If You're Not Happy With Bush, Would You Vote For........ 1125

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 19:56:51 GMT, Traceyl...

Bush and the Pugs were never the answer, not then, certainly not now or in the foreseeable future. Government that benefits only the few and the moneyed has lost its appeal to the mbuttes. Clinton did a superb job, setting aside all that cigar nonsense. And you can bet he'll be a huge part of Hillary Clinton's Presidency. 2-for-1. Pretty good deal in anybody's store. Where does this idea that Democrats hate Liberty just because they don't pander tothe elitist power brokers?

His first election was the greatest advertisement ever for an Amendment to get rid of the Electoral College. The popular vote was that close. The Iran-Contra affair comes to mind, along with his support of Saddam. The USSR had been crumbling under its own weight for 30 years prior. It was inevitable and I stated it as such in my Master's Thesis in 1977. Something gets lost in the translation there. The Pugs always talk a good family values story, but when you delve into most politicians' family lives, it gets very very raw and uncensored. In terms of real money for real people, his 'Trickle Down Theory' has been discredited time and time again. It boosts the economy artificially for a year or 2 as the wealthy make their purchases of luxury items, but the failure to reinvest the money in their businesses as TD proclaims always results in a recession, which is what eventually ousted the Pugs from power. The economy reacts much more quickly today and we are now seeing the opening salvo in Bush's failed economic policy. But you didn't mention the future Reagan wanted. Please expound? Keeping Congress and the Presidency in different parties is always a good thing because nobody gets everything they want and a balance of power is maintained just as the Founding Fathers envisioned. However, we need the Dims in full control for 2-4 years so they can begin to undue the damage inflicted by the Pugs on Middle Americans. Check your records, that's what Reagan and Bush 1 started. We really do need that radical a swing for a little while so the common man can make up some lost ground. The only way to get rid of Big Government is with a Consbreastutional Convention, and that will never happen unless we give the politicians the shove to push everything over the edge, so to speak. As it stands now, the machinery of Big Government has so much mbutt and speed, it's like a runaway locomotive going downhill with no brakes.

If it was just Bush, it would be an easily remedied problem. With the Pugs in control of everything, we need some emergency action quickly. Congressional control by the Dims in 2006 to put a tourniquet on the bleeding and then the Presidency in 2008 and a veto-proof Congress in 2008 to reverse some of the damage. 2012, people will be fed up enough that we can split controlonce again.