From: exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (exuptr@exu.ericsson.se)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Repulicans
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:42:33 GMT
Distribution: tx
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Aug17.142623.6265@oakhill.sps.mot.com> jcj6@ace3.sps.mot.com (james berry) writes:
>Oh, I see.  Let me get this straight.  The Repulicans are pro-growth and
>anti taxes.  Hum, let's see here.  When Mr, I can't remember, Reagan came
>into power we had just had four years of a Democrat acting with a Democrat 
>controlled congress and our deficit was around 1 trillion dollars.  And 
>remember we had gas prices of around 1.50 a gallon and were worried it 
>would go to 3.00.  Now after 8 years of Reagan, who was given much if not
>all he wanted from the congress, our deficit was around 3 trillion dollars.

Why?  Because the democrats continued the spending that got us a 1 trillion 
budget.

>Now after four more years of Bush dealing with a somewhat hostile 
congress

exactly

>the deficit may reach 5 trillion dollars.  Do you really expect 
anyone
>who looks at the numbers to believe the last 12 years have been good 
for
>this country?  

No.  But attribute them to the source.  Give us a republican congress!

>We will be paying for this Repulican BS for decades to come. 

Republican BS from a democrat congress, eh?  That's a good trick.  Congress 
is the problem.  I was saying it before Bush was :-)

>>We need to dump the big-spending Democrat majority in Congress,
>>and install a progressive pro-growth Republican majority.
>>*Then* we will end the tax, borrow, and spend binge, and restore
>>fiscal sanity to the Federal Government.

>I don't doubt that we need to get throw out much of the stagnation in
>Washinton.  But an administration that has been in power for 12 years,
>added a around 5x to the deficit,  

That administration IS the democratic congress.  The president can't make
bills.  Get real.

>given us such PROGRESSIVE things as
>the gag rule and Mr. Thomas to claim that they are the party of change
>and will "end the tax, borrow, and spend binge, and restore fiscal sanity 
>to the Federal Government" is very strange a best.  


>Tell us Pat, have you
>really thought about this or is it just something you heard?  How can 
>the party that has been in power for 12 years 

you mean the democrats of course.  republicans are not "in power" at all 
right now - just look at what happens to Bush's proposals.  It doesn't 
matter how ridiculous you might think they are, you cannot attribute 
problems to someone that is being shut out.

>suddenly claim to be the 
>party of change.  Well that is why do they think people will believe it?
>I can only guess that they know how tired people are of what has been
>going on in Washington for the last 12 or more years and this maybe the 
>only chance they have.   

Let's get rid of all of them then.  You can have Clinton, but give us a 
republican congress ;-)

Then we'll blame all their mistakes on Clinton :-) :-) :-)

>The idea that the terms progressive and Repulican are somehow
>related is simply hilarious.  

That may be, especially historically.  

>>Pat

>I agree let's throw the bums in Washington out, They are completed out of 
>touch with the rest of the country, and I know, let's START AT THE TOP.   
>James L. Berry  jcj6@giedi.sps.not.com                 
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "This must be Thursday.  I never could get the hang of Thursdays"
                                                       - D Adams
  - Patrick Taylor
    Ericsson Network Systems
    exuptr@exu.ericsson.se                       "Don't let the .se fool you"
    alternately, exuptr@ZGNews.Lonestar.Org