[ Show ]
[ Shrink ]
Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor
of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users'
privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your
privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket
to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we
also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.
Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 00:32:14 06/20/05 Mon
Subject: Debate what? lol
In reply to:
Chuck in ND
's message, "OK, Joe" on 13:39:20 06/19/05 Sun
My big question was whether chili is better with or without beans. Without beans is how the one and only truly chili should be served! What did you say you served with yours? Sauerkraut? lol I can actually eat it either way. I'm not that fussy of an eater. If I accidentally buy chili that has beans in it, I'm sure not going to throw it away or feed it to the dogs.
Now, Joe, I asked you down below, in another thread: You'd alluded to some dissatisfaction with Bush. I'm glad to see you no longer think him the saint you once did. But, please, fill me in--what was it exactly that you found dissillusioning.
I'm not sure I ever described Bush as a saint. When he was running for president the first time, I did think he was a good and decent fellow. A 20 year old DUI conviction is no big deal in my book. He didn't do that bad of a job as governor of Texas. He also signed the concealed handgun law like he said he would. That was points in his favor.
Later as president, his administration, through Attorney General Ashcroft, notified the Supreme Court that the official US government position on the 2nd Amendment, was that it supports INDIVIDUAL rights to own firearms, and is not a leftist-imagined "collective" right.
911 changed a lot of things. There are those who argue that Bush knew about the plans of the attack beforehand. I wouldn't go that far, but I guess anything is possible. It's also very possible that Bush just went to war in Iraq to please his papa and to take care of his unfinished business. That stinks.
Second, when Bush is right, I've admitted it. Although, I really can't remember the last time that he was. LOL
A few more examples of being right:
He virtually killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty, which is nothing more than a Robin Hood scheme to shift wealth to poorer countries, via the sale of pollution credits.
Changed parts of the Forestry Management Act to allow necessary cleanup of the national forests in order to reduce fire danger.
Part of national forests cleanup: Restricted judicial challenges (based on the Endangered Species Act and other challenges), and removed the need for an Environmental Impact Statement before removing fuels/logging to reduce fire danger.
Signed an EO enforcing the Supreme Court's Beck decision regarding union dues being used for political campaigns against individual's wishes.
Is urging federal liability reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits.
Killed the liberal ABA's unconstitutional role in vetting federal judges. The Senate is supposed to advise and consent, not the ABA.
Is for protecting national gun manufacturers from frivolous lawsuits simply designed to bankrupt the industry.
Signed two income tax cuts, one of which was the largest dollar-value tax cut in world history.
Supports permanent elimination of the death tax.
Initiated discussion of privatizing Social Security and individual investment accounts. (I don't know how I feel on privatizing SS)
Killed Clinton's "ergonomic" rules that OSHA was about to implement; rules could have shut down every home business in America.
Worked to provide vouchers to low-income students in persistently failing schools to help with costs of attending private schools. Competition is a good thing.
Abortion is not one of my driving issues, but this may interest you:
Banned Partial Birth Abortion — by far the most significant roll-back of abortion on demand since Roe v. Wade. (I think this was struck down in the courts?)
Reversed Clinton's move to strike Reagan's anti-abortion Mexico Policy.
By Executive Order (EO), reversed Clinton's policy of not requiring parental consent for abortions under the Medical Privacy Act.
Upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals.
By EO, prohibited federal funds for international family planning groups that provide abortions and related services.
Disarmed Libya of its chemical, (nuclear?) and biological WMD's. You didn't hear much about this in the news!
Signed the largest nuclear arms reduction treaty in world history with Russia.
Killed the old US/Soviet Union ABM Treaty that was preventing the U.S. from deploying our ABM defenses.
Killed US involvement in the International Criminal Court.
Told the United Nations we weren't interested in their plans for gun control (i.e., the International Ban on Small Arms Trafficking Treaty).
Well, there's more I could post, but this is supposed to be about my dissatisfaction with Bush.
How's this for starters?
There is something wrong with cramming the Patriot Acts down our throats, while at the same time not securing the borders from invasion...
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |