Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Emanuel had beliefs that align with both parties.

Posted By: Besides that...sm on 2008-11-06
In Reply to: Picked Rahm Emanuel, most left wing liberal for - Chief of Staff. nm

he is not necessarily a president's top advisor.

Rahm Emanuel supported Bush on Iraq from the get go. "Lefties" NEVER did...not for a single moment. His poolitical views align with the Democratic Leadership Council, the core belief of which is that the party should shift itself away traditional populist positions and toward the more "third way" centrist views. It has been called the "republican wing" of the democratic party by progressives and the left of centers. His views on Israel are decidedly republican and are more extreme than even the shrub.

Having said that, the chief of staff is not primarily and advisory position. In fact, the nature of the position is primarily defined by the president himself, and the chief of staff can operate only within the parameters that his president allows. JFK did not even have a COS. Obama has not indicated one way or the other how he views his relationship with the COS or how much he will or will not rely on him for advice.

For every single other aspect of those job responsibilities, Rahm Emanuel is undeniable strongly qualified by his experience. The president's chief of staff first and foremost must be trusted by the President, perhaps more than any other person in his cabinet or ministry. I would say the most important qualification for that job is that of impeccable discretion. We have no evidence to indicate that Rahm Emanuel does not posses that trait.



Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Any group that insists its beliefs are the only true beliefs,
works actively to force those beliefs on me, have reduced sex to "expression" and the more partners the better, needs to control their reproductive organs a little bit better, not my enemies either, but their way is not the only way...hellooo democracy...it's part of your name isn't it?

As to Jehovah's Witnesses, I take their booklet, thank them kindly, and throw it in the trash.

No one is forcing anything on you.
sorry...Emanuel. nm
nm
Are you saying that's not Rahm Emanuel?
Or are you just saying if he wasn't speaking to someone you approve of he can say anything he likes and you won't ruffle a feather?

Is your beef with Rahm, or with the person who did the interview? The interviewer is from the New York Daily News.

Just trying to understand your point here. Does it really matter WHO Emanuel gave the quote to? As if that somehow changes the quote itself?
I believe that Rahm Emanuel...sm
has Obama's ear, most definitely, so anything he would purpose would be looked at favorably by Obama.

My personal opinion, and mine only, is that Obama's show of building a cabinet of supporters and nonsupporters is a smoke screen...just like most of the rest of his campaign and office of President-elect thus far. I don't believe we will see the full effects of his administration until it is far, far too late.
What I read about Emanuel is not good at all.

What happened to Col. Powell maybe being Chief of Staff for Obama?  Anyway, I am not too thrilled about Emanuel being chief of staff.  From what I have been reading, he is the son of a Zionist, Israeli terrorist.  Also might be related to 911.


http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2008/11/obama-and-rahm-emanuel.html


Many, many more articles like this about Emanuel. 


 


 


Rahm Emanuel seems worse to me.
x
Rahm Emanuel is no liberal.
Rahm Emanuel supported Bush on Iraq from the get go. "Lefties" NEVER did...not for a single moment. His poolitical views align with the Democratic Leadership Council, the core belief of which is that the party should shift itself away traditional populist positions and toward the more "third way" centrist views. It has been called the "republican wing" of the democratic party by progressives and the left of centers. His views on Israel are decidedly republican and are more extreme than even the shrub.

Having said that, the chief of staff is not primarily and advisory position. In fact, the nature of the position is primarily defined by the president himself, and the chief of staff can operate only within the parameters that his president allows. JFK did not even have a COS. Obama has not indicated one way or the other how he views his relationship with the COS or how much he will or will not rely on him for advice.

For every single other aspect of those job responsibilities, Rahm Emanuel is undeniable strongly qualified by his experience. The president's chief of staff first and foremost must be trusted by the President, perhaps more than any other person in his cabinet or ministry. I would say the most important qualification for that job is that of impeccable discretion. We have no evidence to indicate that Rahm Emanuel does not posses that trait.

Have you guys been reading up on Emanuel?
Geez. This guy is scary. They call him the skull cracker and the pit bull.

This is not going to be a Carter administration.
Rahm Emanuel counts as his mentors...
From what I can see about the Democratic Leadership Counsel is they think Democrats should adopt the more centrist view when the run for something...the way Obama did. Obama is a far left liberal, his voting record says it, his history says it. But that is not the way he ran his campaign.

Rahm Emanuel was totally immersed in the Chicago political machine and counts Richard Daley as a mentor. There is a centrist for you.

as to his supporting the Iraq War....I believe that comes from his militant pro-Israel stance, not from any support of Bush. I think anyone who looks at his history knows that. And anyone who knows him knows how he stands on Israel, so I am assuming that is A-ok with Mr. Obama. It might cause some concern for Hamas though...they might withdraw their endorsement.

Chief of Staff is a title and I know you are not naive enough to think that Emanuel will not have Obama's ear, probably before anyone else.

A little on Mr. Emanuel: "At this point of his political career he was known for his intensity. Notably, he reportedly told British Prime Minister Tony Blair, prior to Blair appearing in public with Clinton for the first time after the Lewinsky scandal, "This is important. Don't fu*k it up."[17] Emanuel is said to have "mailed a rotting fish to a former coworker after the two parted ways."[16] On the night after the 1996 election, "Emanuel was so angry at the president's enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign, grabbed a steak knife and began rattling off a list of betrayers, shouting 'Dead! ... Dead! ... Dead!' and plunging the knife into the table after every name."[2] His "take-no-prisoners attitude" earned him the nickname "Rahm-bo".[16]

I think even his mother called him that...lol.

People who worked with Emanuel at that time "insist the once hard-charging staffer has mellowed out."

Let's hope he mellowed out. Not a lot of impeccable discretion going on THERE.

He left the White House to accept a well-paid position at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein investment bank in Chicago, where he worked from 1999 to 2002 and reportedly earned US$18 million.[18]

Hmmm...$18 mil in 3 years. Not bad.
Emanuel Was Director of Freddie Mac During Scandal...

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6201900&page=1



Emanuel Was Director Of Freddie Mac During Scandal



New Obama Chief of Staff, Others on Board, Missed "Red Flags" of Alleged Fraud Scheme




November 7, 2008






President-elect Barack Obama's newly appointed chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, served on the board of directors of the federal mortgage firm Freddie Mac at a time when scandal was brewing at the troubled agency and the board failed to spot "red flags," according to government reports reviewed by ABCNews.com.


According to a complaint later filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission, Freddie Mac, known formally as the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, misreported profits by billions of dollars in order to deceive investors between the years 2000 and 2002.


Emanuel was not named in the SEC complaint (click here to read) but the entire board was later accused by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) (click here to read) of having "failed in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention."


In a statement to ABCNews.com, a spokesperson said Emanuel served on the board for "13 months-a relatively short period of time."


The spokesperson said that while on the board, Emanuel "believed that Freddie Mac needed to address concerns raised by Congressional critics."


Freddie Mac agreed to pay a $50 million penalty in 2007 to settle the SEC complaint and four top executives of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation were charged with negligent conduct and, like the company, agreed to settle the case without admitting or denying the allegations.


The actions by Freddie Mac are cited by some economists as the beginning of the country's economic meltdown.


The federal government this year was forced to take over Freddie Mac and a sister federal mortgage agency, Fannie Mae, pledging at least $200 billion in public funds.


Freddie Mac records have been subpoenaed by the Justice Department as part of its investigation of the suspect accounting procedures.


Emanuel was named to the Freddie Mac board by President Bill Clinton in 2000 and resigned his position when he ran for Congress in May, 2001.




Freddie Mac Misrepresented Income, Says SEC


During the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, according to the SEC, Freddie Mac substantially misrepresented its income to "present investors with the image of a company that would continue to generate predictable and growing earnings."


The role of the 18-member board of directors, including Emanuel, was not addressed in the SEC's public action but was heavily criticized by the oversight group (OFHEO) in 2003.


The oversight report said the board had been apprised of the suspect accounting tactics but "failed to make reasonable inquiries of management."


The report also said board members appointed by the President, such as Emanuel, serve terms that are far too short "for them to play a meaningful role on the Board."


As a Congressman, Emanuel recused himself from any votes dealing with Freddie Mac until just this year.


In dealing with the nation's economic crisis, the new White House chief of staff will almost certainly be involved in discussions about the house and mortgage markets.


Emanuel's spokesperson said, "As White House chief of staff he will work with President-elect Obama and his economic advisers to help ensure we protect taxpayers and homeowners."


Rahm Emanuel is not the president-elect....(sm)

If you pay attention to what Obama is doing right now this might make sense.  Obama is filling his cabinet not only with people who agree with him, but also people who disagree with him.  Presumably he's following the lead of Lincoln who did this with his cabinet members.  The conclusion I come up with is that just because Rahm said it doesn't necessarily mean it will be law.


Rahm Emanuel Evading Property Tax
On Home By Declaring Himself A Charity?

Wow. When I’m wrong I’m the first eventual one to admit it, so I’ll go ahead and say it, “I was wrong.” Yes, I doubted that Obama could bring about the “change” I needed to not have to worry about paying bills anymore.

Well Barack Obama has put my money where his Cabinet is with the news that his newly minted Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, has possibly been evading taxes on his home for years. How could he do it? Easy! He created a fraudulent charity in 2002, named it after him and his wife, set its address as his personal residence, and voila, taxes are gone:

According to the Cook County Assessor’s website, the Chicago home of four-term Democrat Congressman and likely new White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, doesn’t exist. While the address of 4228 North Hermitage is listed as Emanuel’s residence on the Illinois State Board of Elections’ website, there seems to be no public record of Emanuel ever paying property taxes on this home…

Why would 4228 North Hermitage property owners Rahm Emanuel and wife Amy Rule not pay property taxes?

One reason could be because Emanuel and Rule declared their 4228 North Hermitage home as the office location for their non-profit foundation appropriately called the “Rahm Emanuel and Amy Rule Charitable Foundation”. As a non-profit headquarters, they may consider their home as exempt from paying taxes.

Skeptical? You shouldn’t be! After six years, the “Rahm Emanuel and Amy Rule Charitable Foundation” has had only two donors. Can you guess who?

The Rahm Emanuel and Amy Rule Charitable Trust was formed in 2002, when the Chicago lawmaker was first elected. The former Clinton White House aide and his wife, Amy Rule, are its only donors.

USA Today has a great article about Rahm and other Dems, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who are illegally operating charities under their own names while failing to report that information.

Congratulations, America, you’ve just elected another corrupt politician who surrounds himself with corrupt supporters. “Yes we can” steal from the government and those we represent!
Source: Illinois Review and USA Today

Rahm Emanuel Evading Property Tax
On Home By Declaring Himself A Charity?

Wow. When I’m wrong I’m the first eventual one to admit it, so I’ll go ahead and say it, “I was wrong.” Yes, I doubted that Obama could bring about the “change” I needed to not have to worry about paying bills anymore.

Well Barack Obama has put my money where his Cabinet is with the news that his newly minted Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, has possibly been evading taxes on his home for years. How could he do it? Easy! He created a fraudulent charity in 2002, named it after him and his wife, set its address as his personal residence, and voila, taxes are gone:

According to the Cook County Assessor’s website, the Chicago home of four-term Democrat Congressman and likely new White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, doesn’t exist. While the address of 4228 North Hermitage is listed as Emanuel’s residence on the Illinois State Board of Elections’ website, there seems to be no public record of Emanuel ever paying property taxes on this home…

Why would 4228 North Hermitage property owners Rahm Emanuel and wife Amy Rule not pay property taxes?

One reason could be because Emanuel and Rule declared their 4228 North Hermitage home as the office location for their non-profit foundation appropriately called the “Rahm Emanuel and Amy Rule Charitable Foundation”. As a non-profit headquarters, they may consider their home as exempt from paying taxes.

Skeptical? You shouldn’t be! After six years, the “Rahm Emanuel and Amy Rule Charitable Foundation” has had only two donors. Can you guess who?

The Rahm Emanuel and Amy Rule Charitable Trust was formed in 2002, when the Chicago lawmaker was first elected. The former Clinton White House aide and his wife, Amy Rule, are its only donors.

USA Today has a great article about Rahm and other Dems, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who are illegally operating charities under their own names while failing to report that information.

Congratulations, America, you’ve just elected another corrupt politician who surrounds himself with corrupt supporters. “Yes we can” steal from the government and those we represent!
Source: Illinois Review and USA Today

Rahm Emanuel as chief of staff disturbs you how?
could you please expand on your concept of the Chicago political machine? I must have missed those posts in the past.

The President's Chief of Staff is basically an administrative coordinator who oversees the white house staff. He manages the president's schedule, Under his supervision are his own deputy, White House Counsel and the White House Press Secretary. Sounds like an executive butler to me. He has experience as a political staffer and advisor, a successful campaign director and fundraiser on both the state and national levels. Senior advisor to Bill Clinton on political affairs, policy and strategy. Returned to the House of representatives from the 5th district in Illinois 4 times. He must be doing something right.

