On 3/23/2015 5:20 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 15:02:08 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



All depends on who is the replacement. I don't see Hillary as having
what it takes. She'll be too busy ducking answers to questions and
asking why we don't simply respect the fact that she's the first woman
president.


If this was not such a corrupt government and so many scams going on,
I would suggest a 20 cent hike in the gasoline tax that went for
absolutely NOTHING BUT fixing roads and bridges.
The thing that prevents me form being serious about it, is how badly
the government is in spending money like this on what they were
supposed to be collecting it for.
In states like Florida, it would actually go into the roads but up
north, where they really need infrastructure improvements, the money
gets siphoned off into totally unrelated programs.
That is why Florida only has around 2% of their bridges in trouble and
that is up in the double digits in California, New York and the North
East states.


All true but you don't have a climate that requires salt, sand and snow
plows that destroys the roadways and rots the bridges.

wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:08:31 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 3/23/15 5:01 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 14:25:19 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 3/23/15 12:57 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:16:46 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 3/23/15 11:50 AM, wrote:


Did you ever listen to Gary Johnson?


Yup. Perfectly decent guy. He'd have a chance running for the Democratic
nomination and presidency, but as a Libertarian nominee, he's never
going to get elected, and the Repugnants would never nominate him.

That is the problem with the two party system. If you don't fit into
their category exactly, you are out.
Johnson could run as a democrat in New Mexico or Montana but he
wouldn't stand a chance on either coast ... in either party.
He is too liberal for the republicans and to conservative for the
democrats.

It leaves people like me who are socially liberal and fiscally
conservative with no place to go.


Sure, a lib could win a statewide race or even a congressional district
rate but I don't see anything more than a "spoiler" against the total
vote in a national race. In a parliamentary system, which we don't have,
the lib party might do ok.

The biggest problem libertarians have is they do not draw the
corporate bribe money the Ds and Rs get because part of their fiscal
policy is cutting the corporate welfare from the government.


That may be *a* problem libertarians have, but I don't believe it is
*the* problem.

*The* problem, in my opinion, is that any number of libertarian
candidates for high office are crackpots and therefore in the minds of
the average voters, the libertarian party and its candidates are mostly
crackpots.

The GOP, of course, is also infested with crackpots, but on the national
ticket, they typically do not pick one as the standard bearer except, of
course, in 2008, when MooseMama made it onto the ticket.

Unfortunately you define a crackpot as anyone who disagrees with your
opinion on anything.
I can't think of a bigger crackpot than Al Gore and he is a hero of
yours.

And as usual you are wrong. On both counts.
--
Sent from my iPhone 6+

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:08:31 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

*The* problem, in my opinion, is that any number of libertarian
candidates for high office are crackpots and therefore in the minds of
the average voters, the libertarian party and its candidates are mostly
crackpots.

The GOP, of course, is also infested with crackpots, but on the national
ticket, they typically do not pick one as the standard bearer except, of
course, in 2008, when MooseMama made it onto the ticket.

Unfortunately you define a crackpot as anyone who disagrees with your
opinion on anything.
I can't think of a bigger crackpot than Al Gore and he is a hero of
yours.

The voters define crackpots. That's why loonitarians do so poorly.
They are normally millionaires, and they look out for millionaires.
Cutting SS, Medicare and Medicaid in half won't fly.
When voters agree to that - is when hell freezes over.
I don't know why the loonies don't understand that.

John H. wrote:
On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 08:43:01 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 3/22/2015 8:32 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...is about to start:

"Sen. Ted Cruz plans to announce Monday that he will run for president
of the United States, accelerating his already rapid three-year rise
from a tea party insurgent in Texas into a divisive political force in
Washington."

That would be the Teabagger Derby, of course, in which a plethora of
really crazy Republicans affiliated with the Teabagger Party, announce
they are running for POTUS.

Who will be next after Ted? Michele Bachmann? The $9.99 Pizza Guy? The
Newties?

Should be fun to watch.


Remember Harry. Even *you* could run if you wanted to.

He'd best drop a few pounds first.


And pay his taxes.

wrote:
On 23 Mar 2015 23:22:06 GMT, Keyser Söze wrote:

wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:08:31 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:



Unfortunately you define a crackpot as anyone who disagrees with your
opinion on anything.
I can't think of a bigger crackpot than Al Gore and he is a hero of
yours.

