I stand corrected <G>

Jeff DeWitt

billy ray wrote:
> Jeff that is a terrible thing to say about Mr. Gore's loss in the 2000
> election.
>
> He was a nutcase long before then. In his 1992 literary masterpiece "Earth
> in the Balance: Forging a New Common Purpose" he says he would rather see
> women to die a horrible painful death than to cut down a tree.
>
> I assume that is why the tree huggers support him...
>
>
> "Jeff DeWitt" <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:x_ggg.19453$JW5.16995@southeast.rr.com...
>
>>I guess it depends how you define nutcase, although Al Gore certainly seems
>>to have been pushed over the edge by losing the 2000 election.
>>
>>
>>
>>Garth Almgren wrote:
>>
>>>Around 6/1/2006 9:56 PM, Jeff DeWitt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Oh there will be plenty of need, 2008 is coming and no doubt the
>>>>Democrats will come up with another nutcase lefty to run, someone I can
>>>>use that quote against.
>>>
>>>
>>>Another?? Not a single Democrat candidate at the federal level comes to
>>>mind who could honestly be called a "nutcase."
>>>
>>>Now, some of the more localized candidates are borderline, but that's a
>>>whole 'nother ballpark. :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I just hope to God the Republicans come up with
>>>>someone good to run against him (or her).
>>>
>>>
>>>Why should the Republicans have to come up with someone good?
>>>They've done *very* well with the exceedingly bad candidates of the last
>>>few elections...
>>
>>More's the pity... Actually I don't think Bush (either one), was
>>exccedingly bad, but the Republicans should have been able to do a lot
>>better.
>>
>>>My advice: Don't fix it if it ain't broken. :)
>>>
>>>
>
>
>

 

I stand corrected <G>

Jeff DeWitt

billy ray wrote:
> Jeff that is a terrible thing to say about Mr. Gore's loss in the 2000
> election.
>
> He was a nutcase long before then. In his 1992 literary masterpiece "Earth
> in the Balance: Forging a New Common Purpose" he says he would rather see
> women to die a horrible painful death than to cut down a tree.
>
> I assume that is why the tree huggers support him...
>
>
> "Jeff DeWitt" <JeffDeWitt@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:x_ggg.19453$JW5.16995@southeast.rr.com...
>
>>I guess it depends how you define nutcase, although Al Gore certainly seems
>>to have been pushed over the edge by losing the 2000 election.
>>
>>
>>
>>Garth Almgren wrote:
>>
>>>Around 6/1/2006 9:56 PM, Jeff DeWitt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Oh there will be plenty of need, 2008 is coming and no doubt the
>>>>Democrats will come up with another nutcase lefty to run, someone I can
>>>>use that quote against.
>>>
>>>
>>>Another?? Not a single Democrat candidate at the federal level comes to
>>>mind who could honestly be called a "nutcase."
>>>
>>>Now, some of the more localized candidates are borderline, but that's a
>>>whole 'nother ballpark. :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I just hope to God the Republicans come up with
>>>>someone good to run against him (or her).
>>>
>>>
>>>Why should the Republicans have to come up with someone good?
>>>They've done *very* well with the exceedingly bad candidates of the last
>>>few elections...
>>
>>More's the pity... Actually I don't think Bush (either one), was
>>exccedingly bad, but the Republicans should have been able to do a lot
>>better.
>>
>>>My advice: Don't fix it if it ain't broken. :)
>>>
>>>
>
>
>

 

Ahh the left doesn't pander go greed so that's why they've created all
these government handout programs?

Is that why they go into absolute hysterical hissy fits when anyone
suggests doing anything to fix the Social Security debacle?

While both sides do it the left has done an exceptionally good job of
learning the lesson "He who robs Peter to pay Paul can be certain of the
support of Paul".

Jeff DeWitt

R. Lander wrote:
> billy ray wrote:
>
>
>>You may have something there.
>>
>>If the liberals and Demoncrats could keep their pants zipped the population
>>would drop severely and decent people might again populate the earth.
>
>
> People with low IQs on both fringes should go the www.vhemt.org route.
> But the far-Right is worse than the far-Left because they get elected
> more often. Why? Because most people are greedy and the Right is all
> about pandering to greed. They created the Me Generation without really
> acknowledging it. Having respect for nature is the antithesis of greed,
> hence the strong correlation between Republican "values" and
> anti-environmentalism.
>
> R. Lander
>

 

Ahh the left doesn't pander go greed so that's why they've created all
these government handout programs?

Is that why they go into absolute hysterical hissy fits when anyone
suggests doing anything to fix the Social Security debacle?

While both sides do it the left has done an exceptionally good job of
learning the lesson "He who robs Peter to pay Paul can be certain of the
support of Paul".

Jeff DeWitt

R. Lander wrote:
> billy ray wrote:
>
>
>>You may have something there.
>>
>>If the liberals and Demoncrats could keep their pants zipped the population
>>would drop severely and decent people might again populate the earth.
>
>
> People with low IQs on both fringes should go the www.vhemt.org route.
> But the far-Right is worse than the far-Left because they get elected
> more often. Why? Because most people are greedy and the Right is all
> about pandering to greed. They created the Me Generation without really
> acknowledging it. Having respect for nature is the antithesis of greed,
> hence the strong correlation between Republican "values" and
> anti-environmentalism.
>
> R. Lander
>

 

Ahh the left doesn't pander go greed so that's why they've created all
these government handout programs?

Is that why they go into absolute hysterical hissy fits when anyone
suggests doing anything to fix the Social Security debacle?

While both sides do it the left has done an exceptionally good job of
learning the lesson "He who robs Peter to pay Paul can be certain of the
support of Paul".

Jeff DeWitt

R. Lander wrote:
> billy ray wrote:
>
>
>>You may have something there.
>>
>>If the liberals and Demoncrats could keep their pants zipped the population
>>would drop severely and decent people might again populate the earth.
>
>
> People with low IQs on both fringes should go the www.vhemt.org route.
> But the far-Right is worse than the far-Left because they get elected
> more often. Why? Because most people are greedy and the Right is all
> about pandering to greed. They created the Me Generation without really
> acknowledging it. Having respect for nature is the antithesis of greed,
> hence the strong correlation between Republican "values" and
> anti-environmentalism.
>
> R. Lander
>

 

Jeff DeWitt wrote:
> Ahh the left doesn't pander to greed so that's why they've created all
> these government handout programs?

Exactly. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure out why.
HINT: examine the targets of the left's vs. the right's largess.

> Is that why they go into absolute hysterical hissy fits when anyone
> suggests doing anything to fix the Social Security debacle?

Never seen this phenomenon. I DO notice that leftists do go into
hysterics whenever REPUBLICANS introduce legislation claiming it will
"fix" Social Security when the actual effect will be the destruction of
SS, while divvying up the existing spoils amongst Republican donors...

> While both sides do it the left has done an exceptionally good job of
> learning the lesson "He who robs Peter to pay Paul can be certain of the
> support of Paul".

Funny, I thought that was the operating philosophy of the Republican
Party, with the proviso that Paul has more money than Peter to start with...

Dan

> Jeff DeWitt
>
> R. Lander wrote:
>
>> billy ray wrote:
>>
>>
>>> You may have something there.
>>>
>>> If the liberals and Demoncrats could keep their pants zipped the
>>> population
>>> would drop severely and decent people might again populate the earth.
>>
>>
>>
>> People with low IQs on both fringes should go the www.vhemt.org route.
>> But the far-Right is worse than the far-Left because they get elected
>> more often. Why? Because most people are greedy and the Right is all
>> about pandering to greed. They created the Me Generation without really
>> acknowledging it. Having respect for nature is the antithesis of greed,
>> hence the strong correlation between Republican "values" and
>> anti-environmentalism.
>>
>> R. Lander
>>

 

Jeff DeWitt wrote:
> Ahh the left doesn't pander to greed so that's why they've created all
> these government handout programs?

Exactly. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure out why.
HINT: examine the targets of the left's vs. the right's largess.

> Is that why they go into absolute hysterical hissy fits when anyone
> suggests doing anything to fix the Social Security debacle?

Never seen this phenomenon. I DO notice that leftists do go into
hysterics whenever REPUBLICANS introduce legislation claiming it will
"fix" Social Security when the actual effect will be the destruction of
SS, while divvying up the existing spoils amongst Republican donors...

> While both sides do it the left has done an exceptionally good job of
> learning the lesson "He who robs Peter to pay Paul can be certain of the
> support of Paul".

Funny, I thought that was the operating philosophy of the Republican
Party, with the proviso that Paul has more money than Peter to start with...

Dan

> Jeff DeWitt
>
> R. Lander wrote:
>
>> billy ray wrote:
>>
>>
>>> You may have something there.
>>>
>>> If the liberals and Demoncrats could keep their pants zipped the
>>> population
>>> would drop severely and decent people might again populate the earth.
>>
>>
>>
>> People with low IQs on both fringes should go the www.vhemt.org route.
>> But the far-Right is worse than the far-Left because they get elected
>> more often. Why? Because most people are greedy and the Right is all
>> about pandering to greed. They created the Me Generation without really
>> acknowledging it. Having respect for nature is the antithesis of greed,
>> hence the strong correlation between Republican "values" and
>> anti-environmentalism.
>>
>> R. Lander
>>

 

Jeff DeWitt wrote:
> Ahh the left doesn't pander to greed so that's why they've created all
> these government handout programs?

Exactly. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure out why.
HINT: examine the targets of the left's vs. the right's largess.

> Is that why they go into absolute hysterical hissy fits when anyone
> suggests doing anything to fix the Social Security debacle?

Never seen this phenomenon. I DO notice that leftists do go into
hysterics whenever REPUBLICANS introduce legislation claiming it will
"fix" Social Security when the actual effect will be the destruction of
SS, while divvying up the existing spoils amongst Republican donors...

> While both sides do it the left has done an exceptionally good job of
> learning the lesson "He who robs Peter to pay Paul can be certain of the
> support of Paul".

Funny, I thought that was the operating philosophy of the Republican
Party, with the proviso that Paul has more money than Peter to start with...

Dan

> Jeff DeWitt
>
> R. Lander wrote:
>
>> billy ray wrote:
>>
>>
>>> You may have something there.
>>>
>>> If the liberals and Demoncrats could keep their pants zipped the
>>> population
>>> would drop severely and decent people might again populate the earth.
>>
>>
>>
>> People with low IQs on both fringes should go the www.vhemt.org route.
>> But the far-Right is worse than the far-Left because they get elected
>> more often. Why? Because most people are greedy and the Right is all
>> about pandering to greed. They created the Me Generation without really
>> acknowledging it. Having respect for nature is the antithesis of greed,
>> hence the strong correlation between Republican "values" and
>> anti-environmentalism.
>>
>> R. Lander
>>

 

dan wrote:
> Jeff DeWitt wrote:
>
>> Ahh the left doesn't pander to greed so that's why they've created all
>> these government handout programs?
>
>
> Exactly. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure out why.
> HINT: examine the targets of the left's vs. the right's largess.
>
>> Is that why they go into absolute hysterical hissy fits when anyone
>> suggests doing anything to fix the Social Security debacle?
>
>
> Never seen this phenomenon. I DO notice that leftists do go into
> hysterics whenever REPUBLICANS introduce legislation claiming it will
> "fix" Social Security when the actual effect will be the destruction of
> SS, while divvying up the existing spoils amongst Republican donors...

You need to get out more <G>.

There have been a number of plans to do something about SS, but the
lefties always start bleating about how it's going to cut the benefits
of the poor old people (and invariably whatever the plan is does no such
thing, and doesn't effect current recipients at all). Fact of the
matter is that SS is basically a Ponzi scheme and while it CAN'T be
fixed, it can be turned into something that makes economic sense.
>
>> While both sides do it the left has done an exceptionally good job of
>> learning the lesson "He who robs Peter to pay Paul can be certain of
>> the support of Paul".
>
>
> Funny, I thought that was the operating philosophy of the Republican
> Party, with the proviso that Paul has more money than Peter to start
> with...

No, you have it backwards, that's the Democrat's philosophy, they always
want to raise taxes on the "evil rich" to give more to the "poor" (in
other words take money from one group to buy votes from the other.

Jeff DeWitt

>
> Dan
>
>> Jeff DeWitt
>>
>> R. Lander wrote:
>>
>>> billy ray wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> You may have something there.
>>>>
>>>> If the liberals and Demoncrats could keep their pants zipped the
>>>> population
>>>> would drop severely and decent people might again populate the earth.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> People with low IQs on both fringes should go the www.vhemt.org route.
>>> But the far-Right is worse than the far-Left because they get elected
>>> more often. Why? Because most people are greedy and the Right is all
>>> about pandering to greed. They created the Me Generation without really
>>> acknowledging it. Having respect for nature is the antithesis of greed,
>>> hence the strong correlation between Republican "values" and
>>> anti-environmentalism.
>>>
>>> R. Lander
>>>

 

dan wrote:
> Jeff DeWitt wrote:
>
>> Ahh the left doesn't pander to greed so that's why they've created all
>> these government handout programs?
>
>
> Exactly. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure out why.
> HINT: examine the targets of the left's vs. the right's largess.
>
>> Is that why they go into absolute hysterical hissy fits when anyone
>> suggests doing anything to fix the Social Security debacle?
>
>
> Never seen this phenomenon. I DO notice that leftists do go into
> hysterics whenever REPUBLICANS introduce legislation claiming it will
> "fix" Social Security when the actual effect will be the destruction of
> SS, while divvying up the existing spoils amongst Republican donors...

You need to get out more <G>.

There have been a number of plans to do something about SS, but the
lefties always start bleating about how it's going to cut the benefits
of the poor old people (and invariably whatever the plan is does no such
thing, and doesn't effect current recipients at all). Fact of the
matter is that SS is basically a Ponzi scheme and while it CAN'T be
fixed, it can be turned into something that makes economic sense.
>
>> While both sides do it the left has done an exceptionally good job of
>> learning the lesson "He who robs Peter to pay Paul can be certain of
>> the support of Paul".
>
>
> Funny, I thought that was the operating philosophy of the Republican
> Party, with the proviso that Paul has more money than Peter to start
> with...

No, you have it backwards, that's the Democrat's philosophy, they always
want to raise taxes on the "evil rich" to give more to the "poor" (in
other words take money from one group to buy votes from the other.

Jeff DeWitt

>
> Dan
>
>> Jeff DeWitt
>>
>> R. Lander wrote:
>>
>>> billy ray wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> You may have something there.
>>>>
>>>> If the liberals and Demoncrats could keep their pants zipped the
>>>> population
>>>> would drop severely and decent people might again populate the earth.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> People with low IQs on both fringes should go the www.vhemt.org route.
>>> But the far-Right is worse than the far-Left because they get elected
>>> more often. Why? Because most people are greedy and the Right is all
>>> about pandering to greed. They created the Me Generation without really
>>> acknowledging it. Having respect for nature is the antithesis of greed,
>>> hence the strong correlation between Republican "values" and
>>> anti-environmentalism.
>>>
>>> R. Lander
>>>