I’m striking out on finding the information you are loking for. everything I have found so far is someone’s opinion and is skewed one way or the other. Congressional Quarterly and National Journal are faily non partisan but I didn’t see that they had what I think you are looking for. It was either too detailed or you had to get out your credit card. Sorry, If I come across something I’ll let you know.

I’m with you on this one. I haven’t read the article but McCain breaking his own law would not be out of character. What I am saying is when he wrote the law he put in an exemption that would primarily favor him. Since so much money in Arizona is going to be funneled through the Indian casinos. Soros did the same thing in Congress’ last attempt at subverting the 1st Amendment. He put in a clause that left a loophole for the 521C’s. His advantage was short lived and the Swift Boat guys used the loophole a few months later, but he had the upper hand for a little while. Welcome to bare knuckled politics.

http://www.americablog.com/2008/02/john-mccains-other-scandal-its-actually.html

that is a pretty clear description of the corner McCain has painted himself into.

I apologize if I have bruised the sensibilities of some readers with my description of the presumptive R front runner (if you like I could back up each of those points with extensive research and URLs for each statement, but I am sure it would fall on partisan ears).

Hey did you hear McCain is trying to break the McCain Feingold campaign finance law? Nice. Write a decent idea into law, then break the law you helped author. That is just so…. R. Oh the iRony!

Some of the Moyer’s piece is garbage, some good. Ike is taken out of context and has been for 45 years. Ear marks, pork, whatever is bad and everywhere. I heard a woman say once she was on a panel the help the LA school district work on their books, the group she was with was a volunteer group of accountants, they figured the administrators were educators and just not good at accounting. They found a maze of accounts that sometimes ended in a dead end with millions of dollars dropping off the end of the earth. I don’t have a solution.

www.exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=17088&IBLOCK_ID=35&PAGE=1

www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02222008/watch.html

(the previous link described here: www . pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2008/02/ask_the_reporter_and_producer.html )

http://www.exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=17088&IBLOCK_ID=35&PAGE=1

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02222008/watch.html

(the previous link described here: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2008/02/ask_the_reporter_and_producer.html )

:)

I was being serious, I should have said something, I thought you might take it that way. Sorry.

I’ll look for what you are asking. I don’t off the top of my head know of such information. as i was describing to NL our system is something of a patchwork with all 50 states marching to their own drummer so I don’t know how concise it can be. There is a group that puts out a rather expensive book every two years that is very detailed but I don’t remember their name. they are about as non paratison as you can get. I’ll see if I can find their name and see what they have on their website.

With all due respect to the League of Women Voters, I could interpret your referring me there as a declaration of war. Perhaps that was just your way of retaliating for the “sheared head country baaaa” posts, and if so I’d say we are even. ;-)

If I give NL any bad information, please correct me, I’m not a poly sci major (or even a sergeant)

NL,

It depends on which state you live in. You have to realize that when America was formed it was a confederacy of individual states forming a union. All the states had and still have a certain independence from the federal government. They all have their own constitutions for instance. We have evolved (or devolved in my opinion) to the point that the states are less independent and the federal government is very powerful. This may seem archaic but in reality is was a couple hundred years ahead of the curve. This is essentially what the European Union is trying to emulate.

Back to your question. Party affiliation really only counts in the primaries, you can vote for whoever you want in the general election and typically there are several choices D and R of course, then usually the Libertarian party, Socialists, Communist Party, Green party etc. I don’t know what it takes to get you party on the ballot, I think it has to do with polling.

Party affiliation mostly affects the primaries. Every state is a little different. In Colorado if you are a registered R or D you can only vote in your respective primary, if you are an I you can pick one or the other but not both (I think). In some states, (Kansas for instance) I’s can’t vote in the primary. In New Hampshire I don’t think you even have to be a citizen of the state. So in Colorado we are fairly evenly divided R, D and I with the R’s having a slight lead in registered voters. In Kansas there are very few registered I’s mostly R’s. Those are the only two states I have ever been a registered voter.

Does that help?

Maybe you can help undertsand it a little better. For example, I notice that down there you are either registered as an R, D, or I.

If you’re a registered D, are you unable to vote for an R or and I? And vice versa?

I was thinking about your point that that you don’t know what car you will be buying in twenty years. A person can change his philosophy over the years, Churchill said a man that is 20 and isn’t a liberal has no heart and a man that is 30 and isn’t a conservative has no brain, or something like that. But in our system it still makes sense to vote a party line. Given the way our system works at some point you would simply stop voting for D’s and start voting for R’s or vice versa. That probably isn’t true in the Canadian system, I don’t know enough about it to say. And that doesn’t mean there isn’t room for exception, I have voted for our sheriff, a Democrat, twice but that position is one that is pretty well insulated from committees and such. I also voted for Roy Romer several times. In that case the Republicans put up a truly despicable candidate that even I couldn’t support. But my overwhelming default is to vote Republican.

All my rambling really just boils down to you can’t win if you can’t play. I tried but I just can’t seem to come up with a good analogy. Try and reread those posts without thinking that they are about politics, think it is about a coworker that is a person that has no problem stabbing you in the back and will if it will advance his or her chances of a promotion. See if it makes more sense then. I used real examples to lend credence to my posts. It may have been easier to understand if I had used a more abstract example.

Knarly, you asked about a place to look for election thumbnails. In the past the League of Women Voters has been recognized as one of the best places for unbiased information of the candidates. In the last decade or so they have taken a turn to the left, too much for me but about right for you. They aren’t radical left but a little left of center. Try them, let me know what you think. Is that what you were interested in or were you more interested in the process than the candidates?

I was trying to see your perspective in your posts above, and I kind of almost did.

But I just can’t see myself deciding right now what kind of car I will buy in 20 years, because right now I don’t know which will be the best one for me. That’s where I’m coming from. But I appreciate your stance, just don’t agree, as usual. :)