Re: My two rules of politics
this is quite illogical what democrat has spent more than the present republican president? Check this out at a price of $10 to $15 billion dollars a month there you have it---your more than $700 billion dollars short fall. Cum on yall I'm sure yall can count and think better than the crew you keep putting in control over the wealth which the people create--give me a break! -- Original message from Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -- On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, John Williams wrote: Julia Thompson Well, on my ballot, if I were to not vote for the incumbent in a lot of the state local races, that left me with a choice between a Democrat and a Libertarian in all of the cases where I was left with a choice of 2 non-incumbents. The Democrats would be more likely to spend more. Which is why I came to the conclusion I did. I guess your ballots are somewhat different from mine, then, in terms of how heavily any given party is represented, and how likely a candidate from a particular party is to beat one from another particular party. I wish there were as many libertarians in the top 3 on my ballots as there were on yours! You must live in a libertarian-friendly area. North of Austin, TX. Texas is somewhat interesting that way in some places Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: My two rules of politics
Given that I was talking about how much a hypothetical Democrat would spend vs. what a hypothetical Libertarian would spend, I don't see how dragging a Republican into the mix refutes my statement. Your statement is irrelevant in the context of what was said. I'm not going to argue against your point (in fact, I think it's quite valid!), just point out that it doesn't address what was under discussion in the thread you're quoting. Julia On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: this is quite illogical what democrat has spent more than the present republican president? Check this out at a price of $10 to $15 billion dollars a month there you have it---your more than $700 billion dollars short fall. Cum on yall I'm sure yall can count and think better than the crew you keep putting in control over the wealth which the people create--give me a break! -- Original message from Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -- On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, John Williams wrote: Julia Thompson Well, on my ballot, if I were to not vote for the incumbent in a lot of the state local races, that left me with a choice between a Democrat and a Libertarian in all of the cases where I was left with a choice of 2 non-incumbents. The Democrats would be more likely to spend more. Which is why I came to the conclusion I did. I guess your ballots are somewhat different from mine, then, in terms of how heavily any given party is represented, and how likely a candidate from a particular party is to beat one from another particular party. I wish there were as many libertarians in the top 3 on my ballots as there were on yours! You must live in a libertarian-friendly area. North of Austin, TX. Texas is somewhat interesting that way in some places Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: My two rules of politics
On Oct 26, 2008, at 5:29 PM, Julia Thompson wrote: On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, John Williams wrote: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, on my ballot, if I were to not vote for the incumbent in a lot of the state local races, that left me with a choice between a Democrat and a Libertarian in all of the cases where I was left with a choice of 2 non-incumbents. The Democrats would be more likely to spend more. Which is why I came to the conclusion I did. I guess your ballots are somewhat different from mine, then, in terms of how heavily any given party is represented, and how likely a candidate from a particular party is to beat one from another particular party. I wish there were as many libertarians in the top 3 on my ballots as there were on yours! You must live in a libertarian-friendly area. North of Austin, TX. Texas is somewhat interesting that way in some places Julia And, in many cases, the Libertarian Party candidates are something a little different from what I'd call small-l libertarian. The capital- L variety, around here at least, tend to be more than a little on the neopentecostal-theocratic side. Correct morality can only be derived from what man is—not from what do-gooders and well-meaning Aunt Nellies would like him to be. -- Robert A. Heinlein ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: My two rules of politics
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, Bruce Bostwick wrote: On Oct 26, 2008, at 5:29 PM, Julia Thompson wrote: On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, John Williams wrote: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, on my ballot, if I were to not vote for the incumbent in a lot of the state local races, that left me with a choice between a Democrat and a Libertarian in all of the cases where I was left with a choice of 2 non-incumbents. The Democrats would be more likely to spend more. Which is why I came to the conclusion I did. I guess your ballots are somewhat different from mine, then, in terms of how heavily any given party is represented, and how likely a candidate from a particular party is to beat one from another particular party. I wish there were as many libertarians in the top 3 on my ballots as there were on yours! You must live in a libertarian-friendly area. North of Austin, TX. Texas is somewhat interesting that way in some places Julia And, in many cases, the Libertarian Party candidates are something a little different from what I'd call small-l libertarian. The capital- L variety, around here at least, tend to be more than a little on the neopentecostal-theocratic side. Maybe tend to be, but I wouldn't characterize George Paap that way, and he got on the ballot in Williamson County as a Libertarian candidate not too long ago In fact, I think that if there's a *cure* for neopentocostal-theocratic-ness, George could be an ingredient for that cure. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: My two rules of politics