And as usual you are wrong. On both counts.

Since everyone you disagree with is called some kind of name I let the
first statement stand on it's own merits and if you don't think a guy
who makes his living selling "carbon credits" generated by south
american governments that have no control of the trees they are
selling, is a crack pot, you need to work on your definition of the
word

Your first statement is bull****. I don't think Gore is a crackpot. He's
not a hero of mine though I do believe our country and the world would be a
lot better off if the Bush family and the Supremes hadn't stolen the 2000
election. You really don't get much right with your pronouncements about
posters here.
--
Sent from my iPhone 6+

On 3/23/2015 8:29 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:38:20 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 3/23/15 5:20 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 15:02:08 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



All depends on who is the replacement. I don't see Hillary as having
what it takes. She'll be too busy ducking answers to questions and
asking why we don't simply respect the fact that she's the first woman
president.


If this was not such a corrupt government and so many scams going on,
I would suggest a 20 cent hike in the gasoline tax that went for
absolutely NOTHING BUT fixing roads and bridges.
The thing that prevents me form being serious about it, is how badly
the government is in spending money like this on what they were
supposed to be collecting it for.
In states like Florida, it would actually go into the roads but up
north, where they really need infrastructure improvements, the money
gets siphoned off into totally unrelated programs.
That is why Florida only has around 2% of their bridges in trouble and
that is up in the double digits in California, New York and the North
East states.


Wrong. The reason is that Florida doesn't have a freeze-thaw cycle that
lasts half the year, it seems, as the northeast states do. *That* and
the salt are the killers of road infrastructure.

There is plenty of salt here. Most of the bridges go over salt water.
Freeze thaw can be an issue but not if the road is properly
engineered.
Usually frost heaves are when they did a quicky patch last time.
Water gets under the patch and blows it out when it freezes.

It is still undeniable that the places with the biggest road and
bridge problems have diverted road building money to other things like
trains people won't ride or simply to patch other holes in their
budget instead of patching holes in the bridge.



I doubt very much that the bridges in Florida are subjected to the
amount of salt corrosion that the bridges up here are subjected to.
Down there you get plenty of rain that rinses any salt spray that wind
might deposit on them. Up here the salting starts with the first
freezing sleet or snow and continues all winter. It's only swept up
in the spring.

My neighbor has a very large front yard. It used to be a big hay field
but over the years he's been mowing it, weeding it and developing a nice
looking lawn. Each spring however there are huge boulders "growing" in
the lawn that weren't there the previous fall. Some are
huge... weighing over 1200lbs. I know that because I help him dig them
out with the back hoe on my tractor and then try to pick them up with
the bucket. It's rated to lift 1200 lbs. Some I couldn't pick up and
had to push them off into the woods.

They aren't "growing". When the ground freezes each winter they are
slowly pushed upward until they break the surface and continue to "grow"
each winter until we dig them out.

On 3/23/2015 8:44 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
wrote:
On 23 Mar 2015 23:22:06 GMT, Keyser Söze wrote:

wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:08:31 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:



Unfortunately you define a crackpot as anyone who disagrees with your
opinion on anything.
I can't think of a bigger crackpot than Al Gore and he is a hero of
yours.

And as usual you are wrong. On both counts.

Since everyone you disagree with is called some kind of name I let the
first statement stand on it's own merits and if you don't think a guy
who makes his living selling "carbon credits" generated by south
american governments that have no control of the trees they are
selling, is a crack pot, you need to work on your definition of the
word

Your first statement is bull****. I don't think Gore is a crackpot. He's
not a hero of mine though I do believe our country and the world would be a
lot better off if the Bush family and the Supremes hadn't stolen the 2000
election. You really don't get much right with your pronouncements about
posters here.



Here. Now you can relax.

http://www.theglobaledition.com/breaking-news-florida-finishes-counting-votes-al-gore-wins/

On 3/23/15 9:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/23/2015 8:44 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
wrote:
On 23 Mar 2015 23:22:06 GMT, Keyser Söze wrote:

wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:08:31 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:



Unfortunately you define a crackpot as anyone who disagrees with your
opinion on anything.
I can't think of a bigger crackpot than Al Gore and he is a hero of
yours.

And as usual you are wrong. On both counts.

Since everyone you disagree with is called some kind of name I let the
first statement stand on it's own merits and if you don't think a guy
who makes his living selling "carbon credits" generated by south
american governments that have no control of the trees they are
selling, is a crack pot, you need to work on your definition of the
word

Your first statement is bull****. I don't think Gore is a crackpot. He's
not a hero of mine though I do believe our country and the world would
be a
lot better off if the Bush family and the Supremes hadn't stolen the 2000
election. You really don't get much right with your pronouncements about
posters here.



Here. Now you can relax.

http://www.theglobaledition.com/breaking-news-florida-finishes-counting-votes-al-gore-wins/



Terrific! Al won, 9-11 didn't happen, we didn't go to war against Iraq
and Afghanistan, and the economy didn't tank. Whew...what a relief.

--
Proud to be a Liberal.

On 3/23/2015 9:33 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/23/15 9:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/23/2015 8:44 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
wrote:
On 23 Mar 2015 23:22:06 GMT, Keyser Söze wrote:

wrote:
On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:08:31 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:



Unfortunately you define a crackpot as anyone who disagrees with your
opinion on anything.
I can't think of a bigger crackpot than Al Gore and he is a hero of
yours.

And as usual you are wrong. On both counts.

Since everyone you disagree with is called some kind of name I let the
first statement stand on it's own merits and if you don't think a guy
who makes his living selling "carbon credits" generated by south
american governments that have no control of the trees they are
selling, is a crack pot, you need to work on your definition of the
word

Your first statement is bull****. I don't think Gore is a crackpot. He's
not a hero of mine though I do believe our country and the world would
be a
lot better off if the Bush family and the Supremes hadn't stolen the
2000
election. You really don't get much right with your pronouncements about
posters here.



Here. Now you can relax.

http://www.theglobaledition.com/breaking-news-florida-finishes-counting-votes-al-gore-wins/




Terrific! Al won, 9-11 didn't happen, we didn't go to war against Iraq
and Afghanistan, and the economy didn't tank. Whew...what a relief.


Unfortunately, the 9-11 attack was conceived in 1995 in the middle of
the Clinton/Gore administration. bin Laden learned of the plan and
issued a fatwa in 1996 calling for the American troop removal from Saudi
Arabia and another fatwa in 1998 declaring war on all Americans.
Again ... Clinton/Gore administration.

In 1998 the CIA reported to Clinton that an attack involving the
hijacking of commercial airplanes was being planned. Clinton/Gore
administration.

There's no reason to believe that 9-11 wouldn't have happened under a
Gore presidency. What would have happened afterwards is pure conjecture
except for the economy tanking. That also was well underway,
regardless of who was president and some of the policies of the Clinton
administration and his Democratic partners contributed to it.

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 18:51:04 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:08:31 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

*The* problem, in my opinion, is that any number of libertarian
candidates for high office are crackpots and therefore in the minds of
the average voters, the libertarian party and its candidates are mostly
crackpots.

The GOP, of course, is also infested with crackpots, but on the national
ticket, they typically do not pick one as the standard bearer except, of
course, in 2008, when MooseMama made it onto the ticket.

Unfortunately you define a crackpot as anyone who disagrees with your
opinion on anything.
I can't think of a bigger crackpot than Al Gore and he is a hero of
yours.

The voters define crackpots. That's why loonitarians do so poorly.
They are normally millionaires, and they look out for millionaires.
Cutting SS, Medicare and Medicaid in half won't fly.
When voters agree to that - is when hell freezes over.
I don't know why the loonies don't understand that.

Who, in national politics, is not a millionaire. If they aren't the
first time they are elected, they become one pretty quickly.

I understand doing anything to medicare and SS are the 3d rail of
politics but it is doomed by demographics and it is destined to fall
from it's own weight and it is probably too late to do much of
anything about it. There is no amount of taxation that would fix it.
When you have 2 workers per retiree and each retiree is getting more
money than either of the workers makes (SS plus medical care) , it
can't go on.
Medicare has been upside down for well over a decade and SS has been
upside down for years itself.
Entitlements eat EVERY DIME of revenue and we borrow everything else,
including defense. How is that sustainable?

Who is the crackpot, the guy who points that out or the one who says
everything is fine?

You're overwrought. It's nothing a little tinkering won't fix.
I won't tell you how, because you chose not to believe it.
But that's your choice.