Text 16306, 106 rader
Skriven 2005-11-23 15:16:00 av VERN HUMPHREY (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av ROSS CASSELL
Ärende: Republican post tunring
===============================
Please don't reply to the original post, Ross.  The poster is banned in
this echo.

 BK> ...

BK> RC> You will find that the rabid lefto's are singlehandedly
BK> RC> trying to blame questionable intelligence on GWB, when in
BK> RC> fact our counterparts in the UK confirmed it and as far
BK> RC> back as 97-98, we had one Presidential Candidate speaking
BK> RC> of it as he addressed his colleagues in the US Senate.

BK> Going back 5 years before the war is a joke. Our counterparts in
BK> the UK claim to have confirmed it, but never revealed any of
BK> their supposedly confirming intel.

BK> It doesn't matter if every single leader of every single
BK> government on Earth agreed. What matters is, the inspections
BK> were being done, the facts were being found, and we could have
BK> found the truth without an invasion.

BK> Bush cut it off. Bush decided, unilaterally and arbitrarily,
BK> that we should invade with no legal authority, and, it appears,
BK> for the purpose of stopping the inspectors from finding the
BK> truth, that the WMDs did not exist.

BK> The Bush administration wanted a war. They did not care about
BK> WMDs, they did not care about 9-11, they did not care about
BK> truth. They wanted a war.

BK> And I believe Bush did not know what was going on. I believe
BK> Bush was manipulated by Rumsfeld/Cheney/Libby/Wolfowitz and the
BK> rest of the Neo-Con cabal.

BK> J>> ->  J> And the economy is going into the dumpster...
BK> J>> ->  J> ...part of a plan to starve the beast.

BK> J>> -> Oh really, prove it?

BK> J>> To your satisfaction? :-)

BK> J>> There's a mass if evidennce...

BK> RC> Consistent job growth the past couple years, only hindered
BK> RC> by the 'canes.

BK> Not really. The so called job growth is largely low level, part
BK> time, and eaten up by illegal immigration.

BK> RC> But please do post your evidence.

BK> J>> -> Remember we cant have another tech bubble/dot com boom, thats
BK> J>> already happened, -> er popped.

BK> J>> Say what?

BK> RC> I assume you want to reminisce<sp> about the economic boom
BK> RC> of the Clinton years and measure all economies to it, I
BK> RC> point out that we cant repeat those bubbles that had
BK> RC> already burst.

BK> Well, yeah, we could. However, the current debt fed growth will
BK> pop also.

BK> J>> ->  J> Congress is cutting...welfare, school funding, food stanps...
BK> J>> ->  J> and giving themselves a nice raise...

BK> J>> -> Well I can agree with you on them voting themselves any pay raise,
BK> J>> but welfare -> and foodstamps, are supposed to be a safety net, not a
BK> J>> hammock. -> True enough...it is line-drawing...at least you do seem to
BK> J>> accept the fact that there is a reason for a safty net :-)

BK> RC> Unfortunately, even with the reforms passed in the 90's,
BK> RC> there is no incentive for those on assistance to want to
BK> RC> get off of it.

BK> Before the Welfare deform acts 90% of those who went on welfare
BK> got off it on their own. It was a temporary support structure.

BK> It isn't the desire to get off that is lacking, but the means,
BK> for those who don't. The level of welfare support is low enough
BK> at it's best that a higher standard of living off welfare is
BK> enough motivation. The low level of the minimum wage and near
BK> minimum wage jobs makes that an untenable solution for families,
BK> esp without child care.

BK> RC> Unfortunately the left wing wants these
BK> RC> programs around so they can lock in a voter base who is
BK> RC> fool enough to believe they are being helped by the left.

BK> The democratic social welfare system has long been jobs based.
BK> The LBJ great society was a jobs based program. It has been
BK> under republicans that we have seen the growth of welfare as a
BK> support structure. It has been under republicans we have seen
BK> the jump in the rate of unwed motherhood. The republicans are
BK> the ones maintaining a poverty based system, which holds down
BK> the wages of the working population. They don't worry about a
BK> voter base because they know the welfare supported population
BK> has a low voting rate. Which makes your theory unsupportable.


BK>BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

BK>... E-mail: When it absolutely has to get lost at the speed of light.
BK> * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)