Re: election - delete if not interested - For Joe H.
I apologize in advance for the length, but these ARE important issues,
RE:>>Would you please name the countries that have since the impeachment
hearing passed us in technology, and the technologies? Of
Chinese did make a 25 year leap in their missile technology!
Well, for starters, the Germans at BMW seem to think alternative fuel
sources utilized in an automobile is a good idea. I didn't hear the
whole story, but on NPR last evening I couldn't believe me ears--the BMW
engineers have taken this Hydrogen powered automobile vision of Jules Verne
(offered first in 1871?) and turned it into reality. Apparently,
they have a hydrogen powered car, with 12 cylinders, that is being driven
by foreign dignitaries and being readied for production. It's "toxic"
exhaust? Good old H2O. As I said, however, I didn't get to
hear the whole story so more research is in order. While we're busy
trying to figure out how to pump more fuel from Alaska, the genious's of
the world are busy learning how to implement or create better technology.
We can't sit around and contemplate our navals.
Or how about the French? This GMO/BioTech grain deal. The
Europeans have elected to disallow some of the use of BioTech grain in
foods. One of their companies (A French based company--Aventis?)
makes a product, (Starlink) that is BioTech engineered to resist insect
damage. They decide that they don't want to use it because some radicals
(that barely can tell you the chemical composition of water, let alone
understanding plant genomes), decide that food grown from this seed might
give people the Mad Cow disease.
It's not "Round up" ready, mind you, so our USDA folks fall asleep at
the wheel and let it be sold in this country. (The European's of
course, won't buy any of it back but they can sell it to us...What's wrong
with that equation?) Well, that's fine with me and gazillons of other
people, but apparently, it's not fine with some of the people some of the
time, and bingo--instance new flash; somebody let this grain be manufactured
into Tacos, and some people that don't have the brains God gave a monkey,
start lapping this stuff up. Dan Rather is on the tube every night
for a week forecasting the potential demise of the human race!
Instead of taking to time to educate people, and to do the research that
needs to be done, we're sitting around contemplating our navals and letting
the French stop the distribution of corn out of our fields! Did it
have to become front page news before our Congress starts paying attention?
No, and here is an example of part of what happened.
My Representive in the House for our District is Dr. Greg Ganske(R).
You might have heard of him because he was the first one to call for the
President to step down. He's a doctor--he could have been paying
attention to this BioTech grain issue that has caused turmoil in the grain
markets in Iowa (the state he is representing), leaving lots of grain people
in a big financial bind, but instead he's focused on his naval!
These are but two examples, Joe. (I could add Japan with their
new Honda that gets 70 miles/gallon of fuel that is half petro/half electric,
but I've got to leave something for others). Maybe Kate Klass who hates
to see so many of our manufacturing plants moving to Mexico could provide
RE:>>Why do you say it is unfortunate that the House was unproductive
during the impeachment debate? The way I see it, the best
can have is an unproductive one!
This I definitely do not believe. I am aware that business moves
slowly through these bureaucracies--much too slowly, but when they finally
do make decisions, they can have dramatic impact and they change the world.
We're not talking about some start up country in South Africa here--We're
talking about the largest economic, and military power in the world.
But, unfortunately when we're napping, other countries are taking advantage
We're being beat up by the Japanese, the Europeans, and soon the Chinese
(and I'm not talking about the military, though that is certainly of concern.
For some reason, however, we're gotten this idea in our head that killing
people 17 times instead of just 3 is what is required to dominate the world
with power--three is enough!)
Have you noticed where most of your goods that cost under $5.00 are
coming from? Small appliances? Computers? TV's? Radios?
Clothes? It's seldom from the US. Do we know WHY no one wants
to work for minimum wage? Because many of the lower wage jobs, that
offered some dignity--often manufacturing jobs that required little skill--have
moved to Mexico or overseas. We need to keep Congress focused on
issues that matter, not bogging them down with six months of reading transcripts
to see whether Monica looks pretty when she's naked. It's hard enough
to keep them focused but let them have an excuse not to work on important
stuff--well they might as well have been on recess.
RE:>>Lying under oath is a crime! There is a BIG difference
between personal misbehavior and criminal behavior!
You're right. But entrapping the person to get them to lie is
an even bigger offense, IMO. We didn't like this kind of tactic when
employed by Castro, or Hitler, or any other oppressive ruler, and we don't
like to see it used today.
Kenneth Starr sent Linda Tripp out with a tape recorder to try and get
details from Monica Lewinsky from what was thought to be a private conversation.
The taping was done illegally and few contest that. I believe many
conservatives see that type of Gestapo tactic as being what is required
to implement a moral control agenda. Many more liberal (translation--in
touch with the Constitution and not big fans of totalitarianism?) people
see this as a major loss of inalienable rights that are in the Constitution,
than the white lie told by the President under oath. This was a victimless
crime. In fact, it wasn't even a crime! The right to privacy
is a tenant that many nations with Dictators like to scrap. That
is how they perpetrate their regime--suppressing any dissenters by removing
the right of privacy. I don't want to become a nation where we have
to hide Jews, Moslems, or dissenters in our closets. We seem to be
more obsessed with keeping handguns in the closet than keeping people out
The actions of the Kenneth Starr team, and the 16(?) angry men in the
House of Representatives were the closest thing to removing this inalienable
right since the Constitution was written--all undertaken under the guise
of "exercising the rule of law". Whose law? Which law was broken?
That white lie about whether he was having sex with "that woman, Miss Lewinsky?".
What court has the right to pry into that matter, unless they are claiming
that the deed itself was illegal, which it was not.
Are we really ready to give up these rights? Is the moral majority
suggesting that this "right to privacy" should not stand, instead being
replaced by vigilante police who could invade your home, or your life,
simply because they don't agree with your morals?
I don't believe what President Clinton did was right, but I believe
what Kenneth Starr and the vigilante vice squad was even more threatening.
Which part about this attack on our Constitutional "inalienable rights"
don't conservatives understand? Are such far-right tactics being
undertaken to protect us from ourselves? No, it is a purposeful attempt
to forcibly, through the "rule of law", prohibit engaging in any activity
which some do not believe to be "morally correct". Would they prohibit
another right as well--would freedom of religion be the next target?
Andrew Lietzow (smiling and like Chic, I'll stop when you will.. Hehehe!)