"scrape at mindspring dot com" <scrape@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:q32hgvgtp7pp0tj3drcit7h7jqfo9007qn@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 19:41:48 GMT, "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote:
>
> >Why is all this bollocks so political in the US?

>
> Because, on one hand, you have a political party that has been
> somewhat neutered in the last couple of years that basically believes
> the way to salvation is to triple the tax on everything. And on the
> other hand you have another political party that believes (to a
> degree) that individual freedoms are more important than whatever
> Boxer, Feinstein, Pelosi and Hillary (new Gang of Four?) have to say.
>
> >Petrol is $5 a gallon here in the UK and very few people care what you
> >drive.

>
> That truly sucks. You ought to do something about it.
>


i love to watch morons rewrite history.


 

"John Hinckley" <Aiming@atBush.com> wrote in message
news:1j%Na.2138$7e.834@fed1read07...
>
> "Bud Keith" <budk101@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:D5%Na.20811$Ix2.10402@rwcrnsc54...
> >
> > "John Hinckley" <Aiming@atBush.com> wrote in message
> > news:dMZNa.2119$7e.1964@fed1read07...
> > >
> > > "Educated Republican"
> > >
> > > oxymoron - heavy on the moron

> >
> > Tell me bright eyes how many more republicans are on the welfare roles

due
> > to lack of education, then democrats.
> > It was a democrat that designed the palm beach ballot in 2000 and it was
> > democrats who could not figure out what it said, a great testimonial to
> > democratic intellectual abilities.

>
>
> You're wrong on all counts as usual. However, this is not the proper forum

for
> testicularly deprived chickenhawks like you to pound their chests.....
>


I know that facts aren't a big influencer here, but it is a point of public
record that the palm beach ballot was designed, supervised and approved by
that counties controling party. Which was the Democrats. So he can't be
"wrong on all counts."



--
That's the kind of woolly-headed, liberal thinking that leads to being
eaten.


 

"Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote in message
news:HO%Na.75933$%L.66781@news-lhr.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Papa Smurf wrote:
> > "Bud Keith" <budk101@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:D5%Na.20811$Ix2.10402@rwcrnsc54...
> >>
> >> "John Hinckley" <Aiming@atBush.com> wrote in message
> >> news:dMZNa.2119$7e.1964@fed1read07...
> >>>
> >>> "Educated Republican"
> >>>
> >>> oxymoron - heavy on the moron
> >>
> >> Tell me bright eyes how many more republicans are on the welfare
> >> roles due to lack of education, then democrats.

> >
> > You know, that might be an interesting study. Must be embarrasing to
> > the Dems or we would have heard that one already in the Nighty News.
> > I'd be inertested to know the stats on Unemployed Dems vs Reps, as
> > well as how long they stay unemployed before finding work.
> >
> > ---
> > Suddenly, a small amount of Republicans start searching the web and a
> > small amount of Democrats apply for government grants...

>
> Forgive my lack of knowledge of US political parties as I am an

Englishman -
> I take it the democrats are the very right wing party and the republicans
> are the even more right wing party?


If viewed from a socialistic or communistic vantage point that is probably a
correct statement.

At it's simplest terms, Republicans believe in personal responsiblity, and
Democrats believe in Governmental responsiblity for the citizen.



--
That's the kind of woolly-headed, liberal thinking that leads to being
eaten.


 

"scrape at mindspring dot com" <scrape@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:cc3hgvorkr8p7ob3l20lql2js2nr6m199j@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 20:40:07 GMT, "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote:
>
> >Forgive my lack of knowledge of US political parties as I am an

Englishman -
> >I take it the democrats are the very right wing party and the republicans
> >are the even more right wing party?

>
> Nope. You've got it wrong. The Democrats are the socialists and the
> Republicans are the liberals.


From what vantage point are you viewing? Libertarian?


