Posted on 10/17/2001 10:43:41 AM PDT by Mudboy Slim
Dear Rush:
As you must be fully aware of by now, sir, I consider myself to be amongst your greatest fans (and, yes, some folks who say that are actually sincere and not Seminar Callers). So, when I hear you presenting the LoonyLeftist Cal-State Professor's rantings on CNN about RightWing Militiamen being responsible for the Anthrax Terror, I immediately realize you are "working an angle." Your response to the Cal-State Leftist was to in essence say that you believe Saddam Hussein is the Root Cause of All Evil and that Domestic Terrorism could not possibly be suspected in this heinous crime. BWAHAHAHAHA...you are far too wise to believe that and I see Right thru your feigned naivete!!!
However, for the purpose of this e-mail, I will play along just a bit. Sure, it is entirely possible that Saddam Hussein and his Agents of Hatred could be responsible for the Biological Terrorism; however, IMHO, the Anthrax mailings are far more likely to be the handiwork of the anti-American Leftists who make up the Enviro-Whacko Community, including the Effete Elite who comprise the Tenured Class within our American Universities!!!
"What'choo talkin' 'bout, Willis?!" you say in yer best incredulous voice!!
Yes, my Wise FRiend, I said the Leftists in the Environmental Movement have got to be the Number One Suspects in the ongoing Domestic Terrorism Movement...please allow me explain!! You have always said that Lib'rals are the most hilarious when they are outta Power because they go absolutely crazy and yet can do no damage to this Country. Well, THE LEFT IS MOST DEFINITELY OUT OF POWER and it's driving them to measures that would have been unthinkable just six weeks ago. How do you think the Left feels when they read about Dubyuh's 89%+ Approval Ratings?! Well, on the DemocRATic Underground website, they are going absolutely NUTS!! Dick Cheney is well-advised to be making himself scarce with these deranged LeftistLoonies on the loose...THEY HATE US WITH A PASSION that they could never muster for Osama bin Laden or Saddam Hussein!!!
"But, Mudboy, you RightWing FReeperNut, (nice composite FReeperPic, BTW)" you say, once again feigning incredulity, "why would the Leftist Enviro-Whackos be mass-mailing these Anthrax spores to Tom Daschle, Tom Brokaw, and the Vast, LeftWing Medyuh Whore'd?! Are not these folks in bed with the Socialist Enviro-Whackos?!"
My response is, obviously, that The Leftists--like your buddy, the CNN/Cal-State Professor--believe they can use their Socialist Comrades in the Vast, LeftWing Medyuh Whore'd to blame those of us on the Right who are standing up valiantly against the ever-expanding, Tyrannical Federal Leviathan!! But why would we on the Right be piling onto the Left when the Left's doing a fine job of discrediting themselves? Fact is, we wouldn't...as my Friend Angelwood (you met her a few months ago) so prophetically says, "No Tear Gas Necessary...We're Conservatives!!" We know we're Right...why would we forfeit the High Ground to terrorize a few pro-Rape (yes...Juanita Broaddrick) Leftists?! We wouldn't...and any rational American will come to the same conclusion.
In closing, my FRiend, I humbly offer you my page number--AGAIN...(804-225-XXXX)--if you'd like to discuss this further on your radio show. I spent 5-10 minutes speed-dialing your 1(800)282-2882, but to no avail...I'm sure you've got another number that the important RightWingers call to get on yer show!!
Utmost FReegards...Mudboy Slim, RightWing Patriot and FReeper
Your reply:
REPLY: Just because alcohol has been around for a long time does not make it a necessity. The medical benefits of "a little wine here and there" are debatable, but the millions of deaths caused by drunk driving aren't.
I believe that alcohol gives the American people a competitive edge. For everything, there is a season, and there should be a season for relaxation to refile everything. A survey was done (and I don't have it, so don't ask) that showed that people who drink are more intelligent than those who don't. While drunk driving does kill, more would die if alcohol wasn't available to the masses. What separates us from the rest of the world is partially our ability to reason things through better than the rest of the world. As long as we can outsmart the enemy, we can be safe from the enemy. If no one drank there would be fewer drunk driving deaths but more deaths and murders due to stress and then there's the threat of losing our competitive edge with the result being foreign captivity which would kill millions like in WW2. I know you're not going to agree with me on this point but luckily we all have a vote and you're not king. That's the trouble with liberals, they see death by guns and so they say "get rid of guns" without seeing the resultant criminal and government rampage that would follow. Liberals see drunk driving deaths and say "get rid of beer" and they can't see the consequences of a stressed out population and a dumber society. Liberals have tunnel vision, they can't see anything but what directly in front of them.
If you raise the tax on alcohol and tobacco, you'll have fewer people purchasing beer and cigs, and by extension, you'll have fewer drunk driving deaths, lung cancer deaths, and emphysema deaths.
And more murder due to stress will outnumber the deaths you were trying to prevent in the first place not to mention the strokes and heart disease from a non-alcoholic diet.
It works to save lives. OTOH, raising taxes on non-luxury items like milk, bread, and what have you beyond the local sales tax is gratuitous and could cause the opposite effect.
Just as I thought, you liberals consider everthing but bread and milk luxury items. That gives you the moral initiative to steal from the poor like you've been doing for 70+ years.
If you're a responsible drinker and you want your beer, fine, then pay for it. Frankly, your inconvenience at having to pay an extra buck for a six pack is a lot less important to me than the lives the tax will save.
But it's thievery. It's liberal thievery from the poor. Liberals say that they are for the poor but they're not, the poor are slaves to the liberals dues to their extremely high "sin" taxes. I don't want some liberal telling me what is a sin and what is not when they allow their president to rape, murder, and sexually harass women and kill children (abortion) just so they don't have to go through the trouble of raising them or even give them up for adoption.
It doesn't matter to me...I was just trying to "get a room" for this discussion at Mud's request. Oh well, as long as we keep it to one topic at a time it shouldn't get too bad.
I believe that alcohol gives the American people a competitive edge. For everything, there is a season, and there should be a season for relaxation to refile everything.
If your argument is that alcohol makes people less stressful, you should keep in mind that there are other ways for people to relax. You can work out, you can watch TV, you can go to a NASCAR race, you can make love with your spouse, you can call a friend, you can take a nap. Trust me, there is no shortage of pleasant diversions we can undertake. Alcohol is not the be-all and end-all of relaxation, so raising the tax on alcohol does not mean you're going to be more stressful. Besides, if alcohol were the only outlet you had for relaxing, then it's a good bet you're an alcoholic, and you probably have more serious problems than paying a little extra tax for your Budweiser.
A survey was done (and I don't have it, so don't ask) that showed that people who drink are more intelligent than those who don't.
Sorry, but I would have to see that survey to accept that premise. If, like you've said, poor people are more prone to drink, and poor people are generally not as well educated as middle-class and upper-class people, it doesn't add up.
While drunk driving does kill, more would die if alcohol wasn't available to the masses.
This is another specious claim that needs evidence to back it up. Were there any studies done that support this theory?
What separates us from the rest of the world is partially our ability to reason things through better than the rest of the world. As long as we can outsmart the enemy, we can be safe from the enemy.
Are you trying to say that alcohol gives us an edge in intelligence? Didn't you know that alcohol kills brain cells?
If no one drank there would be fewer drunk driving deaths but more deaths and murders due to stress and then there's the threat of losing our competitive edge with the result being foreign captivity which would kill millions like in WW2.
Whoa there, cowboy...never mind the fact that you don't need alcohol to de-stress, as I stated earlier; now you're saying that if our soldiers are a little bit on edge, they'll get captured and/or killed by the millions? If you're on the battlefield, you're going to be stressed anyway at the prospect of the enemy blowing your brains out! That's a little higher on a soldier's priority list than worrying about not getting a beer last night.
I know you're not going to agree with me on this point but luckily we all have a vote and you're not king.
Nope, my vote cancels out yours.
That's the trouble with liberals, they see death by guns and so they say "get rid of guns" without seeing the resultant criminal and government rampage that would follow. Liberals see drunk driving deaths and say "get rid of beer" and they can't see the consequences of a stressed out population and a dumber society.
I'm not going to get into a debate on gun control, but I'm not saying "get rid of beer". I'm saying put a luxury tax on beer -- big difference. We tried prohibition before and had to repeal it.
And more murder due to stress will outnumber the deaths you were trying to prevent in the first place not to mention the strokes and heart disease from a non-alcoholic diet.
The studies have indicated that alcohol may decrease your risk of a stroke. Not drinking alcohol does not raise your chances for a stroke, as you seem to indicate.
Just as I thought, you liberals consider everthing but bread and milk luxury items. That gives you the moral initiative to steal from the poor like you've been doing for 70+ years.
No, I was giving just a couple of examples of staples. Don't put words into my mouth.
But it's thievery. It's liberal thievery from the poor. Liberals say that they are for the poor but they're not, the poor are slaves to the liberals dues to their extremely high "sin" taxes.
