[quote=moneyadvisor]Can we bury this topic- geeeeez!!![/quote]

Is someone forcing you to read it?

[quote=SonnyClips]This is like when y'all conservatives make us Liberals out to be p@##ies then we fight back which means we're not being fair?

[/Quote]

"Unfair"? No, just dishonest, illogical, childish and, as always, irrelevant. 

[quote=SonnyClips]
And Butler, you agree with the ACLU?
[/quote]

I see that critical ability to comprehend the written word is one you don’t possess. I didn’t say anywhere that I agreed with the ACLU, I simply pointed out the error in your assertion that Bush had some magical extra-constitutional power that not only does he not possess, but that the ACLU warns against giving him.

[quote=SonnyClips]So he never sent federal troops down to the Big NO? Or he did? <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

[/quote]

Of course he did, after they were requested. The article makes that and the law clear. Try reading it.

[quote=SonnyClips]

Your right I just do not logically understand what went on. BECAUSE there are federal troops down there, they were asked for and then it took like four goddam days to show up.

[/quote]

Your [sic] right that you don't understand, and in no small part it's because you're simply factually challenged. For example; you say it took the military four days to show up but the USS Bantan was on-site and helping within 24 hours. The 82nd Airborne had troops there in less than 48 hours.

The state OWNS the LA National Guard. THEY should have been there immediately. The federal troops could be there 24-48 hours after they were requested. If there’s any error on the Feds part it was in not being there in 24 hours instead of the 72 hours it took them. Then again, trucking supplies around floods and missing bridges isn’t easy.

The fact is if the locals hadn’t screwed up by the numbers the nightmare of Katrina would never have been what we saw on our TV screens.

[quote=SonnyClips]The next thing I know you all are talking about Posse Comitatus and you don't even know what it is called.

[/quote]

I can only assume you misread the article I provided and you think it was me speaking, and not the writer.

[quote=SonnyClips] I've always heard that there were two types of people those who run at the fire and those who run away. If your busy looking at the rule book It seems like you wind up letting the house burn down.

[/quote]

Bad metaphor. The Feds don't even have a right to be there watching the fire in your story. What you fail to realize (and purely for partisan reasons) is that the locals ARE the fire department.

[quote=SonnyClips]
Now when it comes to riots and sh*t you can talk till your blue in the face about Posse Com and all that sh*t but come on <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Butler get with the goddam program here.

[/quote]

Wow, who'd have thought you'd unravel so completely when the facts were explained to you. “Get with the program” seems to me to mean “Don’t confuse me with facts, BUSH IS THE DEVIL!!!!!!!

[quote=SonnyClips]

Your pissant excuses for these people is pathetic [/quote]

I agree. Your refusal to open your eyes to the damage the Mayor of NO and the Governor of LA created and the mess they wanted the Feds to clean up with the sweep of a magic wand is just astounding.

[quote=SonnyClips]

ps shouldn't you be working? Me, I'm studying.[/quote]

Hey, when all else fails you can always try to end the discussion by volunteering to be my living daytimer.  Don't worry about me menotell/Sonny, I've passed my exams and my production's just fine. That's two things you can't say....

[quote=mikebutler222]<O:P></O:P>

Hey, when all else fails you can always try to end the discussion by volunteering to be my living daytimer.  Don't worry about me menotell/Sonny, I've passed my exams and my production's just fine. That's two things you can't say....

[/quote]

Mike,

You're an anal MF aren't you?

I am licensed and have been licensed for a few years.  I am much too busy nowadays to play on here as much as I did in the past.

How about a socialist's point of view?

Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author

This statement is available as a PDF leaflet to download and distribute

The catastrophe that is unfolding in New Orleans and on the Gulf coast of Mississippi has been transformed into a national humiliation without parallel in the history of the United States.

The scenes of intense human suffering, hopelessness, squalor, and neglect amidst the wreckage of what was once New Orleans have exposed the rotten core of American capitalist society before the eyes of the entire world—and, most significantly, before those of its own stunned people.

The reactionary mythology of America as the “Greatest Country in the World” has suffered a shattering blow.

