[Rhodes22-list] Political reference by Ed

[Robert Skinner]

When the incumbent makes it clear that he has little respect 
for the people at the bottom of the heap, the broad base of 
the heap reacts.  As Brad remarked, there is little 
difference between this and the Irish organizations last 
century.  If there are any issues of impropriety, they are 
lost in the still-blazing memory of the great election robbery.

However different from Bush, and there are some big 
differences, anyone with the "Republican" sign hanging 
around his/her neck is tarred with the Bush brush.

Unalloyed loyalty to the Republican cause, as defined by 
Bush, has a price in a we/they contest.  Make no mistake 
about it -- Bush is at least as much reviled as he is 
revered, and many voters, myself included, will go to 
great lengths to restore the presidency to a more 
cooperative relationship with the other branches of our 
government.  We will also go to great lengths to break the
nominally-conservative-but-actually-drunk-evangelical-in-
a-whorehouse Republican party's hold on our government.

It is time for the pendulum to swing the other way for a 
while.  This is a nominally secular and peaceful nation.  
Yes, we have some responsibility for world-wide issues 
such as combating terrorism, but we have been using a 
10-guage shotgun to kill a cockroach, and been pointing it 
in the wrong direction to boot.

And a policy of setting limitations on other countries 
options to provide their women with the tools to control 
their own lives is hideous.  Bush appears to regard women 
as chattels.  I thought we dealt with that in 1865.  But
the Republican candidates seem to be courting our own 
radical extremists with that view.  Another mill-stone 
around their necks.

Reality will intrude.

/Robert

Tootle wrote:
> 
> Brad,
> 
> See this article from the LA Times:
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-donors19oct19,0,4231217.story?coll=la-home-center
> 
> Ed K