Actually, if you want to talk about thievery from the poor, we can talk about how Republicans have cut taxes across the board for the rich but virtually ignored the poor. A poor person who doesn't drink is no "slave" to any luxury tax, but a poor person who has to pay a disproportionate amount of taxes is.
Too bad, it's a relatively free country and alcoholic beverages are the preferred ralaxative. The bible says to drink for health and so you can't convince me you know better than the bible.
Alcohol is not the be-all and end-all of relaxation, so raising the tax on alcohol does not mean you're going to be more stressful.
Alcoholic beverages are the preferred realaxative. Majority rules on this subject. The fact that you liberals use the people's preference to steal from the poor proves how dispicible you are.
Besides, if alcohol were the only outlet you had for relaxing, then it's a good bet you're an alcoholic, and you probably have more serious problems than paying a little extra tax for your Budweiser.
Another typical liberal response. Everyone who does anything is automatically addicted to that thing. Liberals are addicted to the filthy lucre they recieve from taxing the hell out of the poor.
Sorry, but I would have to see that survey to accept that premise.
It doesn't matter if you believe me or not. Alcohol is not going to be outlawed. You wanted to discuss this subject, I gave you the reason I believe what I do and it doesn't matter to me what you believe because the fact that you are a liberal already proves you are unable to reason things out.
If, like you've said, poor people are more prone to drink, and poor people are generally not as well educated as middle-class and upper-class people, it doesn't add up.
You're lying, I didn't say the poor were more prone to drink but that a greater proportion of their pay is taken when you liberals tax the hell out of staples of the American diet.
This is another specious claim that needs evidence to back it up.
No it doesn't. I believe what I believe. If you don't agree with me,I don't give a damn because you're an idiot liberal anyway.
Were there any studies done that support this theory?
I don't know. The universities are run by lying liberals anyway so even if there was, the results could be taken with a grain of salt.
Are you trying to say that alcohol gives us an edge in intelligence?
Yes.
Didn't you know that alcohol kills brain cells?
The alcohol molecule takes the place of a water molecule in the nueral connectors in the brain, lessening the connector's efficiency, that's what make you feel drunk. Later the water molecule comes to replace the alcohol molecule with time. I believe the belief that alcohol kills brain cells is myth. I believe that alcohol helps intelligence by cleaning up the vessels that run throughout the brain. Again, I don't care if you believe me or not, that's what I believe and I've never seen anything to suggest I'm wrong.
Whoa there, cowboy...never mind the fact that you don't need alcohol to de-stress, as I stated earlier;...
You don't but you're not taking it away from me.
...now you're saying that if our soldiers are a little bit on edge, they'll get captured and/or killed by the millions?
No, I'm saying that alcohol improves the intellegence of people that drink which gives us a competitive advantage or at least keeps us even with many countries of the world.
If you're on the battlefield, you're going to be stressed anyway at the prospect of the enemy blowing your brains out! That's a little higher on a soldier's priority list than worrying about not getting a beer last night.
I wasn't talking about the individual soldier.
Nope, my vote cancels out yours.
And mine yours.
I'm not going to get into a debate on gun control, but I'm not saying "get rid of beer". I'm saying put a luxury tax on beer -- big difference.
Yes, you're trying to tell people how to live and if they don't do as you say, they have to pay you tribute. You people are thieves.
We tried prohibition before and had to repeal it.
Exactly. So you liberals just steal from the poor instead of let people live the way they want.
The studies have indicated that alcohol may decrease your risk of a stroke. Not drinking alcohol does not raise your chances for a stroke, as you seem to indicate.
You just contradicted yourself. The French drink every day. They have the lowest cases of Strokes and Heart disease. Read it and weep.
No, I was giving just a couple of examples of staples. Don't put words into my mouth.
Thieves. You people are thieves.
Actually, if you want to talk about thievery from the poor, we can talk about how Republicans have cut taxes across the board for the rich but virtually ignored the poor.
As I said before cutting taxes across the board increases opportunities for the poor. You liberals aren't smart enough to see a couple steps ahead.
A poor person who doesn't drink is no "slave" to any luxury tax, but a poor person who has to pay a disproportionate amount of taxes is.
Exactly. Most people drink. Liberals use this fact to steal from the poor to fund their high places. Thieves. You people are dispicible thieves.
No wonder NOBODY takes you the least bit seriously, TPW...you are a lyin' Leftist BEECH!!
