 sj |
||
|
||
POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords!
|
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: jeffp Date: 25 May 01 - 03:26 PM According to the U.S. Constitution, vacancies are handled as follows: Article 1, Section 2 (with respect to the House of Representatives): "When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies." Article 1, Section 3 (with respect to the Senate): ... and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies. However, this was modified by the 17th Amendment, which provides, "When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct." Therefor, it appears, if I read these runes aright, that Representatives must be replaced by special election, but Senators are replaced either by appointment or by special election, depending on the laws of the particular state involved. Interesting what you find out when you actually research stuff people have told you. jeffp |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: Kim C Date: 25 May 01 - 03:35 PM Voted for Eisenhower 'cause Lincoln won the war. |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: jeffp Date: 25 May 01 - 03:45 PM Just did a little more checking. According to the US Senate site, Arizona is the only state that requires a special election to fill a vacant Senate seat. jeffp |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: GUEST,Melani Date: 25 May 01 - 03:52 PM I don't think any of us should be surprised when politicians try to play events to their own and their parties' advantage. What I do (unfortunately) find surprising is when a politician actually stands up for his principles, even to his own disadvantage. I certainly hope that the moral points Jeffords has accrued from his action will stand him in good stead in the future, and that his career will not suffer because of it. I have always thought that even politicians I disagreed with probably had the good of the country at heart, even when I felt that they were totally mistaken in their ideas. George W. Bush is the first one that I have seriously felt doesn't give a damn about any of us. |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: BobP Date: 25 May 01 - 04:20 PM DougR Agreement? 'Crats aren' bound by no stinkin' agreements. They only negotiate when their pet puppies have something they want. They keep republicans as pets so the voters won't get so discouraged. When they are in control, the opposition can go to hell. The Jeffords switch on the heels of the dangling chad election does not bode well for confidence in the two party system, otherwise known as, "what passes for democracy in these parts." All the reteric won't disguise the fact that the political makeup of the senate does not reflect what the voters intended. If dem 'crats couln't prevail at the polls in house or senate, but take control anyway, then democracy is dead. |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: mousethief Date: 25 May 01 - 04:29 PM BobP, you seem to have this idea that people vote for parties and not for people. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: CarolC Date: 25 May 01 - 05:09 PM BobP,
It was pointed out earlier in this thread, "that in the past two decades twenty or so Democratic legislators have switched to the Republican party. During the same period, the Republicans have lost two or three" (--DougR). Do you hold the same view about Democracy being dead as a result of the Democrats switching to the Republican party as you do about Jeffords becoming an independant?
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: BobP Date: 25 May 01 - 05:17 PM Jeffords, the person is still in the senate; so "person" is not the issue. But Deception is! I'm a product of the 60's. We took a skeptical notion to all things political back then; including party politics. My concern is that this political scheme may lead to our trusted governmental "leaders" not being held accountable for their duties. Committee chairmanships are nice, and the DC cocktail circuit will certainly be 'abuzz" this season. But what about issues? How are we going to know if Dubya is screwing around on our dime. Now I was a Truman fan, somewhat. But he railed for years on the ol saw about "that damn do-nothing republican congress" that came in with the election of 47. So for three years the country stood politically frozen; thawed by Korea. He could have tried harder to work with them but railing was more in his nature and easier. When hot spots like Haiti or the Balkans can erupt instantly or some cop does something stupid that causes folks to go into hysterics, the loss of duly elected government systems could cost lives while idiots scramble for glory (and avoid blame). Ya see if the repubs are in control, they have no place to duck and cover when the heat turns on, they have to produce! People are entitled, by virtue of last fall's election to that accountability, even if it happened by accident, and Jeffords confounded it. Sadly, we won't know how what his conduct manifests till people start hurting.
Remember Or pwhich side is dragging efforts to
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: BobP Date: 25 May 01 - 05:24 PM DougR, I, like many, don't even like that Ford became VP, then P without popular referendum. I think that was the single biggest factor in his loss to Jimmy in 76'. These guys can do whatever they like, politically, so long as they have the blessing of the voters. |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: DougR Date: 25 May 01 - 05:30 PM jeffp: you researched the rule if there is a vacancy. There is no vacancy though. Jeffords is not going to be replaced by anyone from Vermont, he just switched parties. I would think the rules would be different for that. Evidently, there are none. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 May 01 - 07:58 PM But there would be a vacancy if the fella had done what you suggested Doug, and resigned as senator with the intention of asking the voters to back him. Except that they wouldn't have a chance to back him, because the governor would appoint the replacemnt instead.
