EAGLE Netlist conversion

[Jim Thompson]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:52:42 -0800, John Larkin
<jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:43:07 -0700, Jim Thompson
thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:28:00 -0500, Chuck Harris
cf-NO-SPAM-harris@erols.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:

John, Don't waste your breath. Leftists just can not cope with the
concept that LESS taxes is a GOOD thing. Leftists throw up this
"corporate welfare" BS to confuse the masses... the masses who have NO
CLUE what it really is to PAY massive taxes... the masses who have NO
CLUE that it is THEY who are on welfare.

...Jim Thompson

It is really quite simple: If I pay more taxes, so you can pay less,
I am paying your way, and you are on welfare.

-Chuck

Yup. Just what I said. I'd just like to pay LESS of your way.

I pray for tax reform... but I doubt that it will ever happen... the
leftists won't allow anything that approaches fair taxation.

...Jim Thompson


The only rational taxation is a universal sales tax, with exemptions
for basics. That would reduce the huge disadvantage that domestic
manufacturers/employers face.

Income tax is a job-destroying machine.

John

That's what "W" wants. But watch the Demonkrauts block it :-(

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highTHIS
landPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote (in <rlnvu0lqmbtaoe6n0fftb3kh31mdhkv0de@
4ax.com&gt about 'OT: Red States to Secede', on Thu, 20 Jan 2005:

Even simpler: if I pay taxes, and you don't, and we both receive
benefits, you are on welfare.

It sounds OK initially, but then what to make of these big corporations
that pay minute amounts in tax? How do they fit in?
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Charles Edmondson]

Spehro Pefhany wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:11:33 +0000, the renowned John Woodgate
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:


I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highTHIS
landPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote (in <rlnvu0lqmbtaoe6n0fftb3kh31mdhkv0de@
4ax.com&gt about 'OT: Red States to Secede', on Thu, 20 Jan 2005:


Even simpler: if I pay taxes, and you don't, and we both receive
benefits, you are on welfare.

It sounds OK initially, but then what to make of these big corporations
that pay minute amounts in tax? How do they fit in?


Like the farm that pays some tax, but receives massive subsidies on
its products.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
Because that corporation employs thousands of persons whoe EACH pay taxes...

and issues dividends to stockholders who EACH pay taxes...

They get their cut, eventually!

--
Charlie
--
Edmondson Engineering
Unique Solutions to Unusual Problems

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 13:02:43 -0500, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

The only rational taxation is a universal sales tax, with exemptions
for basics.

Screw the exemptions for "basics" (that's the politically easier
route, however). Give people money if they need it. The exemptions
cause a LOT of complexity with a reasonable VAT/GST type system
because of the way input tax credits have to be handled. AFAIK no
country has been able to do that (politically) at a useful tax rate.

Here in California we have exemptions from sales tax for lots of
items; they just hit a key on the cash register, or program the
barcode scanner to handle it. But sure, you could combine universal
sales tax with a negative income tax; that's even simpler, if less
politically palatable.

And I didn't mean a VAT: I meant a single visible point-of-sale sales
tax; a tax entirely on end-user consumption. Businesses would pay the
tax on things they consumed, but not on things for resale. California
does that now, too.

John

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:27:07 -0800, the renowned Charles Edmondson
<edmondson@ieee.org> wrote:

Spehro Pefhany wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:11:33 +0000, the renowned John Woodgate
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:


I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highTHIS
landPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote (in <rlnvu0lqmbtaoe6n0fftb3kh31mdhkv0de@
4ax.com&gt about 'OT: Red States to Secede', on Thu, 20 Jan 2005:


Even simpler: if I pay taxes, and you don't, and we both receive
benefits, you are on welfare.

It sounds OK initially, but then what to make of these big corporations
that pay minute amounts in tax? How do they fit in?


Like the farm that pays some tax, but receives massive subsidies on
its products.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
Because that corporation employs thousands of persons whoe EACH pay taxes...

and issues dividends to stockholders who EACH pay taxes...

They get their cut, eventually!
Charlie

That's the kind of logic that has governments subsidizing "dead man
walking" corporations just to keep the employment going. Even if they
just break even or perhaps lose a bit (there are other businesses in
the area affected etc. etc. ad nauseam. Bad economics.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:33:07 -0800, the renowned John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 13:02:43 -0500, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:


The only rational taxation is a universal sales tax, with exemptions
for basics.

Screw the exemptions for "basics" (that's the politically easier
route, however). Give people money if they need it. The exemptions
cause a LOT of complexity with a reasonable VAT/GST type system
because of the way input tax credits have to be handled. AFAIK no
country has been able to do that (politically) at a useful tax rate.


Here in California we have exemptions from sales tax for lots of
items; they just hit a key on the cash register, or program the
barcode scanner to handle it. But sure, you could combine universal
sales tax with a negative income tax; that's even simpler, if less
politically palatable.

And I didn't mean a VAT: I meant a single visible point-of-sale sales
tax; a tax entirely on end-user consumption. Businesses would pay the
tax on things they consumed, but not on things for resale. California
does that now, too.
John

A VAT/GST is much better. Otherwise there is tax embedded in exported
goods, which is unfair to domestic companies. And there is double
taxation because businesses don't really "consume" things. It's really
simpler too.


As a consumer:
You pay tax on everything. End of story (unless there are exemptions)
No records to keep, nothing.

As a company (again assuming your business isn't involved with exempt
goods):

You pay tax on everything at X%.
You collect tax at X% on everything sold domestically.
You collect nothing (0%) on exported goods.
You remit (or claim a refund) of tax collected minus tax paid with
your sales tax return.

The records are essentially the same ones you'd need for corporate
income tax, and there is no double taxation.

In fact, it works so well without damaging the economy the trick is to
keep go vernments from cranking the spigot too far open. The Europeans
are experts in extracting taxation- that's why they use it.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Charles Edmondson
<edmondson@ieee.org> wrote (in <41eff7fb$1@news.cadence.com&gt about 'OT:
Red States to Secede', on Thu, 20 Jan 2005:

Because that corporation employs thousands of persons whoe EACH pay
taxes...

and issues dividends to stockholders who EACH pay taxes...

They get their cut, eventually!

You could be right. If the corp pays little tax but high dividends, then
indeed there is a compensation effect. It's up to the government then to
set the corporation and personal tax rates to achieve a suitable
balance. There could even be an argument for abolishing corporation tax
and make it all personal. But then there are arguments against any
income tax at all ......
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 13:02:43 -0500, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:52:42 -0800, the renowned John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote:
[snip]

The only rational taxation is a universal sales tax, with exemptions
for basics.

Screw the exemptions for "basics" (that's the politically easier
route, however).

Nope. It's actually quite easy. Here in AZ there is no sales tax on
FOOD. Automatically done in the stores computerized registers.

Give people money if they need it.

Damn! Spehro, you're responding like a socialist ;-)

The exemptions
cause a LOT of complexity with a reasonable VAT/GST type system
because of the way input tax credits have to be handled. AFAIK no
country has been able to do that (politically) at a useful tax rate.

That would reduce the huge disadvantage that domestic
manufacturers/employers face.

Income tax is a job-destroying machine.
John

*Replacing* IT with a GST/VAT at a reasonable rate would be nothing
short of revolutionary. Estate taxes should probably be jacked up
(make it easier to make money in this generation rather than
accumulate it over many), but that's another story.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

Estate taxes? Come on, Spehro, here in the colonies we're gradually
phasing out estate taxes.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin <jjlarkin@highSNIPland
THIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote (in <60uvu0l0dbemllbht7g5di1e7j4e8ju4m0@
4ax.com&gt about 'OT: Red States to Secede', on Thu, 20 Jan 2005:

ere in California we have exemptions from sales tax for lots of items;
they just hit a key on the cash register, or program the barcode scanner
to handle it. But sure, you could combine universal sales tax with a
negative income tax; that's even simpler, if less politically palatable.

There are all sort of things that could and should be done if engineers
were in charge rather than economists. For example, a power law for
personal tax rather than stepped rates, and extending to negative rates.

And I didn't mean a VAT: I meant a single visible point-of-sale sales
tax; a tax entirely on end-user consumption. Businesses would pay the
tax on things they consumed, but not on things for resale. California
does that now, too.

We'd like that in Europe, too, but the authorities have found VAT to be
a good way of collecting data on business activities that are not
exactly legal, or are legal but annoy the government.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:23:58 -0700, the renowned Jim Thompson
<thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 13:02:43 -0500, Spehro Pefhany
speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:52:42 -0800, the renowned John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote:
[snip]

The only rational taxation is a universal sales tax, with exemptions
for basics.

