Feeling a little marginalized this morning?

Oh well, you did well in the Senate -- wait, no.

The House? Nah!

Governorships? Oops!

State legislators? Hmmm, not so hot.

At least you won't go hungry...

Have some crow.

snicker

pyjamarama wrote:

Feeling a little marginalized this morning?

LOL...
Be careful, it could be a boomerang question. :-)

"pyjamarama" wrote in message
om
Feeling a little marginalized this morning?

They rest secure knowing that the political world is now safe for Hillary in
2008.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"pyjamarama" wrote in message
om
Feeling a little marginalized this morning?

They rest secure knowing that the political world is now safe for Hillary
in 2008.

**After 8 years of Bush and his cronies, more war, erosion of more rights,
it should be a shoo-in for Hillary. Hell, it'll be a shoo-in for a ficus.
The stupidity of the majority of American voters is astonishing.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"pyjamarama" wrote in message
om
Feeling a little marginalized this morning?

They rest secure knowing that the political world is now safe for Hillary
in 2008.

**After 8 years of Bush and his cronies, more war, erosion of more rights,
it should be a shoo-in for Hillary. Hell, it'll be a shoo-in for a ficus.
The stupidity of the majority of American voters is astonishing.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"pyjamarama" wrote in message
om
Feeling a little marginalized this morning?

They rest secure knowing that the political world is now safe for Hillary
in 2008.

**After 8 years of Bush and his cronies, more war, erosion of more rights,
it should be a shoo-in for Hillary. Hell, it'll be a shoo-in for a ficus.
The stupidity of the majority of American voters is astonishing.


Then Hilary hasn't a chance.

Incidentally, the main reason people voted for Bush was moral values.

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message

Incidentally, the main reason people voted for Bush was moral values.

I'm glad you brought that up. The so-called red states - Kansas, Oklahoma,
Nebraska, Alabama, Georgia - lead the nation in divorce rates and teenage
pregnancies.

Incidentally, Massachusetts (I believe Zell Miller called John Kerry a 'man
with Massachusetts values') has the lowest divorce rate in the nation.

Sorry, Michael. But that just reeks of hypocrisy.

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message

Incidentally, the main reason people voted for Bush was moral values.

I'm glad you brought that up. The so-called red states - Kansas, Oklahoma,
Nebraska, Alabama, Georgia - lead the nation in divorce rates and teenage
pregnancies.

Incidentally, Massachusetts (I believe Zell Miller called John Kerry a
'man
with Massachusetts values') has the lowest divorce rate in the nation.

Sorry, Michael. But that just reeks of hypocrisy.

If there is one thing I hate it is this. The portrayal of people from
Kansas, Ohio or Wyoming as diligent, honest folk while the average New
Yorker, San Franciscan or Bostonian as degenerate, libertine hedonists just
wants to make me throw up.

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message

Incidentally, the main reason people voted for Bush was moral values.

I'm glad you brought that up. The so-called red states - Kansas, Oklahoma,
Nebraska, Alabama, Georgia - lead the nation in divorce rates and teenage
pregnancies.

Incidentally, Massachusetts (I believe Zell Miller called John Kerry a
'man
with Massachusetts values') has the lowest divorce rate in the nation.

Sorry, Michael. But that just reeks of hypocrisy.


Tell it to the people for whom it was a reason to vote for Bush.

I find it hard to believe that any of those states beat out California.

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message

Incidentally, the main reason people voted for Bush was moral values.

I'm glad you brought that up. The so-called red states - Kansas,
Oklahoma,
Nebraska, Alabama, Georgia - lead the nation in divorce rates and teenage
pregnancies.

Incidentally, Massachusetts (I believe Zell Miller called John Kerry a
'man
with Massachusetts values') has the lowest divorce rate in the nation.

Sorry, Michael. But that just reeks of hypocrisy.

If there is one thing I hate it is this. The portrayal of people from
Kansas, Ohio or Wyoming as diligent, honest folk while the average New
Yorker, San Franciscan or Bostonian as degenerate, libertine hedonists
just
wants to make me throw up.



