|
|
Post by Desarollo on May 6, 2003 15:37:25 GMT -5
www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/chuckwagon.htmlWhat does it mean to be right? Does a strengthened federal government fit into the conservative agenda? And are things like the Patriot Act taking away our rights as Americans and therefore anti-conservative? And arent things like the expanding Pentagon and Domestic Spy Rings fit right into what the liberals have been saying all along?
|
|
|
|
Post by Sentinel on Jul 3, 2003 10:38:31 GMT -5
Bush is not a conservative, neither is Fox News. These are neoconservatives. That is, members of the Left who call themselves conservatived.
In some regards, someone like Bush or Fox News is the worst kind of Liberal. He's the enemy who pretends to be on the Right side. Thus, he is better able to corrupt the thinking of many true conservatives.
|
|
|
|
Post by dollygal on Jul 5, 2003 21:15:36 GMT -5
Sentinal
I wouldn't have believed anything bad about GwB but now his sending troops to Liberia (and if he hasn't he will) to gain the black vote in this country is making me think.
Course he's much better than what is out there, but I'm quite disenchanted with him as most conservatives are.
Why haven't ANY of the last presidents closed off our boarders? They've had the Military which wasn't engaged and the National Guard to enforce things but because they are a cheap labor force everyone has turned the other cheek, including GWB.
I'll vote for him, but I ain't happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zhavric on Aug 20, 2003 14:49:48 GMT -5
Bush is a C student.
He's bitter. He's cynical.
He has no plan for this country beyond his own personal greed.
He's in bed with Enron.
Everything Bush Senior put into place to stop more conflict with Iraq, he tore down or ignored and pushed his own agenda.
He's using 9/11 as an excuse to swing the will of the people to seize control of Asian oil resources and eliminate our rights with the so-called patriot act. Don't believe me? Do a google search for "Gulliver's Travails" and read how a bunch of Ph.D.'s working for the Air Force wrote a fictional history up to the year 2025 in which a 2001 terrorist attack on the Olympics is used to swing the will of the people... Did I mention the report was written in 1997?
He went to war with Iraq to settle and old score and get some oil while he was at it.
The Bin Laden family and the Bush family have been in bed with one another for decades. They are both oil giants.
Bush doesn't have the guts to raise taxes and use the money to fix what's wrong (which would eventually lower other taxes and save us all money in the long run).
If there's a worse things for the country right now, I have no idea what it is.
-Zhavric
|
|
|
|
Post by garrett7855 on Aug 23, 2003 0:26:17 GMT -5
::)Oh, great  . Another tax and spend liberal. Yeah, man! You guys have been trying to cram that crud down our throats for forty years, now. It didn't work then and it doesn't work now. So, like a good magician, you try to distract attention from the the hand that steals the money. THat wasn't fair to magicians-I should have said pick-pockets. If you are so impressed by the way liberals manipulate things to draw away our attention, try this for one month-just run your personal affairs the way they run the government. And don't think for a minute that I'll waste any time being concerned when you lose your backside.  |
|
|
|
Post by USA50 on Aug 25, 2003 17:32:14 GMT -5
Hey, garrett (if that's your real name),
Aren't all governments tax-and-spend? I mean how the hell does george fly all those uniforms to Iraq? Hell, how does he get from DC to Crawford without hitch hiking? How did all them interstate highways get built?
Who subsidizes big business agriculture (especially them drug lord cigarette dudes)?
How did my 90 year old crippled since birth aunt who served her county for 40 years get food and shelter when she couldn't move on her crutches anymore?
That tax-and-spend stuff has GOT to go.
|
|
|
|
Post by Walter on Oct 3, 2003 14:12:58 GMT -5
Sentinel,
You see a part of the problem but are missing the big picture.
Bush is a centrist who has a vision but is not holding to the central principle of reduced government.
Abolition of the Dept of Education is the right (both meanings) thing to do but he's expanding it to pander to the Left.
