Making Baby Jesus Cry

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
So you are in favor of conscripted armed forces instead of purely voluntary service.

Duly noted.

BTW, have you sent another pen to our C-i-C? Or can you not drive 55?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
W learned from Reagan that if you spend money and leave paying for it to be someone else's problem, you can be politically popular. So he's a good student.

You say he was coked up during the 80s. The "don't make tough calls now leave it for the next guy" act, he could have learning that from the last Dem president and his brave response to several direct attacks from al Queda. Shit if the Taliban could have predicted Dem's response, and if gore had won, they could have saved some explosives. I bet Gore's response to 9/11 would have included blowing up the Buddha statues to show he'd be tougher than Bill.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
3 Everyone assumed the reason he kicked them out was to CONTINUE, not resume, those activities.

The fact that this is false does not prevent you from saying it at least once a week. Hank you should know that when you assume, you make an ass out of u, if not me.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
So you are in favor of conscripted armed forces instead of purely voluntary service.

Duly noted.

Actually, I agree with Penke's national service plan.

As for the substance of your comments, though, were conscripts making Liberty Boats and Sherman tanks?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Nice politics of personal destruction in the intro. The Clintons have taught you well.

That's pretty cute, coming from someone who keeps calling Cindy Sheehan mentally ill.

The effourt isn't perfect and comparing WWII to Iraq is apples and oranges. Either way its hard work and the Administration is there on the front lines doing the hard work day in and day out.

People forget that Roosevelt regularly took five-week vacations in Crawford, Texas, during World War II. The brush he clear there was vital to the war effort.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The fact that this is false does not prevent you from saying it at least once a week. Hank you should know that when you assume, you make an ass out of u, if not me.

you know clinton's plan that he prepared for Bush? did it include links to all the blogs that you accept as fact?

[SlaveNoMore]

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
BTW, have you sent another pen to our C-i-C? Or can you not drive 55?

Oddly enough, I haven't received any GOP solicitations since I moved to San Francistalingrad.

However, I appreciate the poster out there who put me on the Moveon.org and John Kerry email lists. Nicely done, clown.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Do you happen to know if CAFTA requires Central American health care providers to apply the same reimbursement rules?

Ty your instints of shoving our values down everyones throats is the right instinct it is just premature. I am glad you don't buy into the national sovereignty B.S. of we can torture children in factories because that is part of our cultural tradition. However, we can't shove our values down peoples throats until they are more developed. If you put our rules and regulations on these third world countrys they can't afford them yet and then they stay in poverty and the situation never gets better.

When you create a free trade area the GNPs of the poorest countrys rise the quickest. Look at Spain, Portugal and Ireland when they joined the EU. When Ireland joined the EU their labor rules were much more protective than the rest of Europes so they had to actually scale them down. They were also forced to deregulate a lot of their businesses. The result was a pure economic miracle. They went from being the "basket case" of Europe to having a higher PCI than England. Countries when they join the WTO always get a big boost and Mexico is benefitting the most by far from NAFTA. The Phillipines is benefitting the most from ASEAN because they are the poorest. When you create a free trade area the natural pressure is to pull the poor nations into par with the wealthier ones.

So the plan is we open trade with latin America, and when their per capita income gets around $7000 per year then we start shoving our rules down their throats. Not because it levels the playing field, but because it is good for their people.

The only problem with this is that generally countries that get to that level generally institute more strict labor, safety and enviromental policies than we have anyway.

I would love it if in the current WTO meetings if the EU would say they won't cut their subsidies unless the US institutes a stricter clear or water act, that would be great. Then we might actually get some clean air and water in this country (the Water in Costa Rica is better than it is in Los Angeles - really - not kidding). I don't mind them shoving their values down my throat as long as they are the right values. But the Europeans are much more concerend with coddling their farmers and with the CAP (and with making money trading illegally with Iraq).

The problem is that everytime in the WTO when someone mentions that the WTO makes its labor and environmental rules stronger, but that only for countrys with a higher PCI all the supports end. Which reinforces my suspicion that these rules are there to reduce their cheap labor competitive advantage of the third world, not to actually help the world's enviroment or labor situation.

If you want to "level the playing field" among the developed countrys (and leave out the underdeveloped nations) it would be the US corporations that would have to make the most changes. However, the Europeans seem more bent on protecting their subsidies and import quotas than "leveling the playing field".

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
You say he was coked up during the 80s.

No, I don't believe I said that.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Spanky
Ty your instints of shoving our values down everyones throats is the right instinct it is just premature. I am glad you don't buy into the national sovereignty B.S. of we can torture children in factories because that is part of our cultural tradition. However, we can't shove our values down peoples throats until they are more developed. If you put our rules and regulations on these third world countrys they can't afford them yet and then they stay in poverty and the situation never gets better.

When you create a free trade area the GNPs of the poorest countrys rise the quickest. Look at Spain, Portugal and Ireland when they joined the EU. When Ireland joined the EU their labor rules were much more protective than the rest of Europes so they had to actually scale them down. They were also forced to deregulate a lot of their businesses. The result was a pure economic miracle. They went from being the "basket case" of Europe to having a higher PCI than England. Countries when they join the WTO always get a big boost and Mexico is benefitting the most by far from NAFTA. The Phillipines is benefitting the most from ASEAN because they are the poorest. When you create a free trade area the natural pressure is to pull the poor nations into par with the wealthier ones.

So the plan is we open trade with latin America, and when their per capita income gets around $7000 per year then we start shoving our rules down their throats. Not because it levels the playing field, but because it is good for their people.

The only problem with this is that generally countries that get to that level generally institute more strict labor, safety and enviromental policies than we have anyway.

I would love it if in the current WTO meetings if the EU would say they won't cut their subsidies unless the US institutes a stricter clear or water act, that would be great. Then we might actually get some clean air and water in this country (the Water in Costa Rica is better than it is in Los Angeles - really - not kidding). I don't mind them shoving their values down my throat as long as they are the right values. But the Europeans are much more concerend with coddling their farmers and with the CAP (and with making money trading illegally with Iraq).

The problem is that everytime in the WTO when someone mentions that the WTO makes its labor and environmental rules stronger, but that only for countrys with a higher PCI all the supports end. Which reinforces my suspicion that these rules are there to reduce their cheap labor competitive advantage of the third world, not to actually help the world's enviroment or labor situation.

If you want to "level the playing field" among the developed countrys (and leave out the underdeveloped nations) it would be the US corporations that would have to make the most changes. However, the Europeans seem more bent on protecting their subsidies and import quotas than "leveling the playing field".

I'm ready to guess. Spanky is really notme, all pissed off that the board ran him off. look at the evidence- he completely ties this board up with CAFTA and has ruined the purpose of BB while diluting the FB at the same time. No mas!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Ty your instints of shoving our values down everyones throats is the right instinct it is just premature.

It was a joke, my friend.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
People forget that Roosevelt regularly took five-week vacations in Crawford, Texas, during World War II. The brush he clear there was vital to the war effort.

You do realize that one can communicate electronically now? This is as dumb an argument as when Hillary claimed she was without power during the blackout- umm turns out she was lying- who'd have thought?

Ty, sometimes i think I should take time out from my high powered legal career and satisfying family life, to read all the books and blogs you recommend, then you do something like comment on Bush's "vacations" and I realize what a dolt you are and I go back to my high powered legal career and satisfying family life realizing I shouldn't waste one second reading your junk.

Paigow did get it so we can ignore Mods right?

[SlaveNoMore]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Actually, I agree with Penke's national service plan.

As for the substance of your comments, though, were conscripts making Liberty Boats and Sherman tanks?

No, their wives, parents and flat-footed friends were.

And I mentioned before, George Bailey was also getting all the local kids to gather recycled metal.

I don't see much from the communities, do you?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
While you're at it, why don't you ban Las Vegas.

I think Aristotle also said that only a Moron bets against the house. The problem is that whole personal responsiblity thing Penske keeps talking about. You can't always save people from themselves.

Health care is different. You just can't let bleeding people die on the street. So your health problem becomes my health problem. Just like your national security problem is my national security problem.

So you have to compromise. You want to let people have as much personal responsiblity as they can but you have to also keep costs down and take care of those that can't take care of themsevles (I know that makes me a pinko). So I figure my solution is the best compromise. You are not forcing people to pay for health insurance. They don't have a right to use the public roads. You are just charging a fee for their use of the public roads. And yes, you are charging people through taxes to take care of other people but in this case humanitarian reasons trump the evil of taxation. In addition, the system I propose makes the system more efficient than the one we have now. And so far I have never heard of a better alternative.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
You do realize that one can communicate electronically now? This is as dumb an argument as when Hillary claimed she was without power during the blackout- umm turns out she was lying- who'd have thought?

Ty, sometimes i think I should take time out from my high powered legal career and satisfying family life, to read all the books and blogs you recommend, then you do something like comment on Bush's "vacations" and I realize what a dolt you are and I go back to my high powered legal career and satisfying family life realizing I shouldn't waste one second reading your junk.

Paigow did get it so we can ignore Mods right?

Reciting the phrase "hard work" shows a special cluelessness when you're discussing a president who famously doesn't work as hard as anyone since Reagan, at least. Bush has his virtues, but working hard has never been one of them. It takes a particularly special cluelessness to say the "hard work" thing when he's on a five-week vacation.