Here, lap this up, Harry!
 

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:26:53 +0000, Eisboch wrote:


In any event, Bush will be done in by the expiration of his term. Time to
start thinking about a successor, from both sides or more.

I heard an interesting statistic this afternoon. Paul Harvey, I think.
Last year the US graduated 70,000 new engineers. Japan graduated 350,000
and China graduated 650,000. Related, more money was spent in the US on
liability lawsuits than on new technical research and development. Seems
this country has taken it's eye off the ball, and I personally believe it
has a lot more to do with loosing traditional values than it does due to
the policies of any particular politician.

I'm always leery of that "traditional values" thing. I'm never sure what
values they mean. ;-) But you are right, we have lost something. Someone
promised us a free lunch, and we believed them. Those lawsuits are a
prime example. People get injured, and they think they have won the
lottery. We want it all, and we want it now, like spoiled children.

Here, lap this up, Harry!
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:07:16 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Bush's lowest-ever approval rating was 40%.

Clinton's lowest-ever approval rating was 37%

Yeah, but Clinton's lowest numbers were in the early days of his first
term. I'll guarantee Bush wishes he had Clinton's second term numbers,
Monica and all.

http://www.pollkatz.homestead.com/fi...7_image001.gif

Historically, Presidents never have had good approval ratings during a war
(except for Bush 41). When you compound the war with the fact that gas is
50% higher than just a year or two ago, it's amazing that Bush isn't in the
20's.

Here, lap this up, Harry!
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:44:54 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Do you have a link for any historical data graphs of other recent
Presidents?

Yup, I was going to be a wise ass and leave it at that, but . . . These
aren't as precise, but they show the trends of Presidents going back to
FDR.

http://progressivewritersbloc.com/DC...lon-Velcro.htm


Ironically, his numbers fell right after he pitched the $200 billion for
New Orleans, and then again after the Miers' nomination. Abandoning
his base has hurt him much worse than when he sticks to his guns.

A counterpoint to that, he was trying to stop the bleeding. It didn't
work. Face it, Bush's base isn't large enough to rule this country. He
needs the moderates, and he hasn't been doing well there.

His base is there when he needs them. It's just that right now they're
showing their displeasure with his "caving in" on several important
issues to most Conservatives.

See above.

The curtain is open, the honeymoon is over, where is Bush's base. I'm
guessing, somewhere between Carter and Nixon.

See above.

Yeah, but . . . IMO he's still searching for bottom. He has three years
to find it, and I expect he will.

And I expect he has.

Here, lap this up, Harry!
 

thunder wrote in message
...
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:26:53 +0000, Eisboch wrote:


In any event, Bush will be done in by the expiration of his term. Time
to
start thinking about a successor, from both sides or more.

I heard an interesting statistic this afternoon. Paul Harvey, I think.
Last year the US graduated 70,000 new engineers. Japan graduated
350,000
and China graduated 650,000. Related, more money was spent in the US on
liability lawsuits than on new technical research and development.
Seems
this country has taken it's eye off the ball, and I personally believe
it
has a lot more to do with loosing traditional values than it does due to
the policies of any particular politician.

I'm always leery of that "traditional values" thing. I'm never sure what
values they mean. ;-) But you are right, we have lost something. Someone
promised us a free lunch, and we believed them. Those lawsuits are a
prime example. People get injured, and they think they have won the
lottery. We want it all, and we want it now, like spoiled children.

That's the "Ka-Thunk" that went off somewhere in my (mostly empty) head as I
listened to this. It's a social change taking place where the concept of
earning something by working hard is being replaced with "It's owed to me".
It's a change whereby if you feel you've been wronged by a merchant - you
sue him, rather that accepting the fact that you learned a lesson and won't
do business with him again. It's a change where paying your dues is not
necessary, you are "entitled" simply because you exist. Its a change
whereby "I" has become paramount rather than "we". That's what I meant by
loosing traditional values. It may be inevitable as a evolutionary step of
our society, but I think it will be the primary reason of our downfall as a
nation if not corrected, rather than the actions of politics and
politicians.

Eisboch

Here, lap this up, Harry!
 

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 19:23:37 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Historically, Presidents never have had good approval ratings during a war
(except for Bush 41). When you compound the war with the fact that gas is
50% higher than just a year or two ago, it's amazing that Bush isn't in
the 20's.

I'm not sure I'll agree with that premise. FDR maintained high ratings
throughout his war years, as did Nixon until Watergate. I will agree,
though, that people will only take the bleeding from a prolonged war, if
they perceive the cause to be just. Nixon maintained because he could
blame Johnson for the war, and was perceived to be the "peace" candidate
who promised to end the war with dignity.

GWB has no one to blame but himself. The whole weight of this war, the
pluses and the *minuses* will be on him, and rightfully so. When they sat
around looking for a "bureaucratic" reason for this war, perhaps they
should have come up with a better one than WMD.

Here, lap this up, Harry!
 

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 19:37:40 +0000, Eisboch wrote:


That's the "Ka-Thunk" that went off somewhere in my (mostly empty) head as
I listened to this. It's a social change taking place where the concept
of earning something by working hard is being replaced with "It's owed to
me". It's a change whereby if you feel you've been wronged by a merchant -
you sue him, rather that accepting the fact that you learned a lesson and
won't do business with him again. It's a change where paying your dues is
not necessary, you are "entitled" simply because you exist. Its a change
whereby "I" has become paramount rather than "we". That's what I meant
by loosing traditional values. It may be inevitable as a evolutionary
step of our society, but I think it will be the primary reason of our
downfall as a nation if not corrected, rather than the actions of politics
and politicians.

Well then, we agree. ;-) You know, this is still a democracy. We may
want to blame our politicians, and I do, but the reality is that they are
more a reflection of us, than we are of them. *We* elected them.
Furthermore, it seems to me, politicians have very little affect on our
daily lives. I'd hate to point to Carter's "Malaise" speech, but he might
have been right.

Here, lap this up, Harry!
 

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:26:53 GMT, "Eisboch"
wrote:


Harry Krause wrote in message
...

In the end, Bush will be done in by his incompetency.

Your hero.

Tough darts.

In any event, Bush will be done in by the expiration of his term. Time to
start thinking about a successor, from both sides or more.

I heard an interesting statistic this afternoon. Paul Harvey, I think.
Last year the US graduated 70,000 new engineers. Japan graduated 350,000
and China graduated 650,000. Related, more money was spent in the US on
liability lawsuits than on new technical research and development. Seems
this country has taken it's eye off the ball, and I personally believe it
has a lot more to do with loosing traditional values than it does due to the
policies of any particular politician.

Eisboch

And people blame Bush because we're losing the middle class.

I agree with your opinion on the loss of traditional values, especially the ones
associated with hard work.

We need fewer liberals teaching Liberal Arts.

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

Here, lap this up, Harry!
 

On 13 Oct 2005 11:01:35 -0700, wrote:


wrote:


Here, why don't you lap THIS up:

http://tinyurl.com/9za2n

Anally fixated? Is this prevalent among liberals, or is it primarily you and
Harry?

Have you discussed this with *any* adult in your life?

Here, this may help:

http://psychology.about.com/od/gloss...Fixation13.htm

I hope everything works out OK for you.

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

Here, lap this up, Harry!
 

On 13 Oct 2005 11:24:47 -0700, wrote:


NOYB wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:


Here, why don't you lap THIS up:

http://tinyurl.com/9za2n

You sure do visit some strange sites there bassie. I never knew you had a
homoerotic fetish.

What would make you think that I've got a homoerotic fetish, nitwit?
Because I've got enough brains to go to google and enter "hairy ass" to
get a picture to post to tschnautz to "lap it up"?

Again,

http://psychology.about.com/od/gloss...Fixation13.htm

Maybe Harry's wife, who is a Doctor Doctor, I think, can help out.

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

Here, lap this up, Harry!
 

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 20:37:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 15:12:18 -0400, thunder
wrote:

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:26:53 +0000, Eisboch wrote:


In any event, Bush will be done in by the expiration of his term. Time to
start thinking about a successor, from both sides or more.

I heard an interesting statistic this afternoon. Paul Harvey, I think.
Last year the US graduated 70,000 new engineers. Japan graduated 350,000
and China graduated 650,000. Related, more money was spent in the US on
liability lawsuits than on new technical research and development. Seems
this country has taken it's eye off the ball, and I personally believe it
has a lot more to do with loosing traditional values than it does due to
the policies of any particular politician.

I'm always leery of that "traditional values" thing. I'm never sure what
values they mean. ;-) But you are right, we have lost something. Someone
promised us a free lunch, and we believed them. Those lawsuits are a
prime example. People get injured, and they think they have won the
lottery. We want it all, and we want it now, like spoiled children.

TANSTAAFL.

There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

Where we've lost is in basic and middle education. We're much more
interested in diversity and socialization than in rote learning of
math and science skills.

Just yesterday, in a school system in which I am intimately aware of,
they eliminated a science period for the 7th graders so they could
have a "social" event - namely a make believe 20th reunion so the kids
could start thinking of where they are and where they are going.

At eleven years old, it's a little over the top.

Personally, I think the only thing they knew was (1) they got out of
science and (2) there was ice cream and cake.

As an observation, I have noticed that when I emergency substitute in
high school advanced math classes, they are getting smaller and
smaller because its' an elective and nobody believes it's important.

Don't know what that proves - something.

Amen. And, what percent of the students are Asian?

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan