You think you’re so different from the Republicans? You’re not. You’re exactly like them and vice versa. You see what the other side favors and then you take the opposite stance. You got pissed when people criticized Clinton and they get pissed when you criticize Bush for the same things. You’re all alike.

God help us if either group ever evaluated an issue on merit alone.

This is my new favorite definition
parisan (noun) - A fervent, sometimes militant supporter or proponent of a party, cause, faction, person, or idea.

Tiny history lesson…the best Republican in NE history was Sen. Norris, who FDR campaigned for. The best Democrat was William Jenning’s Bryant, who was a Fundimentalist Christian.

But the way the GOP runs the house, senate, and Exec branches, there’s no reason not to be a partisan. The tone is set by the party in power. Remeber how Clinton reached for Bipartisan issues like Welfare Reform and Nafta (not that I liked either of those much)? Bush has made the key points of his administration 1% tax cuts, stripping medicare, privitizing SS, and starting two wars.

Any objective observer can see that Bipartisanship has been something Democrats give Republicans when Democrats are in power…and Republicans beat Democrats into submission with when Republicans are in power.

So call me a partisan…but I’m going to apose each and every move that the GOP makes in the next 4 years unless a democrat can convince me it deserves bipartisan support.

oh wait. we were talking about Elkhorn.
annexing is common sense. I supported Daub when he was in favor of it, and I support Fahey now.

Free trade between 1st world nations is one thing (like the EU), free trade between two of the richest nations in the world (America, Canada) and easily manipulated 2nd world countries with vast natural resources to squander (like Venezuela, Brazil and Chile) is somewhat imoral, and free trade between 2 of the richest and some of the poorest (Belize, Columbia, Bolivia) is downright criminal.

The problem is exploitation. Free trade is good when it moves goods faster, helps businesses reach larger markets, etc. It is bad when it is really just anther way of saying “let’s ship jobs over seas to people we can economically force them onto with no living wages and no infrastructure to protect their rights or give them any shot at advancement in the world.”

But I don’t know why I feel the need to go into policy debates about Nafta right now. I mean, the things Bush is doing to the budget are so much worse for 2nd and 3d world countries, not to mention our economy, that who really cares.