BS: Code of a Good Republican

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 12:32 AM

Ah, Claymore, I see you're back. We didn't miss you. Gonna call in your good squad again if this discussion doesn't shift the way you'd like to see it?

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 01:22 AM

Nah, this is the kinder, gentler me. Besides my "good" (sic) squad has more than enough work keeping me in check...

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 07:56 AM

I'd call that whistling in the wind. True enough, for the time being the profits might come back to a few people who are American citizens who may spend some of their time and some of their money in America. But the people doing the work building and designing the "American" planes and "American" fabric manufacturing software and all that - what possible reason is there to imagine that they will be American in a few years, even if they are now?

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: kendall
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 09:20 AM

The shirt thing was just an example of what is going on, and you know that. We are down to one steel mill. Tell me Claymore, when the steel worker loses his job so the fat cats can send his job south, and no one benefits but the fat cats, how is he going to pay his mortgage? Will he have to move into a hovel like the poor bastard who took his job in some shit hole country? That poor bastard can barely afford his hovel on the $2.00 a day that the robber barons pay him.
Shouldn't the price of everything be going down instead of up?
You may not remember it, but the price of everything doubled under Reagan. Did your income double?

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Naemanson
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 07:06 PM

I read down to the discussion of picking on people and JimmyT's complaint about generalizing about parties. I'd like to address that issue.

First, this kind of thread is very different from a thread that might generalize about people based on religion or etnic background. A Jew or a Catholic is part of their religion based on much more than an intellectual rationalization. They are usually born into it and they live it. It may be possible to talk weaker members out of their religion but it is not something that is based on argument. Religion is based on inner drives and emotion, a spiritual connection.

Ethnic origins too are not based on decisions. It is the summation of one's life, the inheritance of one's family. As such there is no question of being Arabic, Polish, French, or any of many other sets of cultural heritage.

But politics is different. One's decision to join a political party is based on intellectual leanings and arguments. You support the party that does what you want it to do. Thus, in this day and age, if you are a Republican you support what the Presidaent is doing. And if you are not a Republican and you do not support the Presidaent then you feel the need to speak out against his actions. If you are standing near the target you are going to get splashed.

So I see no reason to apologize to anyone for what is said in a political thread. The anger we liberals feel is real and justified. If the conservatives don't like it they can either not read the thread or they can join in the debate. But whining about mistreatment because of their choice of politics is only trying to evade the issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 07:34 PM

Politics can in fact be almost as tribal as religion. And letting political differences spill over into personal abuse and anything-goes is just as regrettable, whichever flavour of politics is involved.

Which doesn't rule out vigorous contriversy, and teasing. As for professional politicians and the like, they are fair game.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: jimmyt
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 07:44 PM

Not exactly Whining, Naemanson, just pointing out that making generalizations about people because of their political leanings is not any more logical than saying Jews are all money grabbing and Blacks are lazy it is stupid and wrong!

Kendall, I used to work in a steel mill in Ohio in the 60s and it folded, went out of business. Actually they opened another plant in Alabama where there were no labor unions and they felt they could be competetive because od the decreased labor costs. Whether this is true or not is anybody's guess, but I know lots of men in Ohio that look back and lament on the great pay they got, the good working conditions, the benefits, and the fact that they have never been paid as much since as they were then for the work they did.

The point being, it is a two way street. I am sure the company's fat cats are money grubbing and trying to make as much as they can, but the employees are also at fault and should accept some of the blame for the failure of the American Industrial complexes. I have patients who have retired from General Motors and moved down here in Georgia who have 80-100 percent coverage for their dentistry as opposed to 50 percent for the rest of the country. Not too hard to figure out why lots of companies opt for foreign manufacturing. If I had a business that could no longer turn a profit because for whatever reason labor costs had escalated too much to cover the overhead, I would be a fool to continue the business at a loss.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Jerry Rasmussen
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 09:04 PM

My dear pal, Jimmy:

