A Question for Anti-Bush

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Anarchy 2 : One Thread

To Anti-Bush: Politically ignorant,immature brainwashed sheep such as yourself NEVER cease to amaze me with your idiocy. You prove your worthlessness immediately, with your name: "Anti-Bush". Yes, that shows GREAT intelligence. If everyone went always stated they were anti-this, and anti-that, how would we ever know what people were "FOR"? So your anti-"Bush". I don't really care if you're gay, what I want to know is WHAT ARE YOU "FOR"? Whgat do you ADVOCATE? What is your "better" idea? Lay out your plan for running the country, the economy,foreign policy, the correct response to having 3,000 innocent civilians murdered on Sept. 11, what our policy, in public and BEHIND THE SCENES,(which YOU nor anyone knows NOTHING about)policy concerning the Saudis, Iraq, Iran, Syria, North Korea, China, Taiwan, etc. Seeing as you you are so brilliant as to call yourself "anti-Bush", you MUST have BETTER ideas that would be TOTALLY DIFFERENT and MORE EFFECTIVE than the President, so we would ALL like to HEAR them. And you should be able to answer this IMMEDIATELY, seeing you have so much criticism, you must have the BETTER answers right at the tip of your tongue. And don't forget that these policies must take into account that from 1992 to 2000, during the Clinton Admin., our intelligence agencies were neglected, in some cases ignored, dangerous terrorists like Osama bin-Laden were allowed to roam free, to recruit, to buy guns, bomb-making material, and who knows what kind of chemicals, biological agents, even rumors of suitcase nukes. The only fact that allows me to sleep at night is the knowledge that either fission or fusion bombs(Hiroshima was a fission bomb,power of 12,000 tons of TNT, modern thermonuclear weapons, up to 50,000,000 tons of TNT explosive power)only the knowledge that a in order to fit a nuclear device into a package that a person can carry, it has to be made with elements that decay(disintegrate, disappear), and parts of it must be maintained on a regular schedule and most likely, if they DID buy any of these devices from a black market Russian, they got ripped off. However, all these dangerous things and dangerous people flourished for those 8 years, it seems the President had other "distractions", other "dangers" that took priority in his mind(Monica Lewinsky, Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones(c'mon, Paula, just Kiss It), Kathleen Willy, Hillary(flying lamps), Vince Foster, Ron Brown, Arkansas State Troopers, Meny Airport(cocaine), Whitewater,Rose Law Firm, Web Hubble, billing records, forcing IRS and FBI against people he didn't like, cattle futures, Grand juries, Senate hearings,impeachment, etc., etc. No WONDER he didn't have time for Osama. And even when Sudan and others OFFERED Osama,Clinton said "Well, ah dint have a reason to take him into custody" Never mind he bombed our embassies and the USS Cole, killed many of our citizens, and this was AFTER, of course the first Trade Center bombing. Meanwhile, Osama had plans going, and guys coming into our country, asking to learn how to fly Jumbo Jets, but "not interested in learning how to take-off or LAND" these jumbo jets. So a Middle-Eastern guy comes into your country on a student visa, wants to learn to fly a 747 while it's in the air, but doesn't care about taking off or landing. No problem there, let him, and all his freinds in the country. If they're minority, they'll probably vote Democrat! And, to wrap up, your original question about the penalty for treason? Well, it depends. In peacetime, it's prison. During wartime, it's longer time in prison, I believe the last execution for treason was Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, in 1953. However, there have been MANY instances of treason since that time. Spies, like Aldrich Ames, have been caught and publicly discussed, and other cases, which have been extremely sensitive, have been played down, so as not to reveal sensitive areas of our intelligence, or our ability to learn information(spy) on other security risks, be they personnel or foreign governments. Then there are acts of treason that are not prosecuted, for political reasons. Between 1993-1999, Bill Clinton gave Chinese Nationals free reign in Washington:(read below) The facts below are all well known, but yet No calls for the arrest of Clinton for TREASON have ever been filed. Terrorists are small potatos compared to over 1 billion Chinese, who have slave-labor(cheap Wal-Mart prices!) and are building factories and cars and trucks and an economy determined to defeat ours, and Nuclear Warhead -Tipped Missles that can ALREADY reach Los Angeles, only a matter of time 'til they can reach New York City. They've already calmly stated to us if they move on Taiwan, and we interfere, they will launch Nukes at Hollywood. Nice, huh? And Clinton GAVE them the technology(radiation-hardened microchips) to make the guidance systems UNSTOPPABLE, like OURS. For more info on The greedy, power-hngy piece-o-shit Clinton, ********************************************************************* USA Today 5/19/99 "...In 1996, the Administration transferred the licensing authority for exporting satellite technology from the State Department, which had opposed giving new technology to China, to the Commerce Department, which immediately approved the transfer. Given the green light by the Commerce Department, Loral Corporation provided China with missile technology to improve its satellite launch and guidance systems. This same technology can be used to improve the performance of missiles aimed at the United States. Loral is headed by Bernard Schwartz, one of the largest Democratic donors in the '96 election cycle...."

