Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 09:00:33 -0700 (PDT)

From:  "Eric Burgess" <> 

Subject: Iraqgate


so it keeps piling up, and i don't just mean the evidence that the bush administration distorted, misrepresented, and manipulated facts in order to get both congressional and public approval to invade and occupy iraq. what is also piling up is the mountain of bullshit dubya, rumsy, and ari are shoveling in an attempt to cover up their blatant lies.


so dubya is backing off the contention that iraq had WMDs and is now "convinced" that iraq had an illegal weapons "program." what? saddam had a weapons program?

whoever voted for this sherlock must be so proud of junior. i guess his daddy must have filled him in on the u.s.'s support of saddam all those years. i guess the military intelligence is good for something.


yet, no matter how "convinced" w is, his cute texas drawl does nothing to bring back the dead marines.


i am also troubled by the fact that while we see the british parliament up in arms, heckling blair as he tries to justify riding the u.s. war mongering coattails, there is nary a cry of outrage coming from congress. seriously, we have a bunch of pussies enactinmg laws in this country. they bear part of the responsibilities for the many dead americans and iraqis because they authorized the prez to speak loudly and use his big stick.


go on, jack, rationalize it. but in doing so, please, please, employ some common sense instead of your favorite neocon distortions, misrepsentations, and manipulations. seriously.





Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 09:18:34 -0700 (PDT)

From:  "tad douglas" <> 

Subject: Re: Iraqgate


question. where did the weapons, the anthrax,and the rest of the various toxins go?





From: "THE KID" <> 

Subject: Re: Iraqgate

Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 13:52:29 -0700


Iraqgate? How Liberally clever. Reminiscent of "Whitewater" and "Travelgate" and "PaulaJonesGenniferFlowersMonicaLewinskygate" and "Vince Fostergate" (Hillary in his office taking files, while barring the police from entering, before anyone besides the cops who found him dead and before anyone at the white house was told, knew he was dead so that's why she was taking his files?, makes you go Hmmmm?) huh? And the list goes on and on.

Yeah, Iraqgate really ranks up way up there.


Once again Eric, you never disappoint me. Like Clockwork, you have avoided answering my questions with asking your own questions. Was it because you couldn't? Did those quotes from William Jefferson throw you off? Did the fact that even he knew they are there and that Saddam is hiding them make you answer my questions with your own? Does this refresh your memory?


1) Clinton quote from 1998: "If Saddam Hussein fails to comply and we fail to act or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop his program of weapons of mass destruction...he will then conclude that he can go right on doing more to build an arsenal of devastating destruction.... Some way, someday, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal." Do any of those words sound like Clinton thinks Saddam doesn't have an arsenal? To you, probably not.


2) On December 16, 1998, Bill Clinton ordered a strike "to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs, and its military capacity to threaten their neighbors. Their purpose is to protect the national interests of the United States..."


3) February 17, 1998, Bill Clinton: "Saddam's son-in-law and the chief organizer of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, defected to Jordan." Here are just some of the things this defection forced Iraq to admit, as cited by Clinton: "[A]n offensive biological warfare capability, notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum...2,000 gallons of anthrax, 25 biological-filled scud warheads, and 157 aerial bombs."


In President Bush's January 28, 2003 State of the Union he specifically cited the information gathered by the United Nations, the International Atomic Energy Agency and Bill Clinton as a basis for his conclusion that Iraq did indeed have weapons of mass destruction. In my view, Saddam either hid them or destroyed them prior to the end of months of diplomacy and dithering with the UN. Maybe he shipped them out of the country most likely to Syria. So if you conclude that Bush, Powell, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Cheney lied, you have to add all these other folks into the list, right?


More from Clinton: "And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production." Of course, Saddam's son-in-law was killed when he returned to Iraq. Now, I know that everybody on the right said Clinton was using Iraq to distract from his impeachment scandal.

You have a point, but screw it. This is what Clinton said, and I think someone should point it out to his supporters who are now out there saying there were never any WMD in Iraq.


