(2006-10-23) — With polls showing Republicans could lose control of Congress after the November elections, Capitol Hill physicians have been swamped with Democrats reporting symptoms of optimism, a condition almost unknown among their people.

Eli Lilly, the maker of the anti-depressant drug Prozac, annouced today that sales in the Washington D.C. region have plunged in the weeks since former Rep. Mark Foley, R-FL, stepped down in the wake of scandal involving lurid emails to Congressional pages. And each time CNN announces a new body count plateau for American troops in Iraq, the company said, Prozac sales in the D.C. area dip again.

“Our core customer base in this area is rapidly vanishing,” said an unnamed Lilly spokesman.

“However, longterm prospects for Prozac look bright,” he added, “since optimism is an acute condition among Democrats, not chronic.”

“They’re only optimistic about winning and about power,” he said. “Even if they sweep in November, their view of America’s future will lead them right back to the pharmacist, but this time they’ll have long coat-tails, bringing much of America with them.”

“For the anti-depressant industry,” he added, “a Democrat-controlled Congress means happy days are here again.”

EXTRA: Rush Limbaugh reads ScrappleFace story [Download mp3: 2.1MB, 1:27 sec.] on 10/23/2006 during first hour.

(2006-10-21) — House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, and Rep. John Murtha, D-PA, today issued a joint statement calling on terrorist groups and armed militias to pull out of Iraq, or at least begin a “phased redeployment.” They also called for sanctions against any nation that harbors or funds those terrorists.

Until this week, the Democrat leaders had been calling on the U.S. to retreat from Iraq, but today Rep. Pelosi said, “it suddenly occured to us that the terrorists and so-called insurgents are the aggressors.”

“We realized that if the U.S. pulls out,” she said, “the shooting, bombing and beheading continues. But if the terrorists leave, or if their funding dries up, then the fighting stops and we can build a lot more schools, clinics, water purification systems and electrical generation plants.”

Standing with the California lawmaker at a news conference, Rep. Murtha, a former Marine, unveiled what he called “our new Democrat vision for Iraq to become a country that can defend, sustain and govern itself, a country which will serve as an ally in this war on terror.”

“We got to thinking, Nancy and me, that the old Democrat vision of a U.S. pullout would have created a safe haven and base of operations for al Qaeda to launch its global jihad,” said Rep. Murtha. “and it would have sent a message to those seeking freedom in the Arab world that we think they don’t deserve to be free or can’t govern themselves democratically.”

Asked whether this new position wouldn’t just play into the hands of Republicans three weeks before a national election, a clearly agitated Rep. Pelosi said, “We’re talking about a global conflict that threatens our civilization, and you’re asking about politics?”

“We’re Americans,” she added, “and our sons and daughters are dying to bring freedom to Iraq and that whole region of the world. Any nation or group that buys bullets and bombs to blow up our kids is, by definition, our sworn enemy. You can’t compromise or negotiate with people like that. We must defeat them.”

(2006-10-21) — Sen. Rick Santorum, R-PA, trailing in the polls behind Democrat Bob Casey, Jr., the son of a popular former Pennsylvania governor, will attempt to beat his opponent at his own game by changing his name to George Washington Jr.

“Name recognition is everything,” said an unnamed Santorum campaign aide, “If Bob Casey Jr. can ride the good name of his Dad, then Sen. Santorum can use President Washington’s name the same way.”

A spokesman for the Casey campaign said “this just demonstrates Santorum’s desperation. Rick Santorum has nothing to run on but his record, his conservative credentials, his proven work ethic, his in-depth knowledge of the Senate and his sharp intellect.”

(2006-10-19) — With Republican electoral prospects dimming by the hour, Congressional Democrats today offered to forego “the embarrassment of counting the votes” from the upcoming national elections, but to let the GOP keep some of its seats in the House and Senate.

“It’s kind of like an out-of-court settlement,” said presumptive House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-CA. “We’ll let our friends across the aisle avoid the humiliation of a public thrashing by our strong, attractive Democrat candidates, but we’ll demonstrate mercy by conceding a few seats, so that Republicans have at least a token voice in national affairs.”

An unnamed spokesman for the Republican National Committee (RNC) called the Democrat offer “gracious”, and said the two parties were negotiating over when and where Interim House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-IL, will give the concession speech.

Republicans have staggered in recent weeks under a barrage of painful publicity ranging from plunging fuel prices, to record stock market closes, to the Bush administration’s failure to produce inflation despite growing employment, reduced tax rates and soaring tax revenues.

Meanwhile, Democrats ride a wave of public adoration due to the party’s clear, positive vision for protecting the civil rights of foreign terrorists, retreating from Iraq so that rival Muslim sects can work out their differences without American interference, and restoring the Clinton era “spirit of cooperation” with North Korea.

While some critics have suggested that both parties wait until the American people speak at the ballot box before declaring winners and losers, Rep. Pelosi called that kind of thinking “a quaint relic of ancient history, made obsolete by political pollsters and media pundits.”

“After all,” she said, “just because we’re the Democrat party doesn’t mean we have to be slavishly democratic. Some things are better decided by a few smart people behind closed doors.”

(2006-10-18) — Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, this week acknowledged that she was not named after Sir Edmund Hillary, the first to conquer Mount Everest, but insisted that she did get her last name from a former U.S. president.

The senator’s campaign spokesman explained that the Edmund Hillary legend was simply “a sweet family story” that her mother, Dorothy Rodham, would tell to inspire greatness in her daughter, and to teach the future senator “the value of a flexible, results-oriented approach to truth.”

The New York Times printed a correction yesterday, noting that the mountain climber was an unknown beekeeper when Mrs. Clinton was born, six years before he climbed Everest.

“It’s fair to say that Sen. Clinton might not have become what she is today without the false but meaningful inspiration she drew from her mother’s loving deception,” said campaign spokesman Jennifer Hanley. “In many ways, bearing the Clinton name has provided similar inspiration to her.”

(2006-10-15) — With polls showing that Republicans could lose their majority in Congress in November, the GOP-controlled House and Senate yesterday voted to move the national date for Congressional elections to March 15, 2007.

“The November date, we felt, was setting an unreasonable timeline,” said House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-IL. “With elections in March, we’ll have time to get out the Republican message of small government, lean budgets, strong borders, and aggressive action against terrorists and governments who harbor them.”

Rep. Hastert said it would also give the Republicans time to actually reduce the size and influence of the federal government, cut the budget and to secure the borders.

“It’s always nice to have something to show behind your talking points,” Rep. Hastert said. “It would provide a clear contrast with the Democrats.”

Asked if the unprecedented measure might raise Constitutional issues, Mr. Hastert said, “Hey, we’re the majority. We can do whatever we want. We passed the Medicare prescription drug bill, didn’t we?”

(2006-10-09) — In the wake of the weekend detonation of North Korea’s first atomic bomb, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, called for the resignation of House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-IL.

“It’s important that lawmakers keep the main thing the main thing,” said Rep. Pelosi. “We can’t get so distracted by debates about North Korea’s sovereignty that we forget that Dennis Hastert is still on the loose, indirectly endangering America’s children.”

The timing of the atomic bomb test raises questions, she said, about when President George Bush first knew of former Rep. Mark Foley’s lurid instant message chats with teenage boys in the Congressional page program.

The California lawmaker said the North Korean nuclear test was “a natural result of George Bush’s failure to sit down with Kim Jong-Il and work out their differences. In effect, Bush pushed the button.”

“By failing to negotiate with President Kim,” she said, “Bush virtually assured a pre-election nuclear detonation that would knock the Foley scandal out of the headlines just in time for the Congressional elections. Reporters should be asking how Bush knew that the Foley scandal would break now?”

Mrs. Pelosi said the timing was “beyond coincidence, and has all the earmarks of another cynical Republican ploy to distract people with trivial national security issues so that they don’t hear our progressive Democrat plan to improve America by getting Hastert to quit.”

(2006-10-04) — The attorney for disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley today offered more biographical background about his client who allegedly used his elected position to prey on high school boys sexually.

Previously, attorney and longtime friend David Roth had confessed that Mr. Foley is a mentally-ill alcoholic who was molested by clergy in his youth, and yet takes full responsibity for the unspecified harm he has caused to others.

This morning, Mr. Roth said that Mr. Foley had been exposed to second-hand tobacco smoke, and high levels of partially-hydrogenated soybean oil during his childhood.

“He’s not trying to duck responsibility for his alleged behavior,” said Mr. Roth, “it’s just a fact that these toxins are part of who he has become.”

The spokesman said experts are also “looking into whether a young Mark Foley may have consumed lead paint chips or mercury-laden fish, or if he was forced to play violent sports or had a school teacher who used a red pen to grade his papers.”

“He’s still taking full responsibility for everything,” Mr. Roth added, “but at the very least, an explanation of possible environmental factors will add a few extra chapters to his forthcoming memoir.”

(2006-10-03) — Just five weeks before national elections, in the wake of allegations that disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley, R-FL, preyed on teenage boys, the House of Representatives this week will take up debate on a bipartisan measure to protect “the true victims” of Congressional sexual predation.

“We have seen the tragic toll of this disgusting crime,” said one unnamed lawmaker. “Someone needs to stand up for those who stand to lose the most. This bill would protect the vulnerable political parties and their candidates who get innocently swept up in the wave of voter anger that follows such revelations. Everyone’s worried about the children, but someone needs to ask ‘what about the candidates?’”

Experts agree that the emotional toll of losing pivotal legislative seats because of sexual predation can be devastating to both political campaign strategists and the candidates who love them.

Shortly after the story broke, mental health professionals were dispatched to Congressional offices and the headquarters of the Democrat and Republican parties to deal with the psychological aftermath.

“They’re wrestling with issues of fear and insecurity that gets worse as November approaches,” said one unnamed psychologist. “If we don’t intervene, they could be scarred for life, or at least until the next election cycle.”

Although the Foley scandal involves a Republican, the bill has drawn support from both sides of the aisle because, as one Democrat said, “Congressional sexual predation knows no political boundaries and it can strike at any time.”

(2006-09-29) — According to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, 89 percent of Democrats believe it’s more likely that they will personally be subjected to NSA wiretaps and CIA waterboarding, than it is that Islamic terrorists will attempt another attack on U.S. soil.

The results come in the wake of Congressional passage of President Bush’s terrorist detainee and NSA wiretap proposals designed to prevent future attacks.

“The only thing we have to fear,” said one unnamed Democrat Senator, “is Bush himself.”

The source noted that al Qaeda is not a “legitimate threat”, since the so-called terror group has mounted only one successful operation on U.S. soil in the past six years.

“In that same time, Bush has ordered many wiretaps and the CIA has tortured lots of detainees,” he said. Then he asked rhetorically, “Which one presents a clear and present danger: Bush or Bin Laden?”

The anonymous senator also noted that the al Qaeda leader’s effectiveness has been neutralized because, “Bin Laden has been virtually dead since President Clinton nearly killed him years ago.”