A lap around "The Ring"

Do you even have a CLUE as to why Euro is worth more right now? Do you even
have a CLUE as to what having a weak dollar does for our multinational and
exporting corporations? When you even have a CLUE please respond.

Bill Bollinger


"bernard spilman" > wrote in message
om...
>
> "Bill Bollinger" > wrote in message
> om...
>> You are the one who has pigeon-hold himself. Not my fault that many of
> the
>> Western European countries lean to the socialist side and wonder why they
>> cannot grow their economies and are falling behind.
>
> Damn right! That's why the Euro is worth so much more than the
> Dollar. Looking out for your citizens IS NOT socialist, dumbass.
> WS
>
>

> Do you even have a CLUE as to why Euro is worth more right now?

I know that it is NOT because European economies are falling behind.
Europeans have good roads, good schools, and good health care for ALL their
citizens. This country is starting to look like the old Soviet Union;
run-down
infrastructure, crappy, ill-maintained military equipment, etc... I don't
understand how you right-wing fanatics call yourselves "Patriots," and
squeal like pigs when you are asked to pay your taxes. Do you think
the US can remain the greatest nation on earth by doing it "on the cheap?"


Do you even
> have a CLUE as to what having a weak dollar does for our multinational and
> exporting corporations?

Let me seperate the two:
Multinational corporations are getting richer. They are NOT paying more
taxes, they
are NOT sharing their prosperity with their employees. They are taking
wealth from
the US economy and distrubuting it among the world economy. Our president
should
be looking out for the American People, not multinationals.

Exporting corporations are selling more stuff for less money. They can
afford to
do that since republican policies have made it so much easier for them pay
illegal aliens substandard wages for jobs Americans used to hold.

You could argue that more exports could add to our foreign trade surplus, if
we didn't currently have the largest trade deficeit in US history. There's
some
solid "conservative" governing for you.

Any more questions?
WS

As youve made quite clear. Anything right of Stalin to you is a right-wing
fanatic.

The infrastructure has deteriorated because of failed liberal policies
(since FDR but LBJ can claim a bunch) and nothing more.

Ill make it really easy for ya, you spoil your kid rotten then that same
brat takes everything in life for granted and blames everyone but himself
for his failure. Teach a child appreciation and things change for the
better.

The reason the old folks didnt act this way was because they had
appreciation, plain and simple. Now we have a society of takers while the
only givers are the government with *my* money.


Mitch


"bernard spilman" > wrote in message
. com...
>
>> Do you even have a CLUE as to why Euro is worth more right now?
>
> I know that it is NOT because European economies are falling behind.
> Europeans have good roads, good schools, and good health care for ALL
> their
> citizens. This country is starting to look like the old Soviet Union;
> run-down
> infrastructure, crappy, ill-maintained military equipment, etc... I don't
> understand how you right-wing fanatics call yourselves "Patriots," and
> squeal like pigs when you are asked to pay your taxes. Do you think
> the US can remain the greatest nation on earth by doing it "on the cheap?"
>
>
> Do you even
>> have a CLUE as to what having a weak dollar does for our multinational
>> and
>> exporting corporations?
>
> Let me seperate the two:
> Multinational corporations are getting richer. They are NOT paying more
> taxes, they
> are NOT sharing their prosperity with their employees. They are taking
> wealth from
> the US economy and distrubuting it among the world economy. Our president
> should
> be looking out for the American People, not multinationals.
>
> Exporting corporations are selling more stuff for less money. They can
> afford to
> do that since republican policies have made it so much easier for them pay
> illegal aliens substandard wages for jobs Americans used to hold.
>
> You could argue that more exports could add to our foreign trade surplus,
> if
> we didn't currently have the largest trade deficeit in US history. There's
> some
> solid "conservative" governing for you.
>
> Any more questions?
> WS
>
>

Polly want a cracker? I thought I'd speak Parrot-ese...you might find
it easier to understand.


MartyU wrote:

> Hate? Hate for the idea that might makes right (Bush foreign policy)?
> Hate for the bigotry of right-wingers who have no pity for the
> hundreds of thousands of innocent Arab people murdered at the hands
> of a fraudulent American president responsible for a fraudulent war
> in Iraq? Hate for the corporate fascism that drives Bush's forign
> policy and domestic securty state?
>
> You bet!
>
> Bye-bye? No stomach for a dialog with people who don't agree with you?
>
> Marty
>
> Mitch_A wrote:
> > Delusional is thinking you can actually add anything constructive.
> > Your only motivation is pure hatred and that hate has marginalized
> > you out of existence. Buh-Bye...
> >
> >
> > "MartyU" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > > Mitch_A wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thats exactly what this argument is about. All you can see are
> > > > the bad things. Thats fine, all I can do is try and set you
> > > > straight and hope some small amount of reason enters into your
> > > > thought process
> > >
> > > The good things are good. Everyone likes the good things. The bad
> > > things should be exposed and fixed. But not everyone has the guts
> > > to face the bad things. It's obvious where you stand.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Neither of us is right or wrong in regards to Iraq at this
> > > > point in time. I didnt expect it to be 2 years ago when the
> > > > War started either. Things are looking better for freedom
> > > > daily though and thats all we can hope for and which was our
> > > > original intent in Iraq, not WMD or Oil as your party likes to
> > > > think.
> > >
> > > That's just plain delusional. Iraq is a mess because of, A.)the
> > > incompetence of the Bush administration, B.)the deceit of the
> > > Bush administration, C.) both incompetence and deceit of the Bush
> > > administration. Anyway you look at it the people who created the
> > > problem are unlikely to be the ones to fix it.
> > >
> > > Marty
> >
> >
> >

"Mitch_A" > wrote in message
om...
> As youve made quite clear. Anything right of Stalin to you is a
right-wing
> fanatic.

I consider myself pretty conservative. Nothing conservative about
Bush's deficeit financing, nothing conservative about the federal
government trying to tell the state courts how they must rule. Bush
is an ideologue, he is NOT a conservative.

> The infrastructure has deteriorated because of failed liberal policies
> (since FDR but LBJ can claim a bunch) and nothing more.

Total fu-king bull****! Explain how, idiot. "Liberal policies?", you're
gonna have to get a little more specific than that, most of us here can
read and write.


> Ill make it really easy for ya, you spoil your kid rotten then that same
> brat takes everything in life for granted and blames everyone but himself
> for his failure. Teach a child appreciation and things change for the
> better.

What in hell does that have to do with anything?

> The reason the old folks didnt act this way was because they had
> appreciation, plain and simple. Now we have a society of takers while the
> only givers are the government with *my* money.

I'm sure that you alone are keeping the government solvent. Its all about
your money, ain't it?

Dude, you are really a fu-king ZERO! You make bold ideological
statements that have no basis in fact and you make no attempt to back
up your bull****. When you're finally shown to be an ignorant ass, you make
some stupid, prideful boast and move on to spew your bull**** in another
group.
WS

PS: I am still waiting to hear how FDR and LBJ ruined an infrastructure
that started deteriorating in the seventies, but if you just rattle off more
mumbo-jumbo I won't waste my time responding to an idiot.

Id prefer if you didnt. You make yourself out a real moron everytime you
try...

Buh-Bye Bernie!


"bernard spilman" > > > mumbo-jumbo I won't waste
my time responding to an idiot.
>
>

rmagruder wrote:

>>>More than two centuries of accrued rights and civil balances have
>
> been
> watered down or made illegal>>
>
> What a crock. All that happened was that rules for dealing with
> criminals were extended over to counter terrorist activities whereas
> before they were considered separate. Keep reading to get real info,
> and put down Michael Moore's latest screed.

Randy, before responding to me, check your predjudices at the door,
okay? Does the fact that I dislike seeing YOUR civil liberties eroded
make me a Michael Moore fan?! Quite an astonishing leap of "judgement"
there.

> Your allegation: " FBI agents have the right to go into libraries and
> see what people are
> reading. "
>
> The Truth:
>
> A: No. Section 215 permits the government to obtain "tangible things"
> from third parties in foreign intelligence investigations. Although the
> USA PATRIOT Act does not mention libraries, this section could be
> applied to library records as business records.

Therefore "The Truth" is that the "Patriot" act does allow exactly that,
and is being used as such. Why is it that YOUR government is allowed to
snoop on you, but you are not allowed to know what they are doing?

>>>Universities are being encouraged to report on people who show
>>>"subversive tendencies".
>
> You'll need to back that claim up.

Another non-searcher? Use google - you'll find countless campus news
stories, blogs, articles and reports - or do you prefer your "news"
served by Murdoch in sound-bites?

Mitch_A wrote:
> And those who committed crimes are paying for it.
>
> I bet you agree with the irony of beheading innocents in orange jumpsuits
> also.

I think most people are not closed to the obvious fact that there is
good and bad on both sides - no-one has a monopoly on what is right.

Mitch_A wrote:
> Thats exactly what this argument is about. All you can see are the bad
> things.

Mitch, I *just posted* the words "No-one is arguing that > the US has
done good things" - I know we are "two nations separated by a common
language", but was it really unclear?! :-)


> Thats fine, all I can do is try and set you straight and hope some
> small amount of reason enters into your thought process

Sorry Mitch, it's matter and anti-matter that supposedly cancel out, not
open insult and then smiley...

> Neither of us is right or wrong in regards to Iraq at this point in time. I
> didnt expect it to be 2 years ago when the War started either. Things are
> looking better for freedom daily though and thats all we can hope for and
> which was our original intent in Iraq, not WMD or Oil as your party likes to
> think.

I have no party - please remember it. I do so hate when people try to
fill in aspects about me of which they have no knowledge.

I agree that no-one is right or wrong in regards to Iraq, but if you
cannot accept my point on Iraq, please understand my feeling. You say
things are looking better for freedom - I disagree. The US invaded Iraq,
and forced upon the people a style of government and a leader that they
DID NOT CHOOSE. That is not freedom. Forget for a moment if we think it
is in their best interests, it is NOT democratic, it is NOT freedom, and
it is NOT legal.

Imagine if Saddam had the military power of the US, and decided "poor
USA has George Bush as a leader, half the country vote against him -
they need a dictator to solve their problems!". Then he invades, knocks
out the military, and installs a style of government of which his people
approve.

Set aside the response of "we'll kick his ass", and "it'll never happen"
- I know. Point is, it's the reverse of what was done to Iraq, and would
be equally undemocratic and illegal. The people of IRAQ may think
they've done the right thing - under Saddam (pre-sanctions) they had a
literacy rate of overe 90% (prents were fined for not sending their kids
to attain an education), they had no street children as they have now,
their overall level of wellbeing for the population was among the best
in the world (it's now in the bottom 20%). Those people might believe
they were doing the right thing for the US, but that is not the way to
bring it about - you can't make rules then just set them aside. Bringing
"democracy" by undemocratic means is bizarre, no?

Still, time will tell, and it's done now.

JP wrote:

> No you didn't. At least not to me. *You* posted quotes. I'm looking for
> a link.

It's posted in the thread. If you're too lazy to look, I'm not repeating
myself. Tell you what, chalk this one down as another chance for you to
say "thought not" and once again wallow in ignorance.


>
>
> Hans von Spooneck, who replaced Denis
>
>>Halliday. His resignation was only the first public expression of what
>>was desribed as an unprecedented rebellion within the UN against the
>>manipulation of the sanctions.
>>
>>In an television interview he stated "I had been instructed to implement
>>a policy that satisfies the definition of genocide, a deliberate policy
>>that has effectively killed well over a million individuals, children
>>and adults. What is clear is that the Security Council is now out of
>>control, for its actions here undermine its own Charter, and the
>>Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Convention. History will
>>slaughter those responsible"
>>
>>Please note, the security council to which he refers comprises only five
>>permanent members, US, UK, China, France and Russia. The US and the UK
>>were the only ones to veto supplies under the sanctions, and were the
>>members to which Halliday refers.
>
>
>
> Proof (link, i.e.) showing your claim about the US/UK here ? Exactly
> what kind of supplies are you referring too ? I've posted some showing
> otherwise.

You've posted NOTHING but your own words, backed up with nothing.

And if you don't know who comprises the UN security council members, you
are WAY out of your depth.