The Democratic party should be ashamed of themselves

[Zipp]

They have a corrupt Senator that bails out because he was doing so bad in the polls(i'm sure they made him leave). Imagine that,changing your candidate in the middle of an election just because you know your guy will probably lose.

They sent Baghdad James McDermott and his stooges to Iraq where they did nothing but bad mouth the president and call him a liar and said we should believe the words of the Iraqis.

They're stalling the Homeland security bill because just because they do not want to give GW Bush the freedon to hire,fire and disipline bad employees. You see,when your a unionized goverment employee,you can basically be the laziest piece of trash and you will never be fired. GW wants to change that and make it so bad employees and those who could be a possble security risk can be removed. Dems want none of that.

I don't know,kinda sad if you ask me.

 

[dolph]

yes, darn those awful, awful people. why can't they realize that everything they stand for is wrong? if only they could understand how bad democrats are, our country would be perfect. poor, misguided fools.

 

[gopunk]

flamebait

 

[HendrixFan]

Zipp, you just have to understand that not everyone is as great as you are. It took me time to realize how great you were, but not everyone will come around to see that you know whats best for anything.

 

[mithrandir2001]

Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.

 

[Evadman]

Originally posted by: gopunk
flamebait

*bows to your awesome future see-ability*

 

[Mrburns2007]

Let's see Bush and the Republicans want to keep Iraq on the table because it helps them. Democrats want to get Iraq off the table and talk about corporate corruption and the economy because that helps them.

Yeah neither of them are playing politics

 

[0roo0roo]

and the republicans are forever fawning over total jackasses like rush limbaugh and ann coulter it all evens out.

 

[jorken]

whole lotta democrats in here...

 

[Bluefront]

Democrats will never be ashamed of anything.....evidenced by running clinton for a second term.

 

[IGBT]

McDermott is in his "Jane Fonda" mode..next you'll see a pic.of him on an AA gun...

 

[Moonbeam]

They're trying not to get too big of an advantage over a President that can't talk.

 

[Jumpem]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
and the republicans are forever fawning over total jackasses like rush limbaugh and ann coulter it all evens out.

Rush Limbaugh is brilliant(although not always conservative enough for my taste) and the country would be much better off if some of what he suggests was put into practice. You sir are an idiot.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
They're trying not to get too big of an advantage over a President that can't talk.

Better than one playing hide the cigars with interns in the oval office.

Clinton was a polished used car salesman. He said alot of crap things you wanted to hear, got alot of action because of his position, made alot of money by....renting out the whitehouse, selling China secrets...etc, and giving a grand fark you exit by selling pardons. It amazes me to no end how anyone can think of him as a great president. The only thing he did right was being in charge while the economy without his influence boomed.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Jumpem

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
and the republicans are forever fawning over total jackasses like rush limbaugh and ann coulter it all evens out.

Rush Limbaugh is brilliant(although not always conservative enough for my taste) and the country would be much better off if some of what he suggests was put into practice. You sir are an idiot.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Rush Limbaugh is "brilliant," huh? Can I have a sip of whatever you've been drinking? Can't you at least stick up for a truly bright conservative pundit (George Will, for example) rather than that tubby know-nothing blowhard?

 

[transluko]

Originally posted by: Zipp
They have a corrupt Senator that bails out because he was doing so bad in the polls(i'm sure they made him leave). Imagine that,changing your candidate in the middle of an election just because you know your guy will probably lose.

People do that ALL THE TIME. It's only a couple weeks past the deadline.

HEY. I have an idea. Lets harm the voters of NJ for the next term because of a clerical deadline.

 

[Vadatajs]

Originally posted by: Jumpem

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
and the republicans are forever fawning over total jackasses like rush limbaugh and ann coulter it all evens out.

Rush Limbaugh is brilliant(although not always conservative enough for my taste) and the country would be much better off if some of what he suggests was put into practice. You sir are an idiot.

Ha ha ha ha Ha Ha ha ha. That's the funniest thing I've read in a while. You should do stand-up.

 

[Jzero]

I didn't realize that the honorable republicans would just take it on the chin when they could yank a sure loser in favor of someone who has a shot.

Anyone who blindly supports a political party is the one who should be ashamed. This includes Zipp and CantedValve (yes, this thread is a REPOST).

 

[bGIveNs33]

You can talk about unethical practices on both sides... but the democrats are trying to break the law. The new jersey law clearly states that there can't be a name replaced on the ballot within 51 days of the election... and that is what they are trying to do. They have already named a replacement for him.

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: bGIveNs33
You can talk about unethical practices on both sides... but the democrats are trying to break the law. The new jersey law clearly states that there can't be a name replaced on the ballot within 51 days of the election... and that is what they are trying to do. They have already named a replacement for him.

Trying to break the law? They will only be able to do it with the approval of the state supreme court. They are hardly breaking a law if the court gives it their blessing. Where do you people come up with these notions? This isn't about one political party or another, ANY political party would be doing the EXACT SAME THING

 

[bGIveNs33]

Originally posted by: Jzero

Originally posted by: bGIveNs33
You can talk about unethical practices on both sides... but the democrats are trying to break the law. The new jersey law clearly states that there can't be a name replaced on the ballot within 51 days of the election... and that is what they are trying to do. They have already named a replacement for him.

Trying to break the law? They will only be able to do it with the approval of the state supreme court. They are hardly breaking a law if the court gives it their blessing. Where do you people come up with these notions? This isn't about one political party or another, ANY political party would be doing the EXACT SAME THING

NO.... you are wrong. They have already started to take the necessary steps to do it. The republicans are having to take it to court, not the democrats. If the republicans didn't challenge it, they would be successful. Don't feed that b.s. that the republicans would do the same thing because they aren't doing it. Thats the bottom line, they are NOT doing it right now. Why speculate to what they would do? The democrats are trying to break the law.

-Billy

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: bGIveNs33
You can talk about unethical practices on both sides... but the democrats are trying to break the law. The new jersey law clearly states that there can't be a name replaced on the ballot within 51 days of the election... and that is what they are trying to do. They have already named a replacement for him.

They are democrats, they can do whatever they want. Look at Gore, just because he lost Florida he had to have recount after recount after recount and sue this person and that person and change all these laws so that he would be president. Democrats seem to think that laws are a suggestion and if they don't work in your favor, change them. I bet in NJ, that law will be repealed just because the democrats don't like it.

 

[Jzero]

NO.... you are wrong. They have already started to take the necessary steps to do it. The republicans are having to take it to court, not the democrats. If the republicans didn't challenge it, they would be successful. Don't feed that b.s. that the republicans would do the same thing because they aren't doing it. Thats the bottom line, they are NOT doing it right now. Why speculate to what they would do? The democrats are trying to break the law.

See my post above about blindly supporting a political party

.

No one can be added to the ballot after the fact without it being approved by someone in the legislative branch. The Republicans are challenging it because they want to win the race just like the Dems. They are no better, no worse. I'm speculating about what they would do because I am tired of partisan morons without 2 brain cells to rub together constantly bickering about democrat this and republican that. Political parties and their blind, zealous supporters are one of the greatest hindrances to the democratic process. It should be noted that _I_ am a moderate republican these days, and people like you make me sick.
Doug Forrester is as much a nincompoop as Bobby T. is. I resent that partisan punters would rather force me to vote for that loser.

I also don't see why you feel that the people of NJ should be robbed of their power to choose.

Maybe you don't "get it" because you aren't in NJ and it won't much affect you, but I'm here and I'm not happy about it, and I'm equally unhappy that people like you try to twist this into a partisan thing when you [SHOULD] know full well that corruption does NOT follow party lines.

 

[Michael]

The voters in NJ are not being robbed of their "Power to Choose".

1) There was a Primary and Torricelli won the Democrat nomination. The Democrats chose then.

2) There was a campaign and Torricelli was losing - when offered a choice, they didn't want to choose him

3) They can still vote for Torricelli or write-in a candidate, there is no choice being taken away

This is not a case where the candidate died or was found guilty of murder or a similar crime and thus no longer eligible to run for office. The law appears to be pretty clear, they shouldn't be able to pull a candidate becase they were losing and put another one in.

Michael

 

[StageLeft]

You see,when your a unionized goverment employee,you can basically be the laziest piece of trash and you will never be fired.

Guy I spoke to last night is a federal employee and he said, quote "No matter what happens you always have your job. They can't fire you."