"The Budget Fight" &"Big Brother"

There are two interesting articles in the Washington Post this morning. The first concerns the upcoming budget battle. In his State of the Union Address, President Bush is expected to call for a balanced budget.

Lest you think that the president was visited by the ghosts of three fiscally responsible spirits over the Christmas hiatus, fear not. This is just another piece of Republican political jujitsu, as the Post explains:

Politically, analysts say, the president is calling the bluff of Democrats, who won control of Congress in part by accusing Bush of reckless fiscal policies. While Bush now shares the Democrats' goal to erase the deficit by 2012, the politically perilous work of making that happen -- cutting spending or raising taxes -- falls to the Democratic-run Congress.
"The Democrats have assailed deficits under President Bush. The White House is telling Democrats to walk the walk," said Brian M. Riedl, a budget analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation.
Budget experts and economists from across the political spectrum, including some who worked in the Bush White House, say that Bush is unlikely to offer real concessions toward a balanced budget in the plan he delivers to Congress next month.

After all, as Dick Cheney was quoted as saying back in 2002, “Deficits Don’t Matter”.

And, if your party’s not-so-secret secret plan is to “drown the Federal Government in the bathtub” , then you’d be right, “Deficits Don’t Matter”….in fact, deficits are your friend.

Up until now, the deficit’s existence hasn’t been all that worrisome in our daily lives…

Since then, an unexpected gusher of tax revenue has flooded the Treasury, driven largely by stratospheric corporate profits. Bush credits his tax cuts with spurring the economy and producing more tax receipts, an argument that has been refuted by many conservative economists and Bush's own Treasury Department.

(The fact that this recovery has, unlike the boom times of the Clinton years, not been beneficial to ALL has been a fact of some concern to Centralist Democrats.)

But, the Fiddler’s bill comes due in 2009 (just in time, I might note with some bitterness, for a Democrat to enter the White House and be handed a leaking garbage bag full of rotting trouble by the departing President Bush…however, I digress.)

From the Post:

the Social Security surplus will begin to shrink in 2009, as the baby boomers start to retire. It is it estimated that the fund will dry up completely in 2017. At that point, the nation's rosy fiscal picture will darken rapidly. Costs for entitlement programs -- Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare -- will explode. Without radical changes in tax policy and retirement spending, the deficit will make up more than 24 percent of the economy by 2050, Walker said.

In other words, if we don’t fix it NOW- we are in really deep shit. Because if we don’t fix it now, we will be headed straight back to the days of the Robber Barons of the late 19th Century (you remember, the big dog capitalists who authorized their police minions to shoot men who were striking for an eight hour workday, or an end to Child Labor?)- the good old days when there was no Income Tax or OSHA to slow them down, and no Medicare or social security to help alleviate the mind numbing fear of their workers.

And consider this: When we “go back”, there won’t be the option that was open to many Americans: “Go West…buy a farm, escape Big Business!” The frontier is closed…if you’d care to read the second article I’ve linked to…you’ll see that Big Business is watching your every move.

Sources:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/15/AR2007011501085.html?referrer=email

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/15/AR2007011501304_pf.html

"I Have A Dream" : Hearing Martin Luther King for the First Time

Twentieth Century America heard its share of Great Speeches. From Franklin Roosevelt’s “Fear Itself” inaugural to John F. Kennedy’s exhortation to “Ask Not”, there is much to hear, and to drink in.

But Martin Luther King’s I have a Dream Speech surpasses them all. Rather than a great Twentieth Century Document, Dr. King’s speech is part of the American Testament- it stands with Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence, and Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.

It reminds us of what this country stands for, at our very core, and what we hope to show the world.

But there is one thing which is unique about King’s Dream speech. Unlike Jefferson’s written document, or Lincoln’s address, Martin Luther King’s speech was recorded…it is possible to hear it again today in his own words.

FDR’s voice and speeches remain to us as well, but there is a difference. Because of the quality of the recording equipment, one important character has been left out of the 1930s audio. We hear the President's words, but the immediate and visceral reaction of the listeners has been lost to history.

The Dream speech is different. 1960s recording technology allows us to experience this speech as all speeches are meant to be experienced: as a dialogue between speaker and listener. As we play back the recording of King's address, it is possible to hear the audience murmur in pleased surprise, to feel their breath catch in their throats as they realize that King is adding an immortal page to the book of the American Soul.

The ability to listen with the rest of the audience makes this speach unique. And, when time is devoted to careful listening, that ability, to hear Martin Luther King again for the first time, makes it one of the most emotional patriotic experiences possible.

Size limits prevent me from posting the entire speech, but here is the peroration. If you stumble across this page today, I hope you’ll take five minutes to listen, and a few more to reflect.




If you’d like, you can download the speech for yourself- so, when you need have your faith in American renewed, you can pull it out from time to time…its great medicine.


To Download the speach, right click (Mac Users "Alt Click")the link below, and chose "Save Target As".

"I Have A Dream"

Checking Up: Dick Cheney Looks at Your Credit Rating

Have you seen it yet? Of course you have. According to the AP, Dick Cheney, interviewed on Fox News, said today that:

"[T]he Pentagon and CIA are not violating people's rights by examining the banking and credit records of hundreds of Americans and others suspected of terrorism or espionage in the United States."

Mr. Cheney also mentioned that: "The Department of Defense has a legitimate authorty in this area. This is an authority that goes back thee or four decades."

Let's see, three or four decades. That makes it sound VERY historical, a deep part of the American Tradtion, doesn't it? But just how long ago WAS three or four decades...let's see, now, three would have been....uhm...Watergate? Four would have been...oh, yes, the high of J. Edgar Hoover's power in the FBI....hmmm. I feel like my Constitutional American Liberties, not to mention those unalienable rights endowed me by my creator, are in GREAT hands...don't you.?

Mr. Cheney went on to remind us that there was a war on, and then pointed out that this was all quite legal (which I am actually quite sure that it is), mentioning that this "perfectly legitimate" activity was "was reaffirmed in the Patriot Act."

Gosh, Mr. Dick, I feel better already.


Source:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2794169

More Fun than a Mouse at An Elephant Convention

I try to keep up a friendly correspondence with a few people who are far to the right of me.

I do this because, if I didn't, I'd always only listen to people I agreed with, and my brain would rot.

Here is an exchange between a liberal and a conservative. The names have been withheld (What the hell? If Newsweek can do it, so can I.)

CONSERVATIVE:

Attention drivers who travel in PA -
There is a new Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle law.

HARRISBURG - The
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation announced that a new law, which goes
into effect in January 2007, will require motorists to turn on their headlights
anytime their vehicles wipers are in continuous or intermittent use due to
weather or other atmospheric conditions such as fog or mist.

Motorists
who do not comply with the law could face a fine of $25, but with fees and other
associated costs, the penalty would approach $100.

[And their Governor
is] good ol' ultra-liberal mouthpiece of the Clintonion Democrats.....Ed
Rendell. [Good God, if my friends over at Green
Mountian Daily could see that "ultra-liberal and Clintonian" in the same
sentance- they'd puke!]

Just another example of how the more
liberal side wants to fleece America and protect us from.....ourselves. And
another valid reason to avoid traveling in Pa.

LIBERAL:
You damn right wing radicals will bitch about pretty much
anything, won't you? :)
CONSERVATIVE:
Yep, we sure
will.

But we won't bitch about supporting our
troops.

But we will bitch about those who put them in harm's way by
playing to the media.

Or about welfare reform.

But we
will be the first to help those in need.

Or about saying marriage
is between a man and woman.

But we will about organizations that
support love between a man and boy, or a woman and a girl.

Or about
prayer in school.

But we will about the ACLU trying to make their
will law.

Or about recognizing God and even honoring
him.

But we will fight to our death defending those who
don't.

We won't bitch about Christmas.

We will bitch
about "Happy Holiday".

We won't bitch about "The People's
Rights".

But we will bitch about too big a Federal
Government.

We won't bitch about saving the life of an unborn
fetus.

But we will bitch about taking a life with murder before
it's born.

And, if you like I can go on for another half an hour or
so....

I hope you had a Merry Christmas, and may God bless you
throughout this blessed year.

LIBERAL:

[Now, I tried....whooops.... I mean the LIBERAL
tried to take the high road after this, but temptation was too
strong.]

..........OK, OK, I can't stand it.... I WILL take the bait (damn,
I've got a book I wanted to read tonight, too.)

Yep, we sure will.

But we won't bitch about supporting
our troops.
(Well, not unless you actually have
to PAY TAXES to buy them body armor- then you might start to bitch a
little.)

But we will bitch about those who put them
in harm's way by playing to the media.
(Oh, you
mean like sending them after the WRONG villain- and exposing them to harm's way
just so you can dress up like a solider and say "Mission Accomplished" from the
Deck of Aircraft Carrier while all the reporters take pretty pictures?)

Or about welfare
reform.
(No you don't really bitch too much about
Welfare Reform-- Haliburton seems to be getting everything it needs. And
the Tax breaks on "SECOND HOMES" still seems to be in full force,
too.)

But we will be the first to help those in
need.
(Yes, working side by side with your
Liberal cousins, siblings, friends and colleagues- many on both sides of
the ideological divide DO follow the courage of their convictions to make
the world a better place- that can be
encouraging.)

Or about saying marriage is between a
man and woman.

(And so is Divorce, and so is "Wife Beating")

But we will about organizations that support love
between a man and boy, or a woman and a girl.
(Like the Republican House Leadership under Denny Hastart?)

Or about prayer in school.
(In my town the Christian teachers don't make the kids say
Christians prayers and the Muslim teachers don't make the kids say Muslim
prayers. Those who pray hope that other praying parents pray with the kids
before and after school and while the attend, without fear of persecution or
violence the worship hall of their choice...what a GREAT country this is...you'd
like it here.)

But we will about the ACLU trying to
make their will law.
(Yes, all those nasty things
the ACLU is so willful about- like the right to freedom of speech and freedom of
thought and the freedom to dissent from the opinion of the majority. I
know that Freedom is a popular word describing a much "bitched" concept over
there on the Right Side.)

Or about recognizing God
and even honoring him.
(Perhaps even making a
quick buck by putting "His" slogans- hardly ever "HIs Word" I've
noticed- on cheep Chinese crap and selling it for a buck or
ten.)

But we will fight to our death defending
those who don't.
(By enforcing prayer in schools?
Or by risking getting shot by police while trying to blow up a health clinic or
a federal building?)

We won't bitch about
Christmas.
(At least, most of you who are
Christians won't...aren't there ANY minorities on the right at
ALL?)

We will bitch about "Happy
Holiday".
(What part makes you the most mad? The
"holiday"? or the "happy?"

Here's how we do it where I live. My home and my
Church celebrate Christmas- my town, in which dwell Christians (both Protestants
and Catholics), Jews, Hindu's, Buddhists, and Muslims, celebrates
"Holidays"- everybody except for really pushy people seem to be happy with
the arrangement.)

We won't bitch about "The People's Rights".
(Damn right you won't)

But we
will bitch about too big a Federal Government.
(Yes, too big a Federal government can afford to
investigate irregularities in the savings and loan biz, double check on it's
contractors to make sure that nobody is profiting by the death of American
soldiers and make sure that employers- like Walmart, for example- have to share
the profits of EVERYONE's hard work...at least to the tune of a limited
wage. A big government has the muscle to prevent trusts and
monopoly's...gosh, we can't have that, can we?)

We won't bitch about saving the life of an unborn fetus.
(But you'll execute a born fetus at the drop of a hat- even after
we find out that some of the executed post-fetuses weren't even guilty.)
But we will bitch about taking a life with murder before it's born.
(Yes, then,
and ONLY THEN- a couple of Doctors in a health clinic are fair game,
though.)
And, if you like I can go on for another half an
hour or so....

So can I, my friend, so
can I......

Of course, nothing was proved in this little display, but what the hell? It passed the time.

What Would You Have Done? Democrats And Iraq.

I've been having a discussion over at Green Mountain Daily for the last few days. One of the joys of being a self-described "centrist" is that you find yourself battling with both left AND right.

A blogger with the handle "Monday Morning Clacker" had written an essay blaming the Democrats in Congress for backing off on their opposition to the war. ("Clacker" is of Republican Sympathy, and his point is, Democrats were elected to stop the war; but now that they are in power they are finding it harder to govern than it was to criticize.)

