On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Rex wrote: > And with the budget under the Bush Administration outsocializing the > socialist Clinton by triple and growing (in social spending alone) it isn't > clear that there is any value in knowing whether media people are republican > socialists or democratic socialists. Thanks(?) to our current President > Hillary the democratic socilalists look as conservative as their so-called > alternative. Perhaps they should be referred to only as republican > socialists or democratic socialists, or simply all as socialists. Perhaps this is why Harry Browne said on the C-Span debate amongst the alternative candidates for the 2000 Presidential election that there is no difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. They'll both take you to hell. The only difference is which one will take you there faster, the Democrats will.
Back to our regularly scheduled programming. > -- <table cols=3><tr><td colspan=3><font size=-2>I didn't say it would be easy. I just said it would be the truth.</font></td></tr><tr><td align=right><font size=-2>-Morpheus</font></td></tr><tr><td>ISCS, Inc</td><td>Henry Katz, ScM</td><td>henry.katz at iscs-i dot com</td></tr><tr><td>Lasting Visuals</td><td>718.268.3584</td><td>www dot iscs-i dot com</td></tr><tr><td><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>
