--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F2P00002 Date: 02/18/98 From: MARK FORNOFF Time: 06:44pm \/To: TOM ENRIGHT (Read 0 times) Subj: A new theory Tom Enright wrote in a message to Mark Fornoff: JS> Thomas Sowell in his syndicated column has stated that the ONLY JS> person who benefits from all these leaks is William Jefferson JS> Clinton. No one else and most certainly not Kenneth Starr. JS> Comments? MF> Hard to argue with this one. How do you like the real life version of MF> "Wag the Dog" going on in Washington? TE> The scary part is that Billy-Bob is going ahead with it anyway. TE> This clown really doesn't care what anyone thinks. He's totally TE> convinced that he is the "anointed one." I can't argue. He may know that payback is a ....., but he's convinced "It's never happen to me." -- Mark ... A hundred thousand lemmings can't all be wrong. --- FMailX32 1.22 * Origin: Moderator, LIMBAUGH (1:260/180) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F2P00003 Date: 02/18/98 From: TOM GOODMAN Time: 03:33am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: California Hispanics & LA Coliseum Socce03:33:5102/18/98 Please note. This post is not intended to anger, incite or insult anyone. However, the events described did happen and were reported briefly but was suddenly squelched. Only local sports talk shows carried dialogue from the "sports" talk station & callers. ---------------------------------------------------------------- U.S. / Mexico Soccer or Mexican Hatred! In a recent soccer game between the U.S. team and Mexico in the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, hispanics became downright ugly, for when the U.S. National Anthem was played over the PA, practically 90% (or 90,000) of the hispanics booed to a point of near drowning out the National Anthem! Such behavior at best is poor sportsmanlike conduct. In addition, > urine bombs < were thrown at the American players. Other American Soccer fans were hit by full and empty beer cans, coins and trash. This was just in the beginning. As an insult to injury; poor taste and anti-American sentiment was evident and the Mexican flag was displayed in the crowd. One can expect some crappy behavior on the part of a few drunks, but this mass of people sends a signal. As I remember, we underwent a battle in the Dornan / Sanchez race. I personally witnessed her tactics as 2 of their spanish speaking supporters jumped from a car and trashed and stole Dornan signs from my front yard, just 8 feet from the sidewalk. That's a violation of Cal Penal 602PC, felony trespass. The police did nothing again at that time. In light of the committee rejection of the case against Sanchez & supporters in campaign illegalities, a very clear signal was sent out that it was OK to trash American Rights, and now it is OK to be disrespectful of the American Flag and our National Anthem. This to me is intolerable. Add to this the possible transfer of diseases via the bodily elimination of the people of foreign allegiance. When my own family came over from Europe and England through Ellis Island and elsewhere, the allegiance to former countries of origin ceased and our family has been loyal to death for the United States of America. I just happen to be the last living male member of my family in my generation. This because most of our men died fighting for the US. As someone previously noted, when the Hispanic immigrates were asked as to whether they would serve in the armed forces in a time of National emergencies, their response was that they would go back to Mexico. This is just dandy. Shalom & Maranatha TG ...... a sovereign nation of many sovereign states? I wonder. I feel that if you live here and partake of the system, you must either respect the country or get the heck out!!!!!!! (snarl) --- Aeolus v1.2.1 (#49820837) * Origin: Shofar@714-838-3837 Right-Minded in Orange County (1:103/505) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F2P00004 Date: 02/18/98 From: MIKE ANGWIN Time: 08:25am \/To: ROBERT PLETT (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: useless test? RP>On 02-16-98, MIKE ANGWIN declared to JEAN HALVERSON: MA>In the fifties and early sixties my parents rarely became involved in MA>my homework, RP>Nor did mine. In fact, I cannot remember a single instance they ever RP>did, nor did they ever ask whether I was keeping homework current. It RP>was my personal responsibility to learn on my own and expected that I d RP>well. To do otherwise meant failing the family as well as myself, and RP>failing the family was simply out of the question. I think it worth RP>noting that, near as I can determine anyway, most Asian students do it RP>all on their own also, from similar motivations. And schools, in those days, did a relatively good job compared to the schools of today. Yet we all the time that the failures of public education are not a product of centralization, or of administration, or of educators, or of union influences, or of esoteric learning systems. The failures, we are told, are because of parents. We pay more than we have ever paid, we send our children to school more days than they have ever gone, we spend more hours working with them on homework than ever before, and we darn sure fill out more forms and paperwork than any generation before us, but despite all of this, it's parents that are why Johnny can't read. Sooner or later people are going to have to realize that socialized education is failing because it's socialized. It's that simple. /\/\ike --- RBBSMail/386 v0.997 * Origin: (713) 664-0002 Lightspeed Systems - 24hrs (1:106/7.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F2P00005 Date: 02/18/98 From: MIKE ANGWIN Time: 08:46am \/To: JOANNE JOHNSON (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: California and Hispanics JJ>Illegals lie a lot. They know they can get away with it. A man is declared illegal by virtue of his very existance, hunted like an animal, subject to immediate arrest and deportation without trial, without contacting his family, and without recovering his personal belongings, he is denied a diver's license, he is prohibited from earning a living legally, he is subjected to unimaginable bias and scorn... I am remined of those who aided escaping slaves along the underground railroad talking to those given the task of returning them to their owners. I can well imagine such words being said. JJ>We are the *safety valve* for all over populated countries in the JJ>world. :-( Actually many of the immigrants comming to the Untied States are comming from nations, such as Honduras, with a lower population density than our own. Over population is not the prime motive. The prime motive is to find work and to build a life for oneself and one's family. There are many situations where employment in those nations simply is not available and bright young men and women witht he same dreams of a future you and I have flee their homelands in search of those dreams. We have allowed ourselves to become transfixed on immigration as a problem when, in fact, it is really an ecconomic boom to this nation. Social liberals have convinced many of us that their vast social programs are being abused by immigrants and that if we spend billions of dollars sealing our borders their idealistic programs will suddenly become functional. This is untrue. These programs are flawed at their foundations and no matter what we spend, nomatter how many of our traditional values we turn our backs on, these programs are di\oomed to perpetual failure. Rather than spending billions of dollars in a hopeless attempt to preserve the integrity of these programs by the militarization of south Texas and other areas of the frontier, we should be concentrating our efforts on dismanteling the programs themselves. Then, those that come, can come, work, and contribute to building a stronger and healthier nation. We can give others opportunities that our immigrant ancestors enjoyed, preserve our tradition of being an island of liberty in a sea of servitude, and all be much better off all at the same time for less money and with less government. Mike Angwin --- RBBSMail/386 v0.997 * Origin: (713) 664-0002 Lightspeed Systems - 24hrs (1:106/7.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F2P00006 Date: 02/18/98 From: MIKE ANGWIN Time: 09:20am \/To: ROY J. TELLASON (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: Libertarian Party RJ>I don't see this happening. What strikes me as being far more likely i RJ>that we'll end up with those schools that accept vouchers being subject RJ>more controls than what they have to deal with now, and a push overall RJ>towards the kind of mediocrity that we're trying to get away from. Ah but the power of the private sector may be being underestimated here. Under the present system of direct control and operation of schools government influence is everything. If we went to a competitive voucher system little schools would sping up all over the place and the sheer number would defy such tight control by government. Somehow, we have to find a menas to extract government from education. It's like cutting out a cancer that has spead throught he entire body, but if the patient is to survive it has to be removed. RJ>I don't see this scenario as being at all likely. What way do you see RJ>persuade (if not compel) governments at all sorts of local levels to go RJ>this approach when they're now used to supporting schools from *all* RJ>taxpayers? Unlike most Libertarians I am not opposed to the concept of universal support for education. We were all, at one time or another, given the benifit of an education ourselves and we all, directly or indirectly, benifit greatly from having an educated population. Still, we need to develope a means by which we can all contribute to the education of future generations without submitting to government control of education as a characteristic of that means. Somehow we need o develope and implement a doctrine of separation between education and state, a formidable task. RJ>The point is, we're looking at a situation where they're taking money RJ>a *large* group of people, and expecting them to cut that back to only RJ>taking money from those who are directly benefiting from the situation RJ>the parents. I don't see this as being