Quite a few people, including Rip and Read, pointed out that, it was only Congress's 2nd day, after all. And, by the third day, came a deluge of articles that are already still pouring in. Democrats are on the move.

Today, we see that:

In a blunt challenge to President Bush, the leader of the Senate's new Democratic majority said Monday he will ``look at everything'' within his power to wind down the war in Iraq, short of cutting off funding for troops already deployed.

From: The Manchester Guardian: Democrats May Deny Funds for Surge

In the debate, I placed the blame for Iraq firmly at the feet of the Bush Administration. But "Clacker" had different ideas, writing:

I'm sorry... (0.00 / 0)
What percentage of the Democratic Party voted to give the President authority to go to war back in 2003?
Its Washington's War. Bush started it. The Congress went along for the ride. They all will suffer for it. And should.

And, of course, I had to answer. I had to remember John Kerry who was against the war before he was for it before he was against it, or some damn thing.

I responded this way:

It's tough to argue with you there, but I will. (0.00 / 0)
I was, and still am, disappointed that the Democratic Party didn't show more courage in opposing the war.
Of course, the argument can be made that the war Democrats THOUGHT they were voting for- one to root out WMD- and the war they actually got were very different.

Still...given the Republican Party's well known tolerance and respect for honest dissent and willingness to play fair when it comes to opposing views, the options open to Democrats were somewhat limited at the time.

( I was just reminded today about this Republican legacy of openness as I listened to a speech by a Burlington businessman, and an acquaintance, who recounted how his father, a State Department Employee, had been pushed out of his job and rendered unemployable for TEN YEARS by a well known Republican named Joe McCarthy. )

Given the fever pitch to which the American people had been wound by the lies and propaganda of the Bush administration, there was little chance of being able to maintain a viable opposition party AND oppose the war in 2003.

It's a thorny moral problem: I'd LIKE to think that I would have handled it differently...but I'm not so sure I would have let Karl Rove shoot me in the back, either. I'd be more interested in staying in office and waiting for a chance to bring the madness to an end.

And with Reid and Pelosi pushing hard now against Bush, that answer seems somewhat justified. But it still doesn't sit quite right, I must admit.

What would you do?



PS-The whole exchange - including another good debate between J.D. Ryan and "Clacker" can be found at: http://www.greenmountaindaily.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=807

Ah, The Most Wonderful Thing

...About Tiggers is that, just as you feel you are about to drown in a sea of insanity; say, waiting for the President to change course on Iraq by doing one of three things:

1) Send 4,000 more troops
2) Send 9,000 more troops
or
3) Send 20,000 more troops

That bouncy wouncy founcy fun, fun, fun, fun, stuffed animal does something to make it all go away for a few minutes.

From the AP:

Walt Disney World employee dressed as the character "Tigger" was accused of hitting a child while posing for a photo, a spokeswoman for the theme park said Saturday.

Park officials temporarily suspended Michael J. Fedelem while they investigate the accusations, Disney spokeswoman Zoraya Suarez said.

"Naturally, physical altercations between cast members and guests are not tolerated," Suarez said.

What a great country this is!

Source:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2776222

Good News in the Post Today & Fun At Green Mountain Daily

Couple of good stories in the Washington Post this morning.

House Adopts Pay-as-You-Go Rules
Changes Aim to Curb Deficit Spending, Shed Light on Earmarks

On its second day under Democratic management, the House yesterday
overwhelmingly approved new rules aimed at reining in deficit spending and
shedding more light on the murky world of special-interest projects known as
earmarks.
Under the new provisions, the House will for the first time in
years be required to pay for any proposal to cut taxes or increase spending on
the most expensive federal programs by raising taxes or cutting spending
elsewhere. And lawmakers will be required to disclose the sponsors of earmarks,
which are attached in virtual secrecy to legislation to direct money to favored
interests or home-district projects.

And...

"The one thing we can say about George Bush and his economic policy is: 'We are forever in your debt,' " Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) told his colleagues on the House floor. "On day number two, Democrats have said, 'Enough is enough with running up the debt of this country. We're going to put our fiscal house in order.' "

Also...

So far, fiscal restraint appears to be gaining the upper hand. As he left the House chamber yesterday, Rangel said he is scouring the tax code for tax breaks that benefit special interests. If the beneficiaries "don't put their hands up, it's out," he said, suggesting that the money saved could go toward paying for the repeal of the alternative minimum tax.

