 sj |
||
|
||
BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT!
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 29 Mar 01 - 07:30 PM Bushwhacked-NINE!
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 29 Mar 01 - 07:08 PM Mouse, "Mav is so funny he doesn't even realize when he's calling people names. Come to think of it, we called him on it once and he had some tortured logic to explain how it wasn't name-calling" The logic is, it isn't true! Provide posts where I called you a moron, idiot, vulgar name or referred to you as a biological waste product like you have me or any other ad hominem attack and I will apologize.
The entire government employee culture is an offensive burden on the American taxpayer. It's a self-perpetuating force of bureaucrats who PRETEND to serve certain segments of society but in reality consume nost of their budget in wages for meaningless jobs which produce nothing of substance and merely inconvenience those who would attempt to deal with any given department and waste money (aka "the runaround").
I have no idea whether or not you work for a union, but if you do, please tell us what product the union produces and what it would do if the company (the real source of your income) were to leave the country. I'll tell you what the answers are in case you can't bring yourself to do it:
The union's product is inconvenience and extortion. What they would do is make noise, attempt to sue the company and give you directions to the unemployment office where you would be forced to deal with UNION THUG BUREAUCRATS!!!mav out |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: wdyat12 Date: 29 Mar 01 - 04:08 AM Mav, God Damnit! Please come and play on Paltalk with an original tune that has all your rancor and railings. Let me know with a PM. I don't want to miss this one. You can say this better in song with this group. You might even get a few more converts. You might even convince me. wdyat12 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: CarolC Date: 29 Mar 01 - 01:27 AM I've been thinking about this one for a while. I haven't read all of the posts, so maybe this has already been addressed.
MAV, it sounds like you're saying that it makes more sense to use faucet filters than it does to take good care of our water supply. Is that what you're saying, or am I misreading you? Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: mousethief Date: 29 Mar 01 - 12:21 AM Mav is so funny he doesn't even realize when he's calling people names. Come to think of it, we called him on it once and he had some tortured logic to explain how it wasn't name-calling. His answer is to show that I occasionally get hot under the collar. This more of that mathematics we had over on the Israel thread:
1 wrong + Hey, Mav, pull your head out. Not everybody in a union is shooting truckers and beating up people on camera. Talk about gross over-generalizations. Then again you couldn't be as conservative as you are if you weren't stuffed full of gross over-generalizations. Forget I said anything. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 28 Mar 01 - 11:58 PM Teamsters union backs Alaska drilling to create jobs
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Teamsters union Wednesday endorsed a Republican plan to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil drilling, saying it would create more than 735,000 new jobs for Americans.
Drilling in the Arctic refuge is the centerpiece of a Republican energy bill aimed at increasing domestic supplies of oil, natural gas and electricity.
OH MY GOD! I take back everything I said about all you wonderful union thugs.
mav out
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 28 Mar 01 - 11:45 PM HEY!!! How'd you like the way "W" forced the RATs to kill McCain Feingold??? "W" is such an idiot. WASHINGTON, March 28 (UPI) -- After spending years calling for campaign finance reform, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., announced Wednesday he might vote against campaign finance overhaul legislation, in part because the final bill might hurt Democrats. Daschle said Wednesday he would vote against the bill -- even if that vote meant killing the measure -- if the final legislation increases regulated contribution limits beyond what he considers a safe threshold for Democrats. (he he he) mav out |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 28 Mar 01 - 11:03 PM Sorry about the double post folks, went off line and ..... mav out |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 28 Mar 01 - 10:52 PM "I thought George W. Khan was going to prevent any and all airline strikes this year? Geez, talk about your short-lived promises. There's integrity in the white house for you" He can't and I'm disappointed. I'd like to see him tell them to go pack fudge.
"I like Mav's logic about arsenic in the drinking water. It's naturally occurring, so it's good for us" My point was, it's not like someone is putting it in the water.
"His Republican answer: everybody in the USA can get a faucet filter" Your disingenuous commucrat answer, force every little berg in the US to spend money they don't have to treat water, most of which will go DOWN THE TOILET or FOR WATERING THE LAWN, just so OVERPAID UNION THUG CONSTRUCTION WORKERS can have short term jobs! Buying faucet filters for everyone would cost a pittance compared to that.
"Unfortunately not everybody in the US can afford a clean water filter. But do the Republicans care if the people on the bottom rung of the economic ladder die of poisoning from their drinking water? Apparently not."
Do you mean to tell me that city people actually drink that horrible crap, period! Do you? If so, than I can see why you vote D, brain damage from the toxic water supplied by the union thug water department.
"Union thugs." I like that one. People who want a decent standard of living are thugs and RATS." No, people who beat people up on camera and think nothing of shooting independent trucker during a strike (which does nothing but inconvience the paying customers while committing extortion against a business, artificially setting a high price tag on a likely no-brainer job)those are union thugs. Want more, please get me started.
"People who want the rich to get richer at the expense of the poor and middle class"
That's the stupidist comment I've ever heard......and I've heard a lot of liberal propaganda.
If the poor don't have any money, how do the rich get richer at their expense???????? Duh!
The rich get richer because they know how to and work hard to accomplish that goal. Most of the rich are "work-a-holics"
The poor stay relatively less affluent because they do not strive to improve themselves and their wage earning ability, and are "comfortably numb" in their aquired station in life. (Joe Six-pack).
We have the richest poor in the world. Even on the reservations (the poorest places in the US) they had good sized color TVs, telephones and cars. You go to a third world country and look at REAL poverty.
"I also like the blind faith Mav has in the economy growing at 4%. Looked at the Wall Street ticker lately? We'll be lucky if we pull off any positive numbers at all this year"
WE?? Oh, so you're invested? Must be an evil rich ba$+ard! I know you're feeling shame (high readings on psychic shame meter)
"And I see Mav has jumped on the Greenspan-bashing bandwagon"
What do you mean "jumped on the bandwagon"? I've been criticising Greenspan for a long time.
"Just as foolish as giving Greenspan credit for the economic growth when we had it" The only thing he did right was not raising rates earlier.
"The one thing we CAN give Greenspan credit for is the zero growth in working-class income"
Well??? What was the inflation rate? (1 to 1.5%?) A job is worth what it's worth. If the cost of living doesn't go up, the value of a job doesn't go up either. Knock, knock, knock.....Hello??????
"Can't let the little poeple get ahead"
They can if they stop acting like a bunch of little poor whining victims. Go take some classes, learn a trade, move up the economic food chain.....this is America, poor people make fortunes here.
"That's for the CEO's and Republicans like Mav"
Thanks for the elevation in status, but I'm still "little people" (just one). I still have callouses and cuts on my hands. I get them dirty at work. (I've been a musician remember)
"Only they deserve to share in the economic good times"
I'd like to think so, but I'd have to move to another state where they have some "good economic times".
"Thanks, Alan, you turd" Yeah Alan, you t**d!
"Call me all the names you want, Mav"
Mouser, you want to go back and find all the posts where I called you horrible vulgar names?????????
I'd say I've been remarkably restrained in my comments restricting myself to simply having a little fun with your screen name.
"It's a good indicator of inability to actually reason"
I agree!!! You, on the other hand, have issued a large volume of gutteral phrases and vulgar epithets which indeed demonstrate the above comment.
Perhaps I'll indulge you in a bit of your own copy/paste quotes just to illustrate your own fecal style.
mav out
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 28 Mar 01 - 10:03 PM "I thought George W. Khan was going to prevent any and all airline strikes this year? Geez, talk about your short-lived promises. There's integrity in the white house for you" He can't and I'm disappointed. I'd like to see him tell them to go pack fudge. "I like Mav's logic about arsenic in the drinking water. It's naturally occurring, so it's good for us" My point was, it's not like someone is putting it in the water. "His Republican answer: everybody in the USA can get a faucet filter" Your disingenuous commucrat answer, force every little berg in the US to spend money they don't have to treat water, most of which will go DOWN THE TOILET or FOR WATERING THE LAWN, just so UNION THUG CONSTRUCTION WORKERS Now there's something I'd like to see George W. Hun go down in history for: his was the presidency under which everybody had to get a water filter, because of his relaxing of the clean water regulations. I'd love that! Yeah, Mav, keep it up! Unfortunately not everybody in the US can afford a clean water filter. But do the Republicans care if the people on the bottom rung of the economic ladder die of poisoning from their drinking water? Apparently not. Here's that compassionate conservativism we've heard so much about. "Union thugs." I like that one. People who want a decent standard of living are thugs and RATS. People who want the rich to get richer at the expense of the poor and middle class are good, God-fearing Republicans. Where have I heard all this before? Oh yeah. Last time the Republicans were in the white house. I also like the blind faith Mav has in the economy growing at 4%. Looked at the Wall Street ticker lately? We'll be lucky if we pull off any positive numbers at all this year. And I see Mav has jumped on the Greenspan-bashing bandwagon. Just as foolish as giving Greenspan credit for the economic growth when we had it. The one thing we CAN give Greenspan credit for is the zero growth in working-class income. Can't let the little poeple get ahead. That's for the CEO's and Republicans like Mav. Only they deserve to share in the economic good times. Thanks, Alan, you turd. Call me all the names you want, Mav. It's a good indicator of inability to actually reason.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Mar 01 - 04:19 PM That is a more extensive analysis of the points I raised than I had expected, John. :-) - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Skeptic Date: 26 Mar 01 - 04:10 PM Dear Mav Yes, but the GDP AND tax revenue INCREASED And spending (non-domestic) still increased. So even though GDP increased by 55%, spending on defense rose even faster. Corporate and Income taxes didn't keep pace with the spending and, in fact, declined. Domestic spending increased in dollars but as a percentage, it declined. The growth in GDP didn't help. Reagan tried to borrow us out of a recession based on supply side theory which didn't work. Its all in the percentages, not the absolute dollars. If I earn $30,000 a year and spend all of it on living, I'm breaking even. If my income suddenly goes up 50% to $45,000, and by expenses go up 60%, oops, I'm $3800 in the hole. In this case, expenses went up before the income was realized. Both domestic and defense spending increased in absolute dollars. But defense increased at a faster rate. If W tries the same trick, we could well see the same result. It only works if the economy grows. Texas and Florida are now facing budget problems due to revenue shortfalls. Since the economy has been booming for the last 8 years or so, you'd expect that something would have been put aside for a rainy day. Instead, there were fairly substantial tax breaks given and now Florida faces some very tough choices. Jeb's answer was to propose even more tax cuts, of course. Reagan had a deal with the unscrupulous democRATS amounting to $2 in spending cuts for every additional $1 in increased revenue. Guess what, Dutch was "stupid" enough to trust the crooks. It must make you proud. Except that domestic spending declined as a percentage of GDP, defense spending didn't. Sounds like Reagan didn't keep his side of the bargin. The brilliant commucRATS are responsible for that one (remember they had both houses?), Tip: "TAX THE BLEEPING POOR" No. It was a joint effort of democrats and Republicans with Reagan urging them on. After all, the wage earners don't have much of a lobby. GOOD!...DO IT AGAIN! Absolutely. How many times will it take before it sinks in that maybe you really can't spend your way to prosperity. Yes, what it boils down to is, the rest of the world has been successfully RECYCLING their nuclear fuel rods while Jimmy Carter has them burying the RADIOACTIVE NUCLEAR WASTE in YOUR BACK YARD! (Genius) Actually, I was talking about his statement that environmental considerations for things like placement of power-lines, pipe-lines and power plants without having to worry all that much about environmental impact. As to recycling of radioactive wastes, that was the result of a massive lobbying effort by the utilities. The AEC has a long history of proving itself to be a relatively cheap whore. The utilities paid and the AEC delivered. With the familiar mantra "Because it will cost too much money". Just like ergonomics wasn't cost effective. Its all a matter of what's more important. People or profits. Meanwhile back at the ranch (CA) Hydro-electric, coal, oil, natural gas and wind power elecrtic generating plants are all unacceptable. Not really since by next year new generating plants will be on line. The crisis is temporary and lots of blame to share. The State for proposing a stupid regulatory scheme, the utilities for accepting it with eyes wide open, the consumers for not conserving, either passively or actively. Now california claims that billions in profits were illegal and wants the Utilities to refund the money. Be interesting to see how the Feds respond. On to more interesting territory. During the campaign, W claimed (repeatedly) that his goal was that "no child be left behind" Strangely, in Texas at the time they were being left behind. Until a Federal judge found Texas in violation of federal law and ordered the State to comply with Federal regulations. Strangely under reported by the mythic "liberal press". And now that he is ensconced in Washington, the "compassionate conservative manifests as he has proposed: 1. Cuts in the already modest funding for child- care assistance for low-income families. 2. Cuts in funding for programs designed to investigate and combat child abuse. 3. Cuts in an important new program to train pediatricians and other doctors at children's hospitals across the U.S. 4. To cut off all of the money provided by Congress for an "early learning" trust fund, which is an effort to improve the quality of child care and education for children under 5. But then, these (and similar) programs tend to benefit the poor and those on welfare who, apparently, somehow don't deserve help. Of course we are talking about children here, but if they have no ,more sense than to be born poor, well, they deserve what ever W's going to make sure they don't get. Bartholomew, The real problems that I see are not rampaging big government, or loss of personal freedom. I see a consistant degradation of the environment. A growing reliance on rapidly depleting fossil fuels and the nuclear alternative. Parochial thinking. A growing disparity in the distribution of wealth. Environmental degredation and the rest have a cause. I'd argue that the loss (whether by choice or fiat) of personal freedom and responsibility are root causes. The environment may be a problem that requires a more immediate solution but in the end , along with big governemnt, big business and the rest, it is a symptom. We ignore the disease at our peril. Regards John
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Mar 01 - 03:58 PM I had hopes that I could steer this thread away from endless political wrangling into low humour, inane satire, and worthless doggerel, but I seem to have failed miserably. (Sigh) Go to it, guys! Should I launch a "Bushwhacked - 99" thread so it's there when we need it? :-) - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: mousethief Date: 26 Mar 01 - 11:07 AM I thought George W. Khan was going to prevent any and all airline strikes this year? Geez, talk about your short-lived promises. There's integrity in the white house for you. I like Mav's logic about arsenic in the drinking water. It's naturally occurring, so it's good for us. Like giardia from deer shit, that's naturally occurring too. Must be good for us. His Republican answer: everybody in the USA can get a faucet filter. Now there's something I'd like to see George W. Hun go down in history for: his was the presidency under which everybody had to get a water filter, because of his relaxing of the clean water regulations. I'd love that! Yeah, Mav, keep it up! Unfortunately not everybody in the US can afford a clean water filter. But do the Republicans care if the people on the bottom rung of the economic ladder die of poisoning from their drinking water? Apparently not. Here's that compassionate conservativism we've heard so much about. "Union thugs." I like that one. People who want a decent standard of living are thugs and RATS. People who want the rich to get richer at the expense of the poor and middle class are good, God-fearing Republicans. Where have I heard all this before? Oh yeah. Last time the Republicans were in the white house. I also like the blind faith Mav has in the economy growing at 4%. Looked at the Wall Street ticker lately? We'll be lucky if we pull off any positive numbers at all this year. And I see Mav has jumped on the Greenspan-bashing bandwagon. Just as foolish as giving Greenspan credit for the economic growth when we had it. The one thing we CAN give Greenspan credit for is the zero growth in working-class income. Can't let the little poeple get ahead. That's for the CEO's and Republicans like Mav. Only they deserve to share in the economic good times. Thanks, Alan, you turd. Call me all the names you want, Mav. It's a good indicator of inability to actually reason. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Jim the Bart Date: 26 Mar 01 - 10:16 AM No, Kendall, History will have the last word, not MAV. In a hundred years no one will care about Clinton's sex life, but they will still be apalled at the short-thinking, greed-driven, self-serving "Republican revolution" that our right-wing ideologue friends spend so much time congratulating each other about. I believe that our descendants will look at this period of relative peace and prosperity and wonder why we didn't focus on trying to address some of our core problems (that will seem so clear in retrospect), rather than trying to figure out how the wealthiest few among us could maintain their trust funds. The real problems that I see are not rampaging big government, or loss of personal freedom. I see a consistant degradation of the environment. A growing reliance on rapidly depleting fossil fuels and the nuclear alternative. Parochial thinking. A growing disparity in the distribution of wealth. Sigh. I guess when your "leader" is the late-blooming spawn of a man who admitted to having a problem with "the vision thing", you shouldn't expect anything more than the quibbling over current events that passes for political discourse these days. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: GUEST,kendall Date: 26 Mar 01 - 08:07 AM It wasn't the "freaks" and "Tree huggers" or the blue haired whackos in California that created this power mess, it was DEREGULATION. Look folks, I am a yellow dog democrat, MAV is a mossback republican, and we will never agree.I have a few republican friends, one is a brother, and they too are dead wrong. There is no more to say. MAV can have the last word (for what it's worth) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 25 Mar 01 - 10:39 PM "Kendall,
You forget to mention the pardons of Bush Sr. (Armand Hammer and Casper Weinberger)and the bribes he allegedly took (campaign and library). When that subject was raised at the Congressional hearings on the Clinton pardon, suddenly (in about 2 days) the hearings were over"
Yeah Kendall, what theHELL'sthe matter with you?
"Mav, A repeat"
Yes, yes, but still wrong.
"Looking at taxes and spending as a percent of the GDP for 1980 - 1986 Domestic spending (democratic priorities) decreased"
Yes, but the GDP AND tax revenue INCREASED!
The revenue increased from $550B to $991B and the top marginal rate went from 70% in 1981 to 28% in 1989. I other words, IRS collections almost doubled. The economy went nuts, lines at gas stations disappeared.
Reagan had a deal with the unscrupulous democRATS amounting to $2 in spending cuts for every additional $1 in increased revenue. Guess what, Dutch was "stupid" enough to trust the crooks. It must make you proud.
"(So it didn't contribute to the deficit Payroll taxes (the kind you and I pay most of) increased (and didn't contribute to the deficit)"
The brilliant commucRATS are responsible for that one (remember they had both houses?), Tip: "TAX THE BLEEPING POOR" "Defense spending (Reagan's agenda) increased" GOOD!...DO IT AGAIN!
"Cheney concurs, as witness his recent remarks on MSNBC about dealing with environmental obstacles to new power plants"
Yes, what it boils down to is, the rest of the world has been successfully RECYCLING their nuclear fuel rods while Jimmy Carter has them burying the RADIOACTIVE NUCLEAR WASTE in YOUR BACK YARD! (Genius)
Perhaps you can provide us with some of the nuclear horrors in Europe as a result of this practice.
Meanwhile back at the ranch (CA) Hydro-electric, coal, oil, natural gas and wind power elecrtic generating plants are all unacceptable. I hope the reasonable people of CA LEAVE, take their business with them and let the tatooed, multi-pierced, green haired, Goth-mo, enviro-bleeps....FREAKING IN THE DARK! "Bashing Clinton (and listing his faults and crimes, real or imagined), is beside the point"
Well dad, OK. But Kendall started it, I was just agreeing!
Yes he is, and the contrast is overwhelming.
"Is there a sense of desperation in what he's doing?"
Probably a sense of urgency, but he's got a real good start.
He's got a lot to do...rolling the country back to where it was 50 years ago.
Depends on developments and the effectiveness of our education efforts and your "propaganda".
You'll have to make it simple enough so the gimme girls, the union thugs, the "dumbed down" public school graduates, the illiterate, those duped newcomers that don't yet speak "the language", the people in the blue areas, the people in Palm Beach County Florida and Kendall's "stupid" public can comprehend it. But if the LSCs have the rug yanked out from under them by Huge Tax Cuts and MASSIVE ENTITLEMENT KILLS.....and the by the continuation of prosperity in the private sector..... mav out
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Skeptic Date: 25 Mar 01 - 09:33 PM Kendall, You forget to mention the pardons of Bush Sr. (Armand Hammer and Casper Weinberger)and the bribes he allegedly took (campaign and library). When that subject was raised at the Congressional hearings on the Clinton pardon, suddenly (in about 2 days) the hearings were over. Mav, A repeat: Looking at taxes and spending as a percent of the GDP for 1980 - 1986 Domestic spending (democratic priorities) decreased.(So it didn't contribute to the deficit Payroll taxes (the kind you and I pay most of) increased (and didn't contribute to the deficit) Defense spending (Reagan's agenda) increased. And contributed to the deficit Income and Corporate Taxes decreased. Which contributed to the deficit. (most of the tax breaks went to big corporations. Even then Budget Director Stockman characterized the lobby efforts and out right arm twisting of big business as a "greed fest") Business loved Reagan. he managed to borrow us into prosperity and it only cost around $4 trillion. And now, they don't have to help (as much) in the pay-off. W is troubling when it comes to the environment in part because his record in Texas isn't too good. Cheney concurs, as witness his recent remarks on MSNBC about dealing with environmental obstacles to new power plants. W's proposed "Regulations Czar" believes that regulations should be subject to an acturial analysis, to see if the benefit outweighs the cost. Which may sound fine until you remember that car companies have been accused of the same type of analysis: Is it cheaper to fix the defect or pay off the families of the victims? Perhaps W can at last answer the question: Just how much is a human life worth? The standard argument "Well, its impossible to make everything 100% safe" is true. On the other hand, as a moral and ethical position, refusing to fix something that is going to cause harm as part of its man-made nature or operation seems ethically questionable. Bashing Clinton (and listing his faults and crimes, real or imagined), is beside the point. W is the point. Is there a sense of desperation in what he's doing? As in, maybe the Republican's won't be in control of Congress in 2002? Regards John
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 25 Mar 01 - 09:10 PM Dear Sir,
With all due respect, your liberalism is showing.
Come on, it's just me, MAV! It's all in good fun. (Isn't it?)
Here's something I didn't write. It has a little liberal slant so you won't feel quite so alienated.
Will you be glad when this is all over? It could be 2 years, it could be 50 years.
Anyway read this, it'll warm your heart. http://www.foxnews.com%2fpolitics%2f032501%2fbush_conservative.sml/ The AP disclaimer at the bottom is the liberal part I was referring to.
mav out |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: kendall Date: 25 Mar 01 - 08:27 PM Americans loved Raygun? a man of moderate intelligence, who spent his whole life pretending to be other people, who promised to balance the budget yet never even submitted one, who lied on tv about Iran-contre and Arms for hostages? Now, he gets a ship named after him while Willy gets a blow job and pardons a few crooks (Gerald Ford did it too). G.W.Bush is a doofus. Thats why he has Cheney. They make good drinking buddies, between them they have at least 3 OUI convictions. What the hell is wrong with our priorities? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 25 Mar 01 - 08:07 PM Sigh, OK Mister,
"The fact is, even as a past, disgraced president, Willy is still more interesting than that smirking doofus in the White house"
Perhaps to the remaining 10 criminals defending the s**mbag..x42. I'll take boring over criminal any day.
At least you admit what he is, X42.
"Sad it is that the American public wants more of Willy and less of Dubbya"
Well actually according to the Rasmussen Poll:
52+% of likely voters really like "W", (http://www.portraitofamerica.com/html/poll-1598.html)
According to three seperate polls, over 51%, way back in January viewed the corrupt lying rapist unfavorably. (http://www.portraitofamerica.com/html/poll-1615.html)
I believe it's down below 40% now.
"Sure he was applauded many times. Why?"
Because he's giving the public what they want and what he promised, a tax cut, civility, integrity, honor.
"because he spouts platitudes to the unthinking public!" There you go, insulting the American people again, calling them stupid! You didn't like me calling you an elitist before, but if the shoe fits...(Ooooh, name calling)
"Listen up..THERE IS NO SURPLUS!!"
Listen up..SO WHAT!!!
Basing a tax cut on the surplus is a dirty trick, if it can't be done now, it never can. I say there is a current surplus and it will get even bigger as economic growth increases unabated (lose Greenspan).
The thieving governments at all levels add up to Socialism BIG TIME!
"thanks to the Actor, we have a 4 trillion dollar debt"
Well, clinton did do a lot of evil things, but this one belongs the the commucRAT check kiting bank fraud thieves of Tip O'Neil, convicted and jailed Dan Rottencowskin and Ft. Worthless Jim Wright.
"That, is real!!"
It was over $5T, but I'll take your word for it (see it's working).
The debt is and will continue getting paid down at an unprecedented high rate.
You can't retire it all now!
What about all those poor people in retirement who are counting on their fully matured savings bonds and government bonds......cruel, cold, shame..tsk, tsk, tsk.
"this "projected surplus" is predicated on 3% growth. that is NOT real and doofus knows it"
That's right, I think it's actually been 4%. "Thats why he is fighting the "trigger" proposal by my own Senators (both republicans)"
(?)
The "trigger" guarantees no tax cut. IT'S PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR FOR GOD SAKE!
Besides, your guys (the commucRATS)want an instant massive cut, reading the polls, jumping on the band wagon I guess.
"Why is he keeping quiet about the pardons?"
THE PARDONS? Who gives a damn about the pardons? It's the millions of dollars in bribes he took for granting them.(see: X42 legal defense fund, x42 library fund)
"because he wants to be able to pardon his own crooks"
Let the chips fall where they may, we will see the rule of law return to the US.
"You may be right MAV"
Thanks, I try.
"he might make it through 8 years, Raygun made it"
Yes, America loved President Reagan and rightfully so. I hope they put him on the ten dollar bill.
"Willy made it, just tell us what we want to hear and you have it made"
Well it did work for him, but now we have lying X42/algore fatigue. "To hell with the truth"
That does seem to be the Marxist axiom of the left. Sorry, I prefer the truth, you? mav out
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Mar 01 - 06:26 PM American presidents are always interrupted with applause at numerous intervals. It's as predictable as the laugh track on a sitcom, or the cheerleading at a football game. Gets tedious, if you ask me. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: kendall Date: 25 Mar 01 - 05:32 PM The fact is, even as a past, disgraced president, Willy is still more interesting than that smirking doofus in the White house. Sad it is that the American public wants more of Willy and less of Dubbya. Sure he was applauded many times. Why? because he spouts platitudes to the unthinking public! Listen up..THERE IS NO SURPLUS!! thanks to the Actor, we have a 4 trillion dollar debt. That, is real!! this "projected surplus" is predicated on 3 % growth. that is NOT real and doofus knows it. Thats why he is fighting the "trigger" proposal by my own Senators (both republicans). Why is he keeping quiet about the pardons? because he wants to be able to pardon his own crooks. You may be right MAV, he might make it through 8 years, Raygun made it, Willy made it, just tell us what we want to hear and you have it made. To hell with the truth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 25 Mar 01 - 05:01 PM Hey Skep,
"And let's not confuse fascination with his celebrity as President with acceptance of or agreement with his politics"
Ditto X42 (that's clinton), except now the press doesn't have that problem, the public does. In fact the local press begrudgingly put their story BELOW THE FOLD!
That's why I wrote the stupid headline and story.
Mr. Morse,
"It's sad that a past president commands headlines while the present president has little to say of any great interest"
See Skeptic's comment above, x42's celebrity is fleeting but still titilating to the press. The defenders are becoming fewer and fewer. Now that the protection of the office is gone, look for the immunity floodgates to open as the truth starts to get into the mainstream.
I'll bet it's no accident that "W" and Ashcroft are keeping mum about clinton legal developments.
PRESIDENT BUSH had plenty to say and he was interrupted by applause at least 25 times.
He has been drawing record crowds in "democrat" states (like De Ash Hole's South Dakota) and receiving Rock Star-like reception wherever he goes.
"Maybe he really will go away if we ignore him"
Yes, I guarantee he will go away in 8 years.
Dear Thief,
"He'll go away to the North Slope and throw arsenic-laden soil all over the place"
I suppose you are talking about the issue concerning the 5 to 20 parts per billion allowance of arsenic in drinking water , a standard whose level has yet to be set by the scientific community on the NATURALLY OCCURING MINERAL.
Why don't we have the EPA force communities to BOIL all water, DISTILL THE STEAM and HAND DELIVER it in STERILIZED BOTTLES so we can FLUSH OUR TOILETS and WATER OUR LAWNS with it.
GET A BLEEPING FAUCET FILTER"We need to NOT ignore him very closely"
No, no, Kendall is right, just keep on ignoring and mocking him.
mav out
PS. All you greenies, check out this "Earth at night from space" photo.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0011/earthlights_dmsp_big.jpg
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: mousethief Date: 24 Mar 01 - 08:06 PM He'll go away to the North Slope and throw arsenic-laden soil all over the place. We need to NOT ignore him very closely. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: kendall Date: 24 Mar 01 - 07:13 PM It's sad that a past president commands headlines while the present president has little to say of any great interest. Maybe he really will go away if we ignore him.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: mousethief Date: 24 Mar 01 - 04:43 PM "Bush visits portland; protesters litter" Now there is a headline that says a lot with what it doesn't say. The most significant of all possible subtitles to Bush's visit is what the protesters did? Talk about your non-entities. Compare: "Fred visits George. Tom washes car." Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Skeptic Date: 24 Mar 01 - 03:20 PM And let's not confuse fascination with his celebrity as President with acceptance of or agreement with his politics. Regards John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: kendall Date: 24 Mar 01 - 01:52 PM This is beginning to remind me of those silly ball kicking games when fans go nuts and hurt each other. Never understood that mind set either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 24 Mar 01 - 02:00 AM BUSH VISITS PORTLAND ME
BOTH PROTESTERS LITTER SIDEWALK
President Bush visited Portland Maine at noon today (Mar 23) and spoke to a full house. The event took place in Merrill Auditorium and was hosted by the Portland Chamber of Commerce. The address was covered by broadcast media from as far as MA.
Despite the inclement weather, most seats were filled by 11:45 and consisted mostly of COC members and Maine citizens.
VIPs included Independent (liberal democrat) Governor Angus King, Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, and Congressman Tommy the Commie Allen.
President Bush spoke for about 45 minutes detailing his tax cut plan before this audience in the highest taxed state in the US. He was interrupted by applause and standing ovations throughout the address at least 25 times. The "gathering" of around 9 protesters in front of City Hall was a pathetic mixture of anti-nuke, anti-CO2, anti-business and other obvious losers who were outnumbered 100 to 1 by enthusiastic and cheerful Bush supporters.
They obviously weren't serious about their anti-pollution position as they left their signs and other gargage lying in the slush.
Senator Snowe delivered a response to the press regarding her "trigger" proposal. mav out |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 18 Mar 01 - 12:26 PM Dear Skeptic and Little Hawk, "Stackey really does deserve to be completly ignored" Yes, but I couldn't resist hurling those French "power-sults" at him. I think they contain a great deal of subtle humor (like, "Would you mind clipping my toenails?")
I do take your comment as an indication of moral support.
Thanks!
*******************************************************
Little Hawk,
Thank you for your kind words.
"Conservative versus liberal debates seldom stay reasonable for very long, but we might as well all give it a try at least..."
If you want warm water, it requires both hot and cold water to be mixed.
I appreciate passionate debaters as opponents (of course especially when the facts are on my side)
If you want reasonable and well thought out compromise, the extreme views must be discussed.
This is what "democracy" is all about, not exactly what our current democrat party stands for (but used to)
"What's the alternative? Nothing very good"
That is exactly correct Sir.
The alternative is "bi-partisanship" where both sides are alike on all issues and the likely result is that government always wins and the citizens always lose.
I'm a member of the pro-citizen party.
*******************************************************
Wydat,
Thank you also for your concern about my state of mind, but don't worry, I'm just practicing up for the "big time"
"You both have your points. Whatever happened to "A kinder, gentler" anything? Don't get me wrong, but we are so divided"
We believe school kids need to be challenged with higher expectations, when they succeed they should indeed have higher self-esteems as opposed to worthless social promotions.
That is compassionate.
We have always believed what "current studies" show, that children are better off with their own parents, a married couple who love and care for them.
That is compassionate.
We believe that parents should have the FREEDOM OF CHOICE to send their children to a learning environment that most reflects the values they want instilled in them, not some government indoctrination center which undermines the parents desires.
That is compassionate.
"Is there no middle ground with any of us?"
If you are an American, we have a concept called the "American Dream". Perhaps its existance or meaning has been lost over the years, but here is what it means to many:
To buy and own your own home, raise healthy kids, make a good living doing something you like.
To have the freedom to; pursue any endeavor you choose and practice the religion you wish. To be better off than your parents were and have the opportunity to excel by your own initiative. (ie, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness)
That is the common ground.
SEE? No anger.