at all likely because it goes RJ>counter to the general trend in the way that government at all level li RJ>to do things, spreading the pain across all of the citizens until they RJ>feel it much. I think it a bit idealistic to assume that parents themselves can, or should, bear the full weight of the cost of their children's educations. Philosophically, of course, that would be the perfect solution, but in practical terms I just do not see this as a feasible option. The result, if we did this, would be millions of children obtaining no education at all and the long term social ramifications, which would be increasing crime, lack of skilled workers, deepening social divisions, and potentially destabilization of the democratic process itself would be self destructive costing us far, far, more than we could hope to gain. We generally agree we have a shared responsibility for defense becuase we all mutually benifit from being able to defend ourselves from foreign agression. We generally agree that we have a shared rsponsibility for law enforcement, a judicial system, and a penal system, because we all mutually benifit from removal of threats to our own safety. I also believe we have a shared responsibility for the education of all of our young because we all mutually benifit from a skilled workforce and a stable democratic process. MA> In Texas, for instance, Washington has taken over control of MA> our prison system because we made it self-sufficient and felt MA> prisoners ought work to support the costs of their MA> incarceration. Washington disagreed and a federal judge now has MA> to approve everything we do, an intolerable situation but one MA> we must now live with. Nevertheless, if we being to make MA> positive changes in education on a local or a state level, we MA> can almost be certian we will face federal intevention. RJ>This is not a good thing. No, it is not a good thing, but it does demonstrate the degree of intervention that Washington is willing to deploy to prevent states from exercising the rights accorded them by the Constitution. Any good federal laywer will tell you point blank, state's rights died with the Civil War. Welcome to federalism. MA> Still I thing we have to try and the only way to compel MA> government to loosen it's control of education is to generate MA> popular support for an alternative program such as a voucher MA> system. If the people of a state desire something, it can be MA> accomplished. The only question is how far Washington will go MA> to suppress their will. RJ>"Compel government" is an interesting pair of words. In a democratic society, given ample support for a proposition, government can be compelled to act. It may, as in the case of the Viet-Nam War, require things to go to the point where we are tottering on the edge of open revolution before government is willing to react, but we can compel this government to act. It merely takes a strong enough desire on the part of the electorate to so compel it. RJ>Worse yet, in some instances, is stuff like what we have around here. RJ>addition to the usual patchwork of local governments we also have schoo RJ>districts that appear to have equal taxing authority, local taxes are RJ>almost equaled if not exceeded by the assessments from those guys... : And most of these base their taxes on property, which is a VERY bad way to tax people. I still like the idea of a sales tax as the only form of tax allowed any governmental jurisdiction. That way, each time we purchase something, we can see a breakdown fo the real cost of government. Ideally, if a voucher system wer to be implemented, I would prefer funding here to be doing via a statewide sales tax, not a property tax. I find all taxes to be offensive, but if I am going to be taxed, I want it out in the open so I can see exactly what I am being asked to pay. MA> We've suffered another setback to local control of MA> education, via the federal courts, here in Texas. At presnet MA> local school districts are responsible for generating their own MA> tax rates and funding education with their districts. MA> Washington looked at Texas and decided this system was unfair MA> to poorer areas of the state, intervened, and demanded we more MA> equally distribute funding. RJ>Oh yeah, things have to be "fair"... :-( You know there is something to the doctrine of fairness, but there is also something to allowing an individual school district, if such districts are allowed to continue to exist, to place more emphasis and a larger invenstment into the education of the young in a specific area. Consider for a moment, if you will, particular community and parental needs. Does a west Texas, agriculturally based community, with a school district, honestly have the same practical needs and educational requirements than the community around NASA and the Johnston Spacecraft Center have? Children often follow int he footsteps of their parents and be this a genetic or enviromental trait, it is nevertheless a fact of life. With standardized, centrally controlled education, we end up teaching cattle ranchers children calculus and physicists children how to castrate calves. Like it or not, there are regional and community needs that if neglected only disseerve the educations of our young. Centralized educational control and standardization of cirriculums, mostly transfixed on urban areas, bypasses these local needs. RJ>I think that the same could be said about the feds interfering in RJ>*anything*, when you get down to it... So very true... /\/\ike --- RBBSMail/386 v0.997 * Origin: (713) 664-0002 Lightspeed Systems - 24hrs (1:106/7.