The Left isnt happy with their own party.

[amsterdam]

What a shocker. I'd be mad too if I were them.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006...l-of-them.html

amsterdam Reviewed by amsterdam on 01-18-2006. The Left isnt happy with their own party. What a shocker. I'd be mad too if I were them. http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/01/just-fire-democrats-please-all-of-them.html Rating: 5

[amsterdam]

At least their are some dems with a brain left.

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsAr...OURT-ALITO.xml

[Breukelen advocaat]

From the website in the 1st posting on this thread:

Only an idiot thinks Bush won the election because "much of the American public" supported anything in his platform. He won by default. People couldn't stand him, they didn't want him back as president, but the Democrats presented the voters with an even worse choice. And when it's a choice between two evils, while Mae West may pick the one she hasn't tried, the American people prefer the lesser of the two. Any Democrat who thinks Bush won, and we lost, because he had some kind of mandate is a fool.

In other words:

"Better the devil you know than the devil you don't know" - It is better to deal with something bad you know than with something new you don't; the new thing might be even worse. The proverb is of Irish origin and has been traced back to the 1539 Collection of proverbs by R. Taverner. First attested in the United States in 'Dodd Cases'(1934) by K. Livingston..." "Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings" (1996) by Gregory Y. Titelman (Random House, New York, 1996).

[nicholasstanko]

What a shocker. I'd be mad too if I were them.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006...l-of-them.html

is there a point to this thread of some kind?

members of a political affiliation are unhappy with the people they've elected to represent them.



would they be a better party if they just quietly went along with whatever was "the thing" at the time?