Though he had expressed his interest in staying in the House and possibly aspiring to Speaker of the House, he has now decided to leave the legislative branch and become part of the executive branch. He seems to be imminently qualified for the job and does not have any direct legislative powers. Please tell us what it is you find so foreboding about the appointment of this White House butler guy.

Rahm Emanuel wants forced civil service

Listen to the link.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfV8iXiB9Xg


DH said its disgusting that he's laughing about it.


You're not terribly familiar with Rahm Emanuel, are you?
If you were, you wouldn't be asking those questions.
Picked Rahm Emanuel, most left wing liberal for
Wow, real great choice.  I wished he would have picked more of a conservative or at least someone for both sides of party.  Great way to make start as President.
It's official. Rahm Emanuel star of democratic party
accepts position of the O's chief of staff. 
Christian beliefs. sm
Then, I suppose my next question would be, why do posters who do not agree with how boards are handled and who do not agree with the political spirit continue to come here?  And my second question would be why, with two boards, posters could not have maintained their thoughts to those boards.  Objectively, I believe that is why TWO boards were set up.  The people you seem to have the biggest problem with made a pact not to come here.  They kept that pact. By the way, I see sickness of spirit on both sides.  There were occasions on the other board when posters were were wished death and to burn in hell.  Would you fight back against that?  Personally, I would have left then.  Both of these boards are a mess.  And it solves nothing to sit here and talk about posters who will no longer be here.  Move on. 
I am not pushing my beliefs on you...
I am merely standing for what I believe in, just as you do. You seem defensive, and when people are defensive, that generally means they feel guilty. If you believe in a woman's right to choose to abort a child, that is your right, and you do not need me to endorse that. Just as I do not need you to endorse my feeling that life does begin at conception, I believe the soul begins at the same time. I do not believe a child growing in the womb is soul-less. We agree to disagree.
This is where our beliefs differ...sm
*...and we need to support our country's efforts in Iraq and support the men and women who are there trying to keep just this thing from happening.*

Your Rush Limbaugh cup runneth over. Sure anything can happen in America, but it is ridiculous to believe that us pulling out of Iraq is going to be our death certificate. That somehow we will just lie down and surrender the USA to Arabs.

where our beliefs differ....
I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh on a regular basis (unlike some liberals, I am fully capable of forming an opinion without the help of others), and the opinion I stated is my own. Ever heard the old saying the journey of a thousand miles begins with one step...? Well, every time we pull out of somewhere or ignore an opportunity (like Bill Clinton did out of Somalia, like Bill Clinton did in NONreponse to HOW many terrorist attacks during his presidency) we lay the groundwork for defeat. What makes you think that the same waffling liberals now won't be the same waffling liberals who run to Canada or anywhere else they can if we are attacked here? Tell me, Democrat, why should I believe you or put faith in your party who want to run yet again, to NOT to just lie down and surrender the USA to terrorists? Please tell me how I can have confidence in that? Because you SAY you will?? You need to understand these people...every weakness you show empowers them. They would see us pulling out now as a great victory. Maybe YOU want to give them that. I DO NOT.
False beliefs
On the flip side, what good will the war do us when we lose our house, our jobs, can no longer afford the food in the stores, can't buy gas to get to work (if you still have a job), you and your family now have to find a campground or shelter to live at (or worse) and the banks close and now you can't get any of your money out that you may have in there (this has already happened somewhere - would have to research again to find the exact location but its here in the US). This is exactly the scare tactics/agenda McCain is trying to push (gotta keep up the war, keep up the war, everyone is the enemy, lets keep it going for 100 years) - give me a break! They are trying to get enough people to be afraid (which is in itself a form of terrorism) that we are going to be attacked again. You know what...get our troops home and we will have more troops to protect our borders and increase security here in the US) Well first the economy is the most important issue (at least to me), unless of course you plan to pack up your stuff and go join the service and fight over there. If the economy collapses where are you going to be. How bout your parents/grandparents who cannot just pick up so easily and move to another area. McCain keeps pushing the war issue because he has no clue about the economy. He doesn't even remain consistent with his issue on gay marriage. My feeling is I don't care if George & John down the street or Mary & Sue down the road want to get married - that will not effect my day-to-day life however the economy does, my job does, eating and paying bills does affect me each day. McCain was at a meeting and he said he was for gay marriage, then 11 minutes later he said he was not for gay marriage. He's too old and out of touch with reality. Do you really want someone with his temper ready to hit the launch button in in whim? He is not a stable man (in my opinion).
Christian beliefs

The Lord's Prayer:
...Thy will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven....