Hurricane Katrina has laid bare the awful truths of contemporary America—a country torn by the most intense class divisions, ruled by a corrupt plutocracy that possesses no sense either of social reality or public responsibility, in which millions of its citizens are deemed expendable and cannot depend on any social safety net or public assistance if disaster, in whatever form, strikes.

Washington’s response to this human tragedy has been one of gross incompetence and criminal indifference. People have been left to literally die in the streets of a major American city without any assistance for four days. Images of suffering and degradation that resemble the conditions in the most impoverished Third World countries are broadcast daily with virtually no visible response from the government of a country that concentrates the greatest share of wealth in the world.

The storm that breached the levees of New Orleans has also revealed all of the horrific implications of 25 years’ worth of uninterrupted social and political reaction. The real results of the destruction of essential social services, the dismantling of government agencies entrusted with alleviating poverty and coping with disasters, and the ceaseless nostrums about the “free market” magically resolving the problems of modern society have been exposed before millions.

With at least 100,000 people trapped in a city without power, water or food and threatened with the spread of disease and death, the government has proven incapable of establishing the most elementary framework of logistical organization. It has failed to even evacuate the critically ill from public hospitals, much less provide basic medical assistance to the many thousands placed in harm’s way by the disaster.

What was the government’s response to the natural catastrophe that threatened New Orleans? It amounted to betting that the storm would go the other way, followed by a policy of “every man for himself.” Residents of the city were told to evacuate, while the tens of thousands without transportation or too poor to travel were left to their fate.

Now crowds of thousands of hungry and homeless people have been reduced to chanting “we need help” as bodies accumulate in the streets. Washington’s inability to mount and coordinate basic rescue operations will unquestionably add to a death toll that is already estimated in the thousands.

The government’s callous disregard for the human suffering, its negligence in failing to prepare for this disaster and, above all, its utter incompetence have staggered even the compliant American media.

Patriotic blather about the country coming together to deal with the crisis combined with efforts to poison public opinion by vilifying those without food or water for “looting” have fallen flat in face of the undeniable and monumental debacle that constitutes the official response to the disaster.

Reporters sent into the devastated region have been reduced to tears by the masses of people crying out for help with no response. Television announcers cannot help but wonder aloud why the authorities have failed so miserably to alleviate such massive human suffering.

The presidency, the Congress and both the Republican and Democratic parties—all have displayed an astounding lack of concern for the hundreds of thousands of people whose lives have been shattered and who face the most daunting and uncertain future, not to mention the tens of millions more who will be hard hit by the economic aftershocks of Katrina.

In the figure of the president, George W. Bush, the incompetence, stupidity, and sheer inhumanity that characterize so much of America’s money-mad corporate elite find their quintessentially repulsive expression.

As the hurricane developed over two weeks in the Caribbean and slowly approached the coast of New Orleans and Mississippi, Bush amused himself at his ranch retreat in Crawford, Texas. It is now clear that his administration made no serious preparations to deal with the dangers posed by the approaching storm.

In an interview Thursday on the “Good Morning America” television program, Bush reprised his miserable performance of the previous day, adding to Wednesday’s banalities the declaration that there would be “zero tolerance” for looters.

The president blanched when ABC interviewer Dianne Sawyer asked about a suggestion that the major oil companies be forced to cede a share of the immense windfall profits they have reaped from rising prices over the past six months to fund disaster relief. He responded by counseling the American people to “send cash” to charitable organizations.

In other words, there will be no serious financial commitment from the government to save lives, care for the sick and needy, and help the displaced and bereft restore their lives. Nor will there be any national, centrally financed and organized program to rebuild one of the country’s most important cities—a city that is uniquely associated with some of the most critical cultural achievements in music and the arts of the American people.

Above all, the suffering of millions will not be allowed to impinge on the profit interests of a tiny elite of multi-millionaires whose interests the government defends.

Later in the day, Bush described the aftermath of the flood as a “temporary disturbance.”

The ruthless attitude of those in power toward the average poor and working class residents of New Orleans was summed up Thursday by Republican House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who declared “it doesn’t make sense” to spend tax dollars to rebuild New Orleans. “It looks like a lot of that place could be bulldozed,” he said.

While Hastert was forced to backtrack from these chilling remarks, they have a definite political logic. To rebuild the lives that have been ravaged by Hurricane Katrina would require mounting a massive government effort that would run counter to the entire thrust of a national policy based upon privatization and the transfer of wealth to the rich that has for decades been pursued by both major parties.

Can anyone truly believe that the current administration and its Democratic accomplices in Congress are going to launch a serious program to construct low-cost housing, rebuild schools and provide jobs for the hundreds of thousands left unemployed by the destruction?

Congress has been virtually silent on the catastrophe in the south. It has nothing to say, having voted to support Bush’s extreme right-wing agenda of massive tax cuts for the rich, huge outlays for war in Iraq and Afghanistan and an ever-expanding Pentagon budget, and billions to finance the Homeland Security Department.

The millionaires club in the Capitol is well aware that it voted to slash funding for elementary infrastructure needs—including urgently recommended improvements in outmoded and inadequate Gulf Coast anti-hurricane and anti-flood systems.

The Democratic Party has, as always, offered no opposition. Indeed, the president was gratified to be able to announce that former Democratic president Bill Clinton would resume his road show with the president’s father, the former Republican president, touring the stricken regions and drumming up support for charitable donations. In this way the Democratic Party has signaled its solidarity with the White House and the Republican policy against any serious federal financial commitment to help the victims and rebuild the devastated regions.

The decisive components of the present tragedy are social and political, not natural. The American ruling elite has for the past three decades been dismantling whatever forms of government regulation and social welfare had been instituted in the preceding period. The present catastrophe is the terrible product of this social and political retrogression.

The lessons derived from past natural and economic calamities—from the deadly floods of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, to the dust bowl and Depression of the 1930s—have been repudiated and derided by a ruling elite driven by the crisis of its profit system to subordinate ever more ruthlessly all social concerns to the extraction of profit and accumulation of personal wealth.

Franklin Roosevelt—an astute and relatively far-sighted representative of his class—had to drag the American ruling elite as a whole kicking and screaming behind a program of social reforms whose basic purpose was to save the capitalist system from the threat of social revolution. Even during his presidency, the large-scale projects in government-funded and controlled social development, such as the Tennessee Valley Authority, never became a model for broader measures to alleviate poverty and social inequality. The contradictions and requirements of an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and production for profit resulted in any further projects being shelved.

From the 1970s onward, as the crisis of American capitalism has deepened, the US ruling elite has attacked the entire concept of social reform and dismantled the previously established restrictions on corporate activities.

The result has been a non-stop process of social plunder, producing an unprecedented concentration of wealth at the apex of society and a level of social inequality exceeding that which prevailed in the days of the Robber Barons.

Fraud, the worst forms of speculation and criminality have become pervasive within the upper echelons of American society. This is the underlying reality that has suddenly revealed itself, precipitated by a hurricane, in the form of a collapse of the most elementary forms of social life.

The political establishment and the corporate elite have been exposed as bankrupt, together with their ceaseless insistence that the unfettered development of capitalism is the solution to all of society’s problems.

The catastrophe unleashed by Katrina has unmistakably revealed that America is two countries, one for the wealthy and privileged and another in which the vast majority of working people stand on the edge of a social precipice.

All of the claims that the war on Iraq, the “global war on terrorism” and the supposed concern for “homeland security” are aimed at protecting the American people stand revealed as lies. The utter failure to protect the residents of New Orleans exposes all of these claims as propaganda designed to mask the criminality of the American ruling elite and the diversion of resources away from the most essential needs of the people.

The central lesson of New Orleans is that the elementary requirements of mass society are incompatible with a system that subordinates everything to the enrichment of a financial oligarchy.

This lesson must become the new point of departure in the political orientation of the struggles of American working people. Only the development of a new independent political movement, fighting for the reorganization of economic life on the basis of a socialist program, can provide a way out of the chaos of which the events in New Orleans are a terrible omen.

See Also:
Hurricane's victims left to die on New Orleans streets
[2 September 2005]
Bush rules out significant federal aid to hurricane victims
[1 September 2005]
Crackdown on looting: New Orleans police ordered to stop saving lives and start saving property
[1 September 2005]
Letter from New Orleans: tragedy at stranded hospital
[1 September 2005]

Top of page

The WSWS invites your comments.

[quote=menotellname]

How fitting of you to use this source.

The ICFI rests on the proud heritage of the movement founded by Leon Trotsky, co-leader with Lenin of the Russian Revolution. For more information on the history and program see the further reading list.

First you quote Bob Shrum, now you quote the Trotskites..... 

[quote=SonnyClips]You've been talking about Posse Com for a while the word didn't show up in your post until you found it in an article about it and the ACLU. <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

[/quote]

As usual, you're confused. The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits federal troops from fulfilling a law enforcement role. I haven't been talking about that until the article mentioned it. My point has been the principle of Federalism and how the Feds don't have the right under law to insert themselves without the request of the local authorities without some very specific caveats. Reread my posts, you may recognize the difference.

 [quote=SonnyClips]

Really I just like to see how creative you can get in defending Master Disaster.

[/quote]

Any rational person can see that the multiple failures of local “leaders” created a situation that the Feds, as if by magic, were held responsible for. The horrific pictures were saw of the situation in NO were ALL created by local authorities. The Feds are guilty of not correcting the situation quicker. They were there in large numbers on Friday, Thursday would have been a better and realistic standard. Now, that’s what a rational person would notice, your failure to do so comes from your hyperpartisanship.

[quote=SonnyClips]

As far as the meno/Sonny convergence theory, it just makes you see like a wantonly ignorant boob.

[/quote]

Yeah, it’s fooled many of us how menotell created an alter-ego that just happens to say the same things, uses the same talking points and the same MO but instead of being black guy who’s a “manager” in the Southeast just happens to be a newbie white guy living in the Northwest….

[[quote=SonnyClips]

"My productions fine," throwing your dick on the table so quickly to such a small jibe? It makes you seem weak. It makes me wonder how your really producing?

[/quote]

[quote=SonnyClips]This is crap. You gotta be pretending now because no one could be as stupid as all of this. <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

[/quote]

I explained to you what I hold the Feds responsible for. If you want to pretend there are no laws limiting what Brown and/or the Feds can do and that the local authorities can simply be sidestepped, that's your problem. Despite many, many posts on the subject you've yet to detail what Brown should have done that doesn't lean heavily on fantasies about the authority and power he had.

I said the ugly pictures we all saw of NO were the specific falut of bad decisions by local authorities. If you disagree please explain your reasoning, or admit you got nothing...

[quote=SonnyClips]

They had M. Brown in the hot seat getting grilled by Republicans ....

[/quote]

Shameless political grandstanding. One Congresscritter even had the stupidity to say he held Brown responsible for NOT sending in the 82nd Airborne ON HIS OWN to provide security.

[quote=SonnyClips]
You were refering to the Posse Com sh*t back when you were talking about <?:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Detroit and LBJ you ding dong.

[/quote]

It's obvious you not only can't keep subjects straight, you can't keep posters straight. My point all along has been what powers do the Feds have. The issue of the military functioning as law enforcement (which is what the Posse Comitatus Act covers) was a side issue and Detroit and the riots were part of that side issue. The reason the article mentions the Act is that Bush has suggested giving the Pentagon immediate authority is a disaster, something I've never suggested.

[quote=SonnyClips]
Trotsky had friends among the elitist that run your party, not mine cupcake.

[/quote]

Name them.

[quote=SonnyClips]

As far as Hyperpartisan, I think not.

[/quote]

You wouldn't exactely be the person to ask about your own hyper-partisanship....

 [quote=SonnyClips]
Do you think I am a black person posing as a white guy just because I like Rap.

[/quote]

Could you quote me where I said that or are you simply imagining things?

After these most recent revelations about Tom Delay, does anyone still harbor any illusions as to professional politicians of any description or party being worth a shlt?

[quote=SonnyClips]Here is where you claim I am an African American from the southeast. I may very well find out that I have African ancestry in the future but I am currently a rookie in Oregon of Dutch ancestry.

Yeah, it’s fooled many of us how menotell created an alter-ego that just happens to say the same things, uses the same talking points and the same MO but instead of being black guy who’s a “manager” in the Southeast just happens to be a newbie white guy living in the Northwest….

