//-->

Name:	Nawab Khalihari
Re:	TV & other media in Iraq: Shades of "Hello, VIIIIIIIETNAAM!"?

In response to:
Talk about a Kulture Klub!

Message:
It sounds like the mindless little pink-nosed bureaucratic pinheads are in control. Bureaucrats could screw up sex. Just wait till the U.N. takes over the world. UGH!! Iraqis should hear real Iraqi voices on Iraqi media. Very little should be censored, if anything at all. Send in some honest and competent pollsters and let'er rip!

When you look into your own faults maybe we'll have a better country. It's easy to blame the Clintons or the left, but impossible to see your own faults.

I bet if I asked you what your own party's faults are you couldn't come up with a single thing.

That's why we are not like our forefathers. It's takes a lot of wisdom to see the big picture.

Name:	Wanna Be Offended?
To:	forum
Re:	Anybody thin skinned ; one sided is offended by anything

In response to:
We know TV network has alleged American "atrocities", faked threat of shock, wires to scare, how about a recent cartoon in a quaint little alternative newspaper depicting 6 head bagged people and caption,"Cast of Friends TV should be electrocuted! And all six were wired in series and plugged in! Offensive!

Message:
TV has attempted to show Saddam atrocities, REAL atrocities but is censored by Blame America Firsters and Leftists. Locally some hand chopping was shown. Saddam forced surgeons to videotape their forced malpractice of hand removal for offending Saddam Hussein.Why not show some of that mind-bending material?

Name:

Brok

Message:
Kerry may delay nomination?

Name:	ET
To:	Wanna Be Offended?

In response to:
TV has attempted to show Saddam atrocities, REAL atrocities but is censored by Blame America Firsters and Leftists. Locally some hand chopping was shown. Saddam forced surgeons to videotape their forced malpractice of hand removal for offending Saddam Hussein.Why not show some of that mind-bending material?

Message:
What are you trying to prove here? Are you trying to tell us that we are not as bad as Saddam?

You are practicing Relative Morality: "We're not so bad compared to Saddam"

You can see why we are not like our forefathers. Our forefathers would weigh each act against an internal moral code.

Name:	John Kerry
Re:	Annulment

Message:
"I was married, before, I wasn't married."

Name:	ET
To:	PJ
Re:	RELATIVE MORALITY

In response to:
Conservatives, including most of the Founding Fathers, have always worried that the price of a democratic system would be a mediocre nation. But George Washington and William F. Buckley Jr. put together could not have foreseen, in their gloomiest moments, the rise of Clinton-style über-mediocrity -- with its soaring commonplaces, its pumped trifling, its platinum-grade triviality.

Message:
If I'd re-posted a message like you did I would have deleted the last paragraph where you blame everything on the Clintons and the Democrats.

You are living proof of it because you still can't see the fallacy in your post even after I pointed it out.

Name:

Patriot

In response to:
You are practicing Relative Morality: We're not so bad compared to Saddam

Message:
I don't care about relative morality or political correctness. The fact is that in our society just like in Iraq we have some people without the morals of others. Isn't relative morality the same whether we compare to hussiens morals or your morals? In other words when you expect so much from American soldiers, is that relative to the criminals which exist in the U.S. or the law abiding citizens. The Americans who broke the law should be punished but to continue to thrash the military and the Republican administration for crimes which are rampant throughout our society and then scream about relative morality when comparing our acts of some to a methodical administration of torture and violence since hussien took power I think is relative.

Name:	Wendy Patton
To:	Hillary fans

Message:
Kerry weighs delaying nomination

Dramatic move would give him access to more Updated: 4:58 p.m. ET May 21, 2004BOSTON - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry is considering delaying accepting his party’s nomination to gain time to raise and spend private contributions and lessen President Bush’s multimillion-dollar financial advantage, campaign officials said Friday.

The Democratic Party would still hold its national convention in Boston at the end of July. If Kerry were to delay acceptance of the nomination for a month, it would help even the financial playing field with Bush, who will be nominated at the Republican National Convention in New York five weeks later.

Kerry’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee are still considering the specifics of such a plan. Convention delegates could be asked to gather at a later time for a vote. Another option is holding the delegate vote at the convention but having Kerry put off his official acceptance of the vote, DNC spokeswoman Debra DeShong said, adding that there may be other possibilities. Kerry and Bush are each expected to accept $75 million in full federal funding for their general election campaigns. Once each is nominated, he will be limited to spending the government money and can no longer raise or spend private contributions on the campaign.

“We are looking at this and many other options very seriously because we won’t fight with one hand behind our back,” Kerry spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said Friday. No timetable has been set for a decision, she said. Cutter said other options being considered include having the DNC or local and state Democratic parties raise more money to support Kerry’s candidacy. Kerry would have no control over much of the money raised by the party. By law, the DNC can coordinate up to roughly $16 million to $18 million in spending with Kerry’s campaign in the general election.

Both candidates skipped public funds in primaries Kerry and Bush skipped public financing for the primary-election season, enabling them to spend as much as they wish until their parties officially nominate them at conventions this summer.

Since becoming the party’s presumptive nominee in early March, Kerry has broken Democratic fund-raising and spending records. He raised roughly $31 million last month alone, pushing his campaign total to a Democratic record $117 million.

Kerry started May with $28 million in the bank, far less than Bush’s $72 million but still a Democratic record. Bush has raised more than $200 million so far.

The crucial question, should Kerry try to stop the clock from ticking on his $75 million general-election financing, is when Kerry is considered nominated in the eyes of the Federal Election Commission. Is it when delegates vote? Or when Kerry accepts their vote? The FEC and courts have traditionally deferred to party rules to determine how a candidate is nominated, said Larry Noble, former FEC general counsel. The FEC provides the general-election financing after the candidate is nominated according to the party’s rules.

It’s possible the DNC could change its nominating procedures before the convention, such as deciding to have delegates vote later by mail or by proxy. “I don’t see anything in the general election campaign laws that would stop the party from changing the nomination dates,” said Noble, now head of the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. However, delaying the nomination could have implications for the roughly $14 million in government financing the DNC received to hold its nominating convention, he said.

Ramifications for convention financing? The convention is defined as when the nomination takes place, Noble said. Having delegates vote in Boston, but Kerry put off his acceptance, might not pass muster, he said.

“They would have to come up with an argument that would basically look at the convention as continuing past the convention dates,” Noble said. “Could they do it? It’s possible. In the end it would be up to the FEC and possibly the courts, if it’s challenged.”

The Kerry campaign and DNC would be wise to ask the FEC’s advice before trying to change the nomination process, said FEC spokesman Bob Biersack, adding that the commission has not faced such a question before.

Bush campaign spokesman Terry Holt said throwing a DNC convention with government money only to officially nominate Kerry later could amount to a “bait-and-switch tactic on the American taxpayer.”

“Maybe they’ve found a way to manipulate the federal law in such a way as to avoid that, but fundamentally this is about John Kerry thinking the rules that apply to everyone else don’t apply to him,” Holt said.

If Kerry is nominated in late July as the party planned, he will have to make his $75 million check last a month longer than Bush will. Because the Republican convention is timed later than the Democratic gathering, Bush would have about a month more to raise money from private contributors than Kerry.

When the Democratic Party scheduled its convention, it didn’t know it would have a nominee who opted out of public financing for the primaries and the $45 million spending limit the program imposes through the spring and summer. Remembering the past

At the time, the party anticipated it would face the same situation it has in previous elections: a nominee who emerged from the primaries hovering at the spending limit and had to limp through several months awaiting the convention and the campaign-sustaining government financing.

Interest groups running ads in the presidential race are keeping a close eye on Kerry’s decision. The nation’s campaign finance law bans them from using corporate or union money on ads mentioning Kerry a month before he is officially nominated, with the same rules applying to ads mentioning Bush in advance of his party convention.

If Kerry delays his nomination, that could give outside groups more times to run ads for and against him using the so-called soft money, said David Keating, executive director of the anti-tax group Club for Growth, which opposes many of Kerry’s policies and supports many of Bush’s.

“It would be a really strange situation if the 30-day window closed 30 days before the nomination night and then they decided to kick it down the road a couple weeks,” Keating said. “It would be a ridiculous situation.”

© 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. MORE FROM POLITICS

Name:	The Devil
To:	Leftist

Message:
You make me mad and the last twenty forums will go pooooof!

Name:	ET
To:	Patriot

In response to:
The Americans who broke the law should be punished but to continue to thrash the military

Message:
When did I thrash the military?

I have a son-in-law, and father of my three precious grandsons, flying his plane into Baghdad almost every day. And every time he lands and takes off they are getting shot at. And when he gets out of his plane and into a helicopter to take him somewhere in Iraq they are getting shot at all the time.

And you are accusing me of thrashing the military? Where do you get this information? When did you read that I was thrashing the military? I never thrashed the military. I never even thrashed those that abused the prisoners because I know they would not be doing that unless they were given instructions to do that. I want to thrash the right people who gave the orders. I am not going to thrash a little 18-year old girl who works at McDonalds.

So please point me to a post where I thrashed the military or apologize if you have the morality to do that.

Name:	Scotty
To:	Go Hillary
Re:	http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4565073

Message:
Take this poll and vote for hillary....http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4565073

Name:	Ginger Delong
To:	ET

In response to:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4565073

Message:
Could you please link this for the forum

Name:	Tom Harkin Up better times
To:	forum
Re:	My neck veins stick out,I'm soooo mad!

In response to:
Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin would, it seems bite off Donald Rumsfeld's old Bleep and spit it out. "I think Rumsfeld should resign and if he won't resign I'll resign for him and sign his name to the resignation! If Rumsfeld won't resign the President should resign him and the horse I'd lynch him with"

Message:
"I'm so mad at Rumsfeld I could, could, well I'm going mad just thinking about that Rumsfeld. He should resign and maybe I'll hold my breath and turn BLUE/ until Rumsfeld resigns, gerrrrr, I'm mad!" said the blustered, flustered obese Tom Harkin. "And I'll vote for that "Get Fatty Walking In the Woods Bill" too! GRRRRR, I'm mad!~

Name:	Jay Leno, the great late nite comedian
To:	forum
Re:	I'm with you, Tom, that Rumsfeld, in fact all Republicans should resign!

In response to:
"Hell, I'd quit the Tonight Show if Rumsfeld would resign, err, I'd think errno I want that Rumsfeld to resign . He's responsible for what gays do in the military, and sadists, too. And I'm gonna trash Bush for the first two and a half minutes of my monologue for that just like I always do!

Message:
"We're both mad as hell, we just went mad as HELL, and we're not gonna take it anymore! We're both gonna turn it down. I'll look for headlines about people with Bush in their names and make fun of them! GRRRRR, I'm GROWLING MAD WITH YOU Representative Harkin. I'll join you in throwing poop when Bush shows up in your state. You grow a lot of s and they all poop!!"

Name:	Andy
To:	Esme

Message:
Have a great weekend...

Name:	Bugs Bunny
To:	Lord of Flies

Message:

Hi LORD OF FLIES

Name:	Patriot
To:	ET

In response to:
So please point me to a post where I thrashed the military or apologize if you have the morality to do that.

Message:
I do apologize. But only because you jumped to the conclusion that I was saying you thrashed the military. I know you have a relative didn't know two who are serving. But I apologize for wording my post to sound like I was talking about you, I was not.

I was trying to make a point simply about the perspective of morality, and trying to say you are holding all Americans to your morality, versus th true morality which exists in the U.S. Similar to your post earlier where you claimed that you held a higher level for Smedley. In relation to what? Again I apologize, certainly was not meaning to sound like I meant you were thrashing the military. I am truly sorry!

Name:	Patriot
To:	Et

In response to:
The Americans who broke the law should be punished but to continue to thrash the military and the Republican administration for crimes which are rampant throughout our society and then scream about relative morality when comparing our acts of some to a methodical administration of torture and violence since hussien took power I think is relative.

Message:
This wording does infer me linking you to thrashing the military. I was refering to the media and the democrats which are milking this for all it was worth. I should have worded differently.

I am sorry

Name:	ET
To:	Patriot

Message:
I accept your apology. People who can apologize definitely have a higher morality.

Patriot, when I said that I held Smedley to a higher morality, I was just being facetious. Smedley was complaining that I was bashing him and not some left-winger, and since Smedley is always trying to trump some poor leftie on a morality issue, I was thought it was a good opportunity to hold him to the morality he he tries to wear in order what he would do. I was expecting that it would take the wind out of his sails.

Name:	Phillip Upchurch Combo
To:	ET
Re:	They weren't perfect, either.

In response to:
You can see why we are not like our forefathers. Our forefathers would weigh each act against an internal moral code

Message:
That's OK just as long as the Village pre-approves this "moral code". But if I hear any of that "God" business, I'll blister your bottom till you Can't Sit Down!!!!

Name:	ET
To:	Magpie

In response to:
I think you've gone nuts. You have questioned my sanity and now I question your intelligence. Your victim schpeel about how the right has divided this country is the last straw. the rightwingers around here have time and time again pointed out that the liberal lefts unholy alliance with teacher unions, victim obsessed femnazis, trial lawyers, abortion fanatics, eco weenies, the homo nutballs, hollywood schlockmeisters, flynt type porn peddlers and so on have cheapened life and dumbed kids down so that they assimilate willingly into the collective hillary village.

Message:
So you want me to tell you a bedtime story about how it's all the liberal's fault, while the sweet, compassionate, moral conservatives are just peachy?

Name:	ET
To:	Phillip Upchurch Combo

In response to:
That's OK just as long as the Village pre-approves this "moral code". But if I hear any of that "God" business, I'll blister your bottom till you Can't Sit Down!!!!

Message:
I'll settle for any reasonable moral code that most sane people will agree on. Anything but Relative Morality.

Relative Morality is destroying this country's morals. People use it without thinking -- like it's the natural thing to do.

I get especially annoyed when the so-called God-fearing folk come in here and use it. It's hypocritical to pretend to be religious on the one hand while excusing one's behavior through by resorting to Relative Morality. I always wonder what in the heck they learned in church or Sunday School.

Name:	ET
To:	Magpie

In response to:
so you tell me what the right has done to divide the country except attacking the clintons. If there is anything else, i haven;t heard it from you

Message:
An eight-year war on the Clintons was more than enough to divide this country. I don't need anything else.

Name:	Fat Guy second guessing on Moyers
To:	Public TV
Re:	It's preposterous that we'd consider NOT abiding by Geneva Convention

In response to:
We should abide by the Geneva Convention and blah blah blah

Message:
The Geneva Convention did not apply to Wars before the Geneva Convention such as Indian Wars, White Russians Versus the Russian Bolshevics and Russian Red Communists. Consequently, the Reds put to death all surrendered White Russians (A Political Group not necessarily Caucasians and placed all their women folk in houses of prostitution where most quickly died.) Massacres of 30,000 Polish Prisoners by Russians during World War II, nor did it apply to the ovens where Jews were massacred by the hundreds of thousands, nor more recently to torture sport places frequented by Saddam Hussein and his two sons.

Why would a powerful country at war (The USA) tie one hand behind itself when the wild-eyed Muslim enemy lies, cheats, tortures, beheads, kidnaps, and lies awake at night dreaming up dirty, nasty deeds to do to Americans anywhere in the world Americans and other peace-loving peoples, such as Phillipinos, are found?

One can be a sport when participating in sports contests in which all parties observe the same set of rules, but in a no-holds-barred-war-to-the-death one does not win with pulled punches and kind words. Fighting an enemy one his terms and with his weopons is both a cruel joke to one's own people and those formerly enslaved by the enemy. The Muslim enemy does not hesitate to bring women and children to a training/invasion camp 10 miles out in the middle of the desert and fire upon US helicopters. Then when those put in harm's way are indeed killed and injured, declaring shamelessly that "It was a wedding!"

These are the same type people who loaded bloated, smelly dead Muslims onto a jet airliner and tried to ram a US Aircraft Carrier in the Mediterranian, then tried to claim the US military had shot down a commercial jet full of live people. Many in the Arab world bought the story, hook, line, and sinker even after it was proven in the world court that most of the dozens of \corpses had been dead for 7 days or more before the jetliner was fired upon in the carrier's airspace. Of course, had the ruse been successful, and the jetliner had sunk the carrier killing thousands of US sailors, it would have been a "terrible accident" for the aircraft as well as the carrier.!

Name:	Da Nuze
To:	ET
Re:	Press can't let abuse story go

Message:
By Jennifer Harper

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Accounts and graphic photos of Iraqi prisoner abuse persist in the press despite the fact that the story has run its course.

The world already knows salient details of the prisoner humiliation and nudity, the causes of the abuse are under official investigation, and the courts-martial have begun. Yet, the caterwaul in the press against the American military and the war in Iraq continue.

"U.S. faces growing fear of failure," noted one recent Washington Post headline.

ABC was the first to air yet another set of photos — these showing two U.S. soldiers grinning next to the body of an Iraqi at the Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad. Al Arabiya, an Arabic broadcaster, also aired the photos of Army Spc. Charles A. Graner and Spc. Sabrina D. Harman — both facing a court-martial for prisoner abuse.

As usual, the source of the photos remained unidentified. ABC billed them as "an exclusive" and noted that the soldiers were "posing over the body of a detainee who was allegedly beaten to death by CIA or civilian interrogators in the prison's showers."

Positive human-interest accounts about the armed forces are rare. The press tends to ignore battlefield vignettes from military news services, which could offer an expanded perspective to the public. For example, 30 U.S. airmen and soldiers delivered school supplies and toys — gifts from American children — to an Iraqi village on Monday. Yesterday, Air Force medical teams airlifted a critically ill Iraqi infant and her mother to an Ohio hospital for treatment.

The news focus is elsewhere.

Earlier this week, Reuters news service announced that three of its "journalists" — actually two Iraqi cameramen and a driver under contract — had been beaten and taunted by Army paratroopers in January.

But an Army investigation released yesterday cleared the soldiers of charges and categorized the incident as "a closed case."

The report noted that "the soldiers clearly believed that these same Iraqis had attacked them previously" and pronounced that the charges of humiliation made by the Iraqis against the soldiers "are not credible."

Tim Graham of the Media Research Center (MRC) noted yesterday that the "gay marriage story" overtook the prisoner abuse story in the press, but only for a day. ,p> "This abuse story is just not going away. It's still the first topic on most network news," Mr. Graham said. "And there's strong focus on the court-martials, on the bad apples — it's as if those troops represent the military at large, as far as the media is concerned. That is very discouraging."

The center has been following "the bias problem" among broadcasters who use the abuse story to build a case against the war in Iraq and the Bush administration. As a sample, the group tracked abuse stories from April 29 through May 11 on NBC and found that the network aired 58 stories on the abuse in that period.

The MRC also found, however, that in the past year, NBC had aired only five stories on mass graves found in Iraq from the Saddam Hussein era.

Name:

TE

In response to:
I'll settle for any reasonable moral code that most sane people will agree on. Anything but Relative Morality. Relative Morality is destroying this country's morals. People use it without thinking -- like it's the natural thing to do. I get especially annoyed when the so-called God-fearing folk come in here and use it. It's hypocritical to pretend to be religious on the one hand while excusing one's behavior through by resorting to Relative Morality. I always wonder what in the heck they learned in church or Sunday School.

Message:
Yeah it was horrible the way they attacked Reagan for eight years...

Name:

Phillip Upchurch Combo

In response to:
I'll settle for any reasonable moral code that most sane people will agree on. Anything but Relative Morality.

Message:
Since NO ONE on earth is perfect, isn't ALL morality relative?

Name:	Tlaloc
To:	ET

In response to:
Relative Morality??

Message:
Recognizing that Stalin was a murderous fiend does not make a pharisee of me!

Name:	Draft Her!
To:	Democrats
Re:	Time to get serious! The Revolution is NOW!

In response to:
Kerry’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee are still considering the specifics of such a plan. Convention delegates could be asked to gather at a later time for a vote. Another option is holding the delegate vote at the convention but having Kerry

Message:
What a bunch of weenies! They need to kick Kerry's butt out of the party and draft Hillary clinton. Declare a national emergency and draft her. Nothing on earth is as important as getting her in there. We must save our democracy for Change!

Name:	Why?
Re:	Why not?

Message:
{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{} The Depression didn't hit us too hard at first. Poppa was with the phone company, and people wouldn't stop talking anymore than Roosevelt would, or so he said.

Poppa came home to our house on Delahanty street in a new Buick one fine day in the late spring of 1932. I was sitting on the porch eating peanut butter and crackers with my brother and two sisters when he wheeled into our drive. We were puzzled by the unfamiliar car at first, then our puzzlement became amazement when we spotted Poppa behind the wheel, grinning back at us from ear to ear.

The car was a magnificent thing. It was a brilliant, deep blue with black fenders, gleaming brightwork, and sticky black tires on lovely pinstriped wire-spoke wheels. The inside looked like a palace to us. All of it new and fresh and perfect! As we approached it, we could see our faces reflected in the rich, lambent paintwork. It smelled wonderful, and it seemed to glow in the sunlight. The motor made a low, soothing sound like the meat cooler at the grocery. I remember that we all climbed into the car, and I stood on the carpeted floor with my brother behind the divan-like front seat, clutching the little rope that ran across the seat-back. Mama was wearing a hat, as if we were going to church. I could see over the seat and out over the long, gleaming hood to what I thought was a sparkling angel perched there, beckoning us onward.

The car moved smoothly and quietly, so unlike our old one. Poppa drove toward the river and accelerated out onto the Georges Sewickly bridge. As the ironwork rushed past the open windows, I felt as if we were flying through the sweet spring air. Then Poppa touched a button beneath the dash, and in a moment, music filled the car! A radio!

Name:	WigWorld
To:	Scotty

In response to:
It's just the beggining! Don't you like my legs? Oh, gosh! What should I do? Guess, just have fun! I'll tell you my life story! Some day, I'll write memoirs ;-) I have decided, I want to be a very very very famous movie drag queen actress! I just love dancing and singing!Hm, what should I do? I'll just pose like a professional model;-) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Message:
Get yourself a wig, a spring-steel corset, and a karaoke outfit and go for it. You will need to put in some serious time in the women's wear department of a good upmarket store to learn how women use clothing, appliances, and make-up to project the look and aura that they want to project. It's amazing what some really plain women can accomplish. You can learn to do it, too. It's not easy. You must do it correctly or you will simply look pathetic or even ridiculous. A good drag queen is not ridiculous. Divine was not ridiculous. He was an artist.

Name:	ET
To:	Magpie

In response to:
that's what i thought. it's all the rights fault. you need to check YOUR relative morality. they didn't bring anything on themselves. the lying and finger pointing had nothing to do with it. I see. you're a fool.

Message:
Oh well.. have it your way... The right were very respectful of our Democratic President and our First Lady, Hillary Clinton. They never declared an 8-year war on them. Everything was peaceful between the right and the left. As you can see on all our old forums there was no war between the right and the left.

The Clintons were free to run the country without having to fight off the right-wing war all the time. That's why the Clintons were so successful and we had the greatest world economy ever. I must give full credit to the Republicans for being well behaved and allowing our President to do it wonderful job.

Richard Mellon Scaife, the billionaire Republican wielding power from the shadows, did not pump millions into a right-wing anti-Clinton conspiracy, and bribe the American Spectator whores to make up anti-Clinton lies. He did not hire a private eye to dig up dirt. He did not pump millions more into other anti-Clinton groups.

This did not set off a blast of hateful right-wingers who relentlessly attacked liberals every day all day. If you read it in the old forum archives it is not true. The right would never seek to overthrow a popular, elected president of the opposition. This would be tantamount to treason and the right would never do that.

Name:	Daddy
To:	ET

In response to:
Oh well.. have it your way... The right were very respectful of our Democratic President and our First Lady, Hillary Clinton. They never declared an 8-year war on them. Everything was peaceful between the right and the left. As you can see on all our old forums there was no war between the right and the left. The Clintons were free to run the country without having to fight off the right-wing war all the time. That's why the Clintons were so successful and we had the greatest world economy every. I must give full credit to the Republicans for being well behaved and allowing our President to ...

Message:
So whats the problem today in the socialist camp?

Name:	ET
To:	8 x 8

In response to:
The Clintons are corrupt. That's no one's fault but theirs.

Message:
Please provide proof of Hillary Clinton's corrupt practices. I don't want a Free Republic version, I only want what was proved during the War Against the Clintons 1992 - 2000, in the $70 million investigation by right-wing Special Presecutors: Kenn Starr and Robert Ray.

Name:	Socialist Camp
To:	Daddy

In response to:
So whats the problem today in the socialist camp?

Message:
We socialists are very upset that you right-wing dingbats bungled the war in Iraq. We have a problem with losing 900 brave soldiers, billions of dollars, and our moral authority.

Unfortunately you guys on the right don't see this as a problem.

Which, of course, begs the question: If you guys on the right do not see this as a problem, what would be a problem? Clinton getting a blowjob? Now that's a real problem. We need a total upheaval in this country to put that right. We need to teach those two a lesson they'll never forget. Nothing less than a 8-year War Against the Liberals will do.

Name:	Mel Zuber
To:	Go Girl
Re:	04

Message:
Hillary Clinton/John Kerry Ticket!

Name:	Mel Zuber
To:	Editor

Message:
You never see any real good articles about hillarys good work in the news rags.Im due for a good article.If anyone has one please post it.

Name:

xx

Message:

Name:

xx

Message:

Name:

Lies vs Lies

Message:

Name:

fudd the ghost

Message:
Hello forum! And salute to hrc forum old timers.

I will make this short and to the point.

Readers, we are at war. It could be argued that this war is as important to world peace and freedom as was the first and second world wars. It is a battle long overdue.

As this election gets closer I ask you to consider the only issue that really matters. Who will fight radical Islam the best. Which side will make decisions based on what is in our best interest rather than how we will be judged by others.

If we fail to put our full effort into fighting radical islam, we will come to regret it.

Name:	HUAA
To:	John McCain/Russ Feingold
Re:	Yer stupid law ain't werkin

In response to:
Loooooooooooooop-Holes................

Message:
Kerry to use Delay Tactics 

Will these liberals stop at nothing to gain control of power?

Name:	Bill
Re:	We got files on YOU too

Message:

TOTALLY SAN FRAN
17 Years Of San Francisco Liberalism

THE FACTS ABOUT REPRESENTATIVE NANCY PELOSI (D-CA)

PELOSI IS WRONG ON NATIONAL SECURITY

ü      Pelosi Voted Against Persian Gulf War In 1991 And Liberation Of Iraq In 2002.

ü      Pelosi Questioned Readiness Of American Troops.

ü      Pelosi Prefers Increased Domestic Spending To Increased Defense Spending.

ü      Pelosi Doesn’t Consider War On Terror A Real War.

ü      Pelosi Voted Against Creating Department Of Homeland Security.

PELOSI FAVORS HIGHER TAXES AND BIG GOVERNMENT SPENDING

ü      Pelosi Doesn’t Believe Tax Cuts Stimulate Economic Growth.

ü      Pelosi Voted Against Both 2001 And 2003 Bush Tax Cuts.

ü      Pelosi Voted Against Welfare Reform And Called It “War On The Poor.”

ü      Pelosi Voted For Clinton’s 1993 Tax Hike.

ü      Pelosi Voted At Least Four Times Against Balanced Budget Amendment.

SAN FRANCISCO LIBERAL, OUT OF TOUCH WITH MAINSTREAM VALUES

ü      Pelosi Voted Against Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA).

ü      Pelosi Has Consistently Voted Against Banning Partial-Birth Abortion.

ü      Pelosi Is Hostile To Gun Owners’ Rights.

ü      Pelosi Opposes Death Penalty.

ü      Pelosi Voted Against Banning Flag Burning.

PELOSI IN DEPTH

WRONG ON NATIONAL SECURITY

Pelosi Voted Against Persian Gulf War In 1991,
And Criticized Then-President Bush

Pelosi Voted Against Use Of Force In Persian Gulf.  (H. J. Res. 77, CQ Vote #9:  Passed 250-183:  R 164-3; D 86-179; I 0-1, 1/12/91, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Pelosi Believed If U.S. Troops Were In Saudi Arabia, They Would Never Leave Because Of Oil Companies.  “‘Let’s hope we don’t put troops in Saudi Arabia who will never leave because it would be in the interest of the oil companies,’ said Representative Nancy Pelosi, also a San Francisco Democrat.”  (Larry Liebert, “Washington Perspective,” California Journal, 10/1/90)

Pelosi Claimed President Bush (41) Coddled Dictators.  SEN. MCCONNELL: “With regard to coddling dictators, you can ask Saddam Hussein. George Bush doesn’t coddle dictators.”  REP. PELOSI: “He coddled them. That’s why we had to go into the Persian Gulf War.”  (CNN’s “Live News,” 10/1/92)

Pelosi Was Against Persian Gulf War And Even Joined In Lawsuit Against President Bush (41).  “Stark and Pelosi almost always come down on the same side of those matters. Both vocally opposed the Persian Gulf War, joining 43 other House Democrats in a lawsuit in 1990 that charged President Bush lacked congressional authority to build up military forces in the region.” (Jim Puzzanghera, “Political Allies Split Over Balkan War Wedge In House,” San Jose Mercury News, 5/10/99)

Pelosi Voted Against 2002 Use Of Force In Iraq,
And Was “Devastated” When War Began

Pelosi Voted Against Use Of Force In Iraq.  (H. J. Res. 114, CQ Vote #455:  Passed 296-133:  R 215-6; D 81-126; I 0-1, 10/10/02, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Fought To Water Down Support For War And President.  “The debate over the wording [of the House resolution to support the troops and President Bush] was much more contentious in the House, where Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi … unsuccessfully fought into the late evening to tone down support for Bush and delete other passages opposed by antiwar Democrats, congressional sources said.”  (Jim VandeHei, “Hill Resolutions Supporting Bush, Troops Are Approved,” The Washington Post, 3/21/03)

Pelosi Was “Devastated” On Day After Iraq War Began.  “‘I am devastated,’ Ms. Pelosi recalls saying [on the morning after bombing began in Baghdad], ‘by the fact that we are going to war.’” (Sheryl Gay Stolberg, “With Democrats Divided On War, Pelosi Faces Leadership Test,” The New York Times, 4/1/03)

Inability To Stop War One Of Her “Great Disappointments.”  “‘I consider it one of the great disappointments of my public life that I couldn’t use my influence to stop this war,’ Pelosi said somberly as the first wave of shock and awe began …”  (Marc Sandalow, “Pelosi Picks Her Way Through Brambles Of War,” The San Francisco Chronicle, 3/30/03)

Pelosi Called Resolution To Support Troops “Bitter Pill.”  “As to the resolution in support of the troops, Ms. Pelosi regards it as ‘a bitter pill.’ Ever the pragmatist, she delivered a speech in opposition to its wording, then voted in favor.”  (Sheryl Gay Stolberg, “With Democrats Divided On War, Pelosi Faces Leadership Test,” The New York Times, 4/1/03) 

Response To Fall Of Saddam Hussein’s Regime: U.S. Could Have “Brought Down That Statue For A Lot Less.”  “In a direct response to the televised scene that thrilled the world, Pelosi said: ‘We could have probably brought down that statue for a lot less.’”  (Editorial, “Pelosi For The Democrats,” New York Post, 4/12/03) 

Pelosi Suggested Troops Were Well Prepared,
Then Said Opposite Five Days Later

Pelosi Said She Visited Troops In Iraq And Called Them “Best-Trained,” “Best-Equipped” And “Best-Led Military Force.”  “Three weeks ago in the Persian Gulf, I visited our courageous Americans now risking their lives in Iraq … They are the best-trained, the best-equipped and the best-led military force the world has ever seen.”  (Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Democrat Radio Address, 3/22/03)

Just Days Later, Pelosi Said Troops Were Not As Prepared As They Could Have Been.  “Mrs. Pelosi said that based on her impression from a visit with troops in the Gulf region a few weeks ago, she had a sense they were not as prepared as they could have been. ‘One of the impressions I brought home was that there was less knowledge of the tactics and the capability of our opponents than I would have been comfortable with,’ she said.”  (Stephen Dinan, “Democrat Leaders Moving To Support War In Progress,” The Washington Times, 3/27/03)

Yet Pelosi Voted Against War Supplemental That Provided Support To Troops

Pelosi Voted Against Both Passage And Conference Report On Bill Appropriating $87 Billion In Supplemental Spending For Military Operations And Reconstruction In Iraq And Afghanistan.  (H.R. 3289, CQ Vote #562:  Passed 303-125:  R 220-6; D 83-118; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 3289, CQ Vote #601:  Adopted 298-121:  R 216-5; D 82-115; I 0-1, 10/31/03, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Chose Hatred Of President Over Success In Iraq.  “[T]he Nancy Pelosi Democrats ... voted against Paul Bremer’s $87 billion plan for the reconstruction of Iraq. … [I]f Bush is for it, they’re against it. ... [I]f Pelosi’s arguments had carried the day, our troops in Iraq would be reading this morning about the death of the Bremer plan and the ruination of our efforts to rebuild Iraq.”  (David Brooks, Op-Ed, “The Good, The Bad, The Ugly,” The New York Times, 10/18/03)

Opposition To $87 Billion Package Sends Wrong Signal To Terrorists.  “Saddam Hussein would be jubilant in Pelosi’s Iraq. He has long argued that America is a decadent country that will buckle at the first sign of trouble. If the Pelosi Democrats had won [Friday’s] vote, the Saddam Doctrine would be enshrined in every terrorist cave and dictator’s palace around the world: kill some Americans and watch the empire buckle.”  (David Brooks, Op-Ed, “The Good, The Bad, The Ugly,” The New York Times, 10/18/03)

Pelosi Democrats’ Opposition To Reconstruction Aid Would Leave “Power Vacuum” In Post-U.S. Iraq.  “[I]n Pelosi’s Iraq, there would be little money for children’s hospitals, jails, clean water and schools. In Pelosi’s Iraq, everyone would begin preparing for the post-U.S. power vacuum.”  (David Brooks, Op-Ed, “The Good, The Bad, The Ugly,” The New York Times, 10/18/03)

Pelosi Voted Against Anti-Terrorism Measures

In 1996, Pelosi Voted Against Expanding Federal Powers To Combat Terrorism.  The bill would “make it easier to deport foreign terrorists, bar foreign terrorists from fundraising in the United States, make it a crime to knowingly provide support to terrorist groups, increase the regulation of human biological pathogens that could be used in chemical weapons,” and “increase the penalties for acts of foreign and domestic terrorism,” among other things. (S. 735, CQ Vote #126:  Adopted 293-133:  R 188-46; D 105-86; I 0-1, 4/18/96, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Pelosi Said Homeland Security Legislation Took “Giant Step Backwards” And Was “Exercise In Futility.”  “Minority Whip Pelosi said the bill [to create a Homeland Security Department] takes a ‘giant step backwards’ by ignoring several suggestions made by House committees – and that rushing to produce the bill was an ‘exercise in futility’ … The statement startled Republicans and set a combative tone that continued through the early part of the markup.”  (“Partisan Tone Is Struck At Homeland Security Markup,” National Journal’s CongressDaily, 7/19/02)

Pelosi Resisted Homeland Security Bill Because It Gave Too Much Power To Executive Branch.  “[Pelosi] has been a staunch critic of war with Iraq, leading half the House Democrats in voting against the war-powers resolution approved by Congress last month. Unlike many of her colleagues, she also fought the massive tax-cut package, and resisted the Homeland Security bill on the grounds that it gave too much power to the executive.” (Rupert Cornwell, “Liberal Poised To Be First Woman To Lead Party In Congress,” The Independent, 11/11/02)

Pelosi Voted Against Creation Of Homeland Security Department.  (H.R. 5005, CQ Vote #367:  Passed 295-132:  R 207-10; D 88-120; I 0-2, 7/26/02, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Pelosi Flip-Flopped On PATRIOT Act

Pelosi Voted For PATRIOT Act.  (H.R. 3162, CQ Vote #398:  Motion Agreed To 357-66:  R 211-3; D 145-62; I 1-1, 10/24/01, Pelosi Voted Yea)

Now Pelosi Says PATRIOT Act Is Being Misused By Justice Department.  “As we protect and defend the American people against terrorism, we must protect and defend the Constitution and the civil liberties that define our democracy. When Congress voted for the Patriot Act, it was clearly understood that the Patriot Act was intended to combat terrorism. Now that we have had time to assess how the Patriot Act is being used, it is clear that Attorney General John Ashcroft has misused the Patriot Act for investigations that have nothing to do with terrorism. We should not simply extend it, but we should correct it to prevent abuses of our civil liberties.”  (“Rep. Pelosi Issues Statement On Safe Act,” States News Service, 3/8/04)

But Fellow Californian Senator Dianne Feinstein And Delaware’s Senator Joe Biden Defend PATRIOT Act.  “Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), speaking at the first of several oversight hearings on terrorism legislation, called criticism of the Patriot Act ‘ill-informed and overblown’ and commended prosecutors’ work in some terrorism cases. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) mounted a strong defense of the Patriot Act, saying she believes there is ‘substantial uncertainty and perhaps some ignorance about what this bill actually does do and how it has been employed.’”  (Susan Schmidt, “Patriot Act Misunderstood, Senators Say,” The Washington Post, 10/22/03)

Feinstein Says ACLU Has No Instances Of Actual Abuse By PATRIOT Act.  “I have never had a single abuse of the PATRIOT Act reported to me. My staff e-mailed the ACLU and asked them for instances of actual abuses. They e-mailed back and said they had none.”  (Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D-CA], Committee On The Judiciary, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 10/21/03)

And Pelosi Considers Fight Against Terrorism “Struggle,” Not War

Pelosi Does Not Consider War On Terror A Real War.  “‘I don’t really consider ourselves at war,’ Pelosi said. ‘We’re in a struggle against terrorism throughout the world, and we stand with the president in that fight.’ But that does not bestow ‘some kind of mantle on the president that he can’t be subject to criticism.’”  (Miles Benson, “Democrats Show Greater Audacity In Criticizing Bush,” Newhouse News Service, 5/6/02)

Pelosi Thinks Working To Alleviate Global Poverty Will Alleviate “Fury Of Despair” And Prevent More Terrorist Violence.  “Newly elected House Minority Whip Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), seeing that the president’s budgetary focus is on defense, has called for more international aid to help combat terrorism. ‘The budget provides some foreign-aid investments that will make the world more stable and boost the economy of developing nations,’ she said. ‘However, I am disappointed that the administration has not provided adequate resources to strengthen our foreign assistance. In light of the horrific events of Sept. 11, it is more important than ever to address the root causes of instability in the world by working to alleviate poverty so that the fury of despair will not provoke more violence.’”  (Sheila R. Cherry, “Will Bush Find Budget Balance?” Insight On The News, 3/4/02)

FAVORS HIGHER TAXES, BIG GOVERNMENT SPENDING

Pelosi Often Votes Against Tax Cuts And For Tax Hikes

Pelosi Voted Against 2001 And 2003 Bush Tax Cuts.  (H.R. 1836, Roll Call #149: Passed 240-154: R 211-0; D 28-153; I 1-1, 5/26/01, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #118: Passed 230-197: R 216-0; D 13-196; I 1-1, 5/16/01, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 2, Roll Call #225: Passed 231-200: R 224-1; D 7-198; I 0-1, 5/23/03, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 2, CQ Vote #182: Passed 222-203: R 218-3; D 4-199; I 0-1, 5/9/03, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Pelosi Claimed Tax Cuts Do Not Stimulate Economic Growth.  “California Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the new House Democratic whip, urged more attention to domestic expansion. The president ‘seems to think the best way to revive the economy is to give more tax breaks to those who don’t need them and dole out lucrative incentives that do not stimulate economic growth.’”  (Judy Keen and Laurence McQuillan, “Country Is At ‘Unique Moment Of Opportunity,’ President Says,” USA Today, 1/30/02)

Pelosi Was One Of Only 27 To Vote Against Tax Credits In Depressed Urban And Rural Areas.  Pelosi voted against a bill “that would provide tax credits and economic incentives to encourage investment and job creation in economically depressed urban and rural communities.”  (H.R. 4923, CQ Vote #430:  Motion Agreed To 394-27:  R 214-1; D 179-25; I 1-1, 7/25/00, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Pelosi Voted For Clinton’s 1993 Tax Hike.  (H.R. 2264, CQ Vote #406:  Adopted 218-216:  R 0-175; D 217-41; I 1-0, 8/5/93, Pelosi Voted Yea)

Pelosi Has Voted At Least Four Times Against Balanced Budget Amendment.  (H. J. Res. 268, CQ Vote #238:  Rejected 279-150:  R 169-5; D 110-145, 7/17/90, Pelosi Voted Nay; H. J. Res. 290, CQ Vote #187:  Rejected 280-153:  R 164-2; D 116-150; I 0-1, 6/11/92, Pelosi Voted Nay; H. J. Res. 103, CQ Vote #65:  Motion Rejected 271-153:  R 172-1; D 99-151; I 0-1, 3/17/94, Pelosi Voted Nay; H. J. Res. 1, CQ Vote #51:  Passed 300-132:  R 228-2; D 72-129; I 0-1, 1/26/95, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Pelosi Prefers More Spending On Social
Programs Than Tax Relief For Americans

Pelosi Called Welfare Reform “War On The Poor” And “Attack” On Women And Children.  “‘What they are doing is declaring war on the poor people of America,’ said Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, of the Republican welfare reform efforts. ‘They have given a new meaning to putting women and children first, because they have put them first in their attack.’”  (David Phinney, “Bay Area Democrats Blast Welfare Reform,” States News Service, 2/23/95)

Pelosi Voted Against Welfare Reform In Both 1995 And 1996.  (H.R. 4, CQ Vote #269:  Passed 234-199:  R 225-5; D 9-193; I 0-1, 3/24/95, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 3734, CQ Vote #383:  Adopted 328-101:  R 230-2; D 98-98; I 0-1, 7/31/96, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Pelosi Voted Against Overhauling Public Housing.  (H.R. 4194, CQ Vote #296:  Adopted 230-181:  R 215-4; D 15-176; I 0-1, 7/17/98, Pelosi Voted Nay)

In 1995, Pelosi Was Upset At Thought Of Cutting Social Programs And Said American Families Do Not Want Tax Cuts.  “‘The extreme Republican cuts are the equivalent of wiping out all state spending for one-and-a-quarter of the next seven years.’ The $72.9 billion cut would only affect social programs ranging from Medicare and Medi-Cal to school lunches and student loans, and does not include reduced spending expected in housing, health and human services or the U.S. Department of Interior, Pelosi said. … ‘Do you think that the American family wants a tax break of $1 dollar a day to pay for this?’ Pelosi asked.”  (David Phinney, “California Democrats Warn Budget Cuts Will Undermine State’s Economic Recovery,” States News Service, 11/8/95)

“Pelosi Believes In Big Government.”  “A shrewd politician, she has a strong liberal voting record and is handily re-elected every two years. … Pelosi believes in big government. She built her career fighting for federal funds for health, housing and education programs.”  (Marianne Means, Op-Ed, “Hooray For Pelosi,” Tulsa World, 10/13/01)

SAN FRANCISCO LIBERAL, OUT OF
TOUCH WITH THE MAINSTREAM

Pelosi Is Extreme And Out Of Touch On Abortion Issues

Pelosi Has Voted At Least Eight Times Against Banning Partial-Birth Abortion.  (H.R. 1833, CQ Vote #756, Passed 288-139: R 215-15; D 73-123; I 0-1, 11/1/95, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 1833, CQ Vote #422, Passed 285-137: R 215-15; D 70-121; I 0-1, 9/19/96, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 1122, Roll Call Vote #65, Passed 295-136: R 218-8; D 77-127; I 0-1, 3/20/97, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 1122, Roll Call Vote #325, Passed 296-132: R 219-8; D 77-123; I 0-1, 7/23/98, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 3660, Roll Call Vote #104, Passed 287-141: R 209-8; D 77-132; I 1-1, 4/5/00, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 4965, Roll Call Vote #343, Passed 274-151: R 208-9; D 65-141; I 1-1, 7/24/02, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 760, CQ Vote #242:  Passed 282-139:  R 220-5; D 62-133; I 0-1, 6/4/03, Pelosi Voted Nay; S. 3, CQ Vote #530:  Adopted 281-142:  R 218-4; D 63-137; I 0-1, 10/2/03, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Partial Birth Abortion Ban Is “Misguided Attempt To Play Doctor.”  “I rise in strong opposition to the so-called Partial Birth Abortion Act.  Mr. Speaker, everyone in this room knows that if this Congress succeeds in this misguided attempt to play doctor, not one abortion will be prevented.”  (Representative Nancy Pelosi, Congressional Record, 4/5/00, p. H1791)

Pelosi Calls Partial Birth Abortion Ban “Unwarranted And Unneeded Government Intrusion.”  “I thank the gentlewoman from Colorado for her leadership and for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this legislation and to the veto override of HR1833. I believe it is unconstitutional and interferes directly with the practice of medicine. It is an unwarranted and unneeded government intrusion into medicine and into the family. The bill destroys the family’s right to face a devastating circumstance with safety and dignity. But don’t listen to me. I think that nothing speaks more eloquently to this issue than the voice of some of the families who have been through these very, very sad circumstances.  Many women who have undergone this procedure have bravely shared their stories with Members of Congress and the country, because of their great fear that other women facing tragic circumstances late in pregnancy will not have access to the safest possible procedures.”  (Representative Nancy Pelosi, Congressional Record, 9/19/96, p. H10611) 

ü      Vast Majority Of Americans Support Ban On Partial-Birth Abortion. “The newly enacted ban on partial-birth abortion, signed into law yesterday by President Bush, is likely to meet with broad public approval. In Gallup’s latest poll, 68% of the public says the procedure should be illegal, while only 25% say it should be legal.”  (Lydia Saad, “Americans Agree With Banning ‘Partial-Birth Abortion,’” The Gallup Organization, 11/6/03)

Pelosi Has Voted At Least Twice Against Unborn Victims Of Violence Act.  (H.R. 1997, CQ Vote #31:  Passed 254-163:  R 207-13; D 47-149; I 0-1, 2/26/04, Pelosi Voted Nay; H.R. 2436, CQ Vote #465:  Passed 254-172:  R 198-21; D 56-150; I 0-1, 9/30/99, Pelosi Voted Nay)

ü      Overwhelming Majority Of Americans Support Unborn Victims Of Violence Act.  A Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll conducted July 15-16, 2003 of 900 registered voters nationwide with a margin of error of +/-3% found that 79% of Americans believe prosecutors should be able to charge an attacker with the murder of an unborn child if a violent physical attack on a woman has resulted in the child’s death.  (Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, 7/15-16/03, +/-3%)

Pelosi Voted In Favor Of Human Cloning For Medical Research.  (H.R. 2505, CQ Vote #302:  Rejected 178-249:  R 25-194; D 153-53; I 0-2, 7/31/01, Pelosi Voted Yea)

Pelosi Supports Abortion On Demand.  “Pelosi supports abortion on demand at any time, for any reason. She has voted against a measure to outlaw the procedure known as partial birth abortion, which sucks the brains from a fully developed baby as he/she emerges from the birth canal. She voted against a bill that would outlaw transportation of minors across state lines for the purpose of obtaining an abortion unless it was to protect the girl’s life.”  (Editorial, “Selection Of Nancy Pelosi Would Be Another GOP Victory,” The Augusta Chronicle, 11/13/02)

Pelosi Is Extreme And Out Of Touch On Homosexual Issues

Pelosi Was One Of Only 65 House Democrats And 67 Total House Members To Vote Against Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA).  (H.R. 3396, CQ Vote #316: Passed 342-67: R 224-1; D 118-65; I 0-1, 7/12/96, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Pelosi Called DOMA “Blatant Act Of Discrimination.”  Pelosi called Defense Of Marriage Act “a blatant act of discrimination. She said the definition of family is an individual and personal decision. Pelosi asked her colleagues, ‘Should you find yourself in a situation where your child or close relatives or close friends find solace, happiness, confidence, love and support in a relationship that’s appropriate for them, wouldn’t you want them to have the legal recognition they deserve? It isn’t a threat to anyone.’”  (Elizabeth Schwinn, “Same-Sex Marriage Bill Up For House Vote,” The San Francisco Examiner, 7/12/96)

Pelosi Voted To Lift Ban On Homosexuals In Military.  (H.R. 2401, CQ Vote #460:  Rejected 169-264:  R 11-163; D 157-10; I 1-0, 9/28/93, Pelosi Voted Yea)

Pelosi Was One Of Eleven Who Signed Letter To Clinton Asking Him To Resign Position As Honorary Head Of Boy Scouts Because Of Boy Scouts’ Policy On Homosexuals.  “Eleven members of Congress have signed a letter asking President Clinton to resign as the honorary head of the Boy Scouts of America now that the Supreme Court has upheld the organization’s legal right to ban homosexuals. … In a letter sent to Clinton Thursday, Petaluma Democrat Lynn Woolsey called the Boy Scouts’ policy on gays ‘unacceptable.’ ‘In order to disavow this policy of intolerance, as well as to clarify any misperception of implicit presidential approval, we urge you, the leader of our nation, to resign as the honorary head of the BSA (Boy Scouts of America),’ the letter said. It was signed by Woolsey and 10 other Democrats who have worked closely with Clinton in the past, including Reps. Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco, Barbara Lee of Oakland and George Miller of Martinez.”  (Marc Sandalow, “Clinton Asked To Step Down As Honorary Head Of Scouts,” The San Francisco Chronicle, 7/15/00)

Pelosi Called Sexually Explicit Workshops For Gay And Bisexual Men With Names Like “Booty Call” “Heroic Work.”  “Conducting sexually explicit workshops with names like ‘Booty Call’ is ‘difficult, and often heroic, work’ deserving of support from American taxpayers, according to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat. The Stop AIDS Project, a San Francisco organization that received nearly $700,000 in federal funding last year, promoted workshops condemned as ‘obscene’ last month in a report from the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). In a letter to HHS Secretary Tommy G. Thompson, Mrs. Pelosi asks that ‘potential punitive measures against Stop AIDS Project be set aside,’ according to the Bay Area Reporter. ‘The federal government has a responsibility to support the difficult, and often heroic, work of these organizations. … For nearly 20 years, Stop AIDS Project has been an example for HIV educators nationwide,’ Mrs. Pelosi wrote. The inspector general’s report – which found Stop AIDS Project had violated federal guidelines for AIDS-prevention materials – ‘could undermine the work of an effective organization, and inadvertently contribute to the burden of disease and death among gay and bisexual men,’ she wrote.”  (Robert Stacy McCain, The Washington Times, 12/21/01)

Pelosi Is Soft On Crime

Pelosi Supports Midnight Basketball As Way To Fight Crime.  “The new crime bill, according to Pelosi, would eliminate programs like the Midnight Basketball League, which has been such a success at the Ella Hill Hutch Community Center.”  (Huel Washington, “Welfare Reform Hits Hardest At The Poor Folks,” The Sun Reporter, 1/19/95)

Pelosi Is Against Three-Strikes-You’re-Out.  “Pelosi said stiffer penalties alone will not solve the problems of violent crime. More has to be done, she said, to improve the living standards in crime-ravaged communities and ensure adequate representation for low-income people in the criminal justice system.  ‘I myself am not raising the flag on ‘three-strikes-and-[you’re]-out’,’ Pelosi said.”  (Derrick DePledge, “Bay Area Lawmakers Optimistic About Progress In New Session,” States News Service, 1/25/94)

Pelosi Opposes Death Penalty.  “A California congresswoman has vowed to introduce a bill to abolish the death penalty, but even she admits her plan has no chance of approval against a rising tide of opinion that favors capital punishment. ‘Let’s be realistic. This for discussion,’ said Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. ‘We know that the majority of people are not with us and Congress is not with us.’ Pelosi said her bill would be for purposes of discussion and education of the American public, with a long-term goal of developing support for a death penalty ban. ‘I don’t think we have more than 100 votes’ in the House, the San Francisco representative admitted.”  (Carol Emert, “Anti-Death Penalty Bill Planned,” States News Service, 8/5/92)

Pelosi Is Out Of Touch On Drug Abuse

Pelosi Supports Needle Exchange. “Rep. Nancy Pelosi today criticized the House Republican leadership for failing to properly arm local health officials in the ongoing war on the spread of HIV/AIDS. By a vote of 266-158 the House voted to bar the Secretary of Health and Human Services from spending any federal funds for Needle Exchange Programs. ‘With today’s vote, the Republican-led House stripped the Secretary’s authority to fight the spread of HIV/AIDS,’ Pelosi said. … ‘Needle exchange doesn’t increase the number of needles on the street. It decreases the number of contaminated needles in circulation.’  In the interest of cutting costs and acting fiscally responsible, Rep. Pelosi reminded the Members of the cost-savings associated with prevention. ‘Aside from the human and emotional toll the HIV infection inflicts, the medical cost of caring for someone infected with the virus is $120,000. We can prevent infection and the spread of the disease with a 10-cent syringe. That makes fiscal sense to me,’ Pelosi said.”  (Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Press Release, 9/11/97)

Pelosi Co-Sponsored Medical Marijuana Bill.   “Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) joined with Congressman Barney Frank today as an original co-sponsor of his Medical Use of Marijuana Act. The legislation would end Federal restrictions on the medical use of marijuana which currently run counter to new state laws in California and Arizona. ‘The opportunity to ease the suffering of people who are enduring difficult and sometimes painful therapies is an opportunity we can not ignore,’ Pelosi said.  The bill would move marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule II drug, a change that would acknowledge the medical uses of the drug, and allow for states to determine its medical uses without being in conflict with Federal law. The bill would also remove barriers to biomedical research on the safety and efficacy of marijuana in relieving pain and wasting syndrome.”  (Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Press Release, 6/4/97)

Pelosi Is Hostile To Gun Owners’ Rights

Citizens Committee For Right To Keep And Bear Arms Decried Selection Of Pelosi As House Minority Leader.  “By selecting anti-gun rights -liberal Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California as House Minority Leader, congressional Democrats are turning their party farther away from mainstream America, and clearly demonstrating their contempt for a voting bloc they had spent months courting: America’s gun owners. ‘Just days after the mid-term elections, in which Democrats had been soft-peddling their position on gun rights, the party has dropped all pretenses by elevating Nancy Pelosi to its leadership position,’ said Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA). ‘Democrats have not simply turned a cold shoulder to America’s 80 million gun owners, they have stabbed those gun owners in the back.’ Added CCRKBA Executive Director Joe Waldron, ‘If there were ever any doubt about where Democrats, as a party, stood on the gun rights issue, those doubts evaporated today with Pelosi’s virtual coronation as the new House Minority Leader. California gun owners know that Nancy Pelosi never saw an anti-gun rights law she didn’t love.’”  (Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms, “Democrats Turn Further Away From Mainstream America In Picking Pelosi,” U.S. Newswire, 11/8/02)

Pelosi Voted For Waiting Period For Handgun Purchases.  (H.R. 7, CQ Vote #83:  Passed 239-186:  R 60-102; D 179-83; I 0-1, 5/8/91, Pelosi Voted Yea)

Pelosi Voted For Brady Bill.  (H.R. 1025, CQ Vote #564:  Passed 238-189:  R 54-119; D 184-69; I 0-1, 11/10/93, Pelosi Voted Yea)

Pelosi Votes Against Protecting American Flag

Pelosi Suggested Being Tolerant Toward Flag Burners Is “Measure Of Our Patriotism.”  “As an issue, the flag desecration amendment is, of course, entirely symbolic. Its sponsors believe that support is, symbolically speaking, tantamount to being a patriotic American. But what is true patriotism in the context of the American experiment? At its heart, I believe, is an abiding tolerance – a tolerance so deep and so pervasive that it easily absorbs all insults. … We Americans are most patriotically American when we display our tolerance of virtually all behavior – short, of course, of crimes against people and property. Simply turning away from even such objectionable behavior as the burning of the flag is, then, a true test of our tolerance, a measure of our patriotism, a demonstration of our Americanism.”  (Rep. Nancy Pelosi As Quoted In “Verbatim; That’s Some Star-Spangled Debating!” The Washington Post, 7/4/99)

Pelosi Voted Against Amendment To Protect American Flag From Desecration.  (H. J. Res. 350, CQ Vote #192:  Rejected 254-177:  R 159-17; D 95-160, 6/21/90, Pelosi Voted Nay)

AT ODDS WITH FELLOW DEMOCRATS

On Partial-Birth Abortion

Pelosi Disagreed With Daschle, Biden And Leahy On Banning Partial-Birth Abortion. Pelosi supports partial-birth abortion, while Daschle, Biden and Leahy voted to ban the procedure.  (H.R. 760, CQ Vote #242:  Passed 282-139:  R 220-5; D 62-133; I 0-1, 6/4/03, Pelosi Voted Nay; S. 3, CQ Vote #530:  Adopted 281-142:  R 218-4; D 63-137; I 0-1, 10/2/03, Pelosi Voted Nay; S. 3, CQ Vote #51: Passed 64-33: R 48-3; D 16-29; I 0-1, 3/13/03, Daschle And Leahy Voted Yea; S. 3, CQ Vote #402:  Agreed To 64-34:  R 47-3; D 17-30; I 0-1, 10/21/03, Daschle, Biden And Leahy Voted Yea)

On 1991 Iraq War Resolution

Pelosi Disagreed With Gore, Lieberman And Graham On Use Of Force.  Pelosi voted against the Persian Gulf War, while Gore, Lieberman And Graham all supported the use of force to liberate Kuwait.  (S. J.  Res. 2, Senate Vote #2: Passed 52-47: R 42-2, D 10-45, 1/12/91, Gore, Lieberman And Graham Voted Yea; H. J. Res. 77, Roll Call Vote #9: Passed 250-183: R 164-3; D 86-179; I 0-1, 1/12/91, Pelosi Voted Nay)

On North American Free Trade Agreement

Pelosi Disagreed With Gephardt, On NAFTA.  Pelosi voted in favor of NAFTA, while Gephardt opposed the trade agreement.  (H.R. 3450, Roll Call #575: Passed 234-200: R 132-43; D102-156; I 0-1, 11/17/93, Pelosi Voted Yea, Gephardt Voted Nay)

On Gay Marriage

Pelosi Disagreed With Gephardt, Daschle, Harkin and Wellstone On Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA).  Pelosi voted against DOMA, while Gephardt, Daschle, Harkin and Wellstone supported the bill.  (H.R. 3396, CQ Vote #316: Passed 342-67: R 224-1; D 118-65; I 0-1, 7/12/96, Pelosi Voted Nay, Gephardt Voted Yea; H.R. 3396, CQ Vote #280: Passed 85-14: R 53-0; D 32-14, 9/10/96, Daschle, Harkin And Wellstone Voted Yea)

On 2002 Iraq War Resolution

Pelosi Disagreed With Gephardt, Kerry And Edwards On Authorizing Use Of Force In Iraq.  Pelosi voted against authorizing President Bush to use force in Iraq.  Gephardt, Kerry and Edwards all voted in favor of granting the president authority to use force.  (H. J. Res. 114, CQ Vote #455:  Passed 296-133:  R 215-6; D 81-126; I 0-1, 10/10/02, Pelosi Voted Nay, Gephardt Voted Yea; H. J. Res. 114, CQ Vote #237:  Passed 77-23:  R 48-1; D 29-21; I 0-1, 10/11/02, Kerry And Edwards Voted Yea)

On $87 Billion Iraq/Afghanistan Emergency Supplemental

Pelosi Disagreed With Gephardt, Clinton, Daschle And Feinstein On Funding Troops And Reconstruction In Iraq And Afghanistan.  Pelosi voted against the war supplemental, while Gephardt, Clinton, Daschle And Feinstein supported the funding.  (H.R. 3289, CQ Vote #562:  Passed 303-125:  R 220-6; D 83-118; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Pelosi Voted Nay, Gephardt Voted Yea; S. 1689, CQ Vote #400:  Passed 87-12:  R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Clinton, Daschle And Feinstein Voted Yea)

To See Pelosi's Key Votes And Interest Group Ratings,
Please Click On The Word Or PDF Links.

Name:

Big Russ

Message:

Crime & Punishment (Insert Dramatic Perry Mason Music Here)

Name:	Polosi Cool for VP
To:	forum

In response to:
Pelosi Was One Of Only 65 House Democrats And 67 Total House Members To Vote Against Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA). (H.R. 3396, CQ Vote #316: Passed 342-67: R 224-1; D 118-65; I 0-1, 7/12/96, Pelosi Voted Nay)

Message:
Polosi is her own person and would be a great VP

Name:	Chealsea
To:	Mama
Re:	They're lying again ,ma

In response to:
The cartoon says Barbara Bush's future book. How can she read from a book she hasn't written yet?

Message:
Even I know President Bush went into Iraq because of Saddam's nose-thumbing, kicking out inspectors, weopons programs, and starving children for a weopons program.

Name:	Cabrini Green
To:	All

In response to:
Urban Village

Message:
We are The Village.

Name:	Rep
To:	Dem Bunnies
Re:	Let's find out just how popular Hillary is in the real world.

In response to:
What a mess on this forum. The Republicans are running scared. Blaming everybody but themselves for the *mess we are in*. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Message:
What "mess" is that, Missy? We are in the process of working our way out of a mess that we have been in for over a decade, no thanks to George W. Bush or his daddy.

BTW, it's not our fault that your candidate sucks. Why did you allow the Leftwing media to shove that blithering fop of a turkey up your rears? DUMP HIM AND DRAFT HILLARY! YOU DON'T NEED MORE MONEY, YOU HAVE BOTH MONEY AND THE MEDIA IN YOUR POCKETS. THE MEDIA YAPS ARE AS SICK OF JOHN FART KERRY AS EVERYONE ELSE EXCEPT KERRY HIMSELF IS.

Name:

...

Message:
Kerry's campaign has launched a new slogan, "Let America Be America Again," taken (we kid you not) from the title of a Langston Hughes poem. Let's parse his favorite verses for some deeper meaning about the direction of his campaign. Mr. Kerry quoted a few lines of the poem in his Brown v. Board anniversary speech Monday:

O' let my land be a land where liberty Is crowned

with no false patriotic wreath

But opportunity is real, and life is free,

Equality is in the air we breathe.

Undoubtedly this can be read as a thinly veiled attack on the policies of George Bush and the GOP. What Mr. Kerry neglects to emphasize, however, is that the poem is a call for blacks and poor whites to rise up and take America back "From those who live like leeches on the people's lives." Class warfare, anyone?

But dig deeper into Langston Hughes and you'll find another poem that might be more revealing than Mr. Kerry intends of the inner life of the limousine liberal. A key passage:

Murmuring gently

Over fraises du bois,

"I'm so ashamed of being white."

The lobster is delicious, ,p> The wine divine . . . Message:
You lose ALL credibility when you resort to juvenile name calling...

Name:

Juvenile

In response to:
You lose ALL credibility when you resort to juvenile name calling...

Message:
The Republicans will think twice before they fill up the forum with their stupid posts. You have to speak to these freaks in their own language.

Name:

Americam Soldie