Denys Beauchemin states: "Let's see, George Soros buys the Democratic Party "

Wow, did he get a certificate of title?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [SMTP:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Denys Beauchemin
> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 9:02 AM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:           Re: [HP3000-L] OT: Simple truths
> 
> It's interesting to read such a post coming from Wirt, the
> oft-self-confessed registered Republican on the list.  Let me take this
> occasion to debunk a myth on this list; I am not and have never been a
> registered Republican.  I am a conservative.  Currently, the major party
> that more (not most) closely reflects my views happens to be the
> Republican party, but 40 years ago, that could have been the Democratic
> party, before the Socialists, the special interests and the kooky fringe
> took it over.
> 
> At any rate, the 4 stories that Wirt posted are mildly interesting.
> Here is how I read them:
> 
> 1- On Gay Marriage:
> The Republican Party seems to be open to many.  You do not have to
> subscribe to all its views in order to be elevated within the party.
> The vice-president is for gay marriage, the secretary of State is for
> affirmative action, the governator and the erstwhile mayor of New York
> (and several high officials) are pro-abortion, etc.  There are many
> views reflected in the party.  This is certainly not the case in the
> Democratic Party.  If a high official was pro-life or in any way opposed
> to a tenet of the party, this person would be summarily purged from the
> party.
> 
> I take you back to a posting a few weeks ago by my very good friend Wirt
> who stated that when someone talks about states rights he instantly
> thinks of segregation and worse.  In the case of gay marriage however,
> Wirt seems to think states right are ok.  It's nice to be able to pick
> and choose your beliefs.  The problem with the various states having
> differing positions on marriage is that one will be left with a
> veritable panoply of arrangements and when people start moving from
> state to state, it will surely create confusion.  I leave it to your
> imagination to come up with variations that California, and New York
> would come up with and how that would go over in say, Utah.
> 
> Finally it is clear that whilst the vice-president has his own opinions,
> the president is clearly in charge and the vice-president is the first
> one to recognize that. (Or are you picking and choosing again?)
> 
> 2-On Global Warming
> This shows there is certainly room for disagreement in the Bush
> administration, something not seen in the prior administration.
> However, the accumulating science has really underlined the fallacy
> behind this version of catastrophism and so I say, let's see what
> tomorrow's report brings.  BTW, this report does not explain the warming
> trend on Mars, which I suspect is due to Halliburton, Bush and Texas in
> general.
> 
> 3- On Partial Birth Abortion
> Here I must say that I am baffled.  I do not understand what that has to
> do with Republicans.  Perhaps one should inform my friend Wirt that just
> because there is a Republican administration in the White House does not
> mean ALL federal judges are Republicans. Especially in San Francisco.
> 
> 4-Federal Election Commissioner
> And finally we get to the story that is the most interesting. Sen. John
> McCain is certainly a colorful figure, a maverick, within the Republican
> Party, something that is simply not tolerated in the other party.
> McCain is fun to observe and has certainly been in the center of
> whatever controversy he can steer up or take part in.  McCain is also
> the darling of the (elite, mainstream, left-falling (forget leaning))
> media wing of the Democratic Party.  If he can attack, embarrass or at
> least disagree with other Republicans, the press reports it with glee.> 
> 
> However, in this case, McCain has to participate in this debate, for two
> reasons.  1- He is a Vietnam Veteran 2-He is one of the co-authors of
> the campaign finance reform act that has created this mess.  Yes indeed,
> McCain-Feingold CFR created this multi-headed monster in its virulent
> attack on the first amendment.  The 527s are a direct result of the
> McCain-Feingold BCRA of 2002.  The organizations (called 527 after the
> section in the tax code under which these tax-free entities fall,) were
> formed to advocate policy by whatever means they see fit.
> 
> Let me quote from the IRS publication:
> 
> Section 527 generally provides that political organizations that collect
> and expend monies for exempt function purposes as described in 527
> (e)(2) are exempt from Federal income tax except on their investment
> income.
> 
> Section 527(e)(1) defines a political organization as a party,
> committee, association, fund or other organization(whether or not
> incorporate), organized and operated primarily for the purpose of
> accepting contributions or making expenditures, or both, for an exempt
> function.
> 
> Section 527(e)(2) provides that the term "exempt function" for purposes
> of 527 means the function of influencing or attempting to influence the
> selection, nomination, election, or appointment of any individual to any
> Federal, State, or local public office or office in a political
> organization, or the election of Presidential or Vice-Presidential
> electors, whether or not such individual or electors are selected,
> nominated, elected, or appointed.  By its terms, 527(e)(2) includes all
> attempts to influence the selection, nomination, election, or
> appointment of the described officials.
> 
> As you can see, the BCRA created a monster and now McCain is trying to
> contain it.  Is it gauche of me to point out that McCain only started
> squawking when the Swiftvets.com organization came to light but that he
> was quite happy to leave alone the 527s attacking Bush during the last 2
> years?
> 
> Let's see, George Soros buys the Democratic Party and also funds
> MoveOn.org to the tune of $15 million.  This organization repeatedly
> compares Bush to Hitler and generally attacks him at every turn.  That's
> ok with the media, John Kerry and John McCain.
> 
> But when 254 Vietnam veterans get together and create an ad countering
> John Kerry's claims and they manage to get $150,000 from a Texas donor,
> the media, John Kerry and John McCain get their knickers in a twist.  I
> guess what makes the difference is that what MoveOn.org and its ilk
> produce is total fiction, whereas what Swiftvets.com produces appears to
> be truthful and that's not acceptable.
> 
> Denys
> 
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
> 
> ========================================================================
> This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content and cleared 
> by School Specialty's email filtering solution.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *