SO - no significant response to "w's" speech??

[Joe for Clark]

There will be a a third party that does have the will.

I think the dems may have lost it. There is clearly a liberal-conservative crossover and the dems can't get it done??

I never considered that might happen. Goddamn, it wasn't even a very good speech yesterday.

In 1900 there was the Bullmose, wonder what the name will be in 2008?

You guys get a set here, we are the party of FDR. And I am so sick of losing.

NO MORE LOSING.

[aquart]

1. I so don't appreciate third party talk.

Can't think of a quicker way to turn a golden opportunity to dross.

Gonna vote for Nader?

[Joe for Clark]

3. No,

I will vote Teddy.

If there is a third party, I guarantee you - it fractured in left and right directions.

SO you might remember, or consider, Teddy came in SECOND. On an independent ticket not even planned.

Nader - no. But if you really doubt an independent ticket might win, you look back to 1900.

The day the dems get a pair of balls, no problem. They better find their manhood soon, though.

Patience may be a virtue on Mars - not here.

Joe

[TomInTib]

2. Blather need not be dignified with a response. nt

[Joe for Clark]

4. Hey Tom.

Blather - well, in 1943-45 that was a draftable age.

I think you are well within that range.

And the major problem with losing here, is that you are likely to find out.

Truth is, the day you replace my kid - well worth finding out.

You really don't want to find out though, do you Tom?


The day you kill a kid in Germany, Japan or Goddamn Iraq - well, it is just one fucking bad day, right??

I so wish it was just blather - maybe in Rush Limbaugh's world it is - not in ours.

That is the problem.