Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa
Subject: Re: Something Wicked This Way Comes
From: <ISSCCK@BYUVM.BITNET>
Date: Thursday, 23 Jul 1992 21:41:25 MDT
Organization: Brigham Young University


Sergey Shimkevich (shimkevi@buchmf.bu.edu) writes:

#In article <92204.194051ISSCCK@BYUVM.BITNET> ISSCCK@BYUVM.BITNET writes:
#>What "if" the current administration would be re-elected?
#
#It WILL be re-elected. Not by a margin as wide as the last time, but it will.

"It"? --"IT will be re-elected???" --I didn't know Bush was "fixed" (like my
tomcat was), but then again, I should've known! In hindsight, the Republicans
haven't shown much "balls" in addressing the current social and domestic woes
of America (other than to blame Congress of course, which is "bull" to me)!

It boils down to providing leadership, and to come up for "the least of these
thy brethren." Since Bush claims to stand for God, he might start reading the
New Testament, especially the four gospels: you know, stuff about compassion
and caring for the poor and powerless, amongst other non-Republican behavior.

Hmmm.  --And then this latest crap about being "anti-American" for being pro-
environment???  What kind of message does this convey?  What am I supposed to
tell my kid? --"Sorry Johnny, President Bush didn't sign the Rio de Janeiro
protocol, 'cause its gonna hurt his millionaire friends?"  Of course, that is
*not* what we're told: --"It will cost us jobs" (as if they *care* about jobs
and family services (parental leave vetoed???), affordable health-care, etc.)

But anyways, I digress. Let's get back to Sergey's reply! I turn on my new-
age CD dream music and chant:
"--Who Art Thou, O Net-Master Sergey, He Who Has Seen The Very End From The
Beginning, That I May Worship Thee?  Hitherto I Had Not Assumed That Netnews
Provided An Opportunity To Communicate With Exalted Beings, Equipped With
Omniscience and Divine Foreknowledge!  Hail!  Tell me, I Bid Thee, O Master,
-Did George Bush Strike A Deal With The Ayatollahs In Distant Iran To Keep
Our Hostages A Bit Longer Captive In Dungeons, So That Lord Reagan Could Be
Elected To Rescue Our Nation? --Or Is This A Figment Of A Vain Imagination,
Originating In The Mind Of The Evil One?"

#
#>Suggestions: (comes to mind first) --Quayle four more years? (for an ongoing
#>if not slightly amusing discussion on this very subject, I kindly refer to
#>the "alt.fan.dan-quayle" user group)
#
#I don't mind Quayle at all. Its the advisors that matter, not the head of
#state.

Well, dream on. I'd propose that the head of state matters VERY much indeed.
Quayle doesn't appear --based on results-- (unless you believe the latest
fairy tale that poll results have been "fixed" to misrepresent what Americans
REALLY feel about Quayle. Yeah, right) to have the support of the average
American.  Even some Republicans want him out, certainly they think it (he?)
matters.  Besides, as president, you can continue to frustrate the political
process by veto-ing anything you don't like, blaming it all on the Democrats,
naturally.  I find it highly cynical that when Parliament (the voice of the
People, through their chosen representatives) votes *for* a particular bill,
(say catastrophic health-care) with a 60+% margin, that ONE man can stop it.
That smacks of something my American Heritage textbook used to call Tyranny...

#
#>                                  --Four more years of ... what... actually?
#>More of the same? Hmmm? Can anyone explain to this sucker why anybody should
#>vote *FOR* Bush in the first place?  And not merely *against* Bill and Al?
#
#Why anybody should NOT vote for Bush?

Well, sure, what the heck, show me!  Make my day!

#
#>                                   --Four more years financing of high-tech
#>military toys like "star-wars," this, while our nation's (economic/social
#>infra-structure and energy network stands in need for a major overhaul?
#
#In the era of rapid nuclear proliferation space-based defence is a must.
#A disarmed US is not something I will be happy with.

Ah, I see! The military will always justify its existance, even at the expense
of social and domestic issues (expenditures).  Your "era of rapid nuclear
proliferation space-based defence" is a complete hoax.  It is the same old lie
that perpetuated the (nuclear) arms race: "they *might* be able to launch
MIRV's with 3 warheads, so we build 'm with 6+ (plus a higher yieldage), etc."

Besides, WHO are those evil nations, nuts and able enough to waste billions of
dollars on space-based "defence"?  I guess there are those who keep fighting
the Cold War...  For your information, I'd read Tom Clancey's (sp) latest
best-seller called: "The Sum Of All Fear."  This novel presents a far more
likely scenario when a bunch of terrorists-with-a-cause obtain a crude nuclear
device, smuggle it to the States, and detonate the bomb in Denver. Well, in
this event, there goes your star-wars technology down the proverbial drain...

Did I ever say I would like to see the US "disarmed"? --Give Me A Break. Just
that we scrap unjustifiable defence spending (star-wars, stealth bomber, bat-
mobiles, whatever.)  So long arms and guns are *more* important than people,
please don't claim you've God on your side.  Mammon and the defense industry
perhaps, but not God as I understand Him at least (I'm open to be enlightened
though.) So long as millions of American kids go to bed hungry, I can see
precious little moral or "strategic" justification for star-war e.g. spending.

#
#//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
#// Ryan: What is it to you, demon?       //// Sergei Shimkevich             //
#// Lune: It is Sir, Demon to you, worm!  //// shimkevi@buchmf.bu.edu        //
#// -Phantasy Star III                    ////                               //
Newsgroups: soc.culture.usa