Can't comment on Boston, but New York and SanFrancisco seem to attract a
very odd sort. The people in fly over country do tend to come across as
more honest and hard working IME. YMMV.

In the end, if a candidate doesn't appeal to those people in the red states,
he's going to lose.

I can't wait to see if Hilary actually runs in 2008, I think it will
mobilize people to vote against her in massive numbers. A Fichus actually
could win against her.

I'm most glad of Prop. 66 failing, it was opposed by every living Governor
in California. Next I'm not going to miss Tom Daschle.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Schizoid Man said:

Incidentally, the main reason people voted for Bush was moral values.

If there is one thing I hate it is this. The portrayal of people from
Kansas, Ohio or Wyoming as diligent, honest folk while the average New
Yorker, San Franciscan or Bostonian as degenerate, libertine hedonists
just
wants to make me throw up.

There's always a price for reading duh-Mikey's bleatings.

However, I think I can shed some light on this exchange. It's my
feeling that all those smug "conservatives" who vote for Bush do
identify with his phoney moral superiority. W is a flaming exemplar of
hypocrisy. People vote for him for two reasons: first, because
everybody know what a dimbulb hypocrite he is; and second, by putting
him in office, the voters feel like they've legitimized their own
empty posturing. Have you ever taken a close look at a GOP convention?
Whenever they draft a position on a "moral" issue, there's a heck of a
lot of winking going on. That's because they all know it's a load of
phoniness, but for them it's like going to church: They did bad stuff
recently, but they go to church and pretend they're making up for it.


You mean it's better that the Liberals are unashamed in their depravity?

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"pyjamarama" wrote in message
om
Feeling a little marginalized this morning?

They rest secure knowing that the political world is now safe for Hillary
in 2008.

**After 8 years of Bush and his cronies, more war, erosion of more rights,
it should be a shoo-in for Hillary. Hell, it'll be a shoo-in for a ficus.
The stupidity of the majority of American voters is astonishing.

Trevor, you're a great guy but on this subject you are really clueless.

ScottW

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Schizoid Man said:

Incidentally, the main reason people voted for Bush was moral values.

If there is one thing I hate it is this. The portrayal of people from
Kansas, Ohio or Wyoming as diligent, honest folk while the average New
Yorker, San Franciscan or Bostonian as degenerate, libertine hedonists
just
wants to make me throw up.

There's always a price for reading duh-Mikey's bleatings.

However, I think I can shed some light on this exchange. It's my
feeling that all those smug "conservatives" who vote for Bush do
identify with his phoney moral superiority. W is a flaming exemplar of
hypocrisy. People vote for him for two reasons: first, because
everybody know what a dimbulb hypocrite he is; and second, by putting
him in office, the voters feel like they've legitimized their own
empty posturing. Have you ever taken a close look at a GOP convention?
Whenever they draft a position on a "moral" issue, there's a heck of a
lot of winking going on. That's because they all know it's a load of
phoniness, but for them it's like going to church: They did bad stuff
recently, but they go to church and pretend they're making up for it.

You think the "I'm not George Bush" platform Kerry ran on didn't have
anything to do with it?

ScottW

"George M. Middius" wrote in message


Scottydork barked:

You think the "I'm not George Bush" platform

Scottie, why aren't you delirious? Dubya's re-election is an affirmation
of the supremacy of stupidhood. You should be walking on air.

It indeed is a sad day. However, it has shown that Americans are a patient
people.

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...



Incidentally, Massachusetts (I believe Zell Miller called John Kerry a
'man
with Massachusetts values') has the lowest divorce rate in the nation.



Were those homosexual or heterosexual divorces?

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...

..

I'm glad you brought that up. The so-called red states - Kansas,
Oklahoma,
Nebraska, Alabama, Georgia - lead the nation in divorce rates and teenage
pregnancies.

Incidentally, Massachusetts (I believe Zell Miller called John Kerry a
'man
with Massachusetts values') has the lowest divorce rate in the nation.

Sorry, Michael. But that just reeks of hypocrisy.

