Posted on 02/12/2004 5:25:17 AM PST by TomServo
Edited on 04/22/2004 11:51:05 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
WASHINGTON -- For all the attention paid to partisanship in this town, the more interesting -- and consequential -- fights here in this election year will pit Republicans against Republicans.
A new level of tension is emerging between President Bush and the congressional Republicans he expects to deliver his election-year agenda. Among the sore points, Mr. Bush's initiative to give legal status to immigrant workers who are here illegally, a bid to attract Latino voters, instead has roiled the party's conservative faithful. Republicans have been put on the defensive over the President's policies on Iraq. And record deficits and spending suddenly have Republicans questioning his fiscal stewardship.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
So, I got in the car, spend 30 minutes looking for a place to park, and voted for a conservate Republican. George W. Bush to be precise.
Today, I live in LA. I can't own a gun, taxes are too high, illegal immigration is out of control (and is now being rewarded), abortion is legal, the government spends even more money, and our Civil Liberties are at even greater risk than in 2000 (Patriot Act(s)).
So, the only real reason i'm supposed to go out, spend 30 minutes looking for parking, and pull the lever for George W. Bush again is because Saddam Hussein is out of power.
I guess that's just going to have to be good enough. If I were to do anything else, I would be a raving left-wing liberal loonie. At least that's what they tell me.
It's actually already spread to you. They call them "Federal Grants" ... but basically they just get a cut of your paycheck to develop the drugs the turn around and sell to you at 10,000% markup.
When you are forced to fund the private companies, it ain't capitalism anymore.
Think about this. Suppose that there is an illness that affects 100, 1000, 10,000, 100,000 people. At what point does a company decide that it is not in its economic self-interest to develop a drug that combats a disease that only affects x number of people?
Wouldn't that be where "Federal Grants" are necessary?
More generally, (pick your discipline), government has to step in and fund or help fund R&D precisely because it is not focused on the profit motive.
If it is completely non-profit and for no other motive than saving lives ... sure.
More generally, (pick your discipline), government has to step in and fund or help fund R&D precisely because it is not focused on the profit motive.
But, they are always focused on the profit motive. A company is not going to develop anything that they know they will take a loss on. They will just jack up the price to the point that it is profitable.
So, you have been forced to invest in a company, that turns around and makes a profit on your investment, without sharing the profits with you.
Such as the Republican party returning to conservatism, maybe?
If it is completely non-profit and for no other motive than saving lives ... sure.
More generally, (pick your discipline), government has to step in and fund or help fund R&D precisely because it is not focused on the profit motive.
But, they are always focused on the profit motive. A company is not going to develop anything that they know they will take a loss on. They will just jack up the price to the point that it is profitable.
So, you have been forced to invest in a company, that turns around and makes a profit on your investment, without sharing the profits with you.
She could speak and understand English, but at home she spoke Croatian and gasp read Croatian newspapers. Seems to me you want a language police to make sure that everybody speaks English at home or on the bus.
The French are doing basically the same thing. They are paranoid about English invading France and are almost brownshirt like in their laws about English.
Hey if you want to be like the French, that's your right, but I choose not to follow the French example.
BTW, I am against voting ballots in languages other than English, doing government business in other languages other than English, and the such, but I am not for what I consider your extreme animus against, for the most part hard working people, who speak another language at home.
The only thing worse than failing to "energize" his base is alienating his base.
Clearly, Dubya and his handlers have in their arrogance either underestimated OR discounted the negative impact caused within the true conservative base of proposing blatantly irresponsible fiscal spending and illegal alien/Amnesty policies.
Shouldn't the onus of discontent fall upon HIM?
Why should this onus fall upon those who have the courage to raise the Red Flag, and of whom are merely adhering to the major tenets of traditional GOP Party platform and it's principles?
Then what's the problem???? If she immigrated here legally, could speak and understand English, and didn't commit any violent crimes or property crims ... WELCOME!!!! Thanks for coming to the United States!
Seems to me you want a language police to make sure that everybody speaks English at home or on the bus.
Well, you're completely wrong.
The French are doing basically the same thing. They are paranoid about English invading France and are almost brownshirt like in their laws about English.
People who live in France should know how to speak French. If they know a second language, I don't see the problem. Maybe they are trying to head off the "Press '1' for French" issue.
BTW, I am against voting ballots in languages other than English, doing government business in other languages other than English, and the such
Completely agree.
but I am not for what I consider your extreme animus against, for the most part hard working people, who speak another language at home.
I don't care what they speak at home. As long as they can speak English when necessary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.