BUSHvsGORE re:Horse Industry

[Aly]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Inverness:
[B]I have a new theory:

Jumphigh and Sannois are really Gore supporters.

The two of them have conspired to post outlandishly uninformed and inflammatory statements in order to convince the undecideds that Bush supporters are all loonies.[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ROTFLMAO! Inverness, if that dinner offer is still open, I’d be happy to met you. What say we have Rockstar, Pyn and a few others join us?

As to the DUI revelations, consider these facts: (a) that the arrest occured 24 or so years ago when attitudes towards drunken driving were not as strong as they are now; (b) that the subsequent arrest occured in Maine, where Bush’s family owned/owns sizeable vacation property and the family was and remains very well known; and © that the “punishment” was fairly severe for what might generally be considered a first offense during an historical period when attitudes towards that kind offense were more relaxed. It is fair to say that in similar circumstances, the son of a local/national celebrity often gets a “smack on the wrist.” The fact that that didn’t happen raises questions in my mind as to how many other similar offenses had preceeded it that have not been disclosed. The fact that there were one (or two) prior arrests does not give one comfort either.

On a larger point, I find the tenor of many of the posts to be troubling in the extreme. Mindless repetition of spins (pro Bush and pro Gore) serves no good purpose and shames us all.

Whatever your affiliation and beliefs, in the hours remaining check your facts, disregard “spin” and VOTE!

Aly

[Inverness]

I guess you’ve got your answer!! LOL.

[Caruso]

Hmm - interesting discussion. Couple of questions - how do you who do not like religion in politics support someone who got his tour of duty in VN shortened to 5 months (from the usual at least one year) so that he could attend DIVINITY school (from which he dropped/flunked out)?

As far as brains - his academic record has lower grades than Bush’s…

I’m voting 3rd party, so I will leave the rest of you to ponder these two interesting conflicting points.

[B.G.M_heidi]

I can’t keep up - the threads have now ricocheted from protecting the rights of the fetus to resenting the children who have clearly suffered the misfortune of birth and now roam the planet purely to make your lives an over-taxed hell. I do believe the discussion is degenerating.

[hobson]

How can one save money for retirement if one is making minimum wage, especially if one has done the responsible thing and not aborted one’s pregnancy, and has children to raise?

[Janet]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hobson:

And unless you hunt, or have to chase illiterate hunters off your property like Snowbird (oh, I sympathise, Snowbird - the brain power that’s packing heat out in the woods can be truly chilling - don’t you love finding a decapitated deer carcass with an empty six-pack next to it?) why would you own a gun if you aren’t willing to use it, to point it at someone and pull the trigger? By posessing a handgun, I think you make the statement, “I am willing to kill someone whom I perceive as a threat to me or my property.” Or are you using it to shoot holes in an old K-Car parked in the back yard?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I disagree. I am in favor of gun restrictions, but I know quite a few people who have guns for reasons that have nothing to do with killing people or animals (or even threatening them).

Gun collectors- people who are interested in the history, or technology, or artistry (e.g, an engraved Purdy shotgun) or workmanship of the guns they collect.

Target shooters - including hand guns, rifles, and even semi-automatics and automatics.

Trap and Skeet shooters - another form of target shooting, with a “clay pigeon” flying through the air as the target.

[DMK]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by holland:
[B]I can’t help but think that the same Al Gore who had his father surround him with body gaurds during his infrequent jaunts away from the typewriter in Vietnam would have had his Daddy take care of this problem for him.

The real issue surrounding the DUI leak is this: those “killers” in the “slaughterhouse” (they gave these names to themselves, I can’t take credit) at Gore’s campaign headquarters are brutal and reckless. Do you want those type of people in the Whitehouse? They actually thought that holding this bomb until five days before the election was a good idea. That type of self-distructive behavior is what we have to look forward to in the next four years if Al Gore is elected president.[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Holland, I absolutely agree with you on your take on Dubya taking acountability for his actions and reforming. I stand pretty firmly with Inverness on her take on this issue (well stated, I might add). But the words “you can’t help but think?” bother me… Do you mean, that with no evidence to the contrary, you must assume that another Washington Prince would take the helping hand of his well-connected father? That seems a tad self-serving to me.

And as for the campaign headquarter antics of Gore, has the Bush-McCain runoff antics faded so competely from the collective conscious? Or for that matter, any other politician running for office in the last several decades? Make no mistake about it, regardless of who is elected, “those type” of people WILL be in the White House.

In case you haven’t noticed they HAVE been in the White House for quite some time, and will continue to be in office for the foreseeable future unless the United States Congress seriously embraces campaign reform (which they have promised to do as soon as to do so serves their best interests, hell freezes over, and pigs are seen flying aound the Washington Monument).

I would not insult your intelligence by acting as if the actions of a 30 year old man who has turned that aspect of his life around, should make a difference in this election. Please do not insult mine by telling me that one political machine is more inherently evil than another. No wonder issues get no airtime.

[hobson]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by farmgate:
[B]"…freaky Ayn Rand novels with the cult following"
Oh my…I too am starting to understand. May I ask…have YOU read them? No,never mind. I think I already know that answer too.

[This message has been edited by farmgate (edited 11-06-2000).][/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Au contraire, farmgate! I indeed have read one of them…I just can’t remember which, since I didn’t find it at all memorable. I read about three books a week, so I’m bound to forget a few. Will you confirm for us who John Galt is?

[Everythingbutwings]

Ditto on that, Gore

[Heather]

Now, I realize that abortion is an issue that will never be resolved, but I have a question regarding something I hear pro-llife folks (in general and on this thread) saying a lot.

Obviously I’m pro-choice, but I ask this question with sincere curiosity.

When I hear the average abortion seeker characterized, it is usually with statements like “Then they shouldn’t have hopped into bed with someone they didn’t know” etc., therby implying that all abortionsa re recieved by irresponsible, single whores with no morals.

Well, I just read a statistic that 40% of abortions performed are done on married women? So, what is the reasoning, do you think, behind this?

I’m married, I religously (no pun intended) take my birth control pills, but its not 100% effective and were I to get pregnant, I fairly certian I would not have the child. I can’t afford it–financially, emotionaly, and in every other way. I think bringing a child into this world is a scared duty–the most important thing we can do with our lives–bar none! If you cannot give everthing to a child, then I don’t believe its right to bring it into this world. (This will proabably get me flamed to death, but my feeling on abortion and euthanasia is the same–there are far worse things and existences in this world than death) I’ve known two married women who had abortions–it wasn’t an easy decision, but they have never regretted it.

And yes, I know there is adoption–but to be blunt, my jury is still out on that. In my personal expereince (which is all we can base opinions on anyway) the people in my life (friends and relatives) who were adopted–well, let’s just say it wasn’t exactly like the ending to Little Orphan Annie.

Anyway, I’m not actually trying to change anyone’s mind–because frankly, people don’t change their minds about this topic–you’re either OK with it, or you’re not. But, I am curious what you folks feel would be the motivation for a married person to have an abortion, since irresposnibility seems to be the watch word from your feelings.

Anyway, I’ll be waiting fro the hatemail to come raining down.

[lillian]

Well, I just had to jump into the fray. I personally believe that the race is so close that Bush will win if Nader draws enough votes from Gore, or Gore will win if Buchanan can draw enough votes from Bush. As a moderate Republican, I’m voting for Gore. If I hear the term “compassionate Republican” one more time I’m going to chuck my lunch on my shoes. I’ve chosen Gore for many reasons and I won’t go into detail here, but I will say one thing…if I wanted my government run by religion, I’d move to Iran!

