Quote: "This is just a small example of how party politics works. You do what the whips tell you to do if you want their support and backing which, unless you are a billionare, you'll need. Running for re-election is obscenely expensive."
ok, so according to you, whoever is president listens to all the other stooges until he is elected, then he turns around and forces his views upon them? ...right
Quote: "Only a few deal with economics? They are professors of business. What do you think they deal with? "
business usually deals with management...economics is a completely different subject.
Quote: "As for the doctorates that is pretty much implied by the fact that they are tenured professors of business. Unless of course, you are suggesting that these guys are teaching business at Havard without a degree. I'd like to see you argue that with out feeling foolish."
ahh, but a degree is very different from a doctorate my friend. maybe you should read some news clippings about that.
Quote: "I'll state right now that I believe that the president does not have total control over the economy. The recession was going to happen whether Bush or Gore or Santa Claus got into office. I'm not blaming him for the recession. What I'm blaming him for is this "jobless recovery" and how lousy it has been for pretty much everyone in America including the rich. His policies DO have an important impact on the economy. Do you disagree with me there(and by that I mean that his policies have an important impact on the economy)?"
Actually on this we do agree, presidential policies do effect the economy, to a degree, but not nearly the degree as presented in said letter. However, I do personally believe bush's policies haven't done much to help our economy.
Quote: "It's not. You obviously haven't bothered to look at any of the data."
actually, i have. in all the examples you presented the rates are RETURNING towards previous levels. that simply shows that bush's policies aren't what's pushing us into this recession, and that we are coming out of it, even with him in office.
Quote: "That supports my case. Not yours."
no, it supports mine. why? because its showing that due to the involvement in Iraq and the war on terrorism a majority of the leaders have been removed. ok, so lots more people are mad at America, but we've eliminated a more than 50% of the terrorist core. i think its worth the trade.
Quote: "I agree that there was a few secret reasons for invading Iraq. Wolfowitz I believe has said himself in a few interviews that WMD was the only reason they could agree on to publically support to get the approval of the American public. I don't think this speaks too highly of the adminstration. If the adminstration is afraid the American public will disapprove of their reasons you have to wonder how sound their reasons for going in really were especially in light of the fact that terrorism has increased and not decreased."
he never said that it was because the public would disapprove, the most logical reasons for not releasing the information is that it could compromise either 1, the agents or 2, the mission itself.
And if you agree on this fact, you'd also have to agree that you and me will never be able to accurately argue the benefits and losses of the war.
On the issue of gay marriage, the issue isn't that people should just accept it and move on, the proposal of gay marriage gives substantial benefits to couples, including tax write-offs, etc.
I think it is perfectly fair for people to stand up and say, i don't want to pay for them to be a couple. I don't care if people are gay, but I am definately opposed to paying federal taxes that support it.
Its the product that counts, not the method.
