A TRUE Texas Rebel for Gore!

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Paladin1

New member
Okay, boys and girls, this forum needed some shaking up... I've perused the various topics in this corner of the forum, and it's become a boring litany of Clinton, Democrat, Gore and Liberal-bashing. There's even some enthusiasm for that useless embarassment to our great state of Texas, Governor Shrub. I know this is going to be like taking a baseball bat and smacking a hornets nest, but here I go....

It's a hell of a lot easier to go with the flow, but where's the courage if you don't stand up? And standing up in a forum full of well-armed fellow gun rights advocates and speaking up for Al Gore and trying to bring some reality to an examination of George Dubya takes some guts, you have to admit.

So here I am, friends--a Gore supporter, Bush-hater AND gun rights activist in a room--a BIG room--FULL of bashers. Anyone out there who's been in the closet, come on out and join me. Let's have some REAL fun with this! Let's mix it up, there's too much of the same boring bashing going on in this place. Now I'll give you a target. Let's get it on!

To start off, all you anti-Clintonistas out there who mocked the military saluting the Prez when you felt he had avoided military service... how do you feel about Dubya using his daddy's rich connections to "risk his neck" in the Air National Guard? True service to the country??? What a joke! And what hypocracy if you wouldn't salute Bill but would Dubya. Is THAT someone who should be commander in chief of the armed forces? At least Big Al is a Viet Nam vet--albeit a correspondent. He was THERE, at least. And he could have gotten out of the tour of duty if he wanted to. There's just so much material to work with here on Dubya. Watching him make his acceptance speach, I just looked at this guy and thought he really belonged on the cover of MAD magazine--anyone else see the resemblance out there?

Okay, friends--fire away (not literally, of course)! Let's have some fun with this now!

------------------
"I love to do things that scare me, for without fear there is no courage..."
 
Glad to hear you're pro-gun. I wish all the Presidential candidates were.

I support Bush, only because he is somewhat pro-gun, much more pro-gun freedom than Gore, and because he has a better chance of winning than the Libertarian. And I'm afraid Gore would rob my gun safe.
 
MP-there are more of us pro-gun within the Dems than you would think. The issue has become a media feeding frenzy, which distorts true dialog.

I would suggest, however, that before you decide to vote for a candidate like Bush based on one issue, you take a look at his stands on other issues too. He is very strong, for instance, on bringing the church and religious institutions into our lives, whether we want them or not. Just another bureaucracy with a different name. The Repubs are enthusiastic about claiming the Dems want to control our lives through big government. But what they don't tell you is they have the same approach, just with differnet institutions. Could be through "faith-based institutions", "educational vouchers", "school prayer", "family values". These are all code phrases aimed to emotionally stimulate voters but just really mean some other institution to attempt to control our lives. Just one they like better.

------------------
"I love to do things that scare me, for without fear there is no courage..."
 
Howdy, posting here from Nashville, TN.

I know Gore, not personally but in a neighborly sort of way, and am almost nearly kinfolk to him. Al Senior was engaged to marry my aunt at one time, so there is more of a connection through that as well. Let me tell you a little about the Gores....

They are a very intelligent family, nobody can say anything less than that about Al Jr. as well. But they have their fair share of embarassments, none of which you have probably heard in the media...

They are well known as a pack of hypocrites, while pushing anti-tobacco rhetoric they continue to this day to operate tobacco farms, not through their own names of course but through family controlled corporations. They make more money off the subsidies to not grow it of course though. They owned, until fairly recently, both liquor and gun stores in and around the family complex. While pushing his enviroment friendly speeches the last time he ran for president they were found to be running an illegal toxic waste dump behind the family farm, which has been cleaned up sincethen but from time to time more smaller dumps have been found (one within the last 6 months containing pesticides used for tobacco farming, interesting eh?) They are well known as renting residential properties that can best be described as near tenement level, one case making minor national news recently.

