Advertisement

Archive for Thursday, September 18, 2008

GOP legacy

September 18, 2008

Advertisement

To the editor:

Is it the strategy of the Republican Party to rail against anyone that questions the dubious qualifications of Gov. Palin and their claims of being "reforming mavericks" in hopes that the American voter will forget their leadership over the last seven years? The Republicans have led us to an unnecessary war in Iraq, an unsure victory in Afghanistan, an unprecedented national debt, the attempted trashing of the Constitution, circumvention of the environmental laws and social reform accomplished over the last 40 years, and their cronyism, at the expense of the middle class, with big business. If it works, then we deserve what we get.

The war, national health care, Social Security, the deficit, the housing situation and the economy are a few of the many issues that need to be addressed. It's time to demand more from both parties. In order to cast an intelligent vote, we need to insist on concrete goals and specific actions on how those goals are to be accomplished from both parties. The issues facing America in this election are far too important for rhetoric, fear tactics and personal attacks.

Bill Dymacek,
Eudora

Comments

jackbinkelman 5 years, 7 months ago

Point one; bush/chaney co. installed like thinking drones in all positions of power that they could, blaming much on The Dems is futile. Point two, for my amusement; I read an article in the NYT about McCain's captor in the Nam.. at the end is a quote from the nurse that first treated Micky Cain after he was shot down. Telling.... " Once he was pulled from the crowd, a nurse named Nguyen Thi Thanh said she bound his wounds and gave him a few sips of medicinal liquor.In an interview, Ms. Thanh, now 81, said she had followed his career since then, although with her fading eyesight he is just a fuzzy image now on television."It seems he's been running for president for a long time," she said. "So he's quite persistent, isn't he?"She is confident that whatever happens, he will not give up. "I'm only 81 now. My mother lived till 94. That's 13 more years. So each time he runs for the presidency, I'll have a chance to see him again." "HA!

0

banned 5 years, 7 months ago

Koolaid kevin is back....and so am I- the one who throws hit sh!t right back in his little face.Small man- small mind...he is.

0

Koolaid 5 years, 7 months ago

Under Bill Clinton the USA was progressing toward a utopian level of government never before seen on this planet. Then Bushhitler stole the election from Al Gore and imposed 8 years of dark Christianofacist tyranny on our wonderful paradise. Now because John McCain has voted 90% of the time in line with Bushhitler our economy is in the tank and the elderly are eating dog food to get by. Obama has come to save America and restore balance to the force. Dark Sith Lord Darth Cheney and the Emperor Bushhitler are no match for the good side of the force.Obama was tested as a child and he has the highest midichlorians count ever recorded. He is the one written about in the prophecy. He has been trained in the ways of the force by OMGDA Wright. Oh, and Sarah Palin has cooties!!Oh yeah!!

0

logicsound04 5 years, 7 months ago

"This is probably why most legislation is some sort of compromise."----------------But according the GOP, compromise is a travishamockery.

0

duplenty 5 years, 7 months ago

"let's be honest the Dems ain't done us no good for eight years either."Um, do you understand how our gov't works?

0

jafs 5 years, 7 months ago

Unless the majority party in Congress has a sufficient majority to override presidential vetoes, they are limited in their ability to pass legislation.This is probably why most legislation is some sort of compromise.

0

Pilgrim 5 years, 7 months ago

Harry Truman describes Obama to a T:"I have little patience with those who concoct fancy and plausible schemes out of thin air. Ignoring the lessons and experiences of the past, and who because they are convinced that existing methods and systems are imperfect, conclude that any change, no matter how ill-conceived or ill-founded, would be an improvement.""This Man Truman," Frank McNaughton

0

OnlyTheOne 5 years, 7 months ago

And once again I ask, "Were there not Democrats in a position of authority and power in Washington during this 'rape' of America?"Of course there were but the LTE writer (and a number of others) seem to forget this one small point!Now I dislike Bush, Cheney, Rove and the bunch of 'em as much as the next guy but let's be honest the Dems ain't done us no good for eight years either.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 7 months ago

"but the ACLU does not respect the SCOTUS 2nd Amendment ruling, and is against the 2 nd amendment and the SCOTUS ruling."--------------Interesting you should mention that, as until a few months ago, the SCOTUS and ACLU agreed in their interpretation of the 2nd Amendment--that it is a collective, and not an individual right.The ACLU has held the position that the 1939 ruling in U.S. vs. Miller was correct. It was only after the Roberts' court recently ruled that gun ownership is an individual right, that the two bodies disagreed.======================="Yes I know they are the creeps that support NAMBLA for child predatation and molestation"--------------Like I said, please inform yourself. The ACLU has never defended anyone's "right" to be a child predator. They have, however, defended NAMBLA's right to free speech.You see, that thing you just cited--the Constitution--provides freedom of speech for everyone. Even those people whose message is distasteful or downright dispicable.========================"Yes, I know that the ACLU lobbies for more "rights" for ilelgal aliens and Citizens from other countries, while eroding the rights of the American Citizens"-------------Illegal aliens still have rights. Another one of the beautiful things about our Constitution is that it applies to more people than simply U.S. citizens.I'd also love to hear how defending an illegal alien's human rights simultaneously erodes the rights of a U.S. citizen.========================"Yes I know what the ACLU is, and they are the ones that want to give the "Battlefield" POWs '"ight to trial""--------------The fact that you think anyone is undeserving of a fair trial is absurd. I'm pretty sure it's also a violation of the Geneva Conventions.

0

Koolaid 5 years, 7 months ago

So many of you have drank so much of me. Oh Yeah!

0

beobachter 5 years, 7 months ago

asbestos, why do you hate America so much?

0

ASBESTOS 5 years, 7 months ago

Do you even realize what ACLU stands for, asbestos?YEs I do, but the ACLU does not respect the SCOTUS 2nd Amendment ruling, and is AGAINST the 2 nd amendment and the SCOTUS ruling.Yes I know they are the creeps that support NAMBLA for child predatation and molestationYes, I know that the ACLU lobbies for more "rights" for ilelgal aliens and Citizens from other countries, while eroding the rights of the American CitizensYes I know what the ACLU is, and they are the ones that want to give the "Battlefield" POWs '"ight to trial", which meand that the American Military Policy is to no longer take prisoners.Yes, I know what the ACLU is "supposed to be". it is no longer that, it is an organization that supports ultra left wing philosphhy and no longer subscribes to "American" values, but surenders it to "Global interpertations".

0

Windlass 5 years, 7 months ago

They do none of the above so please link all of the above statements back to my original point earlier today: In regards to an out of control deficit, the Dems are as much to blame as Bush.________Oh boy oh boy - where are Max1's pie charts when I really need them?

0

logicsound04 5 years, 7 months ago

"the ACLU....ultra left wingers"--------------Do you even realize what ACLU stands for, asbestos?They protect your rights, my rights, and the rights of every other group whose views are marginalized by some kind of majority.They've gone to bat for people all along the political spectrum.So when you call them "ultra-left wingers", as if they are some radical fringe, you display your own ignorance, either regarding the meaning of "ultra left wing" or regarding your understanding of the ACLU.Either way, you should inform yourself.

0

ExxonMcCain 5 years, 7 months ago

Some of McPain....RIGHT-WING LUNACY*Said that the nation is founded on "Christian principles." (source)Is in favor of prayer in public schools. (source)The description of McCain's autobiography is by the author of The Unmaking Of Americans: How Multiculturalism has Undermined the Assimilation Ethic and Our Oldest Enemy: A History of America's Disastrous Relationship with France. (source)When asked to name an inspirational author, said "Joel Osteen." (source)Was against intelligent design being taught in schools; now supports it. (source 1, source 2)Describes Roberts, Alito his favorite justices. (source)Campaign actively sought Hagee's endorsement until the "Hitler was a hunter" video came out. (source 1, source 2)

0

duplenty 5 years, 7 months ago

"Nebraska Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel said his party's vice presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, lacks foreign policy experience and called it a "stretch" to say she's qualified to be president. ""She doesn't have any foreign policy credentials," Hagel said in an interview published Thursday by the Omaha World-Herald. "You get a passport for the first time in your life last year? I mean, I don't know what you can say. You can't say anything.""McCain and other Republicans have defended Palin's qualifications, citing Alaska's proximity to Russia. Palin told ABC News, "They're our next-door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."Hagel took issue with that argument. "I think they ought to be just honest about it and stop the nonsense about, 'I look out my window and I see Russia and so therefore I know something about Russia,'" he said. "That kind of thing is insulting to the American people."http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_el_pr/hagel_palinDamn liberals.

0

Windlass 5 years, 7 months ago

And the way you post I am supposed to believe that you actually care about the soldiers? Yeah, right, you are just pooliticizing a side effect of men and women in conflict. You are despicable.-----------------------------------------------------------------I never supported sending them to their deaths for cold, calculated lies. George Walker Bush et al have to know that murder has no statute of limitations. Do I care about the soldiers? Enough that I would hand over the President of the United States to stand trial for his crimes against them.

0

Jason Bailey 5 years, 7 months ago

@Staff04:Man you guys are dense. That's not the point. You guys get so caught up in the most minute details. I know the congress passed balanced budgets but who sets the level of discretionary and direct spending? The Congress!Who has the authority and power to change entitlement spending (thus reducing the yearly cost load to the budget)? The Congress!Who has the authority to override the war and pull the plug on funding the "War on Terrorism"? The Congress!They do none of the above so please link all of the above statements back to my original point earlier today: In regards to an out of control deficit, the Dems are as much to blame as Bush.

0

staff04 5 years, 7 months ago

Ugh...I hate when people whose knowledge of the federal budget process comes from high school or college textbooks try to argue.You are all wrong. Here's a good place to start:http://budget.house.gov/crs-reports/98-721.pdfhttp://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34622_20080819.pdfAnd jason2007, the Democratic Congress DID in fact reject the President's budgets for FY 08 and FY 09 and passed balanced budgets instead.Do some homework and then come back and try again.

0

ASBESTOS 5 years, 7 months ago

Hey Merril, in both of the sites you posted, both have members of ACORN national offices and the ACLU, both ultra left wingers.Like that is an objective group.Windlass the moronic yahoo:"Since 2001, the Republican Party controls the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches."But hey , SNAP, Dems have had control of the legislative branch, and have slept on the Chairmanships of the House and Senate Banking and Finance committees. Well did they let this happen for political means, or did they just let it ride and got fat on the low interest loans and then just "blamed the GOP". """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""They're committing suicide, folks."And the way you post I am supposed to believe that you actually care about the soldiers? Yeah, right, you are just pooliticizing a side effect of men and women in conflict. You are despicable.

0

Windlass 5 years, 7 months ago

Just wondering...if anybody else is wondering that maybe our soldiers want and need to come home. They're committing suicide, folks.

0

Windlass 5 years, 7 months ago

Pelosi and Reed don't have any control over Congress. Since 2001, the Republican Party controls the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches. But hey snap, honesty is such a lonely word, right?

0

Windlass 5 years, 7 months ago

Regarding the terrorist attack:give me a break! You need to read about what Osama himself said on how 9/11 came to be. He is on the record as saying that after the Al Qaeda attacks in the 90s against US interests abroad and seeing Clinton's anemic response that he knew the US was weak. The fact is that your guy's lack of a sufficient response when it mattered led up to 9/11, per Osama's own words!_____No Jason, he said that about President Reagan, not Clinton. Reagan brought the surviving Marines home from Beirut, Lebanon without a fight of any kind. And you say that Americans haven't been attacked in 7 years? or 8? Jason, Jason, Jason, Americans are attacked and killed all of the time to this very day! No, they aren't on American soil, but they are all over the world, and that's where Americans continue to be killed - outside the United States.

0

Flap Doodle 5 years, 7 months ago

Change America needs: Dump the Pelosi/Reid Democrat Congress!

0

Windlass 5 years, 7 months ago

  • Westar Energy- Aquila- SprintThe loss of capitalization of just - one - of the above Kansas companies reached almost $3 trillion dollars.Almost $3 trillon dollars, Jason, who do you blame?
0

Richard Heckler 5 years, 7 months ago

Election IssuesNow it's time to force the issues to the front burner and ignore the sex and swift boating from the republicans. Deception and avoiding the issues are the republican campaign trademark. Voters must defend their rights to an ISSUE ORIENTED campaign!The issues it seems are: http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home Bring all the troops home. The Iraq people know how to rebuild a country and run an oil business. Their oil is not our oil.40,000 disabled troops More than 4,000 dead troops1,000,000 dead Iraq men,women and Children Creating new industry that cannot be outsourced Cleaner Energy Sources National Health Insurance ( Support HR 676) Dumping No Child Left Behind Restoring Rights of Americans that republicans took away Reining in the power of the President Restoring the EPA Acts that the republican wiped out Restoring the USDA to a credible agency that places consumers over special interest money Voter Rights NOT special interest rights:Campaigns go too long,spend way too much money and do not necessarily provide the best available.It is up to us to stop the nonsense at the voting booths on the 2008 ballot.Not voting sends the wrong message and changes nothing.Lets's demand a new system and vote in Fair Vote America : http://www.fairvote.org/irv/Demand a change on the 2008 ballot.

0

Gary Sandell 5 years, 7 months ago

1029 (Anonymous) says: Number of votes it took for Palin to be elected mayor of Wasilla: 909 (32.7% voter turnout)Number of votes it took for Palin to be elected governor of Alaska: 114,697 (51% of registered voters cast a vote)___Number of Electoral votes needed to elect the McCain-Palin ticket: 270.

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 5 years, 7 months ago

OnlytheOne says,"Except everybody seems to have forgotton there were a few Democrats around during the Republicans tenue in the White House. What were they doing? Oh yes, marching to the same tune."I seem to recall them being threatened by the R's with "the nuclear option". Remember that?

0

logicsound04 5 years, 7 months ago

Hatred? Namecalling?Jason, I'd love for you to cite either of those elements in my post. I have a feeling you'll find them in the same place as your understanding of basic civics--a void of nonexistence.At any rate...her we go:"I said that 90% of the Liberal agenda is Unconstitutional when viewed from a Constructionist vantage point. Perhaps you should do some research on what the Constructionist philosophy is."-Jason2007-----------------All I asked you to do was provide an example of your claim. And I'm familiar enough with the term "Strict Constructionism" to understand that it is hogwash.Strict Constructionism requires that one follow the text of the Constitution as written and no further. This is an attempt to pretend that there is one objective meaning within the writing of the Constitution and nothing more. Unfortunately, it ignores the fact that the meaning of the text must first be agreed upon. With the need to agree upon meaning comes interpretation--which is what Constructionism is seeking to eliminate in the first place.Constructionists like to pretend that there is no room for variances of opinion, so long as one follows the text. The reality does not fit with that view.============================"Regarding the terrorist attack:give me a break! ....The fact is that your guy's lack of a sufficient response when it mattered led up to 9/11, per Osama's own words!"-----------------Once again, I find it curious that conservatives cite the words of terrorists like bin Ladin so often. It never seems to cross their mind that the things (writings, quotes, videos) published by terrorists are not designed to be truthful or accurate, they are designed to elicit a specific response.No matter. I only point out that 9/11 happened while Bush was president because YOU brought up the fact that we have had no further attacks since. You can't have it both ways--giving credit for a lack of attacks during a certain period, but also saying that the attacks that DID happen weren't his fault.Either Bush's actions and policy decisions are directly related to the terrorist attacks that happened (or didn't happen) while in office or they aren't. I personally think it is naive to think that there is such a direct correlation between attacks and actions taken to try and thwart said attacks.

0

JohnBrown 5 years, 7 months ago

jason2007 1) Balance a budget? Who controls the budget since 2006? A: Dems.JohnBrown: Wrong: President submits and congress passes or rejects. Bush can veto any achanges he doesn't want and Republican'ts in congress can sustain the veto.2) Can't regulate banks and lending? Where does the Constitution give any Fed party that power? A: It doesn't.JohnBrown: Article 1 of the Constitution.3) Can't clean up after a hurricane? Who's responsibility is this? A: The States.JohnBrown: Since the Congressional Act of 1803 the President has been tasked with responding to, planning for, recovering from, and mitigating against disasters. 4) Can't follow the Constitution? Um, 90% of the Liberal agenda is Unconstitutional when viewed through a Constructionist vantage point.JohnBrown: I disagree, but even if true, the Supreme court would set them straight. But that is a different topic. The topic at hand is habeas corpus and safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary state action.5) Can't win either of two wars? Who declared defeat and said the surge would never work? A: Barry Obama and Harry Reid (BTW: even your party is no longer saying we lost Iraq so you might want to get in line).JohnBrown. Did we win? Is it over? Was iraq the fight we should have chosen? 6) Can't keep their promises? Where are all the promised reforms that Pelosi spewed before gaining a majority in Congress? A: They haven't happened.JohnBrown: Conservatives pride themselves in being against big government and for reduced spending. BUT, Reagan added $2 trillion in debt while he was in office and Bush II has added another $5 trillion. of our $9 trillion debt, two conservatives created $7 trillion of it.7) Can't protect us from terrorists? Are you kidding me? Please let me know where we've been attacked since 9/11:.I missed that newsflash. Oh, BTW your party's revered and esteemed Father of Liberalism FDR had an attack on his watch too but it didn't happen twice under his watch:.same goes for Bush.JohnBrown: As I recall, 9/11 happened under the Bush administration. Where was the protection then? Oh, but you ONLY want to talk about since 9/11. Well, what about the anthrax attack? That was a second, unrelated terrorist attack that happened under Bush. Further, neither purpertrator has since been captured "dead or alive'. Instead we spent billions "attacking" Bin Laden in the wrong country.Care to try again?

0

Jason Bailey 5 years, 7 months ago

@Every Angry Lib:Duplenty: I believe it is you that needs a Civics lesson, friend. The President submits a budget but the Bicameral legislature must pass it by Resolution. Discretionary spending is set by the House and Senate Appropriation Committees. Direct spending is mandatory spending by law which (the last time I checked) was enacted or changeable by the Congress. Who controls the Congress?I believe there's a small thing called checks and balances outlined in the Constitution. The Congress has the power to control spending thus my statement about balancing a budget is correct. They could DEMAND that Bush submit a balanced budget or not move the submitted budget to Resolution on the floor of the House/Senate.@LogicSound:Please read my post in context before spewing hatred and name calling (I know that's hard for you guys). I said that 90% of the Liberal agenda is Unconstitutional when viewed from a Constructionist vantage point. Perhaps you should do some research on what the Constructionist philosophy is. I didn't make a blanket statement that it WAS unconstitutional, I specifically qualified the point from a Constructionist view.Regarding the terrorist attack...give me a break! You need to read about what Osama himself said on how 9/11 came to be. He is on the record as saying that after the Al Qaeda attacks in the 90s against US interests abroad and seeing Clinton's anemic response that he knew the US was weak. The fact is that your guy's lack of a sufficient response when it mattered led up to 9/11, per Osama's own words!@1029: I really think we need...oh never mind. Your attempt at an intelligent comment doesn't warrant a response.

0

duplenty 5 years, 7 months ago

" Balance a budget? Who controls the budget since 2006? A: Dems"???Civics 101, friend. You need to do a little research before you speak to that of which you have no clue.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 7 months ago

Jason,Before you go gloating about how Democrats have "controlled" Congress for 2 of the last 8 years, perhaps you should take a look at yesterday's article regarding the offshore drilling bill.Republicans wanted to allow drilling within 25 mi. of the shore. Democrats wanted to allow drilling within 100 mi. of the shore. The end result was a bill that passed allowing drilling within 50 mi. of the shore.The Republican response was to rant and rave about how much of a "sham" the bill was. In other words, they found a bill that involved compromise to be a mockery. It's a perfect example of why the Republicans' (or at least the ones of the last 8 years) are a detriment to this country right now. They see compromise as a problem.Now, knowing that, do you really think the razor-thin majority that the Democrats have in Congress really provides them with the coalition they need to make any meaningful changes from the Republican policies that are already in place?Furthermore, the fact that you think one political philosophy is "Unconstitutional" proves how ignorant you are. So often the word "Unconstitutional" is thrown out there by people who have no idea what it means to make their point have more gravitas. If you think the "liberal agenda" is unconstitutional, then please provide me with a policy and corresponding passage in the constitution that prevents said policy from being enacted.I also apparently need to remind you that, as proud as you are that we have not had a terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 2001, you are conveniently glossing over the fact that the worst terror attack in the history of U.S. soil came on Bush and the Republicans' watch.Why try again when you haven't successfully argued against the first try?

0

1029 5 years, 7 months ago

jason2007's 9:42 comment is a perfect example of how ignorant the average American is about how government works. Required high school curriculum needs to be reformed to put more of an emphasis on understanding how our government works.

0

Richard Heckler 5 years, 7 months ago

How will the rest of the U.S. economy be affected if the republicans social security privatization plan is enacted?Put simply, moving to a system of private accounts would not only put retirement income at risk--it would likely put the entire economy at risk.The current Social Security system generates powerful, economy-stimulating multiplier effects. This was part of its original intent. In the early 1930s, the vast majority of the elderly were poor. While they were working, they could not afford to both save for retirement and put food on the table, and most had no employer pension. When Social Security began, elders spent every penny of that income. In turn, each dollar they spent was spent again by the people and businesses from whom they had bought things. In much the same way, every dollar that goes out in pensions today creates about 2.5 times as much total income. If the move to private accounts reduces elders' spending levels, as almost all analysts predict, that reduction in spending will have an even larger impact on slowing economic growth.The current Social Security system also reduces the income disparity between the rich and the poor. Private accounts would increase inequality--and increased inequality hinders economic growth. For example, a 1994 World Bank study of 25 countries demonstrated that as income inequality rises, productivity growth is reduced. Market economies can fall apart completely if the level of inequality becomes too extreme. The rapid increase in income inequality that occurred in the 1920s was one of the causes of the Great Depression.http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2005/0505orr.html

0

1029 5 years, 7 months ago

Number of votes it took for Palin to be elected mayor of Wasilla: 909 (32.7% voter turnout)Number of votes it took for Palin to be elected governor of Alaska: 114,697 (51% of registered voters cast a vote)