Screw the exemptions for "basics" (that's the politically easier
route, however).

Nope. It's actually quite easy. Here in AZ there is no sales tax on
FOOD. Automatically done in the stores computerized registers.

No, the problem isn't exempting tax on classes of items at the
registers, everybody does that- it's that the companies that produce
food now have embedded tax in their products, or there is a complex
system to determine what everything is *used* for- exempt goods or
non-exempt goods, and their supplies must be exempt or non-exempt.
It's how the GST is done in Canada, so it's not totally unworkable,
but with a strong leadership (?) it might be possible to just have one
tax and no exemptions, which is much simpler. And the tax rate can be
quite a bit lower if you don't exempt so-called basics (food is a
typical "basic", but when you buy a prepared meal for $10 is it really
a "basic" or is it $1.50 of basic and 8.50 of preparation?). And what
is food? Chips? All that varies from state-to-state and
province-to-province right now. Bottom line, is that a lower rate is
better, and that means a minimum of exemptions (preferably none).

Give people money if they need it.

Damn! Spehro, you're responding like a socialist ;-)

Oh, not really, just going to the next step. Remember we've had
revolutionary sales tax reform in recent memory, so the issues are
relatively fresh to me. The argument will be that very poor people are
already spending 100% of their income and paying no IT so they can't
afford a sales tax. It's silly to make a decision that affects the
whole country's tax system on that group. Maybe they could have a
subsidy card that gives them a discount equivalent to the tax at
everyone else's expense. Or something else.

The nice thing would be if most people didn't have to keep track of
their income and expenses. I would like the privacy, for one thing.

The exemptions
cause a LOT of complexity with a reasonable VAT/GST type system
because of the way input tax credits have to be handled. AFAIK no
country has been able to do that (politically) at a useful tax rate.

That would reduce the huge disadvantage that domestic
manufacturers/employers face.

Income tax is a job-destroying machine.
John

*Replacing* IT with a GST/VAT at a reasonable rate would be nothing
short of revolutionary. Estate taxes should probably be jacked up
(make it easier to make money in this generation rather than
accumulate it over many), but that's another story.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany

Estate taxes? Come on, Spehro, here in the colonies we're gradually
phasing out estate taxes.

...Jim Thompson

Yes, it's a different group of people that would support a sales tax
and an estate tax (or equivalently to the latter, capital gains tax),
but just my view of "fairness" and efficiency. Of course the rate must
be further lowered by such a move, it's not "extra" money for the
government to waste. There's no estate tax at all here, BTW, but the
capital gains tax tends to have a similar effect. Politically,
probably difficult.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 13:19:14 -0700, the renowned Jim Thompson
<thegreatone@example.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:11:33 +0000, John Woodgate
jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highTHIS
landPLEASEtechnology.XXX> wrote (in <rlnvu0lqmbtaoe6n0fftb3kh31mdhkv0de@
4ax.com&gt about 'OT: Red States to Secede', on Thu, 20 Jan 2005:

Even simpler: if I pay taxes, and you don't, and we both receive
benefits, you are on welfare.

It sounds OK initially, but then what to make of these big corporations
that pay minute amounts in tax? How do they fit in?

They don't pay taxes. Only end consumers pay sales tax. So you only
get taxed if you spend any of your income, earned or unearned (as they
call dividends, etc.).

...Jim Thompson

Getting rid of personal income tax (and disbanding the IRS) would be
the equivalent of winning WWII in terms of improving the quality of
lives. Maybe better.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 19:05:25 +0000, John Woodgate
<jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that Charles Edmondson
edmondson@ieee.org> wrote (in <41eff7fb$1@news.cadence.com&gt about 'OT:
Red States to Secede', on Thu, 20 Jan 2005:
Because that corporation employs thousands of persons whoe EACH pay
taxes...

and issues dividends to stockholders who EACH pay taxes...

They get their cut, eventually!

You could be right. If the corp pays little tax but high dividends, then
indeed there is a compensation effect. It's up to the government then to
set the corporation and personal tax rates to achieve a suitable
balance. There could even be an argument for abolishing corporation tax
and make it all personal. But then there are arguments against any
income tax at all ......

Exactly. You solve a world of problems if you only tax consumption. It
becomes, essentially, a penalty for destroying resources.

John

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:30:04 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:39:08 -0600, "jason" <jpop@carrollsweb.com
wrote:

Bush has the brain of a retarded clam.

He has a BS from Yale and a Masters from Harvard. He got better
grades than Kerry, and wasn't expelled for cheating like Teddy
Kennedy.

Where did you go to school?

Kansas State Institution for Juvenile Rehabilitation ?

Oh, his inauguration speech today was inspired, historical. He
explained what he's trying to do, and it's magnificent. Not easy, but
noble as all getout.

Oh, my spell checker suggests "sorry" for "Kerry." Right.

John

So does mine ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[jason]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote in
message news:hvi0v09fs91fp0v2ngq9iqfu851c21j904@4ax.com...

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:39:08 -0600, "jason" <jpop@carrollsweb.com
wrote:

Bush has the brain of a retarded clam.

He has a BS from Yale and a Masters from Harvard. He got better
grades than Kerry, and wasn't expelled for cheating like Teddy
Kennedy.

Where did you go to school?

The implication being that what school you went to correlates to how
intelligent you are, and further that if you went to a "better" school than
someone else, then you must be smarter than them.
I don't accept that. I am old enough and have been around enough to know
what an Ivy league education can be for someone who is wealthy and
connected. Hell, even summa cum laudes get off easy if they choose the right
classes.

Therefore, it is irrelevant where I went to school. If I tell you an Ivy
league school, what does that prove? If I tell you a state school, then you
will just use that as an example of how much dumber I must be than George.
If I did not go to college at all, well, then, you won your argument, right?

I do not believe that Bush got better grades than Kerry. Show me the proof.

Here is some interesting reading:

http://s88172659.onlinehome.us/bushprofessor.htm

http://www.thebatt.com/news/2004/05/26/News/Same-School.Different.Personalities.Defined.Candidates.Since.Yale-683302.shtml

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:07:30 -0600, "jason" <jpop@carrollsweb.com>
wrote:

"John S. Dyson" <toor@iquest.net> wrote in message
news:cspnat$2ctd$1@news.iquest.net...
In article <aLKdnZ4dQtmG3G3cRVn-sw@kans.com>,
"jason" <jpop@carrollsweb.com> writes:
[snip]


I'm not playing your semantic games. EVERYBODY KNEW there was nothing
there!!!

Really?

The whole fucking world knew there was nothing there!
[snip]
The Pope was against the Iraq war.

He's senile. Most ineffective Pope EVER!

And let us suppose we accept your rediculous parsing of the argument, and
assume that Bush simply stated an untruth and did not lie. Then where is the
outrage at over 1,300 American men and women who have died

We lose almost that many Americans WEEKLY on our streets and highways.

[snip]

The soldiers are not adequately supplied.

Probably so.

Whose fault? Perhaps Clintons' ongoing undersupply of the military
was difficult to overcome? Why weren't the uparmor kits already
supplied well before Bush?

Clinton was too busy getting a blow job ;-)

Unbelievable. Clinton has been out of office for over four years, and the
humvees without armor are his fault, the troops without kevlar are his
fault, while Bush spends 40 million dollars on a 4 day party.

Indeed I agree we should pump more money and manpower in there.
Perhaps DRAFT you ?

[snip]

and one more thing,

9/11 happened on Bush's watch!!!!!!!!!!!

And, hopefully, your unemployment ;-)

But Kansas is probably sufficient punishment ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Don Klipstein]

In article <v00vu0dq6h8a10qgkb9pg2uvtc2gjaasb9@4ax.com>, RdM wrote:

nico@puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) notes in
alt.binaries.schematics.electronic<41dee5c8.1580411121@news.planet.nl>:

: Jim Thompson <thegreatone@example.com> wrote:
:
: >See...
:
: >http://www.analog-innovations.com/Musings/Funnel.gif
:
: I recently visited Auckland (New Zealand). Its now supposed to be
: summer over there. I've had rain, hail, clouds and sunshine in one
: day. According to a taxi driver its not uncommon to have all four
: seasons in one day.

Hail is actually typically a phenomenon of spring and summer! Hail
traditionally falls from thunderstorms, but also from cumulonimbus clouds
that are a bit short of thunderstorms, but generally requiring the cloud
base to be above freezing (usually associated with air temperature at
ground level substantially above freezing).

The frozen raindrops that fall from nimbostratus clouds in some winter
storms is not hail, but sleet.

Larger hailstones (20 mm in dianmeter or larger) is one of two factors
that can qualify the responsible storm cell as a severe thunderstorm.
Most or at least a large number of storm cells that qualify on this basis
are "supercells", which in the areas they form the most do so mostly from
2 months before to about a month after the summer solstice. Areas where
supercells are most severe have some trend of getting them earlier in the
"season", as in springtime.
(The other factor that cn qualify a thunderstorm as "severe" is wind
gusts 58 MPH-plus. A thunderstorm qualifies as severe if only one of
these two factors is present. Rainfall and lightning are not factors for
qualifying a thunderstorm as "severe" in the USA. A cumulonimbus storm
cell having minimal lightning and dumping .1 inch of rain where it dumps
the most rain qualifies in the USA as a severe thunderstorm if peak wind
gusts at ground level or treetop level hit 58 MPH or more or if the storm
cell drops hail reaching the ground with a size of 20 mm or larger.)

This is a saying that sometimes applies:- However, we have been having
an extraordinarily wintery summer this year. The best summer weather is
usually found in late January and February, despite midsummer's
theoretical December date ...

In most parts of the world that get a summer warm/hot season,
temperatures on a long term trend maximize close to 3 weeks after the
summer solstice - anywhere from 2.5 to 4 weeks, even 5-6 weeks where air
temperature is greatly affected by an upwind body of water. The main
exception is monsoon areas where spring is dry and summer is rainy -
temperatures there may have a long term trend of peaking out closer to or
even in some monsoon areas a bit ahead of the summer solstice.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

 

[jason]

"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message
news:22p0v014iurg4i51d90o6aptvk7la26ilc@4ax.com...

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:07:30 -0600, "jason" <jpop@carrollsweb.com
wrote:

And let us suppose we accept your rediculous parsing of the argument, and
assume that Bush simply stated an untruth and did not lie. Then where is
the
outrage at over 1,300 American men and women who have died

We lose almost that many Americans WEEKLY on our streets and highways.

Oh, then that makes it okay.

Unbelievable. Clinton has been out of office for over four years, and the
humvees without armor are his fault, the troops without kevlar are his
fault, while Bush spends 40 million dollars on a 4 day party.

Indeed I agree we should pump more money and manpower in there.
Perhaps DRAFT you ?

No, not me. I served my time. Five proud years in the United States Marine
Corps, under Clinton's command.
And guess what? I never heard any complaints about lack of weapons or armor.

--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food. And
then shove the bottle up my ass.

 

[Rich Grise]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:31:10 -0800, Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:

Just costs that society will pay one way or another. Businesses aren't
very efficient when it comes to purchasing things like health care
benefits for employees. They would be better off if they didn't have to
concern themselves with such expenses.

The way I heard it, this whole entitlements fiasco was caused by the
imposition of the income tax. Companies started offering benefits, instead
of cash. If you make, say, $100.00 more per month, you'll take home maybe
60, 70 bucks from it - Uncle Sugardaddy gets "his" (stolen - remember,
taxation is theft) piece of flesh before you even see it. $100.00 per
month in medical insurance, however, isn't taxed, and probably costs the
employer less that $100.00 because they can get some kind of group
discount.

So, originally, all the benefits were self-defense against the rapacious
bureaucracy; but they've done an end-around by using that stolen money to
get schools to turn out generations of ignorami. Sigh.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <PuOdnSvA-fN8_m3cRVn-gw@kans.com>,
"jason" <jpop@carrollsweb.com> writes:

"John S. Dyson" <toor@iquest.net> wrote in message
news:cspnat$2ctd$1@news.iquest.net...
In article <aLKdnZ4dQtmG3G3cRVn-sw@kans.com>,
"jason" <jpop@carrollsweb.com> writes:

"gwhite" <gwhite@deadend.com> wrote in message
news:41F017F8.5BEFC321@deadend.com...
jason wrote:



I don't know why the left hates Bush.

Gee, where do I begin?

He lied to get us into a war.

There is no proof that Bush lied. Please refer to a dictionary
for the definition of a lie, and you'll see that claim to be untrue.
Perhaps that untrue claim is a lie in itself (in fact, is more probable
than Bush telling lies -- because I cannot believe that you don't know
what a lie is.)