Seems like this thread (and perhaps you too, buddy) are mixing apples and orangutans. The old line "Some of my best friends are ... add appropriate label) applies to individuals. I believe we are all challenged to consider everyone as an individual first, rather than applying generalities (we agree here, jt..) But, when I step into a voting booth, especially to vote on a national level, I am usually voting for a political party, even though an individual is the candidate. I am a democrat who has voted republican several times on a mayoral election, because in that case, I felt the qualities of the individual justified supporting the candidate. On a local level, I believe that an individual candidate has more influence on the direction a community takes. On a national, or even State level, I would be far more hesitant to vote Republican, because I believe that the Republican party's theme songs is God Bless The Child That's Got It's Own. I don't think the Republican party has a corner on crooks, or that they kick their dogs when they come from work any more than Democrats do. I vote on a national level based on what I believe is a major difference in social philosophy. Those who are as old as I am may remember a great Al Capp character, General Bullmoose, whose motto was "What's good for General Bulmoose is good for the country!" I don't like the whole idea of trickle-down economy, because it smacks too much of Lazarus begging for crumbs at the rich man's gate."

None of what I say is personal to you, and I think you shouldn't take it that way. A week ago, I took a thread about singer-songwhiners personally, and ended up making an ass out of myself, because the comments weren't directed at me. I consider myself an angst-free songwriter. Somehow, a button of mine got pushed, with no intention of directing the phrase at me. It was my fault that I took it personally, and I felt embarassed about it and apologized.

Truth is, jimmy, we could not make it through one day without generalizing. Make a generalization that cars don't run red lights, and it won't take long before you get run over, crossing the street.
The danger in making generalizations is that you measure people by those generalizations, rather than as individuals. As far as I'm concerned jimmy you are downright swell. I think George Bush is as dangerous (or more so) than Saddam Husein ever was. I'm not judging GW morally, but on the power he holds and weilds so recklessly, much more as a dictator than an elected official.

Now, when we get to political parties, you have to make generalizations. If you vote, I assume you choose a Republican candidate based on some generalizations of your own. If you only vote for an individual, then you would not identify yourself as a Republican, but an independent. You are voting on a different set of generalizations than I am. Like me, I don't think you judge someone simply on a party label. But, you judge a party on it's basic platform of beliefs.

I think it will take years to undo the destruction that G.W. has done in this country and the world. But I think you're a fine man, jimmy. Don't take things so personally, my friend... And I agree wholeheartedly with Naemonson.... You choose to be a Republican. No one chooses to be disabled, or black or of a particular nationality.
Unless someone starts a thread that says jimmyt is a Republican Jerk (
if they do, they'll have to deal with me) assume they're talking about some other Republicans. God knows, each party has more than it's quota.

U DA MAN, jimmy!

A pointy-headed liberal

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 09:11 PM

That's true. In a profit based system, anyone is a fool who continues business at a loss. The trouble is, that doesn't suffice to deal with all (or even maybe half of) reality. There are many things that we do in life not because they are dollar-profitable, but because they are beneficial in a great many other ways. There are things that are absolutely necessary, which will not earn anyone a profit.

And that is precisely why government arranges to do a lot of those things. Whenever it does...that's socialism.

There are actually many different kinds of profit in life...

Dollar profit, emotional profit, natural environment profit, moral profit, health profit, security profit, enjoyment profit, leisure profit, spiritual profit, love profit, etc...

It is when the exclusive search for dollar profit relentlessly harms other natural forms of profit that it becomes very problematical, and that's where a lot of these disputes arise.

If a powerful sector of the economy, in its search for profit, ruins the environment, and hurts people's lives in many ways...then it should be called into question by government and by the public...and not allowed to continue destroying various other forms of profit merely so that one sector can experience dollar profit.

The neo-conservative movement is generally seen to be so enamoured of one form of profit (money) that they have forgotten many of the others.

Profit isn't just about money. Or if it is...then people need to redefine their whole notion of "profit"...else they will end up destroying almost everything that makes life worthwhile.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 09:31 PM

Well said, both Jerry and Little Hawk. And what comes thru to me is a sense of humanity that you both speak of that I don't sense in reading posts of those form the other side. But, hey, humanity may be more than its cracked up to be. But on the other side, when one considers elected officials as "public servants" then maybe having a sense of humanity seems to me to be at ones core. Well, unless one isn't into public service to serve anyone but themselves...

I don't consider myself a Democrat anymore but, between dems and repubs, it would seem that the dems could teach the repubs the difference between we and me...

But I'd sure like the Dems to quit trying to out Repub the Repubs and get back to what they have traditionally been about: public service.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Naemanson
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 09:51 PM

Bobert, the humanity goes away when the discussion is political. Humanity is a requirement when talking about almost everything else but the political discussion works at two levels. The first is at the office level. This is the disgust and anger an individual feels at the office holder. Republicans have to put up with it now just like Democrats had to put up with all the foolishness about Clinton and Monica.

Second is the individual level. Very few posts, and none of mine, are intended as attacks against any individual party memeber at the ground level. Choosing to read it as a personal attack is a mistake. I'm pretty sure that philandering is not restricted to Bill Clinton but I never took any attacks against him to mean that I was chasing young women. When I write about the idiot the current administration has running it I do not mean to imply that everyone who supports him is an idiot. But I do mean to imply that the Bush supporters need to open their eyes to the damage he has done and will continue to do to this nation. With that we could get into a rational discussion of the actions of the President and how it will or will not benefit the USA.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: kendall
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 10:09 PM

It's the old blame game again. Companies want to make a profit, labor wants to share in the American dream. Sounds good, yes? What happened?
A game of leap frog between corporate greed and labor greed with the rest of us jambed up in between. The fat cats have the advantage of shutting the doors and moving to Mexico where they can do what they did to the American worker 100 years ago, EXPLOIT!
I wonder why I just thought of the causes of the French revolution?

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Amos
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 10:11 PM

"Let them eat ....ummm... uh, er... Moonpies!!!!"


A

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Naemanson
Date: 02 Nov 03 - 10:24 PM

They are just shortsighted and ignorant of history. They want to make their pile and split before the fecal matter hits the air conditioning. They don't have enough of a conscience to let it bother them.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Hrothgar
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 05:05 AM

Keep tellig yourselves:

"Abraham Lincoln was a Republican!"

What Abe is telling himself, I hate to think ...

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Naemanson
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 06:41 AM

Republicans had a different point of view back then.

But this seems like a good time to point out how short a time it has been since Lincoln walked the Earth. I was thinking about this just the other day. I read in a history magazine about the reunion of Confederate soldiers in Atlanta in 1932. That got me remembering that I remember hearing of the death of the last of the Civil War soldiers when I was a kid. Now, I am 51. some of you out there are older and may have clearer memories of the event but the old men who had survived that war bridged the years between something we think of as ancient history and our modern age. At least some of those men might have known men who fought in the Revolution. It has not been that long a time that this country has been a great nation.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 07:42 AM

And while we're on the subject, Abe Lincoln is no hero in my book. He baited the South into the war. He did not free *the* slaves but only proclaimed that slaves of the Confederate states should be freed. He and his boys occupied the South, much the way Bush's boys are occupying Iraq until 1876 during which time, the remaining cultured. white southerns that weren't killed in the war, were degraded to point where, after several generations of disgusting behavior (think KKK...) that they were ripe for the Southern Stategy which keeps the idiots in power today....

Bring me another Bud Lite, Mabel.... and....

As per usual...

Beam my boney butt up...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Rapparee
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 07:59 AM

Let me point out that profits become the dividends that the stockholders demand. Stockholders include anyone (including me) who own mutual funds or who participate in pension plans, not just the fat cats who purchase shares for themselves.

Since the stockholders demand dividends, companies are going to do what they can to increase profits. Yes, the monies paid to some CEOs are obscene and yes, there is a lot of greed. But the greed comes from our demands as well as from those running the company.

In a sense, the US government is a mutual fund. You can purchase shares from the US Treasury (bonds, for instance). What I don't understand is why then those who hold treasury note and bonds don't demand a "profit" from the government. One area in which such a profit might be maintained would be the curtailment of certain overseas operations; another might be in the re-introduction of laissez-faire economics to the so-called "private sector."

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 08:29 AM

Jerry Rasmusson as an "angst-free songwriter" - yes, I think that fits. Actually I'd say that listening to Jerry is a pretty good way for dealing with any free-floating angst that's messing up your day.

Treating labels too seriously can be a mistake. I remember one time I was talking to one of the English musicians I most admire and respect, after a workshop at Whitby Festival. It had been held in one of the venues used by the festival, the Whitby Conservative Club, and I was saying how strange it felt making music and drinking in a building with pictures up on the wall of Tory Prime Ministers.

Anyway, he said that in fact he was himself a Tory voter. And talking further, I came to the conclusion the reasons why he voted Tory were not so very different from the reasons I am decidedly not.

And I remembered that in among the Tory Prime Ministers, there was another picture, a guide dog for the blind the local Tories had raised money for. A much more attractive face then the others on the wall, and a much more attractive face of the Association as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 09:33 AM

McGrath has said what I was feebly trying to say, that 2 perfectly intelligent people can and do make decisions on elected officials that can be 180 degrees apart, and it is not that one is completely wrong on the other completely right. It is that from where they are in their life, what is the correct thing to do is not always what the other may perceive as correct if you are coming from an entirely different perspective.

I can accept this, and pretty much never say liberals are wrong, they just see things from a different perspective. WHy is that concept so hard for you folks to see?   I am not trying to be a smart ass.   I just can't understand how such a community as this has so many folks who seem to agree on so much, that would never intentionally say a hurtful thing to someone, can't manage to meet people of differing views on some middle ground.

Some times it seems that you think youp political views are not only what is best for you but also what is best for the country. We, on the other hand, on the conservative side, you think only vote for our selfish personal interests, with no thought toward what is best for the big picture. I happen to disagree. Frequently I feel so strongly about certain social issues, that I am willing to pay higher taxes to prevent the conservative agenda from accomplishing their goal. It would be a rare person that can go down the line and agree on all major issues that either party espouses.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Amos
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 10:20 AM

Guest:

It is strange for me to listen to well-phrased ideas from a nameless point in cyber-space. It reminds me of those Doonesbury cartoons that portray GB I as nothing but a voice-spot, with a feather floating in front of it. No face or body.

Anyway, you're obviously tyhinking hard about things which is good, but I can't answer your questions without more specifics. I didn't think I had a problem with people of differing views on a middle ground, except where the differing grounds veer toward the destructive. Most of my rhetoric about politics is aimed specifically at the Axis of Weasel -- Bush-Cheney-Wolfowitz-Rumsfeld.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: jimmyt
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 10:23 AM

SOrry, I had lost my cookie, I was the guest, for the first time ever, anon! Sorry Amos.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Naemanson
Date: 03 Nov 03 - 06:50 PM

"But the greed comes from our demands as well as from those running the company."

YOUR demands, not mine. I don't have enough money to "invest" in any of those fancy options. However, as an investor you have (or should have) certain rights and responsibilities. Among them is the right to guide the company down the path you feel it should take. If that path will cost you a percentage point or two of "profits" then I don't see why it isn't a more palatable option. But then, it isn't my money.

My point is that the big investors are focused only on their money and not on their place in the world. The little investors are only along for the ride. Dickens described the big investors in his Scrooge. Focus on the money and let the rest of the world go hang.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 10:59 AM

After reading the above four or five responses I was sitting here thinking those responses are just too much suger for the dime.

A couple of real inconvienent facts.

A the end of the Civil War, all of the defeated southern states had a majority of black Governors, Senators and Representatives. They were all Republicans, as was Stephen Douglas. This is why when you read of an Afro American being elected to a high state office, the comment most often heard is the first black Governor "since the Reconstruction".

The Civil Rights Bill of 1964 was passed by a majority of Republicans voting for it; the majority of Democrats voted against it.

The only people who exploited the major unions (Steel, Auto, Teamsters, etc.) was their own leadership and the mafia.

At some point I need to get a little more time to answer the rest, because as some of you have recognized above, there are two sides (and maybe more) to the above views.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 12:22 PM

Good post there, JimmyT (the one where you were "GUEST").

Curiously enough, Bobert, I tend to agree with your assessment of Abraham Lincoln. He was an interesting man, but I think his generally combative attitude toward the South greatly contributed to starting the Civil War and he shares part of the blame for what followed.

People who are presidents during great wars are always seen as heroes afterward...specially if they also get assassinated in office.

I suspect that Lincoln may have been in fact a very flawed president, made "great" by living in remarkable times...

If the South had won the Civil War (highly unlikely, but just barely possible), and achieved independence as a separate nation, they would now view Jefferson Davis as the greatest statesman of all time, and thousands of tourists would go to visit the "Davis Memorial" in Richmond, I'm sure. (You can follow a similar analogy regarding Hitler and Winston Churchill, if I may wax a bit cynical here...there's nothing like a winner to make a "hero".)

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 12:46 PM

Republican implies something rather dissimilar in different places - for example Northern Ireland and the USA. The same is true for different periods of history?

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Amos
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 12:57 PM

As I recall, Lincoln's combative attitude was not directed toward the South, but toward the dissolution of the United States -- Secession -- and anyone who promoted it. If New Jersey had decreed it was going Secesh -- which many have wished since -- it would have been just as much a target of his wrath as the Southern States who did so.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 01:09 PM

Claymore, as usual you weren't paying attention. To answer your question, McGrath, in the U.S. the Republican party of Lincoln's day morphed into what is today the Democratic party fairly soon after his presidency.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 01:11 PM

Yes, that's true. Lincoln obviously did not believe in divorce... :-)

I find it interesting that he said "a house divided against itself cannot stand"...because that is the continuing chronic illness of a country that is artificially divided into Democrats and Republicans, who basically detest each other most of the time!

And that's why I don't believe in party politics. Political parties are a bad idea. We should vote for individuals, not party machines.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 01:16 PM

Well, Landmine, re: your first two points, here's a really inconvenient fact- that was then and this is now. The PRESENT SITUATION is under discussion.

RE: all of the defeated southern states had a majority of black Governors, Senators and Representatives Absolutely untrue.

RE:At the end of the Civil War... They were all Republicans, as was Stephen Douglas Not only was Steven A. Douglas a Democrat, he wasn't anything at the end of the Civil War. He died in 1861.

re: your third "fact": total bullshit.

Just about up to the standard of your usual "facts".

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 01:27 PM

Yes, follow the line from Lincoln to the present Republican party. But so what? Except for rhetorical purposes, which I don't disdain.

There's no reason decent people who disagree politically should detest each other, just because they adhere to different parties which represent different views as to how society shoudl be organised.

There is every reason they should encourage each other in getting rid of the malevolent parasites who tend to crawl into positions of power and influence in all organisations. (Including non-party organisations.)

I've just been reading some Don Camillo stories. Don Camillo, the Parish Priest, and Peppone, the Communist mayor - that's the model for how political enemies should deal with each other.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Naemanson
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 07:38 PM

Actually the politicians don't detest one another. they maintain a professional attitude and keep things as friendly as possible. Occasionally there are disagreements and arguments and there may be individuals who despise one another. That's only human. It's at our level that people start to hate if they are not careful.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 04 Nov 03 - 10:03 PM

Greg F: Thanks for doing that bit of research. I was going to pull out the timeline later and refute a few of those myself.

Politics these days does create some strange bedfellows--those who are close friends behind the scenes in Washington, D.C., for example, can be at each other's throats rhetorically when they're on the Hill. Same with the press.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 05 Nov 03 - 06:55 PM

Greg, you are absolutely correct about Steven Douglas, I meant to say Frederick A. Douglas, the black abolitionist, and self stated Republican who was a constant written and personal consultant to President Lincoln.

