Saying that he felt "used and abused" by the political rally that was supposed to be a memorial for Sen. Paul Wellstone, Gov. Jesse Ventura has announced that he will not appoint a Democrat to be Wellstone's interim successor.

This means that the Democrats will have 49 Senators, the Republicans will have at least 49 Senators, and there will be 1 or 2 Independants.

Should the interim successor be a Republican, the Republicans will take control of the Senate until Jan 20. Should he/she be an Independant, the Senate will be evenly split between the two parties, chaimanships and committees will be equally split, and the deciding vote to break deadlocks will be in the hands of Vice President Dick Cheney.

The long dark night of the Democratic obstructionist Senate is over, if only until Jan 20.

God Bless America.

For another view on Wellstone's send off, and how the reaction to what became a politcal rally wasn't anger (as the conventional media reported) but fear, see

http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/11.02A.ma.minn.htm

...once again the Facist Right (pardon my redundancy) has shown their outright fear of democracy....

...they fear the people!

How so? The people's voice is heard through their Senators and Representatives. The people had voted in the majority for a Republican senate. A single man, after deceiving the people about his intentions, then abandoned the Republican party, giving control of the Senate to the Democrats. Now the Democrats have suffered a loss, and the balance of power is returned to the Republicans as the people had intended.

I'm surprised I have to explain this to you.

"The people have voted in the majority for a Republican Senate"? Oh, really? How did they do this? Did the people "in the majority" who voted for, say Barbara Boxer, vote for a republican Senate?

...it don't work that way, ignoramus...your point is, umm...pointless.

And what is this "one man"? If he decides to change parties and he is not representing his constituents, then he will answer to them...that is democracy...that is between him and his constituents...it matters not one fuckin iota whether some rube in South Carolina doesn't like it because he would want every Senator to be named Helms...

...c'mon little boy, when are you gonna get some huevos!

Jeffords didn't deceive his people or his party when he switched from Republican to Independent. Vermont and most of the northeast has a long-standing tradition of voting for Republican moderates (I know, sounds like an oxymoron, but it wasn't always that way). And so Jeffords was simply being true to this tradition, which is what the people of his state voted for.

For those of you who haven't lived long enough, the Republican party has been hijacked over the last couple of decades by extreme idealogues of the Trent Lott variety. This is what Jeffords and the state of Vermont is against.

I know all of this because I am from Pennsylvania, and Sen Arlen Spector is one of the last Republican moderates, from this long standing tradition, still in office.

This moderate asshole Sen Arlen Spector, was the

originator of the magic bullet theory which demonstrated

his moral fiber and made him politicaly viable.

May he forever kiss my ass.

Every time you type letters on a keyboard, Mr. KPC, you expose how little you know, and how limited your vocabulary is.

First Point: The people of the United States voted for their various Senators. The results of this vote were 50 Republican Senators and 50 Democratic Senators. In the case of an equal number of Senators, the Vice President gets the deciding vote. The Vice President is a Republican. Hence the Senate was under the control of the Republican Party, as the people voted. I’m surprised I have to explain this again.

Second Point: Jim Jeffords is the ‘one man’ in question, and there is no doubt that he deceived his constituents. And, as you have said, he will answer to the voters of his state for his treachery. Sen. Jeffords votes now with the Democrats on almost all issues, so much for his principled position. If it is ‘moderate’ to carry Daschle’s water, then I guess Jeffords is a moderate. He will probably not seek reelection, but hold out hope for a Democratic Presidential victory in 2004 and the bone of an ambassadorship. Should he make the mistake of running he’ll find out how grateful his new masters are for his service. They’ll run ads portraying him as a Quisling and harp all the while about how we need to get past the politics of personal destruction.

I was never nuts about Spector (or most of the other Rep moderates), but he at least isn't as extreme as PA's other senator, Santorum, who's in with the Trent Lott wing. Spector and the few other moderates remaining, do try to temper their colleagues.

We'll see about Jeffords. I have no data on it, but there's little doubt in my mind that many Vermonters applaud him for his courage to bail from the neanderthal wing of the Republicans. There's no need for him to hang his head in shame, in fact quite the contrary. I know because I've been there.

...like shootin' fish in a very small barrel, SimpleMinded,

Let's see...first you write this horseshit: " The people had voted in the majority for a Republican senate." When I point out what utter stupidity this is (if the majority of people in CA voted for Boxer, this would outweigh the votes electing Repulsicans in three rural states, which COMPLETELY contradicts your comments)...

