[Rhodes22-list] Your Tax Dollars At Work

Mon Sep 19 14:57:21 EDT 2005

Absolutely. I think any large company, business, entity, or even governmental department, needs a PR department. Or else, you get more of the nonsense we see going on about the Bush administration right now. I didn't object at all when Clinton had his spin-machine going to try to mitigate the damage that was done by his false statements under oath. Staff such as that is just part of the price we have to pay. I don't object now, and didn't object then.

Herb Parsons

S/V O'Jure
  1976 O'Day 25
  Lake Grapevine, N TX

S/V Reve de Papa
  1971 Coronado 35
  Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana Coast

>>> saroj at pathfind.net 9/19/2005 12:56:47 PM >>>
Frankly I wasn't aware of it... but had I been, I would have protested that 
too...

What do you think about it? Useful way to spend your money?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Herb Parsons" <hparsons at parsonsys.com>
To: <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Your Tax Dollars At Work

Ahh, so you were as vocal about it when other folks in office had PR people? 
I doubt it, but would certainly like to see your reply, and the reason.

Herb Parsons

S/V O'Jure
  1976 O'Day 25
  Lake Grapevine, N TX

S/V Reve de Papa
  1971 Coronado 35
  Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana Coast

>>> saroj at pathfind.net 9/19/2005 12:11:26 PM >>>
I think it is a stupid waste of my tax dollars no matter who does it.  I
guess we're the dummies to allow it to happen.

Saroj
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Herb Parsons" <hparsons at parsonsys.com>
To: <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 12:52 PM
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Your Tax Dollars At Work

Saroj,

Do you REALLY think that the Bush administration is the first, or only,
administration put someone in that position? Or is it that you resent that
she's actually doing her job.

You folks are amazing.

Herb Parsons

S/V O'Jure
  1976 O'Day 25
  Lake Grapevine, N TX

S/V Reve de Papa
  1971 Coronado 35
  Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana Coast

>>> saroj at pathfind.net 9/19/2005 9:49:43 AM >>>
Anyone notice how the ouster of Carl Rove was a BIG conversation just before
Katrina?  Guess he is under the radar now...  But luckily we have a new
high-level PR person in government (Karen Hughes)... to try to convince the
rest of the world that we are really good guys afterall... How bizarre is
that?  Does the White House really think they are all dummies that can be
convinced with slick talk?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven L. Mutart" <SMutart at CWRLaw.com>
To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 9:57 AM
Subject: RE: [Rhodes22-list] Your Tax Dollars At Work

I just don't understand why people don't get it! The Bushies deliberately
push the hard choices off awaiting the inevitable day when the Dems take
over the mess and push for higher taxes against which the Rs run for office.
And it seems to work. Either we all are pretty stupid or Carl Rove is a
genius.

-----Original Message-----
From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org 
[mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org]On Behalf Of Bill Effros
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 9:29 AM
To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Your Tax Dollars At Work

Thanks, Brad,

I think we're all sending around the same stuff.

I wonder what we're going to do about it.

Bill Effros

brad haslett wrote:

>Rummy,
>
>I've had problems with W's spending habits from the
>get-go, this is nothing new.  The problem is that
>EVERY politician from every stripe wants to fund their
>own pet projects at the other guys expense.  Why don't
>we do an entire review and eliminate some programs
>wholesale, say farm subsidies, and cut all the others
>by 10% across the board.  The Congress is responsible
>for the spending, the President has the veto.  W, are
>you listening?  You have the VETO, USE IT!!
>
>Here is an article that sums up my feelings quite
>nicely.  We'll revisit this later, I'm off to work to
>pay my tax bill.
>
>Brad
>
>--------------------------
>
>DELAYED SUCCESS
>By RYAN SAGER
>
>DID House Majority Leader Tom DeLay hear the rumor
>about the educators who wanted to replace "failure" on
>report cards with the sunnier "delayed success"? It
>would explain his declaration Tuesday that the
>Republican Party is winning an "ongoing victory"
>against wasteful government spending.
>
>As President Bush prepares to spend his way out of the
>post-Katrina political muck, there's more than a
>little reason to snicker at DeLay's linguistic
>gymnastics.
>
>Indeed, Katrina's aftermath may trigger a real split
>between the big spenders who now control the GOP and
>the small-government conservatives who consider
>themselves its conscience. Republican dissidents are
>launching an all-out assault on the White House and
>GOP leaders in Congress over the Bush-era explosion in
>spending.
>
>"It is inexcusable for the White House and Congress to
>not even make the effort to find at least some offsets
>to this new spending," Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) said
>Friday, responding to Bush's speech in New Orleans the
>night before, where the president pledged spending
>that is expected to exceed $200 billion in one year --
>more than the cost of the entire Iraq war and
>reconstruction so far.
>
>"We're going to end up with the highest deficit,
>probably, in the history of this country," Sen. John
>McCain said.
>
>Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), a member of the Republican
>Study Committee (a group of more than 100 GOP House
>members committed to small government), took an even
>harder line when I talked to him Thursday: "These are
>difficult times, and there are difficult choices to
>make, but that's what statesmen do," he said, blasting
>Bush for a lack of "presidential leadership."
>
>"Ultimately, it's the Congress that controls the
>purse," Flake said. "But it certainly would be made
>easier if he vetoed a bill."
>
>When Newt Gingrich led the GOP takeover of Congress in
>1994, his Contract With America railed against
>"government that is too big, too intrusive, and too
>easy with the public's money." Now conservatives like
>Flake worry that the party's lost the mantle of small
>government.
>
>In fact, it's a virtual certainty. Bush has midwived
>the largest expansion of the federal government since
>the Great Society. His No Child Left Behind law
>doubled federal spending on education (to no
>measurable good). His new Medicare benefits are
>expected to cost some $1.2 trillion over 10 years.
>
>Congress has been no better. Look at
>appropriations-bill earmarks -- pork projects. When
>Democrats last held Congress, there were some 4,000 of
>these annually. Under the Republicans, it's
>skyrocketed to 15,000 a year. And more than 80 percent
>of the pork boom came on Bush's watch.
>
>It's shameful: Conservatives in Congress now compare
>Bush -- unfavorably -- to Bill Clinton. Staffers point
>out that when disaster triggered unanticipated
>spending on Clinton's watch, that government-loving
>liberal actually asked Americans to make some
>tradeoffs.
>
>After the 1994 Los Angeles earthquake, Clinton asked
>for more than $3 billion to offset the new costs. The
>Democratic Congress gave it to him.
>
>After the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, Clinton asked
>for more than $1 billion in cuts. The newly Republican
>Congress insisted on more than $15 billion in offsets.
>(Let's hear it for divided government!)
>
>Since taking office, Bush has yet to ask for a single
>offset to disaster-related spending.
>
>The point of the debate among the Republicans isn't
>about whether to spend the money needed to rebuild
>after Katrina -- that's a given. The question is
>whether, even under the most extreme of circumstances,
>they can make even the most minor of cuts to the size
>of government.
>
>In a press conference Friday afternoon, Bush mentioned
>for the first time the possibility of "cutting
>unnecessary spending" as a way to pay for Katrina
>cleanup. But he also said the effort will "cost
>whatever it's going to cost"; his economic advisers
>told people to prepare to watch the deficit swell.
>
>If Republicans can't cut now, they can't cut ever.
>They'll be just what their critics claim: A party that
>rode into office promising Americans more freedom and
>lower taxes, but now simply uses its power to hold
>onto power.
>
>Republican victory against big government, in other
>words, may be delayed indefinitely.
>
>
>rsager at nypost.com 
>
>
>
>
>
>--- R22RumRunner at aol.com wrote:
>
>
>
>>Brad,
>>Perhaps you should read what you wrote. I think
>>you'll understand why we're
>>just now beginning to bash W.
>>
>>Rummy
>>__________________________________________________
>>Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
>>www.rhodes22.org/list 
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com 
>__________________________________________________
>Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list 
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list 
__________________________________________________
Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list 

__________________________________________________
Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list 
__________________________________________________
Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list 

__________________________________________________
Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list