Email from a freeper friend - pretty scary

[gristy]

I got the email below from a republican friend today. I was reading and typing my reply so fast I didn't respond to everything he brought up.

Hi,

It was good (and a surprise) to hear from you as well. I hope you end up happy and very well compensated by your next challenge.

Regarding the deficit graph, I'll bite. It is interesting to note that the projected 2004 gross deficit is the 9th largest since 1941. Look below the graph at the second table of the site you sent. The deficit peaked above 30% during WW2. One could argue that we are in WW3 or 4 right now only our enemy this time doesn't wear uniforms and can walk right into our country.

You might argue we are in WW3. I would not. Given the way GWB attacks "Terrorism" (beating the SHIT out of a country which had no connection to the problem) he's only only fanning the flames. He is ignoring Afghanistan. He clearly failed to act on the Hart-Rudman report in 2001. GWB believes the rest of world can be bullied into playing nice. I do not agree.

It appears to me that GWB is doing a hell of a job keeping the deficit under control. Interest rates after WW2 and the cold war didn't increase and damp the economy. I remember all the doom and gloom, sky is falling BS in the 80's, when Reagan was beating the pants off the soviets, about interest rates. I was buying my first house and locked in at 8.5%. Boy what a mistake. I also attached a (independent?) report about how the deficit might affect interest rates.

Reagan doesn't hold a candle to GWB. The structural deficits GWB has established will sink our economy if not reversed. It is impossible for either party to control spending. Now the republicans refuse to match income to their spending. Can you say Enron?

It seems what is most important right now is that we beat terrorism so that the economy can grow. Some oil drilling in the gulf and in Alaska would help too since oil prices will damp the economy as well, just ask Jimmy Carter.

So whose economy can grow? And why must we drill for oil in AK when some economic incentives for improved gas mileage can do the same thing? That oil isn't going anywhere. It'll be there when we need it. Did you know that the term "grow" as applied to the economy is a Republican meme? Cheap labor conservatives. Why else do you think GWB said he wanted to give illegals amnesty last month.

I bet we agree that GWB is spending too much. Unfortunately, JFK2 is proposing to spend 265B more and raise taxes. And if you think JFK2 wants to tax and spend, wait till we get Hillary. GDP and the federal "take" increased after JFK1 and Reagan lowered taxes. Based on his record, JFK2 will cut the military, cut intelligence, give up our right to protect ourselves to the UN and make us vulnerable again to attack. Clinton had several low-cost chances to stop Bin Laden after the trade centers were attacked, the Cole was attacked and the Khobar (sp?) towers were attacked but he was too busy with an intern.

Don't forget that the 160B GWB has spent in Iraq so far has yet to show up on any budget. I hear he's going to be out of money over there in a couple months.

I also find it interesting that near 4% unemployment in the late 90's was a 'problem' that caused Greenspan to raise rates too high and kill the economy. Now the unemployment rate is 5.6% and according to the democrats and the media the world is coming to an end because 'everyone' is out of work. What is the perfect number? Maybe we can look to the enlightened euros, Germany and France would kill for 5.6% since they are at 11% and 10%.

Remember the unemployment rate does not count those who are underemployed nor those who have giving up looking for work. People who are contracting (with long breaks in between contracts), and working part time. As well as those who can find any work to match their skills. The gov't is apparently not enforcing contract laws any more. I am contracting at xxxxx yet I am using THEIR tools, THEIR facilities, and following THEIR careful direction. No benefits, and no promise of stable employment (not initially, anyways).

We can talk about the health care system later.

Don't get me started on the pharm. industry. I've had the pleasure of insulin dependent diabetes for 21 years. I get wonderful blood sugar testing machines and wonderful insulin (Lilly came out with a very fast acting version that more closely matches the rise in blood sugar after a meal). What I also get is a very expensive disease. What I don't get is a cure. The pharma industry certainly isn't interested. The gov't needs to step in on diabetes research. This is just one example.

Sam

We can talk about climate change later (be glad you are in Fla).

[stepnw1f]

1. It's unfortunate

I get the same crappy reasoning from people I've debated with. I guess it's more important to being right rather than looking at real issues that effect people. The bottom line is part of that reasoning. Sad.

[StClone]

2. Snake oil sales

He has an answer for every issue and most seem to have thought but few past muster. Why oh why can't they ever admit they were wrong. Why can't Bush bring himself to say he was wrong either. Common affliction denial and forensics approach to obscuration.

[RobertSeattle]

3. Should point out War Taxes

During WWII it was something like 94% (!) at the highest margin. Also RW'ers never mention the absolute values of JFK's drop - something like 94% to 77%. (And the Economy was booming during the 50's even with these "high" maximal marginal rates)

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/03inta.xls (requires Excel)

[ComerPerro]

5. No shit

Instead of pretending to be fighting a war while passing tax cut after tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, why doesn't that asshole actually try to be a leader and aske Americans to sacrafice something?

[jackson]

4. Some responses

On the point about Clinton being busy with an intern, he did bomb bases in Afghanistan in 1998 that were believed to be bin Laden's after the African embassy bombings. But many Republicans accused him of wag the dog schemes to divert attention from their favorite intern. you can say that many republicans were more interested in Monica than bin Laden in 1998.

And as far as Kerry spending more, no one really knows what he will do. The bottom line is we need a change, if just to shake things up a bit.

[ComerPerro]

6. Not only that

:hi:, by the way

Not only were more Republicans interested in Monica than our apparent security, but when Clinton bombed Iraq (with UN consent, I might add) the Republicans accused him of wagging the dog.

[gristy]

8. Yes, I remember that!

he did bomb bases in Afghanistan in 1998 that were believed to be bin Laden's after the African embassy bombings. But many Republicans accused him of wag the dog schemes to divert attention from their favorite intern.

The uproar was quite loud.

[Terran]

7. "Beat terrorism so the economy can grow"??

Your friend is incredibly naive. We will no more "beat terrorism" than we will win the war on drugs or prevent the sun from coming up. At least, not using the methods George Bush thinks will win.