|
|
Cheney's new fishing companion
Scott Seidman wrote:
rw wrote in news:puednU_mo4uiF5 : Until there's either a veto-proof Democratic majority in the Senate and/or a Democrat in the White House, they are essentially powerless to change the disastrous course the Bush administration and his party have set us on. That's the way the system works, and God help us if something doesn't change. I call bull****. If the Dems had guts, they'd stop Bush. It might take a super majority to overide a veto, but it still takes a simple majority to pass a bill. The Dems have been caving far too easily. Suppose the House passes your great bill with a simple majority. The Senate either never votes because it can't get past a filibuster; or, if by some miracle, a few Senate Republicans have the guts to vote for the bill and vote for cloture, it won't survive a Presidential veto. Be it stem cell research, be it anti-torture, be it SCHIP, or whatever is your hot-button issue. That's the way the system works without a clear majority and a lock on power. Which, by the way, the Republicans had for six years, and look at the mess they've gotten us into. Maybe the Dems could have cut off war funding. It's not clear. I think Bushco would have defied them and we'd be in the middle of a Constitutional crisis. But be that as it may, it would have been irresponsible, IMO. That's too blunt an instrument to get us out of this trap Bush and Cheney have blundered us into. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Cheney's new fishing companion
"rw" wrote in message m... Scott Seidman wrote: rw wrote in news:puednU_mo4uiF5 : Until there's either a veto-proof Democratic majority in the Senate and/or a Democrat in the White House, they are essentially powerless to change the disastrous course the Bush administration and his party have set us on. That's the way the system works, and God help us if something doesn't change. I call bull****. If the Dems had guts, they'd stop Bush. It might take a super majority to overide a veto, but it still takes a simple majority to pass a bill. The Dems have been caving far too easily. Suppose the House passes your great bill with a simple majority. The Senate either never votes because it can't get past a filibuster; or, if by some miracle, a few Senate Republicans have the guts to vote for the bill and vote for cloture, it won't survive a Presidential veto. Be it stem cell research, be it anti-torture, be it SCHIP, or whatever is your hot-button issue. That's the way the system works without a clear majority and a lock on power. Which, by the way, the Republicans had for six years, and look at the mess they've gotten us into. Maybe the Dems could have cut off war funding. It's not clear. I think Bushco would have defied them and we'd be in the middle of a Constitutional crisis. But be that as it may, it would have been irresponsible, IMO. That's too blunt an instrument to get us out of this trap Bush and Cheney have blundered us into. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. BS! they are both feeding at the trough. They overspent for how many years when they had a Democrat Supermajority? Only reason Clinton somewhat balanced the budget, is revenues increased from the dot.bomb debacle faster than they could spend them. How much did spending go up during all those Clinton years? Including the first 2 years. It was a Democrat controlled Congress that put in "Baseline Budgeting" that built in a yearly 13% increase. |
Cheney's new fishing companion
"rw" wrote in message m... Scott Seidman wrote: rw wrote in news:puednU_mo4uiF5 : Until there's either a veto-proof Democratic majority in the Senate and/or a Democrat in the White House, they are essentially powerless to change the disastrous course the Bush administration and his party have set us on. That's the way the system works, and God help us if something doesn't change. I call bull****. If the Dems had guts, they'd stop Bush. It might take a super majority to overide a veto, but it still takes a simple majority to pass a bill. The Dems have been caving far too easily. Suppose the House passes your great bill with a simple majority. The Senate either never votes because it can't get past a filibuster; or, if by some miracle, a few Senate Republicans have the guts to vote for the bill and vote for cloture, it won't survive a Presidential veto. Be it stem cell research, be it anti-torture, be it SCHIP, or whatever is your hot-button issue. That's the way the system works without a clear majority and a lock on power. Which, by the way, the Republicans had for six years, and look at the mess they've gotten us into. Maybe the Dems could have cut off war funding. It's not clear. I think Bushco would have defied them and we'd be in the middle of a Constitutional crisis. But be that as it may, it would have been irresponsible, IMO. That's too blunt an instrument to get us out of this trap Bush and Cheney have blundered us into. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. Maybe we should listen to Iococca. Did not run it though Snopes but sounds good. Remember Lee Iacocca, the man who rescued Chrysler Corporation from it's death throes? He has a new book, and here are some excerpts. Lee Iacocca Says: 'Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage? We should be screaming bloody murder. We've got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, 'Stay the course' Stay the course? You've got to be kidding. This isAmerica, not the damned 'Titanic'. I'll give you a sound bite: 'Throw all the bums out!' You might think I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore. The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs. While we're fiddling inIraq, theMiddle Eastis burning and nobody seems to know what to do. And the press is waving 'pom -poms' instead of asking hard questions. That's not the promise of the 'America' my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for. I've had enough. How about you? I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have. The Biggest 'C' is Crisis ! Leaders are made, not born. Leadership is forged in times of crisis. It's easy to sit there with your feet up on the desk and talk theory. Or send someone else's kids off to war when you'v e never seen a battlefield yourself. It's another thing to lead when your world comes tumbling down. OnSeptember 11, 2001, we needed a strong leader more than any other time in our history. We needed a steady hand to guide us out of the ashes. A Hell of a Mess So here's where we stand. We're immersed in a bloody war with no plan for winning and no plan for leaving. We're running the biggest deficit in the history of the country. We're losing the manufacturing edge toAsia, while our once-great companies are getting slaughtered by health care costs. Gas prices are skyrocketing, and nobody in power has a coherent energy policy. Our schools are in trouble. Our borders are like sieves. The middle class is being squeezed every which way These are times that cry out for leadership. But when you look around, you've got to ask: 'Where have all the leaders gone?'&nb sp; Where are the curious, creative communicators? Where are the people of character, courage, conviction, omnipotence, and common sense? I may be a sucker for alliteration, but I think you get the point. Name me a leader who has a better idea for homeland security than making us take off our shoes in airports and throw away our shampoo? We've spent billions of dollars building a huge new bureaucracy, and all we know how to do is react to things that have already happened. Name me one leader who emerged from the crisis of Hurricane Katrina. Congress has yet to spend a single day evaluating the response to the hurricane, or demanding accountability for the decisions that were made in the crucial hours after the storm. Everyone's hunkering down, fingers crossed, hoping it doesn't happen again. Now, that's just crazy. Storms happen. Deal with it. Make a plan. F igure out what you're going to do the next time. Name me an industry leader who is thinking creatively about how we can restore our competitive edge in manufacturing. Who would have believed that there could ever be a time when 'The Big Three' referred to Japanese car companies? How did this happen, and more important, what are we going to do about it? Name me a government leader who can articulate a plan for paying down the debit, or solving the energy crisis, or managing the health care problem. The silence is deafening. But these are the crises that are eating away at our cou ntry and milking the middle class dry. I have news for the gang in Congress. We didn't elect you to sit on your asses and do nothing and remain silent while our democracy is being hijacked and our greatness is being replaced with mediocrity. What is everybody so afraid of? That some& nbsp; bonehead on Fox News will call them a name? Give me a break. Why don't you guys show some spine for a change? Had Enough? Hey, I'm not trying to be the voice of gloom and doom here. I'm trying to light a fire. I'm speaking out because I have hope I believe in America. In my lifetime I've had the privilege of living through some of America's greatest moments. I've also experienced some of our worst crises: the 'Great Depression', 'World War II', the 'Korean War', the 'Kennedy Assassination', the 'Vietnam War', the 1970's oil crisis, and the struggles of recent years culminating with 9/11. If I've learned one thing, it's this: 'You don't get anywhere by standing on the sidelines waiting for somebody else to take action. Whether it's building a better car or building a better future for our children, we all have a role to play. That's the challenge I'm ra ising in this book. It's a call to 'Action' for people who, like me, believe in America . It's not too late, but it's getting pretty close; So let's shake off the crap and go to work. Let's tell 'em all we've had 'enough.' |
Cheney's new fishing companion
On 13-Apr-2008, "Calif Bill" wrote: Lets look at the last year. Democrat controlled Congress. Inflation has soared, unemployment has increased, oil has skyrocketed, spending has increased. Vote both parties incumbents out! I agree But the problem goes fare deeper than you can really imagine - Who controls the world economies? In each country A few families here and there but the oligarchy is another story for another day Forget Republicrats One way that I differ from you is that once we vote the incumbents out we should try them for war crimes and war profiteering The deaths of 4200 American boys and countless other humans - mainly Iraqis For what? only Money - More money for ever greedy war profiteers and low end criminals. And an erosion of our civil liberties and a foreign debt that has broken all records Bush and Cheney have pocketed a lot of money And so have their friends. What can we do? Any ideas What is even worse is that Cheney is laughing at the US and World public Why should Bush reduce troops or pull them out of Iraq For every soldier we outfit he must see some $$ For every round fired he probably gets a cut No bid Haliburton Contracts No bid contract security forces and private armies Its a crazy world .. Ainna. Fred |
Cheney's new fishing companion
Calif Bill wrote:
BS! they are both feeding at the trough. They overspent for how many years when they had a Democrat Supermajority? Only reason Clinton somewhat balanced the budget, is revenues increased from the dot.bomb debacle faster than they could spend them. Clinton didn't "somewhat balance the budget." He balanced the budget. In fact, he did more. At the end of his administration we were running a fat surplus -- so much so that Alan Greenspan thought our biggest problem would be paying own the national debt too fast! (Look it up.) When Clinton entered office in 1992 with a Democratic majority in Congress he raised taxes, rather modestly, and mostly on upper-income people. The Republicans were all gloom and doom -- it would lead to a recession! Instead, it restored the faith of the financial markets that the US could actually meet its obligations, and we entered a period of enormous, unprecedented economic growth. That was then. This is now. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Cheney's new fishing companion
