If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Honesty and complete presentation of the facts were not part of the last
presidential campaign. BOTH candidates were full of fog and obfuscation. I don't hate Bush, but because I am not in the top 1% of wage earners, the Bush regimes policies have hit me in the pocketbook, time and again and again. When well over half of the people in this country take an economic hit, even those who voted for Bushie, can we call this government of the people, by the people and for the people? Heck no!!! You and I and all our children will pay and pay dearly for what can only be characterized as the reckless economic policy of the last four years. We've gone from a healthy budgetary surplus to horrific budget deficits and equally horrific balance of payment issues in just over four years. Yes, 9/11 and the dot-com implosion helped. So did Enron, Arthur Anderson, Health South, AIG and all the other corporate thieves. But the bottom line is that cutting taxes and increasing spending results in deficits. Duh! Doesn't anyone in Washington do the math? ... Ben Myers On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:13:51 GMT, Leythos wrote: On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:05:52 +0000, Ben Myers wrote: And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented objectively to the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your bait and switch! ... Ben Myers Sheesh, and I suppose that you believe the Kerry camp just presented facts and other information that was completely honest and correct all the time? The only bait and switch was Kerry, he would bait people into attending his SHOWS and then change his position for the next SHOW, at least Bush always had the same stance on his positions. So, instead of whining about it until Hillaryious becomes president, just get over it, accept it, and be happy that you don't have a two faced, dishonorable, gumby looking, double talker, idiot in the office now. Dell is about as guilty of Bait-Switch as this thread is - they present you with options and if you want something else it's not B&S by Dell. I'm sure that if they only offered two products someone would still complain about it. -- remove 999 in order to email me |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
well said. and least we forget the defective thinking that got us into the
iraq mess where another 122 innocent people died earlier today. i also can not help wondering why new york city, the place that suffered (and still suffers from) the greatest loss from the 9/11 attacks, and a place that remains to be the most likely target for future attacks, voted overwhelmingly against bush. bush won, but the country lost. 11/2004 presidential election results for nyc were 16% for bush, 78% for kerry http://www.miata.net/faq/wheel_weights.html ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers) wrote in message ... Honesty and complete presentation of the facts were not part of the last presidential campaign. BOTH candidates were full of fog and obfuscation. I don't hate Bush, but because I am not in the top 1% of wage earners, the Bush regimes policies have hit me in the pocketbook, time and again and again. When well over half of the people in this country take an economic hit, even those who voted for Bushie, can we call this government of the people, by the people and for the people? Heck no!!! You and I and all our children will pay and pay dearly for what can only be characterized as the reckless economic policy of the last four years. We've gone from a healthy budgetary surplus to horrific budget deficits and equally horrific balance of payment issues in just over four years. Yes, 9/11 and the dot-com implosion helped. So did Enron, Arthur Anderson, Health South, AIG and all the other corporate thieves. But the bottom line is that cutting taxes and increasing spending results in deficits. Duh! Doesn't anyone in Washington do the math? ... Ben Myers On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:13:51 GMT, Leythos wrote: On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:05:52 +0000, Ben Myers wrote: And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented objectively to the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your bait and switch! ... Ben Myers Sheesh, and I suppose that you believe the Kerry camp just presented facts and other information that was completely honest and correct all the time? The only bait and switch was Kerry, he would bait people into attending his SHOWS and then change his position for the next SHOW, at least Bush always had the same stance on his positions. So, instead of whining about it until Hillaryious becomes president, just get over it, accept it, and be happy that you don't have a two faced, dishonorable, gumby looking, double talker, idiot in the office now. Dell is about as guilty of Bait-Switch as this thread is - they present you with options and if you want something else it's not B&S by Dell. I'm sure that if they only offered two products someone would still complain about it. -- remove 999 in order to email me |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
wrong link... should be
