BUSHvsGORE re:Horse Industry

This is somewhat off topic. . .But when I used to be in the insurance field full time, I had a call out of the blue, from a “friend” of a young single mother, who wanted to buy some whole life insurance (ie - one with cash values) for an infant son of said mother. Reluctantly, I went on an appointment to meet the mother. It was not in a terribly nice part of town. But, I will say that the inside of her small apartment was spotless. However, this young mother admitted to me, after I saw not just the one infant son, but two not-so-older siblings, that she made more from welfare by having more kids than she would if she worked. But, that she’d probably stop after the three, because the increase in payments if she went to four wasn’t enough (or none - can’t remember - was quite a few years ago).

Call me naive, but I was shocked. I couldn’t believe that a person that was so “educated” as to be able to figure out how to swindle more money out of the government, could not find a job with reasonable pay. And to have more kids so that she’d get more money from welfare??? And this woman was no “monster”. It truly was scary to me.

[This message has been edited by Duffy (edited 11-04-2000).]

Yes, there’s the real question… which candidate is PBQ&C??? (pro-baby quiche and carrots!)

QUOTE: “The envirommentalists do not consider that horses are an appropriate use for public land because horses drop manure behind. Their hoofs chew up the trails and make it unpleasant for the joggers and walkers”

Well, It’s true. As a hiker and a horseman, horses are a pain in the butt on hiking trails. Whether it’s the ankle deep mud crossing the trail, or deep ruts, it makes it very difficult to hike. It is extermely difficult to walk where horses have been.
My take on the issue is that we need MORE public parks with trails for bikers, hikers, and horses to be separate. I have no problem with limiting horses to certain trails, ensuring that hikers will have adequate footing. Oh, and I have no problem with horse poops - after all, it helps fertilize!

Every time I hear a Buchanan ad I cringe and think, well, this is the price we pay for a free society

I’ll forever defend my right to own the fifty assorted assault weapons in my basement. I need my guns to defend my home, pursue my happiness, and threaten those heathen flag burners and IRS agents.

[This message has been edited by Inverness (edited 10-30-2000).]

Thanx alot DMK,
Three people just came running into my office wanting to know what I was shrieking about!!

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jumpcrew:
As the person who started this thread, let me restate the question: Which candidate is best for the horse industry?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There’s just no single answer to this, because the horse industry is so varied. Here are some of the different facets of the industry I can think of off the top of my head - and each one might have a different approach to how national issues shape their life with horses:

Breeders of top-dollar show or race horses; breeders of inexpensive pleasure horses; gamblers; weekend trail riders; hunters who use pack horses in the mountains on federal land; serious show riders; serious pleasure riders; tack shop owners; slaughterhouses; wild horse advocates; auctioneers; working-class riders who only take weekly lessons; working-class riders who own a single horse but aspire to more; farmers; trainers; rural residents who have horses at home; suburbanites who board; city dwellers who board; foxhunters, eventers, and endurance riders whose sports need lots of land; people with non-horse careers who struggle to find riding time…the list can go on and on.

Since we all touch the business in different ways, we’re going to see conflicting priorities.

Molly Ivins for President!!

Molly Ivins
EMAIL MOLLY
Updated: Saturday, Oct. 21, 2000 at 20:52 CDT
Now can we talk about something important?

BOSTON – The news media missed the third debate because they were so focused on Al Gore. Gore was again aggressive, Gore was arguably over the line a couple of times – anyone see any sign of a new stretcher? They missed George W. Bush’s performance.

A lady named Lisa Kee stood up and asked, “How will your tax proposals affect me as a middle-class, 34-year-old single person with no dependents?”

So Gore told how his proposal would affect her, and then it was Bush’s turn. He said Gore’s plan would cost a whole lot of money – “a lot more than we have.”

He then explained: "I think also what you need to think about is not the immediate, but what about Medicare? You get a plan that will include prescription drugs, a plan that will give you options. Now, I hope people understand that Medicare today is important, but it doesn’t keep up with the new medicines. If you’re a Medicare person, on Medicare, you don’t get the new procedures. You’re stuck in a time warp in many ways.

