 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Code of a Good Republican
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Amos Date: 29 Oct 03 - 08:30 PM The Official Guide to Being a Good Republican - The Talking Points 1. Co-Opt God into absolutely everything you say and do. If people believe that God is on your side, then more likely they will support you. Also stress that Democrats do not believe in God, and if elected, they will try to ban God all together. Always remember to use God's name often. Example of how to deliver bad news to your constituents: "This legislation that cut millions of dollars from [insert social program here] was God's will!" -- Smile often and make a "possessed" body movement so people will think that God is speaking through you, reaffirming the impression that you, and only your party, can do God's will. 2. Always stick to the "official" story. Independent statements and thoughts are what get people into trouble. If you don't know the official story, check with Newsmax, FOX, or the Washington Times for updates. Don't run your yap!! The truth may get out and we don't want to have to start explaining things! 3. George W. Bush has been and will be America's ONLY president. Tell everyone you meet, and speak it as if it were told to you by God himself. If people start getting around to thinking that there could be a president other than George W. Bush . . . Well let's not think about that. Also remember to remind people that EVERYONE got to vote in Florida during the 2000 presidential election, and all of that stuff about Katherine Harris was made up by the liberal media. (See Below) 4. All media is liberal lies! Especially the New York Times, the Washington Post , and NBC. The only REAL news comes from FOX. Remember to pepper your comments with statements like, "Katie Couric wants everyone to wear a Mao Jacket!" or "Dan Rather is an atheist!" -- These are statements that cannot be proved or disproved; therefore no one can ever accuse you of lying. If you say them often, proudly, and as if God told you himself, people will believe you. 5. Michael Moore is the anti-Christ. In fact, the reason he always wears a baseball cap is to hide the three sixes on his head. Remember to tell everyone that Bowling for Columbine is a work of complete fiction and only won the Academy Award for Best Documentary because of the liberals in Hollywood. Also remember to remind people that Hillary Clinton is in cahoots with Michael Moore to make America a socialist country, and to take away your guns. 6. Hillary Clinton wants to take away your guns. Remind everyone that Bill and Hillary Clinton hate democracy, hate America, and hate your guns. That should be enough to convince whomever you are talking to that the Clintons really suck, and if you ever want to have a gun on you, whenever that mugging you are so worried about actually occurs, you had better hate the Clintons, too. 7. Clintons Part Two -- All Bill Clinton ever did was have sex, sex, and more sex. While it is partly true, don't let anyone try and Slide things like "Balanced Budget" or "Eight years of peace and prosperity" by you. Tell people that it was the Republicans that kept terrorists in check by spending millions of dollars investigating sex, sex, and more sex. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: curmudgeon Date: 29 Oct 03 - 08:36 PM Absolutely brilliant Amos. I hope you've got a publisher lined up for this gem. Keep up the good work -- Tom |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST,pdc Date: 29 Oct 03 - 09:01 PM Woo-hoo! I love it, and "borrowed" it, but gave credit to "a guy named Amos." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: kendall Date: 30 Oct 03 - 05:29 AM Suggested motto for the republican party. PULL UP THE LADDER, I'M ABOARD. Excellent piece Amos, I'm going to save it for future ammo. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST Date: 30 Oct 03 - 05:43 AM Amos didn't write it. It was copied from here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Rapparee Date: 30 Oct 03 - 07:48 AM I hate to interject (I like them!), but why do we always seek to blame another? Surely some of the fault lies within ourselves, too. Why do we waste time and energy assigning blame instead of using the time and energy to fix the problem? Isn't God a liberal? After all, s/he created conservatives. What's more liberal than that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Oct 03 - 09:36 AM "... make a 'possessed' body movement" What does that consist of? Like in Exorcist? There's always stuff in our papers about politicians going in for "spin", but I haven't so far seen that. (Though with our Tory Party here on the brink of appointing a suspected vampire as its leader, who knows...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: kendall Date: 30 Oct 03 - 09:57 AM Did I imply that Amos wrote it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST Date: 30 Oct 03 - 10:11 AM No Kendall, but Curmudgeon and Pdc did. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Amos Date: 30 Oct 03 - 10:18 AM Apologies for the accidental false impression -- it isn't mine. I just support it. See link above for correct source at buzzflash. Sorry for the confusion. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Oct 03 - 11:25 AM Still no word on what a "possessed" body movement looks like. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Oct 03 - 11:35 AM Here's an interesting footnote. Canada's most populous province, Ontario, got taken over about 8 or 9 years ago by the neo-conservative movement under Mike Harris. Their program was called the "Common Sense Revolution" (ha ha), and was anything but. They succeeded in getting elected by appealing to people's sense of greed (with promises of big tax cuts), their zenophobia (by demonizing the most powerless members of society), and their hatred of "big government" (a handy thing to pin on incumbents whom you hope to kick out of office). It worked. Enough people were fooled that they got elected twice in Ontario. (They didn't talk about God much, cos that angle doesn't work nearly as well in Canada as it does in the USA.) Now, their stated aim was to "balance the budget" and restore fiscal responsibility. Their gimmick is to pretend that all other parties are less fiscally responsible than the Conservatives (which is an outright lie, by the way, but their hardcore supporters believe it like it was gospel...). What they actually do is privatize formerly public contracts, handing them out like plums to their rich pals who fund their campaigns. Those fellas then cut the staff by 50% and cut everything else they can, so as to maximize their profits, AND raise the price of things at the same time!!! What a gravytrain for private enterprise. (and there vanished your tax cut, people...) Everything deteriorates, and everything costs more. So, the damage these guys did to schools, hospitals, roads, municipalities, etc in Ontario became so catastrophic that people finally got totally disgusted and kicked the bastards out in our recent election. The "Common Sense Revolution" is deader than Clinton Hammond's skunk. It has been shown for the fraud it really was. And guess what? It seems that the Conservatives cooked the books when they said that they had balanced the budget all those years. It now appears that far from balancing the budget, they created record deficits while the rich got richer and everyone else got poorer. Gosh, WHAT a surprise.... (sarcasm) That won't stop the jerks from coming back again with the same old phony mantra of "tax cuts" that turn out to be a flimsy smokescreen over a robbery of epic proportions. The scary thing is, I think most of them actually believe their own rhetoric, and they no doubt figure that the rich are rich because God loves them and is rewarding them. Want to get elected in North America? Here's your platform: I will cut taxes! I will reduce spending! I will improve your social services! I will fight crime on our streets! I will clamp down on welfare cheats and crack users! I will defend our institutions of freedom at home and abroad! Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit. But it sounds marvelous, doesn't it? - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST,JTT Date: 30 Oct 03 - 12:40 PM A small coda: When Bill Clinton has sex with people he's not supposed to, it's bad. When Arnie does it it's good. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Don Firth Date: 30 Oct 03 - 01:22 PM And when Bush screws the whole nation, it's-- Hallelujah Chorus from Handel's Messiah.) Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Amos Date: 30 Oct 03 - 01:23 PM Maybe Arnie's just better at it? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: jimmyt Date: 30 Oct 03 - 03:34 PM I work, pay my taxes, put money in the offering at church, put my children through college, pay my bills, try to be kind and sensitive to my environment and citizen's of the earth, and in addition I am a folk musician. I am not ovwerly religious and rarely bring God up in a conversation. I am also a Republican Always interesting that such a "politically correct" group as you, can absolutely tee off on someone else's political leanings with absolutely no regard as to whether or not it is as generalizing and stereotyping as saying all Jews are pawnbrokers or all Gypsies are cheats, etc I read thread after thread here where everyone tiptoes around on eggshells trying to be "sensitive" to people of different skin, religion or ethnicity. This is almost a joke the way you manage to rush headlong with reckless abandon at a different political persuasion. Just an observation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Oct 03 - 04:01 PM I partly agree with jimmyt there - there are so many reasons why people, looking at the political parties around, might settle for one rather than another, and most parties are such broad and shambolic coalitions of people who agree on some things and not on others. I could never divide people into those I respect and like and those I despise and dislike, just on the basis of political affiliation, any more than on any of the other labels jimmyt mentions. Mind, there's a difference between things that you can't change, such as what colour you are, or where you come from, and things that are your own choice, such as politics, or even religion. But it's not a difference that means everything goes. However I think it's generally fair to be unfair about politicians of every shade. They've put themselves deliberately in the firing line, for good motives maybe as well as bad ones, but they knew what they were getting into. And they tend to hand it out pretty freely towards their opponents. Anyway, I hope that jimmyt would make the same objection when it came to people with his own political views attacking the people he disagrees with. And I'm quite willing to believe that he would, on the basis of what he writes there. (And I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what a "possessed" body movement looks like. I'm just curious.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST Date: 30 Oct 03 - 04:10 PM jimmyt - very well said - |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: jimmyt Date: 30 Oct 03 - 04:14 PM Mc Grath, I have strongly opposed the political persecution of Liberal Politics as strenuously as I have the right wingers. I guess I can agree that if this or other threads are strictly picking on the POLITICIANS, of which many are pretty sorry on either side of the aisle. It is the attack on the entire political party and by doing so are as much as directing it at me personally that I don't like. Good Lord, MC GRATH AND I AGREE ON SOMETHING!!! I may start a thread! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST,pdc Date: 30 Oct 03 - 04:39 PM Jimmyt, you probably understand that most people criticize on the basis of stereotypes. Given that Republican Bush is running the US at the present time, the temptation to give in to stereotype thinking is almost overwhelming, as he is the consummate stereotypical rightwinger. Couple that with what he has done to the country, and the urge to "bash" rightwingers becomes almost obligatory, out of a strong sense of frustration. If the next President of the US was a moderate, decent Republican, I think you would see attacks on rightwingers diminish sharply. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Bill D Date: 30 Oct 03 - 04:44 PM McGrath...I can't TYPE a 'possessed body movement'..only *grins*, but they can be anything from a jerky head movement with eyes closed, as if having a petite mal, to a clenching of the fists as the head tilts back and the mouth opens widely, as if gasping for breath. The implication is that 'something' extraordinary is guiding your movements. It takes LOTS of practice and watching televangelists to do it so it doesn't look like 'ol Beelzebub had got you! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Stilly River Sage Date: 30 Oct 03 - 04:54 PM JimmyT, it goes back to Lincoln--the "you can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time." There are politicians who thrive on figuring out ways to fool enough people into thinking they are legitimately going to do what they say that they get elected, and then do a lot of damage before they're kicked out again. Ronald Reagan is a template for our time, with all of his deregulation and letting all of his pals get rich. He had coat tails long enough that quite a few of his cronies are still around, and Dubya is trying to out-Reagan Reagan. And seems to be doing a marvelous job. People from all parties have at times managed to enrich themselves, but it seems that in the past century the republicans have had the upper hand at it. This has nothing to do with us little folks who call ourselves Republicans or Democrats. It has everything to do with industry, lobbyists, the corruption of power, and a lot of people not paying attention in civics class who continue to not pay attention when they go to the polls. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Amos Date: 30 Oct 03 - 04:59 PM JimmyT: Apologies if you got inadvertantly tarred with the wrong brush. I posted it in reference to the more rapacious sort of Republican, the kind that starts wars unilaterally. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: jimmyt Date: 30 Oct 03 - 05:10 PM So, Stilly RIver Stage, By This am I to understand that I didn't pay attention in Civics class? As I remember I got an A, as well as in Political Science and American Government. You must understand that as in art, 2 people can look at the same painting or situation in the government or economy etc and derive totally different thoughts,and neither is necessarily wrong, nor is the other necessarily smarter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Oct 03 - 05:21 PM God, that sounds scary, Bill D. Bush is paying a state visit to London in a couple of weeks. If he tries something like that while he's here, it'll either be the men in white coats or an exorcism - probably in Buckingham Palace. There are limits. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Don Firth Date: 30 Oct 03 - 07:11 PM JimmyT, the problem may be that classic definitions have shifted. Believe it or not, people used to regard me as somewhat conservative. Over the years my views haven't really changed that much. But the whole spectrum has shifted so far to the right within recent decades that when I express some of the same views I expressed years ago, now I find myself being called a "flaming liberal." And although I have voted for Republican candidates in the past, I have not done so recently. Nor will I. And I am not alone in this. I know a number of people who, at one time considered themselves to be Republicans or who, at least, regularly voted Republican, who feel that Bush has made such a pig's breakfast of things that they cannot, in good conscience, continue to vote Republican. On the other hand, I know some people of the Republican persuasion who are very apprehensive about the rightward shift of the nation's policies, but they are so caught up in the idea of being Republican and so loathe to put themselves in the position where someone might call them that dreaded epithet "liberal" that they continue to support Bush even though it wrenches their best instincts to do so. If you honestly compare the philosophy of main-stream Republicans with the position taken by the Bush administration, you will see the quandary this rightward shift puts many Republicans in. I only hope they will follow their best instincts instead of the current reactionary party line. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Oct 03 - 09:03 PM Sure thing, JimmyT...totally legitimate point you have made there. I'm actually fed up with ALL the political parties, not just the Republicans. And I'm fed up with the party system of politics. I don't think "divide and conquer" is a good way to govern a nation, but that is exactly what is being done everywhere where party politics is practiced. The very nature of such a combative system leads to false campaign promises, phony tax cuts (that rob Peter to pay Paul) and dirty tactics by all the parties. It's not good. It will one day be seen as having been a very foolish way to organize a supposedly "free" society. Consensus is better than the triumph of one special interest group over another. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Oct 03 - 09:07 PM "But the whole spectrum has shifted so far to the right within recent decades that when I express some of the same views I expressed years ago, now I find myself being called a "flaming liberal." And what do you think they'd call Abraham Lincoln? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST,John Hardly Date: 30 Oct 03 - 09:48 PM I couldn't agree more, jimmyT. Well said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Bobert Date: 30 Oct 03 - 11:14 PM Hey, ain't nuthin' about the code... "I am not a crook.... I am not a crook... I am not a crook... I am not a crook... I am..................... .... and the crook beat goes on... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Stilly River Sage Date: 30 Oct 03 - 11:58 PM Yeah, but in many ways Tricky Dick seems mild by comparison. No, Jimmyt, I did not say you didn't pay attention in civics class. But I will suggest that you're thinking along binary lines, instead of recognizing a range of possibilities, and that I didn't necessarily include you in that explanation. By suggesting a couple of scenarios that doesn't mean there aren't many more stops on this sliding scale between the rapacious and the knee-jerk Bubba who doesn't evaluate the slogans he is using to decide who to vote for. It is amazing how few votes it can take the tip the scales, and the sloganeers bank on that. Literally. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST,Larry K Date: 31 Oct 03 - 11:19 AM Amos: A breif note or rebuttal to your 7 points. Its easy to preach to the converted with a one sided rant, but it does little to convince anyone of anythings or change anyones mind. Here is the other side. 1. Co-Opt God in everything. I seem to remember Bill Clinton carrying a bible and being photographed by the media before he got oral sex that same afternoon with Monica. I don't think this is only a republican issue. At least (by all accounts) Bush his sincere in his belief in God. The same cannot be said for many other politicians. It is the democrats and ACLU trying to take God and the 10 commandments out of the schools and courts. 2. Stick to the official story- Don't let the truth out. "I never had sex with that woman" Bob Torecelli scandals kept quiet. LBJ revelations recently that he knew we were loosing Vietnam and lied to the people. Dick Morris and Bill planning a family values campaign while he was getting his foot sucked by prostittues. Susan Estrich stated on tv that Hillary knew she was lying when she went on tv and denied Monica stating it was a right wing conspiracy. Another issue not owned exclusively by either party. 3. Bush is only president- Florida- Back to selected not elected. The best way for democrats to keep losing elections is to stick to this mantra. The story would have more credibility if every recount done afterwards didn't show that Bush still won the election. (When the New York Times admits that Bush has won, you know its time to give up the ghost) 4. Liberal Media- If you read Ann Coulters book "Libel" or Bernard Goldbergs book "media bias" you couldn't possibly defend this charge. Here is a game to play. At the next election count the number of times the media introduces a Republican as either Republican or extremist, or right wing. Than count the number of times they introduce the Democrat by the same means- Democrat or extremist, or Liberal. You will find a 20 to 1 ratio. By the way- fox news keeps on growing. CNN and CBS news keep on shrinking. The american public is sending a message. And yes- Barbara Steishands husband playing Ronald Regan on a CBS movie. Lets have Rush Limbaugh play Bill Clinton in a movie. 5. Michael Moore- Check the Larry Elder website and others for all the lies and inconsistencies in the movie. According to police reports, the two kids were in a bowling class, but skipped school and did not attend the class the morning of the movie. The kids parents didn't make bombs, they made communication satellites. When Moore was asked about it, he said "well they may make bombs in the future" Very lame response to a mistake in the movie. When the hollywood crowd at the acadamy awards boo a liberal, it says something. Quite frankly, Moore, Sharpton, and Franken are an ambarrassment to the Democratic party and I hope they continue to get huge media coverage. 6. Hillary- Failed at education in Arkansas. Failed out Healthcare in 1994. Has done nothing for upstate NY. Lied about a right wing conspiracy. Lied about cattle futures. I give up. Convince me on something she has done other than being Bill's wife. Ok Ok- she has voted for every tax increase that she could. 7. Bill- Plus side- a great economy. That is the mantra. He gave us a great economy. How did he do that. Most people can't tell you a single thing he did to benefit the economy but they give him the credit. All we can point to is a tax increase very similar to the one Bush 41 gave us in 1990 whicl Bill claimed resulted in the worst economy in 50 years. The facts. According to all economists the economy had rebounded and was strong in the last year of Bush 41. Clinton inherited a good economy,it stayed strong for 6 years (we'll talk about that later) through the internet bubble, and that had a recession in the last year of the Clinton term. The Nasqac fell by 50% during the last year of clinton. Those are the positives. The negative. Sommalia disgrace- Ossama cites. this as his belief that americans are weak. Clinton turned down Ossama 4 separate times. (several books on subject) Was lied to by North Koreans- surpize we have nuclear weapons. Did nothing for Sadaam. Boosted Yassar (the terrorist) Araftat. (Arafat was the most frequent visitor in the Clinton white house- a fact) Released the FLAN puerto rican terrorists to gain votes for Hillary. Gave nuclear secrets to chinese. Sold the Lincoln bedroom. Lowered the morale standards for the country. Bacically, an inpeached, disbarred, perjurer. And that has nothing to do with sex. Sex was his least offence. I liken it to convicting Al Capone on tax evation. The amazing thing is that When Clinton was elected, the democrats had the house, senate, governers, and the presidency. Today they have none of those and people still love the Clintons. The Clintons campaigned hard in the 2002 elections and 7 or their 8 candidates lost. They helped Grey Davis. He lost. And Democrats still continue to love the Clintons. I don't get it. The only ones the Clintons help is themselves. The democratic party is broke but the Clinton Library is thriving. Well at least there is another view. Isn't diversity great. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Amos Date: 31 Oct 03 - 11:33 AM Thanks, Larry. ALways nice to know there is more than one point of view around. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 31 Oct 03 - 02:00 PM But it wasn't very funny was it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Rapparee Date: 31 Oct 03 - 05:49 PM My brother is a Republican who acts as an independent. I'm independent, voting for the person who seems best to me regardless of political party. But I offer these names from the not-too-distant past: Richard Allen, James Watt, William Clark, Paul Thayer, Raymond Donovan, Ed Meese, Michael Deaver, Albert Hakim, Richard Secord, John Poindexter, and the suit Marine, Oliver North. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Don Firth Date: 31 Oct 03 - 06:19 PM Not to belabor my point above (30 Oct 03 - 07:11 PM) about the major shift to the right in the Republican position, but to put the matter a bit more graphically, in 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a Republican, warned of the dangers inherent in the military-industrial complex when he said:— Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.The Bush administration IS the military-industrial complex. Don Firth Eisenhower's entire speech, well worth reading by liberals and conservatives alike. On the military-industrial complex. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Bill D Date: 31 Oct 03 - 06:35 PM "If you read Ann Coulters book "Libel"....ummmm...right. The lady who would make Rush Limbaugh sound liberal. I'll sure run right out and immerse myself in THAT! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: kendall Date: 31 Oct 03 - 08:19 PM The first article talked about the republican party. The other side could only mention a few names. Hardly a balanced report. Another point, you say Liberals love the Clintons? BS! I/m as Liberal as any, and I have no use for either of them. Now, if you want to make a list of bad democrats and a list of bad republicans... well, you already know which would be the longer list. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 31 Oct 03 - 11:13 PM And to add to the mix, the Republican tax cut just slammed into the economy giving us the highest growth rate (7.2%) in the US economy since 1984 (Reagan years). As for co-opting God, does anyone remember that when faced with the stained dress, Clinton brought in Jesse Jackson as "his spiritual advisor". And that Jackson showed up with a whore, who at that time was carrying Jackson's child. Also the Washington Post has been one of the strongest supporters of the Iraq War, recently posting a full page editorial, "Why Bush is still right" about the correctness of why we went to Iraq, and todays editorial about the Ramadan Offensive, in which they praise the Presidents "strategery" of "rooting them out" and requesting more troops to Iraq along with passing the Iraq reconstruction request. As Bobert knows, that ain't the same Washington Post we knew in our salad days. I think they finally got a lick o' sense. And as I have written many times... ain't facts a bitch |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST,pdc Date: 01 Nov 03 - 02:18 AM Claymore said: "And that Jackson showed up with a whore, who at that time was carrying Jackson's child." Could you provide evidence for your statement that this woman was a whore, please? Otherwise you are committing slander, which is an offence under the law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Greg F. Date: 01 Nov 03 - 09:43 AM Not to worry, pdc. If you read Claymore's posting history it will be abundantly clear to you that his precious "facts"- as he calls them- tend to be somewhat elastic to cover his purposes. Just skip on ahead..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Rapparee Date: 01 Nov 03 - 09:51 AM Claymore, while I respect your statements, I should point out that economists think that the 7.2% surge in the GDP was due to the money people got back for the "child tax rebate" and that there will be a significant braking action on the GDP in the next quarter because that money will be gone. Yes, the tax cuts might be working, but I'd wait a couple more quarters before saying that they are. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST,pdc Date: 01 Nov 03 - 12:16 PM The CBC news called it a "jobless recovery." Unless employment rises significantly, the recovery cannot last. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Forum Lurker Date: 01 Nov 03 - 01:00 PM I wasn't aware that any recovery had taken place. Jobs are still being lost, not made, prices and tuition are rising, salaries aren't, and the deficit's growing. Oh, I see. The rich are getting richer, so the economy OVERALL is increasing, even though most people with only 5 figures in their income are getting poorer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: kendall Date: 01 Nov 03 - 03:40 PM Bush is saying that the economy has "turned the corner"..well, it sure as hell didn't leave any skid marks around here. The last Maine shoe manufacturer just moved to Mexico. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 01 Nov 03 - 08:13 PM The lady in question was a staff worker (not his wife) who was paid to provide sex for Jackson; thatsa a ho in anybodies book. For several years after, she was given something like $60,000 a year from an illegal fund as hush money. Thatsa a Democrat in anybodies book ( a good Rebublican would have gotten much more);) And being a good Democrat, Jackson took a few days off for "spritual rejuvination" Talk about invoking God... Sorry about Maine, but here in West Va I just got $10,000 promotion and made a federal employee for moving the Job Training completions on my Job Corps Center from 114th to 4th in the Nation, in one year. 84% of my students are the school drop-outs from Philly, B-more and DC. And when the bus arrives on the Center and they process through Security, I greet them at the top of my lungs. "Ladies and Gentlemen, I intend to make sure that that is the last free bus ride you get in your lives". Maybe I should yell louder... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: kendall Date: 01 Nov 03 - 09:28 PM Thats great, but this country runs on manufacturing, not services. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: kendall Date: 01 Nov 03 - 09:36 PM Anyone with more than a teaspoon full of brains can see that this country can not maintain its position as a super power when all the manufacturing jobs have gone south, and we are reduced to flipping each others hamburgers for minimum wage. L.L. Bean still charges $40.00 for a shirt made in India. The profit margin is out of reason. We are screwed buying that shirt and the poor bastard who made it is screwed even worse. Now, justify this if you can. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: jimmyt Date: 01 Nov 03 - 09:52 PM what if you like the shirt? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 01 Nov 03 - 11:17 PM OK, while there has been a bit of a thread creap here, I still have to point out that whether or not any clothing manufacturing jobs go south, it means nothing to us as a world power... absolutely nothing. There are core industries, such as air craft and areospace, weapons technology, information technology, transportation networking, healthcare research, etc. which do. Those jobs which are low skill and repetative need to go south, to force such countries such as Mexico to train and augment their work force and reduce our immigrant influx. We are in a world economy, which President Clinton knew well when he signed NAFTA (a VERY inconvenient fact for Democrats). As Bob Dylan sang, "Please get out of the way if you can't lend a hand, for the times they are a changing". And for those who can't change, they will end their days staring out to sea for jobs that are never coming back. As for the shirt, right now there is a clever manufacturer in Bumfuck, Eygpt, who is working on a cheaper way to produce a better shirt, after he saw L.L Beans on the Internet. Now if he can just find a way to get it to market... which will require American planes, American fabric manufacturing software, American distribution networking, American advertising on American media... It doesn't take a teaspoon of brains to get the picture... just point and click... |
|
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. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: kendall Date: 09 Nov 03 - 03:22 PM Well said Don and Little Hawk. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Rapparee Date: 09 Nov 03 - 04:42 PM Has he mentioned that Charlie used to send in sappers to turn the mines around to that they pointed towards the users? Or that anyone within 10 or so meters of the back of the mine when it was triggered was just as dead as those in front of it (from the backblast)? Or that it was not infrequent for the det caps to fall out of the cap wells and then the mine wouldn't work? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Peace Date: 09 Nov 03 - 06:54 PM Amazing what a little C4 and some ball bearings will do, isn't it? Put that in the hands of someone who enjoys his work--and voila! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Amos Date: 10 Nov 03 - 01:18 PM Here's a list, compiled by historian William Blum, of countries which the US bombed between the end of World War 2 and the current war in Iraq - Korea 1950-53 China 1950-53 Guatemala 1954 Indonesia 1958 Cuba 1959-60 Guatemala 1960 Congo 1964 Peru 1965 Vietnam 1961-73 Laos 1964-73 Guatemala 1967-69 Cambodia 1969-70 Grenada 1983 Libya 1986 El Salvador throughout the 1980s Nicaragua throughout the 1980s Panama 1989 Iraq 1991 and throughout the 1990s Sudan 1998 Afghanistan 1998 Yugoslavia 1999 Afghanistan 2001 In how many of these instances did a stable democratic society, respectful of human rights, occur as a direct result? Choose one of the following: (a) 0 (b) zero (c) none (d) not one (From Dick Gaughan's website) A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Ebbie Date: 10 Nov 03 - 02:03 PM Using Amos's: "a stable democratic society, respectful of human rights" Imposing such a government upon a country, any country, isn't possible, it seems to me. It isn't a democracy if it is forced. It will revert to what the people themselves want when the force is removed. It seems to me that a great deal of the problem we're having is that we don't have a clue that a great many people/nations have a different idea of what is an ideal society. Having a choice between 43 brands of toothpaste may not strike some people as necessary. And some people are comfortable with a strong regime that will guarantee a livelihood while keeping crime down in the ordinary subject/citizen's neighborhood. I believe that historically many, many people have ignored what goes on in the 'upper echelons', knowing they have no control over it anyway. Kind of like Watership Downs, perhaps. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Peace Date: 10 Nov 03 - 02:29 PM I think we shouldn't forget the first nuclear war: Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August of 1945. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Don Firth Date: 10 Nov 03 - 04:36 PM One of the problems with "imposing" democracy has to do with the definition of democracy. The word "democracy" is not interchangeable with the word "capitalism." In fact, the two are often inimical to each other (as I think we are beginning to learn). And no political science text I have ever read says that democracy means, "an economic and political climate friendly to American Corporations." Allowing free elections if and only if the populace will vote the way we want them to is not "democracy." Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Code of a Good Republican From: Peace Date: 10 Nov 03 - 06:05 PM A quote that may have come from this site, somewhere--my memory ain't what it used to be, and never was--: "Communism is the exploitation of people by people. Capitalism is the reverse." |