While Al Jr may have set foot in Vietnam he got nowhere close to the front or danger of any kind, you can say Bush didn't even go but he did risk his life flying fighter jets here in the states daily and could have been called up at anytime, thus putting his life on the line much moreso than Al.

Vote for who you want, just an observation.
 
Paladin, you may get a few flames, but not from me.

Your comparison of Bush and Clinton regarding Vietnam is not completely valid. Yes, Bush did go into the National Guard. He flew jets, which is not exactly a non-hazardous exercise. Clinton, on the other hand, went to London and Moscow to protest the war, and in his letters made it quite clear what he thought of the military. That has rankled some vets, both on TFL and "in real life."

Given your support for Gore, I'd have to question your committment to RKBA. Do you accept the notion that we, the law-abiding, should be licensed and fingerprinted just because we own guns? And how will that affect criminals? Will violent felons recoil at the thought of being arrested for not having a gun license any more than they fear arrest for driving a stolen car? And what about registration of guns? Please explain to me how this will do anything to help fight crime.

You have the right under the Constitution to vote for Gore. Why you, or anyone, would do so is beyond me.

Dick
Want to send a message to Bush? Sign the petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/monk/petition.html and forward the link to every gun owner you know.
 
I see the Democratic party as socialists. The Republicans, unfortunately, are not far behind them. I think Bush is a typical Republican. Gore is going to be the same as Clinton. I have no doubt that Gore will try to appoint very leftist judges. This is the biggest reason I would not vote for him. He is not honest either (selective memory on the fund raising issue).
Gore and his kind believe the we are safe with the government having the guns and not with us having guns. I wonder why that is? If guns are evil, the government should not have them either.



------------------
"Unless the Lord builds the house, they labour in vain that build it:
except the Lord guards the city, the watchman stays awake in vain." (Psalm 127:1)


"Freedom is given to the human conditionally, in the assumption of his constant religious responsibility."
(Alexander Solzhenitzyn)

[This message has been edited by Keiller TN (edited August 06, 2000).]
 
Paladin 1, speaking of magazines, better on the cover of Mad Magazine, than your good buddy Billy Boy on the cover of Time, Jan. 4, 1999, where with that pose, Billy Boy was a dead ringer for Benito Mussolini... whose ideology Billy Boy quite obviously adores.

Get that holier-than-thou smirk, his chin thrust out and up, that lower lip sucking his upper lip like Monica's nipple, those beady eyes (he's as narrow through the eyes as a cut worm, anyway) and that attitude of "I can do anything I want to do to the serfs and peasants and they can't do anything about it! Hahahahahah." If he had on one of those funny hats with the tassle that Mussolini used to wear, he'd be the spittin' image of him.

Yeah, Benito Billy Boy, he da man!!

The various fighter pilots I know don't think it's a really safe occupation. Certainly not as safe as being a REMF pseudo journalist in Veeeitham, being assigned Special Forces bodyguards. You'd think those bodyguards might have had something a little more important to do, like killing V.C., than protecting that wooden indian marshmellow, wouldn't you??

Guess I'll have to vote for the Bushmobile. J.B.
 
Well, well, well...

I am a LIFELONG Democrat. Formerly liberal, now quite conservative (except for medical care issues). I can't bring myself to join the Republican party because certain of their stands on people's health and wellbeing offend me. Also, I find them to be an exclusionary party. By that I mean that if you're not a white, Anglo-Saxon heterosexual making at least $250,000 a year, you need not apply. Further, business can do no wrong, even if it's polluting or running sweatshops.

I voted for Klinton. Twice. (Hanging head in shame). But who ran against him? First time was Bush Sr., who was responsible for a massive recession in the early 90's, during which time I had no job for 18 months. We lost our home, and had to file bankruptcy. While all this was happening to millions of Americans, Bush Daddy was out fishing off the back of his million dollar boat. Asked about the recession, he said "I see no evidence of a recession." He HAD TO GO, if for that statement alone.