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F2P00007 Date: 02/18/98 From: MIKE ANGWIN Time: 09:25am \/To: ROY J. TELLASON (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: Tobacco Settlement RJ>I think that those who are running for office are going to ignore tough RJ>questions and latch on to those things that are going to make a "feel g RJ>kind of impression on the voters, as in "See what I'm doing (or would RJ>to be doing) for YOU" kind of stuff. I won't. I'll be in debates and I'll be talking before large groups of people. I fully intend to raise these questions and these issues. I can't force Republicans and Democrats to respond, but I can sure as heck put the questions on the table before the voters. RJ>I was in a conversation last night about a bunch of other issues, and RJ>they're doing exactly the same sort of thing here in PA, with regard t RJ>Workman's Comp. If you work for a company that uses it (and most do), RJ>_don't_ have the right to sue them if you're covered by WC in that RJ>particular situation... In Texas, you can't sue to recover costs of care since those costs are covered under Workman's Compensation Insurance, but, if you have a case of willful negligence or other just cause, you can sue for punitative damages. /\/\ike --- RBBSMail/386 v0.997 * Origin: (713) 664-0002 Lightspeed Systems - 24hrs (1:106/7.0) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F2P00008 Date: 02/18/98 From: R.ANDREW HOOTON I Time: 12:57pm \/To: TOM ENRIGHT (Read 0 times) Subj: Liars 2/2 TE> On 02-13-98, R.ANDREW HOOTON I declared to ALL: TE> TE> TE> The problem with Clinton is not only that he lies; it is that TE>he TE> TE> makes liars out of everybody else. The problem is not only TE>that TE> TE> his moral standards are low; it is that he requires that TE> TE> everybody else lower theirs to meet his. By the time he is TE> TE> finished, so too will be the quaint idea of a higher ground TE>in TE> TE> politics. TE> TE> RHI> So sayeth our God, Rush Bob TE> TE>BZZZZT! Wrong again twinkle toes. So sayeth Michael Kelly of[there's a i TE>the Washington Post. The article was plainly attributed as TE>"Making Liars of Us All" by Mr. Kelly of the Washington Post TE>published on Feb. 11, 1998 and printed on page A21. Since that TE>information was posted at the top of the article it is difficult TE>to see how you could mis-attribute it. TE> TE>It seems more probable that you *deliberately* mis-attributed the TE>article in order to post an insult to Rush. That makes the TE>article all the more prophetic in that it has certainly made a TE>liar out of you. If your mommy will take you to the library and TE>read the article to you that will become evident. TE> TE>There is a television advertisement for a college fund that says TE>that a mind is a terrible thing to waste. You are living proof TE>of the truth of that statement.[typical junior high debateing. When in oub TE> TE>To the best of my knowledge Rush has never mentioned this TE>article. I got it *from* the Washington Post. Unlike most TE>liberals I have no problem understanding the written and/or TE>spoken word. WORDS MEAN THINGS!!! (Yes, that's a Rushism.)[well, duh] TE> TE>T.E. - San Diego Ilks (Sgt. at Arms) TE> TE> TE>... En loith/eth bein gaven/eth alyui ghutahami! TE> TE>___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR] TE>--- MysticToss 1.20/Pro TE> * Origin: Guilde of High Sorcery (619)575-8249 San Diego, CA TE>(1:202/1100) TE>PATH: 202/1100 800 5 10/3 270/101 396/1 3615/50 128/248 1 246 TE> TE> --- * PowerAccess 1.50 What has four legs and an arm? A happy Pit Bull. * Origin: Abacus PC Online www.abacus2.com (1:128/246) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F2P00009 Date: 02/19/98 From: ROY J. TELLASON Time: 10:26am \/To: MIKE ANGWIN (Read 0 times) Subj: Libertarian Party Mike Angwin wrote in a message to Roy J. Tellason: RJ>I don't see this happening. What strikes me as being far more likely i RJ>that we'll end up with those schools that accept vouchers being subject RJ>more controls than what they have to deal with now, and a push overall RJ>towards the kind of mediocrity that we're trying to get away from. MA> Ah but the power of the private sector may be being MA> underestimated here. Under the present system of direct MA> control and operation of schools government influence is MA> everything. If we went to a competitive voucher system little MA> schools would sping up all over the place and the sheer number MA> would defy such tight control by government. "Little" becomes less practical as the administrative overhead increases, and as long as any of them are taking government funds, or involved in government programs, the burden of paperwork will