YASNY

I went through there last summer, on the way to Galveston.

I can't disagree with you there. I just don't believe in the concept of a wasted vote.

I voted against both major party candidates in Kentucky and I don't feel I wasted my time. It was my way of telling them that they have to do better to get my vote.

I was in the DFW area.

I totally disagree. If you vote, you speak. You may not have voted for the candidate that your states EV's go for, but it is a voice.

I was in Texas last weekend.

You haven't, but usually those that b**** the loudest are those that think they are too good to vote. It's a pet peeve of mine. Sorry, nothing personal meant by that post.

Don't hold your breath.

No b****ing or complaining allowed from you. If you don't care enough to take the time to cast a vote, then you have no grounds to gripe.

Regardless ... stfu anyway.

A lot changed after the Civil War. The word "Union" became common when referring to the nation at that time. The focus shifted from the individual states to the nation as a whole.

Fox News is repoting that the AP is saying that Kerry has called Bush and conceded.

I believe this will end up with Bush taking NV, IA, OH and NM and Kerry taking WS. Those seem to be the states that are under question by various news outlets.

Is death an option?

Hillary ... :puke Anybody but her, please.

So ... would we move Konerko or Lee or Rowand and Garland for Posada?

Amen.

I think the American people spoke loud and clear, my friend.

Let me say this about that. No matter how you feel about this particular issue and the fact that 11 states voted as they did you need to think long and hard about supporting a federal (read constitutional) amendment defining a marriage as being between a man and a woman. The reason I say this has nothing to do with this isuue in and of itself. It has to do with the process of ratifying an amendment and allowing for the opening of a constitutional convention. Once that convention is conviened, any and all changes can be made to the constitution that the delegates see fit to change. For example, Jeckle was saying the 2 term limit on the presidency is a thing of the past, well it may be if a Constitutional Convention is called. Or ... an amendment can be added to make abortion illegal. Or ... hell, they can even repeal the admendment granting women the right to vote if they so choose. Do not give those bastards carte blanche with our Constitution without having a damn good reason to do so.

Jeckle, you should stop banging your head on that keyboard. It's making you looney.

I don't think gloating serves any purpose, now.

Nuke, never underestimate the ferocity of a scorned democrat.

Yes. It's the same here in KY. This is in place to keep someone from going into a bar and saying "Hey guys, come vote and candidate's Name will buy you a drink. Of course, that would have been the only thing a political candidate has ever done for me. So, they outlawed it to prevent it from happening. Typical politicians.

Their credibility kinda got shot to hell, didn't it?

Too many people settle for the choices offered by the two parties because no one else has a snowball's chance in hell of winning. However, if more people would refuse to accept only those choices and vote for another candidate it could possibly eveolve into a third party. If nothing else, it sends a message. I voted, but not for either of the main party candidates. If John Kerry had taken a stand on any issue besides raising taxes I might have considered him. But his platform was "I'm not Bush". I believe that strategy may have also cost the Dems in House and Senate since they potentially lost a lot coattail votes. When the Democrats realize they are too leftwing for mainstream America, they will be able to get back in power but until they do it's going to be more of the same. I wish they'd steer the party toward a more moderate stance because we do need a change in ideology in Washington. I hope they wise up before '08. God Bless America! we're gonna need it