"So it will be a modern Medicare system that trusts you to make a variety of options for you. You’re going to live in a peaceful world. It will be a world of peace because we’re going to have a clear sight of foreign policy based upon a strong military and a mission that stands by our friends. A mission that doesn’t try to be all things to all people. A judicious use of the military which will help keep the peace.

"You’ll live in a world, hopefully, that is more educated so it’s less likely you’ll be harmed in your neighborhood. See, an educated child is one much more likely to be hopeful and optimistic. You’ll be in a world in which fits into my philosophy. The harder you work, the more you can keep.

"It’s the American way. Government shouldn’t be a heavy hand. It’s what the federal government does to you. It should be a helping hand, and tax relief and the proposals I just described should be a good helping hand. "

Kee sat back down. She will be eligible for Medicare in 31 years.

Bush’s proposals are actually so big that they’re simple. Just forget how many zeros a trillion is and do this math: He wants to give back $1.3 billion in tax cuts, the great bulk of which will go to the richest people in the country. Then he will take $1 trillion out of Social Security – but he says he will not cut benefits, so he promises to put another $2.3 trillion into Social Security and Medicare, and he also wants to spend money on education, the military, health care and prescription drugs.

Really, once we get to trillions, it’s quite simple. We don’t have the money.

Bush wandered between pathetic and ridiculous, while the media focused on the fact that when Gore got a question from a teacher, he asked the guy, “What grade do you teach?”

“Gore repeatedly violated the rules!” claimed indignant spinmeisters for the next two days. “He was rude; he was arrogant.”

In the absurd hothouse environment of Washington, where they all seem to have lost their grip years ago, I was actually asked by one interviewer, “Which of the three Al Gores do you think showed up last night?”

Gore changed his debate strategy in the second debate because everyone said he came on too strong in the first one. In the third debate, he went back to being himself, knowing so much about everything that he’s boring. It beat Bush’s not knowing enough to be able to talk for two minutes on major issues.

But the blackbird journalists of Washington had got themselves into a perfect tizzy of pop psychology – Gore doesn’t know he who is, who is the real Gore, Gore is unauthentic, he’s trying to be an alpha male, not an omega male. Actually, it’s pretty clear to everyone outside the Washington press corps that Gore is a politician trying to win a presidential campaign.

Remember the great flap and carry-on when Gore told of a Florida schoolgirl’s lack of a desk, but the next day her principal said it was no such thing? This was rich new evidence of Gore’s “Pinocchio problem.”

Last week, CNN’s Brooks Jackson reported that the principal has misrepresented the situation to reporters and that students had gone for weeks without desks in classes of 36 to a teacher.

The issue in this campaign is not Gore’s truthfulness. He read in a newspaper article that Erich Segal, author of `Love Story,’ had said that Gore, Tipper and Tommie Lee Jones were all models for characters in the book. Segal later said he had been misquoted about Tipper being a model. How does that make Gore a liar?

He never claimed that he invented the Internet or that he discovered Love Canal, and he did have to work cruelly hard on his father’s farm in Tennessee. OK?

Now can we discuss Bush’s plan to free us from dependence on foreign oil by more energy exploitation in Mexico? Now can we discuss Bush’s tax plan? He has repeatedly claimed that the bulk of his proposed tax cuts would go to “the people at the bottom end of the economic ladder,” and it’s simply untrue.

The danger of Bush’s tax cut, in addition to its timing, is that it will exacerbate this growing disparity between the rich and the rest of the country. It’s not just tax cuts for the rich, but the fact that Bush doesn’t believe in increasing the minimum wage – which is set at $3.55 a hour in Texas, covering mostly farm workers who don’t come under the federal minimum.

The average housing wage in this country – what you have to earn to afford a relatively decent two-bedroom apartment for a family of four – is $11 an hour. Bush’s plan would make one of the most troubling trends in this society considerably worse.

Molly Ivins is a columnist for the `Star-Telegram.’ You can reach her at 1005 Congress Ave., Suite 920, Austin, TX 78701; (512) 476-8908; or send comments to mollyivins@star-telegram.com.

“True, this is a significant portion of the party, but lots of us are regular, Cap’n Crunch-eating folks with good hygeine”

Hobson - this makes me laugh - my boyfriend is a Nader man (he voted early, but couldn’t vote Green - not on the NC ballot - talk about a crock of $%&# (could they not have gotten 2000 signatures in the Hygenically challenged Asheville area?). At any rate, he is a granola freak and wouldn’t touch Cap’n Crunch with a 10’ pole ~ but I digress. I should fix you 2 up. LOL

Secondly, to the republican gal claiming that tax dollars support Planned Parenthood’s abortion mill. I believe Planned Parenthood is a not for profit charity that recieves no government funding. They serve a far more broader constituency than those seeking abortions. They provide women’s health services. The clinic I used to go to for a yearly, when I was a poor student gave me an exam, pap and pills for about $72.00. They did not perform abortions at that specific clinic, but would refer if needed. By far, the majority of people in that waiting room are uninsured women with the need for healthcare. I believe the doctor’s are low paid, and there are many volunteers. I too think they shouldn’t be funded with tax dollars (which I don’t believe they are), but I sure as hell wish they didn’t have to spend 1/2 their money on security measures like cameras, and on my last trip some $%#hole asked me not to kill my baby, and I was just going for a yearly exam…I’m all for free speech, but this was harassment, and worse yet, it was ignorant. Maybe tax dollars would be better spent making sure these yahoos didn’t try to bomb people like me just seeking affordable healthcare.

Why the unquestioning reverence of the Constitution as an omniscient, infinitely wise document, as though it flew down from Mount Olympus straight from the printing presses of the gods? Half of these ubermensch “forefathers” owned slaves, and the other half didn’t object. We would consider these men morally deficient if they lived today, so why do we transport their political theories into the 21st century without any critical thought at all? Most of their ideas may be perfectly sound, but why are so few willing to examine the document more carefully?

And if you want politics today to be just like those in George Washington times, remember that the new nation loved taxes and had no qualms about using the army to subdue its own people - Alexander Hamilton himself led the expedition to crush the anti-tax Whiskey Rebellion in western PA. Uh-oh, this is taking time away from my campaign. Where’s rockstar? I need a handler to manipulate the masses for me.

My golly Inverness,
I just saw you reciting Wordsworth from memory on the Sea Urchin thread and now here you are over here in the middle of a blistering cross-examination.

Are you one of them Washington litigator types? We should oughta go for drinks some night. Is your office downtown?

Gadzooks woman - you are over there on the Horse Care forum too! Thanks for the info on oral supplements. I’ll try and find that issue.

[This message has been edited by smedley (edited 11-02-2000).]

Whew!! After reading all of this, I can say that the candidates have nothing on anyone. Things I’ve read: misquotes by people who would rather continue misquoting than find the truth, stretching and twisting of facts, cruel, selfish, narrow-minded ideaology, frightening reactionary beliefs, lies, stereotyping and prejudicial untruths about people who have little or no voice in this society. In short, there are many people who posted here who would make GREAT political candidates for this race, and be picked apart, looked at under a magnifying glass, and made to looking just as bad, if not WORSE than anyone currently running. Fortunately we have the right to read, go to libraries, use computers and in general, EDUCATE OURSELVES and make a change in this country by voting, writing letters, running for office, and getting involved. VOTE TUESDAY in PEACE as an AMERICAN…

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Blinky:
[ Honestly-it seems crazy for people to pin their hopes and fears on one man-it’s the Congress and Senate we need to take more if an interest in.[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very, very true Blinky. I neeed to take more consideration into who & what is voted in those areas, but so often for me I honestly don’t know the majority of names listed in ballots, and it comes down to the party and the ideologies they represent. Thats the scariest part about elections for me, I really don’t know how much the actual president plays into this any more, someone who charms me scares me as much as some one who has no presentation skills.

I once saw a former prime minister who was under Churchill, say that Churchill would never have made it to prime minister or leader today because of the media’s effect. He said that while Churchill could give a strong speech, he couldn’t react or speak immediately, was not witty and was rattled when he had to. The person interviewed said that today’s media and need for immediate information would have eaten him alive.

So much of what a politician does is sell themselves to you, that it’s hard to always remember what that smiling face represents. It’s always amazing how one leader can symbolize a country, and even though that person isn’t involved in all, if any. of the procedures, if they die or leave it seems like chaos can reign.

[This message has been edited by Moose (edited 10-20-2000).]

Oh, I can’t believe it!! Are we REALLY on page five and still civil?!? I’m so proud!!!

First: I used those comparisons to point out how really stupid the generalizations of people’s intelligence or lack thereof are in the big scheme.

As I have many times said, to deal with the “personalities” the individuals is a waste of time and energy. I also think you should not fall for the produced line of PR patter and believe it is the gospel.

It appears to me that we are divided nationally and intellectually between those of us who believe in the individual rights which I believe our forefathers intended for this democracy and those who see the Federal Government as some sort of big daddy who will take care of us.

We have the right to pursue happiness and not the entitlement of happiness. Therefore, it seems to me that a government which rewards only those who perform as expected is being fair. For example if I pay my taxes and choose not to have children, and the government has a surplus because they underestimated the income and over taxed the populace, why should I be denied a tax refund while my neighbor who did not exercise caution and produced 5 children gets a $50,000 deduction so they can go to college?

I worked just as hard, I paid even more without the deduction for children and yet the Federal Government gets the right to choose who will benefit from the fact that they plain and simple oversharged with taxes.

As to politics, I have never had the call to be a “public servant” simply because I felt that it was not viable option since I simply do not have the talent or will power to keep my opinions a secret! I believe that equally with right to become a millionaire we also have the right to starve to death. In direct proportion to the limitation of our right to get rich is the reduction of the possibility that we might starve to death. Somewhere in between is democracy.

I do not think that a government is responsible for social engineering or the reallocation of funds from one segment of the population to another. I have believed in the right of the individual to control and master his own life since FDR. Yes, I am that old and it was he who convinced me that being a Republican meant that I did not require anyone to tell me, what to eat, how to eat it, what to wear, what to think or to require a government stamp approval on my chosen life style.

I have chosen to smoke cigarettes, I will not blame the government or the tobacco companies because I find cigarettes useful to me. I enjoy having a drink of “alcohol” at the end of the day. I don’t give a rat’s “****” whether you think I’m too fat or too skinny!
I believe I was given by GOD and not the government the right to live my life the way I want, to spend my years doing what I enjoy whether or not it is approved by the government and all I ask from the government is “bug out” of my life and get to what matters like keeping the highways from flooding, keep the crooks somewhere where they won’t get my money.

I will choose to whom I donate my money! I will choose whom I wish to assist in their path if they need help!

As a young Republican, it was clear that those of us who were Republicans were simply positive that we would always be able to find work and support ourselves. The young Democrats on the other hand had a doubt and wanted to hedge their bets with a BIG GOVERNMENT that would be there as a safety net just incase they didn’t!

Karl Marx said in his manifesto, which was brand new when I was in school that Socialism would replace Democracy when it reached the point where 50% of the society was supporting the other 50%.

Where is the incentive to be sucessful? What are the benfits if the government can decide that you have too much money and therefore don’t deserve to keep it.

I rather liked a proposal a few years back that said everyone was entitled to $100,000 a year. So when you filed you tax return and you earned less the government would send you a check for the difference. That was to show we didn’t need an IRS at all.

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

However, you have stepped over a line to a place where you do not belong. How dare you discuss the topic of interracial or international adoption if you know NOTHING about it? What on god’s green earth does this have to do with Bush vs. Gore, much less about horses?

You comments on this subject have not only been ignorant and uneducated, but also highly insulting and offensive. I speak from first-hand experience. I do not feel the need to attempt to educate you or anyone else any further about this issue, as it clearly doesn’t concern you and is out of place on this board. But I will cordially ask you to please confine yourself to subjects about which you know something.[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The reality is many, many people post on threads and topics when in reality they have little first-hand experience and do not qualify as leading experts - that’s the nature of a bulletin board.

Does this thread have much to do with either of Gore or Bush’s impact on our equestrian pursuits? No.

I would urge you to carefully read Kryswyn’s post - there’s nothing offensive in what she writes or perceives. You perhaps responded to the perception of a slight when there is none apparent nor intended. I don’t know Krsywn nor do I know you but I do find your dismissive and enraged response strangely upsetting.

As my dear husband often reminds me, ‘don’t personalize’. I believe you may have.

Oh, and Holland, as Dan Qualye would say, it was a truly heart-rendering ballad you told about Dubya. I’m mopping at my eyes here.

