I agree. When parties control the White House and Congress bad things are bound to happen. It happened in the Clinton White House and the then Democratically controlled Congress. However, using that argument to mitigate what this White House and Congress have done is weak at best. None of the Clinton "scandals" involved the outing of CIA operatives as political retribution, the manufacturing of intelligence to fit a pro-war scenario, and political croynism, all which in some way has led to the deaths of more than 2000 U.S. Servicemembers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

As for the ideological "flip-flop," well, that's not that big of a deal. Ideology doesn't pay the bills, you know.

Actually, Clinton did lie the country into war and did practise cronyism. He didn't out an CIA agent. He looks good compared to Bush because he isn't a brain damaged yuppie cretin, and he was competent at his evil.

What makes Bush so extra specially appalling is the enormity of how bathsit crazy and how stupid his supporters must be. Clinton's supporters, and even his apologists, were a lot less cracked than the wingnuts. The Clinton brand has been deprecated, however, and won't fly again -- even though the terminal muttonheads at Dem Central haven't got it yet.

Actually, Clinton did lie the country into war and did practise cronyism.

I won't dispute that for a second (if you are referencing Kosovo).

However, I think the really big mistake there was in not making the Clinton Doctrine: Anytime anyone declares a War on Terror they are hypocritical, ego-centric assholes and should be dealt with at rock bottom as international pariahs. From Xinjiang to Chechnya to Kosovo to Palestine, Iraq (to roll the clock back, Vietnam, South Africa, Angola, etc.. check the early rhetoric) it's damn near a truism that when those words pour out of the mouth of some potentate it's a preamble to some miserible hell on earth and the leader that starts out down this path should be shut down or shut out at first opportunity and that applies to Milosovich and would have applied to Saddam during the 80's (not that that means a squirt of piss after he was encouraged then, castigated with crocodile tears shed a few decades later).

Ah shit, I almost forgot why I came over here.

Dennis Perrin says you converted to Jews for Jesus. Not to second guess your religious convictions I just wonder for God's sake, why?

I had an Assembly of God education, I run as far and as fast as I can from his followers. If you want some spirituality (or even just Vonnegutessqe extended family) have you ever considered the Unitarians?

I respect your decision's but as someone who has followed American Jesus down the rabbithole, I can tell you one day you are going to look around and wonder exactly what the hell you got into

Hey everybody,
Big Ed: I know U R not talking to me, but I like pre-merger Unitarianism myself. There's a UU congregation here in my town, and I imagine they're nice people and many Saturdays I find myself wanting to stay up all night so I can go visit(they don't seem to have a hangover service) as I prefer vampire hours, or at least my body does, but I worry about taxing my ticker.

Just as John Wayne always said he didn't trust a man who doesn't drink(ahem!), I'm leery of a congregation that doesn't have an evening service, even if they mean well. I still may go visit them some day.

However, regarding Mr Ritter:
this is the thing-- they WILL talk about it.

Just not the way you think: they'll wait a while, then at least 1 member OF EACH PARTY will denounce

something else he says-- it crawls inside your noggin that way, and your unsuspecting psyche doesn't even notice you've been played...

I'm convinced that's how it works.

Finally, come visit my blog and give me buckets of money. Uncouth of me? I suppose so-- I lack experience as a fundraiser.

Tell you what: ask young mister Schwarz if I kick ass, and if so, to what degree.

And Jonathan S., thank you for indulging my visitation. You know I always take my hat off when I visit, out of respect.

Jonathan V, you _are_ indeed uncouth and likely have not even taken the most introductory of marketing classes. Everyone knows there has to be something in it "for me", the consumer. So, what will it be? A free rubber bracelet to show off one's support for the Hugo Research Initiative? A clock/radio in the shape of Karl Rove's head? C'mon, what kind of fundraising are you starting without the notorious 'free gift'??

mk,

Perhaps the time has come to abandon this "institute of higher learning" crap and just raze Yale to the ground. We should take a lesson from Poltergeist and accept that the real problem is that the New Haven Green just outside Yale's gates is a huge abandoned graveyard.

Also: I could go for a clock/radio in the shape of Karl Rove's head.

Non-Blonde,

For some time now I've been curious what color your hair is, since you're only willing to specify that it's not blond. Could it be that your hair is ROTARIAN COLOR?

Magnus,

Actually, the bad Clinton administration things Ritter is referring to mostly happened when the Republicans controlled the House. And rather than opposing Clinton's bad actions, the Republicans wanted to do things that were even worse.

Ed Marshall,

Actually, that was just a many-layered joke on Dennis' part. It's too complicated to explain here, but be not afraid.

Jonathan Versen,

Thank you for taking off your hat. I understand there are people who specifically wear multiple hats while here, just to spite me.

I'm also a non-brunette, non-redhead and non-black haired Rotarian. "Skinhead Rotarian" seemed a little threatening, Jonathan. Plus, I'm wearing the hat Jonathan V sent me. I realize none of that makes any sense, but I am on your side in this discussion, and any other.

sorry, I was asleep-- the only prize I ever gave viz-a-viz my blog was to "Holly X" of Youngstown, Ohio in my "guess Xymphora's real name" contest from this past spring.

Holly claimed Xymphora was her husband because hubby was moody and irritable and worked in a dead-end IT job there in Youngstown, and that his boss was scared of him because he was mildly antisocial and so fucking smart, which of course meant that his up-the-ladder chances at mysterious organization "X" were essentially nil.

Holly offered no proof of her assertion, although

a. she said that she thought that his being so paranoid that he password-protected his home PC such that even she didn't know the password was proof enough for her, and naturally if he was Xymphora he wasn't about to tell her...

and

b. she didn't follow the rules and leave her guess in the comments, emailing me directly at my yahoo address, and was so brazen as to give me an address to mail the prize to her.

so, given the plausibility of her explanation and her rebellion in not following the rules, I had to send her the prize...

and no, it wasn't a tinfoil hat. It was an edible treat named after a person...

finally, people who ask for something in return for giving me gobs of money without suggesting a really compelling and thoughtful prize are just dorks. Unless they do give me gobs of money, in which I'll have to tell all the local bail bonds outfits in Denton that all that stuff I said about them wasn't really true...

I will offer the same prize to someone who puts me over 250 bucks, either via a single donation or a donation AND telling a whole mess folks to give me money too. I'll take as little as 1 dollar at a time, but keep in mind that the prize costs approximately 2.39(plus tax) at the store, so don't be chintzy or I'll use my mysterious voodoo powers on you. I'm thinking that if you want to score my mysterious prize and a mention at HZ, a minimum of five bucks from you and 200 plus from a bunch of other pals of yours should do it. Remember Tom Sawyer's famous distribution of labor scheme whenever anyone asks you for money, and you want to do it.

or, just give because it helps me make a my documentary, if you regard this as a worthy thing, and seek out rich buttery goodness on your own if you don't win...

And thank you again, Mistah Schwarz, for indulging me.

I heard Ritter on Democracy Now and also read the transcript at the Nation website. Anyway, he wasn't talking about Clinton's lies about Monica--he was talking about Clinton's lies about Iraq, WMD's, weapons inspectors being forced out of Iraq when in reality Clinton pulled them out, and so on.

I greatly prefer a relatively competent and sane liar like Clinton to a moronic and incompetent liar like Bush, but they do have that one trait--lying--very much in common.