But, further, he was involed (along with his mentor Reagan), in conspiracy to defraud the United States government. How you ask? Well, by funneling money to the Contras after a law was passed banning that activity. By holding meetings to discuss the funding. By having Ollie run off and play spy (or whatever it was that he was doing).

No, the Republicans were doing themselves no honor during that period. Then, the 2nd time around, they ran Bob "just say no to everything" Dole. Mr. Congeniality himself. I'd been seeing that guy around for many years, and not ONCE did I ever see or hear of him doing something POSITIVE. Couldn't support that sourpuss either.

Which brings us to today. Let me tell you friends, that I wouldn't vote for Algore if this were a ONE MANE RACE. The guy is the most amoral man (next to Klinton) that I've ever seen aspire to high office. At least Nixon had the DIGNITY to resign when it became obvious that he'd broken the law. Klinton and Algore ("inventor of the Internet") just laugh at the Constitution, as something the "little people" have to follow.

They are swine.

I doubt that I'll EVER vote Dem again.

That being said, I cannot understand the violent reaction to wanting medecines covered by Medicare. Haven't any of you seen the recent news stories that drug prices have gone up 150% in the past 8 years? Or that old people must now decide on drugs or FOOD? Or that they take busses to Mexico and Canada, where THE SAME DRUGS are only 1/3 to 1/2 the price here in the U.S.?

Do any of you have elderly family still alive? Have you EVER asked them about their drugs? What is happening here is that U.S. drug companies are bilking the elderly out of hundreds of millions of dollars BECAUSE THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT. Many other countries have strict price controls on drugs, but the drug companies still manage to sell there. If it were "unprofitable" for them, they'd just pull out, now wouldn't they?

So, I guess if Grandma needs that heart medication to stay alive, but can't afford it, tough sh*t, hmmmm?

"If they're going to die, let them do it, and decrease the surplus population!" - Ebenezer Scrooge.

Personally, I felt that Klinton's "deal" to remove the marriage tax for Medicare funding of drugs was a great idea (the ONLY one he had in his entire two terms). Too bad many people are so hysterically against even the SLIGHTEST thing that might help a PERSON, rather than a business. Which is why I cannot join the Republican party.

Flame retardant suit now on. Have at me.
 
Dennis, there are at least two parts to the Republican Party: the country club Repubs, and the grassroots Repubs. I don't fit your $250,000 a year category. I'm at least $210,00 short. But, in the grassroots category I'm in there 100%...for now.

Years ago I voted Democrat. In part because I didn't know what I was doing, but also because the Democratic party was different then. At one time they stood against the idea of an overwhelming, snooping federal government. Now they embody that type of government. Are there Repub's that fit that bill? You bet. And I want them out.

Dick
Want to send a message to Bush? Sign the petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/monk/petition.html and forward the link to every gun owner you know.
 
Dennis O., This is not a flame. JMO.

Bush was responsible for a recession??? One man is not responsible for the economy, be it the Prez or the Fed Chairman.

Price controls on drugs or anything help no one. The reason these and other wonderful drugs are available is due to the free market, and the companies stand to make money on it. Why else would they research and produce the product? Not out of altruism, I can tell you that. Who are you or I or anyone to tell what amount of profit should be made on a particular product? That is determined by the market. IMO the gov't should get out of providing medical care once and for all, and health insurance should not be tied to your job.

I'm no republican, but I agree with some of the items in their platform. When there is a choice between the free market and regulation, I'll vote for the market everytime.
 
Dennis,
Without flamming, I want to calmly express my feelings on the healthcare issue. YOU DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO HEALTHCARE. You have every right to go out and get a job, and pay for your doctor yourself. If you have no job, then you have a right to equal protection under the law and there is even a Federal Bureaucracy in place to see that when you want to pursue a job, nobody can discriminate against you (EEOC).
When you assert that you have a RIGHT to healthcare, then you also assert that the physician has no right to practice his trade. If you can force a physician to do his life's trade for free, or for the price you can afford to pay rather than what the work is worth market value, then you in essence are promoting theft.
The right to prescription drugs is also a puzzler for me. I am presently 30 years old with a wife and a son. I work, and I go to school. I am so damn busy working so the government can already pay for healthcare and meds, that MY F*&$in' son doesn't have healthcare insurance himself! How can you in a strait face tell this 11 month old, that daddy needs to FIRST pay for healthcare for his neighbors before he can pay for it for his own family? How immoral can you possibly be?
Let me explain what a right is not: A right does not force someone else to do anything. A right means you have the ability to pursue something as long as it does not interfere with my rights. By making prescription drugs to the elderly a taxpayer supported thing, you are advocating that a guy in my position should have to pay for it. There is no greater sin than to force your kids to pay for benefits for you that they themselves will never see, nor pay off in their lifetimes. When do we finally say enough!?
I want my kids to have health insurance, and I want to see a doctor when I'm hurt/injured. I absolutely refuse to do it through the threat of a gun.
If the government puts a program in place to pay for meds, then I decide I don't want to pay for it, what do they do? They send men with guns to my house. They strip me of my liberty, and family. I have a right to what I have worked for more than somebody who decided not to save enough money for their retirement, and so thinks that I need to pay for it for him (by threat of a gun).

I'm damn close to voting for GW based solely that he picked Dick Cheney who has a voting record in congress of upholding the only rights that matter. Those listed in the Bill of rights. More than likely I'll keep the faith and vote Browne to keep the kind of socialist stupidity presently controlling the world at bay.
 
kjm:

YOU DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO HEALTHCARE. You have every right to go out and get a job, and pay for your doctor yourself.

Dude, tell that to a sick little 4 year old girl, whose parents can't afford to take her to the doctor.

"Mommy, will you make me feel better?"... "I'm sorry sweetheart, but we can't afford a doctor. Maybe if you go get a job and help us bring some money in, then we could take you."

Now... you were saying...? (and think REAL HARD before you answer... Ebenezer.)


Oh BTW, in a good year, I earn in excess of $125,000 these days. My FEDERAL TAX BILL alone is over $15,000, and my state over $5,000. I begrudge the go'vt EVERY CENT of it. But, my family and I have also been down so low that we had no food in the house, and couldn't possibly afford medical care for our children. IMHO, those that cannot afford the outrageous cost of medical care SHOULD be allowed to have it. Abso-frickin-lutely. Especially the elderly on their TINY little fixed income. Drugs or food should NOT be question our elderly should have to ask. Ever.

It's the ONE issue that I am PROUDLY a flaming liberal about. I've been on both ends of the earnings spectrum. Have YOU?

(One more thing: If you vote for a 3rd party candidate, you are giving a vote to Gore. How bad do you want that fascist Nazi in the White House? Pretty bad, if you're going to (implicitly) vote for him.)

EricM:

I KNEW someone would try to use that tired "they need the money" line. That is such BS when taken to the level it has been by the drug industry. How much is "enough" profit? Do you have figures that show how much of their profit is actually used in research vs. pissed away to a rich CEO's salary and stock dividends? I thought not.

IF what you said were actually true, the drug companies would ONLY sell in countries where they could make a profit. Else why bother? But they still sell in Mexico and Canada. Why is that? By selling drugs at inflated prices in the U.S., we are in effect SUBSIDIZING OTHER COUNTRIES' CITIZENS. Is that really what OUR elderly should be doing, often at the expense of their FOOD? I think NOT.


[This message has been edited by Dennis Olson (edited August 06, 2000).]
 
Paladin 1,

You mock Gov. Bush for joining the National Guard by comparing it to Clinton's actions during the sixties. There is a world of difference that I'm sure even the most partisan Democrat can see; the National Guard is an honorable alternative to serving in the regular armed forces, dodging the draft, as Clinton did, is not. As someone earlier said, flying fighters is far from taking the easy way out, many fine men have died while training even during peacetime. Gov. Bush could have found much safer duty if he wished, such as Dan Quayle did. Did you ever think that he may have wanted to be a fighter pilot like his father and the N.G. was the quickest way to become one while fulfilling his obligation to serve his country?

