NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/alt/fan/rushlim/13773

Text File | 1993-01-25 | 4.0 KB | 80 lines

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Path: sparky!uunet!stanford.edu!EE.Stanford.EDU!playfair.Stanford.EDU!budd
From: [e-mail] (David Budd)
Subject: Re: Inherant characteristics of inanimate objects
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Usenet)
Organization: Stanford University
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 08:39:44 GMT
Lines: 67

In article <[e-mail]> Mark 'Mark' Sachs <[e-mail]> writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>(David Budd) says:
>>Reagan wasted tons of money, huh? Like spending millions to have
>>the 411-phone info line for the district of columbia moved
>>to west virginia? oops. sorry, that was Senator Byrd... Like having
>>money appropriated for a Lawrence Welk museum in North Dakota? oops.
>>it was the profligate congress again.. sorry.
>>our cities went straight to hell because of reagan, huh? yup. he tacitly
>>encouraged drug use when he was caught smoking crack in a d.c. hotel.
>>wrong again... that was marion barry.
>>boy, that damned reagan. what a mess he made.
>
>Yup. You got it.
>
>Our destroyed cities aren't the fault of corruption in HUD, massive
>social cutbacks, and generally insane redistribution of wealth upwards...
>they're the fault of Marion Barry. By the mere act of smoking crack in
>a hotel room, he singlehandedly caused all the problems of poverty,
>drug addiction, and homelessness.
>
No. Our destroyed cities aren't the fault of corruption in HUD. We reap
what we sow. Cities, with their corrupt local govts, political
infighting, and general inefficiency, to name a few things,
have forced out sources of capital. People, afraid of rising crime,
atrocious schools, and other ham-handed tactics have fled
the cities, leaving them with a burgeoning need and a shrinking
tax base.
As for social cutbacks, I suppose that it is the responsibility
of the middle class to take care of the poor? Nice pie-in the sky, but
I think not. And, as for "insane redistribution of wealth" upwards,
what are you talking about? That Pres. Reagan allowed people to
keep more of what was rightfully theirs to begin with is insane? Read
Jefferson. No. Marion Barry did NOT cause these problems, but, as a "leader"
of the urban poor, whom are urban youth more likely to look up to
and emulate? President Reagan or Barry?

>Our $4 trillion national debt isn't the fault of gigantic increases in
>spending for useless weapons, simultaneous tax cuts, and totally demented
>back-of-the-napkin economic policy; it's because of that damned Lawrence
>Welk museum. If we hadn't built that museum, we'd have $4 trillion in the
>bank, right now, this instant.

I agree that the defence spending is culpable, and was overdone. But this
is hardly the only source of the bloated debt. Spending ,must be cut. But, not
only from the defence.. And, taxes were reduced to, although still
unfair levels, more equitable than they had been. Again, the Lawrence Welk
museum is not totally to blame. It is just a drop in the bucket. But.
With many drops, the bucket fills up pretty fast.


>Yes, it makes PERFECT sense.
>
>HIDDEN MESSAGE: Don't sweat the small stuff.
>
Non-hidden, completely obvious message: When you say the apple dumpling
gang (our leaders in washington) rides again, president reagan
was not alone leading the charge. the (democratic) congress must
share at least equally in the blame, which is something liberal
democrats neglect to mention in their virtiolic diatribes against the
Gipper.

--
 !         \                                                                    !      1------1
 !\     1______1            __1__     "And my mind was filled with wonder,
 ! \    1______1      /   ____1____    when the evening headlines read:
 !      !   \        / /  1__|_|__1    'Richard Cory went home last night,