[spfarm]

Well. excuse me pat-on-the-back! Hobson was the one who wrote that, so I assumed that she was talking about herself. And if you say she wasn’t then my post above is for the ones that are. The statement that I made above was a general statement to anyone that has children and making minimum wage.
As for men, sure they can go jump in the bed with Sally, Jane or Sue, but it’s usually a two way street. What’s wrong with saying NO??? Raging hormones? Primitive animal instincts? No control over your own body?

[Snowbird]

NAH! Applebird vote BUSH!

[Heather]

Trying . . .to sit on . . .hands . . can’t stop myself from . . .responding.

The way I see it, both parties want to put someone in charge of telling us what to do. The democrats want it to be the government, the republicans want it to be the job of organized religion–organized CHRISTIAN religion.

Sorry kids, I’ll take my chances with the government.

If you are a Chrsitian, I congratulate you. It is very hard to be a person of faith in this time in our history. If you are truly following the Chrisitan ideals of love for your fellow man, then you are an asset to the planet.

However, I wish to be in charge of my own life, morals, and spirit, and have my own beliefs. If God, Goddess, Allah, Yaweh, The Powers that Be, Brahma, or whoever, has a problem with my decisions and spritiual beliefs, then they can take it up with me personally. Seeing as how they are the supreme being in the universe, I think that is within their power. He/She/They doesnt/don’t need a translator or interpretter.

[hobson]

Good mornin, pacificsolo…

No, I think I did get your point. It was this: you do not like having the money you pay in taxes going to support people who do not deserve it. You characterize these people as lazy female welfare recipients who crank out babies to increase their payments. It is not clear whether you believe that ALL welfare recipients fit this description, but perhaps you see them as the majority.

Perhaps I was in a weird mood late last night, sitting at work with nobody else around, watching the tumbleweeds roll past my office…but Magnolia interpreted my post correctly. I grow weary that we all generalize and scapegoat the “welfare mother” when we talk about the waste of government funds.

Here are some of the other undeserving recipients of your hard-earned money: logging companies, mining companies and ranchers who use public land for pennies per acre (magnolia has mentioned this earlier); defense and space contractors who supply the hardware for boondoggles like Star Wars and $2000 toilet seats for the Pentagon; multinational agricultural corporations who receive ag subsidies…magnolia can probably think of additional examples.

Again, this is not a new idea to this thread, but I can’t begrudge cutting a government check to some woman with a couple of kids to help them live a slightly less crappy existence, when much larger checks are buying homes in Aspen for officers of space contractor companies. I’d rather send my money to help people who are LESS fortunate than me, not people who are MORE fortunate.

And “stupid theological holes”? If you think that our beliefs are stupid or somehow deficient (because we don’t share your personal interpretation of Jesus?), please provide an argument as to why you think this, rather than just calling us stupid. As you can see, there’s no shortage of back-and-forth argument on this thread, so a little theology-based counterpoint won’t hurt anybody here.

And hey, Sannois, I thought you were retiring from the thread! If not, please stop teasing us and tell us what a tolitarian is. I checked my 6-inch thick dictionary, and it’s not there. C’mon, don’t keep us in the dark!

[This message has been edited by hobson (edited 11-07-2000).]

[B.G.M_heidi]

As a neighbour to the North my condolences to all Americans this election year. It’s sad when democracy leads us to vote for the lesser of two evils – rather than, how novel, a leader of character, integrity, vision, social compassion, who practises restraint re: taxation.

[Magnolia]

Erin-
I hate SUV’s, but at least you need one to haul your horses!
What makes me mad is the guy tailgating me in his Excursion, with maybe some golfclubs in his trunk! My god, he could kill me.
Trucks are AOK in this environmetalists book for you horse trailer hauling folks - but hey, if your just hauling your #$%, and have no use for a truck, by a car!
BTW, even more of the topic, if you are a horsey person w/o need of hauling a trailer, a hatch back is just the bomb! My back seat folds down in my little Acura, and I can sleep in my car, haul mulch for our garden, and all sorts of stuff, and I get 30 mph!

[Regalmeans]

---

Originally posted by lillian:
but I will say one thing…if I wanted my government run by religion, I’d move to Iran!

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kryswyn:

Amen, Lillian, Amen! Gore, because the thought of GW putting as many as 4 Supreme Court justices on the bench is just too scary.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Both of you are right on target. Whoever wins will have a HUGE EFFECT on our country b/c of the supreme court - yeah whoever we elect may be gone if 4 years but who ever they appoint is there for life - so if Bush wins we can bet your last centRoe V Wade will be challenged - and under Bush it will be all strict constructionalists (code words for ultra conservatives who will never step outside the box) wheras Gore favors more liberal judges. Both SAY they are against a litmus test - but HELLO? the Democrats won’t touch Roe V Wade and the Republicans will certainly try to. And there are alot of other issues hanging in the balance. I am a die hard democrat (and I’m 17 and can’t vote…but let’ move beyond that) I have worked on campaigns and I know the issues -

Bush’s wanting to drill in Alaska bothers me! He is against the environment. As a student

• Gore’s college loan thing appeals to me
• Bush’s charter schools and vouchers seem to further strip public school.
  Bush is favoring therich, Gore is more equal oppurtunity.
  The one thing I like about Bush is that I agree that we shouldn’t have the military everywhere - not for the same reasons he does (I am a pacifist and thus don’t believe in fighing) butI agree we are spread to thin and cannot be everywhere and we often don’t help at all (um…Vietnam?).
  My bigget beef with Bush though is something he said about ‘morals for our country’ as a free country with religious freedoms you cannot really tie all people to one moral system and Bush reeks of the Christian right. 10 commandents in school? No thank you!

My question - is Gore goingto keep giving Clinton the cold shoulder? Is it hurting him? I think Clinton is such a great speaker andregardless of what youthink of him he did do a good job overthe pat 8 years - he would be great to have in Gore’s corner but Gore isto into distancing himself! MY local senator/congress campaigns areusing Clinton support with great responses - with alot of democrats that factor might help Gore…but who knows?

My vote, if I had one, would go to Gore. It may be the lesser of two evils but he’s a democrat, I agree with most of his policies and I’m just so scared of Bush…

[Twister]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hobson:
[B] If I murdered someone, but was never caught, I am technically law-abiding in the eyes of the background checkers. Should I have a gun? What if I’ve never done anything wrong before, but plan to shoot my boyfriend because he annoys me? Should I have a gun? The law says this is just fine. After all, every dangerous criminal is a law-abiding person right up until they’ve committed their first crime.

It seems like no matter how you cut it, liberal gun-ownership laws will invariably result in the wrong people having guns. [/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You want to deny ‘things’ to people based on what ‘might’ happen??? You might drive drunk, but have never been caught, should you still get a license? Your child might drown if you put in a swimming pool, should you still have one???

Strict gun control laws will result in ‘only’ the wrong people having guns.

[hobson]

What’s up with Gore trying to pressure Nader into dropping out of the race? Cheesy, cheesy, cheesy. The LEAST he could have done would be to offer Nader a job - head of EPA or Interior Department or something like that. Now THAT would have convinced me to vote for Gore. But…he and his campaign are acting like spoiled brats: MINE, MINE, MINE! THESE VOTES ARE MINE! It’s highly undemocratic. Rockstar, what can you do about this?

Now in defense of Gore, why are people so hot about his fundraising foibles? Does anyone recall that Bush did not accept federal campaign financing, which releases him from ethical restrictions on the use of his campaign funds? He’s raised lots, lots more money than Gore, largely from corporate gifts. When you add it up, Bush owes a lot more favors to corporate giants than does Gore. It’s going to be a while before he can straighten his knees again, to borrow from Nader’s comments.

Whatever to the whole thing. Now if you want to spend your time doing something truly worthwhile, check out my new home page, which I just launched last night! It’s pretty basic right now, but when I have time one day again I plan to expand. Here’s the address: http://www.geocities.com/jenandchristian