...but that's OK...cause you just change your argument when your realize how stupid it was...just CHANGE IT...from the "Majority voted for an Asshole Party Senate" lie that you told, to some nebulous shit about 50 - 50 which is not even remotely close to your original argument....

...and hope nobody notices your an idiot....



Well, it ain't workin'.....we all noticed.

Now to Jeffords...how is it that you seem to know that he will "pay for his treachery" (giggle, giggle, nothing like a little hyperbole when you got nothin' to show, little boy...). Do you live in Vermont? Have you been organizing in Vermont? Have you spoken to the voters....? No? What have you been doing....? WATCHIN' FOX??!?!?!?!? Well, that explains it then.

Now, put you head back up your ass where it belong...

....oops...I mean "rear end", sorry to offend you delicate sensibilities...

...fuckin' eunuch!

Got yourself in a regular tizzy there. You better calm down. If you spill your diet coke on your keyboard again, you'll have even stickier fingers. And then your KFC won't taste so good.

The framers of the constitution held that all States would have equal representation. Hence Delaware has as many Senators as Texas. The framers did this to prevent the possiblity of a State with a large population from dominating the national debate. The people of the States voted and the result of their votes was a Republican controlled Senate. Any way you slice it, potty mouth, that's the way it comes out.

Tizzy? Maybe "fizzy", as in a few beers later...

...me n' da boys are laughin our asses off at you, Simpleton...we're in a "tizzy" of hillarity!

..wrong again, SimpleOne...but that's OK...just change your argument and hope nobody notices...

Here is what you said: "The people had voted in the majority for a Republican senate."

That is a direct quote, go back 'n check...problem is...IT AIN'T TRUE...the people voted in the majority for a DEMOCRATIC senate and a DEMOCRATIC president. What you should have said was "The majority of the states had voted for a Republican senator." That would have been accurate, but of course, you're not concerned with accuracy, but in obfuscating and confusing....that comment would not support your point, so you lied. That is what the Right always does, lie when it suit syou...rules are made for other, non-white people, not for YOU...

..now, do you have BALLS to admit it, or are you really hung like a safety pin?

"The majority of the states had voted for a Republican senator."

I have now said it. And according to you I am accurate.

I freely withdraw the point that that majority of Americans voted for a Republican Senate. The end result is the same, and the historical facts are unchanged.

And I am accurate. And you are a foul mouthed cretin.

...OK...so maybe you got one ball...but it must be shriveled like a raisin...

...You are NOT accurate...your original comment was a LIE as you have now admitted, changing to the more accurate comment does nothing to support your point, which was that the country is in the majority Republican...which is, of course and thank Allah, a LIE. This is what you should have said "Well, yeah, I tried to imply that the country was majority Republican, but, hey you caught me in my bullshit, hopefully you won't catch me next time." But, no...you try to claim victory from the ashes of your humiliating defeat...and make a fool of yourself in the process....

....now go away or I will taunt you a second time....

But wait, I though you said I was accurate...

Were you just telling a LIE?

silly boy.

my bad...I should have used "precise" in place of "accurate"...

...wiggle out of that, weasle boy....

The facts remain the same KPC, and it is you who are the master wiggler.

Republicans were in control by the authority of the voters.

Democrats gained control by the desertion of Jim Jeffords.

Republicans will now regain control.

God Bless America.

Keep watch the puppet show, don't look behind the curtain.

Both puppets, one operator. Simple.

God bless we the people.

So I have been thinking about this, and here is the way I see it. Yes, the people of Vermont elected Jeffords as a Republican. However, they did not elect a rubber stamp for President Bush's agenda, as evidenced for the fact that they did not elect President Bush (Gore carried the state 51%-41%). Hence, if the President and the Republican leadership were going to threaten him and give him an ultimatum every time he voted against something the President wanted, than he would have been unable to adequately represent the state of Vermont within today's Republican party. It's interesting...if the Democrats had kept just one more seat in this year's elections, I bet things would be a lot different. I think the GOP would be walking on eggshells, because they would be worried that other moderates would follow suit. Even still, I think the moderates have more clout in the party now, because Jeffords made them realize that they cannot just suppress the moderate wing of the party...they didn't have the votes in the Senate to do that, and they still don't.

Maybe, but don't forget that that was not exactly how the President gained control of the country. The people may have elected a 50-50 senate, but don't forget that the majority of Americans voted for a Democratic president and vice president, which would have put the Senate under Democratic control anyway.

Actually, Jeffords has been making not-so-subtle hints that he wants to switch back to the Republican Party. So much for standing on principle.

My prediction: He will be rebuffed, continue as an 'independent' and not seek re-election. Game over.