Bush Twins doing America proud!

[Scott J]

Originally posted by RockRambler:
Just think if every Christian gave 10% to their local church, and the local churches spent it on social programs instead of buildings...how much lower the tax rate would be when the government provided for only those services specified in the Constitution.

Amen.

And how wonderful it would be when people needed help they looked to the local churches instead of looking for a government handout.

Preach on...

Now, let's see if we can get support for a change in the tax laws that give us a dollar for dollar credit for contributions to charity... just until we demonstrate that the services can be better provided privately.

I know, I know....if "Ifs and buts were candy and nuts, then every day would be Christmas".

I like your idea Santa.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by RockRambler:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Was the same objection given when Clinton sent troops into the Balkans or ordered the ill-fated mission in Somalia?

Yes...some of us had the same objections then...we were just known as conservative isolationists then, while now we're called liberal isolationists.</font>[/QUOTE] I would love to be an isolationist if someone would propose a practical way of doing it and surviving.

As much as we would like to think they wouldn't, the bad guys would eventually come calling... en masse.

I have two sons in the USMC...both joined after 9/11. Both have been in Iraq, one is returning this week, the other is going back for the second time in September.

Bless you all.

When the Bush twins respond to their father's call for young people to serve in the war on terroism like my sons have....then I'll be more impressed with President Bush.

He raised them but do you really think he is responsible for these particular decisions?

Until then, I think of him like I do about other chickenhawks who seem to love war, but only if the poorer folks fight it.

I would be more inclined to agree with you if he had sons...

Or maybe the girls and Chelsea should join ROTC and/or the National Guard? Woops... that might not work, huh?

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by Scott J:
typically perform jobs that "Americans" turn their nose up at.

If employers pay a high enough wage, then I don't think that would be a problem. I'd rather pay an extra $0.50 for a head of lettuce than to leave our borders unsecured.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by King James:
legal ones. Many people STILL have a problem with them.

Not me.

 

[LadyEagle]

KJ, the most benevolent people I know are political conservatives - they give to the needy, are always ready to lend a hand, most would give you the shirt off their back if you needed it - and above all, conservatives promote life instead of killing life in the womb.

 

[RockRambler]

ScottJ...I don't consider myself an isolationist, but many times that is the label one obtains whenever they oppose a war, police action, or military misadventure that might take the public's minds off of a president's other problems.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by KenH:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Scott J:
typically perform jobs that "Americans" turn their nose up at.

If employers pay a high enough wage, then I don't think that would be a problem. I'd rather pay an extra $0.50 for a head of lettuce than to leave our borders unsecured. </font>[/QUOTE]Ken, I agree with you most of the time. However, I don't think we could have gotten Americans to do the jobs I referred to at any legitimate wage... and certainly not to the level of performance the Mexicans gave.

As a matter of fact, the few temps who did come in from Atlanta were paid about $9.50 while the highest paid Mexicans made $7.00. The Mexicans did more than twice the amount of work on average.

They had more of the American spirit than the Americans did.

I agree that we should secure the borders... but I think we should let more Latinos in legally.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by RockRambler:
ScottJ...I don't consider myself an isolationist, but many times that is the label one obtains whenever they oppose a war, police action, or military misadventure that might take the public's minds off of a president's other problems.

Do you think that is what Bush did?

I believe that he had an itching trigger finger with regard to Iraq... but I also think they were a threat and a sponsor of terrorism.

 

[KenH]

As long as it is done legally, I have no problem with a limited worker program of some kind for foreigners. But I also don't want it to be used to hurt the employment of U.S. citizens.

 

[OCC]

"Not me." Ken, that is good to hear.

LE...I'm sure they are. But many come across like they would not do that (give the shirt off their back). Also...there are many liberals who do not support abortion. If I were a "liberal" I would be one of those.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by patrick:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ASLANSPAL:

In each place, Mrs. Bush was mobbed by well-wishers. Nowhere did she encounter the swarms of protesters who appear wherever her husband goes in the world. Despite a lifetime at George Bush's side, Laura Bush remains, in the eyes of many at home and abroad, blissfully distant from the enmity her husband sometimes provokes. She rarely has an unkind word to say, and largely keeps her opinions, whatever they may be, to herself. (Her subtle hints that she may not be as hard-line as the president on abortion and gay rights helps further soften his edges.)

