Subject:
|
Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 11 Jul 2003 04:47:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
246 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Costello wrote:
> > Here in California we have a man who is possibly the worst governor in US
> > history, definitely the worst governor in California in a decade.
>
> I'm not really digging too many politicians lately, but let's at least keep
> in mind that the man is contending with one of the worst CA economies in a
> long time. He, like Shrub and the U.S. Congress, has done almost zero to
> better the situation -- but again, let's agree that the situation is bad to
> start with. The whole CA legislature should be brought to task for discussing
> not so long ago what to do with the projected surplus that never
> materialized. We lost jobs, we lost income, we lost tax monies coming in, we
> lost the whole domino effect of economic benefits that a good economy
> provides.
Uh... The only thing the government can to do "help" the economy is to cut
taxes. Everything else only makes it worse or at best has no impact. And please
don't give me that "tax cuts for the rich" crap. The "rich" by the definition
the Democrats have been using, means about 98 percent of Americans for at least
1/3 of their lives. (which is a descriptor of the top 20 percent of the income
bracket.) I also liked the one where the top 1 percent were getting 40 percent
of the tax cut. Nevermind that they pay 60 percent of the taxes and to give
everyone a fair tax cut would have meant giving them 60 percent of it.
>
> Maybe we should blame the whole thing on P2P file sharing?
>
> > the rumor that Arnold Schwarzenegger might run for the job hasn’t hurt.
>
> Great, another idiot actor running for office.
I would tend to disagree, these people are generally not motivated by the power
and fringe benefits of "holding public office" because they already have those.
If anything I would think they would stand the most likely chance of actually
representing us "little people."
> First, he has to prove
> himself intelligent in my view. Republican? Married into the Kennedy
> family? Not a good start...
>
> > So in between your surfing of anti-Republican websites, and foreign news
> > organizations fairly biased against the US...
>
> Uh-- the BBC is anti-american? Can you prove that in any way?
>
> > ...basically forcing the resulting military action.
>
> You have a strange take on peace as a priority. I recently read something
> like: "There is no good war, nor a bad peace." I tend to agree with that
> statement.
"[There are no good wars] with the following exceptions; The American
Revolution, World War 2, and the Star Wars Triliogy. Peace Man." -Bart Simpson
As far as "bad peace" well I guess that is accurate. After all peace with a
dictatorship isn't really peace, simply a delay of the inevitable.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
81 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