You are wrong about the Governors, Senators, and Representatives. For the first ten years after the Civil war, no person who had been in rebellion against the Union could run for office. As a result, unless a white person from the North moved South to run for office (called carpetbaggers) the vast majority of Federal offices were held by African Americans (hence the "Since Reconstruction" attachment to most Federal offices, newly won by blacks). Did you ever ask yourself why the papers, etc. always seem to include that comment?

As for the comments about the big Unions, their members had far more stolen from the inside, than they lost at any bargaining table, (a variation of a comment I recall first attributed to Robert Kennedy).

And as an additional exercise you might want to listen to the Johnson tapes currently being played on PBS as he constantly complains of the Democrats tactics to foil the Civil Rights bill, while his conversations with Everett Dirksen(R) were two master politicians attempting to do the right thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Susan A-R
Date: 05 Nov 03 - 09:36 PM

All I can say is that I'm not wild about a surpluss going to a massive deficit in such a short time. I'm not crazy about prett substantial fight in jobs from Vermont many to China and India over the past year. I am not crazy about Bush's rulings on coal burning plants which have a direct impact on what I breath and on the environment and agriculture of this state. I am not thrilled about paying taxes (I didn't get a check this year. I don't make enough and I don't have kids) to subsidize what I perceive as a massive oil grab. I am terrified of the Patriot Act and Electronic Voting, and although I have not been thrilled with the Democratic leadership, it sure looks better to me stacked up against all of this stuff.

I live in a state that was largely republican until the mid 1960s. a lot of people I know are or were republicans. I can't disassociate them from Republican and do a lot of name calling, but I sure can ask them to think about their leadership and what it says about their beliefs. And Jimmyt, I must admit, I have a lot of difficulty purchasing goods which I believe were made on someone else's pain, and I hope that I continue to feel that way. I'm not perfect in that, but at least I give it some thought.

Susan A-R

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: jimmyt
Date: 05 Nov 03 - 10:37 PM

Susan, where were your electronics made?

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: jimmyt
Date: 05 Nov 03 - 10:59 PM

Excuse me, let me be more sensitive, Susan.

I don't mean to make light of the fact that many textile jobs as well as lots of other product oriented employment is moving to foreign markets. I live in Dalton Georgia, where the entire economy is based on manufacturing carpet. That could dry up someday and it would totally wreck my financial life.

But, in the big picture, what about the global economy? What about all the products that we manufacture and sent to other nations? How does that all fit in to the big picture? In the end, someone (perhaps an individual or maybe a corporation with ten million stockholders) will decide to manufacture some product in Vermont, or Indonesia, or Mississippi, or Belgium, whereever, it makes no difference. They are making this decision on the business climate, and are endeavoring to make the most profit that they can for as long as they can.

If you live in Vermont, and they come there it is a good thing. If you live in Vermont and they decide to go to tupelo Mississippi because the profit margin is going to be higher, is it bad? Not if you live in Tupelo! I am only trying to think globally here. I have a brother in law who used to bitch at me for owning a Toyota (that by the way was manufactured in the US) and would only buy AMERICAN cars. I could walk through his house and point out scores of products that he owned that were foreign made, but NOT A CAR!~!! What the hell makes the difference? It is only what you are sensitive to. He was a United Steel WOrker that had been layed off due to the plant closing.

I imagine in the northesat you are more sensitive to textiles and shoes as these are the businesses that have been effected. If you live in Seattle you are more concerned about Aircraft. I do not claim to know the answers to this delemma, but it think it is pretty presumptuous of us in the USA to be isolationists. Perhaps an entire thread should be devoted to this economic delemma. Could be quite enlightening. I wonder if this economic discussion will layer out on party lines or if it will be more random as to how each individual has been effected by foreign imports

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Nov 03 - 02:55 PM

Just an interesting aside on the "Buy American" when it comes to automobiles: I don't know how it is now, but a few years ago, there were more American made parts in a Nissan than there were in any automobile made by the "Big Three" and bearing an American brand name.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Nov 03 - 06:54 PM

Landmine,

The man's name is Frederick Douglass; no "A" and two "s"es. If you're going to use his name, would you do him the honor of at least spelling his name correctly? He was indeed a Republican (then- but this is now, q.v. above), but if by trotting him out as a [nineteenth century] Republican you are attempting to imply that this runaway slave, abolitionist, newspaper publisher, advocate of womens' rights and universal suffrage, champion of human rights & etc. would in any way condone the current doings of the Republican Party as exemplified by Bush, & Co, you must be a complete idiot. Have you ever read any of Douglass' works? Puh-leeze!!

You can repeat your bogus claims about Black officeholders as often as you wish, but it just won't make it so- I do NOT have the time to look up all the statistics for you, but they are readily available- I can provide a bibliography for you if you want. But as an introduction:

Only sixteen Blacks sat in Congress during ALL of Reconstruction. There were only 3 Blacks in the 41st Congress and 5 in the 42nd. The first Black Senator to serve in the Senate was Hiram Revels- and not until 1870. The only Black Governor of a southern state was P.B.S. Pinchback of Louisiana. Absolutey NO blacks held major state office during Reconstruction in Texas, North Carolina, Alabama, Georgia or Virginia. And on, and on.....

If you have any facts to support your contentions about the unions, I'd be interested to see them. If all you have are anecdotes.... who cares.

I HAVE listened to the Johnson tapes. So what? That was then, and this is now. Nowadays- the time period under discussion- its not the Democrats that are rolling back civil and personal rights at every available opportunity.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Nov 03 - 07:10 PM

Oh, and Landmine, before I forget, the only State Senate where Blacks were a majority South Carolina.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 03 - 07:22 PM

Didn't the racist Democrats in the South mostly move over to become Republicans? Where, of course, they stopped being racist...

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Nov 03 - 08:01 PM

McGrath:

YES.

and NO.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Susan A-R
Date: 06 Nov 03 - 09:43 PM

Alas, there are some things you can't buy which were made in the US. We do great weapons though. Interesting.

I am not convinced that the issue I'm arguing about is that I'm glad when the jobs come here and sad when they go somewhere else. I'm not thrilled that people making silk shirts (which through some strange morality I can't really even explain to myself, I only buy second hand now) are made by people who are basically enslaved in China because they have done something that the Chinese Regnine believes is wrong, or that those lovely disney toys my nieces and nephews so loved were made by child labor (irony that) When everyone has decent choices regarding work day length, age at which they have to enter the work force, and pay reasonable to their needs, fine, but it's that there are people in this country making a pretty penny on stock, not lifting a finger, because they are invested in companies which exploit people. The profit margin on a pair of Nike shoes is obscene, given what the people who make 'em make. I don't buy them.

I also don't have an automobile, for other reasons. As I said, I make an imperfect effort. I wish I had more choices.

Susan.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 08 Nov 03 - 08:47 PM

Refresh

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: toadfrog
Date: 08 Nov 03 - 09:23 PM

That's an interesting point, Claymore.

But many of us don't care all that much about what the situation "means to us as a world power." That's because many of us suspect that "world power" is going to mean that a few persons who are well-connected in Washington get to push foreigners around and that the great majority of us, who are not so well-connected and do not work in the aerospace or weapons technology industries, get to pay for it. And some of us are concerned we will be understandably, even if unjustly, hated by all those foreigners who get kicked around. And maybe get shot by terrorists, if we aren't careful, because brutality begets more brutality. Foreigners, in the main, do not appreciate being pushed around.

Ordinary Danes do not suffer because Denmark is not a "world power." Ordinary Frenchmen did not benefit a lot because of Louis XIV's power. Ordinary Russians did not benefit from the "power" of the Soviet Union. Ordinary Germans . . . Do you get my drift? I strongly suspect you won't get my drift, Claymore. But what the hell.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Rapparee
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 02:21 AM

Claymore --

Your post earlier about the sources of US military weapons and weapon systems was interesting and I did a little checking. Here's some things I discovered.

*The M16A2, A3, and A4 rifle is manufactured by Colt, a good US company, and by Fabrique Nationale, a good Belgian company.

*The M240 machine gun is manufactured by Fabrique Nationale.

*The 9mm pistol is manufactured in the US by Beretta, an Italian company. (Not liking the caliber I forebear from giving the M- designation.)

Colt has licensed M16 production to Isreal, but the US military does not, as far as I can determine, use any of these weapons.

For some things of interest, peek at the weapons systems at this site; the bottom of the page devoted to each system details the major suppliers for the weapons system.

Your nom du claviers, "Claymore," can refer of course to the Scottish sword. It can also, as I'm sure you're aware, refer to the M18A2 Claymore antipersonnel mine -- used by the US in Vietnam, developed by the US for Korea, and, like the M60 machine gun of fond memory, invented (but in this case never perfected) by the German Army for WW2.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: kendall
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 07:38 AM

The original republican party is a far cry from today's republican party.Teddy Roosevelt was the last republican who gave a rat's ass for the common man.
World economy? BS! the corporations are moving their jobs out of the country to make BIGGER profits, and for no other reason. A worker here at, say, Briggs & Stratton would hve been making, say $20.00 per hour. In Mexico, that worker makes $2.00 an hour, and the price of a lawn mower does not reflect that drop in labor costs.It's all profit at the expense of this country's manufacturing base. Do we want to join all those countries such as, Somalia, who produce nothing?
Seems like a case of myopia to me. How are we going to function as a world power with all our manufacturing jobs going south?
De Ja Moo...we've heard this bullshit before.

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 01:01 PM

Now if these companies would pay the Mexican worker $20.00 an hour, or even $15.00 or maybe as low as $10.00, there might be some merit to the idea that they're benevolently trying to "raise all boats" worldwide, but they're not. It's as kendall says: all for profit. But the corporations are too short-sighted (only as far as the Almighty Quarterly Report) to see the ultimate result of this kind of policy.

There is the story (undoubtedly apocryphal, i.e., probably untrue, but edifying nonetheless) about the CEO of one of the Big Three auto companies taking Walter Reuther, head of the United Auto Workers union at the time, on a tour of a newly installed fully automated assembly plant. There were no warm bodies in evidence. Robot arms swung this way and that, picking up components, putting them in place, and welded them with great showers of sparks, then shiny cranes hoisted heavy parts, and other robot arms, moving here and there, bolted them into place. It was a marvel of technology. No human hands took part in the process, and at the end of the line, fully finished painted and gleaming automobiles came out of the assembly line like link sausages.

"All automated," said the CEO proudly. "No human workers. Robots, Mr. Reuther, robots. What do you think of it?"

"Truly a marvel of modern technology," said Reuther, genuinely amazed.

"And now," said the CEO, unable to refrain from twitting Reuther a bit, "how are you going to charge all these robots union dues, Mr. Reuther?"

Reuther smiled and stroked his chin thoughtfully, then said, "The same way you are going to sell them automobiles."

Moral: No matter how cheaply you can make a product, there is little profit in it if you can't find anybody left with enough money to buy the product. Henry Ford, for all that might have been said of him, knew this. This is why he paid his employees a pretty decent wage for the time. He wanted them to be able to buy the automobiles they were making.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 02:12 PM

A sensible social system attempts first to secure a decent level of existence for all its members.

A senseless one does the exact opposite, rewarding the most aggressive and ruthless, so that a few can get very, very rich. It finally ends with a revolution, a disastrous war, or a social collapse of some other kind in which almost everyone suffers.

Then, if people are too foolish to learn a lesson from the past, it just starts up all over again...

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Nov 03 - 03:21 PM

He's told us its the land mine, Rapaire. He's regaled us with tales of how much he enjoyed setting them in Viet Nam. Just search the postings without the "guest" prefix.