World Net Daily 7/21/98 Charles Smith ".President Clinton signed a SECOND part to the waiver for Loral's Globalstar system in July of 1996. The second part of the Clinton waiver was not for satellites to Russia but allowed Loral to sell an encrypted telemetry control ground station to China for the Loral Globalstar satellites. The station has already been built and has opened just outside of Beijing.."In March 1996," wrote Reinsch in his recent letter to Spence. "The export of a ground station which contained encryption would have been under the jurisdiction of the State Department." In 1996, encrypted telemetry was a separate item -- not controlled by the Commerce Department. The only way to dodge the State Department sanctions on the export of satellite encryption to China was by obtaining Bill Clinton's signature. On July 9, 1996, Bill Clinton signed the waiver for Loral."

Capitol Hill Blue 4/22/99 Doug Thompson "...In 1996, the Clinton administration, over the objection of the CIA and the Defense Department, approved the sale of sensitive satellite technology to China by Loral, a company headed by Clinton campaign contributor Bernard Schwartz. That technology, intelligence analyst Owen says, was a key component in developing the missile technology that China is using to developing a delivery system for its new nuclear weapons. "Countries spy on each other, that's a fact of life," Owen says. "But usually the country that is being spied on doesn't give the one doing the spying this much help." ..."

Wall Street Journal 4/14/98 Editorial "…President Clinton approved the transfer of missile guidance technology to China at the behest of the largest personal contributor to the Democratic Party. He granted the needed waiver despite an ongoing Department of Justice criminal investigation of the same company's earlier transfer of similar technology: a Pentagon study concluding that in the earlier episode "United States national security has been harmed." That is the essence of a report yesterday by Jeff Gerth of the New York Times (who also reported the original Whitewater story in 1992) concerning satellite launch technology provided by Loral Space and Communications and Hughes Electronics, a subsidiary of General Motors. Loral Chairman Bernard L. Schwartz topped the personal contributions list in 1997; his 1994 trip to China with Commerce Secretary Ron Brown was quickly followed by a memo to the President from Harold Ickes saying Mr. Schwartz "is prepared to do anything he can for the Administration." Lobbying jointly with Hughes Chairman C. Michael Armstrong, who has gone on to head AT&T, Mr. Schwartz succeeded in softening licensing requirements for export of guidance technology to China…."

Wall Street Journal 3/11/99 Editorial "…On their own the security lapses would be serious enough….. But the story's context invites an even more chilling conclusion. The Clinton Administration's inaction, after all, did not occur in a vacuum. It came in the thick of a 1996 re-election effort we now know included campaign contributions from those with ties to the Chinese government, its military and even its intelligence organizations In other words, at the same time the FBI and CIA were investigating the source of the Los Alamos leak, Vice President Al Gore was passing the hat among inexplicably wealthy Buddhist nuns, Mr. Clinton was serving coffee at the White House to PLA arms dealer Wang Jun and the Administration responded favorably to a request from a man who would be the Democratic Party's largest donor in 1996--Loral Chairman Bernard L. Schwartz--to transfer authority over licensing of satellite technology from the State to Commerce Department. Two years later Loral would be granted a Presidential waiver to export its technology to China, even though it was under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for previous technology transfers….More to the point here, neither of Mr. Clinton's predecessors involved their foreign policy people in campaign politics the way this Administration has. What makes Sandy Berger's lack of action on the espionage front so scandalous is that as deputy National Security Adviser in 1996 he sat in on the weekly White House meetings about the re-election campaign. And he wasn't alone. The President himself chaired a September 13, 1995, meeting after which Johnny Huang--Lippo's man at the Commerce Department--was transferred to the Democratic National Committee. The result was that a man suspected of having compromised national security continued at his post, and foreign scientists were allowed to visit lab facilities without background checks. Indeed, the White House began to tighten things at Los Alamos only late last year, after the arrival of Bill Richardson at Energy and after a bipartisan committee convened by Rep. Chris Cox looked into issues of Chinese espionage and technology transfer. Over at Justice, meanwhile, the Attorney General resolutely refused to follow the recommendations of either FBI director Louis Freeh or her handpicked prosecutor, Charles La Bella, to appoint an independent counsel to look into any Chinese connection to the 1996 campaign…."

