It was announced that Shrub vetoed the "Farm" bill this afternoon.

Maybe the "Farm" lobby didn't take care of business or the Shrub's
friends don't stand to make enough money from the bill the way it was
written.

Don't get me wrong, the "Farm" policy of the US gov't has been a
disgrace for as long as I remember.

I still remember as a 7th & then an 8th grade kid, riding the school
bus after school to a potato farm to ride on the potato picker,
picking out clods of dirt and potato vines from about 4:00PM till dark
and all day Saturday.

It was hard work, but $0.50/hr was good money for a 12-13 year old kid
back then.

It was also depressing.

The farmer had to dye the potatoes purple, then sell them for
$0.01/pound, to be used for hog feed.

The farmer got a subsidy payment from US Gov't. after submitting the
necessary documentation.

There were a lot of hungry people in the world back then, and wasting
good food went against everything I was taught.

Things haven't changed much, but doubt much will be done about it.

Wonder what Shrub's real agenda is?


Lew

Lew Hodgett wrote:
It was announced that Shrub vetoed the "Farm" bill this afternoon.

Maybe the "Farm" lobby didn't take care of business or the Shrub's
friends don't stand to make enough money from the bill the way it was
written.

Don't get me wrong, the "Farm" policy of the US gov't has been a
disgrace for as long as I remember.

But that fact won't stop you from blaming Bush, right? Because
it's ideology over reason at all time. Bush did the right
thing. The Cowardly Congress will likely override.

(Hands Lew a clean hanky to wipe the foam off.)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
news:z12Zj.12963$IK5.6724@trnddc04...
It was announced that Shrub vetoed the "Farm" bill this afternoon.



Assuming that you are talking about Bush, Louise Hoggett seems displeased.

Funny how this "Idiot" you are referring to is the one who the Democratic
front runners seem to be running against. Has no one told them that Bush is
done at the end of this term? Does the Democratic party really think that
fussing about Bush is a reason to vote for them? LOL
Both of those clowns seem to be pointed in the wrong direction.

On May 21, 9:06*pm, "Leon" wrote:

[other stuff snipped]


*Does the Democratic party really think that
fussing about Bush is a reason to vote for them? *LOL
Both of those clowns seem to be pointed in the wrong direction.

Ain't she cute? I have a feeling I know what she's thinking. I can
read it in her face. And THAT is why she's staying in the race. It
might even be the same reason she did so well in Kentucky.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/Disdain.jpg

On May 21, 9:34*pm, Robatoy wrote:
On May 21, 9:06*pm, "Leon" wrote:

[other stuff snipped]

*Does the Democratic party really think that
fussing about Bush is a reason to vote for them? *LOL
Both of those clowns seem to be pointed in the wrong direction.

Ain't she cute? I have a feeling I know what she's thinking. I can
read it in her face. And THAT is why she's staying in the race. *It
might even be the same reason she did so well in Kentucky.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/Disdain.jpg

I forgot to mention that one commentator suggested Obama better hire a
food taster if he picks HRC as VP. That look, makes me believe he's
right.

"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
On May 21, 9:06 pm, "Leon" wrote:

[other stuff snipped]


Does the Democratic party really think that
fussing about Bush is a reason to vote for them? LOL
Both of those clowns seem to be pointed in the wrong direction.

Ain't she cute? I have a feeling I know what she's thinking. I can
read it in her face. And THAT is why she's staying in the race. It
might even be the same reason she did so well in Kentucky.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/Disdain.jpg


The MSNBC head lines today indicated that she is staying in because she has
some good reason to do so, or something like that. She is staying in to
remain in the head lines, notoriety, fame, etc. Spend that money and hope
Obama will bail her out at the end.
I just hope that this will be the end to that era.

On Wed, 21 May 2008 18:34:14 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
wrote:



Ain't she cute? I have a feeling I know what she's thinking. I can
read it in her face. And THAT is why she's staying in the race. It
might even be the same reason she did so well in Kentucky.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/Disdain.jpg


And here's the caption.


"Infirm of purpose!
Give me the daggers."



Lady Macbeth - Macbeth Act 2, scene 2, 45–52




Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
On May 21, 9:34 pm, Robatoy wrote:
On May 21, 9:06 pm, "Leon" wrote:

[other stuff snipped]

Does the Democratic party really think that
fussing about Bush is a reason to vote for them? LOL
Both of those clowns seem to be pointed in the wrong direction.

Ain't she cute? I have a feeling I know what she's thinking. I can
read it in her face. And THAT is why she's staying in the race. It
might even be the same reason she did so well in Kentucky.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/Disdain.jpg

I forgot to mention that one commentator suggested Obama better hire a
food taster if he picks HRC as VP. That look, makes me believe he's
right.

No kidding. While she is busy trying to do that deed Bill will be raiding
the hen house. ;~)

On May 21, 9:43*pm, Tom Watson wrote:
On Wed, 21 May 2008 18:34:14 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy

wrote:

Ain't she cute? I have a feeling I know what she's thinking. I can
read it in her face. And THAT is why she's staying in the race. *It
might even be the same reason she did so well in Kentucky.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/Disdain.jpg

And here's the caption.

"Infirm of purpose!
Give me the daggers."

Lady Macbeth - Macbeth Act 2, scene 2, 45–52

Tom Watson


Here's another cation:

"He's taller than Vince Foster...."

"Leon" wrote:


Assuming that you are talking about Bush, Louise Hoggett seems
displeased.

Funny how this "Idiot" you are referring to is the one who the
Democratic front runners seem to be running against. Has no one
told them that Bush is done at the end of this term? Does the
Democratic party really think that fussing about Bush is a reason to
vote for them? LOL
Both of those clowns seem to be pointed in the wrong direction.


My, my, bit testy I see.

Would appear you have allowed your emotions to affect your logic.

The post had absolutely nothing to do with the upcoming election or
the campaign that goes with it.

Case you missed it, the final line of the post was a question:

"Wonder what Shrub's real agenda is?"

Lew

In article ,
"Leon" wrote:

"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
On May 21, 9:06 pm, "Leon" wrote:

[other stuff snipped]


Does the Democratic party really think that
fussing about Bush is a reason to vote for them? LOL
Both of those clowns seem to be pointed in the wrong direction.

Ain't she cute? I have a feeling I know what she's thinking. I can
read it in her face. And THAT is why she's staying in the race. It
might even be the same reason she did so well in Kentucky.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/Disdain.jpg


The MSNBC head lines today indicated that she is staying in because she has
some good reason to do so, or something like that. She is staying in to
remain in the head lines, notoriety, fame, etc. Spend that money and hope
Obama will bail her out at the end.
I just hope that this will be the end to that era.

"There's many a slip twixt the cup and the lip."

Plenty of reason, in my mind, for her to stay in the contest. Obama
does not have the nomination, yet. Odds are against her, given. That
doesn't mean she can't get the nomination.

On May 21, 10:13*pm, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
"Leon" wrote:
Assuming that you are talking about Bush, Louise Hoggett seems
displeased.

Funny how this "Idiot" you are referring to is the one who the
Democratic front runners seem to be running against. *Has no one
told them that Bush is done at the end of this term? *Does the
Democratic party really think that fussing about Bush is a reason to
vote for them? *LOL
Both of those clowns seem to be pointed in the wrong direction.

My, my, bit testy I see.

Would appear you have allowed your emotions to affect your logic.

The post had absolutely nothing to do with the upcoming election or
the campaign that goes with it.

Case you missed it, the final line of the post was a question:

"Wonder what Shrub's real agenda is?"

Lew

Sorry about the thread-jack there, Lew.
Bush's agenda is whatever The Illuminati tell him it is. s

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
Wonder what Shrub's real agenda is?


Lew

Just to **** you off.

"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote:

Just to **** you off.

Naw, he's not worth it.

If it wasn't so pitiful, what is happening would be humorous.

Lew

On May 22, 2:27 am, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
"Edwin Pawlowski" wrote:
Just to **** you off.

Naw, he's not worth it.

If it wasn't so pitiful, what is happening would be humorous.

Lew

Fixed the subject line.

--

FF

Nothing like this would ever happen under BO....... Well maybe Im wrong.

cm
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
news:z12Zj.12963$IK5.6724@trnddc04...
It was announced that Shrub vetoed the "Farm" bill this afternoon.

Maybe the "Farm" lobby didn't take care of business or the Shrub's friends
don't stand to make enough money from the bill the way it was written.

Don't get me wrong, the "Farm" policy of the US gov't has been a disgrace
for as long as I remember.

I still remember as a 7th & then an 8th grade kid, riding the school bus
after school to a potato farm to ride on the potato picker, picking out
clods of dirt and potato vines from about 4:00PM till dark and all day
Saturday.

It was hard work, but $0.50/hr was good money for a 12-13 year old kid
back then.

It was also depressing.

The farmer had to dye the potatoes purple, then sell them for $0.01/pound,
to be used for hog feed.

The farmer got a subsidy payment from US Gov't. after submitting the
necessary documentation.

There were a lot of hungry people in the world back then, and wasting good
food went against everything I was taught.

Things haven't changed much, but doubt much will be done about it.

Wonder what Shrub's real agenda is?


Lew

CM wrote:
Nothing like this would ever happen under BO....... Well maybe Im
wrong.

What, vetoing subsidies for huge agribusinesses?

cm
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
news:z12Zj.12963$IK5.6724@trnddc04...
It was announced that Shrub vetoed the "Farm" bill this afternoon.

Maybe the "Farm" lobby didn't take care of business or the Shrub's
friends don't stand to make enough money from the bill the way it
was written.

Don't get me wrong, the "Farm" policy of the US gov't has been a
disgrace for as long as I remember.

I still remember as a 7th & then an 8th grade kid, riding the
school
bus after school to a potato farm to ride on the potato picker,
picking out clods of dirt and potato vines from about 4:00PM till
dark and all day Saturday.

It was hard work, but $0.50/hr was good money for a 12-13 year old
kid back then.

It was also depressing.

The farmer had to dye the potatoes purple, then sell them for
$0.01/pound, to be used for hog feed.

The farmer got a subsidy payment from US Gov't. after submitting
the
necessary documentation.

There were a lot of hungry people in the world back then, and
wasting good food went against everything I was taught.

Things haven't changed much, but doubt much will be done about it.

Wonder what Shrub's real agenda is?


Lew

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Robatoy wrote:
On May 21, 9:34 pm, Robatoy wrote:
On May 21, 9:06 pm, "Leon" wrote:

[other stuff snipped]

Does the Democratic party really think that
fussing about Bush is a reason to vote for them? LOL
Both of those clowns seem to be pointed in the wrong direction.
Ain't she cute? I have a feeling I know what she's thinking. I can
read it in her face. And THAT is why she's staying in the race. It
might even be the same reason she did so well in Kentucky.

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o...oy/Disdain.jpg

I forgot to mention that one commentator suggested Obama better hire a
food taster if he picks HRC as VP. That look, makes me believe he's
right.

I'd rather he just hire Ted Kennedy as his driver...

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Some of your guys crack me up. A lot of hollering and screaming about
things, but what do we really know?

Is our hard headed nitwit president?

Is it the school yard mentality of childish Congress?

How do we know?

I looked at the farm bill:

http://tinyurl.com/59cobr

Wow. 67% going to foodstamps and foreign aid! SIXTY ****ING SEVEN
PERCENT!

I am lost... how does that help the farmer again?

Worse, 840 million of that isn't even for domestic use... it's to feed
all the people in this world that hate us, but think we should still
share.

I wonder what that 840 million dollar infusion would do for Social
Security...

There are other fun things in there... stopping the subsidies to dead
people. I don't know why this is important... down here in Texas we
have been voting the graveyards for years....

But, you read right. NO MORE subsidy payments to you if you are
dead. *******s. Short sighted morons. After all, the DoA only paid
out over a BILLION dollars, with a B, in the last seven years to
people that don't exist. And now with typical Congressional saber
rattling, they want to form yet another investigative committee to see
if they can retrieve some of that dough.

Worse, they bill included language that would try to keep farmers from
double or triple dipping by starting multiple businesses to take
advantage of specific subsidies to different types of crops.
How's a guy gonna make a good living if he can't double dip?

Still, the farmers are somewhat protected. If the combined family
income is less than $1.5 million dollars, they can still get
subsidies. *whew*
Cite: http://tinyurl.com/4njwzo

Fear not, there was an effort to get everyone in on the aid to the
farmers. The bill purporting to be aid for our farmers also includes
a settlement to black farmers for 100 mil so they could settle claims
of discrimination by black farmers against the CLINTON
administration. The dems sure pinned the tail on the donkey by
passing that one onto the Bush group.

