To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 18205
18204  |  18206
Subject: 
Re: Vote against/for...
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 00:51:13 GMT
Viewed: 
697 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
That is why our Founding Fathers created a government of checks and balances.
Our executive branch has no such thing and absolute power.

Total crap -- it would be true in a constitutional or purely theoretical
system; alas, we have only the government that has been left to us.

A judicial branch that is beholden to the son of an ex-president doesn't
seem like much of a check and balance, but in theory....


Plus, you act as if everything going on is above board, and it is fairly
obvious that much goes on that is neither above board nor even allowed to be
known to the public at large.

Who is protected by the continued secrecy surrounding the assassination of
John F. Kennedy?

I thought the X-Files was cancelled?


Why was poppa Bush in Dallas that day?

Wrong Texan (not that I'd count Mr. Preppy as a real Texan).  What was
Lyndon doing by NOT being in Texas that day?


Was daddy Bush CIA?

Was daddy Bush the REAL power behind the Reagan administration?

That can be answered by a meeting between Bush and Andropov.  Bush suggested
that there was a great similiarity between the two due to the one being the
head of the CIA and the other being the head of the KGB.  Andropov gave a
look that clearly expressed his contempt about the comparison, which I think
tells you his professional opinion of Bush being the "head" of the CIA.
Andropov knew an apparatchick when he saw one.  :-)

The real power behind the Reagan administration?  The Dragon Lady (as Nancy
would be willing to tell anyone foolish enough to listen).  Bush was a
delivery boy.


Why didn't we finish the problem with Saddam years ago, seeing as how
everything was already in play?

No mandate.  Bush may regret it, but he made the correct political decision
at the time.


What is the REAL national debt?

With or without the 40 acres and a mule?

(Do I really have to put a smiley there on something so obvious?)
:-)


Is daddy Bush the REAL power behind the current administration.

Cheney.


What REALLY happened in Florida 2000?

The republicans did their best freeze out people they thought wouldn't vote
for them (racial profiling? Ooooooooo, I'm a bigger racist in John's eyes -
in for a penny...).


Who bought the Supreme Court?

George the Elder.


Does any of this matter to people up to their eyeballs in international oil
interests?

Lost the thread here with all my own interruptions.  Wouldn't that be a yes?
You phrase it as if it should be a no.  Maybe I'm just confused.


Yeah, the reason you don't know is because everything is either actually
supra-U.S., illegal and therefore secret, or because it is protected under
the guise of national security.  There are a thousand ways to conceal the
evidence when people act dispassionately and with premeditation.

But I will hold the example our world dominance today up against any other
country in history-- show me one that has been more responsible in wielding
that power than we have.  Good luck.

This isn't a game of compare and contrast, dingus -- it's a game about
constitutional govt.  I am not seeing anywhere in the constitution that
allows for an imperialistic Pax Americana.

Dingus?  Anyway, after three European-engineered world wars, maybe we should
have a Pax Americana.

Of course, I'm not convinced that this is the path to such...

-->Bruce<--



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Vote against/for...
 
(...) Total crap -- it would be true in a constitutional or purely theoretical system; alas, we have only the government that has been left to us. Plus, you act as if everything going on is above board, and it is fairly obvious that much goes on (...) (22 years ago, 10-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

161 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR