Bush...misunderestimated

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Bush Limbaugh, May 22, 2004.

  1. Pabst

    Pabst

    I'll gladly share with you what's unreasonable. A political party that believes human beings should be extorted for almost half their income each year. I work for Pabst not for the Federal government. ironically Russia now has a 15% flat tax. I've been busted below zero so bad that I've held every shit job in the book. NEVER did I ask for a "safety net." Corporate welfare, farm subsidies, prescription drug benefits...all bullshit. People think Bush is a big spender. Well look at the Congressional vote on the budget. Dem's were CRYING about the budget cuts. Socialism is anti-worker and anti-American.
     
    #11     May 22, 2004
  2. Graduate of Harvard and Yale:
    Do you think he would have been admitted if not for his family?
    How do I know? Maybe like Jack Kennedy's grades at Choate got him in to Harvard?


    You believe that GWB and JFK are intellectual equals?

    Al Gore was a worst student than Bush. Somehow the press doesn't like mentioning that.

    I never heard that. (a worst student?) I do find it difficult to believe. But I take your word for it. However, I did watch the debates. Bush could be 10 times more intelligent than Gore, but that would not change the fact that the man was not half as informed about anything relevant to the job at the time of the election. Obviously almost as many people didn't care as did.

    I don't know the "odds" of being accepted into the ANG during Nam. All I know is he became an accredited pilot. That is not a cake walk. Landing a Fighter Jet is not like parking a pick-up truck.
    Well I have a pretty good idea what the odds were. Pretty much zero. And yes, I give the military a lot of credit. They can and do teach educated and physically fit men to land (and take off, and fly) fighter jets. Bush flew the F-102 (I think...maybe 104 or 105?), certainly not a Piper cub. A tough airplane to fly. I know that. But he never had enough flight time to see combat. He dropped out before he did. So he never truly earned his wings. And that was a guaranteed way to stay out of Vietnam. (Wish I could have done the same deal).

    And his publicity stunt of "landing" on an aircraft carrier ("Mission Accomplished") was just that. NO WAY could he ever have been permitted to land any jet on the deck of a carrier. Even if he had truly earned his wings. Landing on a carrier is a very special qualification. Read "The Right Stuff". A lot about that. Read what John Glenn did.

    Yes all who immigrate here speak a native tongue. I'm not impressed at how well most of them are picking up English.

    Somehow that doesn't surprise me.

    You had trouble with French? (Me too). But a whole lot easier to learn than English.

    Except for the Marlins has any team NOT gotten a stadium deal? He had the khutspe to insert himself in as Managing Partner and get rich.

    Gee, Pabst, I don't really know how many teams other than the Marlins haven't gotten a stadium deal. But we won't count the Expos, so without researching it, I will just go with the one team I do know can't get a new stadium funded. That would be the NY Mets. Could be others. But your question was has ANY team NOT gotten a deal. Well I guess the answer is YES.

    (sorry to re-post this...just did a day or so ago for AAA)

    "Usually parked in a front-row seat by the dugout, with his (GWB) feet up and a bag of peanuts perched in his lap, Bush put a congenial face on a crooked deal, at the heart of which lay a complicated land play.

    When they bought the team, the Rangers were playing in an old minor-league stadium. It didn't have the fancy sky boxes and other amenities that helped make other franchises much more profitable. As a result, the team couldn't compete with other big-city teams for good players. But the new owners weren't willing to finance the construction of a new ballpark . They decided to hit up taxpayers for the money."

    "Texas taxpayers handed the privately owned Rangers more than $200 million in public subsidies. Taxpayers didn't get a return from the stadium’s surging new revenues, either. The profits went almost exclusively to the team’s already wealthy owners."


    Bet that Clinton victory in 1992 with a 42% mandate got you riled up too.

    No Pabst, I am not riled. Not at all. That is how the system works. (I don't believe that Bush legitimately carried Florida, but that is a whole different issue). But while Clinton may have only gotten 42% of the vote, it was more than his opponents. Still, as I said, I am not in the least riled. Bush won (whether fairly or not....certainly HE HIMSELF had no part of any shenanigans if there were any in Florida), and was given the chance to BE President. Now the electorate will determine if he earned a second term. At this moment, it looks like he hasn't. But still, he has six months or so to make things better. And despite what you probably believe, I hope he does.