Clinton always spoke about Hussein's arsenal as a "fact" with none of his characteristic wiggle room or hedging and of the dictator's determination to build it as a fact. At the time, Democrats from Al Gore to Senator Tom Daschle backed Clinton 100%. So did the United Nations. President Clinton and the UN relied on intelligence information similar to the information relied on by Bush, folks. Yet when it was suggested that Clinton acted out of personal reasons to deflect from his criminal offenses, today's Bush critics dismissed that as "politics." Of course unlike Clinton and the UN, Bush is not a liberal. He took effective steps to destroy Saddam Hussein - and for that, he's attacked.


If Saddam Hussein never had WMDs, why didn't he just let the UN Inspectors into his nation so he could keep on torturing and building palaces? If he never had WMDs, what did he use to gas the Kurds? Why if he didn't have them, didn't he just let the UN inspectors in 2 weeks, 2 days or 2 hours before the "Assassination Attempt" began? Anybody who's "Intellectually Honest", whatever their politics, knows Saddam had those weapons. The question is, "Where are they, and what condition are they in?" But I'm sure you'll dismiss these questions too.


The run-up to the Iraq war was 14 months. That's a long time for Saddam Hussein to hide and disperse this stuff, thanks to all of you who urged diplomacy. One of the reasons you people are so ready to believe Bush lied on this, is the hangover from Clinton's reign. We had eight years of, "Well, they all do it," as reaction to any and all proven allegations against politicians. President Bush is a different animal when it comes to this, which is why I can tell you with confidence that these weapons did exist.

Besides, Clinton himself cited many of the same intelligence sources in talking about Iraq's WMD programs when he was in office! So if William Jefferson Clinton said it, IT MUST BE TRUE!


Just can't come up with an anser huh? How "Prophetic" I was in saying that you would "Dismiss these questions too?"


You're fond of quotes, but I'm sure this one will go right over your head as to what I'm getting at...


"Truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it; but, in the end; there it is." Sir Winston Churchill


It's funny yet...funny how you tell me so self righteously "go on, jack, rationalize it. but in doing so, please, please, employ some common sense instead of your favorite neocon distortions, misrepsentations, and manipulations. seriously." ROFL


Neocon distortions, misrepresentation and manipulations, SERIOUSLY?

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL x squared x infinity LOL


When you subscribe to the Gospel of "Robert Scheer and Maureen "Mislead" Dowd?" (Isn't it the CUTEST when she calls us "Bushies?") and you tell me not to employ (See Above) and then you don't answer my questions with the same "Common sense" you implore me to? Oh my brother from another mother...

That one was so "SCHEERDOWDESQUE" of you.


When you decide to practice what you preach, I'll do the same.


All your Neo(WHOA)Lib distortions, misrepresentations and manipulations (a la Ms. Dowd) are nothing more than a weak attempt to further your party's political agenda which the public just isn't buying, and that's what's killing all of you neolib's who think that "James Howard Dean" or "John (I'm using an "F" in my name now to exploit the fact that just by using that people will HOPEFULLY associate me with John F. Kennedy and then maybe on that I'll get elected) Kerry" or any other unknown, unrecognizable candidate who thinks their going to run let alone win in 2004.


This Democrat strategy is petty and flawed, but it's just part of the party's nervous breakdown. If they still had their wits about them, and were the party we thought we'd never beat back in the mid-90s, they wouldn't preach this absurd line that the WMDs never existed or that a president the American people love "lied." They'd be harping on the "incompetence of Bush in not finding the WMDs," and asking, "Where are they?" How the mighty have fallen.


And before all of you get your panties in a bunch over the prospect of "Shrillary Clinton" running and winning in 2008, pay heed to the following quote from one of your own, uber-lib "J. Bradford DeLong"


Clintonista and Berkeley economics professor J. Bradford DeLong in his latest Daily Diary column. DeLong worked with Mrs. Clinton on her 1993-94 health-care task force, and was under-whelmed. Quote: "Heading up health-care reform was the only major administrative job she has ever tried to do. And she was a complete flop at it.


"She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts to do the job she was then given. And she wasn't smart enough to realize that she was in over her head and had to get out of the Health Care Czar role quickly." So here's a guy who hates Bush and all Republicans, who worked with Hillary on health care and found her utterly incompetent. DeLong: "My two cents' worth - and I think it is the two cents' worth of everybody who worked for the Clinton Administration health care reform effort of 1993-1994 - is that Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life."