Of course this is true since she is not an elected leader who has to make decisions for the free world. Those who have responsibility to lead are generally the ones who are scrutinized and criticized the most. Let her run for an office and see how her popularity wanes. Those without leadership responsibility can enjoy being popular with everyone.

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]Joe you are always are so negative. Mrs. Bush is well liked and is the epitome of a lady. If you don't have anything good to say, why say it? </font>[/QUOTE]I agree, Patrick. Perhaps, you would also like to make the same self-righteous sermon to the author of this post:

Nowhere did she encounter the swarms of protesters who appear wherever her husband goes in the world. Despite a lifetime at George Bush's side, Laura Bush remains, in the eyes of many at home and abroad, blissfully distant from the enmity her husband sometimes provokes.

Now, that wasn't a very nice thing to say about President Bush. If you don't have anything nice to say about President Bush, then don't say it. Patrick said so.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Rocko9]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by patrick:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ASLANSPAL:

In each place, Mrs. Bush was mobbed by well-wishers. Nowhere did she encounter the swarms of protesters who appear wherever her husband goes in the world. Despite a lifetime at George Bush's side, Laura Bush remains, in the eyes of many at home and abroad, blissfully distant from the enmity her husband sometimes provokes. She rarely has an unkind word to say, and largely keeps her opinions, whatever they may be, to herself. (Her subtle hints that she may not be as hard-line as the president on abortion and gay rights helps further soften his edges.)

Of course this is true since she is not an elected leader who has to make decisions for the free world. Those who have responsibility to lead are generally the ones who are scrutinized and criticized the most. Let her run for an office and see how her popularity wanes. Those without leadership responsibility can enjoy being popular with everyone.

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]Joe you are always are so negative. Mrs. Bush is well liked and is the epitome of a lady. If you don't have anything good to say, why say it? </font>[/QUOTE]I agree, Patrick. Perhaps, you would also like to make the same self-righteous sermon to the author of this post:

Nowhere did she encounter the swarms of protesters who appear wherever her husband goes in the world. Despite a lifetime at George Bush's side, Laura Bush remains, in the eyes of many at home and abroad, blissfully distant from the enmity her husband sometimes provokes.

Now, that wasn't a very nice thing to say about President Bush. If you don't have anything nice to say about President Bush, then don't say it. Patrick said so.

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]Joeseph , you are aware tha aslanspal is just quoting what Newsweek printed and that what you have pulled out cannot be attributed to Aslanspal.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

If he can't post any articles that are nice about the president, then he should not post them at all. Patrick said so.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Rocko9]

The quote is just a stated fact Bush does encounter swarms of protesters it is not being mean or nasty it is stating an observation.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

I agree. Neither were my comments about Laura Bush and the twins mean or nasty. They were simply the reality of the situation. I guess Patrick doesn't have a clue what he is talking about.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Rocko9]

&lt;oversized image deleted - Rule 12. Limit image size. Any image used in a post may not exceed the size of the BB logo at the top of the homepage.&gt;
Well maybe he had too much baloney for lunch and now he is full of it.

[ July 19, 2005, 01:55 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

 

[RockRambler]

Scott J...as I have pointed out on some other posts, now is not the time to debate why we are in Iraq...we are there, so let's win it. Might have been based on some faulty intelligence information, might have been getting some revenge for Dad, but we need to win it since we've made this much committment.

In Bush's case I don't think that he went to Iraq to get people's mind off of his other problems. But I do think that had a lot to do with Clinton's military adventures.

I also think that many times Presidents who have not served in war...and in the case of Clinton and Bush did all they could to keep from going to Vietnam, which was their generation's war...then they try harder to prove their machoism.