And re-electing idiots no matter how bad they screwed up! Is There Anything That Democrat Voters Wont Tolerate In There Represenatives?

I can't speak so much for the others, but I've seen McDermott speak and he seems like a pretty classy guy. I know it's his whole job to seem like a classy guy 'cause he's a politician, but I believe him and I don't believe many of them.

I believe him when he says he didn't know. And I think his criticism of the war has been spot-on.

How did Bush win in 2000?

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

I wasn't the one that drifted, you may note.

Moreover: I wasn't bringing up the Supreme Court's selection; merely his loss of the popular vote and electoral victory.

Well I say you drifted when you insisted it be called democraic lawmakers. Whether it is the democrat party or the democratic party, it doesn’t seem all that democratic. As for George Bush losing the popular vote in 2000, that was primarily due to the fact that the major news media outlets who called the election for Gore hours before the polls closed suppressing the votes of millions of republicans who failed to show up at the polls because they were told it was over. It's not hard to see that the voters who were discouraged from going to the polls would have easily made up the 500,000 votes needed to get Bush the popular vote, and that small a difference could have been made up in California alone. The 2004 election where he received more votes than any other president in history and more than 50% of the popular vote proves that, an accomplishment by the way, that the ever so popular Bill Clinton never achieved in either of his successful presidential campaigns.

But to get back on the subject at hand, it did not escape my notice that you have to defend the three congressman with the following quote, "None of the congressional representatives are accused of any wrongdoing", which is true in the legal sense (yet). However, why do you feel the need to defend them at all (other than the "D" after their names)? While these alleged lawmakers may not have technically broken the law (McDermott's previous criminal activities that he was never prosecuted for not included), they are guilty of at least poor judgment. That is they traveled to Iraq at the very moment we were about to go to war with them attempting to undermine the president and demonstrating division amongst the American people to the Iraqi dictator. They may not be guilty of breaking the law, no, but they should be held accountable for their lack of judgment and leadership as leaders of our country.

__________________
"We should Invade Their Countries, Kill Their Leaders, and Convert Them to Christianity." Ann Coulter
There is a fine line between a subtle nuance and an extreme dichotomy! - PatriotNews

How do you "extend (ing ) aid and comfort from the enemy "' LOL

There is no indictment because there was no law broken because the mousketeers did not know that the trip was sonsored by the Sadamites. But you can keep trying!!

__________________
"I was born at night, but it was not last night night"

roflmnao... Smokin' HOT! and spot ON!

Right, not a secret . The main point is did they know who paid for the trip. They should have questioned it a whole lot more before they went on that camel ride but there is no eveidence that they did anything illegal, stupid maybe, illegal hardly!!

__________________
"I was born at night, but it was not last night night"

Not to derail the thread, but take out the known Democrat election fraud and GW carried 2000 by double digits in the summed votes of the individual states... which isn't a popular vote per se; as there is no popular vote for the Federal Executive.

It's worth noting that Bill Clinton didn't win a majority of the summed votes from the individual states, realizing a consistant majority of the nation voting against him, in BOTH is Presidential runs. I've never seen the left crying about that.