Hello Richard,
LL>> It is all too easy to blame GWB for the problems this country has.
LL>> But the fact of the matter is that those problems have existed for
LL>> years, with little or nothing done about them. As a result, it was
LL>> just a matter of time before everything imploded and went to shit.
LL>> GWB simply made things happen sooner rather than later.
RW>> Agreed, i consider the clinton years a buble that was bound
RW>> to burst, sooner or later, and it wasn't that good, but at
RW>> least money was moving around, and folks were spending it.
LL>> It was definitely a "feel-good" presidency, the biggest story of
LL>> those years being the president getting a blowjob from a White House
LL>> intern. :)
RW> Yeah I know. i was still trying to figure out waht all that bs was about.
RW> Grounds for divorce, maybe, that was between him and his wife.
RW> What business was it of mine who honks his horn?
I really do not expect our leaders to be angels. I could care less
about what they do behind closed doors. As long as it does not affect
me, they can do whatever the hell they want. But to some folks, sex
really does matter. As well as sexual orientation. And God forbid
we ever have an open atheist as president...
LL>> I still have the speech to the nation Bill Clinton gave about the
LL>> meaning of the word "is". The man was such a great debater he could
LL>> convince his harshest critics he was right.
RW> IT was a leg slapper alright.
You remember that blue dress with the stain on it? That was real
evidence. Yet how many congresscritters bothered to inspect the
evidence? Probably no more than half a dozen. The impeachment was
a joke, the trial in the Senate to have the president removed from
office being an even bigger joke. Meanwhile, the taxpayers of this
country footed the entire bill, put together by Ken Starr.
RW>> AS for Wall Street, forget Wall Street, they've got their too big to
RW>> fail happening when it comes to sticking their hands in our wallets
RW>
RW>> The auto industry maybe, but i can't see where the rest of
RW>> this bailout actually helped average folks any at all. Was
RW>> reading in the NEw York Times weekly braille edition the
RW>> other day that fat cats are crying that they're limited to
RW>> $125k bonuses at some companies. Jesus Christ! $125k and
RW>> this jerk's gonna cry? Come on, he makes $60k a year and
RW>> is gonna cry cause his bonus is limited to $125k? I have no
RW>> sympathy.
LL>> And yet Mitt Romney is the frontrunner for the Republican
LL>> nomination. After Newt Gingrich won the South Carolina primary, it
LL>> was gloves off for Mitt Romney. The end result was Newt Gingrich
LL>> getting run over by a freight train. And now that Rick Santorum has
LL>> won three straight primaries (plus his win in Iowa) the same thing
LL>> will happen to him. What remains of Santorum that can be found will
LL>> be so scattered that it won't really matter...
RW> Yeah I know, the whole bunch of 'em scare me. Wish I still
RW> had it, but a NEw YOrk times braille weekly editorial said a third party
RW> candidate who could actually put together a
RW> platform talking about rebuilding the infrastructure, etc.
RW> could sure do well with voters. IF I still had it I'd quote some of it.
I still say for a third party candidate to be successful, he or she
must have three attributes -
* a geographical base
* charisma
* a single issue
The only two regions in this country having anything close to a
geographical base are the South (Redneck country) and the Northeast
(Yankee country). I doubt that anybody from the Northeast would be
able to gather a nationwide appeal. But a Southerner, or someone
who appeals to Southerners, could.
LL>> How did Mitt Romney get so fabulously wealthy? And why is he using
LL>> his wealth to steamroll his way to the Republican nomination? Nobody
LL>> seems to know what Mitt Romney is all about. What is he for? He
LL>> has the money to tarnish the reputation of any candidate who runs
LL>> against him. Not sure that strategy will work against incumbent
LL>> President Barack Obama in the general election, who is getting more
LL>> and more popular with each passing day...
RW> I've always wondered that myself. This guy's fabulously
RW> wealthy and will outspend the competition. I can believe
RW> somebody else would win Iowa though, those Republican
RW> farmers aren't gonna vote for a guy like Romney. I have
RW> plenty of Republican farmer friends back in the midwest, and before romney
RW> ever set foot in IOwa I could've told you that these guys weren't ROmney
RW> voters.
For whatever reason, Mitt Romney seems totally unable to understand
or speak the idiom of the general population. He keeps making the same
mistakes, over and over and over again. Like a total klutz, he never
seems able to get it. No matter how sincere he may be in trying to
appeal to a wider audience, he just can't do it.
LL>> "Corporations are people." - Mitt Romney
RW>> YOu cannot jail a corporation, nor can you torture it, deny
RW>> it liberty. YOu can holdits officers and directors liable
RW>> for criminal acts however. Hence, it is not a person,
RW>> because it cannot be held personally responsible in the way
RW>> people can.
LL>> It's a legal term, the courts ruling that corporations are people.
LL>> Gerry Spence wrote in detail about the ruling several years ago.
RW> I know that, but still it's bullshit. If you can get
RW> drilled down far enough to find out who actually gave the
RW> order, then you can jail or fine or otherwise hold that
RW> person responsible, but you cannot hold a corporation
RW> responsible for its actions as you can a person. Until you
RW> can, a corporation is not a person.
Nerd talk is just that. Nerd talk. Which is why Mitt Romney
cannot connect with everyday folks. He just keeps shooting blanks.
--Lee
--- MesNews/1.06.00.00-gb
* Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)
|