Hint: making a statement that might be incorrect is not necessarily
a lie. The same statements that Bush had made were essentially the
same as being presented by Blair/Clinton and other democrat/GOP
leaders. Even the French had effectively admitted to misbehavior
by the Iraqis, but didn't believe that the misbehavior reached
the level that would necessitate the loss of their illegal oil
for food income.


I'm not playing your semantic games.

You are dismissing proper language usage as a semantic game. You

show the epitome of dishonesty. Perhaps part of your problem is
that you are playing the poetic usage 'is is' game -- I am just
looking at the real definitions and usage of words. You could redefine
a lie to be simply a statement that might be untrue, but then your
usage would make no sense to anyone else (except with other liars.)

EVERYBODY KNEW there was nothing
there!!!

Not true. Again, further indication of visceral leftist dishonesty.

Note that even BJ Clinton and his crew (the lefty demoncrats) essentially
agreed with the claims about WMD -- of course, they used the same
sources as the president. Do you actually believe that GWB or BJ Clinton
have private information sources outside of the government (and other
governments?) Convienient forgetting about even the Demoncrat party line
about WMDs and the dangers of Saddam are a part of the leftist dishonesty.

Perhaps you should condemn the damage done by the Church commission and
other ongoing weakening of the CIA (and other intelligence agencies.) Note
that Clintons damage done in 1995 (essentially weakening the human
intelligence capabilities) was exactly the opposite of what was needed.

Again, the information sources used by the president were indeed likely
worse than some of the public sources, but the damage that caused that
was almost 100% due to the leftist actions against the CIA. For example,
the partisan reply to the Watergate fiasco was the damage done to the
CIA by the Church commission. LBJ and Kennedy didn't really do much worse
against their enemies than Nixon, it is just that it was time (probably
partially due to partisan reasons) for the government to clean up its act.

So, the most obnoxious reasons for the leftist Democrats to weaken the
CIA, along with the incomptent handling of the Shah problem in Iran
by Carter, thereby eventually leading up to the 9/11 attacks, were purely
partisan or democrat incomptency.

John

 

[David]

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 04:21:46 +0000, John S. Dyson wrote:

I don't know why the left hates Bush.

Gee, where do I begin?

He lied to get us into a war.

There is no proof that Bush lied. Please refer to a dictionary

Look, it's quite simple - what Bush said about WMD in Iraq was untrue. He
has repeatedly said things that are untrue, regarding both international
and domestic affairs. That much is clear and simple fact.

The question is whether he knew they were untrue at the time (i.e., he
lied), whether he believed them to be true but was duped by those around
him (i.e., he was stupid and had appointed liars to trusted positions), or
whether everyone around him believed them to be true (i.e., the people
responsible for providing the information got it wrong).

So either Bush is a liar, or he is stupid and surrounded by liars, or
everyone from Bush downwards in the "intelligence" branch is incompetent.
Given the numbers of reports and complaints about people "higher up"
doctoring, changing, or dictating intelligence reports, I'd assume that,
in most cases, it's one of the first two. My personal opinion is that
while Bush probably knowingly lied on several occasions (he apparently has
no feelings of responsibility or scrupples), it's mostly a case of him
being stupid and surrounded by liars.

EVERYBODY KNEW there was nothing
there!!!

Not true. Again, further indication of visceral leftist dishonesty.

Ok, everyone outside of America knew there was very little real chance of
Saddam having real, dangerous WMD's. Even within the US, anyone with two
brain cells to rub together (and the guts to use them, in the face of
witch-hunting) could have worked it out. Remember, the USA stopped
selling WMD's to Saddam shortly before the first US-Iraq war. They (along
with the UK) destroyed most of Iraq's infrastructure, bombed them into the
dark ages, then starved them for a decade, while watching closely all the
time. It would have been an impressive feat indeed if Saddam had managed
to get real WMD capability.

Anyway, the whole concept of "weapons of mass destruction" is a made-up
phrase to sound good in propoganda speaches (as is the modern American
misuse of "terrorist" to mean anything from "someone who wants to fight
America or Americans" upwards). Just for an example, a few years back a
fanatical religious group in Japan used nerve gass canisters (a "WMD") in
an underground. Six people were killed. A Korean terrorist killed well
over 200 people in a South Korean underground station, using a good
old-fashioned petrol bomb. Which of these was the weapon of mass
destruction?