Every time a member switches parties in the House of Commons there are objections that it's unfair and they should resign and see if the voters would reelect them. That has happened, but very rarely. Winston Churchill was the most famous turncoat, did it twice.
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: DougR Date: 26 May 01 - 08:45 PM Well, McGrath, evidently the Governor would have reappointed Jeffords anyway. The Gov. was on Fox News yesterday and he is a great admirer of Jeffords. Not surprising since the Governor is a Democrat. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: kendall Date: 26 May 01 - 10:37 PM I hardly think the term "Turncoat" applies here. A turncoat is a traitor. That's serious, but, a man who finally decides to do what he believes is right is hardly a traitor. |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: Sorcha Date: 26 May 01 - 11:23 PM Can it possibly matter? (from Scorch, who seems to be real cynical tonight) |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: LDave Date: 26 May 01 - 11:40 PM This could be a watershed event in American history. The Democrats and the "liberal media" are so spineless it took a Republican to stand up and say "You guys have gone too far." |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: Peg Date: 26 May 01 - 11:49 PM Sorcha: I have noted your laissez-faire attitude in several threads tonight... is everything okay? :)
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: kendall Date: 27 May 01 - 08:01 AM The democrats have been saying all along "You have gone too far." |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: jeffp Date: 27 May 01 - 02:41 PM Doug, I was looking into the vacancy rules because of all the talk about resigning and running in a special election. A special election would only be held in Arizona. Therefore, the people who advocated that he resign and run in the special election as a Democrat or Independent are advocating something that could not happen, whether he wanted it to or not. That was the only reason for that bit of research. Back to my holiday weekend. The weather cleared unexpectedly, so we're cooking out. jeffp |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: DougR Date: 27 May 01 - 03:51 PM jeffp, good luck on the cook out! I was listening to "Meet the Press," this morning, jeffp, and Senator Daschel was on with Tim Russert. Russert showed him a quote Daschel made in a newspaper when Senator Ben Campbell switched from the Democratic party and became a Republican. Daschel was quoted as saying that if Campbell wanted to be fair with the people of Colorado, he would resign his seat and run for re-election as a Republican in a special election. So there must be some provision for doing it. As you might imagine, however, he made no such demands on Jeffords. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: Bill D Date: 27 May 01 - 05:46 PM Jeffords will still be Jeffords on votes, many of which will still be Republican ...what he really did was allow committee chairs to switch and give Democrats control of the 'process'...which in the Senate is crucial...it is still close, and even the Democrats will need to be careful what they do |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: jeffp Date: 27 May 01 - 07:58 PM Let's face it; expecting anybody, no matter which side of the aisle they're on, to act counter to the side of the bread that is buttered, is expecting just too much. jeffp, getting even more cynical than he thought possible |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 27 May 01 - 08:55 PM A turncoat is someone who decides they are on the wrong side, and changes sides. It's the right thing to do sometimes, but you'll always be called a traitor by the side you're leaving.
I'm still a bit puzzled by all this. Apparently it doesn't matter how you vote on all the issues, but what does matter is whether you are officially signed up to one of the parties - even if you consistently vote the other way, any time you get a chance... |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: CarolC Date: 27 May 01 - 09:06 PM It's a funny old world, innit? |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: MAV Date: 27 May 01 - 10:11 PM You people crack me up. You'd think Jeffords became a democrat.
D'ashole bribed him with power but now that JJ didn't come through, he gets nothing. D'ashole said as much this morning on Press the Meat.
Personally I was glad to see the bastard go, he's not a moderate but just a whiney @$$ panty wearing liberal "Republican". The GOP gave him plenty of appeasement but he still made the inexplicable decision (self-serving political move).
But it may be a double cross, you might say he stomped on a big flaming bag of doo doo!
Now we have Specter the Defector appointed as "King of the RINOs. I'd just as soon see him take that rag tag bunch of "moderates" with him (including Mc*bleeping*Cain) and join Jeffords. The "Big Tent" ain't that damn big. (At least then we'd have a little more definition in the GOP delegation to the Senate.)
If he doesn't (which he probably won't) there's a nasty rumor going around that Zel Miller may unenroll as a democrat and return the balance of power in the Senate.
Meanwhile, a big Salute to Jim Jeffords for yanking the rug out from under the self important "moderates" by thrusting the GOP into the minority and requiring them to need only 40 votes to wreak major havoc.
mav out
PS A couple of polls from the Burlington Free Press:
Poll 1. (last week)
Stay Republican......50.1%
Poll 2.
Positive?.....21.4%
PPS...Enjoyed the Chanty sing, thanks.
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: DougR Date: 28 May 01 - 12:19 AM Mav, I'm shocked at the result of those polls! You're not puttin' us on, are you? Everbody I have heard interviewed on televison from Vermont has expressed the opinion that the good folks in Vermont are going to be much happier with him for making the change! Daschel said this morning on the show (you watched so you know) that he didn't think it was necessary for Jeffords to resign and run for his seat in a special election because all of the people in Vermont were happy with his decision. I assume the Burlington Free Press is a right wing publication, right? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: CarolC Date: 28 May 01 - 01:34 AM Well, DougR, if it's the poll that's being conducted at this site www.burlingtonfreepress.com/, I think we can safely say that it's not a scientific poll. |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: CarolC Date: 28 May 01 - 03:19 AM I just finished videotaping the Meet the Press interview with Senator Dashcel (thanks for the heads-up, MAV!) so I can provide direct quotes if there are any misunderstandings about what was said by whom.
Here's what I find to be a bit of a conundrum...
There are some people in this discussion who are suggesting that Jim Jeffords left the Republican party for self-serving reasons (ie: accepted a bribe in the form of a committee chairmanship).
Some of these same people are also suggesting that the majority of voters in Vermont are/were not happy with this move on the part of Senator Jeffords. It has even been suggested that public opinion on this issue was known prior to Jeffords' announcement of his decision. Here's what's got me puzzled... If Jeffords was acting out of self-interest, and if it was known that the majority of voters in Vermont would not be happy with this decision prior to his having made it, why would he do it? It would certainly ruin his chances of getting re-elected. Even a committee chairmanship is not worth that.
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: CarolC Date: 28 May 01 - 03:25 AM I'm re-posting my last post here, because I can see that it is doing the 'amazing disappearing post trick'...
I just finished videotaping the Meet the Press interview with Senator Dashcel (thanks for the heads-up, MAV!) so I can provide direct quotes if there are any misunderstandings about what was said by whom.
Here's what I find to be a bit of a conundrum...
There are some people in this discussion who are suggesting that Jim Jeffords left the Republican party for self-serving reasons (ie: accepted a bribe in the form of a committee chairmanship).
Some of these same people are also suggesting that the majority of voters in Vermont are/were not happy with this move on the part of Senator Jeffords. It has even been suggested that public opinion on this issue was known before Jeffords announced his decision. Here's what's got me puzzled... If Jeffords was acting out of self-interest, and if it was known that the majority of voters in Vermont would not be happy with this decision prior to his having made it, why would he do it? It would certainly ruin his chances of getting re-elected.
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: MAV Date: 28 May 01 - 08:39 AM Dear Carol,
I don't know if it's a scientific poll or not.
What is scientific is the pendulum swing of the Vermont voters back towards the Republicans as seen in their legislature's composition after the "domestic partnership" legislation hit home.
I guess what gets me the most is the way Jeffords took advantage of all the Republican volunteers (kids and elderly) and contributors who helped his campaign, and the Vermont GOP who prevented a primary just for his benefit.
There's nothing kind, caring or compassionate in that kind of double-cross no matter in which party it happens.
This should have happened either before or LONG after the election.
It's no secret that the GOP and the US is moving to the right. One of the reasons for x42's popularity was his signing into law most of the CONTRACT WITH AMERICA. This has been but a symptom of that shift. There are many democrats who are also leaning conservative as can be seen in some of the recent votes. (Did you know David Bonnier is pro-life?)
It pleases me that the liberal Republicans have been relegated to the status of irrelevance (as they should be). I would think the democrats would like to have their party cleansed of those "rotten conservatives" as well so that their brand of ideology could be preserved.