Jon Louis Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] i prefer taxing the rich. I prefer taxing Jon Louis Mann for all his money to reduce my taxes! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: My two rules of politics
On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, John Williams wrote: For what it is worth, I have two simple rules for deciding which candidates get my vote: 1) Never vote for the incumbent 2) Of the remaining candidates, predict which two are most likely to win. Vote for the one who is likely to spend less. Vote Libertarian much? (I had more Libertarians on my ballot than Democrats. More Republicans than Libertarians. 4 Republican judges running unopposed will do that) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: My two rules of politics
Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vote Libertarian much? No, they are rarely in the top two. Probably because libertarians do much less pandering to special interests. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: My two rules of politics
On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, John Williams wrote: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vote Libertarian much? No, they are rarely in the top two. Probably because libertarians do much less pandering to special interests. Well, on my ballot, if I were to not vote for the incumbent in a lot of the state local races, that left me with a choice between a Democrat and a Libertarian in all of the cases where I was left with a choice of 2 non-incumbents. The Democrats would be more likely to spend more. Which is why I came to the conclusion I did. I guess your ballots are somewhat different from mine, then, in terms of how heavily any given party is represented, and how likely a candidate from a particular party is to beat one from another particular party. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: My two rules of politics
Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, on my ballot, if I were to not vote for the incumbent in a lot of the state local races, that left me with a choice between a Democrat and a Libertarian in all of the cases where I was left with a choice of 2 non-incumbents. The Democrats would be more likely to spend more. Which is why I came to the conclusion I did. I guess your ballots are somewhat different from mine, then, in terms of how heavily any given party is represented, and how likely a candidate from a particular party is to beat one from another particular party. I wish there were as many libertarians in the top 3 on my ballots as there were on yours! You must live in a libertarian-friendly area. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: My two rules of politics
On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, John Williams wrote: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, on my ballot, if I were to not vote for the incumbent in a lot of the state local races, that left me with a choice between a Democrat and a Libertarian in all of the cases where I was left with a choice of 2 non-incumbents. The Democrats would be more likely to spend more. Which is why I came to the conclusion I did. I guess your ballots are somewhat different from mine, then, in terms of how heavily any given party is represented, and how likely a candidate from a particular party is to beat one from another particular party. I wish there were as many libertarians in the top 3 on my ballots as there were on yours! You must live in a libertarian-friendly area. North of Austin, TX. Texas is somewhat interesting that way in some places Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: My two rules of politics
Jon Louis Mann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Seems to me that the GOP has been doing the most spending.., Clinton went out with a surplus. 1) I am a fan of gridlock. I think if Obama wins, with a Democrat dominated Congress, there will be a lot of new spending. I'm convinced Clinton would have spent more if the Republicans didn't dominate Congress during most of his 8 years. 2) A surplus does not equal less spending. Clinton balanced the budget by raising taxes and and keeping the rate of spending growth in control. He was lucky to have a period of rapidly growing GDP and tax revenues, and a Republican Congress for most of his years made it more difficult to pass new spending bills. Not that a balanced budget is bad, but I'd rather see the budget balanced by cutting spending rather than raising taxes. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: My two rules of politics
On 10/26/2008 5:16:57 PM, John Williams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well, on my ballot, if I were to not vote for the incumbent in a lot of the state local races, that left me with a choice between a Democrat and a Libertarian in all of the cases where I was left with a choice of 2 non-incumbents. The Democrats would be more likely to spend more. Which is why I came to the conclusion I did. I guess your ballots are somewhat different from mine, then, in terms of how heavily any given party is represented, and how likely a candidate from a particular party is to beat one from another particular party. I wish there were as many libertarians in the top 3 on my ballots as there were on yours! You must live in a libertarian-friendly area. I'm a couple of hundred miles from Julia. There are always Libertarians on the ballot here and I vote for them frequently. Why? Because I trust their conservatism more than I trust Republican conservatism and I want them promoted. No, I don't support Ron Paul. (My high school economics teacher was his father-in-law) He is not much for pragmatism and seems to prefer polemics, but that makes his followers happy it seems. Heh! There are videos of me on the net talking to Paulies at a Republican convention. (If you find them keep it quiet so I won't be namefagged.) xponent Most Famous For Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
