<DIV>Nathan's right that the Dems have been doing a much better job than I expected blocking Bush on the domestic front. They are bereft of ideas of their own, of course, since they can't be seen to be advocating (gasp) liberalism. That would be bad. jks Nathan Newman <nathanne@nathannewman.org> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Henwood" <DHENWOOD@PANIX.COM> Nathan Newman wrote: >So Bush is nowhere near secure. In fact, he's toast if this is the best he >can do with fullout military rah-rah behind him right now. -But thankfully he's got a bunch of wimpy Dems to bail him out! Silly story quoted, since it ignores the Dems killing ANWR drilling, filibustering Estrada, and slashing Bush's tax cut in the budget vote. To note my perennial-- where's the Bankuptcy Law? Dems spent their year and half of Senate control blocking every major piece of Bush legislation and most of his judicial appointments. And even in opposition, they are recruiting enough moderate Republicans to block a lot of his legislative agenda. Bush's labor department is trying to drop insanely burdensome "reporting requirements" on unions, and already Dems and labor have recruited 28 GOP folks in the House against the Bush position. You are so fixated on the war (which again two-thirds of House Dems voted against authorization) that you ignore the full-scale Dem opposition to Bush's domestic agenda. -- Nathan Newman ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk</BLOCKQUOTE></DIV> <hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!? <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/search/mailsig/*http://search.yahoo.com">The New Yahoo! Search</a> - Faster. Easier. Bingo.