Rev. Erudite Redneck, B.S., B.S., M.A., M.Div.

That bastard!
 

Whew! I'm at least relieved that it wasn't the senator himself, but one of his flunkies.
 

When Democrats, as a whole, start promoting themselves as the end-all-be-all when it comes to what's right and wrong, putting themselves (in their minds) on a higher moral plane than the rest of us, then, I will condemn for hypocrisy, as well.
 

Uh ... ER, I think you swatted a hornets nest.

I think I've found a comfortable place in my politics -- not as far right as one, not as far left as the other, right here in the middle eating my porridge and sleeping on the comfy bed.
 

It's just like the Republican party to deny, deny, deny -- even when the evidence is out there. Every last one of the GOP senators distanced themselves from this memo, and then it turns up to have originated in the office of the one from Florida, no less.

Of course, this will completely blow over, because it always does, just like Iran-contra. It's unAmerican to question the motives behind anything a Republican does.

This is about as good as Henry Hyde's "youthful indiscretion" and a married Newt Gingrich shaggin' his staff aide not-his-wife while the dang Senate was trying to hang the president for using what they thought was bad grammar (there "is" no relationship -- which the record proved was true by the time the statement was made).

The moral majority on the right just keeps bending the rules (and bending over for them) as it suits them. The Dems' flaw is not having a good way to stop this. We know this because the GOP is never wrong.
 

Not too hard. Not too soft.

Juuuuust right.
 

I think the line from whichever Quaid it was in "The Paper" who hounded the city traffic engineer to the point of drunken violence sums up my feelings on attacks, ad hominem, deserved, undeserved and otherwise, on the party now in power: "It was your turn." ... I will never forgive the treatment the flaming right gave Bubba -- EVER. Y'all cast yer bread on the waters then. It will come back an hundredfold.
 

When I first typed that, it came out "pint of drunken violence."

If I ever run a drinkin' joint, that will be the house specialty: a red draw beer (beer and tomato juice, for all you Yankees), with salt and pepper, served with a Jim Beam or Wild Turkey shooter. Yeehaw!
 

Yeah, forget the politics, I'll never forget the first time I saw you drinking a red beer. It was at a farewell party for some coworker or other. A photographer we know was sitting at a nearby table and about got sick at the sight. Right then, I knew the red beer has value. hee hee.
 

Red beer good.

Politics bad.
 

Re: Nick Toper's argument. I agree completely that both sides have politicians that exploit "issues" to pad their own power. If the Dems use Social Security, civil rights, helping the poor, etc., to gain votes, but also destroy people by helping them, consider what the Republican philosophy does:

A CBO chart (link below) outlines how federal revenues have climbed since 1962, but notice the dramatic change in 1980-82. These are the years when Reagan and the Republican House were able to implement their fiscal policy designed to give them power over voters while “helping” them. In a nutshell, the policy is to cut taxes and spend like drunken sailors. They skyrocketed the debt, per Republican policy, until George H.W. Bush and Clinton responsibly decided to increase taxes to offset Capitol Hill’s inability to stop spending like mad. (Surplus revenue reached in 1999.)
Enter the Republican takeover again in 2000, and the deficit spending cycle begins anew and with great vengeance. With Republicans in control of the House, Senate and presidency, they’ve gone back to their formula of cutting revenue (taxes) and launching huge deficit spending. It’s a shrewd formula that keeps the party leaders in power: To wit, the party buys votes by giving taxpayers part of their money back (tax cuts) and the leaders get re-elected by spending billions on pork for their districts (keeping voters happy). The third leg of this stool is to keep telling voters – despite all evidence to the contrary – that Republicans are deficit hawks and out to stop reckless federal spending. The formula works for the leaders who control the party, and for short-sighted, gullible voters who get miniscule tax cuts if they’re only middle class (but if you're one of the wealthy in charge of party policy, buy yourself a yacht and call her "Tax Cut").

So is this good for America’s long-term future? The federal government has been running with deficit budgets for a long time, with big and small results in any given year. But only the Republican Party has embraced the idea of massive deficit spending as policy (albeit one to be denied steadfastly in public).
Do you really think America's economy is going to take off when the Repubs get the yearly deficits past $1 billion, or $2 billion, a year? When we become a second-rate economy overtaken by Europe and Asia, we’ll look fondly on these days of half-billion dollar deficits. Remember, don't put your measly tax cuts in the American stock market, though. That'll be a sucker's bet, too, after the Republican deficit wet dream creams on us all.
See Table 1:
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1821&sequence=0#table1