http://vote.nyc.ny.us/pdf/results/20...2004Recaps.pdf "Christopher Muto" wrote in message news:0O2Vd.38197$ya6.36610@trndny01... well said. and least we forget the defective thinking that got us into the iraq mess where another 122 innocent people died earlier today. i also can not help wondering why new york city, the place that suffered (and still suffers from) the greatest loss from the 9/11 attacks, and a place that remains to be the most likely target for future attacks, voted overwhelmingly against bush. bush won, but the country lost. 11/2004 presidential election results for nyc were 16% for bush, 78% for kerry http://www.miata.net/faq/wheel_weights.html ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers) wrote in message ... Honesty and complete presentation of the facts were not part of the last presidential campaign. BOTH candidates were full of fog and obfuscation. I don't hate Bush, but because I am not in the top 1% of wage earners, the Bush regimes policies have hit me in the pocketbook, time and again and again. When well over half of the people in this country take an economic hit, even those who voted for Bushie, can we call this government of the people, by the people and for the people? Heck no!!! You and I and all our children will pay and pay dearly for what can only be characterized as the reckless economic policy of the last four years. We've gone from a healthy budgetary surplus to horrific budget deficits and equally horrific balance of payment issues in just over four years. Yes, 9/11 and the dot-com implosion helped. So did Enron, Arthur Anderson, Health South, AIG and all the other corporate thieves. But the bottom line is that cutting taxes and increasing spending results in deficits. Duh! Doesn't anyone in Washington do the math? ... Ben Myers On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:13:51 GMT, Leythos wrote: On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:05:52 +0000, Ben Myers wrote: And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented objectively to the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your bait and switch! ... Ben Myers Sheesh, and I suppose that you believe the Kerry camp just presented facts and other information that was completely honest and correct all the time? The only bait and switch was Kerry, he would bait people into attending his SHOWS and then change his position for the next SHOW, at least Bush always had the same stance on his positions. So, instead of whining about it until Hillaryious becomes president, just get over it, accept it, and be happy that you don't have a two faced, dishonorable, gumby looking, double talker, idiot in the office now. Dell is about as guilty of Bait-Switch as this thread is - they present you with options and if you want something else it's not B&S by Dell. I'm sure that if they only offered two products someone would still complain about it. -- remove 999 in order to email me |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"Christopher Muto" wrote in message news:0O2Vd.38197$ya6.36610@trndny01... well said. and least we forget the defective thinking that got us into the iraq mess where another 122 innocent people died earlier today. i also can not help wondering why new york city, the place that suffered (and still suffers from) the greatest loss from the 9/11 attacks, and a place that remains to be the most likely target for future attacks, voted overwhelmingly against bush. bush won, but the country lost. 11/2004 presidential election results for nyc were 16% for bush, 78% for kerry http://www.miata.net/faq/wheel_weights.html Lest we forget that well over 100,000 Americans died in the U.S. Civil War. I suppose we could've avoided all of that abolition stuff and simply negotiated with the confederacy. We'd all be better off today, no? sarcasm I really do hate it when this group rails of topic into politics. I find myself at odds with many in here whose opinions I otherwise hold in high regard. Stew |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"Jerry Park" wrote:
Timothy Daniels wrote: "Jerry Park" wrote: Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have an effect is on good companies who do want to do a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit mentality forces them to charge more for their product than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits. And who is to decide for us which lawsuits are "frivolous" and which are "non-frivolous"? You base your argument on the implied assumption that all class action law suits are "frivolous" and not with the effect of curbing unfair corporate practices. *TimDaniels* No. I know many do have merit. My point is that no one benefits from class action law suits except the lawyers. This is the case when the lawsuit is frivolous and when it has merit. It is still the case when the complaintant wins and when the complaintant loses. To be fair, there is some benefit when a bad company is forced out of business with a class action lawsuit. Unfortunately, that small benefit is well offset by the good companies which are forced out of business by class action. While it's mostly attorneys who benefit *directly* from class action suits, we all benefit indirectly as consumers because the threat of law suit is one of the few things that keep corporations in check. The government is *supposed* to do that for us, but, well... you know how that goes. Whenever a class action suit is slapped on a publicly-owned company, its stock price goes down because every analyst knows what a drain they frequently are on the corporate officers' time and attention. They can drag on for years and sap a company's strength and vitality. That is why they are frequently settled out of court. The attorneys reap a wad of fees, and the company goes on, but a bit chastised. Corporations may set aside funds for unforeseen law suits, but those funds come out of company profits, and companies try to avoid law suits to keep their profit margins up. I agree that class action suits are an inefficient way to police corporations, but in the absence of effective government agencies, what other mechanism is there? *TimDaniels* |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Timothy Daniels wrote:
