The Best We Can Do?

[Timber Loftis]

Kudos, Sky - Leahy really rocks.

[skywalker]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Kudos, Sky - Leahy really rocks.

Yes he does, doesn't he? Best head of the Senate Judiciary ever! And a Batman fan too!

Mark

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by skywalker: quote: Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Kudos, Sky - Leahy really rocks.

Yes he does, doesn't he? Best head of the Senate Judiciary ever! And a Batman fan too!

Mark[/QUOTE]Judiciary Committee is where it's at. Very powerful committee. Moreover, very cool issues. If it involves really complex legal analysis - it's gotta go through the judiciary Committee. I interned on a state legislature's judiciary committee (Vermont's in fact) and found it absolutely fascinating.

Originally posted by skywalker: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Sorry Mark, I didn't mean to make this a pick on Mark for telling me to not call him an idiot. You were right and I was wrong on that account.

You know, I really don't know why I get so angrivated (word I made up!) when someone bashes the Dems. I have no connection to the party and do not follow all their platforms (I'm Independent...vote for the best person for the job). I do not follow the Republicans at all either (did you notice?). But I do start to bristle when the Senators I voted for and who I feel are doing a great job, get bashed. I feel equally as strong about Leahy and also Congressman Sanders. I feel they all fight the good fight. This is my opinion, of course and others "will" disagree, but I hate them being called idiots just like others feel when their "boy" gets smacked around. That is why I've decided not to call other people idiots. It's just wrong.
And just because I feel that way, it doesn't mean that others have to respect my "boys". So fire away MagiK and Iron_Ranger, I will try to be less thinskinned in the future.

Mark[/QUOTE]No Mark, you were right. I ripped on you long ago about calling Bush an idiot or some other name that I have forgotten. I was completely wrong to turn around and do it right back to you and my apology was sincere. I can admit when I am wrong. (it does happen occasionally )

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Magick: I don't know what you think I called Jeffords in my hectic detail of the "3 kinds" of Vermonters, but it wasn't anything bad. I was simply stating that both "the good" and "the bad" ends of both the economic as well as the ideological scale in that State would IMO agree with Jeffords. And if you think I'm trying to put down honest, hard working Vermonters, you're simply wrong. I was simply trying to define, in a mere sentence, three character types I see as representing the outside world's, and the Vermonters', view of Vermonters. You obviously know very little on this issue, and I'll leave it at that. I know enough to get irked when people slander good decent people just because they live in trailers. You all but called them trailer trash As for the problem you're ranting about and saying you want to solve, what is it exactly? You've been quite scattered on the issue. The original post seemed to define the problem as Jefford's desire to concentrate on or talk about problems. I thought you were just trying to slam Jeffords/ Dems/ and anyone else who says anything other than President Bush's sh*t smells like a bed of roses. So, I thought the goal you were seeking was to limit issues and NOT discuss things the current administration sucks at - or deflect the blame for those things. Come to think of it, are you a WhiteHouse staffer? If your reading comprehension doesnt allow you to determine the issues we have covered, you may want to try taking some more classes. The only other big bitch I can see you having is that "Federal Income Tax" withholding line on your pay stub. How do you fix that? Simply lower taxes? If that's your solution, it shows a lack of even rudimentary socioeconomic understanding. Don't get me wrong, here. I do not deny that I hate every dollar taken from my payday - and I often has some choice things to say about where I see the money going. As well, I'll again agree with you on inefficiency in the government. But you define these broad problems, and then act like taking money from one program will fix everything, but you don't want to take any money from your precious defense budget. There is no logic in this. Just because National Defense is a NECESSITY, it does not logically follow that we allow an infinite amount of capital to be sucked in by it. I'll point out that there are other NECESSITIES our taxes pay for. I am completley against taxation that rips 48% of every dollar I make out of my pocket. The constitution and the founding fathers actually decryed a federal income tax and intended there to be no such tax. The idea was to fund both governmental and social programs (if there were to be any) by what we now call a sales tax on goods and services. Income taxation is actually antithetical to the whole concept of the type of government we were supposed to have. The government has no right to our income. They only can morally and legally gain access it through charging us for the goods and services we choose to select..but you see that takes the power away from the federal government and puts it into the hands of those people who work for a living...and we can't have that now can we? But all that is irrelevant. MY point is now and always has been, throwing more money at the Education system and medical systems is a complete waste, untill you actually FIX the dang problem. The problem is WASTE FRAUD AND ABUSE. Which of those three words can you not understand? As for me not knowing anything about military spending, I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you trying to tell me there is no waste in military spending - no, wait, you're trying to tell me it's all the fault of Dems. Either way, excuse me while I proceed to ROFLMAO. The military only accounts for roughly 14 percent of the national budget. Sounds to me like rather than short the people you depend on to secure your national interests, it might be better to examine the bloated 86% that is called the US Beauracracy. I get the idea you are ignorant about military matters from the way you brought up an issue from 30 years ago rather than something recent and more accurate.(and also other thoughtless comments you have made in other threads) I try to stay politically unaffiliated, but you seem to push me there. So, I'll again point out, as most everyone can attest, we all had more money with the past administration, and with Democrat administrations in general for the past 50 years. Mr. President can keep his paltry refund check - I want him to come up with an idea to decrease unemployment. I do believe that the DOT comms had more to do with that economy than Alan Greenspan or The administration. The people at the Fed were screaming bloody murder about the ridiculous PE ratios for years and no one listend...turns out Greenspan was right and the boom went bust the year of the last election. (ie before a new administration took office). Is Bush or Clinton responsible of the Boom or bust, nope. That was the Capitalists...and some idiots and some criminals. Bush is right about slashing taxes, captial gains taxes, personal income taxes and all the rest of the taxes and the outrageous Death Tax the socialistic minded have imposed on us. Sometimes you add some interesting thoughts to the discussions herein. On this issue, however, you have simply wasted a lot of space and time on stream-of-consciousness rambling. Right. Are you really sure you are not Dramnek in another guise? Nice of you to blow my issues off wihtout even really saying anything...ohhhh stream of consiousness....puhlease. The fact is the education system and the medical system and the welfare systems are run rampant with fraud, waste and abuse and you have missed those topics all along through out. You just keep saying, tax more, spend more. A disaster waiting to happen. Jeffords was a bad target, my friend. As far as politicians go, he's got a lot of integrity. Even in his decision to leave the party, as most will attest. The only ones with bad things to say are staunch Republicans, who are obviously angered at losing the numbers game. It is no secret that Jeffords was a Vermont Republican, and Reps in Vermont are more liberal than Dems in most places, my friend. My favorite being, of course, my old neighbor in Tunbridge, Fred Tuttle.

Jeffords was a good target though he wasnt really my main target, he just got hit with colateral fall out. What he SAID was my target, his ideas and concepts about increasing spending rather than fixing the problem, his deriding the president accusing him of politicizing the war while he and his cronies are and have been stonewalling any action to try and get the economy back on track untill their election is over and they attempt thos 40 seats that his leader was crowing about when he didnt know the mikes were live. If Jeffords had integrity, he would have served his term as the party he was elected to office as (he could still vote the way he wanted to on the issues. there is no mandate that all members of a party toe the line.) But instead he timed his move to gain the maximum amount of political gain for himself not caring if his constituents would mind or not. Don't try to make him sound like something he is not...he is no saint nor is he some kind of legendary folk hero....or maybe he is, how would I know? All I know is that I dislike his tactics and his methods (you see to me, the ends do not justify the means)

You did manage to make me realize one thing. You seem very much like Dramnek and I guess Ill deal with you in the same way.

Take care and enjoy.

[ 10-07-2002, 08:46 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[skywalker]

Read the book.

Mark

Originally posted by skywalker: Read the book. Mark

In my copious amounts of free time between 60 hour work weeks, Accounting 111 classes and American History 111 classes and going to see my kinds now and then hehe I barley have time to post enough on here [img]smile.gif[/img] Im procrastinating my Accounting reading assignment right now.

[Gregory Longshanks]

Perhaps I'm quite wrong, but I would venture Mark, that you had originally posted the text of Sen. Jeffords speech to highlight that there are other issues within the country that really have received scant attention if at all.

Though it's tempting to immediately judge a person's words based upon sentiments, political affiliations and other factors...I would argue that it is far more enlightening to actually listen to what is said. Separating our personal feelings and looking at things objectively is very difficult as the previous postings show. However as noted in a previous posting, we are very human, and time has shown each and everyone of us for the comedians that we are.

Personally I admire those who take their act public. Politicians don't make it onto the stage by accident. Sometimes it is embarassing, other times just funny. But in the end if you listen carefully enough, you can catch a glimmer of truth. Humor is perhaps the greatest vehicle for truth...and no damnable person is always damnable, nor every hero always a hero.

Gregory [img]smile.gif[/img] I never said that what Jeffords said was not an issue (or issues) that needed to be addressed...I railed at the fact that the very party he belongs to has been stalling every effort to address those issues all year long, in a blatant political attempt to gain seats in the up coming election. Then turn right around and blast Bush for doing the same thing about war issues...completely disregarding the fact that they are doing the exact same thing, only on an issue that effects pretty much everyone in the country rather than just the military (mostly just the military).

[True_Moose]

That speech seemed remarkably like the speech on the West Wing last week...

Seriously, down to the we can do better.

BTW, I think that the senator makes a pretty good point. Only problem is, I'm sure that the democrats *cough* Yugoslavia *cough* have done it too. And such is the nature of politics. [img]smile.gif[/img]