 
"Papa Smurf" <fakeaddress@Iwantnospam.crap> wrote in message
news:2I0Oa.31284$U23.3459@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
> At it's simplest terms, Republicans believe in personal responsiblity, and
> Democrats believe in Governmental responsiblity for the citizen.


The Republicans want to be everyone's parent and tell them what
they can and can not do. The Democrats are the rebellious
teenagers who want an ever increasing allowance.


 
> Forgive my lack of knowledge of US political parties as I am an
> Englishman - I take it the democrats are the very right wing party
> and the republicans are the even more right wing party?
> Julian.


Since I'm neither one maybe I can answer your question in a more
real world kinda way. :)

Talking and doing are two different things, ok?

Democrats talk and do what's popular with the public which of course
is a lot of wishful thinking. "wish/hope/prey in one hand and ****
in the other and see which one fills up first" -Mom ...so of course
it doesn't work.

Repulicans talk cutting government spending (firing bureaucrats) but
never do. R's talk fiscal responsibility but never do. R's talk
increasing production by getting gov't off the backs of the -real-
producers like mining, manufacturing and agriculture but never do.

R's sound more reliegious and D sound more the other way.

D's tend to be more socialist since that's what's popular and more
"idealistic" and just plain sounds better to the city dweller.

R's have a big problem with, a bunch of them really are D's, but
too friggin religious to be D's which is more "communist or red"
sometimes refered to as pink. ;)

D's tend to be on the homos side etc but only because they can be
exploited by appearing to "protect" them from the R's.
(like it friggin matters to anyone except a religious zealot)

D's are more for women and the weak since they sell gov't spending
by talking more about "helping, nurturing and wet nursing" which of
course mostly just helps the bureaucrats with more make-work
projects that don't do any of those things.

R's talk like they are against that!
But are crooked in that they do the same friggin thing. They
tend to help military and policing bureaucrats more than the
other bureaucrats tho.

D's are more "honest loving caring" but are selling you ****.

The R's are liars since they -talk- a better plan but don't intend
to follow up. They know they can't for one! The gov't is a giant
steam roller and we, all together, are nothing but a pile of ants.
And they know it, so they change directions and get what they can
out of it. Crooked.

Alan Greenspan is a libertarian/Cato-man and -the- best guy we could
possibly hope for in that position. He is why we haven't collapsed
economically and taken everyone else with us. But still no one is
-able- to do what he says to do because of the size and momentum of
the steamroller. But he has been able to curtail a few things that
would have been a disaster. One example comes to mind that oughta
stirthe****... he doesn't reccomend an across the board tax cut.

Beacuse gov't spending won't be cut at the same time and just make a
bigger mess. "We can't spend our way to prosarity" -Alan Greenspan
"...however we can produce our way to prosperity" -Alan Greespan

"cut capitol gains tax and take some of the burden off of the -real-
producers and we'll produce our way to prosperity" -AG ...sorta! ;)

It's just really a matter of getting the gov't workers to quit doing
what they are doing and switch to producing wealth. For every
worker in production they have like one bureaucrat and two private
service providers and one gov't contract worker on their back.

Pretty tough to function with all that huh? Pretty easy to
understand why the US economy is in a slump and not going to pull
out anytime soon, when you picture the miners, assembly line
workers/egineers and farmers trying to do their work with all those
on their back asking for a piece of their product for -free-.

Alvin in AZ, libertarian and 100% atheist
ps- for libertarians the D's and R's are about the same thing in
the end, but in the meantime sound different, 1 party suystem
pps- fellow libertarians... what did I leave out? :)
 
Glad to see some things never change and everyone is running to the cliff
like lemmings ready to leap into the gotcha sea.

Geez, it's not even like it was a subtle troll.

