted by: Larry | November 8, 2006 10:15 AM
" I predict at least 5 resignations.
Posted by: fasteddie | Nov 8, 2006 9:10:16 AM"
eddie,
You bring up an interesting point; The next few weeks will reveal some interesting retirements/resignations/fireings.
Who's Next!
I can't wait for the recriminations, accusations, posturing, posing, and general spinning from the right wing chatting class on Fox, and the rest of the conservative controlled media.
This is a sweet day, and I plan on enjoying it. Gotta live for and in the moment sometimes! Can't always be wringing the hands over that crappy mutual fund performance.
Posted by: c.Morris | November 8, 2006 10:21 AM
Drunken Democrats - I hope none were driving.
Posted by: pjb | November 8, 2006 10:26 AM
John D the only pure partisan is you. I fought for my Country once. I fought to defeat those who would destory her. If the Democrats do not do what they say. I will fight them the next time. John that is the part you cannot see take off the shades. This Country will go back to being great again. And the Leader of the world. Not a Country that chould not be trusted. Maybe my Family can come home from the Sand Pit.
Posted by: Dale Peters | November 8, 2006 11:01 AM
BobinATL,
Just what is the plan for withdrawing from Iraq? I'm sure the Democrats have their plan ready to present to the American public. Right?
As usual, the Democrats slammed Bush but have no real plan in place for withdrawing from Iraq.
And, as usual, we'll hear the tired and worn excuse " Well, the Republicans don't have a plan either."
Just remember, now the Democratic party has to put up or shut up.
The old saying "Be careful what you wish for because you may just get it" will come back to haunt the Democratic party.
jj
Posted by: jj | November 8, 2006 11:25 AM
No, this is the easy part. The hard part was being shut out of discussion on important bills, amendments added in secrecy, and partisan name-calling by fellow congressmen and the president himself.
Posted by: Tom | November 8, 2006 11:26 AM
Bruce,
Are you so sure the "celebrations" you are hearing out of the Middle East aren't coming from our soldiers that now have hope that they may soon hug their sons, daughters and families, spend the holidays w/ them because our government is no longer controlled by a "stay the course" party and Democrats will look for a way out of that mess so our troops aren't referees in a Shia v. Sunni war.
Posted by: jethro | November 8, 2006 11:27 AM
I believe the U.S. will still have a heavy troop presence in Iraq in 2008. It is only the strategy, which does not include an immediate withdrawal, that will change over the next two years.
However, expect strong gains for the middle class at home. Expect better government overall, since the zealots in either party will be marginalized as the branches of government are forced to compromise.
Posted by: FirstNameLastName | November 8, 2006 11:28 AM
George "Macaca" down in Virginia,and Mr.Burns of "The Simpsons" fame over in Montana are sweating bullets right about now.
Posted by: John E. | November 8, 2006 11:40 AM
I can't believe we may not win the senate just because some of those idiot voters were still mad about Kerry's remarks -- HE WAS OBVIOUSLY JOKING -- CAN'T PEOPLE TELL WHEN A CELEBRITY IS JOKING ????????? -- SIGNED --- FAITH HILL
Posted by: FAITH HILL | November 8, 2006 11:45 AM
The problem with the whole "stay the course" drivel in regard to Iraq - the biggest issue of the campaigns this year - was that there was no "finishing line" in sight. Nor was/is there a coherent plan. Nor was/is there any end in sight of the killing of Iraqis and US servicemen. (And BTW, how can you put our troops into dangerous situations without the best equipment available? In all the years the troops have been there in Iraq, they still have not been issued adequate equipment. That's treason.) The "braintrust" went into Iraq thinking that the Iraqis were Republicans in disguise: they'd take to democracy the way a good ol' boy Texas governor took to whiskey and blow. More and more voters finally realized that Bush is disconnected from reality: "intellectually lazy" is a euphemism I'd heard mentioned in regard to him.
There is a quote in Thucydides' "History of the Peloponnesian War," written c. 2,400 years ago, by a man named Kleon, who is called the "most violent" man in Athens. Kleon says that it's better have bad laws firmly enforced than good laws that aren't, that governments need to do what they have to do to prosper, and that it's better for voters in a democracy not to think too much before acting. Sound familiar? Read on in Thucydides if you want a good chilling.
Posted by: George Watson | November 8, 2006 11:45 AM
C M,
You're right.
I'm going to be watching the Fox News Republican Cheerleading Channel the next few weeks,......for the comedy material.
Posted by: John E. | November 8, 2006 11:45 AM
So John D, as you continue to vomit venom about all the loony left --
FYI, I'm gonna be thrilled to see the Democratic party just the way it is. You see, in the REAL world (unlike the one you live in, apparently invented by Ann Coulter and visited by your God, Adolf Hitler), Democrats are not a half-step away from Communists. We're comfortable dealing with moderates and true conservatives. Many Democrats (like me) actually ESPOUSE moderation and conservative approaches. I'm no more eager than a sane Republican (which excludes you) to see our country awash in needless giveaways, government intrusion in my private life, or even a precipitous evacuation from Iraq, leaving them to chaos and waves of bloodbaths. And when we need to fight an enemy, I think we ought to fight them.
You're correct that yesterday's election was more about Republicans losing than it was about Democrats winning. That would be just FINE with me, as long as it's the Democrats that now get to pull in the reins on the neocons who've been driving this country very quickly down the road to destruction.
Doing so is going to take compromise on both sides, working together toward common goals. That's ALSO fine by me -- it's been what I've missed from our political scene for nearly a decade.
Best wishes to you as the -- loser!
Posted by: John | November 8, 2006 11:49 AM
John E & C Mor,watched Faux News for about an hour last night,it looked like Brit Hume was presiding over a funeral.
Chief Chickenhawk William Krystol and Freddie Barnes looked sick!!!!
Can't wait to watch Hannity and O'Really tonight!!!!
Posted by: Raving Loon | November 8, 2006 11:53 AM
Donald Rumsfeld is stepping down.
Congrats libs. You've won your war on terror.
Posted by: JD | November 8, 2006 11:53 AM
Hey everybody, the Swamp neoconmen are back!!!
You guys have any hair left after yesterday?
You should look on the bright side now. Think of every little thing that can potentially go wrong that you can now blame on:
A. The source, always discredit the source
B. The loopy,looney leftist media
C. Bill Clinton
Oh wait, that's the only response you collectively have ever had.
But now you have Pelosi, a Dem house and soon to be Dem senate. You guys will be swimmin in the bottom of the Swamp for years. Cheer up!
Posted by: Bubba | November 8, 2006 11:57 AM
Breaking news...Rummy to resign!
Posted by: bill r. | November 8, 2006 12:00 PM
This Republicant talking point about Dems needing a "plan" reflects incomprehension of our Constitution. I know that some of you realize this, but have latched on to this line because you really don't have anything of merit to add.
As the wingers have been so willing to remind us over the past five years, the President is the "commander in chief." Indeed, this "President" is so devoted to the role that he likes to dress up in a flight suit -- a coward in a hero's clothes.
Congress does not direct the troops or carry out military strategy. Congress instead has "checks" on the executive branch: 1) the ability to conduct oversight hearings, which have been lacking in the rubber stamp era; and 2) "power of the purse." Congress, in other words, can use its leverage to influence executive decisions, but it cannot make those decisions.
Now...if GWB and Darth Cheney would resign -- i.e., undertake the only selfless and patriotic acts of their singularly reprehensible lives -- then indeed it would be up to President Pelosi to act like a Chief Executive, and come up with an actual strategy. Since no one expects those two rodents to do anything like that, though, we're all going to be stuck with them -- two guys that have proven beyond dispute that they don't have a clue, let alone a plan.
Peace.
Posted by: a blinkin | November 8, 2006 12:01 PM
Breaking News and its Big Rumsfeld is stepping down
Posted by: Dale Peters | November 8, 2006 12:03 PM
The hard part for me has been watching the Republicans attempt to destroy all social progress achieved since the end of the Gilded Age.
Posted by: c.Morris | Nov 8, 2006 9:55:49 AM
This is a sweet day, and I plan on enjoying it. Gotta live for and in the moment sometimes! Can't always be wringing the hands over that crappy mutual fund performance.
Posted by: c.Morris | Nov 8, 2006 10:21:06 AM
Sorry to rain on your parade CM, but then I'm sure you knew that I would. I suppose you should be happy that the Bad Guys lost, but what did you WIN? The democrats ran mostly center/conservative.
Besides, Bush has been enabled every step of the way by a Democrat party that was at critical times compliant, and was consistantly confused and disorganized. So you see hope in that?
Plus I happen to know that you're one of the very few true Leftists posting here. As such, you have no party to call "Home".
I guess it's a victory of sorts...
Posted by: Juanito | November 8, 2006 12:28 PM
Jethro,
What exactly is the Democratic plan for withdrawing from Iraq?
I'm waiting.
I'm still waiting.
Oh that's right, the Democrats don't have a plan. Furthermore, when there is another terrorist attack on US soil, how will the Democrats respond?
jj
Posted by: jj | November 8, 2006 12:47 PM
I think the first order of business for the Dems is to stop allowing the corporate-owned press to define them. JD/JohnD, Paolo, Bruce and others have continuously quoted talking points verbatim from their heroes-Rush Limpdick, the self-loathing gay Drudge and paranoid O'Lielly.
Most Dems are more centrist than these goofs think. (I'm referring to JD/JohnD, Paolo, and Bruce.) The other goofs are just in it for the dough. Limpick probably voted straight Democratic because he needs to buy more Viagra and the blowup doll that goes with it.
Posted by: Catherine | November 8, 2006 1:09 PM
Catherine,
You'd be better off sticking to Dem talking points. Your own are a bit sick.
Drudge self loathing gay man?
Yes, he may be gay, but your post sings the sweet sounds of supposed liberal inclusion. One of the few reasons I don't buy the liberal Democrat stereotype of being open minded.
Also, point out where we have listed talking points verbatim.
Posted by: JD | November 8, 2006 1:22 PM
jj,
Little js are appropriate for your little mind. By the way...the only time we were hit was on GW's watch...you neocons always forget this little fact. Thank god America has finally come to its senses!
Posted by: neal | November 8, 2006 1:22 PM
I hope the Democrats have a "secret plan" to win the war.....sort of like Nixon's "secret plan" back in 1968....oh, wait, that was expanding the war into Cambodia....nevermind...
Waiting to see if the party of John ("If you're dumb, you'll wind up in Iraq") Kerry can pull off a victory better than Vietnam or Korea (the last 2 Democratic wars).
At least Rummy's out -- that is a blessing. No more "oh, well, we are where we are" -- maybe someone can fix this thing before Bush is out and leave the next President without a mess to fix (like Truman did to Ike, LBJ did to Nixon, Nixon did to Ford....)
Still hoping beyond hope for peace and stability so we can pay 100% attention to Britney and Kevin without worrying about body counts and terror levels...
Posted by: Eric | November 8, 2006 1:23 PM
I'm giggling like a schoolgirl...
Hey, jj, what was the Repub. plan for Iraq? What would have constituted a victory? How many American lives are too many to lose?
Stop kidding yourself. Are you REALLY more afraid of a terrorist attack, now? Yer boy is still pres, he's been protecting you all these years...
You guys kill me with the 'oh, well there haven't been any attacks since 9/11'. Wow, that totally proves NOTHING. My 8-year-old has more common sense than that!
Oh, hey, I haven't had a car accident since Bush became president - does that mean they made the roads safer? hahahahaha
sorry, I'm laughing myself silly.
Posted by: andrea | November 8, 2006 2:07 PM
You missed my point yet again, JD. I have no problem with Drudge's gayness. It's just that he champions people who are disgusted by something that is as much a part of him as much as the color of his eyes. That makes him someone who is more to be pitied, I guess. It's the relentless hypocrisy of these guys. Rush's condemnation against drug users and guess what! He's a druggie himself. O'Lielly is looking out for who? Himself of course as he sexually harrasses an underling. He rants and raves and threatens like a bully, but God forbid anyone calls him on his BS.
And I have sensed much hypocrisy on your part as you pretend to be reasoned and Christian. Or was that your alter ego who claimed that?
Posted by: Catherine | November 8, 2006 2:10 PM
I do not know why any American is celebrating today. If anything, this election showed how utterly pathetic politics has become in this country. This election did not bring out any discussion on real issues that need to be addressed in this country. Instead it was based on which candidate was the lesser of the two evils and it involved nothing but mudslinging. Politics has become such a partisan, corrupt profession that no one of any quality wants to get involved. Look at the choices we had here in Illinois. Rod or Judy? The entire Todd Stoger situation was a slap in the face to the citizens of Cook County. Yet, Senator Obama, who I thought was a man of substance, still towed the party line for him. The only winners are the men and women in office who continue to take advantage of their positions and yet do nothing to impove this country. The Democrats were just the lesser of the two evils this time.
Posted by: Kate | November 8, 2006 2:19 PM
jj, why is it that "well, the Republicans have no plan either" is a tired old excuse but "why don't Democrats have a plan" ISN'T? Your plan didn't work, as of the time we captured Saddam Hussein, yet you still followed it expecting the results to change.
As for another attack on US soil, please keep in mind Bush's record for Hurricane Katrina, because I suspect that his reaction if another terrorist attack occurred here would look a lot like that. When Clinton was president, emergencies were actually taken care of and people got the help they needed. Perhaps that indicates that Democrats would do just fine if they need to respond.
Posted by: John | November 8, 2006 2:20 PM
To talk of a Democratic plan (or any plan) for withdrawal from Iraq ignores the facts: there is/was no Republican plan. I really don't understand how anybody, including Republicans, could believe that Bush and Rumsfeld did a good job in Iraq. They ignored every indicator including a CIA prospectus on Iraq invasion which expressly stated that nothing - NOTHING - good would come of it. And now we're hearing that, if we withdraw from Iraq, there will be chaos. "Chaos"? That's what's been happening for three plus years.
It was up to Bush and his cabinet, including Rumsfeld, to get something done in Iraq. And nobody can argue with this: THEY DIDN'T DO IT. IT IS THEY WHO FAILED WHEN THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD A PLAN. And our boys and girls - and Iraqis of all ages - are dying there for their arrogance when they deserved better. Rumsfeld should have resigned long ago.
BUSH & RUMSFELD + IRAQ = FAILURE
Posted by: George Watson | November 8, 2006 2:24 PM
Neal,
Have you forgot the USS Cole attack during the CLINTON PRESIDENCY?
And what was Clinton's response? Typical DEMO response - nothing. Wow, what a bunch of intellectuals he must have had on his cabinet.
jj
Posted by: jj | November 8, 2006 2:26 PM
Andrea,
I can understand why you're acting like a schoolgirl after that response.
Would you feel better if there had been another terrorist attack?
What is the Democratic plan for withdrawal from Iraq? How many more dead US soldiers? How many months? What't the total cost?
That's right, the DEMS don't have any answers either.
And if you haven't had a car accident lately, why are you still paying for insurance?
jj
Posted by: jj | November 8, 2006 2:45 PM
Juanito,
What did we win? Fair question. In politics, ours in particular, there is never 100% compliance.
We stepped over the edge in 04, but it appears on the way down we threw a sky hook back to the edge, and hopefully can climb back out of the abyss.
There remains YEARS of hard work, investigation, and just plain hard study to figure out everything that has been done to our public institutions, public lands/environment, justice system, more.
How many unknown one liners have been slipped into legislation?
How many executive orders and signing statements have been forgotten? I don't know.
Fixing the Republic will take 10 years of hard work?? I don't know if they, the Dems, are up to it, but it is the only path at this time.
Posted by: c.Morris | November 8, 2006 2:52 PM
Catherine,
your not, by any chance, married to John E. are you?
Raving Loon?
...so lets see Rush was/is addicted to drugs, O'reilly sexually harrased an underling, and Drudge might by gay.
Sounds like they should be heroes to you guys.
Posted by: JD | November 8, 2006 2:59 PM
JD,
I'm not sure why I'm even bothering - I know you're perfectly intelligent enough, and Catherine certainly expressed herself well enough, so it can only be stubbornness on your part, which means I'd be better off talking to a wall, but here goes. The issue with Drudge, Rush, etc. isn't an issue of gays, drug addicts, etc. It's an issue of gays participating in gay bashing in order to be accepted themselves. It's an issue of a drug addict condemning other drug addicts for lack of willpower and moral fortitude. In other words, it's an issue of hypocrisy. Or don't you see the irony of a leader of The Center for Missing and Exploited Children sending lewd emails/IMs to teenage boys?
Posted by: Dienne | November 8, 2006 3:35 PM
Little j's,
So little time, so little minds. The USS Cole was not hit on US Soil so your argument is about as useless as your little mind. Also, neocon nutbar, the CIA did not certify the Cole attack as an al queda operation until Clinton was nearly out of office. I know facts get in the way of your little fantasy land, but those of us in the real world use them all the time!
Posted by: neal | November 8, 2006 3:42 PM
Bobbie L. Steele just began to uncover the true financial mess that's been going on in Cook County government.
Get ready for massive increases in either property taxes or some other tax for Cook County residents.
You're already hearing proclamations of "A chicken in every pot!" Sounds good but guess who's going to pay?
Maybe they'll raise the tax on cigarettes to 5 bucks a pack? Or maybe the tax on fuel will go to 2 bucks a gallon. Just keep telling yourself--Todd Stroger is my friend when you're paying your bills.
Posted by: Toscano | November 8, 2006 3:50 PM
JD, I think I'm old enough o be John E.'s mother.
Posted by: Catherine | November 8, 2006 3:51 PM
neal -- with all due respect -- you are an idiot
the "only" time we were hit on US soil was during dubya's watch ???
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrright
tell that to the families of those killed the first time osama bombed the wtc
and the uss cole doesn't count cause it was deployed and not in one of our harbors
technically you may be right that the cole incident wasn't on US soil, but that hardly changes the fact that clinton failed to respond
and while you are being technical, remember our embassies are technically U.S. soil -- so -- you are tragically wrong on multiple "facts" AND even more importantly -- you missed the point
tom little t
Posted by: tom | November 8, 2006 4:13 PM
Tom,
Thanks for setting Neal straight.
His response brought to mind the famous Clinton quote "It depends on what your definition of is is."
American citizens were killed on the USS Cole - is that good enough for you Neal?
jj
Posted by: jj | November 8, 2006 4:46 PM
The pendulum swings.
We vote for the Democrats until we can't stand them any more (1994), then we vote for the Republicans until we can't stand THEM any more (2006).
Through all this tacking to the left and the right, the ship of state sails on. (For those of you who are getting metaphorical whiplash, sorry.)
The Democrats had best enjoy this moment of victory, because now, and particularly if they reclaim the White House in 2008 (who?) everything that is perceived to be wrong with the country will attach to them. Watch out for the pendulum on its way back. When the mainsail boom comes across, better duck.
Posted by: Dave Brann | November 8, 2006 4:51 PM
Neal,
I'm sad to see that when it comes to American lives you split hairs.
Not on American soil? Attacking a US naval vessel is the same as an attack on the US.
I'm sure the widows of the dead US soldiers will take comfort in the fact that the attack wasn't on American soil.
jj
Posted by: jj | November 8, 2006 4:52 PM
these are the victims of the first WTC bombing --- 1993
John DiGiovanni
Bob Kirkpatrick
Steven Knapp
Bill Macko
Wilfred Mercado
Monica Rodriguez Smith
Neal, would you like to tell the daughter of Mercado who was 10 the last day she saw her daddy OR the four children of Macko that they don't count in your monkey math just so you can figuratively be a lewinsky for your beloved Bill Clinton who can do no wrong in your eyes ???????
yes, ALL of our leaders have made mistakes -- yesterday Bush was held accountable for his -- why after all of this time can you people not hold Bill accountable ??
(maybe so you can justify voting in 2008 for his spouse so Bill can be appointed to supreme court or some other policy-making position as was always the plan right up until a successful pattern of pathological lying suddenly failed to cover up what was on the blue dress)
why do you guys give so much grief to everyone but bill ??
I could launch any number of legitimate attacks on the Bill you keep defending with your high degrees of historical revisionism and selective amnesia and you would do nothing but call me a neocon hit man for being accurate.
However I would prefer to list the names of those killed in 1993 on US soil one more time with a request that someone such as Neal give me one legitimate reason why these people shouldn't be counted !!!
John DiGiovanni
Bob Kirkpatrick
Steven Knapp
Bill Macko
Wilfred Mercado
Monica Rodriguez Smith
Posted by: tom | November 8, 2006 5:21 PM
Fixing the Republic will take 10 years of hard work?? I don't know if they, the Dems, are up to it, but it is the only path at this time.
Posted by: c.Morris | Nov 8, 2006 2:52:14 PM
C.Morris,
Good response. From your lips to God's ear... in some cold dark distant place.
Posted by: Juanito | November 8, 2006 6:04 PM
jethro,
Just so you are clear on the topic, this is what our forces in Iraq think of Democratic "leadership"
http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/kerrysign.asp
RRD
Posted by: RRD | November 8, 2006 6:05 PM
jj and tom,
You guys just lost the big homecoming game,now do us all a favor,and crawl back into your NeoCon holes like good little groundhogs.
Your opinions won't be needed for the next 6-8yrs
Quit trying to justify the Republican beatdown,you're only making things worse for yourself.
Posted by: John E. | November 8, 2006 6:07 PM
tom with a little t and a big MD, you da man!
Posted by: Juanito | November 8, 2006 6:07 PM
Bruce, the GOP's second-string cheerleader (GWB is first string) sounds depressed. Poor thing.
Posted by: Karen Up North | November 8, 2006 6:47 PM
I read all your comments. I conclude we will all never get along because right down to regular people-on-the-street-Trib-readers like yourselves love to rip each other apart.
Remember - mean people suck. Just because one has a different opinion doesn't mean we have small brains, deserve terror attacks or are idiots.
Obviously you ALL have pent up anger/rage/anxiety/over jubilation etc. Go take it out at the gym, not out on a fellow American.
Have some respect for yourself and your fellow man.
Peace.
Posted by: Carry | November 8, 2006 7:44 PM
Carry,
We're not ALL that.
Posted by: Juanito | November 8, 2006 8:24 PM
RRD:
The troops' sign poking fun at Kerry's screwup is just what it looks like- poking fun at Kerry. Only someone prone to wishful thinking could extrapolate that into an indictment of all of the troops' feelings about Democratic leadership.
By the way, www.snopes.com is an outstanding source to debunk or verify the chain emails that perpetrate myths about polarizing figures. Most the things said about Hilary Clinton and other Democratic leaders are BS.
Watch now for bizarre stories about Nancy Pelosi and her "San Francisco Values" whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.
Posted by: Catherine | November 9, 2006 7:36 AM
Tom and jj,
What did Bush do to try and take out Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda before 9/11 happened...after the USS Cole? Chirp...chirp...chirp...(tumbleweed rolls across the screen) The answer is nothing.
Posted by: jethro | November 9, 2006 8:16 AM
Some people ask for proof of foreign celebrations of the Democrat's win. Some people still ask for the proof that Hitler had death camps. Since proof of the obvious was asked, proof shall be furnished.
First, from the Middle East, the AP published photos of a rally in Pakistan. See
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/061109/481/isl10411091304
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/061109/481/isl10511091251
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/061109/481/isl10311091251
Note the AP caption that Pakistanis are praying for a Democrat victory. Note also how the rally signs are in English, and thus intended for the American news media to pick up. The most prominent sign slogan, "No more Rumsfeld, no more war", could be taken from a Nancy Pelosi speech.
Another AP article is headlined "World welcomes shift in US politics", and mentions how, "from Paris to Pakistan", the world (or at least the 7 people they quote) are celebrating the Democrat victory.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061109/ap_on_el_ge/eln_elections_world_view
Forbes has an article
http://www.forbes.com/business/energy/feeds/ap/2006/11/08/ap3155690.html
on Arab reaction to the election. The money quote comes from "Mohammed Ali, a Cairo auto parts salesman": "I was really thrilled when I learned that the Democrats won Congress."
The above is merely a sample. I could furnish many more examples.
Posted by: Bruce | November 9, 2006 8:44 AM
Bruce,
We are screwed. I thought we were fighting Islamo-fascists but the captions say that those people praying for changes in US policy are Pakistani Christians. Now we have to fight Islamo-Christo-fascism. We are outnumbered! Where's my white flag!
Posted by: jethro | November 9, 2006 10:30 AM
Bruce,
You criticize the Swamp reporters all the time and then you provide reckless, out of context quotes. You failed to include the reasons Muhammed Ali gave for being happy about Democrats winning. He didn't say because Bin Laden is the supreme ruler, Al-Qaeda is king, or death to Americans, he said, "They (Democrats) are far better than the Republicans led by Bush, who destroyed everything everywhere. Look at Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon." Cha-Ching!
Posted by: Janet | November 9, 2006 10:44 AM
Well duh, Bruce. Since Bush has come to symbolize the USA as evil to these people,(Note to crazy people, people from other countries hate Bush, not me.)and the citizens of some of them are subject to increased hardships including bombings since the Iraq war, they are probably hoping that the Democrats do a better job than Bush did. Will the Democrats do better? I don't know. It's totally FUBAR now.
Posted by: Catherine | November 9, 2006 10:48 AM
Bruce:
While you post links to articles about foreign celebrations regarding Democratic victory in Tuesday's election, your post implys the basic Neocon talking point that "Democrats are weak on terror".
Try another possibility: that these countries want the Democrats to put a stop to American imperialism, to remove our troops from countries that have not attacked us, that people in places like Iraq see us as occupiers for the past 3 years and not the liberators that we were initially.
Maybe these foreign people want to see the "War on Terror" run intelligently, not by bluster from someone acting like a dimestore cowboy.
Posted by: BC | November 9, 2006 11:17 AM
So much meaningless and mindless babble...is it any wonder that our country is spinning wildly out of control and completely unfocused on the things that REALLY matter. We INTELLIGENT AMERICANS (cough...cough) would rather ARGUE with each other about mindless fodder than team up and do something POSITIVE in our country.
BTW, POLITICIANS, remember, are voted in because they ARE POPULAR, NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE RIGHT!
Posted by: Steve | November 9, 2006 2:48 PM
Hey Bruce!
Those Pakistanis are our friends/allies in the war on terror!
Posted by: c.Morris | November 9, 2006 8:13 PM