[/quote]

I'm aware that I said menotell, a black guy "manager"  from the Southeast, created you, a white newbie from the Northeast as an alter-ego. Now, tell me where I said I thought you were black because you liked rap.

[quote=SonnyClips]
Your so fond of wiki look here dummy.Trotsky's Republican Friend

[/quote]

So "your" saying that since Kristol Sr. was a Trotskite in the 1940s in his twenties as a college student, that means Trotsky had "friends" among Republican elites? ROFLMAO....

[quote=SonnyClips]

You are an ass. Make up some sh*t to cover yourself on the Irving Kristol, City College and Trotsky sh*t you dissembling bumpkin.

[/quote]

That's some amazing "logic" "your" using there. Say, by that theory Reagan was a "friend" of organized labor as president. 

[quote=Starka]After these most recent revelations about Tom Delay, does anyone still harbor any illusions as to professional politicians of any description or party being worth a shlt?[/quote]

I must have missed the "revelations". All I see so far is an indictment from a political hack DA who also indicted Kay Bailey Hutchenson. Pardon me while I wait for evidence, then, if he's guilty, I'll help you hang him.

[quote=SonnyClips]All of the nicknames in the following page [/quote] <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Wow, an entire post that looks like the result of an allergic drug reaction.....

Let's see if I can make heads or tails of it....

So you admit I never said I thought you were black because you like rap. Fine. You could have saved a great deal of time simply saying so earlier.

The fact that the same DA indicted Hutchenson during an election season and then failed to go to trial says something about his partisanship. The fact the same guy (and elected Democrat) spoke at a Democrat fundraiser where he called Delay a crook says something about his judgment. The fact the Texas Democrat party is in a state of hysteria because the GOP, long the major party in Texas FINALLY undid the Democrat gerrymandering that kept them in office and that Delay did that work, says something about the entire situation. Does that mean Delay's innocent? Not by a mile. Does that mean there are reasonable suspicions about the nature of the indictment? You bet.

So Irv Kristol was a Trotskite in his youth in the 1940s. BFD. That doesn't mean he was a "friend of Trotsky" 40 years later, you nutjob. As to menotell (funny how you hyperventilate to defend him) quoting the ICFI NOW, it's clear THEY'RE a group that didn't learn and move away for him. Quoting that loony bin today is just embarrassing. Need a further explanation? Sorry, your educational privileges have run out.

"Oh and the deal that Bush Brokered with the No Ko's is virtually the same as the one he grenaded that was Brokered by the Clinton admin, Grommet"

 ROFLMAO. This one's just comical. JImmah inserted himself in a diplomatic role between Clinton and NK. He signed a laughable deal with zero verification that led to NK taking the multi-million dollar bribe AND then STILL building nukes. The NK's came clean a decade later and Bush was left to clean up the mess. How you can call that "grenading" is beyond reason.

The Democrats harangued the poor guy for five years trying to get him to go the unilateral route (I thought they opposed unilateral measures?) and meet with NK alone, as Carter did. He refused and worked the six party angle. Even during the 2004 campaign TerAZZZZAAA's empty suit of a husband pontificated about how Bush had failed in this because he refused to meet one on one with NK. Obviously the six-party talks were a far better plan.

The rest of your blather simply didn't meet even the low standards we accept here, I'll let it pass...

BTW, Carter’s presidency was an unmitigated disaster and his forays into diplomacy since have been just as bad. The guy should shut up and build houses. After all, he can continue to bask in the glory of “inventing” Habitat for Humanity, something he didn’t do.

[quote=Starka]I'll be busy all day tomorrow, so I'd just as soon lynch 'em all tonight.[/quote]

If you found a large group of people completely free of fraud or corruption and/or have found a reasonable alternative to political parties, I'm dying to hear about it.

[quote=mikebutler222]

[quote=Starka]I'll be busy all day tomorrow, so I'd just as soon lynch 'em all tonight.[/quote]

If you found a large group of people completely free of fraud or corruption and/or have found a reasonable alternative to political parties, I'm dying to hear about it.

[/quote]

By the very nature of politics in our time, people who are "free of fraud or corruption" shy away from public office.  That doesn't mean that we must tolerate this behavior in our public officials.

[quote=Starka]

By the very nature of politics in our time, people who are "free of fraud or corruption" shy away from public office. 

[/quote]

I wouldn't paint with so wide a brush. I'm sure there are plenty of ethical people on both sides of the aisle.

[quote=Starka]

That doesn't mean that we must tolerate this behavior in our public officials.

[/quote]

I never said we should tolerate anything of the sort. I was simply responding to your comment  "... does anyone still harbor any illusions as to professional politicians of any description or party being worth a shlt?" and asking what alternative you had in mind.

The alternative would be to pillory those who abuse the public trust.

I wasn't clear enough?

[quote=Starka]

The alternative would be to pillory those who abuse the public trust.

I wasn't clear enough?

[/quote]

Of course we should pillory those that abuse the public trust. Remember, I offered to help you dispense the justice after the facts come out.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Now, if you could tell me how possible abuse on the part of Delay damns all politicians and both parties or how is it that the "current nature of our politics" keeps honest people out, I'd say you were plenty clear on your larger point.

I'm not trying to be needlessly argumentative with you, just trying to understand your "hang them all" point of view. I hope people never take that attitude with us when some broker behaves like a thug…

Yours is an apples-and-oranges argument, Mike.

I will apply the same standards to brokers when we as a group can increase our pay without any input from those who pay the bills, when all kinds of unrelated fees and expenses can be added to our transactions, when we can retire after one "term" as a broker and be guaranteed COLAs from the public trough, and so on ad nauseum.

[quote=Starka]

Yours is an apples-and-oranges argument, Mike.

I will apply the same standards to brokers when we as a group can increase our pay without any input from those who pay the bills, when all kinds of unrelated fees and expenses can be added to our transactions, when we can retire after one "term" as a broker and be guaranteed COLAs from the public trough, and so on ad nauseum.

[/quote]

Having a complaint about their pay or retirement syetm is one thing, "hang them all", damning all members of both parties or saying honest people stay away from politics is another. It's easy to be deeply cynical, I'd be interested in hearing an alternative.

I'm not trying to be needlessly argumentative with you, just trying to understand your "hang them all" point of view. I hope people never take that attitude with us when some broker behaves like a thug….

Is this more of what you believe to be logical and objective argument? <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

You don't rate the sort of response Starka does. Note those words for  him, not you....

If you look at my long and rather detailed post..

You mean long, boring and disjointed.....

  Like you respond as if I defended Carter or Clinton when I simply stated that the Bush deal was the same.

And you were wrong, it isn't the same deal and it wasn't reached in the same manner.

Bush is at the same point now and with the same deal that Clinton was with NK when he left office.

Hardly. Clinton had been taken for a ride by the NKs. They took his money and with his non-verifiable deal, they built nukes anyway. You might want to ignore the fact that Bush proceeded, over Democrat hysteria, with six-party talks, but that's your problem, not mine.

"Oh and all the list of reasons you gave for your mistrust of Ronnie Earle do not add up to an impeaching of his credibilty. "

If you figure indicting the Senate candidate during an election season and then not following through with a trial and his making of rabid partisan speeches at Democrat fund raisers where he named Delay explicitly, doesn't make him suspect, again, that's your problem.  As I said in the post, it doesn’t make Delay innocent, but it sure gives a legitimate reason to be suspicious of Earl.

You continually offer up arguments that have no warrant.

If that were the case you'd be able to point them out, but you fail to.

And when someone like Starka tries to ....

Don't try to hang your lame arguments on Starka. He's an adult I respect, you're a  child. This will fly right over your little head, but Starka has made negative comments about political parties in general in the past and I tried to further the conversation on the subject.

In short, be quiet when adults are speaking.

Oh and what was the stuff about a drug something or other. I think the word you were looking for is litany or rant.

Thanks, but I prefer allergic drug reaction. "Your" constantly having trouble framing your own posts, don't bother me about mine.

I'll boil down the rest of your piffle;

 He will probably be exonerated in the long term, but that is a long time."

 "one Republican strategist, who asked not to be identified because of his work with Republicans on Capitol Hill" in the New York Times

ROFLMAO.... even if we were to believe the NY Times, the Democrats are in such shambles that they won't be able to take advantage of it all.....