Omaha World Herald 3/10/99 Editorial Board "…Bereuter has said before that two American companies, Loral Space and Communications and Hughes Electronics Corp., have broken the law in the 1990s by giving China access to unauthorized technological materials. Both companies contract with China to launch satellites. China uses the same type of missile for commercial and military launches, Bereuter said, so Loral and Hughes are subject to restrictions on how much they can help China improve its missile technology. He said the companies are required to keep satellite technology to themselves. Bereuter suspects that Loral and Hughes shared prohibited missile and satellite technology. He said he believes Loral was especially brazen in violating national security laws in order to curry better business relations with China. When congressional investigators tried to pursue the matter, Bereuter said, the Justice Department told them to back off, that Justice was conducting its own criminal investigation. That, Bereuter said, does not inspire confidence. He said Justice may be shielding Loral rather investigating it. He noted that Bernard Schwartz, Loral's chairman, was the largest individual donor to the Democratic Party last year and has given the party more than $1 million in recent years…."

FoxNews 3/17/99 Crier report interviews Timperlake author of Year of the Rat – Freeper Jobim reports "…Why did Clinton sell out? For the money. A quest for power. Then you need to cover your tracks. Riadys had John Huang working with them for a long time. Riady $ was to get Huang in the government. Hubbell was at ground zero in the entire conspiracy. Huang got clearance 5 &1/2 months before he showed up for work. Huang received documents that were stamped: COULD LEAD TO HANDLERS DEATH. 1996 - Clinton needed money. Loral sends committee over to help the Chinese. Berger gave Loral a get-out-of-jail-free card. 20 missiles have ready capability to go to 200 with miniature nuke tips…."

Creators Syndicate 3/2/99 Linda Bowles "…Why did this administration obfuscate, stonewall, and cover up this devastating breach of national security? Let's set the stage. The 1996 election campaign was in full swing. Despite warnings from the FBI that the Chinese were planning to buy influence in the elections, "For Sale" signs had been hung up on the White House, and various Chinese hustlers, gun runners and communist officials were rubbing shoulders with the president of the United States. Millions of dollars from various Asian sources were being funneled to Democrats. Some of the money came directly from the Chinese People's Liberation Army…. The same year, hundreds of Chinese "visitors" without security clearances toured Los Alamos, some of them, no doubt, on their way to White House receptions. Background checks for visitors at Los Alamos were not required until early in 1999, a full 17 months after a recommendation by the FBI. In 1996, against the advice of then Secretary of State Warren Christopher and experts in the Defense Department, Bill Clinton lifted a long-standing policy of severe restrictions on the export of American satellites to China for launch on Chinese rockets. He moved control over such decisions from the security-oriented State Department to the let's-make-a-deal Commerce Department run by the late Ron Brown….. But when the dust cleared, the Democrats got money from satellite companies and from Chinese communists; China got supercomputors, advanced production equipment and missile technology; Loral got its satellites launched at bargain basement prices; and the American people got shafted. The theft from Los Alamos gave the Chinese the capability to produce highly sophisticated nuclear bombs. And on Clinton's watch, the transfer of sensitive missile technology gave them the capability of depositing the bombs on American cities…."

WorldNetDaily 3/30/99 Charles Smith "…General Ding and the PLA also passed money directly to Clinton through various agents such as Johnny Chung and Charlie Trie. In exchange, the PRC warlords got access to U.S. secrets other than W88 nuclear bombs. For example, Lt. General Shen's son, Shen Jun, was the lead software engineer for Hughes on all Chinese satellites. Loral provided the PLA with radiation-hardened encrypted telemetry control systems such as the missing board of chips from the 1996 Intelsat crash. In fact, according to the State Department, Loral satellite CDMA communications technology was preferred by the PLA. According to a 1996 Department of State cable to President Clinton by Beijing Ambassador Sasser, the PLA was using money from Chinese billionaire Li Ka-Shing to finance Chinese army communications systems….." ********************************************************************* And the last TREASONOUS bastard is a guy, who on foreign soil, LIED about "events" he witnessed(made up), and co-operated with an enemy who held hundreds, maybe thousands, of our POW's for YEARS, without even having decency to TELL us WHO they were holding, TORTURED, BEAT AMPUTATED LIMBS AND GENITALS, MURDERED,all against Geneva Conventions, AND this same guy, after scamming his way out of danger early, because his STATED plan all along was to have a career in politics,came back to the U.S.,went to Congress, and LIED thru his teeth about all his comrades, the guys he lived with worked with, who risked their lives for him every day, as you do in War, and told Congess they were "rapists, baby-killers, civilian murderers, collectors of Heads, Ears, etc., village burners, and ravagers of the countryside in the manner of Genghis Kahn"(who he couldn't even pronounce)Why did he do it? So his name and face would become FAMOUS, in all the PAPERS, and on TV. You see, it was part of the plan, to first play the HERO, then when the public wanted out, he became ANTI-HERO.Well, he got elected, it worked, and now, he made it to his REAL goal. He's running for President. Even though his picture hangs in that enemy's war museum along with Jane Fonda and others who helped keep our POW's longer, tortured longer, and inevitably cost some their lives. Yes, the last man who is guilty of TREASON, and hasn't been charged is none other than John Kerry.

-- The Oral-Kill (Libssuck@giveourcountryaway.com), August 21, 2004

Answers

God you are soooooo boring. You're worse than the Oracle ever was. Get a life already. SHUT THE FUCK UP, wind-bag.

-- Shut the fuck up (shut@thefuckup.goof), August 21, 2004.

You have devoted too much of your time to attacking a high-schooler. You ask what his plan for running the coutry, etc. is; no one has all the answers, and it is unrealistic of you to think that anyone professes to.

-- J Biscuits (thefilthohgodthefilth@yahoo.com), August 25, 2004.

It seems I've got another fan.

"So your anti-"Bush". I don't really care if you're gay, what I want to know is WHAT ARE YOU "FOR"? Whgat do you ADVOCATE? What is your "better" idea? Lay out your plan for running the country, the economy,"

I'm no expert on the economy, but I would certainly end (or at least dramaticaly change) NAFTA. It destroys local economies and takes away American sovreignty of it's own economy. I'd try to stop globalization. I'd try to discourage outsourcing by denying government contracts to companies that move overseas to avoid U.S. taxes and labor prices. Outsourcing puts Americans out of work, takes money out the American economy, and leads to the exploitation of workers in the third world.

"foreign policy"

I'd bring most, if not all, of our troops home. Isolationism, that would be my foreign policy. I'd cut all foreign aid to nations with a history of human rights abuses. I'd stop arming dictators. I'd stop overthrowing democracies. I'd launch a real investigation into Saudi Arabia's involvement in 9/11. I wouldn't start a war with a country unless it was a direct threat to the Unites States, which Iraq was not.

"the correct response to having 3,000 innocent civilians murdered on Sept. 11"

The correct response would be to cooperate fully with the 9/11 comission. Bush at first resisted even HAVING a 9/11 Commission, and then he was uncooperative and resisted them every step of the way. They had no real power, they couldn't force the release of any evidence, all they could do was ask real nice and hope the President would cooperate. For God's sake, they tried to name HENRY KISSINGER as head of the commission at first. That man is a war criminal if there ever was one. The Bush Administration refused to release hundreds of documents which could have been crucial to a full understanding of 9/11 and the steps that need to be taken to prevent it. Bush wanted to delay their report so that it didn't come out before the election. Why? What was he afraid of?

I would go after Saudi Arabia. That's where the money is coming from, and that's probably where Osama is now. Bush never gave it a second thought.

" what our policy, in public and BEHIND THE SCENES,(which YOU nor anyone knows NOTHING about)policy concerning the Saudis,"

Stop supporting their dictatorship. They are one of the world's last absolute monarchies. The people have no say in the government. People are beheaded in public. A country that cuts off body parts and uses torture as a regular method of interrogation (in defiance of the UN) is no friend of the United States. It is quite likely that Saudi Arabian money funded 9/11, yet we haven't even looked into that possibility.

"Iraq"

Iraq is simply the product of another American fuckup. We created the monster that was Saddam Hussein. We gave him billions worth of chemical and biological weapons and gave him the green light to use them on his own people. We looked the other way while he murdered 30,000 Iranians and a million of his own people. We shouldn't have supported him in the first place. There is no excuse for that. George HW Bush should be tried for war crimes for his help in Saddam's bloodbaths in the 80's. Saddam deserved to be taken down, but war was not the answer. We should have gone to the UN in good faith, instead of giving them the finger, and proposed he be tried for war crimes in Geneva. We should have sent him an ultimatum, reading something like this: Saddam Hussein, you are to be tried for war crimes in Geneva on (insert date here). You may come to Geneva, a neutral city where you will be safe, to respresent yourself. You have the right to an attorney. You will be presumed innocent until proven guitly. Should you chose not to attend your hearing, you may send someone to speak on your behalf, or you will be tried in absentia.

Granted, he probably wouldn't have shown, but we could have tried him in absentia, like they did with some of the Nazis who were still at large during the Nuremburg trials. If he was convicted, which he definitely would be, the UN could place a bounty on his head for his removal from power, capture, or killing. This would probably lead to war in the end, but we would have had the full support of the UN behind us, and the war would have a lot more legitimacy in the eyes of the international community.

"Iran"

Again, another fuckup we are currently paying the price for. They had a democracy, but we just couldn't take the idea of self-determination in the middle east, so we overthrew it and installed the Shah (secret police, anyone?). As a result of that, the people revolted and allowed the current government to come into place.

The thing about Iran is that their regime is walking on thin ice already. The winds of change are blowing in Iran and the country is ripe for another revolution. Most experts are saying that change is innevitable within the next ten years or so. I would create a program where Iranians could come to the US and study at our colleges for free if they promised to return to Iran after grad school. That way Iran would have a population of educated youths who have all witnessed freedom and democracy and know how it works. When they return to Iran, they're going to hunger for democracy, and when the revolution does come, there will be a generation of people who have a plan for a better form of government. I know we already have student visa plans, but I'm talking about expanding them, having the government pay for 100% of their tuition, room and board, and airfare, and watching them much more closely than we have in the past (making sure they go home when they're supposed to). If they begin neglecting their studies or are found to have ties to any terrorist group, send their asses packing.

Aside from that, I'd sit the Ayatollah down and tell him "No funny buisiness. You mess with us, your ass is mine."

"Syria"

I'm not too worried about Syria. Under US pressure over the past decade (yes, during the Clinton Administration too), they have introduced democratic reforms, given more freedom, and begun lowering the levels of propaganda children recieve in school. Where they once wore military uniforms every day, they now wear the semi-casual clothing you might see in an American Catholic school. It's not a democracy, not by a longshot, but they are making steps in the right direction. Just keep applying pressure to them, offer to help fund anti-terrorist operations, and they shouldn't be a threat.

"North Korea"

Fuck 'em. Kim Jong Il is a crazy little bastard with a Napoleon complex. He knows if he fucks with America we will vaporize his ass.

"China"

What is there to say about China? They won't fuck with America. They know they can't beat us.

"Taiwan"

Encourage them to move towards total independence from the mainland. Promote international recognition of their nation.

"Seeing as you you are so brilliant as to call yourself "anti- Bush", you MUST have BETTER ideas that would be TOTALLY DIFFERENT and MORE EFFECTIVE than the President, so we would ALL like to HEAR them. And you should be able to answer this IMMEDIATELY, seeing you have so much criticism, you must have the BETTER answers right at the tip of your tongue."

Anything elese you'd like my input on?

"And don't forget that these policies must take into account that from 1992 to 2000, during the Clinton Admin., our intelligence agencies were neglected, in some cases ignored, dangerous terrorists like Osama bin-Laden were allowed to roam free, to recruit, to buy guns, bomb-making material, and who knows what kind of chemicals, biological agents, even rumors of suitcase nukes."

Baseless accusations with no real substance behind them.

"However, all these dangerous things and dangerous people flourished for those 8 years, it seems the President had other "distractions", other "dangers" that took priority in his mind"

Yeah, like fixing the economy (after that brilliant little experience in "Reaganomics"), getting Arafat to sit down and begin negotiations (of course Bush put a stop to that!), and balancing the budget.

"forcing IRS and FBI against people he didn't like"

Well, he grew up with Nixon as President, so I guess he learned from the best.

"And even when Sudan and others OFFERED Osama,Clinton said "Well, ah dint have a reason to take him into custody""

Jesus Tapdancing Christ, I'm getting sick of repeating myself. Sudan didn't offer anybody. Someone CLAIMING to represent the Sudanese government CLAIMED they had Osama in custody, and offered to deliver him to the US--for a price. The US was never able to confirm that this man actualy represented the Sudanese government, or that they actualy did, in fact, have Osama. The man's claims were totaly unreliable and it was highly unlikely that we would have gotten Osama.

As for your claim about Clinton, it sounds to me like it's not so much calculated treason as it is outsourcing going totaly out of control. He should not have been allowed to sell our defense industries overseas, but there is no evidence that he profited from it other than a tenous game of connect-the-dots that we're seeing from right leaning sources like the Wall Street Journal and Fox News.

"And the last TREASONOUS bastard is a guy, who on foreign soil, LIED about "events" he witnessed(made up), and co-operated with an enemy who held hundreds, maybe thousands, of our POW's for YEARS, without even having decency to TELL us WHO they were holding, TORTURED, BEAT AMPUTATED LIMBS AND GENITALS, MURDERED,all against Geneva Conventions,"

There were numerous occasions where American soldiers perpatrated human rights abuses in Vietnam. As fucked up as that war was, I'm inclined to beleive most of those claims.

"Even though his picture hangs in that enemy's war museum along with Jane Fonda and others who helped keep our POW's longer, tortured longer, and inevitably cost some their lives. "

Horse Shit. Where in the hell did you hear that? First of all, Kerry was not by a long shot the biggest anti-war protester. What about Abbie Hoffman? Or Martin Luther King, for that matter? Hell, Neil Young and Stephen Stills were pretty big into the anti-war movement too. There is nothing wrong with protesting the war. It was a bullshit war that cost the lives hundreds of thousands of kids. I could give a rats ass what the government of Vietnam is like. We killed more people by fighting that war than we would have had we left that entire corner of the world the hell alone.

Anyhow, seeing as how you've expanded your definition of treason to fit anyone who protests a war, I'm sure you also beleive that George W. Bush should be tried for treason as well, right?

Those are all just ideas. I don't have all the answers, and I don't have all the details of how my ideas would work. All I know is that there is NO excuse for the state of the world today. There is no excuse for the death and destruction that occurs around the world every day. And there is sure as hell NO EXCUSE for the poverty some people in America are living in. NONE. In a country that has so much, there is no reason for people to EVER have to eat out of a dumpster, or sleep in a box, or sit at home when they should be going to a hospital because they are too poor to afford healthcare. THERE IS NO EXCUSE. I grew up with a lot of advantages. I'm one of the lucky few people on this earth who don't have to worry about where my next meal is coming from. You and I owe it to other people who don't have as much to help them.

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), August 26, 2004.


Well Anti, if you actually READ all the Barnacle's post, my hat's off to you. Once I saw the dense-run-on-page of his, I skipped out.

BAzooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), August 26, 2004.


If you don't have all the answers, how do you expect all those things to be done? Maybe you have no real idea what you are talking about either. Or like most liberals you never let the facts get in the way, of your bullshit

So you are a yuppie puppy, but anti capitalistic? How do you think your dad makes his money then? How does this country run then if not for big business. The middle class may be the backbone, and businesses are it's working bodies. Is your dad a trial attorney, or something? A reporter? Attorneys in no way shape or form benifit the ecomony, the money for this country is made through businesses, who must raise their prices, and cut their costs, every time they have to pay on a ridiculiously high legal settlement. This goes for the insurernce companies as well, especially medical insurence. And journalists make their money just like any other business does. But can you tell us what about capitalism does not work, besides generalizations like "There are too many poor people in this country, so capitalism doesn't work." Like someone else said, grow up!

But that might not be the answer. Churchill said "If you aren't a liberal by the time you're 20, you don't have a heart. If you are not a conservative by the time you're 40 you haven't got a brain." Age isn't the reason for many liberals.

-- (a@b.c), August 28, 2004.



By calling himself Anti-Bush he HAS told you what he is for. He if for the things that Bush is against. If I called myself anti alternitive fuel that would make me pro oil. Or anti peace that would make me pro war. Anti Abortion/ Pro life. Pull your head out of your ass and try using it.

-- Dick Tator (link4pres@yahoo.com), September 02, 2004.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