Dammit......
 

NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

All major corporations want these days is the cheapest possible
workforce, and if that means exporting jobs to China or India, so be it.
The righties think this is "good" for our economy, but it will do us in
sooner rather than later.

The only hope is to elect a president and congress in 2008 who will do
something to stem the flow of jobs. Those are more likely to be
democrats than republicans.
Baloney. Duncan Hunter is about as protectionist as you can get.

My personal pick is Mitt Romney.




Duncan Hunter has about as much chance as either of us to be nominated.
Your nominee will be Guiliani, Romney, or Tired Old Fred.

Hunter will be the VP candidate, and if he isn't he should.


Is Mitt for the war in Iraq, or against it? Or was he for it and is he now
against it? Mr. Flip-Flop..,he'll be fun to Swiftboat.

You guys might shoot your load too early trying to swiftboat Mitt. The only
position that he has "flip-flopped" on is abortion...and pointing out that
that he now takes a pro-life stance after taking a pro-choice stance in
order to win the governorship in MA only solidifies his standing in the
Republican primary.

You should save the flip-flop accusations for *if and when* he becomes the
nominee. It might sell well during a general election with independents
who are pro-choice. But it's not going to sell well with Republicans who
are glad he has "finally seen the light".

Democrats are scared of Romney. He has managed to steal the health care
issue with Romneycare. He is smart, articulate, accomplished, and good
looking. The man has also led a life that is beyond reproach. They'll be
no dirty tricks or last-minute skeletons for an October surprise.

I guess that's why the Dems are sending their attack dogs at the Boston
Globe against him.



No one is scared of Romney. Really. He'll probably win the NH primary
because he has name recognition there, and then that will be the end of
him. His "nuanced" flip-flop on abortion is a tad too sophisticated for
the majority of simpleton southern Republican jesus freaks, most of whom
also relegate Mormonism to the same category as witchcraft. I lived
among the "stuporcons" of the south for more than five years, and was
always amazed at their religious simplemindedness. These are the same
folk who believe Roman Catholics aren't christian, and Jews are the
spawn of the devil who killed Jesus.

Personally, I'd love to run a campaign against Romney, the guy who
represents the same corporate interests who have sold this country down
the drain.

Dammit......
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

All major corporations want these days is the cheapest possible
workforce, and if that means exporting jobs to China or India, so be
it. The righties think this is "good" for our economy, but it will do
us in sooner rather than later.

The only hope is to elect a president and congress in 2008 who will do
something to stem the flow of jobs. Those are more likely to be
democrats than republicans.
Baloney. Duncan Hunter is about as protectionist as you can get.

My personal pick is Mitt Romney.




Duncan Hunter has about as much chance as either of us to be nominated.
Your nominee will be Guiliani, Romney, or Tired Old Fred.

Hunter will be the VP candidate, and if he isn't he should.


Is Mitt for the war in Iraq, or against it? Or was he for it and is he
now against it? Mr. Flip-Flop..,he'll be fun to Swiftboat.

You guys might shoot your load too early trying to swiftboat Mitt. The
only position that he has "flip-flopped" on is abortion...and pointing
out that that he now takes a pro-life stance after taking a pro-choice
stance in order to win the governorship in MA only solidifies his
standing in the Republican primary.

You should save the flip-flop accusations for *if and when* he becomes
the nominee. It might sell well during a general election with
independents who are pro-choice. But it's not going to sell well with
Republicans who are glad he has "finally seen the light".

Democrats are scared of Romney. He has managed to steal the health care
issue with Romneycare. He is smart, articulate, accomplished, and good
looking. The man has also led a life that is beyond reproach. They'll
be no dirty tricks or last-minute skeletons for an October surprise.

I guess that's why the Dems are sending their attack dogs at the Boston
Globe against him.

No one is scared of Romney. Really. He'll probably win the NH primary
because he has name recognition there, and then that will be the end of
him. His "nuanced" flip-flop on abortion is a tad too sophisticated for
the majority of simpleton southern Republican jesus freaks, most of whom
also relegate Mormonism to the same category as witchcraft. I lived among
the "stuporcons" of the south for more than five years, and was always
amazed at their religious simplemindedness. These are the same folk who
believe Roman Catholics aren't christian, and Jews are the spawn of the
devil who killed Jesus.

Personally, I'd love to run a campaign against Romney, the guy who
represents the same corporate interests who have sold this country down
the drain.




Romney represents corporate interests? Why, because he's a businessman with
an MBA from Harvard?

I'd rather have a guy who made his money in business than one that made it
manipulating the law through our "injustice" system.

Dammit......
 

NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

All major corporations want these days is the cheapest possible
workforce, and if that means exporting jobs to China or India, so be
it. The righties think this is "good" for our economy, but it will do
us in sooner rather than later.

The only hope is to elect a president and congress in 2008 who will do
something to stem the flow of jobs. Those are more likely to be
democrats than republicans.
Baloney. Duncan Hunter is about as protectionist as you can get.

My personal pick is Mitt Romney.



Duncan Hunter has about as much chance as either of us to be nominated.
Your nominee will be Guiliani, Romney, or Tired Old Fred.
Hunter will be the VP candidate, and if he isn't he should.


Is Mitt for the war in Iraq, or against it? Or was he for it and is he
now against it? Mr. Flip-Flop..,he'll be fun to Swiftboat.
You guys might shoot your load too early trying to swiftboat Mitt. The
only position that he has "flip-flopped" on is abortion...and pointing
out that that he now takes a pro-life stance after taking a pro-choice
stance in order to win the governorship in MA only solidifies his
standing in the Republican primary.

You should save the flip-flop accusations for *if and when* he becomes
the nominee. It might sell well during a general election with
independents who are pro-choice. But it's not going to sell well with
Republicans who are glad he has "finally seen the light".

Democrats are scared of Romney. He has managed to steal the health care
issue with Romneycare. He is smart, articulate, accomplished, and good
looking. The man has also led a life that is beyond reproach. They'll
be no dirty tricks or last-minute skeletons for an October surprise.

I guess that's why the Dems are sending their attack dogs at the Boston
Globe against him.
No one is scared of Romney. Really. He'll probably win the NH primary
because he has name recognition there, and then that will be the end of
him. His "nuanced" flip-flop on abortion is a tad too sophisticated for
the majority of simpleton southern Republican jesus freaks, most of whom
also relegate Mormonism to the same category as witchcraft. I lived among
the "stuporcons" of the south for more than five years, and was always
amazed at their religious simplemindedness. These are the same folk who
believe Roman Catholics aren't christian, and Jews are the spawn of the
devil who killed Jesus.

Personally, I'd love to run a campaign against Romney, the guy who
represents the same corporate interests who have sold this country down
the drain.




Romney represents corporate interests? Why, because he's a businessman with
an MBA from Harvard?

I'd rather have a guy who made his money in business than one that made it
manipulating the law through our "injustice" system.





The current president has an MBA from Harvard, thus proving the utter
worthlessness of the degree.

Dammit......
 

On Jul 17, 8:54 am, Vic Smith wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 08:45:45 -0400, HK wrote:

Around here, liquor stores compete to see who can sell crappy beer at
the lowest price. Miller Lite seems to be the "leader." I have a buddy
whose favorite is Miller Lite and he offers me a can from time to time.
I tried it once, and thought it the most awful concoction that ever bore
the name "beer." But it is a big seller.

I never could figure out why anybody would drink "lite" beer.
But as you say, they do. Sometimes it's a problem for me on
a picnic where whoever brings the beer gets nearly all "lite."
I might have one of the few non-lites then switch to soda.
Better anyway, since daytime beer drinking in the sun ends up giving
me a headache if I drink more than one or two.

--Vic

Tried twice in the last 24 hours to post to this thread, anyone seeing
this post?? It is not showing up in my profile either, however, the
posting process poceeds with no problems as if it is working.

Dammit......
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

All major corporations want these days is the cheapest possible
workforce, and if that means exporting jobs to China or India, so be
it. The righties think this is "good" for our economy, but it will
do us in sooner rather than later.

The only hope is to elect a president and congress in 2008 who will
do something to stem the flow of jobs. Those are more likely to be
democrats than republicans.
Baloney. Duncan Hunter is about as protectionist as you can get.

My personal pick is Mitt Romney.



Duncan Hunter has about as much chance as either of us to be
nominated. Your nominee will be Guiliani, Romney, or Tired Old Fred.
Hunter will be the VP candidate, and if he isn't he should.


Is Mitt for the war in Iraq, or against it? Or was he for it and is he
now against it? Mr. Flip-Flop..,he'll be fun to Swiftboat.
You guys might shoot your load too early trying to swiftboat Mitt. The
only position that he has "flip-flopped" on is abortion...and pointing
out that that he now takes a pro-life stance after taking a pro-choice
stance in order to win the governorship in MA only solidifies his
standing in the Republican primary.

You should save the flip-flop accusations for *if and when* he becomes
the nominee. It might sell well during a general election with
independents who are pro-choice. But it's not going to sell well with
Republicans who are glad he has "finally seen the light".

Democrats are scared of Romney. He has managed to steal the health
care issue with Romneycare. He is smart, articulate, accomplished, and
good looking. The man has also led a life that is beyond reproach.
They'll be no dirty tricks or last-minute skeletons for an October
surprise.

