Four More Years...

In the minds of conservatives it has slipped too far to the left: entitlement programs from Bush, the increasing immorality trends, neither party wanting to protect the southern border from the silent invasion (to get around the minimum wage laws), etc. ...dragged by the Republican Congress. At first, Clinton had grand liberal visions, but the Hillary health plan failure and the landslide loss of congressional seats at his 2-yr mark caused him to change tactics (to win a second term). He was able to slide many monetary problems (such as depleting military) to the following president. Obviously, he didn't beef-up the intelligence community after the first attack on the WTC. That may be because you grew up with traditional party thinking. Now, workers have it made in the USA, except they have a difficult time competing with other countries who offer very low wages. Even white-collar workers are losing work to overseas labor, such as India.To make matters worse, what business wants to hire union workers when illegal aliens are available and being used by the competition? And, both political parties want to give them amnesty. It won't be long before they get minimum wage (thus inviting more cheap labor across the border).So far, I think Truthlover understands the political divide quite well, even though he's tucked away in a commune.

Maybe in your neck of the woods focus is elsewhere, but here in Enron's back yard, I assure you attention to the top management of Enron is big news. Slowly but surely, the prosecutors are working their way up the ladder of former Enron management and charging them. It's unfortunate that plea bargains for the guilty middle management are necessary to get to the top.As for Martha, will another celebrity get away with it? Probably a light sentence. For some reason, people tend to associate "rich" with corporate CEOs rather than celebs. Maybe because it's the number of workers affected.Here I am an agnostic, thinking... I wish management of corporations were more committed to ethics and morality than greed. It gets you thinking about how much corruption a capitalist democratic republic could survive. You look around the world and see that democracy and non-corrupt government is very difficult to achieve, much less sustain.If only religious folk on this forum could provide convincing arguments so that everyone could believe and follow the light.

Just like you say to the creationists: If you have evidence, then present it.Otherwise, you are just reeking of speculative conspiracy theories, as usual, when it comes to politics.There are two sides to every story, and you consistently present the anti-Bush propaganda. If I had the time, I would dig-up the counter arguments. But I don't. I would guess you could get that from Limbaugh and some websites, anyway.You get the last word, so go ahead and attack.

We don't have the largest military, in terms of soldiers. I believe China owns that honor.Regarding costs: I suspect there is a lot of waste. It is, after all, a government-run operation. Much of the high costs can be blamed on current and past Congressmen creating jobs (votes) in their territory. Another source of cost is due to high-technology devices to protect the lives of our soldiers, and increase their effectiveness to reduce the need of so many soldiers for extended periods of time.Regarding what is really needed: I don't know. I don't think any of the people on this forum know either. The politics of world power is mainly conducted behind closed doors. However, since the military does not run the government, the elected administration can seek to cut costs or trade costs for other benefit programs, depending on the mood of the voters. I am not sure the majority of Americans want to see what happens if we cut back drastically. Bargaining from a position of strength seems to be successful, historically.

Do you expect me to believe propaganda from an avowed Bush-basher?
There are two sides to the events, and you presented one.There are plenty of questions regarding Franken's claims, which you present as facts.Here is one website that refutes his claims:Page not found - WNDIsn't it amazing how the debate tactics of EvC parallel the political debates ?!

I agree with you, but doggone it if I know how to regulate them without killing the golden goose. That may be where Nader has some ideas that the big two parties won't back.Just as life finds niches via evolution, white-collar crooks and their accountants & lawyers find niches in financials.

Look, Schraf,
I do not have the time or interest to play ping pong with you with facts and opinions on this topic. That are people in the political arena who will do that for both sides. Go argue with them. Just because my interests lie elsewhere does NOT mean you are right! I stand by my point that there are different points of view on what actually happened and who knew what and when.