If there is one thing I hate it is this. The portrayal of people from
Kansas, Ohio or Wyoming as diligent, honest folk while the average New
Yorker, San Franciscan or Bostonian as degenerate, libertine hedonists
just
wants to make me throw up.


You are 1/3 right.
New Yorkers are decent.

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
hlink.net...


I'm most glad of Prop. 66 failing, it was opposed by every living Governor
in California.


Which of the Props was 66?

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Scottydork barked:

Whenever they draft a position on a "moral" issue, there's a heck of a
lot of winking going on. That's because they all know it's a load of
phoniness, but for them it's like going to church: They did bad stuff
recently, but they go to church and pretend they're making up for it.

You think the "I'm not George Bush" platform

Scottie, why aren't you delirious? Dubya's re-election is an affirmation
of the supremacy of stupidhood. You should be walking on air.

Not really. City of SD elected a mental nutcase to Mayor on a write-in.
State of Ca went on a money grub from rich folks for county mental health
services. (If you need the county services for your mental health you might
as well pack it in. They're version of treatment is closely related to
sedation dentistry).

The fact that Bush won so easily is really just a sad testament to the fact
that the primary system is incapable of selecting the best candidate from
either party. Ca. tried to go open primary but it is so hard to figure out
exactly what that will do, even the experts couldn't fathom it. Didn't
matter anyway, Ca primary is so late in the game that it's usually over by
then.

I am please Daschle got wacked. A bigger obstructionist in the minority
position I cannot recall.

It was kind of amusing watching the loons on CNN practically break down and
cry last night as they stubbornly refused to acknowledge Ohio. When
Carville sprung his "he should concede" bomb about 10:20 PM PST the CNN crew
just about passed out.

ScottW

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
hlink.net...


I'm most glad of Prop. 66 failing, it was opposed by every living
Governor in California.


Which of the Props was 66?

3 stikes law revision requiring the 3rd strike be a violent or serious
felony. Lots of guys in jail would have been sent back to court for
resentencing and if their 3rd conviction was for something minor, they would
be resentenced based on sentencing guidelines for their 3rd crime, not under
3 strikes.

ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
news:89hid.75083$bk1.11013@fed1read05...

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Schizoid Man said:

Incidentally, the main reason people voted for Bush was moral
values.

If there is one thing I hate it is this. The portrayal of people from
Kansas, Ohio or Wyoming as diligent, honest folk while the average New
Yorker, San Franciscan or Bostonian as degenerate, libertine hedonists
just
wants to make me throw up.

There's always a price for reading duh-Mikey's bleatings.

However, I think I can shed some light on this exchange. It's my
feeling that all those smug "conservatives" who vote for Bush do
identify with his phoney moral superiority. W is a flaming exemplar of
hypocrisy. People vote for him for two reasons: first, because
everybody know what a dimbulb hypocrite he is; and second, by putting
him in office, the voters feel like they've legitimized their own
empty posturing. Have you ever taken a close look at a GOP convention?
Whenever they draft a position on a "moral" issue, there's a heck of a
lot of winking going on. That's because they all know it's a load of
phoniness, but for them it's like going to church: They did bad stuff
recently, but they go to church and pretend they're making up for it.

You think the "I'm not George Bush" platform Kerry ran on didn't have
anything to do with it?

ScottW
How about the fact that just as Zell Miller said, the Democrats have written
off the South?

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message
hlink.net...


I'm most glad of Prop. 66 failing, it was opposed by every living
Governor in California.


Which of the Props was 66?


The one that would have amended the 3 strikes law, requiring the 3rd strike
to be a violent felony. It would have been retroactive and something like
26,000 felons would have been released. Probably just a coincidence that
trial lawyers supported it.

Arny Krueger wrote:

"pyjamarama" wrote in message
om

Feeling a little marginalized this morning?


They rest secure knowing that the political world is now safe for Hillary in
2008.

Hillary is so not the choice. OTOH, Boxter or Feinstein likely is.
(both of which are scary, but still not Hillary)

Michael McKelvy wrote:

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"pyjamarama" wrote in message
e.com

Feeling a little marginalized this morning?

They rest secure knowing that the political world is now safe for Hillary
in 2008.

**After 8 years of Bush and his cronies, more war, erosion of more rights,
it should be a shoo-in for Hillary. Hell, it'll be a shoo-in for a ficus.
The stupidity of the majority of American voters is astonishing.



Then Hilary hasn't a chance.

Incidentally, the main reason people voted for Bush was moral values.

Which makes you wonder exactly what they were thinking, since
politicians are by definition self-serving liars.

Schizoid Man wrote:
"George M. Middius" wrote in message


Scottydork barked:


You think the "I'm not George Bush" platform

Scottie, why aren't you delirious? Dubya's re-election is an affirmation
of the supremacy of stupidhood. You should be walking on air.


It indeed is a sad day. However, it has shown that Americans are a patient
people.

This has mainly shown that "Americans" more and more look like the
demons they are fighting...
In the war against the muslim religious fundamentalism this could be an
advantage. :-(

George M. Middius wrote:

Bush do
identify with his phoney moral superiority.

Nokia?

Lionel wrote:
Schizoid Man wrote:

"George M. Middius" wrote in message


Scottydork barked:


You think the "I'm not George Bush" platform


Scottie, why aren't you delirious? Dubya's re-election is an affirmation
of the supremacy of stupidhood. You should be walking on air.



It indeed is a sad day. However, it has shown that Americans are a
patient
people.


This has mainly shown that "Americans" more and more look like the
demons they are fighting...
In the war against the muslim religious fundamentalism this could be an
advantage. :-(

I think this has shown yet again, that there is still a lot to fix and
adjust and tweak and configure in "democracy" as a whole. Bush simply
frightened these people, he was backed by big oil companies he *used*
all the fears of the american people, induced mass hysteria and got what
he wanted.

What do you think of the French that vote for LePencil (or whatever the
**** his name is)?

In any case, and ANYWAYS!! (duh!mb mikey boy, that one was for you) if
an ideology, a form of regime ends up with a leader like bush, or
hitler (he also was elected into office!)stalin, putin, than that means
simply, that there has to be something wrong with that regime, something
missing, or malfunctioning. It is just meaningless to accuse and point
the finger at the millions who elected "a bush", we have to look into
the mechanism that got him there.

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:11:48 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote:

However, I think I can shed some light on this exchange. It's my
feeling that all those smug "conservatives" who vote for Bush do
identify with his phoney moral superiority. W is a flaming exemplar of
hypocrisy. People vote for him for two reasons: first, because
everybody know what a dimbulb hypocrite he is;

Well, that's a good start. I know if I'd been voting in your elections
that would have turned me on. I always put dimbulb hypocrites No. 1 on
my ticket.

and second, by putting
him in office, the voters feel like they've legitimized their own
empty posturing.

That would have settled it for me. If I could have come out of a
voting booth feeling I'd legitimized my own empty posturing, well, I'd
have felt it was more than worth the effort of picking up a pencil.
Yep, George, I'd say you've definitely hit the nail on the head. Both
of them.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message



However, I think I can shed some light on this exchange. It's my
feeling that all those smug "conservatives" who vote for Bush do
identify with his phoney(sic) moral superiority.

And exactly what do we call the vain name-calling we've been subjected to
for months by the left-wing media?

W is a flaming exemplar of hypocrisy.

And Kerry and Dean weren't?

People vote for him for two reasons: first, because
everybody know what a dimbulb hypocrite he is; and second, by putting
him in office, the voters feel like they've legitimized their own
empty posturing.

Or, people identified with him because they were tired of the name-calling
and non-sequitors that flowed out of the left wing like a torrent of mental
sewage.

Have you ever taken a close look at a GOP convention?

I'd rather watch reruns of a cock fight than a political convention, and I
hate cruelty to animals.

Whenever they draft a position on a "moral" issue, there's a heck of a
lot of winking going on.

And the Democrats differ from the Republicans exactly how, in this regard?

That's because they all know it's a load of
phoniness, but for them it's like going to church: They did bad stuff
recently, but they go to church and pretend they're making up for it.

Sort of like that sockpuppet named Middius whose endless personal attacks,
posturing and private politicking has ruined RAO as an audio forum, right?

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 21:12:00 -0800, "ScottW"
wrote:

The fact that Bush won so easily

He won 51 percent.

"jak163" wrote in message

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 21:12:00 -0800, "ScottW"
wrote:

The fact that Bush won so easily

He won 51 percent.

Clinton won 43 percent of the popular vote in his first presidential
election and 49 percent of the popular vote in his second election.

What's your point?

On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 05:53:37 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

How about the fact that just as Zell Miller said, the Democrats have written
off the South?

Yes old-fashioned racism is very powerful, hence the solid block of
the South. Throw in sexism (Roe v. Wade) and homophobia (gay
marriage), plus anti-Arab racism and anti-Muslim bigotry ("terror"),
and you basically have the Bush bloc. These are the "morals" that
people voted for. Combine this with relatively lower voting
participation among the less wealthy, and you get enough of the
working class going for Bush in the midwest to put him in office. The
only place this doesn't work is on the coasts and Great Lakes region,
where education is better and people have more contact with foreign
cultures, so they can see past this ideology to their real interests.

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 23:51:17 -0500, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:

You are 1/3 right.
New Yorkers are decent.

75 percent of them voted for Kerry.

"jak163" wrote in message


On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 05:53:37 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

How about the fact that just as Zell Miller said, the Democrats have
written off the South?

Yes old-fashioned racism is very powerful, hence the solid block of
the South.

As if there is no such thing as African-American racism or racism in the
North.

Throw in sexism (Roe v. Wade)

Agreed, but abortion's main beneficiaries are irresponsible males who like
to inseminate and run, leaving women with the resulting economic problem...

You do know Roe versus Wade is really based on a woman, who under duress
perjured herself, right? BTW and her name wasn't Roe...

and homophobia (gay marriage),

Agreed, sort of.

plus anti-Arab racism and anti-Muslim bigotry ("terror"),

Again, you're very poorly informed. Most terrorism in the world today is
about Muslim anti-secularism and poor economic development. True Arabs make
up only a minority of all Muslims. The largest Islamic nation in the world
is Indonesia.

and you basically have the Bush bloc.

No, you're got a hodge-podge of this week's version of the Democratic
Party's official propaganda.

You believe everything you read in the liberal press, right?

These are the "morals" that people voted for.

Or against, but only if they are as poorly-informed as you.

Combine this with relatively lower voting
participation among the less wealthy, and you get enough of the
working class going for Bush in the midwest to put him in office.

Aren't the working class "less wealthy"? Doesn't that mean you just
contradicted yourself?

The only place this doesn't work is on the coasts and Great Lakes region,

Of course in your version of geography, Ohio and Indiana don't border on any
of the Great Lakes.

LOL!

where education is better and people have more contact with foreign
cultures, so they can see past this ideology to their real interests.

Come back when you have some kind of a grip on the relevant facts.

Fella said:

I think this has shown yet again, that there is still a lot to fix and
adjust and tweak and configure in "democracy" as a whole.

The US isn't a democracy, it's a republic.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

"Arny Krueger" said:

Again, you're very poorly informed. Most terrorism in the world today is
about Muslim anti-secularism and poor economic development. True Arabs make
up only a minority of all Muslims. The largest Islamic nation in the world
is Indonesia.

And it's really quiet there, right?
Bali isn't part of Indonesia, right?

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

"jak163" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 05:53:37 GMT, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

How about the fact that just as Zell Miller said, the Democrats have
written
off the South?

Yes old-fashioned racism is very powerful, hence the solid block of
the South.

Racism is not part of the GOP appeal since it is not a party built on
racism, it is in fact one of the key reasons the first Civil Rights act was
passed.

Throw in sexism (Roe v. Wade) and homophobia (gay
marriage),

Opposition to abortion is not sexism, it is a belief that life has value.

plus anti-Arab racism and anti-Muslim bigotry ("terror"),
and you basically have the Bush bloc.

