voteforme
Joined: 07/22/2008
Posts: 3

Recent Comments by voteforme
07/23/2008 09:08:46 PM
So Wes, by that rationale you would also agree that we had no reason to go to Bosnia under Clinton. After all, they had N O T H I N G to do with anything in America at the time. I also made no reference to 9/11 so I am not sure where you got that. You may have done the usual and A S S U M E D that is what I was refering to. Also, the muslim nation was already there we are not building it, we are rebuilding it. Perhaps the real problem with our current lack of funds is due more to the overwhelming amount of government hand outs that everyone seems to love. Read the book, A Matter of Character, in it you will find where the Clinton-Gore administration used unauthorized tax payer money to extend business trips into lavish personal vacations. Let's see what is truly an investment to our nations future, the personal lifestyle of a not so good president, or protecting our country against all aggressors whether they have to do with 9/11 or not. Not that hard of a decision wes! The facts are, that regardless of any affiliation with terrorists or not, Sadam Hussien was himself a terrorist, ethnic cleansing and genocide were very popular in Iraq. Just as they were in the totally justified conflict in Bosnia. If it's good for the goose it's good for the gander. Both situations needed to be handled. Period.
07/22/2008 07:59:59 PM
That is right we are about freedom. The freedom we are defending now is that of our own and of those who may or may not be able to defend their own. You are also correct that it is never too late for justice. I am cofident that when Osama bin Laden is found that he will be brought to justice and hopefully it will be with a sniper rifle. Did we not go into a "conflict" in Bosnia over genocide and ethnic cleansing? Why was that okay? Oh that's right because we had a Democratic President. The issue in Iraq is that the left has constantly changed their story as to why we are there. First, congress, baby blue's and reasonable red's both voted in favor of the effort in Iraq. So at least at one point, they though we should be there. Then it was that we were there for oil. I would say that since gas is $4.00 a gallon we didn't get much from Iraq. Then it was that we were there for Bush to finish what his dady couldn't. Well, that is great I hope that some of the reasoning is that, but let's face it, we all know somewhere in our heart of American hearts, blue or red, that if someone peed on your leg, whether it be now or years from now sometime your gonna get the urge to pay them back. Thank God for President Bush and for what he stands for! Just remember that no one liked Jefforson or Jackson at the time either and now they are two of America's most well known, true patriot's.
07/22/2008 07:46:33 PM
WolfDawg, You hit the nail on the head. I am terribly upset that the current commision stands on the principles of Republicanism and can't even get the basic concept of little government down. Why would you seek to replace two private organizations ( the current fire services) with the government running them? The whole idea of little government is that the people involved in the business are the smartest ones to make the decisions regarding the business, not a politician. In the fire talks, there was 140+ years of fire service experience around one table. Not a single commissioner had the sense to swallow their on pride and ask the people that knew how to go forward with a county fire service for advice. That was pretty anti-Republican! Step 2 to moving to the blue side. They cannot balance a budget. The reason they cannot balance a budget is because of the gross and irresponsible over spending. Isn't that the very thing that we all gripe about on a national level with our Democratic congress? Step 3 to the blue side! Political power plays ans serving ones self. Why is it that the county is funding all of the sewer projects? Perhaps the developers are being protected by the commission. If a subdivision is built it should not be the county's responsibility to run sewer throughout. It should be the developer, that developer knows that once the subdivision is complete the houses will most likely sell, making him money. If our policy was to run the main lines and let the developer run sewer throughout, we would still have developers and still have subdivisions, which still would house taxpayers, and with more money left over. Yahoo! What a hard concept. A large percentage of growing populations all around use this method why not us? That didn't even scratch the surface I know but it was fun and I feel better now. Clayton Brown