No. William F. Buckley offered it to her, but she said she has had enough
embarassment with the Royal Family in the tabloids lately. she doesn't need
any more. Thenk yew veddy much. --jks
>
>Speaking of which, is there any truth to the rumor that because the US
>can't govern itself, the Queen
Brad wrote: > I've never understood the whole "things are bad, so let's
make them worse!" meme...<
isn't that the slogan of the IMF? or is it "things are so bad for the
wealthy, let's make them worse for the working people"?
Speaking of which, is there any truth to the rumor that because the U
>
> I've never understood the whole "things are bad, so let's make them
> worse!" meme...
>
>
> Brad DeLong
***
I've never understood the unsurpassable predictive prowess of economists in
all socio-politico-economic matters that exhibit greater complexity than
atmospheric chemistry.
> Like you
>I worked in DC. I watched the rewrite of the Clean Air Act become a tragedy
>foisted on the US citizenry by lawyers on K Street doin' the revolving door
>thang on Capitol Hill, arguably the real cause [along with the arrogance of
>the Big 3 "catering" to the consumer choice of a publi
I quoted Hitchens:
> >It's not enough that the two-party machine has all the
> >money at its disposal and all the press and media, too. It still needs
> >courageous volunteers to ram its message home. These unctuous surrogates
> >seek to persuade us that, though we have no power, we can and should
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 7:55 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:4150] Re: Nader 3? Blaming who?
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jim Devine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >It's not enough that the two-party machine
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
> Nathan:
>
> >The continual evasion by Nader and other Green supporters for the results of
> >their leadership and actions is incredibly distressing on that point.
Nathan, do all voters to the left of Calvin Coolidge belong to you Democrats by
devine right or something
Nathan:
>The continual evasion by Nader and other Green supporters for the results of
>their leadership and actions is incredibly distressing on that point. I far
>prefer Carroll forthright joy in undercutting Gore -- at least that is taking
>responsibility that others can evaluate and decide is
SUVs? The fact that the American Petroleum Institute ate Gore for
lunch in the fight over the BTU tax in 1993?
You can say that Gore didn't try hard enough for taxes on emissions.
But you can't say that he didn't try. And you can't blame dirtier air
in Portland-Seattle over the past eight years
Nader and his supporters had the power to throw the election to
Bush. That
is very real power. I have frankly urged that since the Greens have
exercised that power, they should now take advantage of it to promote a
radical change in the electoral college in favor of ranked voting
or i
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Devine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>It's not enough that the two-party machine has all the
>money at its disposal and all the press and media, too. It still needs
>courageous volunteers to ram its message home. These unctuous surrogates
>seek to persuade us that,
In his series of pro-Gore flames [*], Brad wrote:
>If you think there's no difference between a Clinton-Gore EPA and a
>Bush-Cheny EPA you need to have your brain overhauled.
One nice thing about the US election being over (and I really, really wish
it were) is that we won't have to read or he
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/08/00 09:34AM >
>
>the biggest display of political incompetence I have
>seen this fall, save for the way that Al Gore has run his campaign...
>
>(
>
>CB: Do you think Gore should have stuck with the one what brought
>him to the dance, Clinton ?
No. I thin
>Brad,
> I'm going to repeat my comments to Michael
>Perelman earlier. I suspect that a Bush-Cheney
>EPA will not be all that much worse than a Gore-
>Lieberman one, although probably marginally so.
"Perhaps"? "Perhaps"?
And as I said, if you think the issues are important, then marginal
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/08/00 09:34AM >
the biggest display of political incompetence I have
seen this fall, save for the way that Al Gore has run his campaign...
(
CB: Do you think Gore should have stuck with the one what brought him to the dance,
Clinton ?
>BDL>>If you think there's no difference between a Clinton-Gore EPA and a
>Bush-Cheny EPA you need to have your brain overhauled.
>
>Why is it that the people who claim to care the most about issues so
>often turn out to care the least about them?
>
>
>Brad DeLong
>
>*
>
>Why has the air i
make.
Barkley Rosser
-Original Message-
From: Brad De Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, November 08, 2000 1:25 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:4088] Re: Nader 3? Blaming who?
>> >If you think there's no difference between a
>To demonstrate your immense weakness and inability to mobilize voters
>while at the same time working against your own substantive political
>positions is the biggest display of political incompetence I have
>seen this fall, save for the way that Al Gore has run his campaign...
Bollocks, Bra
G'day Ricardo,
You point out:
>...and there's no contradition stating that Nader had every right to
>stay 'till the end (and to have participated in the debates) and
>concluding, if only at the last minute, that since Nader's campaign
>was going nowhere, and since the Gore-Bush campaign was s
> Face it: your faction fucked up bigtime. You thought that you could
> demonstrate the mass voting power of the American left without
> swinging the election to the right-wing candidate.
...and there's no contradition stating that Nader had every right to
stay 'till the end (and to have pa
>Sorry, I don't think you want to listen (and this has been the larger
>problem all along) and I'd rather not continue in this tone. Signing off
>for now.
>
>PA
>
> >
>>Why not be an adult, recognize that there is a big difference between
> >a Clinton-Gore EPA and a Bush-Cheney EPA, and admit y
BDL>>If you think there's no difference between a Clinton-Gore EPA and a
Bush-Cheny EPA you need to have your brain overhauled.
Why is it that the people who claim to care the most about issues so
often turn out to care the least about them?
Brad DeLong
*
Why has the air in the Portla
Brad De Long wrote:
> >Just reflecting on Nader getting 3%. If Bush wins the enviros who agonized
> >over the vote, and then voted for Gore will lose. They'll regret not voting
> >for Nader
> >
> >If Gore wins, he will, with certainty, sell out the enviros, and then they'll
> >regret not voti
Sorry, I don't think you want to listen (and this has been the larger
problem all along) and I'd rather not continue in this tone. Signing off
for now.
PA
PS I am not a faction
>You shoot yourself in the foot and then look around for someone else to blame?
>
>Why not be an adult, recognize that
> >If you think there's no difference between a Clinton-Gore EPA and a
>>Bush-Cheny EPA you need to have your brain overhauled.
>
>Brad: Surely by now you have caught the point: people don't feel there is
>ENOUGH of a difference
If the issues are that important, then even small differences are
>If you think there's no difference between a Clinton-Gore EPA and a
>Bush-Cheny EPA you need to have your brain overhauled.
Brad: Surely by now you have caught the point: people don't feel there is
ENOUGH of a difference to endure a permanent abandonment by the Democratic
Party of many of its c
>Just reflecting on Nader getting 3%. If Bush wins the enviros who agonized
>over the vote, and then voted for Gore will lose. They'll regret not voting
>for Nader
>
>If Gore wins, he will, with certainty, sell out the enviros, and then they'll
>regret not voting for Nader.
>
>Many, of course, w
Eugene Coyle wrote:
>
> Many, of course, will not comprehend that Gore has sold them out, and they'll
> fume that the poor president can't get anything done, just as they have
> excused Gore/Clinton for their environmental sell-out for the past eight
> years.
This is crucial to understand the po
Just reflecting on Nader getting 3%. If Bush wins the enviros who agonized
over the vote, and then voted for Gore will lose. They'll regret not voting
for Nader
If Gore wins, he will, with certainty, sell out the enviros, and then they'll
regret not voting for Nader.
Many, of course, will not
At 02:40 PM 11/7/00 -0800, you wrote:
> What do you think of the reports that many of the Nader voters are
>defecting to Gore? What a shame. If Gore wins, he will bear the
>blame for the recession, showing the Democrats that they need to be
>even more market friendly.
don't worry about the rec
What do you think of the reports that many of the Nader voters are
defecting to Gore? What a shame. If Gore wins, he will bear the
blame for the recession, showing the Democrats that they need to be
even more market friendly.
Venting,
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State
31 matches
Mail list logo