I must commend Gore on his military service, he has no reason to be ashamed of his actions. I know I spent many hours in the early seventies trying to decide what I would do if my name was called. However, if you don't think that Gore got preferential treatment on assignments, you are fooling only yourself. Let's not forget that there is only ONE Junior in this race: Albert Gore, Jr. His daddy was a powerful U.S. Senator during the sixties and had much more political power at the time than Gov. Bush's father.

Gun rights are only one of many reasons I am opposed to Gore. I differ with his stance on special rights for gays, hate crimes legislation, increased government spending for just about everything, social security, health care, taxes, education, etc, etc. Furthermore, I feel that his "no controlling legal authority" and Buddist fundraising is just more of the same mocking of the Constitution that Clinton raised to an artform. The funny thing is that Gore was probably a fairly honorable man before he got involved with Clinton.

You may feel that Gov. Bush is an embarassment to the State of Texas, but you are part of a VERY small minority. Gov. Bush has higher popularity ratings than any current Governor of any state. Even the former Lt. Governor of Texas, a Democrat, endorsed Bush for re-election over his Democrat rival.

You must be able to hold your statewide "I hate Schrub" meetings in a local Hardees. You probably still have enough room left over for a Cub Scout troop to come in and be seated for ice cream!

Dennis, I have to differ with your take on the drug companies. The reason the prices are lower in Canada and Mexico is because those countries do not allow the drug companies to pass on research and development costs. Because of this, all R&D costs are passed on to American consumers; not fair but certainly not the drug companies fault.

If the U.S were to outlaw the drug companies from passing on their R&D costs, you will see an immediate reduction in the amount of new drugs developed. This is one reason why most major drug companies are located in the U.S., not Mexico and Canada.

Further increased costs for drugs can be attributed to the strict regulations imposed by the FDA and the enormous costs of liability insurance caused by our lawsuit happy legal system. Liability costs are an area that Gov. Bush has attempted to control in Texas. On the other hand, Gore and the Democrat Party are very much in the pocket of the trial lawyers who oppose tort reform. It amazes me how after eight years in power, Clinton/Gore only recently discovered the high cost of drugs. Could it be only for political reasons?

If you think that further government regulation will make drugs more accessable, you are mistaken. Further government regulation, if requiring the drug companies to reduce prices, subsequantly reducing profits, will only reduce the supply of drugs. If investors can't make a decent profit on drug company stocks, they will simply invest their money elsewhere. This will eliminate the capital the companies need to make new products. Look at the medical system in nations such as Canada to observe how well government intervention works. The consumers costs are low but the availability of care is falling short of demand.

For the life of me, I can't think of one area where excessive government regulations have reduced the price of products and/or increased there availability. This is one of the reasons that socialist countries do not work.
 
Paladin 1,

I believe you when you say there are many pro-gun dems. With my current job, I work in a lot of factories around the country, and many of the union guys I talk with are both pro-gun and democrats. They vote democrat for the union issue only.

As far as me voting for 'dubya', I vote for him so my 2nd amendment freedom will be safer than if Al Jr. gets in. I don't agree with very much of Bush's stand, but I am committed to RKBA. And a vote for the Libertarian is a vote for Al Jr. Both Dems and Reps want to control our lives, it's just who will take our RKBA.

As long as we have the RKBA, we can keep the government in check.
 
Great subjects, guys. Now THIS is a debate with some juice! Now, to begin with the last issue....

Dennis, I couldn't agree with you more on the healthcare issue. KJM, you are thirty years old. You have many more working years ahead of you. I'm still in my late forties, so I haven't gotten to medicare age yet. But my folks have, and one thing we need to do in this country, is give our elderly the respect of a worry-free health and financial existance in their later years. Hopefully, we'll be there too. And then we'll understand this subject much more intimately. Honoring our elderly is an important aspect of most civilizations, and we should have more of it. We are just a bit too NOW-oriented. Give it to me NOW, at the expense of later. When we're unable to work and provide for ourselves the way we'd like to, and saving is not the issue with cost of living, we should, as a community, care of the disadvataged and elderly. Call me a flaming liberal for that attitude, but I'm not selfish enough to dump the disabled, elderly and disadvantaged into the street. One of the things that makes us a noble civilization is that we care for our disadvantaged and honor our elderly.

To those who think Bush's service was "better" than Gore's because it was the National Guard, get over yourselves! I was in the draft at that time, and the National Guard was the place those with connections could get out of serving in Nam. Come on, guys. Back then they were seen as dodging, just a click more respectable than Canada. And risking his life in the air? Following in his father's footsteps? Come one, introduce yourselves to reality. That's stretching it a whole lot. I'm not going to excuse Clinton. He took the educational deferment way out, and protested like a lot of others did. But Shrub was no fearless hero. At least Gore was there. He might have had a cushier job than most, but he was there. Anything could have happened. If you switched Gore and Bush's parties, the holy conservatives would be gushing with praise for Gore's service in Nam.

Normalizer, I can't address the family issues you raise about the Gores. I simply don't have that information. Okay, if you claim to be on the inside of the situation, so be it. I don't know any families that don't have skeletons. And some hypcocracy to boot. If true, none of that stuff is good. But I don't know enough about you to tell you I believe what you've related.

Monkeyleg, don't worry about my committment to non-regulation of guns. I don't belong to the NRA because they support too many right-wing crackpot causes. They have their own public relations problems (for example, get rid of Chuck Heston and his creaky old crackpot image and gloss it up for public consumption--if the tobbaco industry can kill 400k people a year and get away with it, the gun industry can do a better job of PR--now that's only comparing PR, by all means I believe in gun rights and will scream holy hell within the Dem party for it).

On the economy, understand this--if an incumbent Repub was running for reelection to the White House, he'd be crowing about the economy and his role in it. Come to think of it, why aren't the Repubs crowing about wasting $50MM of our tax dollars and freezing the entire mechanism of government (not a bad idea some would say) in order to chase the Monica-Bill firetruck to it's unholy death? They debased themselves on the floor of Congress by acting like angry, spiteful, vengeful little hypocrites. Screaming their indignant sermons while they were having affairs with their own admins--someone should have dumped the whole lot of them into the Potomac before they wasted our time and money.

Also, I love to hear all the hysterics screaming about the Dems as socialists, the Dems as big government boogeymen. Very easy to see these complex issues and ideas as black and white. Not all Repubs are right wing conservative whackos. Not all Libertarians are fringe crazies. Not all is this or that. Wake up guys. No group is all this or that. Look at the subtleties, the shades of gray in the issues and the stand the individuals take. It's way too easy to fall prey to the "they're all [fill in the blank]" mistake. I guess it's easier than thinking. JUST THINK!

I do realize in this great state, that my views are in the minority. Hell, we have Phil "the Turtle" Gramm as a senator! Next to that idiot, Bush actually looks like a stateman. But this state has a history of going against the grain. And that's what I'm doing. Bush may be high in the polls here, but so was Ann Richards before she lost her election. Just because most like Dubya here, doesn't mean he's any good. Or that I won't stand up and speak my mind on the subject. Politics in Texas is much like the weather. If you don't like it, wait a while and it'll change.

------------------
"I love to do things that scare me, for without fear there is no courage..."
 
So, Dennis, because you've seen hard times (as have I), you feel everyone should be coerced into providing food and drugs to the elderly? And poor 4-year-old little girls? And, anyone else that needs it? Surely we needn't stop there.

Entitlements, right? 'Course, to provide entitlements, we must coerce citizens to pay more in taxes, essentially at gun point ... if you don't pay, they'll put you away.

So, you embrace socialism. Government must take care of us. Al Gore is certainly your man.

Price controls for drugs? Those policies have a very checkered history, you should know. And, when the price-controlled drugs suddenly are in short supply, and research funding is drying up, who will you blame? The drug companies, right? This argument is really quite predictable ... sounds just like the rent control debate.


Regarding this debate over Bush / Gore service, especially regarding Viet Nam, I think a lot of you folks need to reread your history. By mid 1968 there was widespread discontent with that debacle, including within our own troops. I graduated high school in 1970, and I didn't know a soul who wanted to serve in that mess. I respect the men and women who served, and I regret that our leaders at the time were so spineless as to prosecute that conflict so poorly.

But, to now play this game of comparing one guy's service 'in country', albeit non-combat, with another fellow who flew jets stateside? Sorry, friends, but this is silly. Sounds to me like their Dad's knew the war was a deadly farce, and they helped their kids survive. I would never think less of either man for their service - this match is a draw.


The RKBA is paramount this year, IMHO. Al Gore is anathema in that debate. Bush / Cheney are the only logical 'horses' for anyone who believes in the RKBA.

Live and let live. Regards from AZ

[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited August 06, 2000).]
 
Al Gore jr spent like five months in Vietnam as a photo journalist for Stars&Stripes. He was not allowed anywhere near danger. He also was the only US military person in history with his own privately paid personal bodyguard. When the unit he was assigned to was deleted, the troops were sent to other in-country units. All except Al, he was sent back to the good old USA.
Dan Quayle and George W Bush joined the National Guard. There is nothing dishonorable in that. I went to Vietnam in 1967 and I would not have gone if I could have found an honorable way out. A lot of people, Bill Clinton included, took a dishonorable way out and I have no respect for anybody who did.
I have mentioned before that I have a lot of respect for Cassius Clay because he showed up and refused to be inducted on religious reasons. He stood up and took his punishment. Compare this tp Bill and Al and tell me who has honor and who doesnt.

------------------
You have to be there when it's all over. Otherwise you can't say "I told you so."

Better days to be,

Ed
 
You know, some of you are so damn predictable.

If it's a choice of giving health care to those in a temporary bind or not, the answer is a no brainer. Sick kids have the RIGHT to be made well. I DARE any of you to say otherwise. And sick adults CANNOT WORK to help themselves.

And the elderly should NEVER have to choose between life-sustaining drugs and STARVING.

Or am I off-base... Ebenezer?

And yes, being in the crapper usually gives a person an insight into the "other side". There are some however, who are so obtuse that "being there" doesn't allow them to see. Pity.

We dredged ourselves out of the maw of poverty and homelessness. But there was a period where, had the kids gotten sick, we couldn't afford to care for them. And THAT should not be tolerated.

Medical care for the needy, immigration control and defense are the only things I feel the fedgov should be involved in. Outside of that, the rest is just pork. Do you think that it's "right" for a kid to stay sick because of politics? To hell with any who think like that.

And I'd wager that I pay more in taxes (in a good year) than many of you earn as salary. And I bitch about the amount too. BUT, I believe in caring for the sick and elderly. What a shame that some of you do NOT. One day, your eyes will be opened. Maybe it'll be when YOUR parent needs care, or when you have an extended layoff. Then it'll be too late...
 
Okay, Paladin, go ahead and vote for AlBore. I'LL cancel your vote and my wife's will count for Bush, and my inlaw's and my kid's and my nieces and nephews and my neighbors (18 that are close and that I've asked) and my Deep East Texas Yellow Dog, too, if I can get him past the poll monitors!
If Gore wins, in a few years you will still have your baseball, I guess, but nothing else.

------------------
Tonkin Gulf Yacht Club
68-70

[This message has been edited by TexasVet (edited August 06, 2000).]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top