    BTW, I looked at the betting site you referenced. I could not understand the betting line layout. I understand that you will have to lay odds on a 50/50 bet anywhere. What do you have to lay to bet on Kerry (or against Bush)?

    Peace,
    :)RS
     
    #12     May 22, 2004
  3. How 'bout them CEOs crying their precious tears when they're getting busted on the international arena ? Steel tarifs ? Agriculture subsidies larger than most countries national budgets ? Energy companies and tax breaks ?

    Social-democracies in europe are "anti-american" ?

    "Are you with us, or are you against us ?"
    "Get with the program " ? There are only "them and us" ?
    How easily susceptible are you to group influence anyway ?

    Get a grip on reality. Cut back on doublethink training.

    http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackag...entertainmentNews&storyID=515697&section=news
    Michael Moore won the Palme d'Or for best film in Cannes. I guess "those communist-bastards around the world" are all wrong in their views on GW Bush. For the continued peace and international prosper around the world I hope US voters get the hint.

    The british government is not totally blindfolded with regards to what's going on either: http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=515683&section=news
    "Problems": "Heavy-handed U.S. military tactics in Falluja and Najaf some weeks ago have fuelled both Sunni and Shi'ite opposition to the coalition and lost us much public support inside Iraq."

    Change is needed - mostly for change's own sake. GWB is the fallguy for all that is bad with the US right now. Just like Arnold is a hero when California's credit rating is improving and the economy is getting stronger there. That's how politics works - and should continue to work. Some former re-hab wonder should not try and change that.
     
    #13     May 22, 2004
  4. LOL. I don't think you could get a much better condemnation of your position than to have a bunch of movie biz sissies handing you awards.

    And fuck it, yeah, those bleeding heart dumb fucks (like you, it seems) absolutely are dead wrong about Bush. Totally fucking wrong, the brainless fuckers.
     
    #14     May 22, 2004
  5. Have you seen the movie? What exactly are they so wrong about?

    Do you personally know Bush? What do you know about the guy that the "brainless fuckers" don't know?

    And, is it necessary to use "fuck" or some variation of the word four times in two sentences? Not that it offends me....I just thought the use of some words was best used for emphasis. But what kind of impact can a word have with so much over-use?

    Just asking.

    Peace,
    RS
     
    #15     May 22, 2004
  6. If you haven't guessed it already you are on my shortlist of posts I don't see. But I guess I could temporarily remove you from it if you'd like some more verbally spanking like you've encountered before.

    You admitted to agreeing with libertarians before - not that I consider myself part of any "social clubs of cookies, sunday rallies and harmonious meanings", and also that you like to rattle their chain sometimes.

    However, it's tiresome with nationalist foul language on sundays, so I'll pass still.

    Some more on the British qualms with the US army behaviour in Iraq: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3739955.stm .

    Bush should be more careful when "he goes all out" on his bicycle and on his job. I wonder if he was the same way when running his golf cart just before 9/11. The man has been a complete disaster for his surroundings most of his life.

    :D
     
    #16     May 23, 2004

  7. Again with these pointless questions RS. Really, just a quick browse through your posting history will reveal how often you do it.

    Do you really think it's important that I personally know Bush in order to defend his actions as president? Are you really that dumb, or does your aversion to the man get the better of you every time? And why would have I have to have "seen the movie" to comment that because the movie biz is almost entirely composed of liberals any political endorsement they give would surely reflect their political orientation? (Wait, since you couldn't seem to accept that the majority of Jews vote democrat maybe you'll also disagree about the general political leaning of the movie industry.) And crap, if that wasn't enough, I even prefaced my movie biz comment with a "Lol", letting you know the point was being made half jokingly.

    As for the repeated use of 'fuck', I put that down to being drunk when I made that post. Apologies to Gringinho.
     
    #17     May 23, 2004