-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Bush III? NOOOOOOO!!!!!
- Thread starter Magnetic Poles
- Start date
poncho
Well-Known Member
From what I understand at this point Matt (I'm no expert) monopolies are formed by some means of reducing the competition, buying, merging or forcing it out. Then at some point the monopoly itself will gain enough power to influence government policy to protect itself from further competition.
Imo, the anti-trust laws are seldom enforced due to this power and influence over the government and even the courts and when they are mostly it's only for show. Today we're at the point that monopolies are in a postion to influence government on a global scale and are actually writting their own rules and dictating to governments. Globalization in other words. Hardly what I would call "free market".
Good article Matt, I enjoyed reading it. I'll think on this today and try to reply either later tonight or in the morning.
Magnetic Poles
New Member
I agree. I think most American's have about had it, except for the hardcore, "W can do no wrong" bunch. Bush fatigue has definitely set in.
poncho
Well-Known Member
And it's no secret that Jeb is of the neocon persuasion. But really it matters little who sits in the oval office as neither party seem to be opposed to big brother, big government or perpetual revolution. There's a little bit of Trotsky in all them these days I reckon. The only real change can come from the local level. Imho.
The Galatian
Active Member
I've got the slogan:
"Not quite as incompetent as his brother."
"Not quite as incompetent as his brother."
Baptist in Richmond
Active Member
Speaking as someone who used to live in Florida, please explain your rationale for such a statement. Note that I am honestly asking you for your opinion.
Recently, I was out in Idaho, visiting one of my branches. During my visit, the Rep in the branch received a phone call that was a survey about Jeb Bush. The questions mostly involved ascertaining one's opinion and perception about the Governor. Make no mistake: Jeb's gonna run. It may not be in 2008, but he will run.
Regards,
BiR
poncho
Well-Known Member
But is that necessarily a bad thing...or are you speaking from an American cultural perspective? SEE HERE </font>[/QUOTE]Okay I've given it some thought Matt. The answer is yes it comes from an American cultural perspective for me at least. Scott made a good point on this imho.
Socialism is just a stepping stone on the way to communism. Some well known communists have made that pretty plain in their own writtings.
I think it must be from an American cultural perspective then; there's nowhere near the fear about socialism over here in Europe than there seems to be in the US
Socialism is communism. The agenda is the same the values are the same the goals are equal in every way. I know the left wing doesnt like the label because of the perception it has tied with it.
Mc Cain doesnt have the support of the base. He supports our illegal Alien Invasion. That is what is getting Bush in trouble. He has sided with democrats to many times. He will never get past the primaries. Jeb wont either as he also supports the ilegal alien invasion. Base Republicans want it stopped and employers penalaized for hiring them. We want our borders locked down. We want to put a stop to all the social spending in washington. That is the other thing getting Bush in trouble.
Mc Cain doesnt have the support of the base. He supports our illegal Alien Invasion. That is what is getting Bush in trouble. He has sided with democrats to many times. He will never get past the primaries. Jeb wont either as he also supports the ilegal alien invasion. Base Republicans want it stopped and employers penalaized for hiring them. We want our borders locked down. We want to put a stop to all the social spending in washington. That is the other thing getting Bush in trouble.
poncho
Well-Known Member
That's too bad RM because the CFR, Trilaterals and UN want the borders abolished, sooner or later we're going to have to face facts those we elect represent the corporations, bankers, United Nations all their NOGs not the people of the United States. Doesn't matter which party they belong to. For the most part all their lefty vs righty squables are just theater to convince us to keep voting in democrats and republicans.
Magnetic Poles
New Member
Speaking as someone who used to live in Florida, please explain your rationale for such a statement. Note that I am honestly asking you for your opinion.</font>[/QUOTE] He is an intelligent man that appears to have done a good job in Florida. In spite of natural disasters and a fiasco of the 2000 election, the people of his state view him favorably.
Baptist in Richmond
Active Member
Thanks for your honest opinion.
As to being "an intelligent man," to what example would you point to illustrate this?
I actually voted for him, by the way..... twice. The first time I voted he lost to Lawton Chiles, and the second time he was elected.
Regards,
BiR
Thanks for your honest opinion.
As to being "an intelligent man," to what example would you point to illustrate this?</font>[/QUOTE] Not much more than the fact that I don't think a babbling idiot could successfully run Florida's state gov't. Beyond that, he seems to "present" well on tv.
RockRambler
New Member
That's better than the current President does.
Of course, I guess Hillary could run for President, choose Bill as her Vice-President, then resign on the first day and turn things back over to Bill.
Guess that could be her slogan for the Democrat nomination:
"Choose me, I'll give it back to who you really want".
Do you want Clinton back? Much of the mess we found ourselves in on foreign policy and terrorism was a direct result of his policies and decisions. Granted they probably did what they thought was best at the time (or at least best for him politically at the time) but would you really want him back?
As for the economy, Clinton was the chief political beneficiary of the technology revolution that began in the 80's... GWB in addition to 9/11 inherited the economic hangover.
FTR, Clinton's best years came after 94 when the markets knew that he wouldn't be able to do much legislative damage. Clinton very shrewdly jumped to the head of the band wagon on things like welfare reform... which wouldn't have happened without the 94 election and Dick Morris. Further, many of the regulatory changes with economic impact that Clinton made were designed to become effective or fully effective after he left office.
As for the economy, Clinton was the chief political beneficiary of the technology revolution that began in the 80's... GWB in addition to 9/11 inherited the economic hangover.
FTR, Clinton's best years came after 94 when the markets knew that he wouldn't be able to do much legislative damage. Clinton very shrewdly jumped to the head of the band wagon on things like welfare reform... which wouldn't have happened without the 94 election and Dick Morris. Further, many of the regulatory changes with economic impact that Clinton made were designed to become effective or fully effective after he left office.