THAT URANIUM STORY

NRO ^ | 7/14/2003 | David Frum

[Mo1]

Oh geez that picture hurt my eyes .. LOL

[Howlin]

Sorry, it's late........my head hurts, too.

[joesbucks]

Call him a Mush-bot

That's cool. Names and labels don't bother me.

[Mo1]

A quick glance at this thread .. and I can understand

[okie01]

"That's cool. Names and labels don't bother me."

Actually, that's hypocrisy. You've been littering this thread with names and labels.

[joesbucks]

oh?

[King Prout]

He extended the assault weapons ban,... - OWK
No he didn't. - facedown

thanks - that bit had me confused.

[King Prout]

I agree with the sentiment, and hope you are right in your certainty. Needs doing... BEEN needing doing for quite a while.

[Marysecretary]

Nope. God uses men and has throughout history to complete His purposes. Just because we're in the 21st century doesn't mean God's not operating just as He always has. Yes, Dubya IS anointed by God to perform His purpose for America at this time in our history. That's why he's being villified by not only democrats but some pubbies as well.

[Marysecretary]

Churches in the inner city are beginning to reach out to the poor and that's why I'm glad Dubya wants to give them money to continue. I think this is a good way to minister to the poor and I don't mind my tax dollars going toward that end. God is the solution to poverty and despair. He's willing if we are.

[carton253]

Mary... totally off topic...

Have you heard Sandy Patty's new album? It is wonderful. I highly recommend it.

[Marysecretary]

No,I haven't. What's it called? She's an amazing singer.

[Marysecretary]

Uh, sure, buh-bye back atcha.

[swarthyguy]

we can call ourselves BUSHPACKERS

Now that is funny!

[carton253]

Take Hold of Christ!

It is so good!

[cardinal4]

Or nine Souters.

Or worse, nine Ginsburgs..

[Marysecretary]

Thanks! I'll check it out. Mxxx

[Kevin Curry]

A particular character (Professor De La Paz) helps establish a new government on a lunar colony toward the end of the book . . . I rather like the idea.

You're a political trekkie. You wear the verbal equivalent of pointy styrofoam ears, banlon shirt, and high water sansabelt slacks, tote a plastic phaser etc. You attend all the conventions, tweaking one eyebrow up high while gravely intoning, "The law of the many is not a logical solution, captain."

And you have way-y-y to much time on your hands, wasting the time that you do during the productive hours of life, posting endless Heinlein polisci-chobabble.

I don't know who supports you (the taxpayer?), but they must have deep pockets and no clue what you are doing on their dime.

[roughrider]

"The Republicans voted for tax cuts. The Democrats opposed them. Yet you claim they are the same."

You are implying that only how socialist programs are financed is a material difference between the MAJORITY of the Members of Congress and the Senators who are both Republicans and Democrats. How socialist programs are financed is not a material difference between those who vote for the programs. The elephantine Ted Kennedy "Education" bill that passed early in the Bush Presidency had to have the support of a majority of both Houses of Congress with GOP majorities. That means a majority of Republicans in both houses, and the President who pushed Kennedy's bill and signed it, were in favor of the socialist Kennedy program. When most of the Republicans voted for the tax cuts, they were only voting in favor of a particular way of financing the programs, namely tax cuts that, they believe, will stimulate the economy, increasing revenues to the government in order to pay for the socialist programs. In other words, "Supply-Side Economics" as a financing technique of government.

The Democrats, on the other hand, prefer direct increases in marginal tax rates to fund the socialist programs. The Republicans believe this is counterproductive, as the tax increases put a drag on economic activity and cut revenues to the government that finance socialist programs.

The Democrats may turn around and claim the Republicans "favor the rich" with tax cuts, but they know this is only true by appearance. It is a political ploy to get more of their party in office, but the Democrats really know that the only difference is how their programs will be financed, and that is NO DIFFERENCE at all with the exception of financing technique. The end result is bigger, less Constitutional government no matter how the programs are financed.

[roughrider]

I have tried to tell people in here that the "vote GOP because you can hold their feet to the fire for conservative values" campaign slogan was NO LONGER OPERATIVE. It isn't even operative during election cycles when the GOP is most striving to hold their conservative base anymore. No one is allowed to criticize any of the socialist programs they pass. "Hold their feet to the fire" is DEAD, officially. It has been dead for a long time, but the chronic campaigners used to haul it out for a little "Weekend at Bernie's" fun at the expense of conservatives and libertarians. Now, they are admitting that it was only hucksterism.