File spoon-archives/anarchy-list.archive/anarchy-list_2001/anarchy-list.0111, message 288


From: "ARON KAY" <pieman-AT-pieman.org>
Subject: Fw: [Political_Sanity] GIVE 'EM HELL, JIM WRIGHT!
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 02:22:30 -0500



ARON KAY-http://www.pieman.org
http://www.pieman.org/fucknwar.mp3
Piss On Bush
http://www.pieman.org/pissonbush.html
TIE A YELLOW RIBBON ROUND GEORGE BUSH'S DICK
STOP 1984 IN 2001

----- Original Message -----
From: <Mike2000z-AT-aol.com>
To: <vital_center-AT-yahoogroups.com>; <bush_occupation-AT-yahoogroups.com>;
<Political_Sanity-AT-smartgroups.com>; <political_sanity_main-AT-yahoogroups.com>;
<political_sanity_news-AT-yahoogroups.com>; <TheFalloutShelter-AT-yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:17 AM
Subject: [Political_Sanity] GIVE 'EM HELL, JIM WRIGHT!


> From: BuzzFlash.com   BuzzFlash-AT-lb.bcentral.com
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 9:26 PM
> Subject: GIVE 'EM HELL, JIM WRIGHT!
>
> Former House Speaker Jim Wright Was One of the First Victims of the Right
> Wing Jihad, Led by Newt Gingrich.  But, fortunately for us, Jim Wright
didn't
> retreat from telling it like it is.
>
>
http://web.star-telegram.com/content/fortworth/2001/11/12/columnist/19566278
00
>
> .htm?template=articleTemplateID.htm
>
> >From the Star-Telegram
> Monday, November 12, 2001
> Bipartisan Boulevard runs both ways
>
> George W. Bush would be wise to use and not abuse the members of the loyal
> opposition.
>
> President Bush needs to learn that bipartisanship is a two-way street.
>
> He cannot reasonably expect unquestioning loyalty from congressional
> Democrats to continue indefinitely while he gives tacit approval to the
kind
> of myopic display of unreasoning partisanship that House Republican Whip
Tom
> DeLay exhibited in derailing the airport security bill.
>
> That bill had passed the Senate without a single dissenting vote from
either
> party. The president had labeled its enactment an emergency, calling for
> swift passage. Senate Democrats complied.
>
> It was carefully designed in a nonpartisan way to strengthen security at
the
> nation's biggest and busiest airports. Senate Republicans found no fault
with
> it.
>
> Then DeLay and a clique of right-wing ideologues and government-haters
> peevishly insisted on overhauling the key provision that federalizes the
> security system, professionalizes the work force and establishes authority
> for its uniform functioning.
>
> It should be obvious to anyone who flies frequently that one highly
> vulnerable point at which a clever and determined terrorist might deceive
or
> corrupt the system would be at one of the electronic gates through which
> passengers line up and pass between sensor machines into the boarding
areas.
>
> By and large, the operators do a good job. But they're often hurried,
harried
> and subject to occasional distraction.
>
> They are characteristically underpaid by their private employers. They
have
> minimal training and no job protection. Their only surety is the
minimum-wage
> law. Some noncitizens have been hired for these jobs as entry-level
workers.
>
> The machines at sundry airports do not operate uniformly. A metallic
credit
> card, a money clip or an aluminum-based arch preserver in a shoe will set
off
> one machine and be undetected by another.
>
> What objection did DeLay and his cohorts make to federalizing the system
and
> professionalizing the work force? That some of the workers might join a
> union!
>
> And supposing they did? Federal workers, unlike private employees, are
> prohibited by law from striking. DeLay says that if they joined a union,
they
> might vote Democratic. Well, what's to keep them from doing that now?
>
> Do we not, and shouldn't we, look first to our public employer to protect
the
> public safety?
>
> Aircraft in annually increasing numbers have moved safely through
America's
> skies because of an air route traffic control system. Its operators are
today
> as crucial to the preservation of human life as members of any other
> profession, save medicine. They are well-trained and reasonably well-paid.
>
> And, yes, they're federal employees. Would we have it otherwise?
>
> Can anyone seriously argue that making people federal employees reduces
their
> devotion to our country? Would we privatize the Immigration and
> Naturalization Service? Have free-enterprise U.S. marshals? Or judges?
>
> Would anyone return to private armies and navies? Rely on the
lowest-bidding
> private corporation to defend our country?
>
> Of course, there might be one advantage for politicians. If we'd contract
out
> more public responsibilities to private profit entrepreneurs, there'd be
more
> plums to distribute among folks with money to contribute to friends at
> campaign time.
>
> Which reminds me: Whatever became of the campaign finance reform bill that
> passed the Senate early this year? Shall we assume that it, like the
urgent
> airport safety matter, got DeLayed?
>
> Bush has enjoyed an unrivalled degree of help and support from Democrats
in
> Congress in each of his anti-terrorism initiatives. That help has been
> wholehearted. There's been no sniping, no obstruction, no foot-dragging.
> Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt
> have offered unstinting cooperation.
>
> Congress, at Bush's request, has approved a full measure of help for New
York
> City, the victims' families and the airline industry.
>
> Lawmakers have given the chief executive an open-ended authorization for
> military action and every bit of funding that he has sought for the armed
> services.
>
> They supported his request for airport security, which members of Bush's
own
> party seem determined to make into a political football.
>
> Today, we face serious problems in America's domestic economy. The gross
> domestic product has fallen. Unemployment is rising. The stock market is
in a
> slump, and consumer confidence is plunging.
>
> By no means is all of this due to the terrorist attacks. The trends were
> clearly in motion before Sept. 11.
>
> Bush had best take a tip from President Eisenhower and seek seasoned
advice -
> and not expect blind obedience - from his loyal opposition.
>
> Jim Wright is a former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.
> PO Box 1413 Fort Worth, TX 76101
>
> >From the Star-Telegram
>
>
> ____________________________________
>
> Get Active!  Stay Informed!  Join by sending email to:
>
> Political_Sanity-subscribe-AT-smartgroups.com
>
>
>
> ====================================================================<<<
> Have you heard about the new SmartGroups feature? Find out how you
> can make storing and sharing your pictures online easy!
> http://ad.smartgroups.com/adclick/CID=000000063264879500000000
>
> ====================================================================>>>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Political_Sanity
>
> To leave the group, email: Political_Sanity-unsubscribe-AT-smartgroups.com
>


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005