"From William Blum, Progressive mag, 1998"
SHEEEEEEEEESH, you Lib'ral TWIT, consider the krap yer reading when you try to figger out how come you are so WARPED, you ugly COW!! I'll be up at the pro-America Rally in DeeCee...but I'll stop by and see if I can pick you out amongst the Anti-America, Anti-FReedom, Anti-Justice Crowd at the other Rally. Bring yer hubby...ohhh, I forgot, yer too good fer everyone, aren't you?! No Hubby fer That Poppins Woman...right?! Well, bring yer significant other so you won't feel intimidated by the Intellectual Bashing you are certain to endure when I--FINALLY--see you putting your physical presence behind your Hateful Words.
Enjoy yer day, Lefty Disruptor...MUD
BTW...KQQL, how 'bouts you dropping by so I can see that Earley'01 BumperSticker on yer Yugo?
What MOOOOOO-larkey, CowWomyn...Rush's been linking Iraq to the Anthrax Terrorism since almost Day One!! It's yer Leftist Buddies in the Lamestream Medyuh who are shying away from the facts so it won't call attention to yer LeftistButtBoyKing, the EX-Rapist-in-Chief, who allowed Hussein to drop kick our inspectors 'cuz the polls said Americans wouldn't support an all-out Fight against Terrorism!! You, ma'am, are as IGNORANT as you is UGLY!!
My sympathies go out to you, poor child...MUD
LOL...I found myself doing the same thing via FReepMail a coupla days ago. It's just sooo frustrating when you try to help these braindead liberals to cut through the fog and they keep regurgitating the same nonsense over and over and over. I mean, dwbh still believes Clinton was the Second Coming of the ChristChild and cannot wait until Hillary! saves us from the Evil of Dubyuh in '04!!
The Publik Skewls really did a number on young Sam here, and it's up to us to help him, IMHO.
FReegards...Steve
BTW...did you see where the #3 Car's coming outta retirement next season, and Junior's gonna be at the wheel?!! IMHO, the #3 Car should be permanently retired, but if it does get back on the track, only Dale, Jr. should be driving.
Thanks fer the explanation...MUD
FReegards...MUD
BTW...did you see where the #3 Car's coming outta retirement next season, and Junior's gonna be at the wheel?!! IMHO, the #3 Car should be permanently retired, but if it does get back on the track, only Dale, Jr. should be driving.
Yeah, he's going to run a couple of Busch races. Daytona, even! I'm undecided on the number retirement thing. At least a long break is definitely in order, though.
Just between me and you I hope I'm right, I read that several years ago in a science magazine. At the time it made me feel better because I really liked to party then. Still do, but I think about my dignity (as Bob Seger says) nowadays a little more.
It'll never happen...Lib'ralism Died on 9/11/01!! Sure, you gotta few of them still kickin' up their heels, but it's sorta like when you pull the legs off a DaddyLonglegs and it keeps twitchin'...LEFT'S ALREADY DEAD, they just don't know it yet!!
LOL...MUD
Someday, I'll have to start a thread on my BuzzMaintenance Philosophy...but here's a Primer. When I was younger, I used to believe that if a 6-pack made me feel sooo good, a 12-pack would make me feel twice as good and finishin' off a case would make me Irresistable to the Fairer Sex. I learned otherwise. Shots, too.
HourOfPower FReegards...MUD
Apparently, this sort of language is what compelled you to apologize. IMHO, you could have said the same thing, but referred to the "you people" as the Effete Elite, thereby allowing Sam the opportunity to agree with you that the Effete Elite were, in fact, "The Bad Guys." By calling dwbh one of the despicable thieves, you lose the Moral HighGround, unless he specifically says he is in favor of Taxing the Poor with so-called SinTaxes.
I have enjoyed y'all's discussion, though, and hope you continue bumping this thread.
FReegards...MUD
RONALD REAGAN SOLD ANTHRAX AND MARBURG AND BOTULLISM TO HIS KISSIN' BUDDY SADDAM HUSSEIN.
Do try to present some argument against the facts detailed in the above listed reports, instead of just the scorned-woman diatribe you've been posting. We know you're hurt to find out Ronnie was kissin' Saddam while he was courtin' you. But suck it up. Stiff upper lip, old man.
Anyhoo, shouldn't you be concentrating on squeaking out a victory for Earley? I've phoned your boss, Jim Gilmore, and he's got the switch all ready to cane your hiney for not focusing!
Focus, man ... focus!
Me thinks thou doth protest too much.
That's why they call them crushes. If they were easy, they'd call them something else. -- Paul Dooley as Jim Baker in Sixteen Candles
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.