Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cholula.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!zehntel!hplabs!tektronix!uw-beaver!teltone!tikal!cholula!tac From: tac@cholula.UUCP Newsgroups: net.flame Subject: Re: Character attacks on Ronald Reagan Message-ID: <11@cholula.UUCP> Date: Thu, 23-Aug-84 15:32:44 EDT Article-I.D.: cholula.11 Posted: Thu Aug 23 15:32:44 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 25-Aug-84 07:16:22 EDT References: <801@ihuxn.UUCP>, <1109@hou4b.UUCP>, <965@pyuxa.UUCP> <1156@ihuxq.UUCP> Organization: Teltone Corp., Kirkland, WA Lines: 90 , (sop to the blank line eaters--consider it a religious sacrifice) >> -- >> >> Ron also promised to cut inflation and to bring down interest rates. >> >> Two out of three ain't too bad. Which one hurts you the most, inflation, >> >> interest rates, or the deficit? Now if Congress will see the light, even >> >> >> the deficit will dry up. >> >> T. C Wheeler >> >> What is this Pavlovian conditioning? Reagan in office, economy gets >> better, ergo Reagan improved the economy. Just like rats in a Skinner >> box, we get our reward, so we keep pushing the lever. Clever us. >> >> Reagan has shown he knows nothing about how the economy works (indeed, >> few presidents ever have). The Democrats may tax & tax, spend & spend, >> but that contains the implicit realization that it has to come from >> somewhere. Reagan simply spends & spends. >> >> If you must vote for the man, vote for him for what he *IS* responsible >> for: policies on foreign affairs in general, Central America in >> particular, nuclear arms, the environment, abortion, school prayer, >> state's rights, women's rights. Because those issues are what he *CAN >> AND WILL* do something about. As for the economy, "Dat ol' man river, >> he jus' keep rollin' along." >> >> For the record, I have about equal contempt for both the Republican >> and Democratic parties and policies. In fact, I have never in my >> almost 36 years voted for a major party candidate. But God help me, >> I'm about to. >> -- >> *** *** >> JE MAINTIENDRAI ***** ***** >> ****** ****** 21 Aug 84 [4 Fructidor An CXCII] >> ken perlow ***** ***** >> (312)979-7261 ** ** ** ** >> ..ihnp4!ihuxq!ken *** *** It does sound like pavlovian conditioning, now that you mention it. I am not sure what sort of blindness allows you to consider that the alternatives would not spend even more though. Lord help us all if we elect Mondale and he treats the soviets as he is currently behaving towards Reagan! This assinine round of "You're going to do this!" "I am not!" is childish in the least, and aggravating to all who have to listen. If, however, Modale got elected and talked like that to Chernenco (sp?) we would be at war tommorrow! All those who think a Soviet leader can afford to let an American President call him a liar in the world press, mail $20,000,000,000.00 to the address below. If you want to vote for the man for what he is responsible for, THINK about that. I do not support all (or even nearly all) of the current administration's foreign policy decisions, but the dealings between the US and the Soviets, at present, is definitly supportable. The Soviets want us to agree to talk only about an area of technology and warfare where we are head and shoulders ahead of them. If we don't agree to limit the talks to this area, they will not come to the bargaining table. To do other than what RR has done would be to enter a no-win situation which could conceibably cost us allies. We could gain nothing from any agreement that the USSR could make at such talks, and if we fail to agree to something, the entire world sees us as the "bad guys" who wouldn't bargain. They would never agree to treaty talks limited to SS-20 missiles, why should we agree to talks limited to weapons only we are capable of? Negotiation is a give and take situation. If we are the only ones who can give and they are the only ones who can take, why should we bother? As to spending, Ken, I am amazed at you! A marcher from the sixties who doesn't believe that we can change the world with a little trying? If we all write our congresspersons and tell them that they will have to find a more efficeint way of doing things (i.e. cut both taxes and spending) or they will have to find a new job, then we may get somewhere on this issue. We have become a "gi'me" society. We don't want to get rid of our senior senators and representatives (deliberatly UN-capitolized [sp]) because they can get more goodies of the federal budget for us! THERE AIN'T NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH! You (yes, you Mr. & Mrs. America) pay for each and every thing you get from the government. You pay MORE because of the extra layer of overhead in having the Feds filter the money first. If you kept that money closer to home you would have more controls and less siphons on it! WAKE UP, AMERICA, QUIT SPENDING IN CONGRESS! From the Soapbox of Tom Condon {...!uw-beaver!teltone!teldata!tac} A Radical A Day Keeps The Government At Bay. There haven't been near enough of us of late. DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed herein are those of everyone who matters, but not necessarily anyone you know, and most certainly not my employers!