DeLong also chronicles how Hillary - typically - attacked anyone who had questions about her plan, even the Democratic senator she replaced: the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan. "So when senior members of the economic team said that key senators like Daniel Patrick Moynihan would have this-and-that objection, she told them they were disloyal. When junior members of the economic team told her that the Congressional Budget Office would say such-and-such, she told them (wrongly) that her conversations with CBO head Robert Reischauer had already fixed that. When long-time senior hill staffers told her that she was making a dreadful mistake by fighting with rather than reaching out to John Breaux and Jim Cooper, she told them that they did not understand the wave of popular political support the bill would generate. And when substantive objections were raised to the plan by analysts calculating the moral hazard and adverse selection pressures it would put on the nation's health-care system.


Hey Eric being a "Soprano's" fan, did you notice Hillary/Carmellas description of when she found out Bill/Tony was cheating on her? It's amazing. This is the scene, All the mob wives are sitting around talking about dealing with their husband's infidelity. Carmela Soprano starts out saying that Hillary shamed herself by letting Bill humiliate her, but the wife of the previous boss explains how Hillary put up with all the bulls--- on the road to her own power. Carmela ultimately decides that Mrs.

Clinton "is a role model for all of us." did you noticed how much her account of how she 'just couldn't breathe' when Bill broke the terrible truth to her is like the last show of The Sopranos this year when Carmela told Tony, 'I can't breathe.'" I had forgotten that, but it makes perfect sense.

Shrillary's poll numbers never climb higher than when she portrays herself as a victim and anything is possible with pop culture the way it is.

Just a coincidence? I know, but still.... O.K. one last comparison.


On sunday as I was watching the Godfather for the umpteenth time, when this great scene comes to mind, Diane Keaton is facing down Al Pacino with teary eyes, begging her husband to tell her whether he ordered the assassination of his sister Connie's husband. Just this once, Pacino says, he'll let her pry into his business.


"Michael, is it true?" she pleads. Summoning his best Slick Willy imitation, Pacino says, "No."


What's clear in this brilliantly directed moment is that Keaton knows Pacino is lying, but gratefully embraces him anyway. She leaves the room and watches as Pacino's disciples stoop to kiss his ring and the door closes on truth. By her denial, she has become complicit in his corruption. I guess there's no turning back now Hillary? It is now time for you to snatch the pebble from the Masters hand and leave to make your own path to corruption.


I could get into Sean Hannity's interview wth Juantia Broderick who William Jefferson Raped in "78" which aired last night on his show and the second part is tonight but I won't. LOL, it just keeps getting better!


So no matter how hard you neolib's continue to make this into a scandal on the same scale of any of William Jefferson's, FUGGETABOUTIT!


Now, on to Joey "Vizzini"


Joey, your intellect know no bounds, no bounds of self promotion. I'm sure to you that it's INCONCEIVABLE (LOL) to you that there is anyone smarter than you, and in your pseudo-humbleness you make sure everybody knows that.


You're the type of guy who if he was questioned, "You're that smart?" your reply would be "Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?" and if the answer was "Yes" you would probably say "Morons."


You must astound your students and fellow teachers daily with your mind numbing intellect. To be a fly on the wall for one of your lessons must surely be mind numbing, like drinking a Big Gulp Slurpee in 15 seconds.

It just makes me think of your poor students who I'm sure have to sit through your blatant condescending attitude towards those who you think aren't on the same intellectual level (I know I know that's Everyone) how they must feel every time they turn in an assignment knowing that they'll get the same treatment as those who you feel are intellectually inferior to you. I bet they tell each other "I wish Mr. Vizzini would just give me my grade instead of photocopying his SAT scores and Diplomas and stapling them to my paper every time we get our test's back"


I must say in my "Rage" as you say, I am impressed at your continual "Intellectual Masturbation" which you just love to showcase. And I say that with the greatest respect because I was in the mid 1100's on my SAT's (I know I know, I'M NOT WORTHY, I'M NOT WORTHY, I don't even come close to your score) but if you type slow enough, It makes it so much easier for me to understand.


