Democratic Party Senator
(prototype,
revised versions additionally miss a brain)
©DLC Inc. in cooperation with Rove Labs
|
|
|
|
Back to Main
|
||
|
January 27, 2006
Alito Confirmation
Democratic Party Senator ©DLC Inc. in cooperation with Rove Labs
Comments
no, already? i am listening to versi’s aida dreading this momet Posted by: annie | Jan 27 2006 17:10 utc | 1 jeez! that’s verdi, moment. you’re all probably used to my spelling/typing by now. this is hell Posted by: annie | Jan 27 2006 17:12 utc | 2 i realize i have made an improper interpretation, how embarrassing. Posted by: annie | Jan 27 2006 18:28 utc | 4 This looks like some kind of museum exhibit. What are we looking at here? Please don’t tell me this is a medical photo! Posted by: Obs | Jan 27 2006 18:32 utc | 5 You couldn’t post up another front page story, please, to push the baby in a bottle picture off the top of the page? Thanks. Posted by: Araneidae | Jan 27 2006 20:46 utc | 6 Don’t worry, Annie. Posted by: Antifa | Jan 27 2006 22:08 utc | 7 I disagree with the thesis that the DNC are spineless, which is how we keep approaching this. They’re complicit, which is a whole different set of problems for we, the people. Posted by: Monolycus | Jan 27 2006 22:21 utc | 8 A more accurate biological analogy wouldn’t be a child with a bifid spine, rather, it would be one of those deep sea fish where the tiny, impotent male attaches itself and grows into the body of the larger female. Or maybe an intestinal worm. Either way would be a more representative mascot than the obstinate jackass they are using now. Posted by: Monolycus | Jan 27 2006 22:25 utc | 9 Well, I just don’t know what to think. But I know a couple of beers will make my eyes a little more fuzzy, so I’ll say, an alien. But it could be a ono filibustering dem. Anyway, yes, the dems are spinless. Posted by: jdp | Jan 27 2006 23:06 utc | 10 I’m w/Monolycus, they’re complicit. As for the pic, it looks like something from Thailand’s Forensic Museum. Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jan 27 2006 23:25 utc | 11 Just curious, I’ve been away for a few days making phone calls, sending faxes, etc. Any of the Americans here calling Senators to support the filibuster? Posted by: conchita | Jan 28 2006 0:02 utc | 12 excellent. wouldn’t it surprise us all if we actually succeed? the more calls made the more likely it is that we will. i am savoring the news of those dems who signed on today and hope that their example will cause a flood of support from the remaining hold outs. maybe we’ll even manage to change some of those votes for alito. you never know unless you try, and i have never been one to back down from a fight over principle. glad to hear i am not alone. Posted by: conchita | Jan 28 2006 0:58 utc | 14 antifa, aida Posted by: annie | Jan 28 2006 1:30 utc | 15 Annie, soaking one’s soul in Verdi is sometimes the only thing that will do. It’s especially nice to know we are communicating clearly across the centuries when we do that. Posted by: Antifa | Jan 28 2006 4:17 utc | 16 Hmm I’m going to have to find another way to get into the bar. Last time when the picture of the Fallujah incinerated was up, I went particularly crazed. Posted by: Debs is dead | Jan 28 2006 6:41 utc | 17 Debs, FDR did upset the elite. The rich paid the taxes. The income tax on the whole population is a new thing coming about mostly from WWII. Now it has been turned full circle and lands squarely on the middle class. Posted by: jdp | Jan 28 2006 13:55 utc | 18 Debs, another point though still off topic and then I will go away for the day. FDR believed he was saving and likely did save the free market economy in the US. The free marketeers still don’t like what he did because it cost them more to do business, but, FDR did address in-equalities in the free market system. The free market will not do certain things like build roads to rural areas, put electric and phone to rural areas, or put services into low income areas that cannot buy the high end services they want to sell. AT&T is currently doing that now. There is an article in the Detroit News business section, they want to compete with Comcast, they want all local franchising done away with by the state or federal governments and this is what they’ll offer: quote “The company has told Wall Street it intends to serve 90 percent of households it considers “high value,” 70 percent of “medium value'” buyers and 5 percent of “low value” customers.” If AT&T has they’re way and franchising is completely done away with to a state or federal franchising system, already straped local governments will lose millions of dollars. Local governments in Michigan have had to cut fire, ambulance and police services because of the lack of local revenues. They are throwing millions of dollars at this. They want to be the pipe for all data coming into your home. Internet, phone and TV programming. The three largest phone providers want to put cable out of business and basically have further monopolies. Posted by: jdp | Jan 28 2006 14:41 utc | 19 thunk, thunk, ker thunk, ker thunk ker thunk…. Posted by: annie | Jan 28 2006 15:24 utc | 20 < rant on > @jdp I don’t see the purpose in playing the wet blanket. We will continue this discussion after the dust has settled. Posted by: Debs is dead | Jan 29 2006 3:26 utc | 22 hey Debs, at least a guy can hope. I am as cynical as anyone, but, I must continue to believe someone gets it. Posted by: jdp | Jan 29 2006 4:07 utc | 23 @jdp I don’t disagree with that at all. And when they alito business is settled one way or another, maybe then we’ll talk about it again. Hopefully these guys (cause the US legislature isn’t exactly overbrimming with women) will listen for a change. Posted by: Debs is dead | Jan 29 2006 6:23 utc | 24 How do you approach the likes of Senators Warner and Allen? Tell me, I’ll do it. I once delivered petitions to Allen’s office. Posted by: beq | Jan 29 2006 14:00 utc | 25 |
||