I guess that's why the Dems are sending their attack dogs at the Boston
Globe against him.
No one is scared of Romney. Really. He'll probably win the NH primary
because he has name recognition there, and then that will be the end of
him. His "nuanced" flip-flop on abortion is a tad too sophisticated for
the majority of simpleton southern Republican jesus freaks, most of whom
also relegate Mormonism to the same category as witchcraft. I lived
among the "stuporcons" of the south for more than five years, and was
always amazed at their religious simplemindedness. These are the same
folk who believe Roman Catholics aren't christian, and Jews are the
spawn of the devil who killed Jesus.

Personally, I'd love to run a campaign against Romney, the guy who
represents the same corporate interests who have sold this country down
the drain.




Romney represents corporate interests? Why, because he's a businessman
with an MBA from Harvard?

I'd rather have a guy who made his money in business than one that made
it manipulating the law through our "injustice" system.





The current president has an MBA from Harvard, thus proving the utter
worthlessness of the degree.

Bush's economy has given us a record stock market, record unemployment
numbers, a shrinking deficit, and unprecedented sustained growth for the
past 4 1/2 years. I'd say his MBA is serving him just fine.

Dammit......
 

On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:54:11 -0000,
wrote:

On Jul 17, 8:54 am, Vic Smith wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 08:45:45 -0400, HK wrote:

Around here, liquor stores compete to see who can sell crappy beer at
the lowest price. Miller Lite seems to be the "leader." I have a buddy
whose favorite is Miller Lite and he offers me a can from time to time.
I tried it once, and thought it the most awful concoction that ever bore
the name "beer." But it is a big seller.

I never could figure out why anybody would drink "lite" beer.
But as you say, they do. Sometimes it's a problem for me on
a picnic where whoever brings the beer gets nearly all "lite."
I might have one of the few non-lites then switch to soda.
Better anyway, since daytime beer drinking in the sun ends up giving
me a headache if I drink more than one or two.

--Vic

Tried twice in the last 24 hours to post to this thread, anyone seeing
this post?? It is not showing up in my profile either, however, the
posting process poceeds with no problems as if it is working.

JWFM, I see this post.

--Vic

Dammit......
 

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jul 17, 8:54 am, Vic Smith wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 08:45:45 -0400, HK wrote:



Tried twice in the last 24 hours to post to this thread, anyone seeing
this post?? It is not showing up in my profile either, however, the
posting process poceeds with no problems as if it is working.


I don't see it.......honestly I don't. ;-)

Dammit......
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"HK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:




Romney represents corporate interests? Why, because he's a businessman
with an MBA from Harvard?

I'd rather have a guy who made his money in business than one that made
it manipulating the law through our "injustice" system.





The current president has an MBA from Harvard, thus proving the utter
worthlessness of the degree.

Bush's economy has given us a record stock market, record unemployment
numbers, a shrinking deficit, and unprecedented sustained growth for the
past 4 1/2 years. I'd say his MBA is serving him just fine.




Don't forget lower taxes........the reason all those great things are
happening. ;-)

Dammit......
 

On Jul 17, 1:12 pm, HK wrote:


"....Those were the days. I earned enough in the summer to just about cover
the next year's tuition, books and room and board, thanks to the
American union movement!-...."

Even with a unions help, those are deffinately days gone by.....

Dammit......
 

On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 07:00:40 -0400, HK wrote:

Jack Goff wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:12:52 -0400, HK wrote:

Don White wrote:
"JimH" ask wrote in message
...
"Don White" wrote in message
...
"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
snip...
The unions were good to me. Except for those 2 pricks I never had
problems with management either. *Guys like them are the reason
there's unions*. They'll lie and steal you blind, and get you killed
for a buck.
snip
--Vic
Bingo!
If everyone was treated fairly & with respect why would they willingly
pay those union dues year after year.
(not counting a few cases where a particular union may hold a business
hostage to enrich it's members above their fair value)
Stop living in the 1920s Don.

Unions cause mediocrity...........everyone receives the same pay increase,
despite their abilities and contributions.
The same 'minimal' increase. Nothing stops a corp from rewarding
exceptional workers.



That's right. The union rate in most contracts is the minimal rate.
There is nothing to prevent an employer from rewarding exceptional
workers more expansively.

Unfortunately, the basic union rate is already excessive in most
cases. The cost of employment of American union workers has initiated
the move to outsourcing. It certainly is sinking Chrysler and the
rest of the American auto industry, huh?


Sorry, Jackoff, but bad management and pursuit of short-term profit is
what sunk American manufacturing, that and the cost of providing health
care insurance to workers, which U.S. car manufacturers pay for but
Japanese car manufacturers do not.

Those are factors, but you're ignoring the excessive pay rates and
benefits, along with poor worker productivity, which accompanies UAW
employment. That's not the employer's fault.