You would be wise to take some lessons from Eric on how to relate to those who you feel are not as smart as you as if that was the only thing that mattered. I've known Eric for nearly 8 years now (he'll probably deny it, but I've got proof!), and there is not one of our mutual friends or anybody for that matter that knows Eric would ever say that he's ever come off as arrogant as you are for as long as they've know him (they may say he sucks as a center fielder, but that's for another day). And these are guy's who are not of the Academic Elite. These are all the guy's in the softball league who have known him throughout the years. Every day average people, you know just like the type of people who many of your students will grow up to be, you know, the one's that you see at the end of your nose? I know it's a hard concept for you to comprehend, but not everyone is cut out for a life of academic stimulation which will lead to being a teacher.


BTW, can you do me a favor? Tape one of your classes for me and give it to Eric, every now and then I don't get a full 8 hours sleep and I don't want to take any sleeping pills, so can you do that for me? Thanks Vizzini.


One last shout out to my Homie "Old Man Winters" (Brians words LOL)


I see you out there with my "Hobo Kelley" mirror just biting at the bit wanting to say something regarding all of this. C'mon, I know you want to, just one more time won't kill you, C'mon you can do it, You know you want to.. that's right, pull the keyboard closer, now find the home key's, now look at the screen, you're doing good, now slowly start hitting those key's... You know that this discussion is your "Kryptonite" C'mon Dick...







From: "Brian Day" <> 

Subject: Re: Iraqgate

Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 16:27:50 -0700


Wow. When did these discussions become such personal attacks? While there was certainly some (needed) humor in mocking Eric's skills on the Softball field amidst the recycled debate, the rant about Joe's teaching seems way out of place. Perhaps you are not aware that the long list of participants who receive these often educational, mostly entertaining, and occassionally offensive missives, is comprised mostly of students. Jack, you are setting yourself up to be blasted by kids. While (all of our) politics could be suspect, I assure you that there is a smoking gun regarding Joe's teaching skills and rapport with students. And beware that you hear from them.

Yes, you are making a point about arrogance...but unless irony is also a point that you are making...the lesson is coming from the wrong person.

Usually I pipe in only when I have something (arguably) funny to say...I leave the true debate to the guys who know, however, it seems like you are baiting Joe (and Dick) just to piss them off and get them to fight. Yes, it is hard not to respond to you, believe me, I had a thousand and one comebacks after I said goodnight re: our Laker bet, but I think the discussion should stay focused on the issue. As The Godfather's Tessio said, "Tell Michael it's not personal, only business." Or maybe I'm just a big pussy.






From: "THE KID" <

Subject: Re: Iraqgate

Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 17:08:59 -0700


Brian! Where have you been? I'll Assume (yes I know what happens when you do that) that you didn't read the last response "Vizzini" sent me regarding my intellect or lack thereof in his passive aggressive way. But I felt it was quite personal. So I felt that I should respond in kind to his Dime store psychology session with me. I had no idea that these other people were students at your school. I probably wouldn't have been so personal with him... probably. But still, that's how I felt he was being with me, so I make no apologies. Why are YOU OF ALL PEOPLE crying foul about personal attacks? He's a big boy, let him defend himself.


And as far as the Laker bet goes, I was hoping you would say something, hell even a thank you. For $25 I didn't even get my money's worth! I'm very disappointed in you. Some Liberal/American Hating/Socialist you are, how come you didn't even burn my check that had the American Flag on it?

Is there such a thing as a "Liberal/American Hating/Socialist/Capitalist?" What will your friends say? You might have to revoke your membership to the "Liberal/American Hating/Socialist/Teachers Association" the horror!


And what does your being a Big Pussy (your words) have to do with anything?

LOL Besides, Big Pussies sleep with the fishes.


Oh and Mr. Winters knows I'm not baiting him, Right Dick?






Wed, 11 Jun 2003 18:52:27 -0700 (PDT)

From:  "Eric Burgess" <> 

Subject: Re: Iraqgate


oh no he didn't just talk about my athletic skills.

but it's cool, jack, "the reason that I have to love thee doth much excuse the appertaining rage to such a greeting." just a little shakespeare for you. how's that for arrogance?


jack, why would i answer questions regarding your cleverly-chosen clinton quotes when they are completely irrelevent to the current situation.

besides the fact that your quotes are FIVE years old, there were many people that believed saddam had WMDs but only dubya started a war over the issue. clearly clinton was smart enough to demand real proof before starting a full-scale war on a third world country.

using flawed intelligence to justify an invasion just "wouldn't be prudent." clinton agreed. apparently junior failed to understand daddy's warning. where's atticus finch when we need him?


i concede saddam had WMDs. would you not also concede that it was the u.s. that was both directly and indirectly complicit in putting them in saddam's hands? as for the gassing of the kurds, this was in 1991. again, jack, living in the past. are you that fearful of facing the present? by the way, it was dubya himself who ordered hans blix and the u.n.

weapons inspectors out of iraq in order to launch his attack. this, if you remember, was amid blix's fervid protests, as he claimed again and again that the inspectors had more work to do and needed more time.

also, if you recall, blix had actually complimented the iraqis for allowing the inspectors full access to the country. if your memory fails, i understand, since fox news and your other hawkish neocon news sources probably omitted this information.


so if saddam did use those 14 months to "hide and disperse this stuff" as you assert, what better way to determine this than to send in more inspectors during a time of peace as opposed to bombing the living crap out of the country, destroying what war and sanctions-ravaged infrastructure it had, then sending in the marines as inspectors to find the weapons.

every marine that has been killed since the end of the official fighting is the responsibility of the supergenius in the white house/pentagon/cia who made this decision. julius caesar, hannibal, or napolean they are not (well, at least stategically speaking).


now jack, when you quote someone make sure it helps, not hurts, your cause. you use churchill's "Truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it; but, in the end; there it is." i agree with him but your point is...? as i have continually requested and you have mocked me for, show me the much-feared WMDs. if this happens you can then employ churchill's words again and i will retire this argument. until then....


seriously, dude, it was bad enough that your response to each of my rants was "clinton this" and "clinton that." but damn, man, now hillary? what is it with your grade school deflections? what next, chelsea? the ghost of socks the cat? if you will allow me a moment of amateur psychoanalyzing, i would venture that you are suffering a bit of "clinton envy." seriously, dude, let it go. if you are so freakin' outraged by examples of presidential abuse of power open up the paper, bro, you've got a doozy on your hands. or is it simply that you are morally outraged by clinton but your political apologies know no bounds? peace.




p.s. i won't venture to defend joe because i trust he will do a more than adequte job of it himself.





Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 20:29:10 EDT

Subject: Re: Iraqgate



       You know its one thing to talk about somebody's political ideals and standing in life, but once you cross the threshold of dissin there character then its wrong. Also considering the fact that you have probably never have met either DR. winters or MR. Vasquez it kind of makes it worse. Personally I never have had MR. Vasquez for a teacher, but from what I hear from all of my friends, Mr. Vasquez is probably one of the coolest teachers, and better qualified than most, English teachers. I mean he may not smile, and sometimes it seems like he doesn't have heart, but trust me, he is far from arrogant. Also speaking from experience, when it comes to arguing sometimes everyone tends to make the other person believe they are superior. They may come across as arrogant. Never once have I seen, or heard about, Mr. Vasquez walking up to somebody and telling them to shut the fuck up because he is superior to them. Mr. Vasquez is highly regarded by his peers as well as students. I know Dr. winters is a lot better person than to answer back to your little challenge. Besides, give the man a break. HE is finally retiring, well for a while at least, and deserves a little break before he makes the next step towards becoming a professor. Leave the poor guy alone. I mean from what I can tell, I know that you probably hate every liberal to ever walk the face of the earth and no matter what somebody tells you other wise, you will until the day you die. But that's fine with me. I don't want to say anything else, because I haven't been having the greatest of weeks, so I don't want to press my luck. I just wanted to say that you really don't have the right to bag on DR. winters and Mr. vasquez like that. That's all.






Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 16:28:13 -0700 (PDT)

From: "diana khuu" 

Subject: Re: Iraqgate


Spare me your pity, Mr. Hack - oops, Jack - because in reality, I pity you. How sad it is that you have descended into such an existence. You live in a miserable world built buy your own intolerance, apathy, and yes, arrogance.


You just missed out. Somewhere, somehow, you got lost somewhere and the place you are now is a bottomless pit that churns of fury and resentment. I have had the privilege of learning from Dr. Winters for the past semester and I do not know of a teacher who has affected me more in such a short time. He is in many ways and salvation for the freethinking minds of Rosemead. He has inspired me and many other people in my class to be better than we are, to try to become better than we could be. It is because of him that I will be entering Pomona College this fall with an interdisciplinary major in Public Policy and Economics. Unlike you with your ranting and boundless quoting of unoriginal thoughts, I am choosing to DO something that will hopefully change the world for the better. I, sir, am getting off my ass to work for what I want to happen, instead of sitting in front of the computer for hours cutting and pasting bitter diatribes that don't really say that much at all.


Yes, I'm one of those "smarties" whom you probably consider beneath your self-schooled intelligence. I'm going to an over-priced, overrated private school where everything I'll learn is uber-liberal and not very useful at all in the real world. Sorry, but furthering my education (yes, I believe in school and book-learnin') is something I consider necessary for what I want to do with my life. You're an insurance agent. I think that's great; you've established a career of which you can be proud. But I hope that I will become something other than ordinary when my time comes to contribute to the work force and economy.

Going to Pomona will help me establish the path that will lead to a position where I will have the authority to do better than the Republicans that screwed it up in the first place.


Don't knock smart people. Dr. Winters, Mr. Burgess, and Mr. Vasquez are some of the smartest people I know. Truly. And before you go on about me being a vapid rich girl who is too idealistic for her own good, know that I am not. I worked my ass to get here, and I know that I have a lot more work to do. I am the daughter of a Khmer Rouge refugee who lived in concentration camps for five years and lost eight members of her family to a war that the United States still won't officially acknowledge. I know where I come from and I am not ashamed of where I am now. Nor am I ashamed of being the very grateful students of Dr. Winters and Mr. Burgess, for they have given me the world. It is your egregious mistake to have disrespected these men in such a way. How sad that you have to show off your "obvious" superiority with insults instead of intelligent rebuttals. If you had any character (like Mr. Burgess), or humility (like Dr. Winters), or tolerance (like Mr. Vasquez), you would apologize.


Yeah, yeah. I'm young and I don't know anything.

So I'll ask from an elder some very simple questions: How many lives have you enlightened? How many young people, after having learned from you, will go on to make the world better? How many young people have you inspired lately? Multiply that number by 20 and then again by eight or 34, and you will then realized the immensity of what Dr. Winters, Mr.

Burgess, and Mr. Vasquez have done for those they have taught.


- Diana




From: "THE KID" <> 

Subject: Re: Iraqgate

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 16:59:05 -0700


Thank you Diana for proving my point about Liberal arrogance.


I hope you do make it on your path to authority to right the wrongs for all of us and that you become something other than ordinary. And I'm sure once your done reading Hillary's book, you will.


I must get back to the ordinary, thanks again!






Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 15:29:32 -0700

Subject: Re: Iraqgate

From: "Richard Winters" <> 


I'll pay no attention until you learn some Economics and some History.






From: "Brian Day" <> 


Subject: Like a fly on Godzilla's ass.

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 15:40:01 -0700


This note's just for you Eric:


We've tried logic, appealed to common sense, used humor, sarcasm, sincerity, and misdirection. Pages are filled getting us nowhere.


In one sentence "Steve" Winters just slaps the bitch down.


God, I'm gonna miss Winters.




From: "THE KID" <> 

Subject: Re: Iraqgate

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 16:59:28 -0700


LOL, Like A Moth To A Flame!


Well if you mean by "Your View" of History and Economics, then I do need to learn.


I guess people who pay no "Federal" income tax are entitled to get some of that same money they don't pay any taxes on right? I guess I'll never understand the logic of raising the taxes of those who actually pay taxes to subsidize those who don't pay federal taxes.


I'm sorry to say that I am not a disciple of Warren Buffet's and his theory on how the government would be so much better off using his plan.


I guess knowing that he's a major financial contributor to the Democratic party, and that his interview with Uber-Lib Ted Koppel on nightline a few weeks ago did nothing to sway me to your parties beliefs on the economy.


Say what you will about me, but I'm still of the belief that we should be able to keep a fair share (75 to 80 GASP! Percent) of our money that we earn by going to work instead of having 40 to 50 percent of it taken away because the government (Democrats/Liberals) feels they have a right to it (our money) and that they know how to spend it better and should be in charge of spending it?


Which I'm sure will eventually lead to (if the Democrats/Liberals ever get into power again) them being able to seize any amount of it that they want when they want, which I believe is called Socialism, which is otherwise called "Progressive Government."


Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.

-- Thomas Sowell


But I guess all your knowledge in economics and history tell you otherwise right?


So as soon as I "Learn some Economics and History" I'll let you know so that you can tell me that I'm still wrong?


Take care "REW" and Best Wishes for your upcoming retirement.






Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 19:14:18 -0700 (PDT)

From:  "Joseph Vasquez" <> 

Subject: watergate


kid, i will once again concede something that i, and many of us who choose to respond to you rather than bite our tongues, have conceded: clinton is not a good man.

he lied. he cheated. he got things wrong. ok? now, let's look at the business of the suffix "-gate." it comes from the name of a hotel in washington, d.c.

that was the center of a scandal. the current useage of "-gate" to change any normal word into a "watergate" style affair has been adopted by many.

speaking of nixon, i find it ironic that a man who spent much of his life cursing liberals and elites now enjoys a place at the alter. before he died he became an elder statesman of sorts. the so-called liberal media hailed him, and even oliver stone celebrated him. i won't. his pride, his arrogance, led to secret wars that were supposed to protect america from the evil soviet empire. who protected those effected by those wars? speaking of cold warriors, reagan also thought it wise to fund semi-secret wars. look at all the good that has come out of afghanistan. he also saw fit to run huge deficits and allow american companies to move to other countries to improve profit margins.

gee, unchecked capitalism is a great thing. i'm so glad to see that pride and arrogance is a flaw of only the uber-liberals. speaking of arrogance, i heard, i believe last week, that defense sec rumi believes that saddam may have destroyed his wmds before the war. if this is true, does that mean that we went to war to disarm a country that had disarmed itself? hmmm . . .

did our government lie to us? of course not. if no wmds are found, it's obvious who is to blame: the cia.

good ole w went on their evidence. so we sack a few people in the agency and move on to iran. as we run across the world, liberating people, let us hope that they do not use their new found freedom to return the favor. what do you think of that, jack? what do you have to say about the issues i've raised? anything beyond the fact that i look down my nose at the common man? anything besides the fact that i am deluded and living a dream that will never come true because right minded individuals such as yourself will keep this nation from going adrift? you know, when i critiqued christianty, i was hoping, again, for a discussion of ideas, not to offend you. for someone who loves telling people that they can't take as well as they receive . . . eh, nevermind. i have never met you jack. i'm sure you're a pleasant man. but when i respond, i respond to what you write. please do the same. if you want to settle this over an armwrestling match, that can also be arranged, though it still wouldn't prove whose opinion is more valid. maybe we should have a duel. pistols? that way, it'd be clear who was right. geez louise, kid, when i first started reading this it was because eric called it an interesting debate. i began responding because i thought it would be interesting to bounce ideas back and forth. so let's do that, let's bounce. stop telling our students that they are deluded. if you are in possession of facts that may enlighten them, share them. don't be another michael savage or bill o'reily or sean hannity or phil donahue. they just spout out party line gibberish. they entertain through spectacle. don't we need some substance too? respond to something i've written, jack. cause in the end, that's all you really know about me. you could respond by saying that i overgeneralize when analyzing your messages, but do i? maybe. i'll try not to do that anymore. see ya all next tuesday.


p.s. socrates, plato, aristotle? brilliant.