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 01:45:39 GMT, wrote:
What can we do? Any ideas Yeah. Smoke a joint, take two ecstacy pills, and call me in the morning. Dr. Dave |
Cheney's new fishing companion
|
Cheney's new fishing companion
"rw" wrote in message m... Calif Bill wrote: BS! they are both feeding at the trough. They overspent for how many years when they had a Democrat Supermajority? Only reason Clinton somewhat balanced the budget, is revenues increased from the dot.bomb debacle faster than they could spend them. Clinton didn't "somewhat balance the budget." He balanced the budget. In fact, he did more. At the end of his administration we were running a fat surplus -- so much so that Alan Greenspan thought our biggest problem would be paying own the national debt too fast! (Look it up.) When Clinton entered office in 1992 with a Democratic majority in Congress he raised taxes, rather modestly, and mostly on upper-income people. The Republicans were all gloom and doom -- it would lead to a recession! Instead, it restored the faith of the financial markets that the US could actually meet its obligations, and we entered a period of enormous, unprecedented economic growth. That was then. This is now. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. Clinton even admitted he raised taxes too much. He inherited an economic growth cycle, just as Bush inherited a down turning economic cycle. The budget was never balance. It was projected to be balanced, but look at the national debt for all his years. It did not decrease. And the inflow of money was huge! All those stock options that were cashed in gave the Federal government about 36.5% of each option. 35% tax and 1.5% Medicare. The California government got about 14% of all the Calif generated options. Plus the Newt Contract with America cut Clinton's and A DEMOCRAT CONTROL CONGRESS's overspending. All this added up to nirvana for the party in charge of the Executive Branch. Plus Clinton was a master of the PR world. When the government partly shut down in the fight against overspending, it stuck all the blame on the Republicans. Clinton was a lucky SOB. Greenspan screwed up in letting the 'unbridled enthusiasm' run rampant and the massive Ponzi scheme of the IPO's and margin's to run rampant. The "Contract with America' was one of the last good things that happened to the US. Too bad it did not last. |
Cheney's new fishing companion
On Apr 13, 6:08*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"rw" wrote in message m... Scott Seidman wrote: rw wrote in news:puednU_mo4uiF5 : Until there's either a veto-proof Democratic majority in the Senate and/or a Democrat in the White House, they are essentially powerless to change the disastrous course the Bush administration and his party have set us on. That's the way the system works, and God help us if something doesn't change. I call bull****. *If the Dems had guts, they'd stop Bush. *It might take a super majority to overide a veto, but it still takes a simple majority to pass a bill. *The Dems have been caving far too easily. Suppose the House passes your great bill with a simple majority. The Senate either never votes because it can't get past a filibuster; or, if by some miracle, a few Senate Republicans have the guts to vote for the bill and vote for cloture, it won't survive a Presidential veto. Be it stem cell research, be it anti-torture, be it SCHIP, or whatever is your hot-button issue. That's the way the system works without a clear majority and a lock on power. Which, by the way, the Republicans had for six years, and look at the mess they've gotten us into. Maybe the Dems could have cut off war funding. It's not clear. I think Bushco would have defied them and we'd be in the middle of a Constitutional crisis. But be that as it may, it would have been irresponsible, IMO. That's too blunt an instrument to get us out of this trap Bush and Cheney have blundered us into. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. BS! they are both feeding at the trough. *They overspent for how many years when they had a Democrat Supermajority? *Only reason Clinton somewhat balanced the budget, is revenues increased from the dot.bomb debacle faster than they could spend them. *How much did spending go up during all those Clinton years? *Including the first 2 years. *It was a Democrat controlled Congress that put in "Baseline Budgeting" that built in a yearly 13% increase.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - This must be entertaining for you, pretending the last 6+ years just didn't happen. Kinda-like playing "Fuher Bunker," sending out dispatches to non-existant divisions. Fun times, take a riduculous stance and then defend it to ehaustion. Reminds me of a "catch and release" thread. Bottom line is that most sensible people are saddened for what's happened to our country, and realize that facing the pain ahead requires adult grade honesty if we are to fix the mess and move forward. Dave Dave |
Cheney's new fishing companion
Calif Bill wrote:
Clinton even admitted he raised taxes too much. He inherited an economic growth cycle, just as Bush inherited a down turning economic cycle. The budget was never balance. It was projected to be balanced, but look at the national debt for all his years. It did not decrease. And the inflow of money was huge! You're entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts. This web site shows a graph of the national debt as a percentage of the nation's annual income: http://zfacts.com/p/318.html Compare the increasing trends under Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II to the decreasing trends under Clinton. BTW, the data is from the Office of Management and Budget. That the modern-day Republicans could have a reputation as fiscal conservatives and good managers is a cosmic joke. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:06 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter