posted
Durnit, First, you posted while I was typing. Stop that.
Right on the money, though, for the most part. 'Cept that religion thang you got goin'. But let's not start that again.
Although now that I think about it, I don't think we've ever had a debate about the role of religion in government...
"Inflation is too high. Who's fault is that? *BZZT!* 70's Carterism. Democratic Congress."
Well, much as I hate to blame a Republican ( ), Nixon's wage controls were probably more responsible for inflation than Carter. They started the spiral that Reagan ended. Carter certainly didn't help much, though. And the Democratic congress was definitely responsible for the deficit spending of the eighties.
Good terrorist strategy, BTW. Ever read "Patriot Games"?
------------------ "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
quote:Actually, IINM, one of those "powerful" that Gore is always ranting about came in and bailed out the Democrat convention. They didn't have all that much money to work with before he came along. Hardly funded by tax dollars, and hypocritical, besides. Don't know about the Reps, but I doubt it.
On June 24, 2000, Los Angeles Times' Jim Newton wrote:
"The hosts of this summer's Democratic National Convention eked out a victory Friday in their fight for a $4-million public subsidy, but only after City Councilwoman Jackie Goldberg used her decisive vote to extract concessions that cheered activists, alarmed downtown business owners, worried police and cost Mayor Richard Riordan $1 million of his own money."
quote:Again, get all the facts first
------------------ This is a place of business, not a peewee flopphouse! ~C. Montgomery Burns
posted
The POINT isn't that W. has taken drugs (which seems to be common knowledge, as the media and other candidates mentions it at one time or another), it's that drug use is a social HEALTH problem, not a crime deserving punishment. The problem is not with what W. or Gore did in their youths, it's with jailing people for 18 years for being sick! Heck, they don't even jail murderers for that long in California. What's more, this was in Texas while W. was/is governor.
First: I have no problems with tax credits for small businesses, but does Microsoft or GM need it? Giant corporations are the ones funding political campaigns, not your parent's little shop.
And you're right, Nader has no chance in hell of getting elected. He's not corrupted enough. Vote Gore so W. doesn't become president.
Omega: So how come your conservatism doesn't go both ways? If the government shouldn't restrict businesses, why should it help them?
------------------ "Poetic souls delight in prose insane." --Lord Byron
"The POINT isn't that W. has taken drugs (which seems to be common knowledge, as the media and other candidates mentions it at one time or another)"
It's also common knowledge that Gore's winning. Guess what? He's not. The media only reports the polls that show Gore winning, even though historically they're far less accurate than the Battleground and Portrait of America polls, both of which show Bush ahead slightly more than the margin of error.
And as for the drug use aligations, the only time I've heard it come up in quite some time was with that reporter that Bush called a certain bodily orifice. He wrote an article about how the aligations just would not die, citing a press conference where a reporter had asked about them. What he didn't say was that he WAS that reporter. Real unbiased. Again, there is absolutely NO reason to believe that Bush has used drugs.
"Nader has no chance in hell of getting elected. He's not corrupted enough. Vote Gore so W. doesn't become president."
You seem to be implying that Bush is more corrupt (not that you have any evidence that he's corrupt in the first place, but since when has lack of evidence mattered to liberals?) than Gore. This is LAUGHABLE! Go look up Gore's record some time, wudja?
"Omega: So how come your conservatism doesn't go both ways? If the government shouldn't restrict businesses, why should it help them?"
You define cessation of excessive taxation as help? I call it an end to active harm. There's a difference. If someone has me on the rack, then takes me off of it, do I say that they've helped me? Should I thank them?
------------------ "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
posted
Well, if the someone who takes you off the rack isn't the one who put you on it in the first place, then it's help.
------------------ "...you know, Omega, there's a phrase you might want to look up. It goes something like "paranoid arrogant fuckwit who has more chance of ejaculating to the moon than he has of ever convincing a girl that he's a viable prospect for marriage." -PsyLiam, September 16, 2000 10:23 PM.
posted
Omega, true wisdom is knowing when to shut up.
We know that Gore has a serious credibility problem. We know he can't go 5 days without lying. The media is slowly picking up on it, and maybe people out there will too.
George W. Bush is honest, and has far more integrity than Gore. You and I know this. You can present all the information you can, and if others still don't understand, forget about them. Its their loss. I think its time to chill off on the horse for now, ok? It can't get any more dead.
(hrm, I suppose I just gave him license to be smug... oh well)
posted
Shouldn't that read "George W. Bush is less of a liar than Gore"? Because, we you are speaking of a politician, are you not?
------------------ "...you know, Omega, there's a phrase you might want to look up. It goes something like "paranoid arrogant fuckwit who has more chance of ejaculating to the moon than he has of ever convincing a girl that he's a viable prospect for marriage." -PsyLiam, September 16, 2000 10:23 PM.
"Well, if the someone who takes you off the rack isn't the one who put you on it in the first place, then it's help."
Good point. Of course, you could make the argument that it's still the government, no matter who's in charge, that's doing all this, but let's not.
Under any circumstances, cutting unfairly high taxes on big business is right. Why should they pay a greater ratio of their earnings? Why should anyone? Does that seem "fair"?
Can anyone tell me exactly how a business pays taxes? It's never occured to me to ask. Just on their basic income like anyone else?
I still think a flat sales tax would be the most "fair" and efficient.
"Shouldn't that read "George W. Bush is less of a liar than Gore"? Because, we you are speaking of a politician, are you not?"
That's rather cynical, don't you think?
------------------ "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
posted
Oh, I was by no means hinting at W.'s integrity. They're both damned. I just prefer liberal policies in general. And Ultra's not being cynical at all. Last June there was a story where an AP Government class from San Diego, as a post-AP project, went through the entire process of proposing a bill and went to Sacramento to speak to the State Legislature. They were essetially shot down, by both Democrats and Republicans, for being there. Several of the legislators and beer company representatives (Miller and Coors) called them spoiled brats, called their parents names, and basically told them to get out and let the paying customers speak. Sure, politicians start out wanting to do this or do that for the country, but you can't do anything unless you get elected, and you can't get elected unless you have $$$. So they turn a blind eye to one company here, or compromise with a corporation there, and pretty soon they forget what they're really in the career for. Presidents are the worst of all.
And why don't you address some of the tougher questions, like public health, instead of spewing party lines on "assisting" the economy?
Might I remind you that despite all the taxes, corporations have the money to hire big time lawyers to find tax loopholes. Need I even MENTION that companies like Nike charge us $100 for a pair of shoes while its workers are underpaid?
For your information, I don't really care what the polls say about Gore or Bush. I did a poll project in government class, and if there's one thing I learned from it, it's that polls are untrustworthy because people change their opinions all the time. Not only that, the way the questions are phrased can impact the results as well.
On a last note, Nader's really a swell guy. Besides the fact that I like his ideals, he spoke at my school with only a week's notice and didn't even get paid for it. On-campus Democrat and Republican groups are trying to get Bush and Gore to speak, though I don't think they'd have any luck.
------------------ "Poetic souls delight in prose insane." --Lord Byron
posted
"And why don't you address some of the tougher questions, like public health, instead of spewing party lines on "assisting" the economy?"
Okay. the reason people can't afford health care, especially prescription drugs, is government interference. When you arrange for the government to pay for something, the companies supplying it will charge as much as possible, since the government can pay pretty much any price. Hence the $400 hammer.
"Might I remind you that despite all the taxes, corporations have the money to hire big time lawyers to find tax loopholes. Need I even MENTION that companies like Nike charge us $100 for a pair of shoes while its workers are underpaid? "
Need I even mention that you don't need to BUY them? I have never paid more than half that for a pair of shoes. Ever. I won't, I'm too cheap. I shop at discount stores for inexpensive brands, and screw Nike. It's the Fashion Clones simply MUST have the 'swoosh' who keep Nike's prices high. Supply and Demand. if demand is high, prices go up. If demand dries up, prices go down.
I do agree with you about politicians selling out to get campaign money. Here's a campaign promise. I will tell anybody anything to get myself money to get elected... but I'll be lying. Feel better?
------------------ "Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master
), Nixon's wage controls were probably more responsible for inflation than Carter. They started the spiral that Reagan ended. Carter certainly didn't help much, though. And the Democratic congress was definitely responsible for the deficit spending of the eighties.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
