[rednesss]

"Please do bet your right hand."

Ding, ding, ding, Calpernia is out of ideas. Come now, please continue to argue against the common sense that God should have bestowed upon you. I want to hear you try to convince me that the banking practices weren't all that bad. I want to hear you try and convince me that the system they had in 1992 was as moral, upright, and as pure as Mother Theresa's virtue. And if that system was so chock full of integrity and honesty and character, why then did they completely overhaul that system and do away with the practice of kiting checks???? I await your response with bated breath.

[RasterMaster]

The recent examples of 2000, 2004 and 2006 should be a major clue. The Presidential elections were close only because a REAGAN conservative wasn't in the running and the base stayed home. The 2006 election was lost when Republicans didn't stick to conservative principles, thus losing their base voters.

When you push "moderate" candidates, there isn't much difference in them or the democrat and that alone drives the base away. When you push for CONSERVATIVE candidates, it isn't even a close race

[dschapin]

I think what you basically had was a defacto understanding that the Bank of Congress would give free overdraft protection to its members. Congressman like Duncan Hunter took advantage of this and viewed as a perk - much the mail franking privileges that they also get. I think you make a good argument that people should have seen this practice as unethical - however, it was not illegal and it appears to have been widely accepted by the bank and other Congressman at the time. I am dissapointed that Congressman Hunter didn’t hold himself to a higher standard but at least he did eventually act to make things right and he has had an otherwise completely ethical career. So, at the end of the day I am willing to cut him some slack for this though it is a dissapointment.