BUSHvsGORE re:Horse Industry

[hobson]

Heather - get off those hands and keep responding- you post some very thoughtful things. I probably do not completely agree with you on your assessment of the Republican party vis-a-vis the Christian right. I don’t think the party is truly unified behind a pro-Christian agenda, and in fact I heard some Republican political commentators the other day discussing how the far Christian right is a bit dissatisfied with Bush, because they see him as a centrist who will sell them short. The hard-core Christian right must really be torn right now, because on the one hand, Buchanan is well in line with their positions…but he’s without a prayer, so to speak, in the election. Obviously the religious right is a darned powerful force in the party, but I’ve been seeing a tempering of that in the past few years. By the same token, as everyone in both parties move inexorably toward one another on the political spectrum, I’ve also seen a rise in Christian-right democrats.

Like DMK, I too think that focusing on a rigorous, substantive look at the candidates positions on the various issues is all the more important when their respective political philosophies are so close in so many ways. PBS and NPR ran a great 3-hour special on Wednesday night that dissected the candidates in just this way. My husband and I invited his students over to watch. Unfortunately, their attention spans (these are college students, mind you) lasted about 5 minutes and I couldn’t really hear the program because their unrelated chatting drowned out the TV.

[Snowbird]

Well, there is something to agree on! Ayn Rand and I will vote for Bush and the Republican ticket.

What strange bedfellows politics makes? That is the secret…we can disagree vehemently and yet we can agree on other things.

Well, tonight will tell the tale, unless the Electorial overturns the vote. We’ll know soon, who won and who lost.

[ClemsonGraduateRider]

Womens rights - Gore

And taxes don’t just go away they get shifted somewhere else . . unfortunately if you cancel out a stream of revenues it doesnt just miraculously appear somewhere else . .

[Kellybird]

Let me clarify–I am all for PERSONAL freedom–as in, choosing your religion, etc.–, but I am also a big fan of the government. Why?
So I can breathe–EPA, as little as it often does, it has done something.
So I have the option of learning–public education.
So if I desperately need it, I can get healthcare…
…the list goes on. I have no problem with “big government” as everyone calls it. In fact, you would think all these Republicans would be all for MORE government monitoring for things like oh, say, the INTERNET and all that “non-family value” stuff that’s out there. But all anyone ever says is to get out of our lives. WHY? No one is putting a camera in your bathroom, and no one will. Government is not, and probably never will be, to me, a problem. I just don’t think a little control here and there is a big deal: it helps to prevent all the extremes [either direction] from taking over, not to mention helps to even out a the playing field for everyone–usually–at least a bit. people usually ignore gov’t decisions/issues anyway, so what difference does it make? Bad attitude to have, but unfortunately, many have it.
(Did that make any sense?)

I just will not understand how people always think that government control is a bad thing. It’s not anything Orwellian, and I highly doubt it ever will be. Feel free to disagree.

Buy an electric car–70 mpg is better for the environment, and you will save $$$ on gas bills–make all of you who want to drill up Denali National Park a little upset that it may not be neccessary… –our next car will be the Honda Insight–63 mpg in town mileage, 70 mpg on the highways. Ford Excursion? try around 13 in town, 18 on the highways…That ozone hole is growing, and somewhere a small child is coughing, 'cause his asthma just started acting up again…

Anyway, that’s all for now.
kelly

[Magnolia]

On the “childless by choice” women being so apparent with horses, I think it has to do with time and money. I work with mommies - very nice women, actually love and appreciate their kids. Every dime they spend is on the kids. Free Time? Take kids to their activities.
I think to have kids, you must sacrifice a part of your time and money for them. Horses also demand a lot of time and money. So, probably if you have kids, you have to cut back on the horses.
Why aren’t Brad and I having kids? We want to travel, I want to afford a horse someday. He wants the freedom to quit his job and be an activist someday. We want the ability to pick up and move.
BTW, I have never encountered any criticism about our choice. (Maybe that is a hint from people…). But I do get tired of not having a voice on issues like parks because of the soccer moms, and the assumption that parks are for children, and it makes me mad when I see ill-behaved kids, but I feel I have to be mute, because, well, I’m not “qualified” to comment on little Eddie’s food fighting because I’m not a mom.

BTW, I’m still not decided on my vote. I was gonna go third party, but all the anti-Bush propaganda is getting to me and I’m feeling the need to vote Gore as a lesser of 2 evils! HELP!!!

[hobson]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Twister:
[B] 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.[/B]
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What I’m asking, Twister, is this: if we are going to make ideas of who are the “right” and “wrong” people a factor in gun ownership laws, how do we define these terms? We agree that criminals should not have guns. So I’m asking in a most sincere way, what do you think is a criminal? Someone who has done the crime but never been caught…someone who’s been indicted but not convicted…someone who has been caught as well as convicted…someone who is planning armed robbery but has no previous record. I’m honestly interested in how a gun-rights supporter would approach this, because it’s something I’ve never seen expanded upon in the debate.

To use a pertinent comment you made, I do think a person who drives drunk but has never been caught should be defined as a drunk driver…as to whether this person should have a license, well, the law says they can. It’s a really appropriate comparison. There are two questions here: what is a drunk driver, and should a drunk driver have a car/license. Likewise: what is a criminal, and should a criminal based on this definition have a gun. What do you think? I’m interested because it can lead to a more complex debate: how do we keep never-been caught criminals from getting guns? Please answer, because I’d like to hear what you think.

[Snowbird]

To me it simply let’s extend the right to free choice to everyone!

I don’t want the government in my bedroom or my kitchen! Today’s scientific evidence may be tomorrow’s folly.

I think a free people have to be trusted and not policed into autocracy. Adolf Hitler believed he was perpetuating perfection, he was wrong! It isn’t the guns, it isn’t the drugs! It’s our society that needs the correction in favor of individual rights.

There was a show on the other day and it was a comedy, but it made a valid point. Nothing in this world is safe except cotton balls and q-tips, and q-tips are questionable.

People today can lose their job, if they smoke cigarettes (plain ones) caffeine, nicotine, sugar and fat are all on the taboo list. Are people happier? healthier? 30 years ago medical science opposed breast feeding, today it is the approved! 30 years from now who knows!

So should we pass a law that one of the two parents must stay home to parent? If we give the felons enough money will they stop being felons? Freedom is the right to live your life, not be so afraid to die that you can’t live.

What a bunch of paranoid junk! The law is to settle differences between people who are not capable of settling, it is not to regulate your calorie intake, decide on what weight is proper, or to create an image of who we should be and therefore we must comply.

Go BUSH! I don’t want somebody bossing me around the rest of my life. I’ll do what makes me a good person without the LAW!

[This message has been edited by Snowbird (edited 11-01-2000).]

[woodbern]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snowbird:
Well now, I still remember that ringing affirmation, “I never had sex with that woman”.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right… and wagging his stubby little finger in our faces, too.

Loser.

[SFLauren]

I hate say it but Bush barely got by at Yale (with a C average). He got in because his Daddy went (as MANY students today do.) He also was in ‘Skull and Bones’ an elitist Frat type organization that has turned out MANY high powered politicians and business men… only 15 Juniors are nominated to get in every year.

Oh and remember how Bush said he hasn’t had a drink since the early 80’s? There’s a wonderful wedding video out on the internet of Bush drunk off his tushy in the mid-90’s.

Go Gore!

[Snowbird]

Well Wynn if you had the chance to check out that “good ole’ pork barrel” in Washington I think you’d be even more horrified. Same thing only bigger and more expensive.

I think the point is that the money goes through so many administratiove hands that by the time it trickles down only a few cents of the dollar ever make it. Mostly, it’s the Washington slush line that people object to rather than the authority.

I’d rather fight it out at the state level myself.

[ponyesq]

I am particularly enjoying the Doonesbury take on George W – that he’s allowed to make misstatements because he is stupid, so that misstatments are “honest mistakes.” I also heard a bit of Jay Leno wondering what poor Dan Quayle must be thinking now – (paraphrasing): “I’m not smart either. I make dumb mistakes and mispronounce and misspell words and don’t know anything about foreign policy. How come George W can get away with it when I couldn’t. No fair!”

Hey, if all it took to be president was the ability to appoint smart people to do all the work, then why don’t we just elect a good looking actor to the job – oh, we already did that.

[rockstar]

Oh! And to Bertie, DMK, and heidi… thanks for your comments on my last last post… you don’t know how much i appreciate that… especially when i have grown so disheartened in the last few minutes after visitng this thread for the first time since i last posted!

[pwynnnorman]

Thank you, Inverness. The diction problem really, really bothers me.

Diction: choice of words especially with regard to correctness, clearness, or effectiveness.

Now if there’s one trait that I would think most would agree is absolutely necessary in a world leader–given where, when, to whom and why that leader may need to express himself–surely that is one of them. Surely!

Then there’s S. Hayakawa’s (and other highly respected scholars’) research on the relationship between how we speak and how we think.

Egad.

[Twister]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pwynnnorman:
Hey, people! Is anyone upset that Dubya DIDN’T ADMIT TO IT EARLIER? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

‘The cover-up is worse than the actual event.’ Time and time again this gets played out during political elections. Now, suppose when Clinton had been asked about Monica and said, ‘Well, we had a few rounds of wild sex and it was stupid of me, but most men do think with their small heads. I’m past it now.’ We all would have shook our heads, pointed a few fingers and gone on with our lives. Instead we were embroiled in a political mess that shamed our country and brought down other able politicians (remember Livingston?).

I’m far less worried about the OUI than I am that Bush has claimed the high moral ground on the honesty and intergity issues. A pox on both their houses! Vote for Harry Browne!

[moose]

Oh boy, a politics thread, do I forsee a possible lock

"Do you realize that the largest voter base that Gore has is the blue collar people who have never gone to college and many haven’t graduated high school? "

Definately a voter base that shouldn’t be disregarded, since they can vote & tend to get executed in the state of Texas. I’ve had die hard far right republican friends actually say they thought the right to vote should be removed from the less educated. How scary is that, considering the point of the country being founded was that all would have a right to vote, regardless of those issues? Can we say dictatorship?

Seriously, though, if my vote was based on the debates, it would be Bush. He came off more genuine and yes, for local gov’t like Govenor I would want him. Nationally & Globally he scares me and thats a big piece of being president.

At heart I’m a democrat, and the economy has been good, but who knows what will happen when I push that button? As silly as it is, I really don’t like getting lied to straight faced on t.v., which Clinton managed to do.

[rockstar]

In the name of making my posts a little bit easier to read… how do you bold an italicize things? thanks!

[AppleBird]

ROCKSTAR said: “. . .under the present electoral system, every vote thrown for Nadar (ESPECIALLY in the battleground states) takes away from Gore. Now Hardball has just highlighted a NARAL add that calls out for Nadar supporters to vote for Gore because the risks of the reversal of roe v. wade are too high with Bush in the office. aghhhh!”

Listen To Rockstar!!! PLEASE! he/she is right on! Nadar supporters, please vote GORE. GORE GORE GORE GORE GORE
The thought of Bush in the White House is giving me nightmares. The man is a complete fool.

[hobson]

rockstar, pat, magnolia, kryswyn, aly, et. al…you guys want to go out for a virtual beer? Naderite I may be, but I at least bathe, unlike magnolia’s boyfriend.

[This message has been edited by hobson (edited 10-29-2000).]

[smedley]

URGENT ELECTION MESSAGE

Due to an anticipated voter turnout much larger than originally expected,
the
polling facilities may not be able to handle the load all at once.
Therefore,
Democrats are requested to vote on Tuesday, November 7, and Republicans on
Wednesday, November 8.

Please pass this message along and help us to make sure that nobody gets
left
out.

[Magnolia]

You know, there are some poor people that work too. They can’t afford cars, and usually are the ones buying rice and beans at the market.
I’m no republican, but it infuriates me to see people buying twinkies with food stamps, that have a fresh manicure, styled hair and new clothes. It makes me even sadder to see a lady in work clothes have to buy the dented cans and plain rice for her family. Or know that I have $25.00 for groceries this week, so it is Mac&Cheese for me and Brad.
Why not require work for welfare? or, give working poor a boost, so welfare doesn’t seem so nice? What about giving the mom buying rice the money the twinkie lady gets, and telling the twinkie lady to strave or hit the food pantry or get a job?
But please remember that not everyone who works makes enough to get by. (basics, not a new house!) Because their companies won’t pay for their living expenses, we have to pick up the slack. Yet another way we subsidize corporations. Yeah, I think everyone should have a job. And a job that requires 40 hours of your week should pay for food, housing and medical. Yet another example… Mc Donalds worker gets sick. No insurance, so they don’t get to the doctor. Sickness gets worse. Their only choice is an ER. They go to ER. Huge bill. Can’t pay. Hospital raises our rates to cover it. Insurance costs rise. We get hit in our paychecks. Why? Because McDonald’s didn’t pay the employee enough for insurance, so there we are, you and I taking up Mc Donald’s slack, a company wher the salary of the CEO could no doubt cover the insurance bill for it’s full time employees.

Look, I have no patience for non-workers who can work, but we need to help those who do work make a decent living. (Which, LOL, neither party addresses!)

BTW, Duffy, my sentiments exactly