increase to the point where those who are good at that sort of thing will tend to survive better. For an example of this look to the program algor is pushing to get internet into the schools. The subsidy amount somehow or other got tied in to the degree of participation of the schools in the _free lunch program_! MA> Somehow, we have to find a menas to extract government from MA> education. It's like cutting out a cancer that has spead MA> throught he entire body, but if the patient is to survive it MA> has to be removed. Not just from education, but from a great many other aspects of our lives, too. RJ>I don't see this scenario as being at all likely. What way do you see RJ>persuade (if not compel) governments at all sorts of local levels to go RJ>this approach when they're now used to supporting schools from *all* RJ>taxpayers? MA> Unlike most Libertarians I am not opposed to the concept MA> of universal support for education. We were all, at one time MA> or another, given the benifit of an education ourselves and we MA> all, directly or indirectly, benifit greatly from having an MA> educated population. Still, we need to develope a means by MA> which we can all contribute to the education of future MA> generations without submitting to government control of MA> education as a characteristic of that means. Somehow we need o MA> develope and implement a doctrine of separation between MA> education and state, a formidable task. Yep! RJ>The point is, we're looking at a situation where they're taking money RJ>a *large* group of people, and expecting them to cut that back to only RJ>taking money from those who are directly benefiting from the situation RJ>the parents. I don't see this as being at all likely because it goes RJ>counter to the general trend in the way that government at all level li RJ>to do things, spreading the pain across all of the citizens until they RJ>feel it much. MA> I think it a bit idealistic to assume that parents MA> themselves can, or should, bear the full weight of the cost of MA> their children's educations. Philosophically, of course, that MA> would be the perfect solution, but in practical terms I just do MA> not see this as a feasible option. The result, if we did this, MA> would be millions of children obtaining no education at all and MA> the long term social ramifications, which would be increasing MA> crime, lack of skilled workers, deepening social divisions, and MA> potentially destabilization of the democratic process itself MA> would be self destructive costing us far, far, more than we MA> could hope to gain. Sure. But any other solution whatever is going to need something along the lines of what we've got now, a tax structure or whatever you care to call it that requires *all* to subsidize the process. MA> We generally agree we have a shared responsibility for MA> defense becuase we all mutually benifit from being able to MA> defend ourselves from foreign agression. I don't see most of what's being spent in that area as being actually applied towards defense, though. Do you? MA> We generally agree that we have a shared rsponsibility for law MA> enforcement, a judicial system, and a penal system, because we MA> all mutually benifit from removal of threats to our own safety. Again, the form that this stuff seems to be taking is way beyond what one would think is required to do the job. We have twenty-some-odd federal agencies now that have SWAT teams. We have courts that are seriously clogged, to the point where someone charged with a serious offense can languish in jail for over a year before they come to trial (and how's that for making a mess out of your life, even if you should happen to be found innocent?), but those same courts are getting more and more involved in civil matters which no government agency really has any rights getting involved in... MA> I also believe we have a shared responsibility for the MA> education of all of our young because we all mutually benifit MA> from a skilled workforce and a stable democratic process. Yep, but do we really want to continue with any sort of a government "solution" to the problem? MA> In Texas, for instance, Washington has taken over control of MA> our prison system because we made it self-sufficient and felt MA> prisoners ought work to support the costs of their MA> incarceration. Washington disagreed and a federal judge now has MA> to approve everything we do, an intolerable situation but one MA> we must now live with. Nevertheless, if we being to make MA> positive changes in education on a local or a state level, we MA> can almost be certian we will face federal intevention. RJ>This is not a good thing. MA> No, it is not a good thing, but it does demonstrate the MA> degree of intervention that Washington is willing to deploy to MA> prevent states from exercising the rights accorded them by the MA> Constitution. Any good federal laywer will tell you point MA> blank, state's rights died with the Civil War. Welcome to MA> federalism. That's why I spend a lot of time in the 10TH_AMD echo. MA> Still I thing we have to try and the only way to compel MA> government to loosen it's control of education is to generate MA> popular support for an alternative program such as a voucher MA> system. If the people of a state desire something, it can be MA> accomplished. The only question is how far Washington will go MA> to suppress their will. RJ>"Compel government" is an interesting pair of words. MA> In a democratic society, given ample support for a MA> proposition, government can be compelled to act. It may, as in MA> the case of the Viet-Nam War, require things to go to the point MA> where we are tottering on the edge of open revolution before MA> government is willing to react, but we can compel this MA> government to act. It merely takes a strong enough desire on MA> the part of the electorate to so compel it. The problem with that is that so much of the population doesn't seem to want to get involved, doesn't want to be bothered. And if that's not bad enough, we've got all sorts of pressures for people to act that way, towards conditioning people not to get involved, not to stick their necks out... RJ>Worse yet, in some instances, is stuff like what we have around here. RJ>addition to the usual patchwork of local governments we also have schoo RJ>districts that appear to have equal taxing authority, local taxes are RJ>almost equaled if not exceeded by the assessments from those guys... : MA> And most of these base their taxes on property, which is MA> a VERY bad way to tax people. I still like the idea of a sales MA> tax as the only form of tax allowed any governmental MA> jurisdiction. That way, each time we purchase something, we MA> can see a breakdown fo the real cost of government. I still have problem with that. MA> Ideally, if a voucher system wer to be implemented, I MA> would prefer funding here to be doing via a statewide sales MA> tax, not a property tax. I find all taxes to be offensive, but MA> if I am going to be taxed, I want it out in the open so I can MA> see exactly what I am being asked to pay. The biggest single problem I have with it is that there's no way I can see that you're going to ever get something like that implemented _instead of_ what we have now, it's going to end up being _in addition to_ it. MA> We've suffered another setback to local control of MA> education, via the federal courts, here in Texas. At presnet MA> local school districts are responsible for generating their own MA> tax rates and funding education with their districts. MA> Washington looked at Texas and decided this system was unfair MA> to poorer areas of the state, intervened, and demanded we more MA> equally distribute funding. RJ>Oh yeah, things have to be "fair"... :-( MA> You know there is something to the doctrine of fairness, MA> but there is also something to allowing an individual school MA> district, if such districts are allowed to continue to exist, MA> to place more emphasis and a larger invenstment into the MA> education of the young in a specific area. MA> Consider for a moment, if you will, particular community MA> and parental needs. Does a west Texas, agriculturally based MA> community, with a school district, honestly have the same MA> practical needs and educational requirements than the community MA> around NASA and the Johnston Spacecraft Center have? Children MA> often follow int he footsteps of their parents and be this a MA> genetic or enviromental trait, it is nevertheless a fact of MA> life. With standardized, centrally controlled education, we MA> end up teaching cattle ranchers children calculus and physicists MA> children how to castrate calves. Hey, at least that uniformity makes the job of those administering things on the federal level easier... MA> Like it or not, there are regional and community needs MA> that if neglected only disseerve the educations of our young. MA> Centralized educational control and standardization of MA> cirriculums, mostly transfixed on urban areas, bypasses these MA> local needs. No argument there, but that's too logical, and most of the time the feds aren't going to see that as enough justification to butt out. RJ>I think that the same could be said about the feds interfering in RJ>*anything*, when you get down to it... MA> So very true... email: roy.j.tellason%tanstaaf@frackit.com --- * Origin: TANSTAAFL BBS 717-432-0764 (1:270/615) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 115 RUSH LIMBAUGH Ref: F2P00010 Date: 02/18/98 From: MATT MUNSON Time: 08:07pm \/To: TOM GOODMAN (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: California and Hispanics RE: Re: California and Hispanics TO: Tom Goodman (1:103/505) TG> Start their own businesses? By all means! IN MEXICO supplying all the TG> "American" companies that moved jobs, business and/or manufacturing down t TG> Then, they could ship all their goodies back north to the "Mericons". The TG> can then skip north of the border and resale the *free trade* stuff to the TG> rest of us! Then they would be adding to the tax base of California inste TG> of being part of the billion dollar freebies list. :-) TG> TG my father is benifiting from nafta. he ships rail road parts to Canada. --- WWIVToss v.1.39.7 Registered * Origin: Proud Member of The Right Winged Conspiracy (1:218/109.0)