mav out
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: wdyat12 Date: 18 Mar 01 - 02:59 AM MAV, Show us your music. Go to Paltalk and play us something you like. We will be very receptive, but please no old flame songs. Looking forward to hearing you. I know you're good wdyat12 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: wdyat12 Date: 18 Mar 01 - 02:24 AM Hi Psyco! Glad to see you made it. wdyat12
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: psyco Date: 18 Mar 01 - 02:10 AM ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: wdyat12 Date: 18 Mar 01 - 02:09 AM You both have your points. Whatever happened to "A kinder, gentler" anything? Don't get me wrong, but we are so divided. Is there no middle ground with any of us? wdyat12 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Little Hawk Date: 17 Mar 01 - 09:47 PM Yes, MAV is perfectly reasonable when given the chance. Like anyone else he tends to react badly when smacked across the face repeatedly. As for being angry...well, there are a lot of angry people out there, and that may include you and me. Look at what happens in traffic all the time. People are under a lot of stress in this society. Conservative versus liberal debates seldom stay reasonable for very long, but we might as well all give it a try at least... What's the alternative? Nothing very good. - LH
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 17 Mar 01 - 09:19 PM Dear wdyat12, "You are very angry and you show it. This format may or may not be the place to vent, but you are venting angerin every post" Exactly what are you talking about? I'm not the least bit angry, I'm having a great time. I only fire back when shot at or hadn't you noticed? God knows I've received more than my share of "incoming". Being called $h!+ repeatedly does get a little old. I'll bet the couchon is still reading his French dictionary and scratching his head. "Does it help when we listen or does your anger grow when we engage you?" Geesh, lighten up. It helps when you treat American conservatives like they have a right to live. I'm perfectly capable of having a meaningful conversation with anyone who bothers to try. Ask Skeptic or Little Hawk. mav out |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: wdyat12 Date: 17 Mar 01 - 12:44 AM Mav, You are very angry and you show it. This format may or may not be the place to vent, but you are venting angerin every post. Does it help when we listen or does your anger grow when we engage you? wdyat12 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 16 Mar 01 - 11:35 PM Oui oui! Mon Ami! mav out |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Skeptic Date: 16 Mar 01 - 10:26 PM mav, Stackey really does deserve to be completly ignored. Regards John
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 16 Mar 01 - 09:50 PM Dear Stackley, enfant de chienne, "Fortunately for your country and the rest of the world, you are not a represetative American" You speak with a swaggering,ignorant arsehole accent, with your mouth full of shite" Vous est plein de merdre, et ta mere, elle est un couchon crasseux. Votre pere est un etranger. Je raffole des gros chiens qui louchent, mais vos dents de devant ont l'air fichues. Cela vou ennuyerait de me couper les ongles des orteils? Pourquoi ne cherchez-vous pas un vrai boulet? Vous me rendez malade! Je t'emmerde espece de porc a la manque! "Now piss off out of here. Cheers" Tire-toi, morpion! Va te faire foutre, fumer a l'haleine de roquet. Ne vous excusez pas!!! mav out
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Skeptic Date: 12 Mar 01 - 03:25 PM LH What do you mean going. We passed insane somewhere in the middle of Bushwhacked six. :-) Since then it been your basic chaos. See what happens when you don't pay close attention. I'll bet you missed the part where we all agreed to start a commune and live in harmony with nature too. *BG* Regards John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Little Hawk Date: 12 Mar 01 - 12:33 AM What in the world is going on now? Has this thread gone completely insane? Why are we getting postings of Chinese football scores? I don't even care about American football scores. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: GUEST, Stackley Date: 11 Mar 01 - 05:41 PM No such thing, Merde Allure Vagissant! Fortunately for your country and the rest of the world, you are not a represetative American. You speak with a swaggering,ignorant arsehole accent, with your mouth full of shite. Now piss off out of here. Cheers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 11 Mar 01 - 12:02 PM Dear Vote Frauds,
Unlike those other mavs, I speak with an American accent.
mav out PS Thanks for "bumping" the thread.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: GUEST,MAV Date: 11 Mar 01 - 11:45 AM BEIJING, March 11 (Xinhuanet) -- Following are the standings after the first-round matches of the Chinese Football League on Sunday (tabulated under games played, win, draw, loss, goals for, goals against, points): Shanghai Shenhua 1 1 0 0 3 1 3 Yunnan Hongta 1 1 0 0 2 0 3 Dalian Shide 1 1 0 0 1 0 3 Beijing Guo'an 1 1 0 0 1 0 3 Liaoning Fushun 1 1 0 0 1 0 3 Shaanxi Guoli 1 1 0 0 1 0 3 Sichuan Shangwutong 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 Bayi Zhenbang 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 Shandong Luneng 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Chongqing Lifan 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Shenyang Haishi 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Qingdao Beer 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 Shenzhen Ping'an 1 0 0 1 1 3 0 Tianjin Taida 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 Enditem mav out
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: GUEST, MAV Date: 11 Mar 01 - 11:31 AM The EPA - Simply Out of Control !
Maybe you can't relate to this yet, but it is just a matter of time until the EPA police take over every aspect of our lives, no matter where you live in this Country The State of Ohio contracted with Envirotest to perform auto emissions testing on cars and light trucks that are designed to simulate driving at highway speeds. The testing process involves putting your car on a dynamometer that allows the wheels to turn at highway speeds. Pollutants are measured exiting from the tailpipe during this process. If you pass the test, you don't get the specifics; you give them $19.50 and they don't even tell you how you really did. Did you just squeak by or did you tickle the lower limits of the sensors? Government secrecy at its best! What happens if your car doesn't pass? Governor Voinovich has designated a number of service stations to perform repairs on your vehicle should it fail the test. The Government forces you to spend your own money to get it repaired!This can cost hundreds of dollars!! When you have politicians jamming auto emissions testing down your throat, you have to wonder what they are thinking. But you have to understand what's important to them in order to understand their environmental policy.
When you are a politician, the most important thing to you is getting money to spend. The Federal EPA, simply out of control, sets standards for pollutants and then places the burden on the states to institute programs designed to meet those standards. They threaten to cut off highway funding if the state doesn't comply. Now if you are Voinovich, you are not to enthused about losing that money you want to spend on those projects that make you look good, so you simply go along with the environmentalist whackos. George is supposed to be a Republican (conservative) but he acts more like a liberal when it comes to the environment. He'd rather convince you that all this testing is going to make Ohio a better place for our children and grandchildren. It's not the cars that cause the majority of pollution as the EPA administrators have told us. It's industry that tips the scales. So if you really believe the EPA that we have a big problem here, we're just going to have to stop making things. It's time to give the planet back to the native Americans who took much better care of it in the first place.
The federal EPA has been testing the air for many years now. There are some places in the country that have poor air quality. This isn't due to cars that have not been maintained, but to mother nature trapping the air. LA is like a bowl with a lid on it. Air is trapped and the pollutants can't readily escape. No amount of auto pollution testing is going to change that.
But the problem with the EPA is that when air quality is improved, they panic because if the air is clean, they don't have jobs. But since they control the standards, their problem is not a problem. The EPA simply raises the standard . All of a sudden, pollution is a big problem again and they all get to keep their jobs. In order for the EPA to grow and prosper, higher and higher standards need to be set. What really needs to be done is to scale back the EPA. The problem is that if anyone dares to suggest this in the political arena, the media labels them as anti-environmentalists. This kind of publicity can be death to a politician.
Then there is the American Lung Association. They used to be content with simply attacking the tobacco industry, but now they have turned to air pollution for continued notoriety. The lung people have spent millions upon millions of dollars on research to find a cure for cancer. Cancer is taking as many lives as ever and all the research hasn't amounted to beans. They support the EPA's stricter standards, saying that the health risk is too great. Why almost every day, people walking down the street fall over dead after a out of tune car goes by. The problem is that these organizations put the fear into all of us by intimidation. The American Lung Association sued the federal government when the Bush administration frozethe pollution standards. I think it's time to put the American Lung Association out of business whenthey use our money to sue the taxpayer that supports them. They are not going to get any of my money if I can help it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Little Hawk Date: 10 Mar 01 - 11:12 PM Thanks for the perceptive comments, John. MAV - I actually don't mind a bit that you have the beliefs you have, although they're different from mine in a number of areas. I sometimes get quite involved in stating my own beliefs, not in order to change yours really, but in the process of self-discovery, which is an ongoing one. I realize that many people feel man is inherently competitive. I don't. I feel that mankind is inherently desirous of improving things, reaching toward greater perfection. That can certainly result in competition in any free marketplace where things are being sold, but the essential desire of people is to improve things. To reach for the stars in all fields of endeavour. This is noble. To deliberately engage in lies, brainwashing, misleading propaganada, slander, and/or violence...which is what happens in an extremely competitive system is not noble, it is ignoble in the extreme. These are things which happen often in current political systems, in organized team sports, and in the world of commercial advertising, etc. It happens most notably in war, which is the ultimate competitive act. All of that is contrary to Jesus' spiritual teachings, MAV, and I am curious about that, because I get the strong impression that you, and many Republicans consider yourself to be devout Christians. Jesus never taught people to be competitive, but he did teach them to reach for the highest perfection in every aspect of their lives, and to be merciful toward others, and to share what they had with others. So did Buddha and Lao-Tse, and all the great religious prophets of ages past. I don't believe any of them taught competition, but they all taught self-improvement. Many of their followers, however, have gloried in competition, even to the point of killing those whose views differ even in a very minor sense from their own. A win/win scenario is always better for people than a win/lose one. Better in a marriage. Better in a political system. Better in a divided world. Your founding fathers were trying to throw off the distant rule of a senile monarch who was out of touch with reality. They succeeded in that objective. What they did not succeed in was to overcome their own ruthless instincts for domination. They created a society perpetually divided against itself from within, and filled with an utter disregard for the territorial rights of all its neighbours...who were: Native Americans all over the continent, Mexicans, Canadians in British North America, black slaves, Central Americans, Carribean peoples, South Americans...anyone who fell under the hammer of Manifest Destiny. That's what happens when your basic philosophy is survival of the fittest (meaning those with the most guns and money, these days). It's a philosophy for barbarians and conquerors. It is not what Christ taught or recommended to heal the world. End of theological discussion for today. Remember: I'm not trying to change you. I'm just discussing things that interest me, that's all. I respect your right to believe what you believe. Little Hawk out - or...wait... p.s. by "serving the government", I simply mean that a civil servant should fulfill his governmental duties to the best of his abilities, according to his job description...assuming he agrees with those duties. That is serving the governmental structure that has employed him, and serving the public as well, to the benefit of both, hopefully. If he thinks it's not to the benefit of the public, then he should refuse to do it, and/or resign. I am not recommending Marxism. I'm recommending a mixed system of private enterprise and socialism, without any political parties whatsoever, but with elected representatives from every region, who form a unified national council that debates issues and passes legislation. If a representative failed to properly represent his area, they would, I'm sure, vote him out next time around. You could even have provisions for recall, if that wasn't good enough. I know it ain't gonna happen in my lifetime, barring a cataclysm unlike anything that any of us have seen yet...most of us would probably not survive a cataclysm of that dimension, but some of us would. The present deluded system has so much inertia that I doubt anything else could budge it. That won't stop me from dreaming of a better world. - LH out |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: Skeptic Date: 10 Mar 01 - 08:40 PM MAV and Little Hawk, Who would police them and expose corruption? As opposed to what we have now? It is the nature of any bureaucracy to hide it's mistakes. It may well be part of our nature as humans. Like the little dance that some (non mudcat) performers do, claiming "innovation" instead of saying "oops" Little Hawk said You can create a deliberately adversarial system, which is what we have... and you replied Man is adversarial in nature, it is a natural trait which leads to self-preservation. and LH went on to say ...or a system that is cooperative and not adversarial. I believe the latter would be far healthier in psychology One reason for the adversarial system was an attempt to diffuse power, not concentrate it. Well, at least they tried. Have to give them a little something for the effort. It may well be a chicken or egg question. There's some new work going on in that seems to show that, at least in part, nature is much more cooperative than it is competitive. So is the system adversarial because man is truly that way, or was the assumption made that man was that way and a system was set it on that assumption, thereby proving the assumption? Not to claim that it's all cooperation, just that it's not all competetion. A prime example of this is how they wound up defending the criminal and amoral behavior of the clintons and are now smeared with their taint. To say nothing of how they leaped to the defense of Bush Sr for the Weinberger or Armand Hammer pardons....oops they didn't. Although they made the very generous offer to include investigation of those pardons along with the clinton fiasco. Which offer suddenly stopped the Congressional hearings on the pardons. Plenty of blame to share all around, as always. And maybe in part because way back when, the belief was that you couldn't really trust al those colonists to do what's right, so lets create a system They are not artificial, our side stands for the principles outlined in the Constitution, the democrats seek to destroy it. Politicians seek to destroy it. True, some are better at it than others. As long as we rely on a party or ideology to in any way guarantee "right" and "freedoms" and argue the necessity of any system (as opposed accepting purported sufficiency) for moral autonomy, we loose. By its nature, any bureaucracy defuses responsibility. Blaming one side or the other adds to the effect of moving power away from the individual. LH said To deliberately divide a public into adversarial blocks which perpetuate themselves generation after generation is to create a state of ongoing social warfare (I don't mean "shooting" war, but war nonetheless). That is what has happened in both our justice system and our political system. It's divisive and destructive. It hampers independent thought. It precludes fairness, and enshrines intolerance. It perpetuates pointless hatred and prejudice on many levels. It operates on a win/lose basis when it is entirely possible for people to operate on a win/win basis. Try it in a family and see what happens. It's not good. A nation is a very large extended family Inherently so. Mav, you said We now and always have stood for INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS!!! Divide and conquer, you have put your finger on a very major point I've been trying to make and it is exactly what the democrats do very efficiently I disagree. We (whether republican or democratic) manage to pay lip service to the idea with varying degrees of success. Dividing is what the "game" is all about. We have some protections built in to make the inevitable intrusions seem less oppressive. For every assault on individual rights you can detail by the democrats, I can do the same for the republicans. And then we can try to justify our positions and claim "On, yeah but in this case it was Okay becasue....". And liberals can do the same. To what affect? The basic relationships of power remain, encased in the "armour" of various interpretations of what the constitution means, implies or "really" says. ZThey divide and them make victims of all the groups just so they will be dependent on the liberals. They then create social programs which benefit mostly the unionized employees inside them who pretend to serve the public. These programs are not designed to get results. Success would put the liberals out of business. The only goal for them is PERCEPTION! Decade after decade liberals perpetuate and expand these useless programs blaming their failures on GOP interference, even though they (GOP) have traditionally been the minority. Stepping back, it's always "In this case". Whether its communism, politically correct behavior, corporate rights or welfare, the unifying principal seems to be that individual rights get argued away "In the name of". Let's take a look at all the groups that make up the core of the democrat party activists; Government labor unions, teachers unions, non-government labor unions, various ethnic minority groups, NOW and other screaming topless lesbians, Act Up and other Militant homosexual groups, Militant vegetarians, PETA and other "animal rights" groups, Green Peace and other extreme anti-business groups, most people receiving "entitlements", University professors, and of course their students etc. Which groups you don't like. Then there's the list that the democrats don't like and ....so what? The issue is how we can all live together and is the current distribution of power the only, the best or just minimally sufficient? Which ought to be what the real debate is about. Playing the "hero-villain" game is a distraction. LH said You take the adversarial system for granted, cos you grew up with it And if you look at other "systems" that are cooperative in this country (some of the tribal councils come to mind), they manage quite nicely in dealing with advesarial sports without them "infecting" their society. And LH added In a system like that, everybody loses in the end" What's always fascinating is that everyone argues so hard to prove that there are winners. A line from somewhere (e e cummings maybe) comes to mind. "Though they sang in their chains like the sea" My analogy is this, liberals would have you listening to the radio. Conservatives would have you making your own music. It's not their choice to make. They both assume it is. Which is Little Hawks point. Both define for you and me what is "best". Individual moral autonomy is taken away. It isn't a decision that should be left to any political persuasion. It ought to be left to the individual, or the least number of individuals absolutely necessary. It isn't. By either side. It ought to extend to all aspects of life, not just the political. LH, problem with the "powers" in the US Constitution is that it always gets into a discussion of what words mean and away it all goes. Here's a quick link for the constitution: BLICKY TWO that also gets into some of the issues. Mav, On Taxes, take a look at this link: BLICKY ONE Regards John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: BUSHWACKED-EIGHT! From: MAV Date: 10 Mar 01 - 05:10 PM Dear Little Hawk, "It isn't a question of either/or, it's a question of both"
Actually no. In the US we are governed by consent, allegedly. That is we (the people) give the power to the government to do certain things on our behalf, like patrol the borders and defend us against invasion.
"A public servant needs to serve both government and citizens in an impartial manner. That's his job"
Government needs no "serving"! The bureaucracies are easily as self-serving as I mentioned earlier. Since government produces no product (other than regulation) it has no income other than confiscation. We need representation (those selected from among ourselves)to protect us from government's greed and expansion.
GOVERNMENT HAS NO MONEY!!!!!
"Had we all grown up in a society which simply formed a national assembly of representatives, and had never had political parties, we would not see any need for them, and we could still have a democracy, and a far friendlier one at that"
Who would police them and expose corruption?
"You can create a deliberately adversarial system, which is what we have..."
Man is adversarial in nature, it is a natural trait which leads to self-preservation.
"...or a system that is cooperative and not adversarial. I believe the latter would be far healthier in psychology"
You are describing the democrat party, they never have internal dissent (except for Trafficant). They stick together no matter what the issue. Their corruption is profound and runs from top to bottom.
A prime example of this is how they wound up defending the criminal and amoral behavior of the clintons and are now smeared with their taint.
"There would still be plenty of differences of opinion, but they would not be perpetuated along party line and ideologoy. They would arise spontaneously, according to individual use of intelligence and observation..."
First of all you assume they are all intelligent, Sheila Jackson Lee (who asked if the Mars lander could find the American flag planted there by the astronauts) and all those who stood in solidarity on the White House lawn after impeachment come to mind.
Republicans, on the other hand, argue all the time....we like it!
"rather than traditional established loyalties to artificial notions"
They are not artificial, our side stands for the principles outlined in the Constitution, the democrats seek to destroy it.
"To deliberately divide a public into adversarial blocks which perpetuate themselves generation after generation is to create a state of ongoing social warfare (I don't mean "shooting" war, but war nonetheless). That is what has happened in both our justice system and our political system. It's divisive and destructive. It hampers independent thought. It precludes fairness, and enshrines intolerance. It perpetuates pointless hatred and prejudice on many levels. It operates on a win/lose basis when it is entirely possible for people to operate on a win/win basis. Try it in a family and see what happens. It's not good. A nation is a very large extended family"
We now and always have stood for INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS!!! Divide and conquer, you have put your finger on a very major point I've been trying to make and it is exactly what the democrats do very efficiently.
They divide and them make victims of all the groups just so they will be dependent on the liberals. They then create social programs which benefit mostly the unionized employees inside them who pretend to serve the public.
These programs are not designed to get results. Success would put the liberals out of business.
The only goal for them is PERCEPTION!
Decade after decade liberals perpetuate and expand these useless programs blaming their failures on GOP interference, even though they (GOP) have traditionally been the minority.
That is why I say the liberals are racist. Not only do they need to know your ethnic background on applications for programs or employment, right off the bat, they also divide by sex, disablility, perversion and marital status.
Let's take a look at all the groups that make up the core of the democrat party activists;
Government labor unions, teachers unions, non-government labor unions, various ethnic minority groups, NOW and other screaming topless lesbians, Act Up and other Militant homosexual groups, Militant vegetarians, PETA and other "animal rights" groups, Green Peace and other extreme anti-business groups, most people receiving "entitlements", University professors, and of course their students etc.
All of the groups just mentioned directly benefit from handouts from the federal government and have not too much else in common with each other. Then there is the liberal controlled press.
Our current president, the much maligned President Bush IS A UNITER! That is what he ran on, that is what he is doing and it's making the democrats insane.
If he succeeds in undoing their mischief, they are toast. They will no longer be needed.
Then the Libertarians and the GOP can duke it out. HA!! "You take the adversarial system for granted, cos you grew up with it"
Yes, we also have football, hockey, basketball, motor-racing boxing and WWF, all adversarial but not all exclusive to the US I'm sure.
"I don't. I envision a completely different system. This is why I can't get too excited over this or that political party...or really believe in them in the final anyalysis. They are products of a destructive philosophy in the first place....which is: I win, you lose. In a system like that, everybody loses in the end"
Well, we have the systems we have, America is a unique experiment in freedom, but there have been plenty of failed attempts at Marxism. I'd rather they were tried somewhere else.
Little Hawk, as a musician, are you more content to listen to top 40 on the radio, or to make your own music?
And if your answer is to make your own music, isn't it good to get together with others and jam?
My analogy is this, liberals would have you listening to the radio.
Conservatives would have you making your own music.
AND GETTING PAID FOR IT!!!...And not taxing your pants off!
This post is already too long, so I will get back to you on the powers expressed in the Constitution, or you can look in the Britanica under US Government/Constitution.
Time for me to make some music (fix the furnace in my apartment house)
Remember.....any tool can be the right tool.
mav out
|