In article <g9Npj.2913$uE.1298@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
"M.Butzin" <mfbutzin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "ray" <xxxrayted@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:fo81oi02vrh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > In article <lZxpj.10587$hI1.9712@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> > "M.Butzin" <mfbutzin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> >> > I am for the war in Iraq, but this is not to say I agree with
Bush's
> >> > other nonsense such as Katrina. I think instead of apologizing, he
> >> > should have made a strong point as to who was really at fault. I
don't
> >> > agree with his gift cards either. And I certainly don't like his
> >> > border
> >> > stance.
> >> >
> >> > But considering 911 and all the screw ups of the previous
> >> > administration, I don't know that anybody else could have done
better.
> >> > It's my hope that future Republicans see what can happen when you
try
> >> > to
> >> > make everybody happy.
> >>
> >> Look at it this way, Reagan and H.W.Bush pissed of Osama when he was
> >> fighting the Russians in Afghanastan (in the 80's). When clinton was
> >> elected things cooled of back to the "planning stage" for OBL, When
Bush
> >> took over the White House OBL went back on the attack mode. You can
> >> choose
> >> not to beleive it but google H.W.Bush and the Kuwati's and Saudis and
see
> >> how many trips and what kind of oil deals he was trying to make to
the
> >> region, it made the nightly news here. We used to have the "Offshore
> >> Technology Conference" (OTC) google. All the oil companies world wide
> >> came
> >> to Houston Texas for two weeks deals were blowing and going after the
> >> elder
> >> Mr.Bush left the White House the trips to the Saudis and Kuwait
> >> increased.
> >> Now Saddam had attacked Iran after our embassy fell there during
Carter
> >> and
> >> the hostages were released under Reagan, but when Reagan left and it
was
> >> Bush and Quayle, Saddam didn't get along with H.W.Bush. So to get the
> >> attention of the White House he invaded Kuwait H.W.'s friend and
business
> >> partner. Along came Desert Sheild, then Desert Storm H.W Bush
promised
> >> the
> >> coalition that Israel would stay out of it and boom 96 hours later
Saddam
> >> was out of Kuwait, he still tried to involve the Isralies by shooting
> >> scud
> >> missles their way. Saddam agreed to inspections by the UN inspectors.
But
> >> he
> >> (saddam) blocked them from actually leaving the Hotels on most days.
> >> Until
> >> W.Bush made a speech about OBL, neither his father or Clinton gave up
> >> intellegence that OBL was ever in IRAQ. Afghanistan / Pakistan is
where
> >> OBL
> >> was re****ted to be. Making everybody "happy" will never happen! Doing
> >> what
> >> you promise to do will go a long way to accomplish making people
> >> "happier"
> >> Two things that would make people feel better about either side of
the
> >> aisle, better paying jobs and more jobs with benefits for Health and
> >> Retirement cor****ate greed has taken over and reduced the American
worker
> >> to
> >> feel like they are too disposable and are not of value to the
company.
> >> Basically no respect for the employee, the gold watch era is dead and
> >> gone.
> >> "Hopefully" the crack down on illegal immigrants will drive wages
back up
> >> and that will have a positive effect on the economy and return of
higher
> >> paying jobs with better benefits, which would lead to a stronger
economy.
> >
> > MB, first off, when in hell did "things cool off" when it came to Bin
> > Laden? I guess you quickly forget the SEVERAL attacks on the US
during
> > the Clinton administration including the first WTC bombing.
>
> In the last "fifteen" speeches George Bush has not mentioned his name
not
> once, you tell me why / when they cooled off on OBL? Every speech has
been
> about Iraq or lately Iran. According to W OBL is the leader of AQ and
Saddam
> only "allowed" the WTC attackers to train in Iraq, "supposedly".
The reason GW never said anything about Bin Laden is because he is
irrelevant. The obsession of Osama by the left is only used for making
GW and his administration look bad. Every Democrat in the house knows
that if we caught and killed Bin Laden, nothing would change in our
battle with terrorism. We are not fighting one man, we are fighting
several organizations world wide. This war is not about getting even
with somebody or some people, it's about prevention so there is less of
a chance an attack on our country will happen in the future.
> > Next, government is not in charge of making companies give out gold
> > watches. The problem we have in this country today started during the
> > union days when Democrats sup****ted them forcing industry to pay
workers
> > much more than they were worth. This can't be reversed. The jobs
left
> > or will be leaving along with the gold watch days.
>
> People sup****ted the unions, without the workers wanting to join the
union
> there's no fire. Your trying to tell me there are no republicans who are
> union workers? So you think a human is only worth? What twenty five
thousand
> a year max, no matter what his education and training is? Or that a
worker
> should not enjoy discounted rates on health insurance or a credit union
or
> 401k because he works with a group of people? If every company had to
have a
> retirement plan there would be no need for social security "retirement",
> only for disabled people born that way. The jobs left because of
"cor****ate
> greed" why pay an american $6.00 per hour when they can have that job
done
> in mexico for 37 cents a day and no health care, no 401k, no OSHA, No
> Workmans Comp? Down in Mexico you break your arm on the job it's your
tough
> luck, oh yeah and they do employ child labor.
MB, when you pay a floor sweeper at an auto plant $25.00 per hour plus
full benefits, it only does one thing, it increases the wage for other
positions. When everybody's wages increase, you eventually price
yourself out of the world market, and this is what we are experiencing
today.
The people who use foreign workers do so because they have no choice.
If they don't create cheap products, their competitors will, and in the
process, put their company out of business. There is a difference
between "greed" and "survival.'
A man is worth what one is willing to pay him and no more. We don't
have jobs in this country for the purpose of Americans having jobs. We
have jobs because a person or company needs help to produce products or
services. They base the rate of pay by how much profit they can make on
the services of an employee. When you force a company to pay a person
more than the job is worth, you end up with a situation similar to what
we have today.
The supply and demand process of workers is a near perfect system. But
when you bring in people such as unions or illegals to cheat the system,
you throw a monkey wrench in the works.
You are correct about one thing, and that is Social Security. It's a
forced tax that has little benefits.
--
All saints have a past--all sinners have a future
Ronald Reagan
|
