Patrick Conroy notes:
You might want to check on just what a conservative is in Blighty, and a liberal.
Charlie Self "When you appeal to force, there's one thing you must never do - lose." Dwight D. Eisenhower
However that particular quotation is of uncertain origin--the version I first heard substituted "communist" for "liberal", I've seen others that substitute "socialist", and apparently there's a version that dates back to the French Revolution or thereabouts that uses "Republican", which I do not believe meant the same thing in France at the time that it does in the US now. Further, the age is generally more in the vicinity of 20 than 30.
Like I said, for a start!
Wayne
Charlie, I just noticed your sig line. The federal government is all about force. There is no organization that uses more force than the federal government. And I'm talking about the use of force on it's own citizens, not military campaigns. While I'm sure Eisenhower didn't mean it that way, that is a fact of life. Every law that gets passed in Washington means that the federal government is forcing people to do something else, and more freedoms are lost. The people that created this country and it's constitution would be absolutely appalled at what the federal government has become. I would imagine that their worst fears have been realized.
Wayne
"Why trade one tyrant 3000 miles away for 3000 tyrants 1 mile away?" (from the movie The Patriot).
Hmmm - food for thought. Never occurred to me that the terms might have a different meaning across the pond! Oh well. There's also: "Don't confuse me with the facts when my mind is already made up!" ;->
Patrick Conroy responds:
Yes, well, IIRC, it was ol' GB Shaw who first said we (the Brits and us) are separated by a common language.
Charlie Self "When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty." George Bernard Shaw, Caesar and Cleopatra (1901)
And he wasn't even a Brit IIRC, he was Irish.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
Ireland is part of Britain. Not part of England.
Did you mean to say, "And he wasn't even English....."?
I will defer to Andy Dingly on this one.
John
I believe there are some Irish who would dispute that.
the Britons were invaders from france....
NoOne N Particular wrote: : I find it odd that people complain about the bills the R's are running up, : but it STILL isn't enough for the D's.
We had a big budget surplus accumulated under the last Democratic administration. We now have the largest deficit in world history, under a Republican.
I know what I prefer.
-- Andy Barss
Please provide dates and amounts to back up this claim.
Unfortunately, there is none.
Of course there isn't; I was trying to get Andrew to work through this on his own though.
Selective memory is an amazing thing, isn't it?
George wrote: : Unfortunately, there is none.
Au contrair:
Clinton surplus:
-- Andy Barss
:> > We had a big budget surplus accumulated under the last Democratic :> > administration. :>
:> Please provide dates and amounts to back up this claim. :>
"For all the rhetorical flourish in the Clinton budget, there is no concrete proposal for how the White House would secure the Social Security surpluses. They only earmark money without any legal mechanism to protect the funds."
Maybe you have some links you've actually read, and not just random keyword matches from a google search or something? But, let's keep going, shall we?
surplus in nearly 30 years".
Plan. Expects. Will. Not "did".
Comparing Clinton's unworkable and un-implemented changes, to that which was actually implemented during other presidents' terms (with congressional approval, of course) is useless at best. Pathetic, even, that you present these as evidence when the only one that supports your claim has no details whatsoever.
Andrew, A bit of advice:
Never bother to argue with followers of Bush Religion - an oppressive group of zealots who believe nothing but the GOP line. Facts are irrelevant. ;-)
"For the entire 2002 budget year, which ended Sept. 30, the government ran up a deficit of $157.8 billion, ending four consecutive years of surpluses."
From the Bush Cronies at Fox News.
History will show the true impact of this POS on our world. Fortunately, his 4 years are over.
That's fair. As they say.
However, counting the non-spendable Social Security intake as a surplus is Voo Doo or, if you believe it, Doo Doo.
The national debt of the US increased each and every year of the Clinton administration. Now, unless there is another definition of what a deficit/surplus is, there have been no surplusses since 1961.
-Doug
Of course. Like any other shell-game accounting. If it was a Bush ally doing it, they'd be screaming "ENRON!", but when it's Clinton doing it, they call it "heroic".
The historical facts of whether or not there was an actual surplus is reflected in the national debt. In a deficit year, the national debt increases by the amount of the deficit and in a surplus year, the national debt decreases by the amount of the surplus. The last time the debt decreased was 1961.
The claimed surplusses were arrived at by taking all trust fund monies and transferring them to the general fund. This is accounted for as revenue in the annual budget. A corresponding IOU is placed in each of the myriad of trust funds, but these IOU's are not accounted for as expenditures in the annual budget, but are accounted for in the national debt. These IOUs are called intragovernmental debt and are the prototype for Enron style accounting - create shell subsidiaries to hold the debt and claim the corportion/nation is in the black for that year.
This is not only deceptive, but when the time comes to draw the monies from these so called trust funds, the government will have to get the monies by taxing future generations to pay off the IOUs since government's only source of revenue is taxation. So, the current taxpayers get to pay more taxes than required for things like Social Security, the money is spent but not accounted for in the annual budget and future generations get to pay that amount again with interest in addition to the normal taxes they have to pay. Pretty neat scheme, huh? Begs the question of why people like Ken Ley are being prosecuted but our congresscritters talk about preserving the trust funds with a straight face and not jail time.
-Doug
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.