This is a Christian prayer, for those of you who are unfamiliar.  There is nothing radical about what she is saying.  She is a faithful Christian woman. 


OP said not to force beliefs on others...
if you don't want to read religious toned posts, don't open them.
We know your beliefs....... O lover
If you're not an O lover, then one must be pyschotic. At least they're not led by a nose ring.
Exactly and that's the basis for my beliefs. n/m
x
Sorry you have no religious beliefs....... that is sad!
--
Though I think this is more beliefs than political . . .
I would never want to be kept alive like that. Would you? I have voiced this to my whole family, and they are well aware that when God tells me it is time to go, they need to let me go. I would much rather starve to death than be kept here on earth miserable in my own flesh.
Not at all. I was summing up Chomsky's beliefs. sm
In direct response to your remark about the quotes I posted. 
An example - UW professor still under attack for beliefs.sm
http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/index.php?ntid=90930&ntpid=1
Religious beliefs are not the issue here...
We were discussing the law...the phrase concerning Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is actually in the Declaration of Independence, and does not mention "citizens" at all. Regardless of your religion or lack thereof, I'm not aware of any nation in which murder or the taking of a human life is not outlawed.

As far as the ultimate decision resting with God, of course all decisions ultimately rest with God. But does that mean we should not govern ourselves or our behavior while we are here on this earth? Of course not. Laws protect the innocent - few are as innocent as an unborn child. It never ceases to amaze me that people can condone the killing of unborn babies, but are horrified if someone kills one that is 3 days old...or leaves one in a dumpster shortly after birth...or on the doorsteps of a church. I think it has been drilled into our heads for so long that this is a choice for women and our RIGHT that we actually never step back and think about the fact that we are talking about killing babies. If someone were to propose a law that men...simply because they were men...had the right to, oh, kill 3 year olds, people would laugh their heads off at the absurdity of it. Yet that is exactly what we are doing - giving women the right to kill their own children, simply because they are women and the child is in their body. Why not give the fathers the right to abort the child? After all, it is half theirs? Again, an absurd notion. But because we are women and the children grow in our bodies, we have the right to kill them? I'm sorry, I can never understand the justification for this. There are alternatives. There are choices. Choosing to kill the child should not be an option. In what other situation is it acceptable to kill another human being as a viable choice? I can think of only one - self-preservation. Self defense. So I supposed under the law, if the unborn child is killing you, you should probably be able to protect yourself. I would have to agree with that argument, but sadly, that is rarely the reason for an abortion.
not questioning your ideas or beliefs -
I am just wondering how is that? Are you and your husband both American? I am just being nosy and I guess you don't have to answer me if you don't want to... just curious how that happened or how it works and if it was something you chose.
Polygamy isn't just religious beliefs
There are others, such as "swingers" who engage in group sex. Who's not to say that they wouldn't start to fight for the right to marry, even if only for the massive tax break they would get?


No, it's not a human right.....contrary to your beliefs
marriage is supposed to be a gift from God for those that actually understand what that means in the first place. No where in the Bible does it talk about 2 men or 2 women having a relationship as blessed by God, but it sure tells us it is WRONG!

How do you manage to be so screwed up that you don't know the difference between homosexuality and difference in color of skin? Last time I checked, blacks go to school with whites and have for a long time, at least they do in my community.... blacks have every right whites have..... homosexuals have every right we ALL have.


I personally feel that our beliefs

of right vs wrong come from our own personal upbringing.  I was raised in a very strict family.  My mom attended church every Sunday and took us three kids with her.  Dad smoked and swore and refused to go to church on Sunday because he didn't want to be a hypocrit because he wasn't going to give up his cigarettes, etc.  My dad believed in God, but he just didn't want to be one of the people in the pews on Sunday talking about how great of a Christian he was when he knew he was going to walk outside and light up a cigarette. 


My husband is an atheist.  He believes in evolution and says that he doesn't need a higher power or supreme being to tell him what is right and what is wrong.  However, he has no problem with his two boys going to church because he feels the morals that are taught at church are good for the boys.  If they believe in God, he has no problem with that.  If they decided not to, he has no problem with that.  I don't push religion on my husband and he doesn't push his beliefs or lack thereof on me either and we've been happily married for 8 years now with two wonder boys and another baby on the way.


I feel that rules do change with time.  We no longer stone people who commit adultry.  We don't cut hands off of people who steal.  We don't kick people out of our communities for being "unclean" even though there are a few I'd like to kick out.  LOL!  I don't see anyone sacrificing virgins or children either.


I feel that right and wrong should be based upon what is best for the majority of people and not small minority groups.  We are never going to do everything that makes everyone happy, but we have to do what is best for a majority of people. 


They stop trying to push YOUR beliefs on
--
Who belittled Kfir's Jewish beliefs?

I might be missing something here but I can't find posts by Kfir discussing her Jewish faith.  It was all about the war.  It was about the state of Israel not about the Jewish religion.  Isn't that 2 different things?


No matter how long ago it was, Ayers still has the same beliefs sm
He has shown that by not apologizing, but even saying right after 09/11 in 2001 saying that he still didn't feel they had done enough and wished they had done more. People died in those bombings. He was and is a terrorist right here in homeland. He has posed in recent years with himself standing on top of a crumpled American flag - and yet we buy Obama's excuses as to why he won't acknowledge respect of our flag? You really think those two things are not related? That Obama on national television is in essence giving a "wink and a nod" to his cohorts? It screams obvious. And now all the voter fraud with Acorn, and I guess Obama is just coincidentally involved with them too?
Stay out of my bedroom, my beliefs and my uterus first of all.
Then, provide a sound infrastructure (low crime rate, low poverty rate) with my hard earned and eagerly paid taxes with is all a citizen can do for his country besides obeying the laws and living the Golden Rule.
"Muslim is wrong?" "I don't judge anybody or their beliefs?"
explaining away the conflict in this statement TO YOURSELF before you take it upon yourself to explain it to others.
Which can be said for BOTH parties. :-)
nm
I don't understand...you are saying Hitler's beliefs are factual and sane?
I am very puzzled.  When challenged on your historical knowledge, you cite Hitler as a source for your information?  Remember, he also planned to exterminate the Poles and all Catholics eventually.  I don't think the reasons he cites for hating the Jews are really the basis for any historical reality. He was, after all, one the greatest propagandists.
You're right, I cannot change your beliefs, not directed solely at you (sm)
But at anyone who supports partial birth abortion really.  It is just an overwhelmingly horrible thought to me.
Here are some other parties and their candidates.

The Libertarian Party has nominated former Congressman Bob Barr, the Constitution Party has nominated pastor and radio talk show host Chuck Baldwin, and the Green Party has nominated former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. Ralph Nader declined to seek the Green Party nomination and is running as an independent candidate.  That is in addition to the Ron Paul fans as well as McCain and Obama.


What did we get out of the debate last night?  That same ole crap Obama and McCain have been throwing around since the get go.  Imagine what that would be like with all these other people thrown in the debate as well. 


I think you have the 2 parties mixed up. (nm)
x
Tea parties across America
first here is a great video link  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEZB4taSEoA.  Also, many states, including Chicago, are actually hosting tea parties throughout many communities and they are gathering a large following.  We could be on our way to a revolution. 
So you believe we need separate parties to
nm
Yes, that is true, BOTH parties have to...sm
find newer, stronger, wiser candidates, real workers for the American people, NOT lobbyists or special interest groups. Does such an "animal" even exist in politics???? I am wondering. And as for Pub candidates, had Mr. McCain had more, better ideas for the economy, the war, etc., I was willing to vote for him. But after listening to every speech and debate I could, I was horribly disappointed in this brave man. And when he picked Palin, well, let's just say it was like a sign from God saying "Don't go there." JMHO, thanks for your post, and I, too, felt so bad about how Micheal Phelps was VILLIFIED for perhaps taking a hit off a bong. C'mon, he was SUPERMAN for America, and one youthful mistake that happened in private, and no on knows all the circumstances....so wrong how they made this kid feel!
It looks to me like they have all been working parties too -
One of the lines even said that it was a "hamburger and hotdog" affair for the congressman; and it also plainly stated that Obama had left the party before the conga line started - but who cares anyway?

Do you think just because he is President he is not human and does not like to interact and have fun? Do you not think that every President before him has entertained and enjoyed themselves at their "HOME"?
And these Tea Parties are funny because?????? ...
Rachel Maddow is a mean 5 letter word.

I am one of the organizers of a Tea Party in my city. The little people cannot do anything to the politicians, and true, this may not amount to much, but if it makes even ONE elected official take notice then the purpose has been served.

Perhaps if more people got out and did something rather than laughing about this, we ALL could make a difference. But then that is just my opinion.