'til next time,
mav out
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: John P Date: 28 May 01 - 09:27 AM Hmm, I was enjoying this thread until Mav showed up. Mav, is there any way you could be a little less offensive in your posts? Your nicknames for our political leaders are childish and insulting. Why can't you just discuss things like a normal adult? It usually causes you to come across as a reactionary. Since "reactionary" is the opposite of "thoughtful", it doesn't give me much faith in any facts you try to present. John |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: Greg F. Date: 28 May 01 - 09:52 AM Mav is not an adult, John. He's a spoiled, opinionated, not too intelligent little brat throwing tantrums & trying to shock mom & dad. He's been just this way since he was inflicted upon the forum by Uncle Jaque (who seems proud of his creation; rather like Dr. Frankenstein) and if you check back, often a lot more childish and offensive. Best ignored & not encouraged- a lesson some refuse to learn. |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: Bill D Date: 28 May 01 - 10:58 AM some folks' stock-in-trade, like Rush Limbaugh, is cantankerous exaggeration for the sake of some imagined effect, as if the world wont see their point unless it is sharp-edged and laced with invective and name calling ...."D'ashole " "whiney @$$ panty wearing liberal"....lots to consider about Jeffords and the situation in the Senate & Vermont, but it IS possible to talk it over without that level of diatribe. ...oh, it isn't, Mav?...sorry, I meant is is for some of us. |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: MAV Date: 28 May 01 - 11:47 AM To John P;
Hmm, I was enjoying this thread until Mav showed up
Well, this is a political thread isn't it? Its title implies that it is.
Mav, is there any way you could be a little less offensive in your posts?
Well, I suppose, but the title of the thread and the posted insults to Republicans was in itself pretty offensive, seems the tone was already set.
Your nicknames for our political leaders are childish and insulting
I'm sorry I called Arlen Specter "Specter the Defector" and Trent Lott a "Spineless Weasel". Of course your side calling W a "moron", "idiot" and worse should go unchallenged.
Then there's Justice Clarence "Uncle Tom" Thomas, Newt Gingrich, Judge Ken Starr and of course President Reagan, who's under constant attack and currently languishing in the grip of Alzheimers.
Why can't you just discuss things like a normal adult?
You mean like this?
And for that he has been absolutely pilloried by Bush, Lott, and their right-wing henchmen. Me, I think even the revised tax cut is still pretty much a sop for the rich, but I've still got to admire Jeffords for sticking to his principles
Now there's some DEEP thought....Bush and Lott are NOT RIGHT WING. The idle rich barely get taxed already (I've explained that in detail), the high paid WORKING AMERICANS are who carry MOST of the income tax burden. Jeffords has no principles, he's a foot dragging, self serving obstructionist as are most of the "moderates".
It usually causes you to come across as a reactionary.
So what? Someone has to challenge the left-wing extremists.
re.ac.tion.ary n. an advocate of reaction.
re.act.tion n. 1. a return or opposing action, influence, etc. 2. a response as to a stimulus. 3. a movement BACK to a former more stable condition.
Since "reactionary" is the opposite of "thoughtful"
No it isn't, unthoughtful or thoughtless are opposites to thoughtful.
it doesn't give me much faith in any facts you try to present
Well that's a hell of a note, either they're facts or they ain't!
Mav is not an adult, John. He's a spoiled, opinionated, not too intelligent little brat throwing tantrums & trying to shock mom & dad
Now John, you don't suppose having that sort of demonization crap constantly said about you might get your dander up, do you?
and if you check back, often a lot more childish and offensive
Yes, in fact I urge you to research my posts and see just how offensive my OPINION is.
Here's the dirty little secret. It's not my vulgar language (I don't do that)
It's not that I insult individual posters (unless they have attacked me).
It really is my willingness to stand up to the demogogery, lying and mean spirited attacks of the caring, compassionate, tolerant and THOUGHTFUL liberal anti-Constitutional leftists found here.
When I make general (but true statements) they accuse me of name calling, I call it the "If the shoe fits" principle.
Actual name calling is more like; "GregF is a spoiled, opinionated, not too intelligent little brat throwing tantrums & trying to shock mom & dad.....childish and offensive", but I would never say anything like that.
GregF also says I'm...Best ignored & not encouraged- a lesson some refuse to learn
Yes Greg, you'd think you'd know better than to keep spewing your left-wing hate speech...it only encourages me.