Thankfully, they include language in the bill to soften penalties for
those packers, farmers, and manufacturers that mislabel the food's
country of origin. So if you have produce marked from California that
is actually from Mexico or Chile, you will be helping their farmers,
not ours. If you buy fruit that was labeled from South Texas but is
actually from Mexico where they are having a fruit fly epidemic, you
won't get in as much trouble. Bringing the fruit flies in, or any of
the other wilts, fungi, or fruit molds that are often sourced back to
our neighbors (hey, we do fine as we are, we have plenty of diseased
vegetables and fruit). It could work out great for some!

Sadly, regardless of where the money goes, only a little over 11% of
it is going to the farmers. How is this a farm bill?

But still, some felt it was time to draw the line in the sand with
Bush. Even Republicans. Eager to distance themselves from Bush, they
decided to vote for the bill at the last minute when they saw they
would have the votes needed to veto. Anxious Dems looked to connect
to the poor, the blue collar, and anyone else they can to make sure
folks know they are indeed, not elitist.

So this bill had a head of steam.

And then, in a move that would do the Keystone Cops proud, the
collective bags of crap known as our elected politicians sent an
incomplete bill to Bush to veto. Beyond profound stupidity. In a
foot race to get things in the press ( something like 'Bush hates
farmers') before the primaries closed, they forgot all the paperwork.

Did the Bush camp catch it?

Nope. They aren't any brighter.

Did the Dem camp catch it? Nope.

I can't find anyone able to own up to who exactly was the person,
group or committee that caught it, but their lax stupidity is now
being coded by the Dem management as a simple "clerical error". For
billions and billions of dollars they can't have good secretary count
the pages?

I don't know that anyone knows exactly what happened, but several
parliamentarians seem to think that the bill as presented would be
voted down as unconstitutional as

1) the House presented a different bill than the budget describes
since not all funds were accounted for in the bill. The missing 34 or
so pages left on someone's desk have the vital information about trade
agreements that reconcile the budget

2) Since the paperwork is incorrect, the veto is pointless

And now there are those that are speculating that there was nefarious
meaning behind this glaring omission as well. AP cite:

http://tinyurl.com/4njwzo

If any of you guys can figure out any group besides the politicians
that get paid to cluster **** us that benefit from these kind of
shenanigans I hope you write a book to let the less competent among us
know what is going on.

But... as an author, don't forget to get your name in the hat for he
next farm bill. Remember, less than 12 cents on the dollar goes to
them, the rest are up for grabs!

Robert

On May 22, 1:10 pm, "
wrote:
...

I looked at the farm bill:

http://tinyurl.com/59cobr

Wow. 67% going to foodstamps and foreign aid! SIXTY ****ING SEVEN
PERCENT!

I am lost... how does that help the farmer again?


Consider supply and demand. Food stamps and foreign aid,
assuming the foreign aid takes the form of sending food,
create demand for farm products.

Don't ask me to explain the rest.

--

FF

Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Lew Hodgett wrote:
It was announced that Shrub vetoed the "Farm" bill this afternoon.

Maybe the "Farm" lobby didn't take care of business or the Shrub's
friends don't stand to make enough money from the bill the way it was
written.

Don't get me wrong, the "Farm" policy of the US gov't has been a
disgrace for as long as I remember.

But that fact won't stop you from blaming Bush, right? Because
it's ideology over reason at all time. Bush did the right
thing. The Cowardly Congress will likely override.

(Hands Lew a clean hanky to wipe the foam off.)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Man ain't that a fact... the guy signs every pork filled piece of crap
to cross his desk, and he's an A-Hole... He Veto's this piece of pork
filled crap, and he's and A-Hole... Just can't win...

Fred the Red Shirt wrote:
On May 22, 1:10 pm, "
wrote:
...

I looked at the farm bill:

http://tinyurl.com/59cobr

Wow. 67% going to foodstamps and foreign aid! SIXTY ****ING SEVEN
PERCENT!

I am lost... how does that help the farmer again?


Consider supply and demand. Food stamps and foreign aid,
assuming the foreign aid takes the form of sending food,
create demand for farm products.

Don't ask me to explain the rest.

