Donwhite,
You are right-on. Lobbyists should be banned completely. In many cases, they get a foot in the door, because most of the congress members have no
idea regarding the bills that they are voting on. Thus, they let the lobbyists in to "tell them" what the bills mean. Of course, you and I know
what that means. In the process, favors are granted, contributions are made to their campaigns and you have what we have now- a completely bought set
of elected officials, from the state congresspersons to the US congress to the President. It is no accident that the oil companies are making record
profits under Bush-Cheney. Talk about conflict of interest. Sure, Cheney has his Halliburton holdings in a "blind trust", but as soon as he leaves,
it's his again. It doesn't take a genius to see how his trust is affected by his decisions.
|
McCain and Lieberman?
A Republican that Republicans consider liberal, that liberals dislike because of his kowtowing to military and corporate interests
An independent who has pissed off every Democratic voter in the nation and constantly Zel Millers his ass off... yet has too liberal a voting record
for the Republican base to want him.
Both of them are grouchy million year-old men.
You think so, really? Hell, the Semocrats could run a cup of coleslaw as their candidate and sstill win by a landslide against the "Angry Old Coot"
ticket.
|
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
Gee Walking Fox. Tell me how you REALLY feel. LOL!
Anyway, people much greater than me are suggesting it, that's why I put this up for discussion. Understand, that most Republicans won't vote
democratic, anyway, so regardless of who is the VP nominee, they won't bolt the party. Lieberman may give independents some cover, since he is an
Independent now. In addition, there are democrats that don't believe in the cut-and-run strategy, and they could potentially like such a ticket.
Anyway, Reagan was older, and it didn't stop him from winning in a landslide.
|