"It's not good for me to have pay-go, but it's good for the country," Rangel said. "At this point, nobody . . . has convinced me that there should be exemptions from pay-go."

This is encouraging, and I hope we can keep to it.

The other interesting Post Story is headlined:

Pelosi, Reid Urge Bush To Begin Iraq Pullout
President Considering Three 'Surge' Options

At a time when America is questioning the wisdom, or even the possibility of staying in Iraq- President Bush has listened, and he has responded.

He has come up with three options for us to consider:
1) Send 4,000 more troops
2) Send 9,000 more troops
or
3) Send 20,000 more troops

I suppose in their own way, these are "progressive" ideas (at least the numbers keep progressing upwards).

Yesterday, Conservative Vermont blogger "Monday Morning Clacker" posted a diary on Green Mountain Daily in which the argument was advanced that the new Democratic controlled Congress is finding DOING something about Iraq, harder than COMPLAINING about it.

The post is entitled: Iraq, Iraq, Iraq! All People Want To Do Is Talk About Iraq! Where Has All The 06' Love Gone?
Rip and Read had some fun helping to advance the argument that perhaps two days isn't quite long enough to expect results. You can read my response on GMD or on Clacker's blog.

At any rate, when I was finished responding, I came across the above mentioned Post Article:

Pelosi, Reid Urge Bush To Begin Iraq Pullout
President Considering Three 'Surge' Options

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid declared yesterday that "it is time to bring the war to a close" and warned President Bush that sending more U.S. troops to Iraq would be unacceptable to the Democratic majorities that have just taken over Congress.

Directly challenging Bush's wartime leadership on their second day in charge on Capitol Hill, Democrats Pelosi (Calif.) and Reid (Nev.) sent Bush a letter suggesting that, instead of starting a short-term escalation, he begin a phased withdrawal of U.S. forces in the next four to six months. The mission of remaining troops, they said, should be shifted away from combat toward more training, logistics and counterterrorism.

I guess two days wasn't so long to wait for results after all.

PS- Speaking of Fun over at Green Mountain Daily- I HIGHLY RECOMMEND taking a look at Ed Garcia's New Lyrics for "Me & Julio Down By the School Yard" I LOVE the pictures of BUSH IN CHAINS!

As a responsible, moderate,level-headed DLC kind of Democrat, I cannot, in good faith, support impeachment yet...but DAMN it sure is nice to dream!

PAYGO back on the menu

The AP ran a story this morning on the efforts of Congress to put some teeth back into the PAYGO measure. This law requires the Federal Government to Pay for Things As and when It Spends the Money.

I know, this sounds like old fashioned Eisenhower Republicanism. So why am I (a rabid Democrat) so happy to see it back on the table? Well...

While PAYGO might be opposed by those who are seeking to expand entitlement programs for the poor, there is another group in Congress who will not be happy to see it enacted:

...most Republicans were likely to resist the Democrats' move to reimpose the PAYGO rule requiring tax cuts or spending increases in entitlement programs such as Medicare or farm subsidies to be "paid for" with tax increases or spending cuts elsewhere in the budget.

The PAYGO stuff wreaks havoc on tax cuts," Flake [R-Arizona]said.

Those on the left might be tempted to oppose this type of thinking. Instead, they may insist that we begin to put needed entitlement programs in place immediately. But as far as I am concerned, the number one priority should be the restoration of the health of the Federal Government. To me, this is more important that welfare, education, infrastructure rebuilding...anything.

Another quote:

Democratic budget hawks, especially the moderate-to-conservative "Blue Dogs," say that restoring the rule is crucial to curbing the budget deficit. Various forms of PAYGO were in place from 1990-2002, however, and Congress often found ways around it.

Why do I think that restoring the health of the Federal Government is the first priority?

Because Republicans like Grover Norquest have made the "drowning" of the Federal Government their number one priority. (Republicans? Hardly...in name only...right wing wack jobs, really). Knowing that the American People would never approve of an outright attempt on the life of their Government- the strategy of the wack-job right has been to force feed the Federal Government into spending itself to death (Tax Cuts and Missiles during the Reagan Era, Tax Cuts and War during the Bush Administration).

Eventually, there will be no money left for We the People to pay for things like Social Security, the Security and Exchange Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency, and, of course, the I.R.S. The Federal Government will, in effect, be "dead".

With the Federal Government "dead", there will be no instrument which ordinary Americans can use to counter act the drive to power by the wealthy. This will leave the nation free to function according the most basic and brutal of natural laws. Call this law what you will, "Social Darwinism", the "Law of the Jungle", or "laissez faire": it all amounts to the same thing: Might (money, power) Makes Right.

With the death of the Federal Government, there will be no force which demands that everyone contribute to society. With the "death" of the Federal Government, there will be no more "referee" to impose at least some small modicum of fairness on American Society.

So, I for one, applaud Congress, and especially the "Blue Dogs" for realizing that THIS is job number one, and that if we ever hope to build (or rebuild- Democrats build well in during the Roosevelt, Truman, and Kennedy years) an American society that combines the efficiency of Capitalism with a sprinkling of social justice, this is the place we must start.

Source:
AP: Paygo Debate (from the Houston Chronicle)
Wikipedia: Grover Norquist

Kind of a Link Dump Sort of a Day.

Hi. I'm feeling like I'm running really hard these last few weeks, and not getting very far. I've had very little time to read the news, and that is a shame, because there is a lot of stuff going on that I'd like to keep up with.

During lunch today, however, a couple of things came to my attention. In the New Republic On Line, there is an interesting article by Rick Perlstein. It tells the story of a concerted effort on the part of American industry to use company propaganda to begin to instill a spirit of conservatism in their employees which would, ultimately, culminate in the Reagan/W.Bush agenda of undoing the New Deal.

I am looking forward to reading the book Mr. Perlstein reviews, and am very much looking forward to Perlstein's own forthcoming "Nixonland". He seems to have his eyes fixed on an obscure but important part of history- that period when America began to turn away from the New Deal of FDR, and began to RETURN to a policy of Social Darwinism and laissez faire economics.

This shift has long fascinated me, since it seems so obviously not in the interest of any of us who are not incredibly wealthy, but which, nevertheless, seems to hold a powerful attraction for the American character despite their "class interest".

The article can be found at: http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w070101&s=perlstein010407 However, you may have to subscribe to read it.

And Green Mountain Daily has an interesting post by "Odum" today: Bush Administration "Brushes Off" Leahy, Draws the First Constitutional Showdown of 2007

Pat Leahy is moving toward a very important constitutional battle with the Bush administration. Here are two quotes from the UPI article:

Last November, Leahy requested two documents concerning CIA interrogation methods, the existence of which officials recently acknowledged for the first time in a lawsuit.

"The department's decision to brush off my request for information about the administration's troubling interrogation policies is not the constructive step toward bipartisanship that I had hoped for," said Leahy in a statement.

Off To A Bad Start?

Okay,

I haven't finished the article yet, so I don't know how it ends. BUT, it doesn't sound so hot. According to the Washington Post, the first plan of action for the Democratic Party's first 100 hours in power is to power through their legislation without consulting the opposition party.

As they prepare to take control of Congress this week and face up to campaign pledges to restore bipartisanship and openness, Democrats are planning to largely sideline Republicans from the first burst of lawmaking.

House Democrats intend to pass a raft of popular measures as part of their well-publicized plan for the first 100 hours. They include tightening ethics rules for lawmakers, raising the minimum wage, allowing more research on stem cells and cutting interest rates on student loans.

But instead of allowing Republicans to fully participate in deliberations, as promised after the Democratic victory in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, Democrats now say they will use House rules to prevent the opposition from offering alternative measures, assuring speedy passage of the bills and allowing their party to trumpet early victories.

From The Washington Post

Don't get me wrong, I love throwing mud in Republican eyes as much, if not more, than anybody. Still...democracy is democracy...and this, no matter how satisfying and convenient, is not right.

The Republicans have been governing like greedy, spoiled children for the past 6 years. We, as Democrats, MUST take the high road and show the nation that we play fair. As important as it is to solve practical problems as soon as possible, it is even more important to steady our wobbling democratic form of government.

Comments?

Source:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/01/AR2007010100784.html?referrer=email