Another mischaracterization. Arabs are not another race, they are in fact
Caucasian. The GOP is not anti-Muslim it is anti-Muslim terrorist.

These are the "morals" that
people voted for.

OSAF.

Combine this with relatively lower voting
participation among the less wealthy, and you get enough of the
working class going for Bush in the midwest to put him in office.

The working class are the less wealthy. The smarter ones want to become the
more wealthy. Many of the working class are in Unions who are not happy
with the way their dues go to support candidates who wish to raise taxes and
make it more difficult to become more wealthy. Stock market investors are
now in very large part made up of the middle class, who are beginning to
understand how capital gains taxes affect their lives.

The
only place this doesn't work is on the coasts and Great Lakes region,
where education is better and people have more contact with foreign
cultures, so they can see past this ideology to their real interests.

They may have more contact with foreign cultures but there are is plenty of
racism amongst people in those areas, a significant portion is the racism
practiced by African Americans. Chicago, Detroit, and Gary Indiana are not
Mecca's of peace and harmony among the races. Indiana at one point was the
strong hold of the KKK and even had one its leaders campaign for President.

You appear, like most liberals to miss another point, that point is that
many working class people don't particularly like the idea of the Democrats
elitist attitude. They get the feeling that Democrats think they have the
right to tell them how to think and what to value, and how their money
should be spent.

The simple fact seems to be that the Democrats are not in tune with a
majority of the electorate and they are paying for it by losing the White
House, both houses of Congress and more and more Governors. If you think
it's because of racism, sexism, or homophobia, I think you are also
seriously out of step.

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
link.net...


Arny Krueger wrote:

"pyjamarama" wrote in message
om

Feeling a little marginalized this morning?


They rest secure knowing that the political world is now safe for Hillary
in 2008.

Hillary is so not the choice. OTOH, Boxter or Feinstein likely is.
(both of which are scary, but still not Hillary)

Boxer is as dumb as a bag of rocks. Feinstien has more chance but the
Clinton's would not likely support her.

George M. Middius wrote:


Joseph Oberlander said:


Hillary is so not the choice. OTOH, Boxter or Feinstein likely is.
(both of which are scary, but still not Hillary)


I like Barak. He's like Sharpton but with a little more urbanity.

Honestly, though, they would have handed Bush his ass if it
had been Edwards as the only strength of the Democratic Party
is the rich/poor big fish/small guy comparison. And, make no
mistake, it's the single biggest political factor.

But only if they use it. Edwards could have easily played this
card and Bush would have had nothing to counter with. Billionare
Bush versus born in squalor worked his way up common-man Edwards.
(he's still a great choice for 2008, btw)

I can imagine it - "You don't understand the common man
because you never went through what the common man did. Or
is the fact that your parents are a billionares somehow not
a factor?"

Sigh. The Democratic Party is full of morons if they think that
passing off a moderate rich boy motivates the immigrant or minority
vote. They had their chance. Me? I think both parties need to be
scrapped - what we get are worthless choices from the Democrats
and Neo-Con fanatics from the Rebublicans. Neither of which is
close to the average person in this country.

Sander deWaal wrote:

"Arny Krueger" said:


Again, you're very poorly informed. Most terrorism in the world today is
about Muslim anti-secularism and poor economic development. True Arabs make
up only a minority of all Muslims. The largest Islamic nation in the world
is Indonesia.


And it's really quiet there, right?
Bali isn't part of Indonesia, right?

Neither is Timor, but we look the other way...

Michael McKelvy wrote:

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
link.net...


Arny Krueger wrote:


"pyjamarama" wrote in message
e.com


Feeling a little marginalized this morning?


They rest secure knowing that the political world is now safe for Hillary
in 2008.

Hillary is so not the choice. OTOH, Boxter or Feinstein likely is.
(both of which are scary, but still not Hillary)


Boxer is as dumb as a bag of rocks. Feinstien has more chance but the
Clinton's would not likely support her.

Clinton's not a factor at all, so forget about him. Even his
magic presence in Arkansas did nothing to help.