What we need now is a rebound in the economy (it's happening as we speak) and a successful election cycle next year and, watch out. We'll be definitely on the right track.
|
|
|
|
Post by pukaman on Sept 21, 2004 10:46:18 GMT -5
"If you are so impressed by the way liberals manipulate things to draw away our attention, try this for one month-just run your personal affairs the way they run the government.
And don't think for a minute that I'll waste any time being concerned when you lose your backside."
Great idea....lets try the presidents' plan for starters......
taxes are income to the gov't.
Bush cuts taxes...increases spending....(biggest budget yet)
when I cut my income, can I realistically expect to SPEND MORE money!
NO.
I would have to borrow money to meet my monthly needs. Which would put ME in greater DEBT.
So does the Gov't.
Has to borrow from International Banks. which puts your children into debt
If I cut my income, and then spend even more money that I don't have, I go into debt even deeper.
So does the gov;t. Only I can't blame it on the "other" guy, like Bush does.
I don't have people stupid enough to believe that cutting my income, borrowing more money, and spending more will make me prosperous.
Somehow, otherwise smart people, believe that bush can cut income and increase spending, then borrow money under your name, spend what isn;t there, then send the bill to your kids...
I do wish I could run my home like bush runs the money of the country...
|
|
|
|
Post by scummybear on Sept 22, 2004 12:40:25 GMT -5
"If you are so impressed by the way liberals manipulate things to draw away our attention, try this for one month-just run your personal affairs the way they run the government. And don't think for a minute that I'll waste any time being concerned when you lose your backside." Great idea....lets try the presidents' plan for starters...... taxes are income to the gov't. Bush cuts taxes...increases spending....(biggest budget yet) when I cut my income, can I realistically expect to SPEND MORE money! NO. I would have to borrow money to meet my monthly needs. Which would put ME in greater DEBT. So does the Gov't. Has to borrow from International Banks. which puts your children into debt If I cut my income, and then spend even more money that I don't have, I go into debt even deeper. So does the gov;t. Only I can't blame it on the "other" guy, like Bush does. I don't have people stupid enough to believe that cutting my income, borrowing more money, and spending more will make me prosperous. Somehow, otherwise smart people, believe that bush can cut income and increase spending, then borrow money under your name, spend what isn;t there, then send the bill to your kids... I do wish I could run my home like bush runs the money of the country... Pukaman, You're leaving out the part about what cutting taxes accomplishes as far as the effect on the economy. People will put more money into the economy when they have more money to spend. I would agree with you that there is too much spending within the government, but a lot of that is for the war in Iraq (which we will disagree about ) but never the less, war is hell but necessary. A good portion of your tax money goes to pork-barrell projects that are either ridiculous or don't work, such as the endowment for the arts (ridiculous) or some social programs that only promote complancency and dependence. In my opinion, government has always been too big, no matter who was or is the president, but since when has tax and spend (which the last two presidents before GW are guilty of ) ever brought us out of debt? Well, I don't think that's the issue. I think that it's just another thing to blame on W. He's already responsible for the hurricanes. What's next? Hello? |
|
|
|
Post by TNRighty on Sept 24, 2004 18:04:49 GMT -5
I'd like to chime in here.
I agree, reducing INCOME and increasing spending in itself does not make any sense. However, it is possible to reduce TAXES and increase govt revenue. I'll be honest with you, Bush spends WAAAYYY too much money for my liking, but every penny spent on national defense is worth it. That's why I'm voting for him. In my humble opinion, the war on terrorism overrides every single issue facing our country today. In two years, we've spent about $200 billion on the war in Iraq, BUT that accounts for less than 10% of govt spending over that time. SO, don't go saying Bush's defense spending is driving us bankrupt. Anti-war hippie liberals will spew all sorts of crap about this war bankrupting the economy, but the REAL problem is domestic spending here at home. Bush might spend too much money at home, but he's gonna fight this war to the end.
As an aside, I can think of plenty of reasons to vote AGAINST Bush, but I can't think of one single reason under the sun to vote FOR Kerry.
|
|
|
|
Post by pukaman on Sept 24, 2004 18:30:16 GMT -5
I'd like to chime in here. " Bush might spend too much money at home, but he's gonna fight this war to the end. " OK, for the sake of arguement, lets say I agree with you completely. Just so we have understanding, will you please tell me what "fight this war to the end. " means?? The end of what, I wonder ? Untill there are no more people on the face of the Earth that disagree with bush  Or untill the Rapture, when all godly neocons get sucked up to their just rewards ? Please, just what is the "END" |
|
|
|
Post by pukaman on Sept 24, 2004 18:52:20 GMT -5
Also, in regards to spending on "defense"... you say every dime spent is worth it. OK. I agree..... So I want EVERY DIME to get the best value for my hard earned labor. Every tax paying american desrves to have their money spent HONESTLY... However, are you willing and ok with being ripped off ?? I'm not.... Talk to ANYONE who has been in the military, that will still tell the truth, about fraud and waste in both military and "contractors" It's whats called S.O.P. The truth is that YOU and your children, are being ripped off... for the profits of multi-national corporations, and their shareholders. Are you a shareholder in Bechtel, Halliburton, Raytheon,etc ? One day, Halliburton is found guilty of fraud and the next, given bigger contracts. Its right there in your newspaper.... It's always amazed me that people that scream about "social" spending, are complety comfortable, bending over and takin up the geezer by "defense" INDUSTRY... At least when you get hit, it's with a 500 dollar hammer...... Just an aside, how many elder people here love their pharmaceutical drug costs ?? Hey... Why buy Medicine for old Americans, when you can pay Haliburton to blow up "unborn fetuses" "over there". ? At least "WE" are SAFE..... Sleeping safer now, thank you... |
|
|
|
Post by scummybear on Sept 24, 2004 20:15:02 GMT -5
I refuse to believe that you're that shallow. Your favorite word seems to be "neocon" ; what about Islamofascist, barbaric murdering scumbags who kill women and children? Is that OK with you?
It's hard to have intelligent debate with you, when all you can come up with is this persistent, disturbing assertion that all was right with the world until G.W B. attacked it.
Name for me, please, how many companies do what Haliburton does, and what are there names? Should we have contracted with "Pukaman's military contracting and general BS service" instead?
Do you live in one of the volcanos over there? Someone just throw down a rock with the New York Times tied to it?
I'll tell you what the end is: The end is where we find ourselves when we refuse to change our strategy in dealing with terrorists.
Translation: The end is what occurs if Kerry is elected.
|
|
|
|
Post by brian on Oct 7, 2004 16:14:05 GMT -5
Plenty of corporations do what Halliburton does. It's despicable. What makes Halliburton worse is that they have someone in the White House on the payroll.
• $40 million in Halliburton stock options
• $2 million from Halliburton in deferred compensation as Vice President
____________________________
Cheney’s office coordinated Halliburton’s no-bid rebuilding contracts in Iraq worth $7 billion.
In March 2003, the Pentagon awarded a subsidiary of Halliburton a no-bid contract worth $7 billion to help rebuild Iraqi oil fields. According to court documents obtained by Time Magazine, an internal Pentagon e-mail said “action” on the contract was “coordinated” with the Vice President’s office. (Time, 5/30/04; LA Times, 5/7/03; WP, 2/10/04, 6/14/04). However, when reporters found out about Cheney’s involvement, he refused to comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on Oct 7, 2004 16:19:57 GMT -5
Halliburton got the contract for the same reason they got the contract DURING CLINTON'S war. Because they are the only ones that can do the job. They already had people in Iraq! Cheney sold all his stock. He would be getting the same amount in deferred wages whether they had that contract or not. That was set up when he left the company.
|
|
. Another tax and spend liberal. Yeah, man! You guys have been trying to cram that crud down our throats for forty years, now. It didn't work then and it doesn't work now. 