"Jerry Park" wrote: Timothy Daniels wrote: "Jerry Park" wrote: Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have an effect is on good companies who do want to do a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit mentality forces them to charge more for their product than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits. And who is to decide for us which lawsuits are "frivolous" and which are "non-frivolous"? You base your argument on the implied assumption that all class action law suits are "frivolous" and not with the effect of curbing unfair corporate practices. *TimDaniels* No. I know many do have merit. My point is that no one benefits from class action law suits except the lawyers. This is the case when the lawsuit is frivolous and when it has merit. It is still the case when the complaintant wins and when the complaintant loses. To be fair, there is some benefit when a bad company is forced out of business with a class action lawsuit. Unfortunately, that small benefit is well offset by the good companies which are forced out of business by class action. While it's mostly attorneys who benefit *directly* from class action suits, we all benefit indirectly as consumers because the threat of law suit is one of the few things that keep corporations in check. The government is *supposed* to do that for us, but, well... you know how that goes. Whenever a class action suit is slapped on a publicly-owned company, its stock price goes down because every analyst knows what a drain they frequently are on the corporate officers' time and attention. They can drag on for years and sap a company's strength and vitality. That is why they are frequently settled out of court. The attorneys reap a wad of fees, and the company goes on, but a bit chastised. Corporations may set aside funds for unforeseen law suits, but those funds come out of company profits, and companies try to avoid law suits to keep their profit margins up. I agree that class action suits are an inefficient way to police corporations, but in the absence of effective government agencies, what other mechanism is there? *TimDaniels* Free market forces? |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
GB wrote:
"Jerry Park" wrote in message .. . All class actions do is enrich lawyers and raise costs to everyone. The cost of class actions is factored into the cost of everything you buy. The last time I looked, the USA had more lawyers per head of poulation than any other country. True That was quite a long time ago, so it might have changed. Only in that the US has even more lawyers now. Clearly, if you have that many lawyers sitting around, they'll find a way of making work for themselves. Obviously. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Timothy Daniels wrote:
"Jerry Park" wrote: Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have an effect is on good companies who do want to do a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit mentality forces them to charge more for their product than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits. And who is to decide for us which lawsuits are "frivolous" and which are "non-frivolous"? Judges should have leeway in making this decision. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Leythos wrote:
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:05:52 +0000, Ben Myers wrote: And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented objectively to the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your bait and switch! ... Ben Myers Sheesh, and I suppose that you believe the Kerry camp just presented facts and other information that was completely honest and correct all the time? The only bait and switch was Kerry, he would bait people into attending his SHOWS and then change his position for the next SHOW, at least Bush always had the same stance on his positions. So, instead of whining about it until Hillaryious becomes president You've just established yourself as a Rush lapdog & have lost all credibility whatsoever. Social Security ain't broke, don't fix it!!! |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
"Leythos" wrote in message news On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:20:03 +0000, Ben Myers wrote: one must conclude that ANY initiative by the Bush administration would benefit the oligarchs who bought and paid for this presidency, and works to the detriment of the large and growing underclass in the United States... Ben Myers Got news for you - the people voted and BUSH WON - now face that fact or stop whining. -- remove 999 in order to email me Don't bait the RDDB's...... ;-) Stew |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
my new mobo o/c's great | rockerrock | Overclocking AMD Processors | 9 | June 30th 04 08:17 PM |