In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

So, what you're saying is that bipartisn legislation is a bad thing?
That's the whole point of our democracy!

In a perfect world it would be, but this isn't anywhere near a perfect
world. The democrats passed highly partisan bills for decades, at least
until '94.

Democracy isn't a perfect world. Most of the time, partisan bills
don't get anywhere. It takes a village. In your case, it takes a
village idiot.

When Bush was elected, the GOP then passed some partisan bills,
but many of them were bipartisan in nature. If Bush is re-elected, expect a
new rash of highly partisan GOP initiatives during the next four years.

That's for sure. All of them bad for the country. We need a split
between parties in Congress and the White House.

That's the nature of the Washington beast. My favorite mix is a republican
president and a democrat Congress, or vice versa. Keeps things from
becoming extreme, and not much of anything gets passed, except lots of
post-lunch gas.

Then you should be voting for Kerry not Bush. It's doubtful that the
Dems can retake the Senate.

You've got your head up your ass if you actually believe that this is
what is being proposed.

Jon, your derogatory rhetoric has convinced me that looking you up in
December wouldn't be to the benefit of either of us.

I suggest you kill file me immediately!

--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."