Katczinsky wrote:I couldn't agree more! It is painfully obvious that the people deserve the government they get...

And here is a prime example:
----------------------------------------------------------

CNN — LOU DOBBS TONIGHT — Aired March 6, 2008 - 19:00 ET

LOU DOBBS, HOST: The Air Force tomorrow, will explain why it granted a $40 billion military tanker contract to Europe's consortium that builds the Airbus and not to Boeing.

Senator Patty Murray from Washington State, representing many Boeing employees as her constituents, and she like many Americans outraged over this decision.

Senator, good to have you with us. Senator, what in the world is going on down there?

SEN. PATTY MURRAY, (D) WA: This is unbelievable to me. I was out on the floor with the Boeing workers on the line Friday afternoon when this was announced and just the unbelievable look in their eyes as they said to me, how can I be paying tax dollars, my own money, and it's going to go to a company overseas to build the planes that I know how to build. What is going on?

DOBBS: We talked about free trade before as it's practiced by this administration and the previous. You're a free trader, right?

MURRAY: I voted for trade agreements but I believe in enforcing them. And that's one of the problems with this deal ...

DOBBS: I have to say to you. We haven't enforced a trade agreement in the country in 30 years, we are being run over by the people acting in their national interests, in the interest of their employees and this government and both political parties continue to ignore the American worker. Is it finally a place to draw the line, senator?

MURRAY: I think this is a serious place to draw the line. First of all, we have trade outstanding agreement - against - in the WTO against Airbus right now because of unfair subsidies. So on one hand we're filing a trade agreement against them and on the other hand giving them $40 billion. That doesn't make sense to me.

And also we have to be asking, when are we going to stop outsourcing our military capability and realize we're putting our own security in some other country's hands and I think the line is drawn in the sand now and Congress needs to make that decision.

DOBBS: Congress needs to make that decision. This administration needs to make that decision. Every union in the country should be saying to you in my judgment in Congress, in both parties, they have had a bellyful of the nonsense.

We have international trade in this country since our founding. Now some geniuses with multinationals have come up with an expression, multinational globalization. The reality is, we have been sold a pile of goods that is absolutely incredible that an intelligent nation with our absolute depth of knowledge and our expertise, our innovation, our spirit, we are being literally rolled over by idiots in this U.S. trade representatives office, this White House and the previous.

MURRAY: Well, Lou, if we lose our own capability, our workers with the know-how, our ability to bring a plane off line, it's not going to just be gone just for a year or two. Once we lose that infrastructure, it's gone forever. Ten, 15, 20 years from now if we find ourselves in an international conflict and need to be able to call on our military in a very strong way and can't do it, that's going to be our fault.

DOBBS: Are you ready to impeach this president if he goes ahead with it?

MURRAY: I'm certainly ready to call on Congress to take a major discussion and to make a decision on whether or not we, the leaders today, are going to allow our military capability to be lost.

DOBBS: How about to recall of the Democratic leadership of the House and the Senate who are not standing up right now for American workers and saying this will not do? It will not happen?

MURRAY: I invite all of your listeners to go on our Web site and sign our petition. We are asking everyone to help us make the case that America is not going to stand still for this and we need everybody's voice.

DOBBS: We have got that up now, your Web site — Murray.senate.gov/tankers with a petition, a number of congressman and a number of senators now doing so. Senator Murray, we thank you for taking your leadership on this.

At some point, you folks in Congress have got to understand this is not a game for this nation anymore and I mean both political parties. Senator, I know you're doing your best. This free trade nonsense is as it's being practiced is devastating.

MURRAY: Lou, it's an economic question and it is a security question for our nation as well.

DOBBS: I would say to you without a strong economy we can't muster a strong defense.

MURRAY: True.
----------------------------------------------------------

SEN. PATTY MURRAY, (D) WASHINGTON voted for the free trade agreements.

And yet her constituents keep voting her into office...



-

Katczinsky wrote:Yes, and further supports the fact that some folks just luv takin' it in the ass...

BOHICA

Most of the Americans who are screaming for change don't have a clue what that change might be. They see some things about the country they don't like, and think the first candidate who promises "change" is going to fix it all for them. Every wonder why Obama's call for change is so vague? Because he probably doesn't have a clue either.

Now, Nader is a different animal altogether. We have a pretty good idea where he stands and its' all green. Green as in thinking that wind power is a feasible alternative to nuclear power. Green as in creating many organizations such as the "Appleseed Foundation" (for local change whatever that may be).

Don't get me wrong, Nader has done a lot of good for American society too. He saved us all from the unsafe, but yet popular, Chevy Corvair in the early 1960's. He has staved the power of large corporations and made them accountable for unsafe products. He was also one the first activist toward clean water reform. If only he would have stayed at what he did so well.....

No, now he all on about running for president. For the sixth freakin' time I might add. He is still considered by many for costing Al Gore the 2000 presidential election by being the "spoiler" in Florida.

He has no business running for president and even he knows he has no chance whatsoever of winning. The only thing he can accomplish is fucking it up for other viable candidates like he did to Gore in 2000.

Besides, he's a strange little fuck. He doesn't drive or own a car. He doesn't own any real estate and rents an apartment despite being worth over $3M. He doesn't own or watch a TV. And, he claims to live off of only $25,000 a year.

Do you really want something like that as your president?

pensacola_niceman wrote:yes!

He probably wouldn't live in the White House, so he could lease it out for MILLIONS, and help reduce the DEBT.



-

Ol' ex-California Governor and now Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown didn't live in the Governors Mansion. He lived in an apartment.

He’s too weird? Are you trying to date him? This is not a high school popularity
Contest! If you can’t take him seriously then explain why! Are you just regurgitating
What the Media told you what you should feel about Nader?


He and any NON-(REP or DEM) candidate does not a chance at winning and “AMERICA”
Presidential race ! Why doesn’t that bother you? But Nader being a little different
Get’s your panties all in a bunch????????
When America stood against the British they too had "no chance". But look at the out come!
Nader goes against the odd to try and do good for America and you have a problem with that?



That’s fine! Let the REPS&DEMS point out all Nader’s flaws and bad policies!
And if it is true that the REPS&DEMS are truly better to run America, than by all
means let all voters not vote for Nader!! But let it be for the good of America
not because Nader’s "Not Cool" !!!

Remember you get the government you deserve.

It IS a popularity contest, albiet not a high school one. The president of the United States represents our nation and looks and manners are more important than you might realize.

I don't even know what the media is saying about Nader right now. I just remember him from a long way back. That's what I basing my understanding of the man on. I also have only stated facts (with the exception of the weird observation which is merely my opinion). How you interpret these facts is up to you.

Me, I think the man is too strange to be our president. You also have to question what his real agenda is, since even he knows he has no chance whatsoever of winning the presidency.

Resorting to sophmoric personal attacks does not lend itself well to your credibility. At least try to be funny in such efforts as I often am.

Decaf man.

You do have a knack for humour after all. I see the analogy very clearly now. Nader's campaign is a direct comparison to the United States gaining independence from Great Britain. Thank you for the wonderful insight.

Not really. We get the government that the mega-rich cigar flickers fancy.