Well, there are a lot of nominal conservatives who seem to be tiring of BushCo's phoney, perpetual war conservatism and reckless Big Brother antics. And you're right, the Dems have obviously have nothing better to offer. (except maybe Barak Obama)

But I know what you mean about the Libertarian mean streak. You want some real pro-market meanness, check out AEI's James Glassman's (Dow 44,000?) Techcentralstation.com.

As long as we're supposing, I suppose that could happen. Frankly, I think Cheney's too tired to carry on the charade much longer. And my supposition is that if impeachment talk gains much more traction, we'll have another 9-11-style attack to rally the rabid around W. How convenient was it that OBL just showed up again?

Good word, artie! When pigs fly, right? Just before I read your reply I was thinking about how much entrenched power would have to shift in order to put the brakes on this plummeting handbasket that our Government has become. Norquist is a true neo-con, totally a subscriber to the Leo Strauss Method. Gore's speech last Monday was delivered at the invitation of a Libertarian group. There's a mean streak of neo-cons in the Libertarian Party, what if Norquist is making a move to establish the Libertarian Party as his standard bearer? Why wouldn't he run for the Roses in 2008? If the Republicans are disgraced, might he be expecting the Dem's to be too disorganized and inept to fill the void?

What happens if Cheney becomes President, in, say March of 2007? Suppose impeachment hearings begin, soon, are they going to be concluded before then? If Cheney becomes President in March of 2007, he can run in 2008 and run again in 2012. Assuming someone somewhere finds him a heart that works.

Steve

=========

Our lives begin to end the moment that we become silent about things that matter. (Martin Luther King Jr.)

Looks to me like a bunch of far-right-wing-nuts are doing a little preemptive CYA. I wouldn't intrepret this as rapprochement with us "libruls."

Artie

Thanks, coz, for your inherent humor.

Another voice weighs in supporting Mr. Gore's call for immediate Congressional hearings, but from a very unexpected quarter. An organization called "Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances" has released a statement calling for "substantive oversight" in the matter. Looking at the founding membership of the organization, I am shocked - shocked I say! - to find not only Bob Barr, that rascally Congressman who shadowed former President Clinton for two years waving a blue dress, but Grover Norquist, leader of the fourth-most powerful lobby in DC, Americans for Tax Reform.

Norquist is considered by many to be the tail that wags the Republican economic policy dog. What is he doing making a statement like this:

Serious concerns

Alarming revelations

Grover Norquist

Could this mean that the Republican Party is about to abandon their standard bearer and clear the way for the man who actually runs the War on Terra to become the Commander in Chief?

Steve

=========

Our lives begin to end the moment that we become silent about things that matter. (Martin Luther King Jr.)

Well we've got it all out there now. The hanging chads, the Supreme Court, the weeks of ballot counting and recounting, the lawsuits. But which of those resulted in his losing the electoral votes? Was it the hanging chads, the ballot counting, the lawsuits? No indeed! It was the Supreme Court.

Hence the 11 point margin.

Thanks for the extra definitions. I hadn't thought of them when I used the term "resounding". I was thinking of it very much in the literal sense. The 2000 Presidential Election Debacle still reverberates in the minds of many dyed-in-the-wool Libruls. I myself will still avoid connecting the P-word with the B-name. I will refer to him as "Commander in Chief" or "Chief Executive" but I will not demean the office by attaching his name to it.

Steve

=========

Our lives begin to end the moment that we become silent about things that matter. (Martin Luther King Jr.)

"Odd" is putting it mildly.

And "resounding" also means "clear" or "unequivocal." Certainly Bush's win was anything but clear or unequivocal.

Artie

Thanks for your comment, artie. Isn't it odd that despite the popular vote statistic you cited, someone else was sworn in as 43rd President?

I don't think there was any controversy at all as to why he lost Florida's electoral votes. As I pointed out in my previous post, he lost them by an 11% margin.

Resounding: Sounding loudly; full of sound; ringing; echoing or reverberating; mentioned much and loudly.

Steve

=========

Our lives begin to end the moment that we become silent about things that matter. (Martin Luther King Jr.)

Yes, let's do research! Resounding defeat?! He won the popular vote by over 500,000 votes! Do a little more research and you'll find that there was/is considerable controversy over why he lost Florida's electoral votes.

Artie

Thanks for your well-meaning advice, peacearena, and I agree with your sentiment. It's important for all of us to be well-informed, regardless of our position on the political spectrum. Thanks too for your link to Bob Somerby's excellent blog. He is the foremost authority on the media's "Two Year War Against Gore" IMHO, and often manages to recount the most disheartening events with sympathy and humor.

Always worth reading.

As for the right-wing attacks. If you take the time to do the research, you will find that they are based in truth, and did not in fact originate with the "right wing". They came from our own "liberal" media, which Mr. Somerby has copiously (and humorously) documented.

Mr. Gore did in fact state for the public record that he was reported to have been the model for the principle character in "Love Story". There's nothing careless about saying that, and it happens that the author, Eric Segal, later confirmed what Gore referred to as having been written. The "right-wing attack", perpetrated by that right-wing rag The New York Times, arises from the incorrect assumption that Mr. Gore was exaggerating his self-importance, when in fact he was not.

Same is the case for the "invented the internet" claim. Mr. Gore actually stated that he "took the initiative in creating" the internet, which happens to be true. The "right-wing attack", perpetrated by such right-wing media as USA Today, MSNBC, and the US News and World Report, arises from incorrectly quoting Mr. Gore.

I note that you did not dispute the point about Mr. Gore wearing earth tones, peacearena. Did you find that claim to be closer to the truth than the one I mentioned and the other one I didn't? Or did it seem like less of a right-wing attack, and perhaps closer to the real reason why he suffered such a resounding defeat in 2000, losing by a margin of 11 percentage points?

Steve

=========

Our lives begin to end the moment that we become silent about things that matter. (Martin Luther King Jr.)

Al Gore never claimed he was the model for "Love Story" and liberals should not go around carelessly passing on right-wing attacks. That's the mainstream media's job! For the record, he also didn't claim he invented the internet. Please see today's Daily Howler at http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh011806.shtml for further straightening of the record about Gore and the media lapdogs who contributed to his "defeat" in 2000.

This is an excellent speech full of important insight and reflection. I really appreciated that Gore spoke more about the balance of power among the three branches of government rather than between the two political parties. Hopefully by not involving republicratic party politics with which so many Americans personally identify, we can approach reform in a rational rather than emotional manner.