--
Mike G.
Heirloom Woods
www.heirloom-woods.net
"Educated Republican" <educated_republican@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:616e1c.0307060659.1bc69c85@posting.google.com...
> I love my V-10 sittin way up high. The power is unimagined and I feel
> heroic singing to Lee Greenwood. I like to push the guy ahead in the
> liberal econobox. Even more when I have my headlights on blinding his
> mirrors! God made this country great so we could have power on demand
> because its all about us. God told Rush that only HE can change
> warming so my little output don't matter. If the enviros ban big
> motors we will be robbed of our power rights so write to your
> repesentatives or just crush the next Subaru you see!
>
> Steve



 


--
That's the kind of woolly-headed, liberal thinking that leads to being
eaten.
"Mark Jones" <spam@block.com> wrote in message
news:bea5if$ea8$1@slb9.atl.mindspring.net...
> "Papa Smurf" <fakeaddress@Iwantnospam.crap> wrote in message
> news:2I0Oa.31284$U23.3459@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
> > At it's simplest terms, Republicans believe in personal responsiblity,

and
> > Democrats believe in Governmental responsiblity for the citizen.

>
> The Republicans want to be everyone's parent and tell them what
> they can and can not do. The Democrats are the rebellious
> teenagers who want an ever increasing allowance.


Funny, biggest thing I want from government is for it to stay mostly out of
my way. Most of the restrictions I see placed on my choices, I see as placed
there by the Democrats.
On the other hand, I do appreciate the Dems for largely hampering the
Republicans will to enforce their moral beliefs on me.

Garth
Agnostic Fiscal Conservative


 
alvinj@XX.com wrote:
>> Forgive my lack of knowledge of US political parties as I am an
>> Englishman - I take it the democrats are the very right wing party
>> and the republicans are the even more right wing party?
>> Julian.

>
> Since I'm neither one maybe I can answer your question in a more
> real world kinda way. :)
>
> Talking and doing are two different things, ok?
>
> Democrats talk and do what's popular with the public which of course
> is a lot of wishful thinking. "wish/hope/prey in one hand and ****
> in the other and see which one fills up first" -Mom ...so of course
> it doesn't work.
>
> Repulicans talk cutting government spending (firing bureaucrats) but
> never do. R's talk fiscal responsibility but never do. R's talk
> increasing production by getting gov't off the backs of the -real-
> producers like mining, manufacturing and agriculture but never do.
>
> R's sound more reliegious and D sound more the other way.
>
> D's tend to be more socialist since that's what's popular and more
> "idealistic" and just plain sounds better to the city dweller.
>
> R's have a big problem with, a bunch of them really are D's, but
> too friggin religious to be D's which is more "communist or red"
> sometimes refered to as pink. ;)
>
> D's tend to be on the homos side etc but only because they can be
> exploited by appearing to "protect" them from the R's.
> (like it friggin matters to anyone except a religious zealot)
>
> D's are more for women and the weak since they sell gov't spending
> by talking more about "helping, nurturing and wet nursing" which of
> course mostly just helps the bureaucrats with more make-work
> projects that don't do any of those things.
>
> R's talk like they are against that!
> But are crooked in that they do the same friggin thing. They
> tend to help military and policing bureaucrats more than the
> other bureaucrats tho.
>
> D's are more "honest loving caring" but are selling you ****.
>
> The R's are liars since they -talk- a better plan but don't intend
> to follow up. They know they can't for one! The gov't is a giant
> steam roller and we, all together, are nothing but a pile of ants.
> And they know it, so they change directions and get what they can
> out of it. Crooked.
>
> Alan Greenspan is a libertarian/Cato-man and -the- best guy we could
> possibly hope for in that position. He is why we haven't collapsed
> economically and taken everyone else with us. But still no one is
> -able- to do what he says to do because of the size and momentum of
> the steamroller. But he has been able to curtail a few things that
> would have been a disaster. One example comes to mind that oughta
> stirthe****... he doesn't reccomend an across the board tax cut.
>
> Beacuse gov't spending won't be cut at the same time and just make a
> bigger mess. "We can't spend our way to prosarity" -Alan Greenspan
> "...however we can produce our way to prosperity" -Alan Greespan
>
> "cut capitol gains tax and take some of the burden off of the -real-
> producers and we'll produce our way to prosperity" -AG ...sorta! ;)
>
> It's just really a matter of getting the gov't workers to quit doing
> what they are doing and switch to producing wealth. For every
> worker in production they have like one bureaucrat and two private
> service providers and one gov't contract worker on their back.
>
> Pretty tough to function with all that huh? Pretty easy to
> understand why the US economy is in a slump and not going to pull
> out anytime soon, when you picture the miners, assembly line
> workers/egineers and farmers trying to do their work with all those
> on their back asking for a piece of their product for -free-.
>
> Alvin in AZ, libertarian and 100% atheist
> ps- for libertarians the D's and R's are about the same thing in
> the end, but in the meantime sound different, 1 party suystem
> pps- fellow libertarians... what did I leave out? :)


