"scrape at mindspring dot com" <scrape@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:71ahgvcl0cjmt6tmomtu3ku91nsacd6egm@4ax.com...
> 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.
>

Would you guys please come into some power after the leadership vaccuum
created by the dimise of the Democratic party hits it's zenith?
It would be nice to have rational opponents that could be respected.


 
"Papa Smurf" <fakeaddress@Iwantnospam.crap> wrote in message
news:bT1Oa.31481$U23.29828@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
> Would you guys please come into some power after the leadership vaccuum
> created by the dimise of the Democratic party hits it's zenith?
> It would be nice to have rational opponents that could be respected.

That is it in a nutshell. I am a Democrat who couldn't vote
for Gore and his extreme environmental positions. I do not
see a single Democratic candidate at this point who would
make me switch my vote.


 

"Mark Jones" <spam@block.com> wrote in message
news:bea9uc$tao$1@slb9.atl.mindspring.net...
> "Papa Smurf" <fakeaddress@Iwantnospam.crap> wrote in message
> news:bT1Oa.31481$U23.29828@nwrdny01.gnilink.net...
> > Would you guys please come into some power after the leadership vaccuum
> > created by the dimise of the Democratic party hits it's zenith?
> > It would be nice to have rational opponents that could be respected.
>
> That is it in a nutshell. I am a Democrat who couldn't vote
> for Gore and his extreme environmental positions. I do not
> see a single Democratic candidate at this point who would
> make me switch my vote.

What saddens me, is that I start to find myself argueing the same way they
do. After all when facts are dismissed as chicanery, and opinions take the
weight of facts, and feelings trump all, what is the point of trying to put
together a reasoned arguement, or even a civil discussion? It's easier just
to quip and snipe.


 
In alt.trucks.ford Papa Smurf wrote:
> What saddens me, is that I start to find myself argueing the same way they
> do. After all when facts are dismissed as chicanery, and opinions take the
> weight of facts, and feelings trump all, what is the point of trying to put
> together a reasoned arguement, or even a civil discussion? It's easier just
> to quip and snipe.

Yep. :/

You an ex-C-Span junky too?

Alvin in AZ (libertarian) (lower case L)
 
On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 23:01:27 GMT, "Papa Smurf"
<fakeaddress@Iwantnospam.crap> wrote:

>> >> 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.
>>
>
>Would you guys please come into some power after the leadership vaccuum
>created by the dimise of the Democratic party hits it's zenith?
>It would be nice to have rational opponents that could be respected.

That's the plan. First we have to make sure Al Sharpton gets on the
ticket this time around.
 


<alvinj@XX.com> wrote in message news:beabtn$364$3@reader1.panix.com...
> In alt.trucks.ford Papa Smurf wrote:
> > What saddens me, is that I start to find myself argueing the same way
they
> > do. After all when facts are dismissed as chicanery, and opinions take
the
> > weight of facts, and feelings trump all, what is the point of trying to
put
> > together a reasoned arguement, or even a civil discussion? It's easier
just
> > to quip and snipe.
>
> Yep. :/
>
> You an ex-C-Span junky too?
>
> Alvin in AZ (libertarian) (lower case L)

I was for a bit, but it tapped too far into my growing (and it was already
rather large) cynicism. It's one thing to suspect your elected officials are
loons, liars, crooks and idiots - it's quite another to watch it in action.


--
"There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other
is wrong, but the middle is always evil." -- Ayn Rand

"In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us,
'Make us your slaves, but feed us.'" -- Dosteovsky


 



"scrape at mindspring dot com" <scrape@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:slchgv0r5tkg9ao62ut8scnapv37q7lt22@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 23:01:27 GMT, "Papa Smurf"
> <fakeaddress@Iwantnospam.crap> wrote:
>
> >> >> 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.
> >>
> >
> >Would you guys please come into some power after the leadership vaccuum
> >created by the dimise of the Democratic party hits it's zenith?
> >It would be nice to have rational opponents that could be respected.
>
> That's the plan. First we have to make sure Al Sharpton gets on the
> ticket this time around.

Whatever it takes, I guess.
--

"There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other
is wrong, but the middle is always evil." -- Ayn Rand

"In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us,
'Make us your slaves, but feed us.'" -- Dosteovsky


 
scrape at mindspring dot com wrote:
> 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?
>
Is anything provided by any govt. free? It's free at point of supply though,
and truly free for those without cars!

>> 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.

I bet you don't - I'm a right wing conservative. (Small & large 'C') :)

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


 
Slatner t Eliot wrote:
> "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.
>
About 70% - here's what I pay:

http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/pdfs/irinsert.htm

And how about you?

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


 
Papa Smurf wrote:
> "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.
>
So no then.

>>
>> A command economy.
>>
Well?

>> Redistribution of wealth.
>
> Big time. Top 50% of Wage Earners Pay 96.09% of Income Taxes
>
Hmmm. . . . . .could you elucidate please.
>
>> 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.
>
So what public services are provided by the democrats that aren't by the
republicans?

>> 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....

Not even 5% socialists - must try harder.

--
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 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.

Really? Which industries have the democrats nationalised recently?

If they were socialists a national health service would be top of their
list, but they don't ssem to have provided one yet.

A command economy is one run by the state like the old soviet union.

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


 

"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.

%%%% And the lib/dems fell for it! This could be a strong indication of
their intelligence actually lack of!!! ;o0

:
: --
: 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
:
:


 


"Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote in message
news:T73Oa.76196$%L.10957@news-lhr.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Papa Smurf wrote:
> > "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote in message
> > news:Oj1Oa.76183$%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.
> >
> So no then.

I'd put it down as a sort of. It's not that they don't want it, it's just
that they screw up each company that they try this one. They can't do it out
right so it's a lot of smoke and mirrors, regulate everything so tightly
that it might as well be run by the government (ironically: California calls
this deregulation). But do they believe in it and lust for it, I think so.

> >>
> >> A command economy.
> >>
> Well?

I skipped this because I'm not sure what this means and I'm too lazy to look
it up today.

>
> >> Redistribution of wealth.
> >
> > Big time. Top 50% of Wage Earners Pay 96.09% of Income Taxes
> >
> Hmmm. . . . . .could you elucidate please.

The Top half of all American Wage Earners Pay almost all Income taxes.
Nope that probably didn't help. Damned IRS moved everything around again,
I'll have to go with this link:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/irsfigures.guest.html

> >
> >> 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.
> >
> So what public services are provided by the democrats that aren't by the
> republicans?
>
> >> 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....
>
> Not even 5% socialists - must try harder.

Wow, if that's 5% then they must whip most kids straight out of the delivery
room into a bubblewrap crate designed for safety and health, while pushing
the few producers to breaking point to keep society going. No, too far from
one of my concepts of hell.
What's good side for the non-leeches?


 

"Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote in message
news:%93Oa.76197$%L.68601@news-lhr.blueyonder.co.uk...
> scrape at mindspring dot com wrote:
> > 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.
>
> Really? Which industries have the democrats nationalised recently?
>
> If they were socialists a national health service would be top of their
> list, but they don't ssem to have provided one yet.
>

We run into a little trouble with that one. Since largely it is US companies
fronting the bill for the R&D that provides cheapers better drugs and
procedures for the rest of the world it becomes difficult for US to achieve
a leechbased healthcare system without putting at least some of the cost on
the non-producers. Since this is totally unacceptable to leechvoters and
hugely unpopular with those that would end up footing the rest of the bill,
it has trouble even being formed to come for a vote.
Take recent events where Bush has said "Get me a healthcare bill, I'll sign
it" and then the press starts giving out the details that it will (gasp)
cost some more than they are getting back (they wanted the magical cow to
pay for it all), suddenly they are all up in arms and it probably won't get
passed.


 


"David L. Moffitt" <moffitcl@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:eek:p3Oa.113$4V2.68@newssvr32.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "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.
>
> %%%% And the lib/dems fell for it! This could be a strong indication of
> their intelligence actually lack of!!! ;o0
>

In fairness, since it was a lib trying to write as a conservative, it was
far more likely to be perceived as a true viewpoint by the libs. As a
conservative it was more obviously a severe distortion of any rational
viewpoint.
A Rep trying to jym up a lib memo, might fool is fellow alums in just as
high a percentage.


 
How about all you cross posting fools that took the bait from this dump ass
troll keep you stupid replies inside your own group.

Jerry

--
"Character is doing the right thing when nobody is looking."

 
"Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote in message news:0f1Oa.76182$%L.60422@news-
> 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! :)

Most of us Americans get ourselves a skill or an education, then go out and
get jobs and get our own health care - we do not rely on government for
that. Of course the lazy and stupid do. I guess your healthcare really
isn't "free" is it, if you're paying $5 a gallon for fuel.


 
> > 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.....

How is he wrong? You mean it was Republicans complaining because they voted
for the wrong candidate? You made the accusation he was wrong - now back it
up!


 

"John Hinckley" <Aiming@atBush.com> wrote in message
news:RA1Oa.2163$7e.763@fed1read07...

> 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.

No, you are wrong, since it was Democrats who were too stupid to figure out
how to use a simple ballet.


 
On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 00:20:56 GMT, "Exit" <exit@nomore.com> wrote:

>>> 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?
>>
>Is anything provided by any govt. free? It's free at point of supply though,
>and truly free for those without cars!

Free? No. Far overpriced and we're forced to buy things we don't
want or need in order to supply "free" health care to the British
without cars.
<obligatory grin crap>

>>> 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.
>
>I bet you don't - I'm a right wing conservative. (Small & large 'C') :)

My mistake. Being a completely ignorant American, I have no idea how
conservatism in the UK lines up with that of the US though.


 
You must log in or register to reply here.