![]() |
|
Get off this group right now. 2100 hours
Get out of here and turn on the TV.
Our greatest president is giving the state of the union address. Give him your full attention as he has important things to say. CN |
What Bush said really pales in comparison to what a true stateman and
Conservative once said: "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is 'needed' before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents' interests, I shall reply that I was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can." - Former Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.), "The Conscience of a Conservative" |
Admirable thoughts but did he parley them into the Presidency?
Negative! He was not as smart a conservative as President Bush nor did he have such a lunatic Democrat left-wing controlled party to deal with. Give Mr. Bush credit where credit is due. Our greatest President is managing to destroy the Democratic party almost single-handed. The Republican president who follows Mr. Bush will be able to assert true conservatism because Mr. Bush is paving the road to riches as we speak. This is something Mr. Goldwater never, in his dreams could accomplish. CN "Gilligan" wrote in message ink.net... What Bush said really pales in comparison to what a true stateman and Conservative once said: "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is 'needed' before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents' interests, I shall reply that I was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can." - Former Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.), "The Conscience of a Conservative" |
Typical, leftist name-calling that hurts your socialist cause.
It's a true honor and a privilege to be living in these times where liberals are self-destructing compliments of George W. Bush whom they continue to call stupid. He who laugh last, laughs loudest. BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAH! CN "John Cairns" scribbled Bwahahhahahhahahahha. WMD, redux. Your president is a: A.Lying cowardly sack of ****. B. As delusional as you are. C. The stupidest person alive. D. All of the above. I vote for D John Cairns |
Sadly, you're right.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "John Cairns" wrote in message .. . Bwahahhahahhahahahha. WMD, redux. Your president is a: A.Lying cowardly sack of ****. B. As delusional as you are. C. The stupidest person alive. D. All of the above. I vote for D John Cairns |
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 03:31:11 +0000, John Cairns wrote:
Bwahahhahahhahahahha. WMD, redux. Your president is a: A.Lying cowardly sack of ****. B. As delusional as you are. C. The stupidest person alive. D. All of the above. I vote for D John Cairns LOL, You can fool some of the people all of the time. I guess that would include Neal. Others, perhaps, might like to recall the promises of this President's past State of the Union speeches. http://www.americanprogress.org/site...J8OVF&b=310515 |
Poor Neal.
"New jobs" does not equal "More jobs." The oldest trick in the book. RB |
Mr Goldwater's one weakness was that he was honest and said what he truly
thought. He didn't mince words to spare the thin skinned or ignorant. He stood in front of the banner of true Conservatism, rather than hide behind it. Winning the Presidency is not a measure of the man. It is a measure of a political campaign. Remember, Clinton won two terms. Who today holds LBJ in any regard, he was the man who defeated Goldwater. LBJ chose not to run for a second term, so disastrous was his presidency. Today, people still vote for Goldwater even though he is dead. Of the two men who ran for President back in 1964, Goldwater is still talked about, admired and heralded as the man of true Conservative principles. The good was not interred with his bones, yet the evil of LBJ lives on (Great Society, VietNam, Expansion of Federal Government). "America is a country where anyone can become President - except me!" Barry Goldwater Gilligan "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message ... Admirable thoughts but did he parley them into the Presidency? Negative! He was not as smart a conservative as President Bush nor did he have such a lunatic Democrat left-wing controlled party to deal with. Give Mr. Bush credit where credit is due. Our greatest President is managing to destroy the Democratic party almost single-handed. The Republican president who follows Mr. Bush will be able to assert true conservatism because Mr. Bush is paving the road to riches as we speak. This is something Mr. Goldwater never, in his dreams could accomplish. CN "Gilligan" wrote in message ink.net... What Bush said really pales in comparison to what a true stateman and Conservative once said: "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is 'needed' before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents' interests, I shall reply that I was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can." - Former Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.), "The Conscience of a Conservative" |
If a President can create jobs, then why don't they just do it to get
relected? Government can only destroy or take away jobs. It creates nothing. If it could create anything of value, it could then fund itself and never need to tax. Gilligan "Bobsprit" wrote in message ... Poor Neal. "New jobs" does not equal "More jobs." The oldest trick in the book. RB |
"Capt. Neal®" wrote
Some excerpts: Well, I found one statement that wasn't an lie. SS will start paying out more than it takes in in 2018. But he forgot to mention that that is exactly as planned! SS is a pay-as-you-go program. Normally, there is no surplus - everything that comes in goes out as benefits. The rates were increased and benefits cut in 1982 (IIRC) to create a surplus in anticipation of the "baby boom" generation retiring. "Boomers" will retire in a few years and use up that surplus exactly as planned. The surplus will last until about 2048 then the system will go back to pay-as-you-go mode like it worked since Roosevelt. But by then the boomers will be largely dead and payouts will shrink. THERE IS NO EMERGENCY! Are individual accounts a good idea? Sure. I have several - in addition to SS. If the NeoCons are hell bent on a subsidy for their stock-broker supporters then pass a law requiring everybody to have one - seperate from SS. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:10 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com