Subject:
|
Re: Government's role [Was: Re: What happened?]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 15 Jul 1999 15:30:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1069 times
|
| |
|
|
Scott Edward Sanburn wrote in message <378DF799.9B923A@aeieng.com>...
> John,
>
> Thanks for the kind words, John. I usually don't get many in this forum!
As a conservative, I never got many kind words in any forum! but I am
young.
> Oh, believe me, I am sick of some Republicans as well simply because of • there
> non-difference to liberals and Democrats (Decept-o-crats around here) as • well.
> With Social Security, I agree that the system and the millions that are
> receiving the benefits now should not be touched, that would be • incomprehensible
> for the years that they had to pay for it. However, with my generation (I'm • 25)
> I should have an option to defer some of it into a mutual fund or something
> else, not letting the government handle and control it as much anymore!
Right, since you aren't going to get it back (unless they figure a way to
steal money from someone else to pay you, which I don't count on) you should
not have to pay it, and should be able to make your own choices.
> As for wackos, rightism and leftism has it shares, from militant militias • to
> environmentalist wackos to celebrities going to Vietnam cheering as fellow
> citizens get slaughtered by SAMS (Jane Fonda, anyone?) to Woody Harrilson • (sp?)
> chaining himself to the Golden Gate Bridge because of some trees getting • chopped
> down or something, causing one of the worst traffic jams in history. There • are
> many in either branch, it just the right ones seem to be portrayed as • "evil" and
> the like, while the leftist ones are "concerned" citizens (Thanks to the
> ever-present liberal bias on most media outlets).
Well, did you really think I meant that only the right had wackos? The
point here is that the left is wacko and the right has wackos.
Environmentalist wackos! I love that, one thing Rush gave us worth keeping.
You are correct, the right's wackos get portrayed as really wacko or evil,
while the left gets portrayed as loving and compassionate (which makes
thinking people want to hurl).
> Any Republican who adds laws seems to me to be a walking oxymoron, true
> conservatism dictates that government should start repealing unnecessary /
> unfruitful/ outdated laws, and concentrate on what really matters.
Hmm, politicians could be described as walking oxymorons.
> I don't a great deal about the Libertarian party, I have received numerous
> fliers from them, I like most of their ideas, but there are some as a • Christian
> I just can't support. I just don't think they have enough clout to do too • much
> as of yet, and with the ever present left approaching (Think of the last 10
> years, especially), I don't think they can win for right now. Maybe soon, • but as
> for the personal nitty-gritty, any non-left person is a friend of mine! :)
I don't know that much about it either; in fact I get a lot more mail
about Republican primaries and what not compared to letters from the LP.
Some supporter of the LP sent me this handy little (pocket sized) book that
has the US Constitution and the DOC in it. That earned them some points.
You can call 800.767.1241 and buy it for $1. I don't know how many here are
Libertarians, but I am not; I just agree with about 99.3% of what I hear
from Larry concerning Libertarianism. So, I am slowly learning about the
LP, hoping it is as good as it appears. I wish they would steal votes from
the left instead of the right, though, for now.
Scott Sanburn
>
>
>
> John DiRienzo wrote:
>
> > The sweet sound of republican rhetoric is music to my ears. I, like • you,
> > find the liberal policies revolting and find it hard to comprehend why
> > anyone would believe their line! But, the right has its flaws, too, • which I
> > guess is why the libertarian party is gaining poularity. I think the
> > libertarians might do even better with disgruntled republicans if they
> > changed the first five letters of their party's name. Nonetheless, the
> > Rebuplicans disappoint me in that they have been fighting with these
> > liberals for quite a long time, and they are still losing. Plus they • like
> > to be known as the law and order party (which is all well and good if not
> > taken to extremes) and help pass all these crazy laws so the government • can
> > "earn" money, not just take it by taxes. Problem is all these laws are a
> > bunch of crap, as we already have more than enough laws to keep things
> > orderly, if that was the actual goal of the courts. Further, Republicans
> > have too many wackos in their ranks, which makes normal people quite
> > frightened of voting for them. And when we do vote for them, they don't
> > accomplish anything. So, I agree with their ideology for the most part
> > (small government, low taxes, almighty defense), but find them to be a
> > useless deterrent of liberalism - maybe some one else can do it better (I
> > hope some one does).
> > > Scott "Sick of leftism" Sanburn
> > >
> > > [Erased everything]
> > > Simon Robinson wrote:
> >
> > John "PTL for the NRA" DiRienzo
> > --
> > Have fun!
> > John
> > AUCTION Page (15 Sealed Space sets!)
> > http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/2-many-toys/
> > TRADE Page http://www114.pair.com/ig88/lego/index.htm
> > MOC,CA[cl,bf,cr,fm,bk+++ wp,dm,rk,df++ fk-]++++(6035)
> > SW,TR,old(456)+++ TO++ PI,SP+ DU-- #+++++
> > ig88888888@stlnet.com & IG88888888 on AOL
>
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Government's role [Was: Re: What happened?]
|
| John, Thanks for the kind words, John. I usually don't get many in this forum! Oh, believe me, I am sick of some Republicans as well simply because of there non-difference to liberals and Democrats (Decept-o-crats around here) as well. With Social (...) (25 years ago, 15-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
433 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