--

FF


Hmm, let's explore that a bit, shall we. This "demand that is created"
you speak of is ... nothing more than other American taxpayers' money.
It is admittedly subtle, but no different than, any other form of
forced wealth redistribution. It does not increase the marketplace, it
does not improve efficiency, and it is not subject for the most part
to the feedback of a real marketplace. It is a fraud enabled by a
theft, no more, no less...


--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/

Subject

It is so much fun being a **** disturber.

Just like fishing, what you catch depends on the bait and technique
used.

Lew

wrote:

Wow. 67% going to foodstamps and foreign aid! SIXTY ****ING SEVEN
PERCENT!

Since USA foreign aid is a very small amount of GNP, bordering on
"Zip",
67% of "Zip" is still "Zip".

Yes, $840 Mil is "Zip" when compared to the GNP.

Unfortunately, the good will that can be developed with foreign aid,
has been
squandered away.

I am lost... how does that help the farmer again?

As others have mentioned, the farmer gets paid for the food stuffs
given away.

Worse, 840 million of that isn't even for domestic use... it's to
feed
all the people in this world that hate us, but think we should still
share.

After the way FEMA handled Katrina, not sure if there is any qualified
federal
agency qualified to do it's job, especislly if if requires social
skills when dealing
with foreign countries.

I think that is known as dipolmacy.

I wonder what that 840 million dollar infusion would do for Social
Security...

Not much.

Remember Dirksen's classic line from 25 years ago?

"A million here, a million there, pretty soon you have some real
money".

Today, it just takes more millions.

There are other fun things in there... stopping the subsidies to
dead
people. I don't know why this is important... down here in Texas we
have been voting the graveyards for years....

You and the folks in Chicago.

The basic farm bill sucks, every knows it is loaded with "pork";
however,
what made this year different?

What was the real agenda in vetoing the bill?

Lew

On May 22, 4:51 pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
Fred the Red Shirt wrote:



On May 22, 1:10 pm, "
wrote:
...

I looked at the farm bill:

http://tinyurl.com/59cobr

Wow. 67% going to foodstamps and foreign aid! SIXTY ****ING SEVEN
PERCENT!

I am lost... how does that help the farmer again?

Consider supply and demand. Food stamps and foreign aid,
assuming the foreign aid takes the form of sending food,
create demand for farm products.

Don't ask me to explain the rest.

--

FF

Hmm, let's explore that a bit, shall we. This "demand that is created"
you speak of is ... nothing more than other American taxpayers' money.

Yes, hence the term 'subsidized agriculture'. Direct payments
to landowners to grow (or let the land lie fallow) are only part
of the subsidy program. A lot of it is manipulation of supply
and demand, as for example requiring a subsidy to sell produce
in interstate commerce, thus restricitng supply to keep the
price elevated. For the orange industry, those 'subsidies'
don't involve paying the growers. Orange subsidies are actually
bought and sold like bonds.

--

FF

On May 22, 4:36 pm, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:

Since USA foreign aid is a very small amount of GNP, bordering on
"Zip",
67% of "Zip" is still "Zip".

Yes, $840 Mil is "Zip" when compared to the GNP.

I agree, but with this whole toilet of ill will the world has for us,
why give them anything more?

Giving away anything to another country for any reason in any amount
makes me cringe when we have seniors that are making decisions between
prescriptions, doctor care and groceries.

Throwing aid and money around willy nilly worldwide is like simply
pointless.

Unfortunately, the good will that can be developed with foreign aid,
has been
squandered away.

That good will was starting down the road to its end in the late 60s.
The road to us buying the affection and respect of other countries
with food, money, emergency care etc., has simply warped itself into a
monster of expectation from other countries. When there is a natural
disaster, many countries have the instant knee jerk reaction of "where
were the Americans?"

(I have not heard them say "where are the Swedes?" or "where are the
Chileans?". The might, though.)

What was the real agenda in vetoing the bill?

It was a lame bill presented to make the Dems feel like they were
doing something for America. By their own admission (Pelosi as the
spokesperson on this one) it fell far, far short of their goal. But
it was a chance to do something they wanted, and that was to present a
social program for food stamps, free food, etc. Yet if it was
actually defeated, with the label it carried, Bush would be labeled as
anti farmer, making him anti American if he vetoed the bill. But it
isn't really about the farmer, and everyone knows it except the large
group of Americans that don't read.

As for Bush's role, who knows what he was thinking. I read his
spending record, and he could put any tax and spend Democrat to
shame. But he gets to save face with the conservatives by telling
them he vetoed a huge giveaway program, falling on the old
politician's saw of "hey don't look at me, I didn't vote for
that!".

I am thinking I need a new term now for the combined brain trust of
idiots and their activities.

I am thinking "mutual bicameral masturbation" might be good for this
group and what they do.

Robert

Yup.

cm
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
CM wrote:
Nothing like this would ever happen under BO....... Well maybe Im
wrong.

What, vetoing subsidies for huge agribusinesses?

cm
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
news:z12Zj.12963$IK5.6724@trnddc04...
It was announced that Shrub vetoed the "Farm" bill this afternoon.

Maybe the "Farm" lobby didn't take care of business or the Shrub's
friends don't stand to make enough money from the bill the way it
was written.

Don't get me wrong, the "Farm" policy of the US gov't has been a
disgrace for as long as I remember.

I still remember as a 7th & then an 8th grade kid, riding the
school
bus after school to a potato farm to ride on the potato picker,
picking out clods of dirt and potato vines from about 4:00PM till
dark and all day Saturday.

It was hard work, but $0.50/hr was good money for a 12-13 year old
kid back then.

It was also depressing.

The farmer had to dye the potatoes purple, then sell them for
$0.01/pound, to be used for hog feed.

The farmer got a subsidy payment from US Gov't. after submitting
the
necessary documentation.

There were a lot of hungry people in the world back then, and
wasting good food went against everything I was taught.

Things haven't changed much, but doubt much will be done about it.

Wonder what Shrub's real agenda is?


Lew

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On May 22, 5:12*pm, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
Subject

It is so much fun being a **** disturber.


I am SOOO disappointed in you!

.
.
.
.
.
*snickers*

On May 22, 4:12 pm, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
Subject

It is so much fun being a **** disturber.

Just like fishing, what you catch depends on the bait and technique
used.

Lew

Yeah, if you have the time. I personally never wasted the effort
though. If I want to start something, it needs to be in person. I
like the confrontational approach. A internet troll is kinda like
starting a rumor in kindergarten and seeing who gets screwed. A lot
of gas is passed, but in the end, nothing.

It is good though, when a troll turns out at least a little
constructive dialog.

But remember Lew, when you respond to your own troll, that makes you a
sock puppet.

Don't wanna have to start calling you Lamb Chop! ;^)

Robert

wrote:
On May 22, 4:36 pm, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:

Since USA foreign aid is a very small amount of GNP, bordering on
"Zip",
67% of "Zip" is still "Zip".

Yes, $840 Mil is "Zip" when compared to the GNP.

I agree, but with this whole toilet of ill will the world has for us,
why give them anything more?

Giving away anything to another country for any reason in any amount
makes me cringe when we have seniors that are making decisions between
prescriptions, doctor care and groceries.

Throwing aid and money around willy nilly worldwide is like simply
pointless.

Unfortunately, the good will that can be developed with foreign aid,
has been
squandered away.

That good will was starting down the road to its end in the late 60s.
The road to us buying the affection and respect of other countries
with food, money, emergency care etc., has simply warped itself into a
monster of expectation from other countries. When there is a natural
disaster, many countries have the instant knee jerk reaction of "where
were the Americans?"

(I have not heard them say "where are the Swedes?" or "where are the
Chileans?". The might, though.)

What was the real agenda in vetoing the bill?

It was a lame bill presented to make the Dems feel like they were
doing something for America. By their own admission (Pelosi as the
spokesperson on this one) it fell far, far short of their goal. But
it was a chance to do something they wanted, and that was to present a
social program for food stamps, free food, etc. Yet if it was
actually defeated, with the label it carried, Bush would be labeled as
anti farmer, making him anti American if he vetoed the bill. But it
isn't really about the farmer, and everyone knows it except the large
group of Americans that don't read.

As for Bush's role, who knows what he was thinking. I read his
spending record, and he could put any tax and spend Democrat to
shame. But he gets to save face with the conservatives by telling
them he vetoed a huge giveaway program, falling on the old
politician's saw of "hey don't look at me, I didn't vote for
that!".

I am thinking I need a new term now for the combined brain trust of
idiots and their activities.

I am thinking "mutual bicameral masturbation" might be good for this
group and what they do.

Robert


Pray for gridlock.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/