IAP Political Forum

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10184.html

So they are saying anyway...

I hope Hillary still keeps fighting until the convention though!! :)

It was expected that Obama would win North Carolina and that Hillary would win Indiana weeks ago. I don't understand why everything is suddenly over...

... not that I'm upset about it...

Senator Clinton's statements since Tuesday (and those of some of her supporters) suggest, IMHO, rule or ruin.

OswaldTheOsprey

Yeah, egomania. She feels it has been stolen. Sorry, you have to earn it.

I hope Hillary still keeps fighting until the convention though!! :)

All Clinton has earned herself is a lifetime slot as one of the dirtiest and most dishonest politicians in the back of my head. What scares me is that some people look up to her, and I don't understand how you can look up to someone who claims they were shot at by snipers.

I am a conservative not a republican.

By definition a conservative is one who wishes to conserve... the constitution, the environment, public education, public protections, civil rights, democracy...etc. 
 The republicon party now mostly wishes to erode, challenge, change or do away with all these things in the name of the free market and the economic growth of big business. In recent history to be a republicon is to be a radical, the polar opposite of conservative. IMO republicons of late could better be described as free market anarchists. The only thing they truly want to "conserve" are their profit margins.

By definition a conservative is one who wishes to conserve... the constitution, the environment, public education, public protections, civil rights, democracy...etc.
 The republicon party now mostly wishes to erode, challenge, change or do away with all these things in the name of the free market and the economic growth of big business. In recent history to be a republicon is to be a radical, the polar opposite of conservative. IMO republicons of late could better be described as free market anarchists. The only thing they truly want to "conserve" are their profit margins.

Cite examples, please, of big business making an effort to do away with civil rights for 'profit margins.' How about democracy? Public protections?

Clearly this legislation was designed to protect their money.

You should ask those who proposed the immunity legislation that question neue.

They have already demonstrated how they will use any power they have for partisan political advantage without restraint or conscience.

they definitely need to be investigated and the constitution needs to be upheld

The posturing of advocates for immunity notwithstanding, whether the administration's requests were in violation of the applicable laws was not a close question. Although this has largely been flushed down the memory hole, Qwest refused to cooperate with the government and demanded that proper legal procedures be followed before it would proceed. Qwest's attorneys did not think that the government's proposed course of action was even arguably within the scope of the law. AT&T and Verizon (whose combined revenues last year were approximately $150 billion) could easily have consulted with qualified counsel and determined the same thing. Contrary to the breathless hysteria about cooperating with the government in "emergencies," the program at issue was developed over several months and operated for multiple years, requiring the involvement of hundreds, if not thousands, of people. It was not the situation of a police officer running up to an individual on the street and saying that he or she must do something NOW with no opportunity for reflection or consultation.

I should also add that I primarily do defense work and therefore am generally sympathetic to allegations of meritless claims, over the top punitive damage awards, etc. However, there is a very fundamental problem with any party getting a law changed to retroactively immunize it for unlawful conduct that it has all but confessed to. When the parties seeking immunity are multi-billion dollar corporations that have donated lavishly to members of Congress, it becomes even more troubling and damaging to people's confidence in the justice system. Indeed, there's a term for countries in which the wealthy can purchase immunity for themselves: "banana republic".

  He pretty well sums up the situation from a legal point of view.

The word you seem to be searching for  in your last sentence is Democratically controlled congress. You have mistakenly used the noun for the adverb. You see the verb in the sentence is "controlled" and an attempt to modify a verb with a noun really makes no sense. Its just bad grammer.