So I was right then? ;-)

--
Julian.
----------
General Melchett from Blackadder describing
his regiments coat of arms:
". . . .two dead Frenchmen atop a pile
of dead Frenchmen. . . . ."


 
scrape at mindspring dot com wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 19:41:48 GMT, "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote:
>
>> Why is all this bollocks so political in the US?

>
> Because, on one hand, you have a political party that has been
> somewhat neutered in the last couple of years that basically believes
> the way to salvation is to triple the tax on everything. And on the
> other hand you have another political party that believes (to a
> degree) that individual freedoms are more important than whatever
> Boxer, Feinstein, Pelosi and Hillary (new Gang of Four?) have to say.
>
>> Petrol is $5 a gallon here in the UK and very few people care what
>> you drive.

>
> That truly sucks. You ought to do something about it.


Well we could stop providing free health care for everyone and then remove
the duty from petrol with the money we've saved.

But my American friends pay more per onth for Healthcare than I do for
petrol, so I guess I'd be worse off! :)

--
Julian.
----------
General Melchett from Blackadder describing
his regiments coat of arms:
". . . .two dead Frenchmen atop a pile
of dead Frenchmen. . . . ."


 
scrape at mindspring dot com wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 20:40:07 GMT, "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote:
>
>> Forgive my lack of knowledge of US political parties as I am an
>> Englishman - I take it the democrats are the very right wing party
>> and the republicans are the even more right wing party?

>
> Nope. You've got it wrong. The Democrats are the socialists and the
> Republicans are the liberals.


Democrats are socialists?

To be a socialist (like Tony Blair or Karl Marx :)) you need to believe in:

State ownership of big business.

A command economy.

Redistribution of wealth.

That the struggle between the proletariat and bourgeois is a politcal
struggle.

State provision of services.

It still looks to me as though you have two right wing parties neither of
whom would know socialism if it hit them in the face! ;-)

--
Julian.
----------
General Melchett from Blackadder describing
his regiments coat of arms:
". . . .two dead Frenchmen atop a pile
of dead Frenchmen. . . . ."


 

"Papa Smurf" <fakeaddress@Iwantnospam.crap> wrote in message
news:KE0Oa.31266$U23.8401@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
>
> "John Hinckley" <Aiming@atBush.com> wrote in message
> news:1j%Na.2138$7e.834@fed1read07...
> >
> > "Bud Keith" <budk101@comcast.net> wrote in message

> news:D5%Na.20811$Ix2.10402@rwcrnsc54...
> > >
> > > "John Hinckley" <Aiming@atBush.com> wrote in message
> > > news:dMZNa.2119$7e.1964@fed1read07...
> > > >
> > > > "Educated Republican"
> > > >
> > > > oxymoron - heavy on the moron
> > >
> > > Tell me bright eyes how many more republicans are on the welfare roles

> due
> > > to lack of education, then democrats.
> > > It was a democrat that designed the palm beach ballot in 2000 and it was
> > > democrats who could not figure out what it said, a great testimonial to
> > > democratic intellectual abilities.

> >
> >
> > You're wrong on all counts as usual. However, this is not the proper forum

> for
> > testicularly deprived chickenhawks like you to pound their chests.....
> >

>
> I know that facts aren't a big influencer here, but it is a point of public
> record that the palm beach ballot was designed, supervised and approved by
> that counties controling party. Which was the Democrats. So he can't be
> "wrong on all counts."
>
>
>
> --
> That's the kind of woolly-headed, liberal thinking that leads to being
> eaten.
>
>


you are wrong yet. investigate the designer of the ballot and you will see she was a
one-term Democrat; formerly a life-long Pubican and now an independent.


 

"Papa Smurf" <fakeaddress@Iwantnospam.crap> wrote in message
news:2I0Oa.31284$U23.3459@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
>
> "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote in message
> news:HO%Na.75933$%L.66781@news-lhr.blueyonder.co.uk...
> > Papa Smurf wrote:
> > > "Bud Keith" <budk101@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > > news:D5%Na.20811$Ix2.10402@rwcrnsc54...
> > >>
> > >> "John Hinckley" <Aiming@atBush.com> wrote in message
> > >> news:dMZNa.2119$7e.1964@fed1read07...
> > >>>


>
> At it's simplest terms, Republicans believe in personal responsiblity, and
> Democrats believe in Governmental responsiblity for the citizen.
>


So when will Chimpy admit to his cocaine sniffing/AWOL/Desertion/womanizing days? When
will the GOP admit they have ****ed the country in the ass and it's not Clinton's fault.
Your tired mantra flies like whale ****


 

"Mark Jones" <spam@block.com> wrote in message
news:bea5if$ea8$1@slb9.atl.mindspring.net...
> "Papa Smurf" <fakeaddress@Iwantnospam.crap> wrote in message
> news:2I0Oa.31284$U23.3459@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
> > At it's simplest terms, Republicans believe in personal responsiblity, and
> > Democrats believe in Governmental responsiblity for the citizen.

>
> The Republicans want to be everyone's parent and tell them what
> they can and can not do. The Democrats are the rebellious
> teenagers who want an ever increasing allowance.
>
>


yeah but who passed the current red ink budget?


 

"Mike G" <mikeg@heirloom-woods.net> wrote in message
news:-FGdnTEa2ZIkAJWiXTWJiQ@comcast.com...
> Glad to see some things never change and everyone is running to the cliff
> like lemmings ready to leap into the gotcha sea.
>
> Geez, it's not even like it was a subtle troll.



well the "jeep thing" thread had degenerated intro a Microsoft history lesson.......


 

"Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote in message
news:0f1Oa.76182$%L.60422@news-lhr.blueyonder.co.uk...
> scrape at mindspring dot com wrote:
> > On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 19:41:48 GMT, "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Why is all this bollocks so political in the US?

> >
> > Because, on one hand, you have a political party that has been
> > somewhat neutered in the last couple of years that basically believes
> > the way to salvation is to triple the tax on everything. And on the
> > other hand you have another political party that believes (to a
> > degree) that individual freedoms are more important than whatever
> > Boxer, Feinstein, Pelosi and Hillary (new Gang of Four?) have to say.
> >
> >> Petrol is $5 a gallon here in the UK and very few people care what
> >> you drive.

> >
> > That truly sucks. You ought to do something about it.

>
> Well we could stop providing free health care for everyone and then remove
> the duty from petrol with the money we've saved.
>
> But my American friends pay more per onth for Healthcare than I do for
> petrol, so I guess I'd be worse off! :)
>


How much of your paycheck do you bring home? Not as much as I do,I'l bet.

> --
> Julian.
> ----------
> General Melchett from Blackadder describing
> his regiments coat of arms:
> ". . . .two dead Frenchmen atop a pile
> of dead Frenchmen. . . . ."
>
>



 

"Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote in message
news:Oj1Oa.76183$%L.67657@news-lhr.blueyonder.co.uk...
> scrape at mindspring dot com wrote:
> > On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 20:40:07 GMT, "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Forgive my lack of knowledge of US political parties as I am an
> >> Englishman - I take it the democrats are the very right wing party
> >> and the republicans are the even more right wing party?

> >
> > Nope. You've got it wrong. The Democrats are the socialists and the
> > Republicans are the liberals.

>
> Democrats are socialists?
>
> To be a socialist (like Tony Blair or Karl Marx :)) you need to believe

in:
>
> State ownership of big business.


Actually that's too much work for them, they just believe in taxing it into
submission.

>
> A command economy.
>
> Redistribution of wealth.


Big time. Top 50% of Wage Earners Pay 96.09% of Income Taxes


> That the struggle between the proletariat and bourgeois is a politcal
> struggle.


Definately.

> State provision of services.


Don't know how strongly they feel about publicizing everything, but they
show do go ballistic whenever talk of privitizing something comes up.

> It still looks to me as though you have two right wing parties neither of
> whom would know socialism if it hit them in the face! ;-)


OK, we'll just call em 4/5 socialists then....




--
That's the kind of woolly-headed, liberal thinking that leads to being
eaten.


 
On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 21:42:15 GMT, "Papa Smurf"
<fakeaddress@Iwantnospam.crap> wrote:

>> >Forgive my lack of knowledge of US political parties as I am an

>Englishman -
>> >I take it the democrats are the very right wing party and the republicans
>> >are the even more right wing party?

>>
>> Nope. You've got it wrong. The Democrats are the socialists and the
>> Republicans are the liberals.

>
>From what vantage point are you viewing? Libertarian?


Yes.

 
On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 22:18:36 GMT, "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote:

>>> Why is all this bollocks so political in the US?

>>
>> Because, on one hand, you have a political party that has been
>> somewhat neutered in the last couple of years that basically believes
>> the way to salvation is to triple the tax on everything. And on the
>> other hand you have another political party that believes (to a
>> degree) that individual freedoms are more important than whatever
>> Boxer, Feinstein, Pelosi and Hillary (new Gang of Four?) have to say.
>>
>>> Petrol is $5 a gallon here in the UK and very few people care what
>>> you drive.

>>
>> That truly sucks. You ought to do something about it.

>
>Well we could stop providing free health care for everyone and then remove
>the duty from petrol with the money we've saved.


It's hardly free if you have to pay $4.50/gallon tax on gasoline to
get it, is it?

>But my American friends pay more per onth for Healthcare than I do for
>petrol, so I guess I'd be worse off! :)


I'm sure there are other subtleties, etc. Our health care system has
problems due to the lawyers and frivolous malpractice suits.

Nevermind. I know where this is going.

 
On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 22:23:42 GMT, "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote:

>scrape at mindspring dot com wrote:
>> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 20:40:07 GMT, "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Forgive my lack of knowledge of US political parties as I am an
>>> Englishman - I take it the democrats are the very right wing party
>>> and the republicans are the even more right wing party?

>>
>> Nope. You've got it wrong. The Democrats are the socialists and the
>> Republicans are the liberals.

>
>Democrats are socialists?
>
>To be a socialist (like Tony Blair or Karl Marx :)) you need to believe in:
>
>State ownership of big business.
>
>A command economy.
>
>Redistribution of wealth.
>
>That the struggle between the proletariat and bourgeois is a politcal
>struggle.
>
>State provision of services.
>
>It still looks to me as though you have two right wing parties neither of
>whom would know socialism if it hit them in the face! ;-)


Perhaps you need to look a bit closer. I'm not familiar with the
phrase "command economy", but everything else you mentioned is dead on
what the Democrats want.