I agree with him that there should have been spending cuts. I do not agree
that the tax cuts were just for the rich. Unless you believe as some
leftists do that everyone making $70k or more is rich. I believe he did not
vote for the cuts for both reasons. One which I agree and one I do not.
Romney is a walking contradiction and in some ways more liberal. Look as
Mass. healthcare. Bush II is a religious guy, he is probably a principled
guy. He is strong on national defense, but he a too much of a spender and a
goldfish is a better communicator. You know what? Bush I said no new taxes
then raised taxes (bad move). However, in 1992, I still supported him
because I believe he was the best man for the job of those running.
My real pick this year Giuliani. Giuliani is pro-choice. I am pro-life. I
would still vote for him because I believed him to be the most capable.
Anyone who votes based on one, even two issues, is missing the big picture
and, to me, quite frightening.
Who else wee we going to vote for this year, Fred Thompson? I like the guy
and he is a great speaker, but he was clueless when interviewed. Who else,
Ron Paul? How about Huckabee? Here we have another Bush. A social
conservative and a fiscal liberal. the worst of both worlds. He is worse
than a social conservative. He is a social zealot.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Barnes" <rascal@scrtc.com>
To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 12:34 AM
Subject: RE: DML: Made in China
>
> He is a liar. He said he voted against the tax cuts because there were
> not
> spending cuts, yet back when the tax cuts were passed, he said he did not
> want tax cuts for the rich. That is just one of his many lies.
> Disagreeing
> is one thing, he is simply a liar and conservatives will not vote for him.
>
> Rascal
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net] On Behalf Of Tom Byrne
> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 9:28 PM
> To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
> Subject: Re: DML: Made in China
>
>
> Not a liar, he just disagrees with the automatons. I like that.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick Barnes" <rascal@scrtc.com>
> To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 9:43 PM
> Subject: RE: DML: Made in China
>
>
>>
>> He is a liar, no honor in that.
>>
>> Rascal
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
>> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net] On Behalf Of Tom Byrne
>> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 8:38 PM
>> To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
>> Subject: Re: DML: Made in China
>>
>>
>> The man is more honorable than anyone running this time around.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Rick Barnes" <rascal@scrtc.com>
>> To: <dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net>
>> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 9:05 PM
>> Subject: RE: DML: Made in China
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Well I am generally conservative, but will be voting Libertarian once
>>> again.
>>> Would not ever vote for McCain, that lying bastard.
>>>
>>> Rascal
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net
>>> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net] On Behalf Of
>>> jon@dakota-truck.net
>>> Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 5:47 PM
>>> To: dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net
>>> Subject: Re: DML: Made in China
>>>
>>>
>>> "Tom Byrne" <kerib@ptd.net> wrote:
>>>> McCain will have an easier time beating her than Obama. All McCain
>>>> needs
>>> to
>>>> do is to pick a conservative VP and he will win both the middle and the
>>>> right. Most of the country is in the center to, may, slightly right,
>>> McCain
>>>> wins. The Dems should have rolled given Bush's historically-low
>>>> approval
>>>> ratings, but the Democratic Congress has earned even lower approval
>>> ratings
>>>> than Bush. One has to try very hard to earn lower approval ratings than
>>>> Bush, but Congress accomplished the task.
>>>
>>>
>>> I am hearing a lot of talk from conservatives who basically plan to
>>> sit this one out rather than vote for McCain. The usual theory which
>>> is advanced is that if the country is going to go to the crapper, why
>>> not let the Democrat party get the credit? (The reasons given for
>>> this opposition is if you look at his history and policies, McCain is
>>> extremely liberal and even his so called strength of national security
>>> is an illusion when you start looking into it and seeing how he has
>>> handled illegal immigration and his desire to treat enemy combatants
>>> as criminals and handle them via the court system rather than the
>>> military.)
>>>
>>> As much as I would not want to see the country take a step
>>> backwards, I can't say that I disagree with this theory. Its a lot
>>> easier for a conservative congress to fight against a liberal
>>> president when that president is in the other party. (compare the
>>> relative success of Newt and the '94 congress against Clinton for
>>> example, as opposed to that same basic congress with Bush - who is not
>>> a conservative - at the helm.) Its a shame, but party lines seem to
>>> override principles.
>>>
>>> As far as advancing conservatism goes, I think a conservative
>>> Republican congress with a liberal Democrat president would fare
>>> better than that same conservative Republican congress and a liberal
>>> Republican president, even if that Republican congress happens to be
>>> in the minority.
>>>
>>> --
>>> -Jon-
>>>
>>> .- Jon Steiger -- jon@dakota-truck.net or jon@jonsteiger.com -.
>>> | '96 Kolb Firefly, '96 Suzuki Intruder, Miscellaneous Mopars |
>>> `-------------------------------- http://www.jonsteiger.com --'
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 02 2008 - 02:10:10 EST