[geeks] One of the things I love about America

[Chris Byrne]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: geeks-admin at sunhelp.org [mailto:geeks-admin at sunhelp.org]On Behalf
> Of Andrew Weiss
> > Thats what a satyriac is. its the male version of nymphomanias with
> > misogynistic undertones.
> >
> I was contrasting between getting nookie often, and "being a chauvinist
> in addition to getting nookie"  In some ways I see Kennedy as far more
> of the latter and Clinton as the former... (from reported accounts of
> how Kennedy's treated women)
>

Ahhh, alright then. Yes, Id guess that Clinton was less of an ass and more
of a horndog.

>
> > Bullshit. THere was no collusion between the Mullahs and the
> > republicans.
> >
> Maybe not in this case... but I often find myself wondering about either
> party and their secret deals with other nations.  I think there is a lot
> of collusion going on everywhere... and we will probably never know it.
>

Of course there is. ANd no, we never will

> > <snip>
>
> > Not true. The gulf war was very much necessary. Had the US not
> > participated
> > in the gulf war then Saddam Hussein would control Iraq, Saudi Arabia,
> > Kuwait, and most of the other contiguous contries. Saddam is EXTREMELY
> > hostile to america, and 53% of the oil america uses comes from those
> > countries.
> >
> You actually think Saddam would have taken over Saudi Arabia?  I would
> have thought they were way to strong and proud to let that happen.
> Kuwait was tiny.  We've always got the new Russian oil.
>

Yes I do. The Saudi natinal guard is kind of a joke. They shoot a lot cuz
its fun, but they dont know how to fight and maneuver. The only reason
Saddam didnt take Saudi Arabia in the first week was because his supply
chain was to long and too slow. If he had more modern vehicles or bigger
fuel tankers it would have been over and done with before we even woke up.

ANd the russian oil wasnt even beging to be exploited in '91. Though I think
its interesting now that Russia controlls something like half the worlds
known oil reserves. Talk about chagning political dynamics eh


>
> > I honestly dont see how you can call him great.
> >
> This is just a disagreement of terms.

Ok I'll grant that. You like him on a personal level and what he stood for
was much of what you stood for therefore he was great for you right? Vs.
great in the historical sense


>I really don't give a rats ass
> personally about foreign policy.

Ahh see that I think is a mistake. Foreign policy affects your life a lot.
ENergy prices for one, along with the price of consumer goods.


> As a newly unemployed person in a tight market I
> am far more concerned with health care, education, and domestic policy.

Understandable

> If we were on track to paying our country's debt, that's a good thing.

We are actually, even with the current supposedly temporary excess spending.
Unfortnuately it has to stay temporary or we are in trouble and too often
politicos want to make things permanent.

> Taking all the [extra or not] money and throwing it up in the air via
> tax stimulus packages, tax cuts, excess military spending, and pork
> barrel projects is a very bad thing especially after an economic
> downturn (whether or not one believes it to be a recession).

Well it technically was a recession, and could easily become one again if
consumer confidence and corporate profits dont both rise in the next six
months. A stimulus package was a good idea in principle, but in practice
hasnt worked out so well. THe best thing to do would be to vastly cut taxes
on the middle and upper middle class. Leaave the top classes the same or a
percentage or two higher, and increase the maximum income for the bottom tax
brackets. plus provide rebates for capital investment or expenditure and
accelerate or allow total depreciation of currently owned equipment.

>And yes I think Gore's foreign policy would have stunk bad enough I'd care
about
> it in hindsight.
>

Yeah, Id say so.

> "When you have no money, you see government policy by the affluent  as
> aimed at taking money away from you."
> --conversely if corrupted...
> "When you have money, you see government policy on issues you don't care
> about as a waste of your money."
>

Funny enough, I have no money, and I still see things from the more
Libertarian point of view.

> I see it as money or no, you can take my money if you spend it
> responsibly and/or the way I choose....
>

See thats where you and I differ. I think the less money taken from me the
better cuz I know how to spend it better than the govment does

> You can't be a conscientious objector for either political or
> self-preservation reasons... kind of defeats the point.
>
True, but you can become a mennonite

>
> Nobody can win this as a battle ... of course I don't see it as a
> battle.  I am quite bitter at the political behavior of this country in
> the last two years.

How about the last 20? Or 60? Actually IM pretty much convinced that we
havent done much right politically since world war 2, and the time between
the wars wasnt much better. The things we have done right tend to just be
fixing the stuff we screwed up earlier.

And its not a battle. We are sharing our views and opinions in a healthy way
to broaden our experiences and our exposure.

Chris Byrne