Well, that is an interesting question. When making a general comment, to the world at large, is the author speaking to himself?
Anyway, back to the point.
I have been absent for a while, (and probably will be again after this post explaining my absence) because this little SI shop is run like a mom and pop store, where there are no rules except that you do what mom and pop want you to do or you don't shop here no more. I will get into the details later, maybe, but anyway:
Why are the dems protecting Rubin? I tell you, that Rubin screwed us big time. This country is left in a bad way since Clinton left, and it isn't because of Bush.
And the whole world knows it. We are looking for someone to blame. Is it Martha Stewarts fault? Is it Enron? Who put the whammy on us? Onada surely hurt us, but didn't have anything to do with corporate crooks. Are you interested in corporate crooks?
I won't go to deep just now. I know, you have a fractured and shallow ego, that is not capable of making expressions that would signify capacity for discussion, but you do demonstrate interest. For that, you are commendable, and worthy of tolerance for a while.
So, suffice, I lead off with this - is it fair to debate liars? Or, do you really think that Democrats are any diffferent than Republicans in catering to business? I also want to add, Levitt said something the other day on the crooked Cramer show on CNBC, about how he was blackmailed by lobbyists and republicans into now getting tough on accountants, because the threat was that they would cut off funding to the sec. What a joke that is. Can you just see the outrage if a politician said they wanted to get rid of the SEC? LeVitt is a crooked monster, and he shall be gotten to. He has to, or this whole venture is meaningless. he is the one that let AA survive.
--
Anyway the wind blows -- Mike Meehan, the head of polling and message for the Democratic National Committee says the prospects for his party in the fall look good. In a recent memo to party chairman Terry McAuliffe he writes, "With three months to go until the 2002 elections, the nation's political climate has undergone substantial changes. Virtually, all of these changes improve the Democrats' prospects for success in this year's midterm elections." He goes on to cite President Bush's declining job performance ratings, the lack of potential presidential coattails in the fall, and the fact that DNC polling data shows the Republicans are still seen by most voters as the party of big business as a few of the reasons why things are looking up.
According to Meehan's analysis, when the message "We need to elect more Republicans to Congress to help President Bush fight the war on terrorism, cut taxes, and implement his programs" is positioned against the argument that "We need to elect more Democrats to Congress to provide a check and balance to keep the Republicans in Congress from going too far in favoring the big special interests at the expense of working people" -- "voters conclude that it is more important elect Democrats to Congress by a significant 48 percent to 35 percent. Voters who are undecided in the generic trial heat side with the Democratic message on this question by 39 percent to 29 percent." |