Please tell us again, because I’m cracking up over this one…how is it you figure Dubya “speaks for the nobodies” like nobody else can when he springs from one of the most politically powerful, elite, wealthy families in the country?

A letter from Michael Moore - another perspective to peruse.

THREE STRIKES AND YOU’RE OUT, MR. BUSH

November 3, 2000

Dear friends,

With the revelation last night of the drunk driving
arrest and conviction in 1976 of George W. Bush,
this marks the THIRD arrest – that we know of –
involving this man who would be President.

Let me ask you, the readers of this letter: How
many times have YOU been arrested? Me, none.
Most of you – once? twice? This guy has been
arrested AT LEAST THREE TIMES! How many
people do you know have been arrested three
times? Go ahead, do a quick count on your fingers.
The answer? NONE!

Yet, we are being asked on Tuesday to vote for
a man who has been arrested THREE TIMES.
For President of the United States! Are they
kidding? The Republicans must take us all for
idiots.

The first arrest of George W. Bush was for
theft at a hotel. The second arrest was for
disorderly conduct at a football game. The
third arrest, we’ve now learned, is for a very
serious crime – drunk driving. What’s the next
crime committed by George W. Bush that we
will learn of? When will we learn it? It is time for
everyone to demand the truth from Governor
Bush. I’m telling you, we haven’t heard the last of
his criminal behavior.

But next Wednesday will be too late to find out.

The press should be ashamed of itself for its
laziness. I cannot believe it took a young woman,
Erin Fehlau – at a FOX affiliate, no less – up in
Maine to stumble onto this story and do the
necessary work to uncover it. Where have the
big networks’ investigative reporters been?

I’ll tell you where: ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL!

After seeing this local Maine reporter on “Nightline”
last night explain how a policewoman told her she
overheard a conversation between a lawyer and a
judge, and then the reporter started digging around
and found out the facts, it was clear the story was
not planted by the Gore campaign, as Bush and his
people have been insinuating.

The real story here is how did this conviction get
covered up for so many years? I spoke to a lawyer
last night familiar with these kinds of cases. She
said that a D.U.I., in and of itself, is not something
worth covering up. Had Bush revealed this himself,
he would have found the public forgiving of his
infraction.

No, my lawyer friend continued, the only reason
to cover it up would be that there was something
ELSE connected to the arrest that night – e.g.,
drugs or resisting arrest. This other potential charge
could have been dropped and expunged. The
reporter was shown only the court docket which
listed Bush’s name, address, and the charge to
which he pleaded guilty. What we need to see
is the actual POLICE REPORT from that night.
Assuming it hasn’t been doctored, that will tell us
the truth.

The Bush people have already lied about the
nature of the D.U.I. arrest (they said the cop
pulled Bush over because he was “driving too
slowly”; the arresting officer last night said it
was because Bush had “swerved off on the
shoulder of the road”). Bush himself lied last
night when asked about the night he spent in
jail. “I didn’t spend time in jail,” he insisted. The
officer told the local reporter that Bush, in fact,
was handcuffed, taken to the station, and held
in custody for at least an hour and a half.

This is not just some simple traffic ticket. I
don’t want to hear one word comparing this
drunk driving conviction to Clinton’s
transgressions. Lying about consensual sex you
had with another adult is NOT the same as
getting behind the wheel of a car when you are
drunk and endangering the lives of others
(including the life of your own sister, Mr. Bush,
who was in the car with you that night).

It is NOT the same as Gore volunteering he
smoked pot in his youth. That act endangered no
one’s life and he did not try to cover it up.

And don’t tell us that the drunk driving and the
“drinking problem” was just a “youthful indiscretion.”
You were NOT a “youth” when you were in your
THIRTIES on the night you were arrested while
careening off the road. The fact is, according to your
own admission (if not in these words), you were a
drunk and a bum 'til the age of 40, living off your
rich daddy who spent his time bailing you out of
trouble.

For crying out loud – if any Republican is reading
this, I implore you: this man does not deserve to
be placed in the highest and most respected office
in the land! Bush voters, come to your senses! If
you can’t bring yourself to vote for Nader or Gore,
then show your love for your country and just stay
home next Tuesday.

Please, save our nation this incredible, unfolding,
never-ending embarrassment.

Yours,

Michael Moore
mmflint@aol.com www.michaelmoore.com