0

Jason Bailey 5 years, 7 months ago

@JohnBrown:1) Balance a budget? Who controls the budget since 2006? A: Dems2) Can't regulate banks and lending? Where does the Constitution give any Fed party that power? A: It doesn't.3) Can't clean up after a hurricane? Who's responsibility is this? A: The States.4) Can't follow the Constitution? Um, 90% of the Liberal agenda is Unconstitutional when viewed through a Constructionist vantage point.5) Can't win either of two wars? Who declared defeat and said the surge would never work? A: Barry Obama and Harry Reid (BTW: even your party is no longer saying we lost Iraq so you might want to get in line)6) Can't keep their promises? Where are all the promised reforms that Pelosi spewed before gaining a majority in Congress? A: They haven't happened.7) Can't protect us from terrorists? Are you kidding me? Please let me know where we've been attacked since 9/11....I missed that newsflash. Oh, BTW your party's revered and esteemed Father of Liberalism FDR had an attack on his watch too but it didn't happen twice under his watch....same goes for Bush.Care to try again?

0

kidicarus 5 years, 7 months ago

To place the blame for our country's current state entirely on one party is plain stupid. Both parties are at fault. Instead of pointing fingers and calling names, perhaps we ought to be constructive and figure out how to get out of this mess. Both camps have some good ideas. Initially, both the McCain and Obama campaigns seemed like they wanted to rise above the partisanship and get things accomplished. Now, it looks like we're back playing the same old game.

0

JohnBrown 5 years, 7 months ago

When will the Republican't Party take responsibility for their actions? Their stewardship of this country is appalling, but what's worse is that they won't even own up to it.(*) Republican't: the party that can't govern, can't balance a budget, can't regulate banks and lending, can't clean up after a hurricane, can't follow the Constitution, can't win either of two wars, can't figure out who the real enemy is, can't keep their promises, can't tell the truth, can't protect us from terrorists, can't keep our military strong and "ready", can't supply our military with the stuff they need, can't take care of our vets, and can't figure out we need to get off oil.-Pay no attention to that [old] man behind the curtain.

0

Jason Bailey 5 years, 7 months ago

Here we go again....another day, same song.Who controls the purse strings that drives the national deficit? Congress. Who controls Congress? The Dems.Who has the power to pull the funding on the War? The Dems.Social Reform = socialism when a lib is talkingThe last paragraph starts with a diatribe about SS, Health care...blah blah blah.Since the Constitution is so precious to you ("..the attempted trashing of the Constitution...") please point out to me where in the Constitution the Feds have any power to fix healthcare, institute SS in the first place, get involved in the housing situation or manage the economy. The Fed Bank is charged with overseeing the economy but reports to the Legislature and Executive branches in various forms. Those two entities were never given the power to "regulate the economy" in the sense that we are regulating it today.If you would read the original intent of the Founders most of them were very frightened of what the establishment of Hamilton's Fed banking system would mean to the country. It turned out they were right and Washington was wrong to allow it to happen.Likewise, the Framers of the Constitution did not explicitly give the Feds the power that they wield today -- it's inferred through vague language in the Preamble. War and defense is really the only mandate given to government that is crystal clear.In the end, we have another day where (apparently) only angry liberals are frantically sending in hate mail to the LTE. Apparently, absolutely no conservatives have anything to write to the LJW. We're such a mute bunch.The bias at the LJW is appalling.

0

Tom Shewmon 5 years, 7 months ago

Christy Kennedy says: "Good letter".Really? I see a rambling, nonsensical letter that starts out about Palin, turns to big bad Republicans, then goes onto chastise both parties. More drivel from a Bush hater when you clear away the debris. Boring.

0

OnlyTheOne 5 years, 7 months ago

"Good letter." Except everybody seems to have forgotton there were a few Democrats around during the Republicans tenue in the White House. What were they doing? Oh yes, marching to the same tune.

0

Azure_Attitude 5 years, 7 months ago

Mavericks? Yeah, sure . . . It's nothing but the same old garbage. Palame is now adopting the Rove approach to investigations: Don't cooperate. The right fights took and nail when there is an attempt to hold them accountable. They are goin' down!

0

KEITHMILES05 5 years, 7 months ago

There are only two issues in this campaign and they tied closely together.The war has put this country into a tailspin and depression. IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID!

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.