On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:47:24 -0700, Janet Bostwick
> wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 12:11:27 -0800, sf > wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 10:46:37 -0700, Janet Bostwick
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:00:28 -0800, sf > wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Fri, 25 Jan 2013 06:03:23 -0500, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 22:36:43 -0800, sf > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Both parties are corrupt. Take your choice of who you want to take
> >> >> >> your money.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >My choice is the party that looks out more for me.
> >> >>
> >> >> Oh, I didn't know there was a new party making serious inroads. The
> >> >> two major ones look out only for themselves.
> >> >
> >> >The one I chose looks out for me and would do more if the party of NO
> >> >choose to do some work in Washington instead of spend their time
> >> >taking handouts from lobbyists and big business.
> >>
> >> The crazy people have to be voted out first. It doesn't look like
> >> that is going to happen soon.
> >> Janet US
> >
> >Unfortunately, they gerrimandered nice safe districts in 2010 so we
> >have to wait for the next census to make it right. Hopefully, they
> >don't wreck the country in the mean time.
>
> The census isn't going to fix it . . . they are currently in process
> of redistricting Virginia, Pennsylvania and plans for Wisconsin, Ohio
> and Iowa. Since they control the legislature and the governor, the
> process is not in doubt. What it does is fixes it so that even if the
> one party has way more votes than the other, there is absolutely no
> way that party will be able to get enough electoral votes to even come
> close to winning.
> Janet US

I'm amazed that's legal. I thought the point of redistricting was to
balance numbers of people while still retaining your seat.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.