Thoughtful enough for you?
mav out |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: GUEST,Bob P Date: 28 May 01 - 12:11 PM Here's a scenario I would have gladly accepted. Well, the mid-term election results have just come in. Down in florida the new vote counting machinery worked fine, no recounts are planned. For the first time in many years the voters, not the lawyers, have determined the outcome. And, this just in . . . the dems have recaptured the house with a plurality of twelve seats, and the switch announced by Senator Jeffords last night added to the gain of three seats in the senate gives the party of Jackson back to the people. Things are looking down for King George! Well, he surely had his chance. What? Oh that was the a dream? Damn shame! |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: Peg Date: 28 May 01 - 12:14 PM the thing about those online polls is, anyone can vote as many times as they want...and just like "exit" polls, people are notorious for lying, just to shake things up... All the Vermonters I know are thrilled about this...as is just about every other human being I have spoken to about it so far. :)
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: MAV Date: 28 May 01 - 02:19 PM Dear Peg,
All the Vermonters I know are thrilled about this...as is just about every other human being I have spoken to about it so far. :)
Could be, but many hardcore liberals nationwide are not too happy with him.
Check this out, especially the part about the potential for the public's perceived notion of "democrat obstructionism"
Miller called him a Double Double-Crosser!
That's why I say he'll get nothing. His name is MUD....
Gee......! Maybe he could become a MUDCATTER!
mav out
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: GUEST,The Yank Date: 28 May 01 - 02:23 PM Now John, you don't suppose having that sort of demonization crap constantly said about you might get your dander up, do you? Your own obnoxious behavior, of course, plays no part in this?. Puh-leeze! Christ, Mav, you truly are an total effing moron after all. |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: Bill D Date: 28 May 01 - 02:40 PM does the term 'bear baiting' mean anything to some of you? Look it up |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: MAV Date: 28 May 01 - 04:06 PM Christ, Mav, you truly are an total effing moron after all
Thanks, you're so "thoughtful" and say the nicest things.
How about a little tolerance here? mav out |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: kendall Date: 28 May 01 - 04:21 PM I have met MAV. He is anything BUT a moron, no my friends, he is a world class leg puller, and, as long as we resist, he will pull even harder. Can you say "First amendment?" |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: Little Hawk Date: 28 May 01 - 04:38 PM I can. "First amendment". There. kendall, are you saying that MAV is actually a whiney, panty-wearing liberal masquerading as a passionate conservative??? My god, that would be leg-pulling on a truly Olympic scale at this point. It's a shocking assertion. Just who is pulling whose leg around here is what I want to know... - LH |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 28 May 01 - 05:15 PM "Well, this is a political thread isn't it?"
"Look at me ya-boo sucks to all of you lot." That's a political discussion? |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: mousethief Date: 28 May 01 - 06:19 PM Mav, I don't believe I've ever seen Clarence Thomas called "Uncle Tom" at mudcat before. Can you provide a link? Alex |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: CarolC Date: 28 May 01 - 06:32 PM Looks like this has become a thread about MAV instead of Jim Jeffords. |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: Greg F. Date: 28 May 01 - 06:37 PM The usual result of his infantile comments. Kendall: While from your description he may suffer from MPD, the only MAV we get to know here is the one that comes across on the forum. Can you spell "asshole?" I don't find what you style his "leg pulling" to be the least bit amusing or entertaining. Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: kendall Date: 28 May 01 - 08:05 PM Neither did I until I realized what he was trying to do. You gotta give him credit, he knows what buttons to push! |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: CarolC Date: 28 May 01 - 08:13 PM What's he trying to do, kendall? |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: MAV Date: 28 May 01 - 08:59 PM Hey Little Hawk,
I NEVER get my panties in a bunch.
Mouser,
I don't believe I've ever seen Clarence Thomas called "Uncle Tom" at mudcat
No, probably not, when I said "your side" I was referring to the democrat black caucus of the House of Representatives. The NAACP did it too I think.
I've always been talking exclusively about national figures.
Carole,
Looks like this has become a thread about MAV instead of Jim Jeffords
Yes, funny how that happened isn't it? I didn't do it on purpose....Honest.
Thank you Mr M.
mav out
|
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 28 May 01 - 09:00 PM "Looks like this has become a thread about MAV instead of Jim Jeffords."
That's the idea isn't it? But surely the point of the Jeffords thing is that here you have a party machine that has scraped into power with a razor thin majority (and a very questionable one at that), this was achieved on the basis of a pledge to act moderately and inclusively. It then proceeds to act as if it had a landslide majority and a massive mandate. In those circumstances it is hardly fair to criticise someone for sticking to the policies they were elected on, and dumping the political affiliation that is now being used to overturn those policies. |
|
Subject: RE: POL: A Salute to Jim Jeffords! From: kendall Date: 28 May 01 - 09:53 PM Carol, I think he likes to argue. |
| Share Thread: |