What could be worse than losing the war on terror?
 

Elizabeth Dole, in a recent Republican fundraising letter, worries openly that if Democrats win in 2006 they will...

"....cancel the Bush tax cuts, allow liberal activist judges to run our courts and undermine all Republican efforts to win the War on Terror. Even worse, they will call for endless congressional investigations and possibly call for the impeachment of President Bush!"

Even worse.....? Worse than losing the war on terror....investigations???

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/008358.php

Oy vey!

Re: What could be worse than losing the war on terror?
 

MikeAI can't respond...too bad
;)

Re: What could be worse than losing the war on terror?
 

Free MikeAI ???

Re: What could be worse than losing the war on terror?
 

Sorry Gonzo, he's all tied up at the moment...:)

Re: What could be worse than losing the war on terror?
 

..by pesky French women
:)

Re: What could be worse than losing the war on terror?
 

I saw one in front of a tower that could tie me up for the rest of my life.

Re: What could be worse than losing the war on terror?
 

Of course there will be "oversight" dammit didn't our founding fathers set up this system / country that way!!!!

Re: What could be worse than losing the war on terror?
 

Serge you could have posted my response I sent to you in e-mail:

Re: What could be worse than losing the war on terror?
 

Let's see what a decidedly conservative former republican congressmen has to say about the democrats agenda.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...601336_pf.html

To counter that perception, House Democrats have formulated a plan of action for their first week in control. Their leaders said a Democratic House would quickly vote to raise the minimum wage for the first time since 1997. It would roll back a provision in the Republicans' Medicare prescription drug benefit that prohibits the Department of Health and Human Services from negotiating prices for drugs offered under the program.

It would vote to fully implement the recommendations of the bipartisan panel convened to shore up homeland security after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Democratic leaders said.

And it would reinstate lapsed rules that say any tax cuts or spending increases have to be offset by spending cuts or tax increases to prevent the federal deficit from growing.

Armey dismissed the substance of the Democratic proposals as demagoguery but said that the politics "really, frankly, are not too bad."
================================================

I don't know of too many americans who would argue with changing a part of the new prescrition drug law that has widely been seen as a debacle and giveaway to the drug companies or for actually following the reccommendations of the panel for security after 9-11 which the GOP has virtually ignored. The minimum wage thing isn't a big thing as that's a more ttargeted group type of policy. A guy like Dick Armey is blunt when he says the politics of their proposals are good. He's gotta leave his party room to attack it but he can be honest enough to acknowledge and realize people will pay attention and it puts them in a bad spot.