Sandra. While I can appreciate your anger with the Republicans, I don't think handing the keys to the Democrats is any healthy solution, either.

First of all, you are equating the Neo-cons with the whole of the Republican party. The reality is that they are more Neo-lib than anything. Their policies and ideals bear this out.

Thinking from a purely logical standpoint, the healthiest thing for this country would be to maintain balance in the federal government. That is to say that, should Obama win the Presidency, the worst thing to do would be to give him the Congress too. Especially Obama.

If you think about it, the Clinton years were prosperous in part because of the Republican opposition in Congress. The Republicans were against NAFTA. They're not given any credit now for that position.

Of course, Clinton was given a free pass on many things because the econoomy was good.

Part of the problem with Dubya is that he had a lockstep Congress for 6 years. Throw in 9/11 and the Neo-con ideology, and you have a recipe for disaster. Perhaps a Democrat Congress would have stemmed the tide?

The truth is that the extremes of both parties are being played against the middle. The middle being The People. We are forced into opposing camps by the constant attacks and conflict, when all we want is some honesty and integrity from either side.

Both parties have their roles, and play them to perfection. The Republicans are the bad cops right now, and the Democrats are the good cops. But they're both still cops.

You stated in another post that there is no party for you. You are definitely not alone. You once supported Ron Paul. I still do. He truly is non-partisan, and he was the only viable candidate for me. I will now focus my attention on Congress, for there is no candidate worthy of my support on either side.

You are right to be sad, as am I, that they have betrayed our trust. Both sides are flawed and corrupt, for that there can be no mistake. But to give one party complete control is not a viable alternative, in my mind. Restoring balance is the only way to minimize damage, as horrifying as that may sound to you.

Perhaps we can buy another four years to work toward changing the system, and perceptions, for real.

I'll defer to Samuel Adams...

"Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom — go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!"

I'm sorry, was it democrud? Democrap? Another brainwashed partisan automaton. At least I don't resort to such childish tactics. Playground politics. Do your parents know you're here?

You guys have make playing the victims a true art form. Get back to me when you learn the difference between a Republic and a Democracy.

Then find out what principle this country was founded upon. I can assure you it wasn't a democracy. As a matter of fact, The Founders held the idea of democracy in the highest contempt, and didn't even consider it.

And the Democrats are Constitutionalists? You're a fool. Just for the record, though, I am not even Christian. Never have been, never will be. You rant against extremism but you're extremist yourself. If anyone disagrees with you they are un-American. Sound familiar?

You are everything you supposedly denounce. Maybe this isn't the forum for me. I was under the impression I would find rational people here. I was apparently wrong.

You are all over the place yet nowhere. You are led by the nose right where they want you to go. And you go gleefully and ignorantly. You don't understand simple concepts and arguments. You don't want civil discourse and exchange of ideas.

You have no idea who I am or what I believe. You don't want to. You want to live in your own version of reality and condemn anyone that disagrees. You can't make a coherent argument, so you rely on ad hominem attacks and name-calling. You must be a graduate of the Bill O'Reilly/Sean Hannity school of political debate. You apply labels to justify your ignorance.

Yeah, I'm a plant. From where? We fight for the same thing. Only I choose to do it with logic and reason, not hate and emotion. I refuse to be herded by the media and the Establishment, while you bathe in its warm and comforting embrace. While you abandon your party, I choose to change it from within.

You simply fail to realize the one great truth in all of this. A truth that I have attempted to convey. That nothing happens without a reason. That both parties work in concert to foster endless conflict with no resolution. That changing one party for another is not a solution. That absolute power for either party is not a solution. The system that both parties maintain and control is the root of the problem.

So you continue your crusade...that is your right and I respect that. Just leave the thinking to the people with the capacity and the understanding to do so.

You know, my initial response to Sandra's post was respectful, impersonal, and reasonable. She made it personal, and I'll not apologize for defending myself and my position.

My attempt to draw her, and others, into a more substantial, in-depth discussion was met with censorship and accusations. And it's not the first time, either. I guess it's just easier to toe the line and dig yourself in than it is to even consider talking to "the other side".

I greatly resent being lumped in with the rest of the Republican trash. I suppose I'm also a gay child rapist that trolls the nation's airport restrooms. It's already implied that I'm a racist, even though some of my best friends are Hispanic.

What I am is an everage working class joe with a family and a deep and complete dread for the future. What is happening these days in the political arena does nothing to assuage those fears.

On second thought, I do apologoze. Not for the way I think, but only for voicing it in the way that I did. I'm man enough to do that.

George Washington, a hopeless optimist. Oh George, if you could see us now...

"No country upon earth ever had it more in its power to attain these blessings than United America. Wondrously strange, then, and much to be regretted indeed would it be, were we to neglect the means and to depart from the road which Providence has pointed us to so plainly; I cannot believe it will ever come to pass."

Collectivism is slavery...believe it.

That is a fair comment, Warren, yet what I do not understand is why Sen. McCain chose to deny that he had met Paxson. That is so easily checked, as it was.

I can even agree that the insinuation in the Times article that the Iseman relationship was intimate took away from the real focus which was the Senator's blind spot when it comes to lobbyists.

But denying the Paxson meeting is simply absurd and makes me wonder what he thought he was hiding. That is why I wrote this piece, not just to bash the Senator for being very much involved with lobbyists. For example, no other candidate has unpaid lobbyists running their campaign, so what does that fact say about the man?

To me it says he has poor judgment, and that is what my point is.
Phil Hoskins