The losers don't get to make decisions....they have to live with them.

---

Labor's man in 2008?

ROBERT D. NOVAK
THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES

December 23, 2006

While Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama soak up news media attention, John Edwards has pushed for organized labor's support. No decisions have yet been made, but the former senator from North Carolina and 2004 vice presidential nominee is the front-runner for winning over the big, dynamic unions who left the AFL-CIO 18 months ago.

Edwards is a leading prospect for backing from Andrew Stern's Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and James P. Hoffa's International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the unions that led the breakaway forming the Change to Win Federation. Stern and Hoffa are wary of early decisions, and there are things about the Edwards operation their unions do not like. But their interest in him reflects largely unspoken discontent in Democratic ranks over a choice limited to Clinton and Obama.

Withdrawal from presidential consideration of former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner and Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana prompted the analysis that Clinton and Obama consume all political oxygen, leaving nothing for another candidate. But many labor leaders question Clinton's electability and worry about Obama's inexperience. While Warner and Bayh would have been positioned to front-runner Clinton's right, Edwards is on her left. That is no liability in seeking support from Change to Win unions.

While some of these unions fret about Edwards' closest political associates, he personally is a big hit with labor leaders who left the AFL-CIO unhappy about lack of fervor in recruiting new members. With the same eloquence and careful preparation that made him a multimillionaire trial lawyer, Edwards boosts trade restrictions and other elements on organized labor's agenda.

Edwards' game plan begins with the caucuses in Iowa, the state where he burst out of the pack in 2004 by finishing second. A Des Moines Register poll last summer showed him ahead of Clinton there, and an October survey conducted for an environmental group gave Edwards a 20-percentage point lead over her. An Iowa win in 2008 could propel him into the New Hampshire primary with momentum, leading next to South Carolina – the only state where he won a 2004 primary.

In addition to the SEIU and the Teamsters, Edwards has been making points with two other Change to Win unions: Unite Here (apparel and hotel-restaurant workers) and Laborers International. He is also popular with AFL-CIO unions, especially the Steelworkers, Iron Workers and Communications Workers. He won the AFL-CIO's Wellstone Award for backing labor initiatives in 2006.

The day is long past when Big Labor moved in lockstep. Stern, saying he was following SEIU's rank-and-file, backed Howard Dean in 2004. Hoffa supported his old law school classmate, Richard Gephardt. Both endorsed John Kerry as soon as he clinched the nomination and were not happy with him. Nobody is about to move before next summer, and labor sources say Stern will wait until September.

Edwards' unusual step selecting former Rep. David Bonior of Michigan as his national campaign manager, the first such task undertaken in his long political career, has been described as enlisting a laborite politician to woo labor. But Teamsters officials regard Bonior as less their friend than a friend of the United Auto Workers. Some feel Edwards would have been better advised to stick with his former campaign manager, Nick Baldick, an experienced political operative who has been given the task of advising Edwards on the early tests in Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire. Baldick is renowned for saving Al Gore from oblivion in the 2000 New Hampshire primary.

The labor operatives pondering their '08 decisions also confess they are less than comfortable with a prominent role in the campaign by Edwards' wife, Elizabeth, who never has been a political spouse staying in the shadows. It is not good news for Edwards if some Teamsters are put off by the triumvirate of John Edwards, Elizabeth Edwards and Dave Bonior.

Edwards' sunny aura and commanding presence, however, can transcend the negative impact of anybody at his side. When Bayh dropped out last Saturday, there was speculation that Edwards would be the next to go. On the contrary, Edwards is where he wants to be, hoping for a big shove forward from labor.

---

me@rescam.org

For My Politically-correct Friends:

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2007, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great.

Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere. Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.

By accepting these greetings, you are accepting the aforementioned terms as stated. This greeting is not subject to clarification or withdrawal. It is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting. It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for herself/himself/others, and is void where prohibited by law and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher.

This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wish.

AND For the rest of you:

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

---

me@rescam.org

For My Politically-correct Friends:

Please accept with no obligation, implied or implicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2007, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great.

Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere. Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.

By accepting these greetings, you are accepting the aforementioned terms as stated. This greeting is not subject to clarification or withdrawal. It is freely transferable with no alteration to the original greeting. It implies no promise by the wisher to actually implement any of the wishes for herself/himself/others, and is void where prohibited by law and is revocable at the sole discretion of the wisher.

This wish is warranted to perform as expected within the usual application of good tidings for a period of one year or until the issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting, whichever comes first, and warranty is limited to replacement of this wish or issuance of a new wish at the sole discretion of the wish.

What d'ya say? That's even less understandable than most of the politicians' speeches...!!!



Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

---

Account frozen...

Obama vs. history

UNION-TRIBUNE EDITORIAL

Rising star should explain economic views

December 19, 2006

There are darn good reasons that millions of Americans are in full swoon over Sen. Barack Obama and the prospect that the Illinois Democrat will seek the White House in 2008. Just as in the 1976 presidential race, when Jimmy Carter's vow to be an honest, moral leader fit the Zeitgeist of a nation disillusioned by Watergate and Vietnam, Obama's message of outreach and hope make him uniquely attractive to a public weary of our nasty, polarized political debate.

But his appeal is not just of a surface variety. Obama's books and speeches offer a seductive vision of a better America, one in which the energy we spend fighting each other is devoted to actually solving problems. He calls for acknowledging the best arguments on all sides of a debate and resisting the impulse to demonize those with whom we disagree.

No one else talks like this. Instead, we see Karl Rove implying that voting for Democrats is traitorous, or Obama's fellow Chicago Democrat – Rep. Rahm Emanuel – gleefully urging Republicans to perform anatomical impossibilities on election night after Democrats regained control of the House.

For all these reasons and more, Obama's emergence as a national figure is welcome. Nevertheless, at some point – say, before he seeks the presidency – Obama must offer far more substantive explanations of his stands on the issues, especially the economy.

There is a fight going on now for the soul of the Democratic Party. One side, led by former President Bill Clinton, says the answer to rising economic insecurity lies in improving and subsidizing worker training to make it easier to switch careers, making health insurance far more portable and creating a better safety net for those temporarily displaced in our churning economy.

The other side, led by former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, says the answer is protectionism and punishing U.S. companies that choose to invest or expand abroad or do not pay their workers enough.

With his opposition to many trade deals and his Wal-Mart bashing, Obama has tentatively allied himself with the latter camp, all the while depicting himself as a thoughtful centrist. But there is nothing thoughtful about ignoring the vast evidence that free trade and relatively unfettered capitalism have made America prosperous – or arguing that a company whose low prices help millions of families make ends meet and which has no trouble filling jobs should abandon its business model and become an adjunct welfare agency.

If Barack Obama is sincere when he says it is imperative to have honest, good-faith debates on the big issues, at some point he will need to explain how on earth he concluded that governments do a better job than the free market in creating jobs and wealth.

In his research, he might want to ponder this place called Europe. It's a continent-sized example of how protectionism and government regulation kill jobs, depress growth and hurt most the people such policies are supposed to help.

How about it, senator? Any interest in a road trip?

It is apparent that you watch Fox news.. What about the fact that our economy is a lie? The Fed stopped reporting last March how much money its printing, for the first time ever. The fed is between a rock and a hard place, if they suddenly report how much they have printed and the fact that China has now stopped buying dollars, The dollar tanks to being just a gnats hair above worthless. If they raise the prime interest rate to compensate for the weakened dollar than the housing market drops to an all time low which forces a major recession. Actually we have been in a recession since last feb. With all these Idiots who bought homes on interest only loans hanging in the balance and our debt the highest ever, you can plainly see the smoke and mirrors the administration is using. I am an American, who works in the defense industry, and I am not proud of what this country has become. I'm not saying there are better places out there, just that we need to steer this country off the path we are on and back onto the ashphalt.

Oh my brother. I am with you on this one. The dollar is dirt, $2 per pound and euro. Shouldnt be this way. Europeans take an average vacation time of 30 + days a year, we get 13 days. We work harder, but the dollar goes down. We need some "hard love" from the Chinese and Japanese so they QUIT loaning us money. Good time to buy real assets in the US, gotta go thru the roof. Dunno, I'm just cute-not smart. Cant ask both from God, he (she ,it) won't share. OK, I'm not cute either

---

It's like in Germany, were there still are occupying forces, though the world war has been over since 1945.

I can't speak for the US-Germany relationship, but the view from The Bridge is that the Cold War is still on, but alas we can not point to Mother Russia as an ally or as an enemy because we don't have an enemy like we used to.

I believe it was Walt Kelley who said "We have met the enemy, and they is us". I might be wrong about the speaker, but not the speech. We've had a free ride since Berlin. Now it's time to pay the overdue bill, and we've got less than nothing to show for it (because Japan, China, India, Iran, France, Germany, Korea (North and South), Pakistan, the Philippines, Malaya, Sudan, Somalia, and even Palestine kicked our collective socio-, economic, military, and political butts during that free ride)

Maybe if we had done to Baghdad what de did to Berlin - Bomb the living daylights outta the place (and maybe the semi-living lights as well) - followed by a 21st Century Marshall Plan...

No, we should have done the same thing in Iraq as we did in Germany and Japan. We kept the Nazis and the emperor working for their country. We just changed their names. It worked. They knew how to do it. We can't impose freedom on a country that doesn't want it.

Sure, to take mass murderers and war criminals to build a government and its secret services was sooo right!
There has been men from the former Center Party, or the former Social Democrats, who were more qualified than those Nazi bastards! But they were ignored by the US.

"We knew what we did. It was absolutely necessary that we used every son of a b*** as long as he was an anti-communist".
~ Harry Rositzke, CIA-Russia expert

For instance they hired the Nazi spy expert Reinhard Gehlen to build the new Germany's secret service BND - and allowed him to hire at least 6 SS and SD veterans, like Franz Six and Emil Augsburg, two SS intelligence veterans involved in the mass extermination of Jews, and fugitive war criminals.

Hey ! It WORKED ! What we are doing doesnt. Hire Satan to do Satans work.

---

It's like in Germany, were there still are occupying forces, though the world war has been over since 1945.

I can't speak for the US-Germany relationship, but the view from The Bridge is that the Cold War is still on, but alas we can not point to Mother Russia as an ally or as an enemy because we don't have an enemy like we used to.

I believe it was Walt Kelley who said "We have met the enemy, and they is us". I might be wrong about the speaker, but not the speech. We've had a free ride since Berlin. Now it's time to pay the overdue bill, and we've got less than nothing to show for it (because Japan, China, India, Iran, France, Germany, Korea (North and South), Pakistan, the Philippines, Malaya, Sudan, Somalia, and even Palestine kicked our collective socio-, economic, military, and political butts during that free ride)

Maybe if we had done to Baghdad what de did to Berlin - Bomb the living daylights outta the place (and maybe the semi-living lights as well) - followed by a 21st Century Marshall Plan...

No, we should have done the same thing in Iraq as we did in Germany and Japan. We kept the Nazis and the emperor working for their country. We just changed their names. It worked. They knew how to do it. We can't impose freedom on a country that doesn't want it.

Sure, to take mass murderers and war criminals to build a government and its secret services was sooo right!
There has been men from the former Center Party, or the former Social Democrats, who were more qualified than those Nazi bastards! But they were ignored by the US.

"We knew what we did. It was absolutely necessary that we used every son of a b*** as long as he was an anti-communist".
~ Harry Rositzke, CIA-Russia expert

For instance they hired the Nazi spy expert Reinhard Gehlen to build the new Germany's secret service BND - and allowed him to hire at least 6 SS and SD veterans, like Franz Six and Emil Augsburg, two SS intelligence veterans involved in the mass extermination of Jews, and fugitive war criminals.

Hey ! It WORKED ! What we are doing doesnt. Hire Satan to do Satans work.

So you admit that doing Secret Service stuff just for anti-communist reasons, is Satans work?

---

Account frozen...

It's like in Germany, were there still are occupying forces, though the world war has been over since 1945.

I can't speak for the US-Germany relationship, but the view from The Bridge is that the Cold War is still on, but alas we can not point to Mother Russia as an ally or as an enemy because we don't have an enemy like we used to.

I believe it was Walt Kelley who said "We have met the enemy, and they is us". I might be wrong about the speaker, but not the speech. We've had a free ride since Berlin. Now it's time to pay the overdue bill, and we've got less than nothing to show for it (because Japan, China, India, Iran, France, Germany, Korea (North and South), Pakistan, the Philippines, Malaya, Sudan, Somalia, and even Palestine kicked our collective socio-, economic, military, and political butts during that free ride)

Maybe if we had done to Baghdad what de did to Berlin - Bomb the living daylights outta the place (and maybe the semi-living lights as well) - followed by a 21st Century Marshall Plan...

No, we should have done the same thing in Iraq as we did in Germany and Japan. We kept the Nazis and the emperor working for their country. We just changed their names. It worked. They knew how to do it. We can't impose freedom on a country that doesn't want it.

Sure, to take mass murderers and war criminals to build a government and its secret services was sooo right!
There has been men from the former Center Party, or the former Social Democrats, who were more qualified than those Nazi bastards! But they were ignored by the US.

"We knew what we did. It was absolutely necessary that we used every son of a b*** as long as he was an anti-communist".
~ Harry Rositzke, CIA-Russia expert

For instance they hired the Nazi spy expert Reinhard Gehlen to build the new Germany's secret service BND - and allowed him to hire at least 6 SS and SD veterans, like Franz Six and Emil Augsburg, two SS intelligence veterans involved in the mass extermination of Jews, and fugitive war criminals.

Hey ! It WORKED ! What we are doing doesnt. Hire Satan to do Satans work.

So you admit that doing Secret Service stuff just for anti-communist reasons, is Satans work?

Was that in question?

---

It's like in Germany, were there still are occupying forces, though the world war has been over since 1945.

I can't speak for the US-Germany relationship, but the view from The Bridge is that the Cold War is still on, but alas we can not point to Mother Russia as an ally or as an enemy because we don't have an enemy like we used to.

I believe it was Walt Kelley who said "We have met the enemy, and they is us". I might be wrong about the speaker, but not the speech. We've had a free ride since Berlin. Now it's time to pay the overdue bill, and we've got less than nothing to show for it (because Japan, China, India, Iran, France, Germany, Korea (North and South), Pakistan, the Philippines, Malaya, Sudan, Somalia, and even Palestine kicked our collective socio-, economic, military, and political butts during that free ride)

Maybe if we had done to Baghdad what de did to Berlin - Bomb the living daylights outta the place (and maybe the semi-living lights as well) - followed by a 21st Century Marshall Plan...

No, we should have done the same thing in Iraq as we did in Germany and Japan. We kept the Nazis and the emperor working for their country. We just changed their names. It worked. They knew how to do it. We can't impose freedom on a country that doesn't want it.

Sure, to take mass murderers and war criminals to build a government and its secret services was sooo right!
There has been men from the former Center Party, or the former Social Democrats, who were more qualified than those Nazi bastards! But they were ignored by the US.

"We knew what we did. It was absolutely necessary that we used every son of a b*** as long as he was an anti-communist".
~ Harry Rositzke, CIA-Russia expert

For instance they hired the Nazi spy expert Reinhard Gehlen to build the new Germany's secret service BND - and allowed him to hire at least 6 SS and SD veterans, like Franz Six and Emil Augsburg, two SS intelligence veterans involved in the mass extermination of Jews, and fugitive war criminals.

Hey ! It WORKED ! What we are doing doesnt. Hire Satan to do Satans work.

So you admit that doing Secret Service stuff just for anti-communist reasons, is Satans work?

Was that in question?

:O hmmmmm....

---

Account frozen...

It's like in Germany, were there still are occupying forces, though the world war has been over since 1945.

I can't speak for the US-Germany relationship, but the view from The Bridge is that the Cold War is still on, but alas we can not point to Mother Russia as an ally or as an enemy because we don't have an enemy like we used to.

I believe it was Walt Kelley who said "We have met the enemy, and they is us". I might be wrong about the speaker, but not the speech. We've had a free ride since Berlin. Now it's time to pay the overdue bill, and we've got less than nothing to show for it (because Japan, China, India, Iran, France, Germany, Korea (North and South), Pakistan, the Philippines, Malaya, Sudan, Somalia, and even Palestine kicked our collective socio-, economic, military, and political butts during that free ride)

Maybe if we had done to Baghdad what de did to Berlin - Bomb the living daylights outta the place (and maybe the semi-living lights as well) - followed by a 21st Century Marshall Plan...

No, we should have done the same thing in Iraq as we did in Germany and Japan. We kept the Nazis and the emperor working for their country. We just changed their names. It worked. They knew how to do it. We can't impose freedom on a country that doesn't want it.

Sure, to take mass murderers and war criminals to build a government and its secret services was sooo right!
There has been men from the former Center Party, or the former Social Democrats, who were more qualified than those Nazi bastards! But they were ignored by the US.

"We knew what we did. It was absolutely necessary that we used every son of a b*** as long as he was an anti-communist".
~ Harry Rositzke, CIA-Russia expert

For instance they hired the Nazi spy expert Reinhard Gehlen to build the new Germany's secret service BND - and allowed him to hire at least 6 SS and SD veterans, like Franz Six and Emil Augsburg, two SS intelligence veterans involved in the mass extermination of Jews, and fugitive war criminals.

Hey ! It WORKED ! What we are doing doesnt. Hire Satan to do Satans work.

So you admit that doing Secret Service stuff just for anti-communist reasons, is Satans work?

Was that in question?

:O hmmmmm....

What we are doing, doesn't work. Whatever, praise Satan, if it works. we are losing too many Marine's for nothing. We don't have a free vote here ! It's all gerrymandered, we know who will win. Screw it, if Satan is the answer.......

---

Religion in the Politics thread and politics in the Religion thread...anyone else getting confused or is it just me?

---

Account frozen...

Religion in the Politics thread and politics in the Religion thread...anyone else getting confused or is it just me?

No, you are not confused. Just me. It seems that religion and politics are one and the same now. Dunno. What do you think?

---

U.N. votes to impede Iran nuclear programs

---

me@rescam.org

U.N. votes to impede Iran nuclear programs

Wow, that's good news. The UN is gonna solve another problem. Come on ! They are worthless !

---

U.N. votes to impede Iran nuclear programs

Wow, that's good news. The UN is gonna solve another problem. Come on ! They are worthless !

I totally agree with you on this issue.

Wow, somebody finally agreed with me. Damn, now they will close the site.

---

U.N. votes to impede Iran nuclear programs

Wow, that's good news. The UN is gonna solve another problem. Come on ! They are worthless !

I totally agree with you on this issue.

Wow, somebody finally agreed with me. Damn, now they will close the site.

:) I may not see eye to eye on everything with everyone but...

But we are the only guinusess here, all should worship and follow our insight's. And send money !~

---